Full transcript, 791,778 characters — every turn. Summarised passages are
highlighted: 846 passages across 102 turns, covering
16.7% of what was said. The rest is the record itself.
Open on 859 sentences (16.7%
of the characters). 5,675 sentences in 768 stretches are folded
inline — tap a [+N sentences] to read them where they sit.
5 further highlights held back as procedure or repetition (3 restatement, 2 chair housekeeping) — collapsed, not removed. Every topic below is closed until you open it.
[+2 sentences][(proc text) recommendation of President signified; presented by the Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Dr Koh Poh Koon) on behalf of the Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade); read the First time; to be read a Second time at a Sitting of Parliament on or after 14 March 2018, and to be printed. (proc text)]
Regulation of Imports and Exports (Amendment) Bill›Bills Introduced1 turns · 74w
· 0 highlighted
bill-intro-221
Speaker not recorded74 words
[+2 sentences][(proc text) presented by the Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Dr Koh Poh Koon) on behalf of the Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade); read the First time; to be read a Second time at a Sitting of Parliament on or after 14 March 2018, and to be printed. (proc text)]
Films (Amendment) Bill›Bills Introduced1 turns · 67w
· 0 highlighted
bill-intro-222
Speaker not recorded67 words
[+2 sentences][(proc text) presented by the Minister for Communications and Information (Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim); read the First time; to be read a Second time at a Sitting of Parliament on or after 14 March 2018, and to be printed. (proc text)]
Public Order and Safety (Special Powers) Bill›Bills Introduced1 turns · 93w
· 0 highlighted
bill-intro-223
Speaker not recorded93 words
[+2 sentences][(proc text) "to extend police powers to better prevent and respond to any incident or likely incident involving serious violence or large-scale public disorder in Singapore, to repeal the Public Order (Preservation) Act (Chapter 258 of the 1985 Revised Edition), and to make consequential and related amendments to certain other Acts", (proc text)] [(proc text) presented by the Second Minister for Home Affairs (Mrs Josephine Teo); read the First time; to be read a Second time at the Sitting of Parliament on or after 14 March 2018, and to be printed. (proc text)]
[+2 sentences][(proc text) "to establish common services tunnel areas and for the regulation of activities within or connected with common services tunnel areas to ensure the safe and efficient operation and functionality of any common services tunnel and any ancillary facility of the common services tunnel, and for connected purposes", (proc text)] [(proc text) presented by the Minister for National Development (Mr Lawrence Wong); read the First time; to be read a Second time at the Sitting of Parliament on or after 14 March 2018, and to be printed. (proc text)]
[+5 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, this year's Budget sets out the challenges we are facing, how do we respond and the measures needed and how do we find the means to carry out the comprehensive set of plans and initiatives in the medium to long term. Deepening economic transformations continue to be the focus, with various schemes streamlined and better integrated, such as the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) and the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG), the piloting of the Open Innovation Platform to spur partnerships and the enhancements of various tax incentives, such as IP licensing, amongst others. I will speak on the economic measures during the MTI Committee of Supply (COS) debate. I am glad that the introduction of the carbon tax would be phased in gradually to monitor the impact and applaud the Government’s commitment that the projected $1 billion revenue collected over the first five years will be used to support projects that will achieve greater emission reductions. I also welcome the measures to further improve social mobility, such as increasing the annual Edusave contributions, updating the income eligibility for the Edusave Merit Bursary and enhancing the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme, among others. I believe we can do more on this front. But among the most talked about aspect in this year’s Budget is, of course, the topic of fiscal sustainability and the two-percentage point increase in GST. The timing of the GST increase, at least three years from now, should not come as a surprise as both the current and previous Ministers for Finance have already made it quite clear that we do have sufficient revenue to meet the increased expenditures for this term of Government. So, this increase in GST is not a deferred tax. It is meant to take care of future spending increases beyond 2020.[+31 sentences] I appreciate the Government sharing this way ahead of time so that Singaporeans and businesses can better prepare for the increase. It will also give the Government time to work on offset schemes to further enhance the progressivity of our GST system, something quite unique to Singapore. We know the reason why we need more revenues. Our expenditures have been rising rapidly, with healthcare and infrastructure spending among the main drivers. In the next decade, this trajectory is likely to continue with even higher healthcare and other recurring expenditures. In some ways, as Members of Parliament, we have a part to play in these rising expenditures. To progress as a society and to improve the well-being of Singaporeans, we are relentless in pushing for more spending in many areas, such as education, housing, healthcare, transport and others. We asked for more subsidies to help low- and middle-income families; we ask for more facilities in the constituencies we represent. It is our duty to improve lives. So, I must admit I am one of those. For example, I requested the Minister for Health for a polyclinic in my constituency three years ago. I am glad that construction will start this year. But I know that it would cost the Government tens of millions of dollars to build a polyclinic and, when completed, it will incur recurring operating and maintenance expenses in perpetuity. I have made another request to the Minister for Health for a Senior Care Centre, which I understand will cost about $1 million to build and, of course, will come with its operating costs thereafter. But such facilities and the various expenditures are necessary to improve lives. Between not spending on these items or cutting spending, I would rather the Government spend prudently but look for more revenue sources so that we can continue to provide more to improve the quality of life for our people. I believe most Singaporeans can understand why the expenditures are rising. The question is how do we find more revenue to pay for these rising expenditures. Some had suggested why not increase the share of Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) beyond 50% and asked if the Government is too prudent or conservative in managing the finances. So, let me offer my thoughts on this. When I studied Civil Engineering at the Singapore Polytechnic, one of the structural engineering concepts that I learned was this term known as the "Factor of Safety". Essentially, what it meant is that whether it is a building or a structure like a bridge or a tower, engineers will design and build structures with a load carrying capacity way beyond the expected or intended loads ‒ often between two and three times. This is to reduce the probability of the structure collapsing due to unforeseen factors to a negligible level as you can never be 100% sure that the inputs that you use will be accurately captured in the calculations. There could be unexpected extreme wind loads or seismic movements due to major earthquakes nearby, for example, or other possibilities. So, buildings and structures are purposely built much stronger than needed for normal usage, with a "factor of safety” added to, hopefully, cater for the extreme unexpected emergency situations. Similarly, when we look at the long-term finances of a country, should we not also load a “factor of safety” so that, as a country, we will never be caught in a position where we are unable to decisively respond to an unexpected crisis or disaster? Should we not want to ensure that we have the ability to fight back and recover from an extreme risk event? And these risk events could be known unknowns to us or total unknown-unknowns to us. It could be weather calamities, severe global or regional economic crises or even geopolitical crises in the region. Look at what happened to Qatar. Last year, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE and Egypt cut diplomatic relations with Qatar and imposed an air, sea and land blockade, with the aim to isolate Qatar’s economy. According to estimates by the ratings agency Moody’s, the Qatari government injected almost US$40 billion into the economy, just in the first couple of months of the crisis.[+18 sentences] Qatar’s huge reserves have certainly come into play in how they cope with the crisis. We are a tiny island state. We are smaller than Qatar in size, with no oil or gas underneath us. Our economy heavily depended on external trade and investments to sustain our economic livelihood. Any changes to the global economic and trade order can have severe direct impact on our economy, more than any other countries in the world, due to our openness as an economy. And given our inherent circumstances with almost no domestic hinterland, we will always have to be an open economy to seek opportunities. Our domestic consumption can never sustain growth in our economy and will certainly not earn us the foreign currency needed to pay for the imports that we need and want. As we transform into a more innovative, entrepreneurial and internationalised economy, our risk exposures to the volatility of the world market will increase, not decrease. The other reality of a small economy is that we will always be a price taker in the fiercely competitive world out there. Today, we have a vibrant and viable economy. We have strong export capabilities and we continue to be able to attract good investments into Singapore. But one day, if this global economic order changes and turns against us or countries decide to impose unfair trade barriers on us, we may really need to count on our reserves to help us buy time to turn things around. This is about survival. So, I asked myself – what can go wrong for a country like Singapore to be more conservative in managing our finances? What are the downsides for doing that and what are the upsides? Our solid financial position helps us to maintain our position as one the few countries in the world with a triple "A" credit rating – very few left in the world. It helps us to keep our Singapore dollar strong ‒ an important counter-inflation tool. It strengthens our position as an international financial centre, ensuring our connectivity and relevance to the world and, of course, creating very good jobs. Perhaps, what is even more tangible is that the reserves that our forefathers have painstakingly built up over the decades have generated investment returns, and 50% of it is today the largest contributing revenue helping to balance our annual Budgets. This amounts to about $14.6 billion in FY2017, which is actually an expansionary injection to the economy, as it is not taken in through tax leakages. Over the last 10 years, the Net Investment Returns (NIR) – previously the Net Investment Income (NII) – contributions of past Budgets have added up to more than $100 billion.[+14 sentences] Imagine us not having NIRCs or much lesser NIRC, our spending and subsidies of programmes would have been much lower and/or we may have to raise even higher taxes. Parliament had debated the NIR framework in the past and had agreed on a 50-50 split between spending now and saving for the future. This is a fair balance between the current and future generations. I voted in support of the framework then and my position remains firmly unchanged. It is always tempting to go for short-term painless solutions. Our forefathers were resolute in not taking that easy path and so should we. Rather than use more of the returns for current spending, we should let the power of compounding returns do the work by re-investing the other 50% so as to grow the principal amount of the reserves and contribute to bigger value of the NIRC in the future. Going forward, we actually need a bigger NIRC to keep our tax system competitive and, importantly, progressive as well. So, what are the downsides of being more prudent or conservative? Well, there may, indeed, be some years where we do collect more taxes than needed, such as in FY2017. There are many factors that can result in higher than forecasted surpluses ‒ better-than-expected economic performances, actual expenditure and revenue deviating from the forecast, better investment returns, among others. As the Government ‒ like most other governments in the world ‒ adopts a cash accounting approach, as opposed to accrual accounting like companies, the annual Budget position can be significantly affected when there are changes to payment timings for big ticket items. Whenever there is a Budget surplus situation, the Government does have the practice of redistributing the surpluses, whether it is from the current Budget or past surpluses from the current term of Government, to Singaporeans. The payment of special GST Vouchers and the one-off SG Bonus are good examples where payouts are tilted in favour of the low and middle-income. The Government has also used surpluses from each term of Government to top up endowment funds like ComCare, Pioneer Generation Package and, in this year's Budget, a further top-up to the GSTV Fund. This is to accumulate resources so that we can help more Singaporeans when the GST increase comes into effect after 2021.[+4 sentences] Here, I hope the Minister for Finance can affirm this surplus redistribution arrangement as part of our social compact. Besides helping to mitigate the impact of GST and rising costs, it can also help manage the income disparity that we see widening in our society. Of course, in the years ahead, we can never be sure of any surpluses or the extent at which our social expenditures rise and where the additional tax revenues are meant to be used for. However, in years where the country has done well, we should be targeted in distributing the surpluses to the low to middle-income. This would give Singaporeans a sense that everyone has a stake in this country and we are all aligned to work together for the betterment of Singapore. This year’s Budget also sets out with great clarity the framework principles on how the Government would fund various spending and how, for some of the infrastructure projects, the share of funding can be distributed more equitably across generations. I agree with the Minister for Finance that, for recurrent spending like healthcare, security and other social expenditures where it directly benefits the current generation, they should be funded with current taxation so that every generation pays its share.[+2 sentences] This approach would also instil spending discipline as any further rise in recurring expenditures would have to be funded through more taxes. This in-built discipline will help to keep our operating budget sustainable and fairer as well. For the longer term mega infrastructure projects with high capital investments, the Government will set aside surpluses where possible, and to use savings accumulated to pay part of the lumpy investment costs.[+8 sentences] This pre-funding approach demonstrates commitment and ensures that there is sufficient funding for projects with very high capital expenditures, such as the Cross Island MRT Line. I also welcome the new financing approach for projects that generate future economic returns to be undertaken by Statutory Boards or Government-owned companies where they can look to borrow to finance the projects and could potentially draw on the Government guarantee to lower the financing costs of these long-term borrowings. The Government is a net creditor and does not need to borrow, other than the issuance of Singapore Government securities which are to help create a risk-free bond market yield curve. However, for the entity that builds the Government-invested infrastructure, borrowing at the project level does require higher financing costs because of the risks associated, such as construction risk. This could result in a negative situation from the Government's standpoint where borrowing rates may be higher than the returns derived from investing the reserves. Hence, it makes smart sense to tap on the Government guarantees to reduce the borrowing costs. I find this a refreshing approach. Mr Speaker, it is timely that the Finance Minister sets out these funding principles clearly and the thinking behind it. A recent Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) survey with regard to the use of reserves or taxation to pay for social spending suggests that Singaporeans do have an almost equal split view on this issue.[+8 sentences] We need to talk more on this issue and seek buy-in from Singaporeans on the approach that the Government is taking. Importantly, to expound on our value system about each generation – past, present and future – doing our part to shoulder the funding of a socially cohesive and economically vibrant future Singapore. To a certain extent, this Budget has brought to attention this issue and offers some clarity on how we intend to achieve this inter-generation equity. I urge that we continue this conversation. Mr Speaker, overall, Budget 2018 exhibits traits which make Singapore exceptional – always plan and act for the long-term good of the country. And beyond just about living within our means, Budget 2018 acts to grow the means for better living in the future. So, the most balanced way to look at this year's Budget is not just seeing it from today’s standpoint but imagining that we are in 2030 and looking back at the measures that we have put in place today. With that, Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast)1479 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Speaker, Budget 2018 is a far-sighted plan with targeted measures that build on the momentum to reform our economy and care for our people. It is prudent yet aspirational, as it plots a path to a visionary and sustainable future for our country. It is also a bitter-sweet Budget. Singapore’s economy grew at a faster than expected pace, with encouraging growth in productivity, real wages and output. Last year’s Budget recorded a healthy surplus of $9.6 billion, thanks to exceptional items. Seven hundred million dollars was set aside to share with Singaporeans via SG Bonus. When looking beyond short-term headline numbers into the longer-term outlook, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat prescribed the bitter pill of a GST hike to come.[+14 sentences] This is to cater for expected expenditures in the next decade for infrastructure developments and an ageing population. Even though it would have been more convenient to do otherwise, I appreciate the Minister's courage to be upfront and begin the uncomfortable conversation of "money not enough" now, in order to give Singaporeans plenty of time to prepare. It is understandable that no one likes a GST hike. We can take comfort that this increase is not immediate with the exact timing of between 2021 and 2025, depending on the state of the Singapore economy, how much expenditures grow and how buoyant existing taxes will be. As a principle, I urge the Minister to try and delay the need to raise the GST rate. First, with the recovering Singapore and world economies and the shift in global economic weight towards Asia, these shifts represent significant opportunities for our firms and people. One optimistic scenario sees Singapore’s economy continuing to outperform our forecasts over the next few years, with recurring Budget surpluses. Under these happy circumstances, we should review the need for a GST rate hike. Second, I would like to call on the Government to continue studying all other possible streams of revenue. For example, expanding the scope of GST to cover the rapidly growing e-commerce market will plug tax leakage to online sales and level the playing field for offline companies that have struggled to compete. Indeed, with cross-border transactions expected to account for more than half of online sales, the plan to levy GST on all imported digital services by 2020 represents a significant step in broadening the Government’s tax revenue streams. I hope that the tax on imported digital services will pave the way for a broader e- commerce tax on goods and services when complexities of an effective tax collection mechanism for low-value imported goods can be resolved. Given the projected exponential growth of e-commerce, its potential for GST contribution must be worth the effort to get it right. Sir, I would also ask that, in line with the announcement of increased tobacco taxes, the Government also consider reviewing taxes on liquor and gambling. By bringing Singapore's low gambling tax rates of 5% to 15% closer in line with Macau's rate of 39% and Australia’s rate of up to 45% in some states, the authorities can collect much of the $3 billion intended to be drawn from a two-percentage point GST hike.[+23 sentences] The Government should also consider introducing sugar tax in the light of growing concerns over diabetes. Other tax avenues could include introduction of a capital gains tax or increase in property tax for non-resident property owners, as imposed by countries, such as the UK, Australia and New Zealand. When GST hike becomes inevitable, I call on the Government to offer more in the Offset Package, to help lower- and middle-income households and seniors cope with increases in the cost of living. The new package should help people understand how support provided actually "offsets" taxes they pay on their expenses. The Government must do a better job to assure Singaporeans that a GST increase will be implemented in a progressive manner and that the authorities will moderate the impact of this increase on those who struggle to make ends meet. Mr Speaker, I support the Minister’s decision not to tap our reserves any more than we currently do. Under the existing NIRC framework, 50% of expected net investment returns is already contributing the single largest source of funds for Government expenditure. Its contribution has risen steadily over the years, such that $1 in $5 of Government spending now comes from NIRC. This high dependency on NIRC, I think, represents a significant vulnerability for Singapore, given the volatility that comes naturally with any investment portfolio. Even the best investment managers will admit that they can only manage risks, not returns. To ensure a sustainable fiscal position, there may be a need, some time in the future, to consider a limit upon which Government spending can tap NIRC to avoid over dependency, over and above the current NIRC framework. Sir, Singapore's reserves were built up because our pioneering leaders were financially prudent and this has strengthened Singapore’s footing on many fronts. The latest being the Government's consideration of using reserves to provide guarantees against long-term borrowings to build critical national infrastructure at lower financing costs. This is a much better way to tap on the strength of our reserves without having to draw directly on them. While I support this approach, I would like to ask the Minister how these borrowings against reserves can be structured and operationalised. What is the expected difference in borrowing costs versus investment returns from the reserves? Mr Speaker, the Wage Credit Scheme and corporate income tax rebate will help companies to overcome near-term challenges. I am pleased to see broad-based schemes such as the Productivity and Innovation (PIC) Scheme, replaced by targeted measures to foster innovation and R&D, go international, build capabilities and forge partnerships. There are, however, three critical areas we need to address. First, companies are still very concerned that Government regulations have not kept up with the times. I spoke in the last Budget about the need for the Government to create enabling environments, within which companies can become nimbler and more innovative, in order to cope with the rapid pace of innovation and increasing competition, even from within the ASEAN region. Companies do recognise that selected agencies have tried to do things differently, but they often voice their frustration of being tripped up by "last-mile" regulations. A whole-of-Government approach is needed to create a dynamic ecosystem, with coordinated efforts across agencies to update related rules and regulations. Second, the impact of the $4.5 billion Industry Transformation Programme announced in Budget 2016 has yet to be realised.[+5 sentences] The Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) are still a work-in-progress. This effort will need to speed up, their implementation is urgent. ITMs were supposed to be a joint effort between industry partners, trade associations and public agencies, all coming together to support the sector’s transformation. The Government’s role was to bring industry stakeholders together to catalyse action, yet industry players feel that the private sector has not been adequately involved in the process. Given the pivotal role ITMs are meant to play in the future economy, all stakeholders, including the companies themselves, must start pulling its own weight for this important venture to succeed. Third, the Budget does not address measures to deal with Singapore’s shrinking workforce nor offer guidance on foreign manpower policy, despite calls for help by businesses struggling to deal with manpower shortages.[+1 sentence] Many firms complain that they are not able to embrace the push for companies to go digital and adopt new technologies, amidst a severe tech talent crunch. While we must continue our manpower-lean approach as the way for firms to grow and maintain the overall ratio of local-to-foreign talents in our workforce, I call on the Government to consider some adjustments to the mix of foreign manpower to support growth areas earmarked in the future economy, such as expertise in data analytics, artificial intelligence and cybersecurity.[+1 sentence] Shortage of skilled talent will constrain our efforts to transform our economy, with the problem becoming more acute as economic growth gains pace. In order to capitalise on the growth momentum, foreign manpower policies may need to evolve to include skill-based factors to prioritise types of foreign skills and expertise, like those adopted in other countries.[+6 sentences] Mr Speaker, Budget 2018 addresses many issues, some of which confront us now and others which are on the horizon of the next decade, but all of them are of consequence. It lays out a roadmap for a fiscally sustainable and secure future for Singapore in the face of considerable challenges, including an ageing population and infrastructure. It calls on us to face down these challenges today, so that when we deal with them, we do so from a position of strength. As the old Chinese proverb goes, "The best time to plant a tree was 20 years ago. The second best time is now." Mr Speaker, I support the Budget. 12.00 pm
Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang)666 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat and his team have presented a well-balanced plan that shows prudence in our fiscal policies and continues from last year’s theme of preparing Singapore for the future. During the Budget debate last year, I mentioned that there is room to make our tax system more progressive and that those who can afford must contribute more. In particular, I suggested having an additional tier of Buyer's Stamp Duty for properties with transaction values above S$1 million.[+2 sentences] I am glad that this has been introduced this year, although I must say that the Finance Minister is very kind to increase the marginal rate from 3% to 4%, as I had earlier suggested a much higher marginal rate of 10%. Another progressive measure which I noticed is that the levy for foreign domestic workers (FDWs) has increased. In particular, the levy for a second FDW has increased from $265 to $450, representing almost a 70% increase. But I am sure households which can afford to hire two or more FDWs would be able to afford the increase. I wish to reiterate that families who may need help in caring for young children, the elderly, or family members with disabilities will not be affected by this increase as they will continue to enjoy the concessionary levy rate of $60 a month which remains unchanged.[+11 sentences] Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to reiterate the call for more ways to raise revenues in a progressive and discretionary manner. During the Second Reading of the Stamp Duties Bill last year, I suggested setting up a special department to look at creative ways to raise more revenues and also look out for existing tax loopholes which should be closed. I hope the Ministry is looking at this proposal. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to offer two suggestions today. First, I would like to repeat my suggestion last year to introduce the tender of SG-series registration number plates for cars. I noted that the front page of the Straits Times Budget Special covering the Budget Speech by the Finance Minister also featured a white car with a SG2018 number plate! I am convinced that the tender of SG series registration car number plates would raise good revenues which will help boost our Government coffers. Second, I would like to suggest altering the duties payable for dutiable luxury goods, such as cigars and high-end wines and alcohol. According to the Singapore Customs website, for most wines, there is no customs duty payable and the excise duty is $88 per litre of alcohol. Tobacco products are charged by weight and its excise duty rate. I would like to suggest charging duties based on a percentage of its value as opposed to the current rate based on physical measure, such as volume or weight. Under the current system, a bottle of wine which costs $50 is charged the same duty as another bottle which costs more than $1,000.[+8 sentences] Similarly, a top-end Cuban cigar is taxed at a rate of $427 per kilogramme, which is a similar rate to normal cigarettes, even though it may cost many times more. Mr Speaker, Sir, I propose to change the calculation of duties on luxury goods such as wines and cigars to one which is based on customs value. Understandably, this may incur more work for the customs office. However, I am hopeful the Ministry can look into my proposal. Mr Speaker, Sir, as our Government faces increasing expenditures for healthcare and social spending, we need to find ways to make our tax system even more progressive. Raising more revenues from luxury items, such as special car registration numbers, high-end wines and cigars, is not only progressive but also discretionary in nature as there is consumer choice. Once again, I would like to thank the Finance Minister and his team at MOF for presenting a well-balanced and forward-looking Budget which prepares Singapore for the years ahead. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied)3050 words
[+6 sentences]In his Budget speech, the Finance Minister spoke of three major shifts in the coming decade. The rise of Asia was observed some years ago but the colossal scale of the change only became apparent to many with the conception of China's global One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative. Technological disruption is mind-blowing, if not downright terrifying for some. The sight of agile robots from Boston Dynamics on our Facebook feeds, driverless vehicles and news of medical initiatives in cloning herald a world that was considered to be fictional only one generation ago. The prospect of an ageing society, however, was not sudden. Successive Governments have identified it, with the second generation PAP leadership establishing the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Ageing which published its report in 1999 and with at least four other high-level committees on ageing since 1982, putting the issue squarely in the public imagination. The Workers’ Party notes that this year’s Budget is one that seeks to prepare Singapore and establish strong foundations for economic growth for the next 10 years.[+22 sentences] Singapore's situation is unique. Economic growth is at the centre of our existence and an economy that exhibits a certain verve and vitality is critical to the well-being of our people. While the Government has got the headline issues right, as it had with identifying ageing almost 20 years ago, what will matter most is how its vision of looking after Singapore and Singaporeans is translated operationally and executed on the ground. My speech will cover education, fiscal sustainability and taxes. In his Budget speech, the Finance Minister spoke of Industry 4.0, a reference to the technological shift from computer systems to integrated cyber, physical, biological and intelligent systems. Mr Speaker, as much as we seek to encourage workers of today to embrace the future economy through the Industry Transformation Programmes, the Tech Skills Accelerator and the Go Digital Programme, amongst other initiatives, there is another segment of our population for whom the new economy is one they must fit into seamlessly. They are our younger Singaporeans – many of whom are still in school today. On 19 February 2018, The Straits Times carried a fictional article that sought to imagine what Singapore would look like in 2030 for one young Singaporean. It spoke of the story of Alex, whose life was transformed by the Committee of the Future Economy (CFE) report of 2017. Alex interpreted the report to mean that entrepreneurship was the way of the future. By 2023, his fictitious company was awarded a contract to supply MOH with mechanical parts for robot-assisted surgery. With a local foothold, he expanded his business into Southeast Asia. Alex’s story was fascinating to me particularly when I contrasted it against the speech of the former Head of Civil Service, Mr Lim Siong Guan, who gave a series of lectures as part of the IPS-SR Nathan Lecture Series on Singapore late last year. Most striking was Mr Lim’s observation of how we in Singapore pile accolades on those who reach the pinnacle of success, with others often remaining unnoticed and unmentioned. The call for innovation, a central pillar in this year’s Budget, requires – in Mr Lim's view – for our people to try more and fail; and to be recognised not only for their success but their effort, and to be proud of trying their best in exercising their talents and abilities. In a second equally compelling and parallel anecdote, Mr Lim spoke about how Israeli mothers in the past wished their children to be doctors and lawyers. Fast forward 20 years and this scenario has apparently changed completely, with Israeli mothers wishing their children to be CEOs of start-ups. The situation is similar in Estonia and Finland. In Mr Lim's words, "Singapore has to get there and be exceptional in our own way". I have my doubts about whether Alex’s parents are ready for him to forget how they changed addresses to get him enrolled into a better school before he entered Primary 1 and how they spent thousands of dollars in tuition fees so that he would be streamed for the best outcomes to secure a stable and lucrative career. More pointedly, unless Alex comes from a rich family, I am not sure he would be in a position to give up an education in accountancy in favour of entrepreneurship, given our cultural biases to what qualifies as a good job, school, university or career. Mr Speaker, ensuring the readiness of the education system to drive future economic growth is a critical strategy that we cannot afford to overlook. Only last month, the Minister for Education in charge of Higher Education shared that the Government is examining how it can better design the learning landscape so as to ensure that opportunities are available for Singaporeans to succeed in life. However, the Minister said that this endeavour may take a generation.[+4 sentences] Without a doubt, the education system has progressively evolved for the better, but do we have the luxury of time to undertake its transformation for the new economy, a transformation that is arguably as urgent as the economic transformation we desire? With our people as the only natural resource, we must begin from the starting point that each and every one of our students, each and every one of them, regardless of race, language or religion, can not just succeed, but excel in the economy of tomorrow. The focus cannot be on acing examinations alone as a means of securing a child's future, as is overwhelmingly the case today. Even as our education system has correctly made adjustments to allow for a minority of students to benefit from aptitude-based entry points across the education system, this may not be enough. In fact, we continue to have a tuition culture which is alleged to be a billion-dollar industry in Singapore.[+7 sentences] There are no evident signs of this tuition culture abating. Even PAP Members have raised questions in this House about stress and anxiety levels in our students. Parents naturally equate poor PSLE results with relatively poorer opportunities and outcomes for their children in Secondary school. They fear that poor PSLE results will evince a bleak future, with their children condemned to schools dominated by problematic students who, in their estimation, do not like to study or cannot communicate well, hence, setting their own children up for mediocrity. Such fears, amongst others, correct or not, drive the tuition industry and the stress both in parents and, by extension, in students. Mr Speaker, it will take a radical move to energise the cultural shift needed to change mindsets about tuition and early streaming among all stakeholders, particularly parents. But there is another downside – and a very important one – that requires us to hasten educational transformation. Streaming and ranking serve to reinforce the inequality the Finance Minister warned about in his Budget speech.[+12 sentences] This is particularly since our educational culture is weighted in favour of parents with means, and naturally so, and those who can pile on enrichment classes and tuition, and even consider paying educational professionals to work out long-term strategies to game Direct School Admission exercises. The Government has previously looked at broad-based schemes like the Productivity and Innovation Credit (PIC) to drive productivity, only to shift now to more targeted measures for specific industries through the ITMs. In similar vein, the Government should start identifying the specific policy changes needed to alter behaviour and drive cultural change in favour of learning. The time has come to squarely look at our tuition culture and, ironically, how it may actually be holding us back rather than spurring and motivating our students in a healthy manner. The tuition industry is an important stakeholder in this undertaking. Rather than spend time and money on tuition, would our students not be better served by an education in various regional languages, more debates, better communication skills, financial literacy, problem-solving and negotiation, and on field trips rather than cramming model answers and methodologies for exam-based outcomes only for them to be forgotten very quickly thereafter? How critical is streaming and even the PSLE examinations for success in life in the future economy? If it is not critical, are there persuasive arguments that remain for their continued existence? The need of the hour today is different from that of the past. A radical shift in direction needs to take place to set up our future generations of workers and employees for the future economy. Alex’s plans to become a successful entrepreneur with an appetite for risk – and for his story and Singapore’s economic future not to be a fictional one – depend on it. Mr Speaker, from a citizen perspective, making deeper enquiries of the Government's Budget is no less important than acquiring deep skills for the future economy. Some very important and healthy conversations are taking place within our society about social protection and the size and use of our reserves, estimated in The Straits Times last week to be in excess of a trillion dollars – I will say that again in excess of a trillion dollars.[+1 sentence] How much of it do we need to protect the Singapore dollar from currency speculators is a valid question, given that yearly revenue from land sales alone ensures that our reserves continue to grow in size. Some arguments have been made in public for the NIRC to be increased to 60% to stave off the GST hike.[+1 sentence] Similarly, there have been calls to consider only a temporary increase in NIRC to fund non-recurrent, lumpy infrastructure investments, such as the high-speed rail, new MRT lines and Changi T5 terminal. After such infrastructure has been completed, the NIRC can return to 50% and some portion of the revenue earned from such infrastructure can also be returned to the reserves. Such proposals leave more scope for the Government to hold back from increasing regressive taxes like the GST, which also hit middle-income Singaporeans with young children and elderly parents the hardest, mainly because offset packages announced by the Government inherently target the low-income and needy more, and correctly so.[+32 sentences] In his Budget speech, the Finance Minister made a fundamental distinction to set out the Government's thinking on recurrent spending which directly benefits current generations and that the responsible way to pay for such expenditure is through taxation. However, it is no secret that Singapore's approach to budgeting is highly conservative, with land sales excluded from the Government's income, even as more resources are required to take care of our elderly population through to 2030 and beyond. Reasonable Singaporeans take the view that there is scope to consider how elderly Singaporeans can be better protected in their twilight years, with the burden of additional taxes like the GST held off for as long as possible. One novel, if not relatively radical approach in view of the current orthodoxy, is to reconsider the role land sales can play in recurrent spending. The Government is, by far and away, the largest landowner in Singapore. The majority of all land here comprises 99-year or less than 99-year leasehold properties. Seen in this light, should not the current generations be allowed to benefit from some percentage of today's land sales with the knowledge that such land regenerates itself in value for future generations, providing successive Governments with the recurring source of income? Should Singaporeans, who are now expected to live well into their 80s, reap more benefit from land sales so as to justify better social protection for them? Even as land is scarce in Singapore, it is also highly valued, with land sales likely to be very healthy in the decades to come right until our HDB flats run down their leases and well into the second half of the century. As much as the development of the port in Tuas will cost money, the move of port facilities from Tanjong Pagar will free up prime and valuable waterfront land adjacent to Shenton Way. After 2035, a massive tract of land where the current Paya Lebar airport sits, massive by Singapore's standards at least, will be available for sale to the Government of the day. In between, the Government, as the largest landowner, has many sites open for development that will ensure steady growth of the reserves for the foreseeable future. On the Government's "Factually" website, the argument against including land sales for budgetary spending is two-pronged, apart from constitutional restrictions. Firstly, excluding land sales prevents the Government from unnecessarily selling land to meet expenditure needs. However, this argument can potentially be addressed with a cap on spending revenue from land sales, for example, not more than 20% of the value of average land sales over 20 years, or 20% of land sales for that year, whichever is lower. This would give no good reason for an ill-advised government to ramp up land sales when in government to increase its own income. The second argument on the "Factually" website posits that income from land sales is invested and is already available to the Government for spending through the NIRC framework. While this is a stronger argument and certainly true, not co-mingling the income from land sales with other reserves for investment also brings with it the prospect of greater transparency to the public and of mitigating the consequences of poor investment decisions most dramatically highlighted by GIC's partial divestment of its stake in UBS and losing billions in the process, as reported last year. Mr Speaker, the Workers' Party is open-minded about looking at different modalities of funding future Budgets with the view to strengthening social protection frameworks. This also promotes a healthier discussion of fiscal issues amongst our population. Of course, the money has to come from somewhere. But there are two ways of framing this conversation. One, is to say that proposals that seek to improve and suggest better social protection for Singaporeans are tantamount to raiding the reserves. The other is to take a strategic perspective of our reserves position – something only the Government can holistically do in view of the significant information asymmetries – look at how quickly the world is changing and always assess how Singaporeans can be better protected ahead of time. To reiterate, allowing a portion of the revenue for land sales will also not stop the reserves from growing. They will continue to grow and disproportionately benefit future generations. But looking at using land sales also gives the Government of the day more flexibility to ensure that current generations of elderly Singaporeans' healthcare needs, for example, are adequately budgeted for, leaving more scope for the Government to strengthen social protection for the current generation of Singaporeans. Inter-generational equity is a subject that deserves greater discussion. The importance and willingness to prepare for the future cannot be underestimated, especially since the very technological disruption the Finance Minister spoke of will, like globalisation in the past, have its discontents – those who cannot be readily retrained to assume higher-value jobs, those who may not be able to build new capabilities, those who, for example, cannot stand for too long and for whom job redesign is only a catchphrase, and those who may not be able to adapt to what they fear is a brave new world. GST may not have to rise but Singaporeans could be more likely to accept it if the Government considers the pros and cons of moving from the established orthodoxy and considers new approaches that improve social protection thresholds for all, and elderly Singaporeans in particular. As expected, the Budget drew much attention on the Government's plan to raise GST from 7% to 9% sometime in the future. However, there was inconsistency in the treatment of some additional taxes that will no doubt add to the Government's coffers before that. For example, the Government was able to confirm that the imposition of the carbon tax would bring an additional $1 billion a year of revenue after implementation.[+5 sentences] However, no estimates were provided on the likely additional revenue that would be added to the Government's income with the inclusion of the GST on imported services. In addition, the journey to become a Smart Nation – another plank of this year's Budget – is likely to make Singapore more efficient in tax collection. There is also the question on the move to become a cashless society and the impact this will have on sectors which have traditionally been thought to under-declare their income, such as self-employed hawkers and taxi drivers. This prospect will become less probable with the advent of more electronic transactions and, in turn, is likely to have a positive effect on tax revenues. Furthermore, with borrowing backed by Government guarantees proposed for large infrastructure projects, more spending for such projects can potentially be allocated elsewhere for recurrent spending. In view of the absence of such details, the Workers' Party is unable to support the announcement of the GST hike at this moment in time. This is because of the lack of clarity surrounding projected expenditure when the Government raises GST in future and the relative lack of information on whether there is scope for the reserves to better support Singaporeans. In addition, as the Prime Minister told the media some years ago when the GST was raised from 3% in response to initial objections from the Workers' Party, we would also need some understanding of the Government's offset package for the low-income and middle-income should the GST be raised ─ information which the Government has not released thus far.[+3 sentences] In conclusion, Mr Speaker, the Government has made significant investments in placing Singapore to take advantage of initiatives like Belt and Road, and tapping on the potential of the ASEAN region. These are necessary investments to keep the Singapore economy humming along. However, the people who keep it humming must be equipped to succeed in tomorrow's economy. Equally, the security of elderly Singaporeans, each generation a pioneer generation of an improbable country in its own right, should not be made to feel insecure in their old age, particularly when it comes to healthcare. Instead, they should be respected for what they have done for Singapore and looked after in their golden years.[+1 sentence] Mr Speaker, we must never be done making Singapore an even better home for all Singaporeans.
Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member)1375 words
[+24 sentences]Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to join this debate. This Budget is of tremendous importance because it adds further strength and connectivity to the efforts that had already begun in previous Budgets to pave the way for Singapore to embark upon the future economy. In that sense, Budget 2018 cannot be looked at in isolation. It is clear to anyone who has followed the sustained efforts of the last few Budgets that the determinants of where to apply the limited resources in order to maximise the benefits of the fiscal impulse are long-run social and economic objectives rather than short-term relief. The economy’s transformation is based on ensuring greater efficiency in the use of resources, and a crude fiscal push with only short-term gains should be avoided. At best, such a move could crowd out the private sector in the competition for resources already in short supply, especially manpower. At worst, it could detract from the careful efforts already under way in each of the industry transformation maps and accompanying skills frameworks to deepen the push for future readiness. Mr Speaker, Sir, since the launch of the Industry Transformation Programme in Budget 2016, the economy has displayed tentative but encouraging signs of change. These include evidence of fortified strength in the labour market situation, the continuing improvement in competitiveness in external-oriented sectors and the revival in productivity performance. In the labour market for instance, redundancies have stabilised, unemployment continues to be low and re-employment is encouraging. In industry competition, what we find is that businesses are beginning to rationalise their dependence on foreign manpower. In productivity performance, the situation is certainly something we have to continue to watch out for, but the recent uptick in productivity performance is something that we should be able to link to the efforts over the last few Budgets to improve the productivity situation. However, the situation remains tentative. The main question is: what have we to continue to do in order to sustain these gains? Hence, against these positive signs, there are accelerating effects of long-term challenges, especially demographic shifts and national security, which are continuing reminders of our vulnerabilities as a small, open economy. In this Budget, the programmes that are already well-funded continue to be so, with increases in social spending and infrastructure expected to continue in the years to come. But in the longer term, as spending needs grow, we will have to decide how to meet those needs in a responsible manner. Depending on potentially volatile and unanticipated increases in Budget surpluses is not ideal. The unusual Budget surplus that we saw in last year's Budget is a welcome surprise in this case because of currency movements that had gone unexpectedly in MAS’ favour. But market movements which present large upside surprises in one year could also contain the potential to do the opposite. With sufficient diversification and vigilance, the chances of a downside surprise can be minimised but not eliminated. This is not a reliable recipe for funding long-term national commitments. Despite criticisms about the extent of social spending, the incontrovertible fact remains that Social Development expenditures in Singapore account for the largest share of the Budget and has done so with rare exception in recent years. Sir, in 1997, expenditures on Social Development amounted to over $8.7 billion. Of the four main areas of spending, Social Development accounted for the largest share of 38%, above the other areas, namely Security and External Relations, Economic Development and Government Administration. By 2017, its share had risen to nearly half of total Government spending, more than twice that of the share of expenditures on Economic Development.[+1 sentence] I pointed out before that we should not ignore the fact that the pace of increase in social spending must be managed in order to ensure the competition with other areas of spending does not drive up costs of limited resources. From 1997 to 2005, Social Development expenditures grew at an annual rate of 3.7% per annum, below that of expenditures of Security and External Relations. From 2005 to 2017, however, the rate of growth of Social Development expenditures jumped to 10% a year.[+18 sentences] This is a rate of growth that will double spending every seven years or so and this is way in excess of the rates of growth that we see in economies, like Sweden, which have taken a long time to reach the point that they are at, at this point in time. Such spending increases are an improvement that have been made possible by Singapore's continuing economic progress. There are many areas of Social Development, no doubt, that require urgent attention. New areas of needs arise as society develops and the economy matures. Sustainable solutions to such challenges require a focused and targeted approach. Even advanced economies, Sir, have to continue to defend their vulnerabilities against unforeseen national security threats as well as sudden external economic upheavals. The competition to prioritise certain areas of spending should not lead to a softening of emphasis on areas of basic necessity, such as defence spending and the shoring up of our economic defences. At any point in time, there are security threats in various parts of the world which may have an impact on shipping lanes and flight routes vital to our trade linkages. As a sovereign developed nation, it is our responsibility to be prepared to bear the burden of maintaining these vital connections. The building of national defence capabilities is a fundamental priority that cannot be ignored. The experiences of other advanced economies show that the failure to maintain up-to-date defence capabilities could lead to a diminished capacity to play a full role in defence partnerships. Just as with our national infrastructure, ensuring that our defence capabilities are continually upgraded to meet future needs is critical. In recent years, there has been growing criticism from a vocal minority about the growth in Singapore’s reserves and what the reserves are needed for. Sir, Singapore has achieved advanced economy status in the space of half a century. As demonstrated by the last crisis, however, developed economies could actually be more exposed to certain types of crises than less developed ones. The cost of confronting that crisis, Sir, was a costly affair for many governments. But as the experiences of several countries have shown, a strong response with a decisive and sufficiently large package of measures meant that the cost of the responses could usually be recovered if the intervention successfully revived asset valuations that had been downgraded by the crisis. In order for this to occur, the resources needed to mount the rescue packages had to be available in the first place. At a critical point of the crisis, for example, the United States mounted a massively expensive rescue programme for its financial sector by assigning US$700 billion, to what was then known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program or TARP. As it turned out, all the amounts spent in the purchase of what had been toxic assets were subsequently recovered in full as the assets regained values.[+3 sentences] Singapore is much smaller. Our role in financial markets is not small and these examples are not irrelevant. Our own experience during that crisis was no less informative. The sums assigned to the Resilience Package of 2009 by then-Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam included an unprecedented withdrawal of $4.9 billion from the reserves. The full amount of that was returned as a result of the strong recovery.[+7 sentences] If those reserves had not been readily available, the consequences would have been unimaginable. This is why there is a need to protect and grow the reserves through a disciplined fiscal approach that includes responsible taxation. This Budget is a cogent demonstration of these principles of forward thinking and responsible planning. It recognises, for example, that taxing undesirable behaviour is necessary, but not a constructive approach to funding long-term needs. A secure economy will provide the foundation for strengthening social programmes, supporting the needy and expanding opportunities for future generations. Sir, in a world that is facing significant disruption, the early steps that this and previous Budgets represent in gaining early traction on the future economy will enable Singaporeans to anticipate a future with richer opportunities. Mr Speaker, Sir, I strongly support the Budget.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten)1601 words
[+16 sentences]Mr Speaker, as a Member of Parliament, I receive frequent requests from residents asking the Government to do more for them. Residents ask for financial help, they want lower transport fares, they appeal for more bus services to bring them to their specific destination; they ask for low-cost rental flats, they ask for blue CHAS cards, for higher healthcare subsidies and they ask for less expensive medical treatment at clinics and hospitals and the list goes on. For many of these requests, I am sympathetic as these residents are usually low-income. Any reduction of costs or living expenses would be greatly welcomed by them. However, what some people do not remember is that it is not the Government who just pays for the subsidies. The financial burden would be borne by other taxpayers. Not all residents understand that the Government is a trustee of sort to manage the taxes paid by Singaporeans and Singapore companies. In doing so, the Government has to be prudent in its spending and judiciously decide how to allocate scarce resources. Many of us have unlimited wants but there is only so much resource available for distribution. Singapore has no natural resources. We do not have oil reserves, no timber forest or coal or natural minerals at our disposal. Almost everything has to be imported. But despite the lack of natural resources, Singapore has remained successful with good economic growth and has accumulated respectable financial reserves. I attribute this to good government as well as a hardworking and intelligent citizenship who have helped built Singapore to what it is today. Our Budget theme for this year is "Together – A Better Future". In the Budget Statement, the Finance Minister explained that the Budget is a strategic and integrated plan. He asked Singaporeans to take a longer-term view, and set out our strategic challenges clearly and plainly. He indicated that the Government will spend more on healthcare by building more hospitals, polyclinics, nursing homes and eldercare centres. The Government will also spend more on infrastructure projects like the rail network, construction of Terminal 5, Tuas Port as well as the High Speed Rail.[+25 sentences] More will also be spent on education and security. These priorities of the Government resonate with me. Indeed, healthcare is always a concern for many Singaporeans as there will be more and more seniors as we live longer. Many elderly citizens whom I speak to worry about high healthcare costs, especially those who suffer from chronic diseases or had suffered stroke or require long-term medication for cancer. In my constituency walkabouts, I see more and more residents on wheelchair or needing help with their mobility. More spending on healthcare will make it affordable for those who need help in their retirement years. Having improved infrastructure will also allow better accessibility and convenience for many people and create a better environment for all Singaporeans. Lower transport fare is welcomed because public transport is a necessity and public transport should be kept affordable. An increase in education spending is also welcomed as it will prepare our children for the future challenges in the world. Increasing the financial support for students from lower-income families will mitigate the gap between the well-off students and lower-income families. With increased terrorist activities, security should also be an area of priority and, indeed, we should ensure that whatever we have today should be protected from those who wish Singapore to fail. However, the devil is always in the details. In allocating more resources to these areas of priorities, I urge the Government to consider and to ensure that the lives of all Singaporeans would improve. I understand the need to take better care of the poor and needy and those with low-income. But I urge the Government not to forget the struggles and difficulties of the rising number of middle-class citizens who may feel sandwiched by Government policies. They perceive some of the policies as not helping them. Hence, I urge the Government to implement policies which would help those in need and, at the same time, be fair to citizens who have contributed to build Singapore. Thus, for incentives like S&CC rebates or GST vouchers, please consider helping those who live in bigger flats but with lower-income. Please do not just assess based on house type. Review the income ceiling for those who apply for CHAS card or those who should receive Silver Support. Keep an eye on the retirees and the middle-income Singaporeans so that they, too, can share or enjoy the growth of the country. Schemes like the Housing Grant and Proximity Housing Grant are good schemes that help the middle-income own HDB flats with large subsidies from the Government. The increase in GST was voted in November last year. When the idea was floated, I said that there is always a political cost if you cannot persuade the ground that a hike in taxes is necessary. Nobody likes a tax increase as it takes away disposable income from the citizen and transfers it to the Government to manage. The GST increase is planned for 2021 to 2025.[+2 sentences] The Prime Minister had previously said that in this current term of Government, which ends in 2021, it has enough revenue. Thus, I am glad that the GST increase is not taking effect next year or the year after. Instead, the Government is giving three years' advance notice that in order to maintain the spending on healthcare, security and other social spending, they would need to raise revenue by increasing GST by 2%.[+3 sentences] In my view, it is fair and prudent to take a longer term view of the needs of the country. It is not always possible to expect the Government to keep increasing the spending on healthcare, security and other social spending without thinking of how to fund such spending. In particular, if the increase in GST would help reduce the healthcare burden on all citizens, if it helps subsidise transport costs, if it provides more care for the lower-income, it should be something that we should all support as we are helping the majority of Singaporeans, for the lower-income, middle-income and seniors. The Minister for Finance has committed to enhancing the permanent GST Voucher scheme and he has also committed to make a $2 billion top-up to the GST Voucher Fund.[+15 sentences] When the GST increase is implemented, there will also be an offset package later. So, with respect to Mr Pritam Singh, I would not agree that GST in the Singapore context is regressive. In fact, I am surprised at the Workers' Party's reservations on GST increase. Because if the Workers' Party agrees to increase social spending for healthcare, education and security, where can the funds come from to pay for these recurrent expenditures? Minister Heng had said, "In the next decade, between 2021 and 2030, if we do not take measures early, we will not have enough revenues to meet our growing needs." Thus, to me, it is clear that the Government is planning not just for a few years later but for the next decade! For those who say that we should use the Budget surplus last year to fund the increase in expenditure, I respectfully disagree because it is fiscally unsustainable to rely on a surplus which is not a constant or a guaranteed source of revenue. Last year’s surplus was an extraordinary gain and Minister Heng had explained how the surplus came about. Details of the surplus were also published in the media yesterday. Surely, we cannot expect currency translation effects or increases in stamp duty to be always available in future Budgets. For those who advocate that we use more than 50% of the expected NIR and keep less in the reserves, I would urge the Government to be cautious. It is always easy to say spend more today and save less for the future. What should be the right balance is a question that everyone has an opinion about. To me, we should exercise prudence and try to spend within our means, especially if our expenses are on recurrent spending on healthcare, security and other social spending. We have been fortunate that our NIR has been increasing year after year. Last year was $14.61 billion and this year the Budget is $15.85 billion.[+6 sentences] What if the NIR falls in the future years? Would we then say take more from the NIR again? As for using proceeds from land sales, as suggested by Mr Pritam Singh, I want to sound a word of caution: once land is sold, the asset is gone. If we to use any part of the sales proceeds to fund recurrent expenses, does that mean that we are taking the monies away from the reserves? So, I humbly submit that we should allow our reserves to grow in tandem with the economy. Before I conclude, allow me to seek a few clarifications from the Minister. In previous years, when GST was increased, a Committee Against Profiteering (CAP) was set up to combat any illegal profiteering due to a GST increase. Would there be a similar committee set up before the GST increase is implemented?[+1 sentence] Secondly, the Minister had said, the "Government is looking at borrowing by Statutory Boards and Government-owned companies which build infrastructure. This will help spread the cost of certain large investments over more years." Can the Minister clarify why is it necessary to borrow, considering our large reserves?[+2 sentences] Can we not rely on our other resources or borrow from our reserves and pay interest on those loans? With that, Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied)6 words
[+1 sentence]Sir, a clarification for the Member.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Yes, Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim82 words
[+4 sentences]Thank you, Sir. I would like to clarify with the Member Lim Biow Chuan. He made a statement to say that once the land is sold by the Government, it is gone. But does he not agree that actually the Government's definition of land sales includes leases. In fact, the cut-off period when you include a lease as a sale is actually a 10-year lease.[+1 sentence] So, it is not quite accurate to say that once the land is sold, it is gone.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan59 words
In reply to Ms Sylvia Lim, when a land is sold, whether it is on a 99-year lease or otherwise, it is not sold in perpetuity.[+2 sentences] The funds, once they go back into the reserves, would be gone for that period. For you to get back the land, you have to wait 99 years for it to come back.
Ms Sylvia Lim68 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Speaker, just a further clarification, I did file a Parliamentary Question to MOF to ask for the cut-off period for the definition of "land sales" under the Budget and the answer given to me was 10 years is the cut-off. So, again, I would like the Member to confirm that it is not accurate for him to say that once the land is sold, it is gone.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan78 words
[+1 sentence]I am afraid I cannot understand what Ms Sylvia Lim is asking. When you sell a land for 99 years, then the proceeds of sale for that 99 years will be gone.[+2 sentences] You are going to wait 99 years for the monies to come back before it goes back into reserves. Then, you are spending funds that would be gone for 99 years. Yes, that is why, in this generation, you are spending money for the future generations.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]A final clarification?
Ms Sylvia Lim13 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, perhaps, I will wait for the Minister for Finance to clarify.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Thomas Chua.
Mr Thomas Chua Kee Seng (Nominated Member)1012 words
[+16 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Members of Parliament, good afternoon! Today, my topic is: a strategic and long-term Budget which helps businesses grow sustainably. A key highlight of this year’s Budget is that it materialises the framework promulgated by the Committee on the Future Economy through the introduction of a series of targeted measures to assist businesses. Before announcing this year’s Budget, the Government had widely sought views and feedback from trade associations and chambers. The various measures now introduced by the Budget have matched the expectations of the business community. This year’s Budget is very far-sighted, as it is making preparations for a better future. Going forward, Singapore will increase public expenditure in healthcare, security, long-term infrastructure and education. We believe our people and businesses will benefit from public spending in these areas. When I listened to the Minister for Finance as he delivered the Budget Statement, what I thought about the most was the question of how we can increase our revenue sources while curbing our expenditure, 开源节流 in Chinese. I am glad that the Government will, hence, observe the principle of 开源节流 when constructing large-scale infrastructure. Because such investments are huge, the Government is looking at allowing Statutory Boards and GLCs, like LTA, to fund them by borrowing or issuance of bonds, in order to avoid tapping into the national reserves. The Government is also considering providing guarantees for long-term borrowings for such infrastructure. As a country with no natural resources, our reserves are like a financial linchpin that provides the country stability and should not be tapped into so easily. Hence, mobilising resources from the society to continuously obtain funds to finance such construction is a wise decision. The other manifestation is to moderate the pace of Ministries’ budget growth. From FY2019, the rate of growth for the block budgets of Ministries will be reduced from 0.4 times of GDP growth to 0.3 times.[+2 sentences] As Singapore is already an ageing society, there will be more and more areas that will require spending in the future. We need to stringently control Ministry spending, monitor closely the policy implementation processes, plug loopholes in the abuse of Government resources, raise the quality of public projects and avoid the vicious cycle of problems arising from Government spending and then having to spend more money to resolve problems – this is truly how 开源节流 could be meaningfully carried out. As for the adjustment of the Goods and Services Tax, this has been widely speculated before. It turned out that the Government would not immediately raise the GST, but would do so at least three years later, giving sufficient time to businesses and consumers to adapt.[+5 sentences] I would like to convey the views of some smaller retailers, particularly those from the northern part of Singapore. They are worried that following the GST increase, many consumers will swarm into Malaysia, particularly Johor Baru, to shop for daily products. These retailers believe that this is very likely to happen because the Singapore-Johor Rapid Transit System Link will start operating in 2024. With the ease of travelling, more convenient customs clearance, easier conveyance of goods and the strength of the Singapore dollar vis-à-vis the Malaysian ringgit, the lure across the Causeway would only grow greater. Come 2026, the surge in north-bound traffic could be even higher, as the Singapore-Kuala Lumpur High Speed Rail is projected to be operational by then and there will be many convenient places to shop along the route. The Government has also announced that in two years' time, businesses that purchase imported services from overseas would also have to pay GST.[+1 sentence] To local businesses that provide similar services, this is a long-awaited equitable measure. According to the Department of Statistics, Singapore imported close to S$225 billion worth of services in 2016.[+16 sentences] This is a significant figure. Such purchases include software applications and a variety of Business-to-Business (B2B) services, including accounting and IT. On the other hand, once this GST is levied, many purchasers, especially SMEs, will face pressure arising from an increase in their operating cost. However, on-line transaction of services is a complex matter. Whether it is the provision of services through the B2B or B2C model, there is a likelihood that charges from both ends may exploit technical or policy loopholes to gain an advantage in areas, such as during the transaction, the computation of tax assessment and tax rebate. There is a need to strengthen supervision in theses aspects. Mr Speaker, the best approach to achieve 开源节流 is to assist our enterprises to grow. Only when our companies thrive and develop, they could then contribute more to Government revenue. The Government has continuously been helping our companies to transform and upgrade. Next, companies themselves have to be more proactive to push the pace of transformation and innovation. Workers need to learn new knowledge, new skills, while bosses must use a new mindset to develop new markets. Transformation is like stretching the body, where periodic pains are unavoidable. There is no guarantee that transformation will definitely succeed, but not transforming means certainty of elimination. There is another Budget measure that is welcomed by businesses. Businesses passionate about charity have always enjoyed support through Government policies. In the last two years, donations to Institutions of Public Character (IPCs) are entitled to enjoy 250% of tax deduction. This deduction was originally supposed to cease at the end of this year. It is now going to be extended for another three years to encourage more companies to give back to society. Some businesses hope the Government could take a further step to raise the deduction to 300%. This could encourage even more people to make generous donations, contributing both money and effort to build a more caring and united society.[+2 sentences] At the start of a new year, the Government has introduced a Budget that is strategic and with a long-term vision. Following this, it will require all the stakeholders in the society to proactively take action to execute all the measures that have been introduced.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member)3146 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, this Budget marks a significant progress from a wait-and-see posture to strategic and integrated planning to engage three major shifts affecting Singapore’s future. I focus on ageing here. I highlight that ageing is not uniformly experienced, and that men and women experience ageing and are affected by ageing very differently. There are, therefore, gender inequalities we need to tackle if we are to meet the challenges and opportunities of ageing successfully. Our policies targeted at ageing must factor in the gender differences for them to be effective. I focus on three sets of issues, namely, issues related to the gender income gap, issues with supporting caregivers and the economic and health security of seniors. Let me start with issues related to the gender income gap. A study using data from MOM last year showed that the gender pay gap has not improved in the decade from 2006 to 2016. The gap in median monthly income between male and female has remained at around 18% to 19%, with women earning some $610 less than men.[+4 sentences] It is unacceptable that we have not made any progress in closing the gender pay gap in 10 years. We need to tackle the gender pay gap because it will affect our future senior women and their retirement security. Already, women are living longer than men and CPF LIFE is structured in such a way that discriminates between gender, with women paying a higher premium and getting less payouts. The gender pay gap has, therefore, a compounding effect on the retirement security of women. Using the CPF LIFE Payout Estimator on the CPF Board website, my estimate is that, on the average, men will be getting 25% more income than women from CPF LIFE due to the gender pay gap.[+2 sentences] The gender pay gap varies across sectors. There has been some attention on the gender pay gap in the finance sector and in senior management, but I think we should actually pay more attention to the majority of our women workers who are labouring in other sectors. Health and social service is still a sector that has one of the largest gender pay gaps, with women earning around $1,540 a month less than men.[+12 sentences] The health and social service sector impacts ageing and our seniors the most. It is also a sector that is, arguably, the most susceptible to what Minister Ong Ye Kung has noted as a key factor underpinning the gender pay gap, that is, the social norms and expectations placed on women. Minister Ong called for a mindset change. But this is also a structural issue. The crux of the matter is nursing. Nursing makes up the bulk of the health and social service sector and most nurses are women. Nursing is also in high demand because of ageing. A strong professional body of local nurses is essential for us to successfully meet the challenges of ageing. For many decades, there has been an erosion of status and value attributed to nursing, which culminated in the 2013 Population White Paper footnote mistake in classifying nursing as a low-skilled job that is difficult to offshore. The apology and correction from Deputy Prime Minister Teo Chee Hean then was swift and right, and I believe there has been a narrowing of the prestige gap between nursing and other professions since 2013. But there are still two other associated issues. First, while wages for nurses have been improving, there is still a lag. Based on mid-2016 data from MOM, the median gross monthly income from work of all full-time employed residents is $4,056, while the figure for nurses is $4,300.[+29 sentences] This is a ratio of 1.06. This is not too different from similar ratios for OECD countries. However, when compared to small countries with a similar demand profile for nurses, we are behind. For example, the ratio in Israel is 1.4. In Australia, where ageing is also a major challenge for society, the ratio is 1.2. Given the high demand for nursing because of our ageing society, there is scope to further increase the wages of nurses. Second, it has been a longstanding fact that most nurses are women, which has entrenched the perception that nursing is a female occupation. This gendered composition and perception of nursing will continue to exacerbate the supply shortage of trained nurses. Increasing the wages of nurses will kill several birds with one stone. As most nurses are currently women, increasing the wages of nurses will help close the gender pay gap. It will also signal the increased social value and respect that is attached to nursing; that nursing is far from being a low-skilled job; that, on the contrary, nursing is an especially precious skillset for the ageing society. We all know that nursing is a very demanding job. It is emotionally straining, time consuming, especially with the shift work and overtime, and is also physically draining. Increasing the wages of nurses will make the remuneration more commensurate with the passion that is demanded of nurses. Increasing the wages of nurses will also help to shift the mindset over time, so that more men would take up the calling and not be put off by the opportunity cost of higher pay for men in other professions. Another issue related to the gender pay gap is the income security and prospects of women who have become mothers. Part of the reason for the gender pay gap is linked to women returning to the workforce after taking a prolonged break due to pregnancies or childcare responsibilities. Little recognition is given by employers and the Government to the years women spent in service to the family and to the nation to bear and raise children, unlike men who are often given a salary premium for the two years spent in National Service. The current emphasis on lifelong learning and continuous retraining exacerbates the issue. By the time women try to return to the workforce, they face the triple challenges of making sure their skills stay relevant, discrimination against older workers and wage stagnation compared to their male peers. Last year, during COS 2017, I proposed the SkillsFuture Mommy Awards to make re-entry into the workforce for mothers less challenging. We have the social and policy infrastructure to resolve this issue. This is an area that SkillsFuture Singapore and Workforce Singapore should look into. Let me move on now to the second set of issues related to caregivers, who, like nurses, are at the frontlines of the ageing society. Like nurses, most caregivers are women. So, again, we see gender closely connected to ageing. As with nurses, getting our policy right in supporting caregivers is essential for us to successfully meet the challenges of ageing. There are two issues associated with caregivers. If we can resolve these two issues, we will be able to support a strong body of caregivers who would form the bedrock of our silver care system, close the loop between healthcare and community care, and allow our seniors to successfully and actively age in place. The first issue is recognition and reward for unpaid caregiving. It was estimated that there were over 210,000 caregivers in 2004.[+2 sentences] The numbers should have gone up by now. This is not a small number, as it represents around 10% of our resident workforce. In a national survey of informal caregiving of older adults aged 75 and above presented in 2013, only 55.6% of the caregivers reported that they were working full-time or part-time and the caregivers reported they spent an average of 38 hours a week in providing care. Among the three problems of lack of family support, negative financial impact and negative impact on schedule and health, caregivers rated financial impact as the heaviest burden, followed closely by negative impact on schedule and health.[+25 sentences] This is despite the fact that 49% of caregivers in this survey had the support of foreign domestic workers. The same survey shows that caregivers living in private property and, therefore, assumed to have better means, experienced lower stress, while caregivers who were working and who were facing more financial problems due to caregiving experienced higher stress. This is only one of the many surveys and studies that have shown consistent results. I think it is time we recognise that caregiving is full-time work, which prevents caregivers from realising their employment potential and affecting their financial security. How can we better support caregivers in this respect? Two years ago, during COS 2016, I asked the Government to consider giving means-tested refundable tax credits to caregivers, so that caregivers who do not work or work part-time would get some cash refund. This would lessen their financial burden and improve their retirement adequacy. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann then replied that the Government’s approach focused on direct subsidies of services to lessen the costs borne by caregivers, rather than providing cash allowances to people looking after family members. I am of the view that the two do not have to be mutually exclusive. Cash allowances to caregivers suffering from extreme negative financial impact would allow them to access the subsidised services. If we recognise full-time caregiving of seniors as unpaid work, then it is not far-fetched to consider them as low-wage employees who need income supplement. We should rethink the orthodoxy and provide income support to caregivers. There is already one scheme that is suited for this purpose – the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme. WIS is means-tested and, with older workers receiving higher payments, it will ensure the benefit will go to needy caregivers. Also, since 40% of the payment is given out in cash and 60% in CPF contributions, this will help take care of the immediate financial needs and enhance the retirement needs of the eligible caregivers. The second issue is the stress faced by caregivers of seniors, which, in the worst case, can lead to depression and anxiety. Studies of caregivers in Singapore have consistently shown high stress levels among caregivers. But, there are important differences. Caregivers of seniors with dementia experience higher stress. Female caregivers of seniors, namely wives and daughters, tend to experience a lot more stress than male caregivers. These female caregivers reported feeling rundown and exhausted and experienced restless sleepless nights. Many of them reported the desire to be involved in culturally relevant recreational activities, such as a game of mahjong, but they lack the social networks to get involved. Our caregivers are a heroic bunch with strong Asian family values. Another study has shown that caregivers often report concerns about the caregiving and much less about the effect of caregiving on their own physical and mental well-being. What this means is that while they know and are driven to care for their loved ones, the caregivers do not know how to care for themselves and tended to neglect their own well-being. Last year, during COS 2017, I asked the Government to provide better support to caregivers of seniors by setting up caregiver support centres at Senior Care Centres (SCCs). I was glad to hear from Senior Minister of State Amy Khor that the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) has started a three-year pilot since September 2015 to embed caregiver support services in five SCCs, and that AIC had also started AICareLinks centres at five hospitals and its office at Maxwell Road for caregivers to receive advice on services and schemes.[+10 sentences] I think these are great initiatives, but we are starting from a very low baseline of no support for caregivers. There is a lot more we can do, especially given the general reticence of caregivers to seek help for themselves. I suspect the caregivers are not too forthcoming in seeking caregiver support services at the SCCs and AICareLinks centres. It may well be that we would need to use the Social Service Offices (SSOs) and Family Service Centres (FSCs) infrastructure to bring the support to the caregivers to enhance their well-being. I understand the logic to integrate health and social support for seniors under MOH and empowering AIC to be the central implementing agency to coordinate the services announced in the Budget Statement. But I hope this integration will not come at a cost to the cross-functional integration between MOH and MSF, and between AIC and the SSOs when it comes to needy seniors and vulnerable caregivers of seniors. In fact, with seniors ageing in place and in their communities, the delivery of services is most effectively achieved by leveraging the community networks of the SSOs and FSCs. I turn now to the third and last set of issues, which are directly related to the retirement security of senior women. There are two issues here I would like to highlight: economic security and health security. First, existing cohorts of elderly women and soon-to-be senior women cohorts are experiencing economic vulnerabilities. In 2016, it was reported that for those over 60 years of age, the average CPF balance for women is only 69% that of men.[+5 sentences] This gap is narrowing for younger cohorts as gender equality improves with better educational attainment by women in recent decades. However, this problem will remain with us for at least another 20 years, as the gender CPF gap is similar for those aged 45 years and above. Back in 2008, HDB found that just over half of elderly residents living in HDB flats planned financially for retirement, with women much less likely to do so. Many elderly women, much more so than elderly men, are dependent on their spouses and children for financial support and many continued to work in low-paid jobs to supplement their meagre income. One study in 2011 showed that 26% of those aged 55 years and above reported they perceived occasional or regular financial inadequacy, with more women reporting this than men. Another study estimated that the relative poverty rate among the working elderly had jumped from 13% in 1995 to 41% in 2011.[+14 sentences] This means that among the working elderly, 41% had income from work, family members and state assistance amounting to less than 40% of the median income in the workforce. This suggests that many seniors are working past retirement age not just because they want to, but because they had to, and many in this category are women. It does not look like this issue is going to abate in the next decade. Instead, the scale of the economic insecurity problem will increase due to the doubling of the number of seniors to 2030. I would like to call on the Government to study this issue of the elderly working poor, especially involving women, more closely and adopt urgent measures to tackle the issue. One possible line of attack would be to look at how social service and community development agencies helping to place the elderly in jobs could also help the elderly draw up favourable contracts for service and provide advice and retraining opportunities to improve their income prospects. In the meantime, the Silver Support Scheme could be enhanced to mitigate the problems faced by the elderly working poor. As many of the seniors are dependent on their spouse and children for their housing needs, we should make sure this housing dependence does not erode the efficacy of state assistance to support the needy seniors. The Silver Support Scheme payouts to needy seniors are currently tiered according to the HDB housing types they are living in. This is unnecessary as the beneficiaries of the scheme are already means-tested. A needy senior living in a 5-room flat receiving $300 a quarter and a needy senior living in a 2-room flat receiving $750 a quarter are already means-tested to be facing low household support, with a monthly income per person in the household of not more than $1,100. One may be living in a bigger flat, but they are facing the same financial difficulties of meeting their everyday needs. The 5-room flat is a long-term asset and cannot be simply unlocked to support their everyday needs. How is the size of the HDB flat related to the provision of household support to the elderly poor? Is the tiered payout signalling to the family that they should downsize the flat to better support their seniors? I believe needy seniors should receive $750 a quarter, regardless of the size of the HDB flat where they live.[+4 sentences] The second issue is health security. Our seniors are now living longer, fruitful lives and receiving better healthcare. While women are living longer than men, women are also facing more downsides in health security than men. Senior women spend more years in disability than men, and women are two-and-a-half times more likely than men to report difficulties in carrying out typical activities of daily living. The gender-differentiated ElderShield premiums reflect this but, again, this means it compounds the gender income gap and greater financial insecurity faced by women.[+5 sentences] Senior women are also more prone to suffering from dementia and higher rates of depression, which are more home-bound diseases that compound the caregiving burdens faced by female family members. The concern is that women are caught up in an inter-generational vicious circle of caregiving and deterioration of mental well-being. We need a more targeted approach to tackle dementia and mental well-being among seniors and the general population at the national level. Mr Speaker, Sir, back in May last year, I asked a Parliamentary Question on whether the Government practises gender budgeting to determine the effect of policies on women. Gender budgeting involves analysing the Government’s annual Budget and programmes for their different impact on men and women, and then adjusting allocations and programme details to promote gender equality. Minister Heng Swee Keat replied to the question saying that in the design, planning and delivery of programmes, the Government accounts for the impact of policies on different segments of society, including gender, and target benefits at those in need and that Government policies have, over the years, enabled the advancement of women in Singapore.[+1 sentence] Indeed, they have. I read this reply positively as the Government does do some form of gender budgeting for its programmes, though it is not formalised as such.[+1 sentence] I especially like the part on targeting benefits at those in need. As I have made the case in this speech, gender equality is not just an aspiration, but a need. It is a need because, whether absolutely or relatively, the financial security of women through their career from young workers to would-be mothers to caregivers to seniors is paramount to the mitigation of neediness among our ageing population. It is a need because gender equality is one of the key upstream solutions to the downstream challenges of ageing and where opportunities for successful ageing of our seniors are shaped and forged.[+1 sentence] To promote gender equality is thus to be strategic and integrated, as this Budget seeks to be.
The Senior Minister of State, Prime Minister's Office (Mr Heng Chee How)2802 words
[+6 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you very much for allowing me to join the debate. I wish to state right here that I fully support this year's Budget. Sir, when Singapore became independent, some of its key domestic socioeconomic challenges were: low levels of education for the general population, a young and growing working-age population that faced frustration over uncertain prospects, low wages, high unemployment of around 10%, amid unstable industrial relations. And the workforce then was predominantly rank-and-file. Fifty-three years on, our challenges are now different. Our education system prepares students for PMET jobs. PMET employees comprise more than half of our workforce.[+1 sentence] A gig economy element is also growing. We now have a rapidly ageing population and local workforce partly due to the Baby Boom generation effect, while our unemployment rate of 2% to 3% is much lower than that of 1965 in Singapore, or when we compare with most other countries currently, and our industrial relations are stable.[+25 sentences] The rising impact of disruption caused by changing business models, technology and global competition has significantly increased our risk of job obsolescence or, as some people call it ,"jobsolescence", as well as job loss. General wage levels have risen but there is a need to continue efforts to transform low-wage industries for better earnings and prospects. For Singapore as a whole and for the Labour Movement, these changes and realities will dictate our priorities as we continue to pursue our mission to care for our population and to care and value all working persons. For the Labour Movement, we continue to want to work closely with the Government and employers to develop that better future for Singaporeans. To that point, there are three key priority areas where the Labour Movement could help Singapore and Singaporeans do better. First, in the area of "High Age", and this is shorthand for the unavoidable ageing of our local workforce and its implications. I will speak more on this later. Second, low wage. Over the past several years, dedicated efforts by the Tripartite Partners have brought about hard-earned tangible improvement in the terms of work for lower wage workers. The road ahead remains long and arduous, as structural improvements require sustained transformation of mindsets, skills, technology and procurement practices on the part of employers, service buyers, workers and regulators. Third, the "Double Middle". Just because a growing proportion of the workforce comprises PMET jobs does not mean that every PMET employee is secure in his job. With changing technology alone, for example, artificial intelligence (AI), Internet of Things (IoT), Manufacturing 4.0, Robotics and others, many longstanding routine PMET jobs will be redesigned or may be rendered redundant and be replaced by new roles and requirements. Add to that the continuing pressure to de-layer and flatten organisations and to outsource jobs and functions to more cost-competitive countries, we can see the need to help not only today's unemployed find jobs, but also to help those who may be more at risk of becoming "tomorrow's unemployed" manage their risks. This will entail proactive Tripartite partnerships to spur transformation at the industry, company and job levels and to improve the conditions for prompt and seamless skills upgrading and conversion to take advantage of new income opportunities. It would also include enhancements to job-matching and job-switching machinery for both traditional and emerging ways to earn a living, as well as the corresponding safety nets to help the displaced find their feet again quickly. Sir, my fellow Labour Members of Parliament will elaborate on these priorities in their Budget speeches that follow. Labour Member of Parliament, Mr Desmond Choo, will speak of the value that youth will bring to our nation and share how the NTUC is reaching out to them even before they join the workforce. Touching on the issue concerning the "Double Middle" group, that is, middle-income and middle-age, and wherein there is a growing number of PMETs, my fellow Member of Parliament, Mr Patrick Tay, will share how we must value every such worker and how to keep them relevant. Labour Nominated Member of Parliament, Ms Thanaletchimi, will call on all to value the family behind every worker, particularly for women, who often have to juggle between work and family commitments. With the rise of the gig economy, Labour Member of Parliament, Mr Ang Hin Kee, will remind us not to underestimate the value that freelancers and the self-employed bring to our economy. While fellow Labour Members of Parliament have touched on various worker groups, my Labour Member of Parliament colleague, Mr Zainal Sapari, will put the emphasis on the low-wage workers, whose contributions we must continue to value. As we all spend our time at the workplace, Labour Member of Parliament, Mr Melvin Yong, will speak on the value of the life of every worker and how we can render every workplace safer and healthier. Sir, let me now elaborate on the "High Age" area and argue why it is critical that we not allow ourselves to be blind-sided by this aspect. Sir, Singapore quietly entered a new era in 2018. For the first time in our history, the proportion of our citizen population below 15 years old equaled that of our citizen population above 65 years old.[+1 sentence] In years to come, there will be more citizens above 65 than there are those below 15. By one estimate, by the year 2030, the below-15 segment might constitute, say, 11% of the population whereas the above-65 portion could be 27%.[+3 sentences] One might ask, so what? Well, that means that Singapore may be headed for a triple whammy, if we are not careful. First, there will be the peaking of the citizen workforce around 2020 and thereafter plateau and then decline. That does not include attrition from the workforce due to skills obsolescence and mismatch. This shrinking of the citizen workforce will narrow the personal income tax base, adding strain to Government revenues.[+6 sentences] Second, the shrinking citizen workforce and loss of relevant experience through retirement of older workers will impact the ability of companies to operate optimally, unless, of course, they are able to raise productivity or, perhaps, if they could increase the proportion of foreign manpower in their workforce, or profitably and sustainably retain the services of mature workers longer. The constraint on company growth will, in turn, lead to lower-than-potential corporate tax contributions to Government revenues. So, that is the second whammy. The third one, the growing senior segment of the population, will lead to more social spending and support in healthcare and welfare, especially if structural unemployment or downward pressure on the income among seniors increases. The combination of these three factors will mean that the shrinking working population and companies will shoulder an increasingly heavier tax burden to support the reducing tax contribution from the senior population as they leave employment and as they incur higher living expenses linked to ageing. In short, the earlier the older segment of our population ceases to be able to contribute economically, the earlier and more painful we can expect the tax increases that the working population and companies would have to bear in support. Conversely, the longer our mature workers can remain employed and earning, the more they can help contribute towards Government revenues and also support their own needs and thus helping to delay and reduce the need for the general taxpayers and younger citizens and companies to have to chip in earlier than necessary. It is also for this reason that the Tripartite Partners have agreed over the years to extend, first, the statutory Retirement Age, and then to introduce Re-employment and, most recently, to raise the Re-employment Age ceiling from 65 to 67 effective July 2017.[+11 sentences] The raising of re-employment age to 67 actually was contained in the recommendations of the Tripartite Committee on the Extension of the Retirement Age back in July 1997. It is very important but not something easy to do and it took us 20 years to move to 67. Going forward, the question is what do we do and whether this broad tactic of prolonging employment across the board by law is going to be as doable as in the past 20 years or would it face additional challenges. I would like to share that there are at least two specific considerations that we have to bear in mind, going forward. Firstly, despite the improvement in the general health condition of our population over the years, across-the-board statutory re-employment age increase would more likely encounter different constraints for different industries and occupation types as we go into higher age brackets. That said, investments in the use of assistive technology and age-universal process and job design and redesign must continue relentlessly, so that we are able to compensate for the physical declines of the workforce to the greatest extent possible. And in this, schemes like WorkPro should continue and be refined to produce more substantive and pervasive outcomes wherever such opportunities exist so that we maximise this benefit. Secondly, and increasingly important, the threat to employability due to job obsolescence, skills obsolescence and skills mismatch. Hitherto, technology was used mainly to improve efficiency of work processes. Today, technology goes beyond that to drive Business Model revamps. What this means is that a person’s job may change or disappear much faster than before, not only because his company is not doing well, but because entire occupations, organisational layers and how value is created, delivered and captured in an industry may fundamentally change. Some estimates say up to 25% of jobs in the current economy may be altered or displaced by technology in the coming 20 years.[+17 sentences] A person displaced for this reason will have a hard time finding a similar job because the job category itself may be fading. While this scenario may confront a worker of any age, the average older working person may face more and higher hurdles in the adaptation and switching process, on top of ageist attitudes among some employers, and may be displaced out of the workforce long before reaching the re-employment age. With such pervasive technology, rapid digitalisation and changing business models, how can companies stay competitive while tapping on mature workers who bring value, insights and experience to the table? Could we try harder in making the workplace more conducive for mature workers to contribute? How about training them to be more digitally aware and technologically competent, placing them in growth sectors? When we travel to another country with a different plug and socket design for their appliances, we all know that it would be very troublesome if our appliance does not have the right plug design. Even if the appliance itself is functioning well, you cannot use it because you cannot connect to the power source. That is why we find the multi-adaptor plug so useful on trips. We also know that if we go to a country whose language we do not know, we will encounter many difficulties even to get very basic things done or to have ourselves understood. Conversely, if we understand and speak the language, we will be as a duck takes to water. This is the reality. I say this as an analogy for the employment and employability of working people of all ages because, increasingly, it will be like becoming a multi-adaptor plug and being able to understand and use the language of a place. Workers who can learn and adapt repeatedly in their working lifespans will last longer and earn better, whilst those who cannot or will not do so will face increasing difficulties in employment and re-employment, regardless of whatever law you pass or wage subsidies that the Government may put in. In this rapidly changing world of work, skills requirements change quickly with the flux of competitive business models, technology and innovation. Old areas of the economy fade away even as new opportunities emerge. Some growing job areas would be brought about by this very ageing of the population, such as in personal support services, healthcare and eldercare. That is why working persons must keep up with the changing requirements or else find themselves of the "wrong plug design" and become powerless. In this context, workers need to and want to learn what are the skills at risk and what are the skills they need to pick up, and where they can do so efficiently and cost-effectively. This is where the expeditious implementation of the industry transformation Maps for key industries will be critical.[+7 sentences] Businesses and Industry Associations must take the lead, with the support of the Government and the Labour Movement, and to do this without delay. Here, I want to remind everyone not to unconsciously fall into the mind trap of thinking that industry transformation involves only the younger working population or only the local population. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. A company’s workforce is typically both young and mature, both local and foreign. If a company or industry focuses transformation only on one part of its workforce and neglects or dismisses the other parts, it is, actually, short-changing itself. If Singapore, therefore, neglects the segment of its workforce that is growing the fastest – and here, for the local workforce, that is the mature segment – then it is downright counter-productive for these reasons that I have discussed earlier. From the perspective of the company, it would be both sacrificing its own potential capability as well as practically inviting higher corporate tax burdens on itself sooner. For all the above reasons and given that the recommendation of the Tripartite Committee on the Extension of the Retirement Age to 67 has been fully implemented, there is, therefore, cause, in my view, for another Tripartite Committee to be convened to consider the road ahead, beyond 67. I, therefore, call for the forming of such a Tripartite Committee and would like to propose that its terms of reference could include the following.[+3 sentences] Firstly, to assess the effective retirement age, which is not the same as the statutory retirement age, since 1993, and recommend measures to further raise the employment rate of older workers. This includes how the implementation of the Industry Transformation Maps must include the upgrading of mature workers and the speeding up of progress toward more age-universal workplaces. Secondly, in light of the pervasive adoption of the performance-based employment model over the years, to consider whether there is still a need for a statutory retirement age or for a ceiling to be applied to the re-employment age band. Thirdly, if the statutory age and re-employment age band are still assessed to be necessary, clarify the conditions under which the re-employment ceiling of 67 could be further raised and to what long-term targeted age.[+3 sentences] I further call for a special focus on confidence building for mature workers in digital awareness and competencies in working with robotics and in using data smartly to finesse the supply of and demand for goods and services. This is the new language in the world of work. We should proactively and aggressively promote their learning and use, just as we had in promoting basic literacy and numeracy through BEST and WISE courses, and IT confidence through the National IT Literacy Programme (NITLP) in years past. The newly introduced SkillsFuture for the Digital Workplace is a good example of what needs to be done in this regard, and I hope and call for more to be done.[+14 sentences] Facility and adeptness are not innate attributes or in-born. They come with exposure and usage. Finally, I urge the Government to specifically work out recruitment plans and conversion programmes to induct mature workers into the growing areas of healthcare, eldercare and ageing in place. These are growing areas of job opportunities and they also allow our mature workers actually to play to their strengths. The NTUC and Labour Movement stand ready to actively partner and support the Government and the business community in all these areas to build this critical dynamic employability in our older working persons. And we will do that with our network of unions, social enterprises and U-Associate partners. The better we are at pursuing these objectives, the more we will avert that triple-whammy I described and, in fact, turn adversity into advantage and a concern into strength. A better future is possible, but it never comes from just hoping for the best. That future must be invested in, slogged for and cherished together. Time is ticking away and the consequences of our actions or lack of actions will become clearer by the day and month. So, let us press on resolutely. Let us not drop the ball. We must succeed so that our mature workers and citizens' future in Singapore will remain one of hope and promise. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines)1299 words
[+6 sentences]Mr Speaker, the Budget that we are debating about today is about the future of Singapore and, to a large extent, our ongoing economic transformation and the value that each and every worker brings to this ecosystem. Critical to this transformation are the social and career foundations that we are putting in place for the workforce. I will touch on how we can strengthen our social and career foundations further to help Singaporeans, especially younger Singaporean workers and families, to prepare for the changes. Ever more rapid technological disruptions will continue to fundamentally change how work is done. Singapore's limited resources meant that we have ever narrower margins of error to prepare ourselves for the new economy. Our workforce, especially the workers of the future, must be able to take on future challenges quickly and adroitly. The Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) are important guides to help companies and workers understand and prepare for this future. We have committed $4.5 billion for this effort.[+3 sentences] Ideally, employers and employees are aligned in the ITMs and work towards redesigning jobs for the future, promote innovation and seek and seize opportunities to go international, where possible. Because this transformation requires fundamental structural changes, ITMs will, understandably, take time to be pervasive. Two recent surveys done, one on businesses and another on students at the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) hinted that we need to intensify our transformation efforts. In a survey done by the Singapore Business Federation (SBF), companies said that ITMs are a good initiative but about half of these companies are not so clear on what the transformation processes entail. One in four companies are slow to transform their businesses and some have not digitised any part of their businesses at all.[+8 sentences] Clearly, these businesses lack transformation capacity. For example, many training programmes require time away from work. But in a tight labour market, workers are prioritised for operational purposes. The schemes announced in the Budget, such as Productivity Solutions Grant, will go in some way to aid companies to innovate and build deeper capabilities. However, there is still a missing link of a last mile connection of turning transformation plans into transformative actions. Our future workers might also need to be primed for the transformation. Our younger Singaporeans are the future of Singapore’s workforce. They need to be part of this transformation. In a recent survey done by Young NTUC in January 2018 on about 400 students in the universities and private educational institutions revealed that around 83% have not heard about the ITMs.[+30 sentences] Out of the 17% who said they have heard about ITMs, the level of understanding about them was only 6.5, out of a scale of one to 10, whereby 10 denotes that they fully understand the information. This is a concern. It meant that, for most students, the industry that they are studying hard for would have changed in no small measure by the time they graduated. But they would not know this until they have entered the workforce. Students in the IHLs who are poised to enter various industries need to understand these plans so that they can gear up for the changes in the sectors. While the roll-out of ITMs is not yet complete, the communication of the ITMs need to be stepped up so that businesses, workers and students are plugged into the plans and development within their sectors. In both cases – for businesses and students – there is a "last mile gap" in connecting available schemes with the target groups and stakeholders. I would suggest that the Labour Movement could play a bigger role in bridging the gap for both businesses and students. Recently, I visited the workers from the SATS Workers' Union (SATSWU) at their workplaces at the airport. They proudly showed me the new technologies, such as automated check-in and bag-drop. They could now attend to more passengers and guide them – adding value where they previously could not. There were important developments that would improve workers’ productivity and allow workers to work for longer in better jobs. So, I asked, "How is this possible?" They shared that because the industry changes were shared in advance, gaps were identified early and their skillsets were identified in advance. SATSWU also worked with the company to train its workers. However, it was also noted that the operations also depended in part on sub-contractors. The passenger experience was dependent on the capabilities of these smaller companies. These smaller companies might lack the resources to train their workers and undertake productivity initiatives. The Labour Movement can coordinate with these companies and their bigger unionised counterparts on training needs. Then, the training modules can be placed on board NTUC’s ULEAP bite-sized training platforms, so that workers can be trained without significant downtime. This will eventually improve our transformation capacity. Before I left the airport, I asked the workers, "Can we continue to do better?" They shared with me and said, "Of course, we can. Transformation is not new to us, changes at the airport are constant. As long as workers are involved early, productivity gains are shared, workers' value are unleashed to take advantage of transformation and workers' energies and ideas to make airport processes better". For students, ITMs must be made accessible to them so that students can understand the key thrusts of our economic transformation for their desired industry or profession. NTUC, through its youth wing, can help the students navigate the ITMs through industry tie-ups and youth career networks. The latter peer-to-peer systems are more accessible and less top-down. It is shared from an industry peer to another student. Information is personalised, curated and more readily accepted by our millennials and younger generation. Furthermore, to increase youth involvement in SMEs, we also call on the Government to try to help SMEs by providing seed funding to create internship opportunities, and these opportunities can be managed by intermediaries, such as NTUC or the trade associations.[+6 sentences] This would then give SMEs greater access to young talent. The changes brought about by our economic transformation will require workers to be nimble and ready to take on new challenges. Thus, our social system must also be enhanced. More social support should be given to our workers to balance their work and home responsibilities better. Young parents, for example, would require more support in the new economy as they can be considered as "double sandwiched" – middle-income and also having to take care of young children and older parents. As Singaporeans are marrying later, families are getting smaller and people have longer life expectancy, the responsibility of taking care of both young and older parents can converge at such a point in a young couple's life and for a prolonged period. Such families would have to cope with the stresses and rising costs of looking after children and meet the needs of healthcare and other forms of care for their aged parents. Therefore, we need to review how our subsidies and support for childcare and student care are structured, especially for parents with more than one young child and also elderly parents to take care of. As these responsibilities must be juggled and balanced with their careers, could the Government also consider making eldercare or family care leave mandatory in Singapore? This could provide some relief to Singaporeans who must take care of family members who are not covered by childcare leave or parental leave.[+4 sentences] I am confident that as long as the Tripartite Partners work together, we can tackle the challenges and successfully transform our economy. We plug the gaps, we gear up our workers and students for these challenges and we provide greater support for them and their families. Together, we can create a better future for Singaporeans. Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast)2716 words
[+11 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this year's Budget. If you ask me how I would describe this year's Budget, I would say it is a Budget with its "Feet on the ground, hand on the heart and eyes to the future”. "Feet on the ground" because we ground ourselves on solid footing and fundamentals. We ensure our businesses and enterprises do well, so that our workers benefit through better jobs and pay, and stay employed and employable. "Hand on the heart" because of it having the courage to confront the difficult fiscal challenges, share the fruits and to ensure no one is left behind. "Eyes to the future" because of the clarity of focus to build our country, the curiosity to test new ideas and innovations and the conviction to stay the course and prepare for the future. I am worried for a group of workers. My fellow Labour Member of Parliament, Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How mentioned it earlier – it is the double-middle group. They are our Professionals, Managers and Executives (PMEs) or what we often call the "sandwiched class". Why am I worried? The latest labour market report, as well as the labour market trends, do not auger well for them. Seventy percent of those laid off in 2016 and 2017 were PMETs. The trend is that the more degrees you have and the older you are, the more difficult for you to find employment after you have been laid off, are terminated from or leave your employment.[+8 sentences] Structural unemployment, under-employment and unemployment are three challenges which confront our workers in Singapore, especially PMEs. The three "Ds" – Digitalisation, Disruption and Demographics will transform or make redundant traditional jobs, while creating new specialised jobs. In the new normal, skills acquisition will have to increase in frequency, while working people will progressively experience more transitions in their employment life-cycles. A working person may be in a multi-national corporation today, a small and medium enterprise tomorrow, and possibly opt to freelance in the near future. The future of work, workers and workplaces will transform. In the Labour Movement, we value every worker and we are, therefore, concerned about employment and employability of all, especially the PMEs. First, jobs at risk. Are there jobs at risk? During our Labour Movement’s recent Future Jobs, Skills and Training Forum last month, Citibank shared that four years ago, they set up their first smart banking branch and started eliminating jobs.[+20 sentences] There was no longer a need for bank tellers, greeters, cash officers and service bankers in the branches. In their place were 130 multi-skilled, universal service bankers. Job roles requiring a single skill were eliminated. The new job role consolidated adjacent skills and role requirements into one role. In two years' time, the Universal Service Bankers' role will also evolve and may also not exist as more digitisation and digitalisation are adopted. Sales jobs have also been impacted as people prefer to procure services via the Internet or through mobile apps. For example, chatbots are likely to eliminate telephone marketing and support jobs as people prefer not to wait to talk to a person when they have a query; they want to have their query keyed in online and receive an immediate response in their digital environment of choice, for example, in Facebook. In the accountancy sector, the traditional maker and checker roles to assess compliance in assurance, audit and tax will be transformed. With adoption of technology, the process of consolidating and making sense of information will be made easier. Employees will need to possess broader skills in areas of understanding technology. An example is a Tax Technologist who must also understand fraud detection systems. The audit role has to shift to one which helps the client to manage the risk and compliance issues of the business. If it is of any relief, many jobs will continue to require uniquely human skills that artificial intelligence and machines cannot replicate, such as creativity, collaboration, abstract and systems thinking, complex communication and the ability to work in diverse environments. The companies that fare best in this new disruptive era will be those that embrace these changes rapidly and effectively. Put simply, new jobs and economic growth will accrue to those who embrace technology, not those who resist it. Second, skills at risk. Are there skills at risk? At risk of becoming obsolete? At risk of not becoming acquired fast enough? My short answer is yes. The half-life of skills is about five years.[+21 sentences] We need to not just skill our workers to be great at their jobs today but also skilled so as to be prepared for the jobs of tomorrow. Our working people typically take about 15 years to prepare themselves for their first job with the expectation to progress to more challenging and better paying jobs thereafter. Paradoxically, people generally spend less time and effort to prepare and upskill themselves for their next job. Given the time pressures, financial and family commitments, it would not be practical to set aside another 15 years to upskill working people for their next job. The adult learning model thus has to be reworked to enable working people to upskill and remain marketable and relevant and enhance their opportunities for career progression. We need to re-tool at a faster rate. That is why, in NTUC, we are reworking the entire adult learning model. We want to develop modules which are bite-sized and just-in-time for continuous learning. The speed of demand for new skills is faster than the speed of supply of new skills. For every company which has lost out in the digital race, such as Kodak and Borders, there are new companies which are flourishing, such as Carousell and Airbnb. There is a need to make available bite-sized and just-in-time training so that our working people can keep abreast of the latest developments in their work domains. For example, a cybersecurity practitioner needs to keep up with the latest cybersecurity threats and such training should be delivered within 24 hours through bite-sized two-to three-minute updates on-the-go. In the same manner, a safety professional in the construction industry would need to keep abreast of industrial accidents so that they can learn quickly from them and apply the learning at their workplaces. This is a challenge that the world is facing and if Singapore gets this right, our workers can be one step ahead. The traditional mode of curriculum development in Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) is a long one. IHLs have to take time to figure out the market demand, design the curriculum and mobilise workers to be trained. To shorten the development phase, the way forward is to work with companies to design bespoke training to be conducted in-company to upskill their workers. This can shorten the development phase of training substantially as the company knows what skills it wants its workers to be trained in and can mobilise the workers to take up the training. The need to continually upskill applies to both employees and freelancers – all working people should take personal responsibility to prepare and upskill in relevant areas for future jobs. It is imperative that freelancers take on the responsibility to keep their skillsets relevant, too. Increasingly, it is not just a question of encouraging people to learn new skills, but of finding new ways to help them acquire the skills they will need. The biggest challenges involve the creation of ways to help people learn new skills and then rethinking how the labour market operates to enable employers and employees to move in more agile ways to fill up new positions. We have $500 of SkillsFuture credit for individuals to encourage individual-initiated training. Why not take the employer-supported training funding formula, like giving the employers a similar SkillsFuture credit, for them to send their workers for training and skills upgrading?[+15 sentences] In this respect, I have three suggestions on what employers and employees need to do. I call it the three Cs ─ Change Mindsets, Communicate and Collaborate. Mindset change is crucial. Employers' mindsets have to change. Employers tend to fear that the benefits of investing in training are lost when employees leave. It is a valid, albeit myopic, concern. Instead of viewing training as a short-term cost, employee development should be regarded as a long-term investment that allows staff to add value to their roles and take up expanded job scopes. The better employees become at their jobs, the easier it is for organisations to attain the level of productivity projected. Employers, when hiring, need to do skills-based interviews to assess skills, experiences and fit with organisation's culture and values and not just look at paper qualifications and age. Be open to hiring mature and older workers. Our Labour Movement's recent research reveal that employers prefer to hire skilled, trained and experienced staff instead of training their existing staff for these new jobs or hiring someone untrained and train him up. In short, they want "plug and play" employees. We have a tight labour market and an ageing workforce. Employers will find it tough to find the perfect match. I, therefore, urge employers to change their mindsets on "plug and play" and adopt a "hire then train" approach. Best of all, re-train, up-skill and multi-skill their existing workers so that they, too, can take on these new roles. We have started this in the financial sector, with the three local banks embarking on training more than 1,000 of their local workers through the in-house professional conversion programme (PCP) as part of the industry transformation and Tripartite efforts of the financial sector.[+6 sentences] Lastly, the responsibility for skills development and acquisition does not reside solely with the employer nor the Government. Individuals must have a learning mindset in the course of their careers so as to remain able, agile and adaptable. We need to bring people together sector by sector to collaborate, transform our companies and then take proactive and concrete steps to train, re-skill and up-skill employees to match the in-demand skills and competencies. Besides our Tripartite Partners, the Labour Movement has started working with industry partners, training providers and IHL, for example, the Labour Movement’s Multi-Union, Multi-U Associate alliance to uplift standards and improve the employability of workers in the OPEC industries by uplifting standards of process technicians and engineers. By doing so, this will create accreditation of the process technicians' trade and raise the standards whilst boosting transferability of their skillsets. The Labour Movement is also partnering the Institute of Engineers, Singapore, to raise engineering and technical competencies in the profession. The 23 Industry Transformation Maps are developed by the sector, but they are merely blueprints.[+2 sentences] More importantly, the Industry Transformation Maps must be operationalised to benefit the workers on the ground, and stakeholders must join hands to make this happen. In this rapidly changing landscape, transformation is critical and requires strong partnerships between unions, our working people, enterprises, education and training providers, professional guilds and the Government to enable meaningful and mutually-reinforcing transformation for the benefit of all stakeholders and our economy. In engagements with various stakeholders, we found that one of the underlying factors impeding future-skilling and job mismatches was information asymmetry.[+16 sentences] It is important to align all stakeholders and identify what the future jobs and skills are and communicate effectively to all. Besides just looking at job losses and gains, concerted action needs to be taken to identify jobs at-risk of displacement. This is what I urge every sector and every company to do. To proactively and pre-emptively identify the jobs at risk in their organisations and help their employees, our working people, to stay Ready, Relevant and Resilient – Ready with the new skills, Relevant for the new jobs and also Resilient to the new changes. Our workforce has to be Able and equipped with the skills to take on these new jobs, Agile to move across sectors and Adaptable to change. This reminds me of the Wallet Ninja, I have it here. It is a multi-purpose pocket multi-tool, it reminds me of the importance of multi-skilling and making our skills work for us in a variety of scenarios and conditions as and when the situation and need arises. It is also made of four times' treated steel, to remind us to steel ourselves for changes ahead. In conclusion, we have a Budget which values every worker but done by keeping our feet on the ground and staying ready, relevant and resilient. Putting our hand on heart and communicating the jobs and skills at risk. Focusing our eyes on the future by helping the unemployed land into future jobs. We can never change the direction of the wind but we can adjust our sails to always reach the destination. Before I end my speech, I wanted to respond to what hon Member Assoc Prof Daniel Goh spoke on earlier. He spoke about the future of women, plight of nurses, caregivers and seniors. He suggested we spend more and more to help them. I was Executive Secretary and Advisor of the Healthcare Service Union since 2006, more than a decade ago. For the past decade, the Union has been collectively bargaining on behalf of all healthcare workers whether they are workers in the nursing as well in the non-nursing areas in our various healthcare clusters. We have reviewed salary scales on several occasions and had many heated negotiations and collective bargaining with our employers and have done a lot of work to raise wages as well as salaries and improving career conditions and career progression for healthcare workers, both nursing and non-nursing.[+1 sentence] In fact, we have set up a Tripartite Committee and they have been looking at this issue for the past decade, working very closely with the major employers, including MOH, in particular, looking at how we can upskill and raise the career prospects to attract more into this sector where we are in need of workers. Their collective agreements are publicly available documents which Members can refer to. We have since negotiated increases in salary scales and made good progress in terms of annual increments and bonuses.[+8 sentences] So, it is not right to say that their futures and their careers have not been looked after, or neglected. Since a decade ago, from job redesign, then to a one-race to the top, and then now to the Industry Transformation Maps, we have been working very closely with Tripartite Partners, we have made significant headway. If you speak to any healthcare worker in the public healthcare institutions, they can share with you some of the initiatives and programmes that they have done and embarked very tenaciously on. In Singapore, more than two decades ago, we have adopted, at a Tripartite level, a very flexible wage system and a competency-based hiring and progression structure and framework. Therefore, I am surprised to hear that, with these structures and systems in place, some people are short-changed. But I think it is a journey. Yes, maybe perhaps there may be some form of discrimination here and there in small pockets. Yes, we do encounter some of them. But I think it is important to work together as Tripartite Partners and also on all fronts to make sure that, not just pay and wages but also their interests, are not just fair and responsible but also progressive. I also want to express a bit of my concern over Assoc Prof Daniel Goh's various suggestions to raise wages, Silver support, healthcare spending.[+6 sentences] He has made many suggestions on increasing our country's spending but did not really talk about where the money should come from and whether it will be sustainable. I think that is something very important ‒ it must be sustainable. It is this very reason that we want to ensure our healthcare workers are looked after and our healthcare costs are managed that we have this year's Budget. We are concerned and we do not want anyone ‒ whether young or old, male or female ‒ to be left behind. This Budget 2018 is very imperative and its focus is to help each and every one of our Singaporeans navigate a path and be future-ready, and to build up our resources and stay focused. On that note, I support Budget 2018.
Ms K Thanaletchimi (Nominated Member)2824 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of Budget 2018 presented by Minister Heng Swee Keat. I am heartened that the Budget is all-inclusive and it embraces both the short-term and long-term needs of Singapore. Sir, I will be speaking on two broad areas, that is, Industry Transformation Maps and Women at Work. On operationalising Industry Transformation Maps in our journey of economic transformation, I agree that the approach of Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) for the 23 industries was a good start. We need to work on the strategies to operationalise them. The ITMs were a product of Tripartite efforts and should be treated beyond a paper exercise. All relevant stakeholders should continue to come together and implement the ideas on the ITMs. This should be an ongoing effort. On 8 November 2017, Minister Gan Kim Yong, launched the Healthcare ITM which mapped out the key strategies to steer the healthcare industry and workforce towards better skills and better work, so that they can deliver better care for Singaporeans.[+6 sentences] The Singapore healthcare system is confronted with an ageing population with increasing chronic conditions, coupled with a slower workforce growth and rising healthcare costs. Minister Gan presented three "beyonds", that is, beyond healthcare to health, beyond hospital to community and beyond quality to value to ensure our healthcare system meets the three core objectives of accessibility, quality and affordability. The future directions for the healthcare industry have been put forward clearly in the ITM. Therefore, it is important to operationalise the ideas effectively. I shall now speak on national skills framework. First and foremost, there is a need to develop a national skills framework for current skills in demand and future skills. SkillsFuture Singapore has started its work on the development of the skills framework for six healthcare professions, namely, Physiotherapy, Speech Therapy, Occupational Therapy, Nursing, Patient Service Associate and Pharmacy Technician.[+3 sentences] We should continue to look at other healthcare professions, such as Therapy Assistant and Community Nurse, in view of the shift towards community care. We should also consider other job positions in the administrative job group to ensure that the relevant skills and training are mapped out for their career progression. There is fear amongst administrative and ancillary staff group, like the health attendants, that, with automation and robotics, will their job be redundant. One way would be to embark on the progressive wage model (PWM) across all levels of healthcare professions.[+16 sentences] PWM will help to increase wages of healthcare employees through skills upgrading and productivity improvement. Another way would be to gradually move away from only recognising academic qualification to purely skill-based remuneration to break the glass ceiling. Hence, the shift towards modularised training is highly recommended. The Institutes of Higher Learning (IHL) should develop such modules to deepen the skills of healthcare employees. In return, the healthcare institutions, both public and private, should embrace and recognise these skills attained by the employees and remunerate them accordingly. Let me share with you the plight of such a group of workers who felt their career is stagnant. These are the secretaries for the clinical department in the hospitals. They have no room for growth or career advancement unless they obtain higher academic qualifications, that is, diploma or degree. This should not be the case if we truly embark on skills-based PWM and elimination of the glass ceiling. Next, it is also crucial to identify jobs at risk and work out feasible plans for affected employees to ensure smooth transition of employees from existing jobs to new jobs by engaging MOH, public healthcare clusters and various healthcare institutions. For example, the jobs in medical records departments in various healthcare institutions would be replaced by National Electronic Health Record (NEHR). Essentially, we need to engage the relevant stakeholders early to minimise disruption to employees’ livelihood. While we look at existing jobs at risk, it is equally important to identify future jobs to work out the skills and training required. In addition, other support schemes, such as the Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs), Career Support Programme and Work or Career Trial, would supplement the existing efforts in attracting local talents into the growing manpower demand in the healthcare industry. We need to find ways to shorten the PCP programmes and improve the quality and standards of healthcare professionals, especially for career switchers. In this aspect, we need to draw in the expertise and wisdom of the professional licensing body. It is critical for us to change so as to attract more locals into the healthcare profession. It would also be worthwhile to conduct a study on the nearly 4,000 non-practising nurses to understand their reasons for exiting from this profession and what would make them return as a practising nurse.[+13 sentences] With the shift to community nursing and the focus on the Intermediate and Long-Term Care (ILTC) sector, we will need more nurses with the relevant skillsets and attributes. I would like to suggest three ways to embark on this. First, provide opportunity for workers in other industries who are potentially in danger of retrenchment or whose industries are in the sunset industry. Work with the relevant stakeholders, licensing body, IHL and professional group to review the current training programme and provide them with bite-sized curriculum. Two, invite non-practising nurses to return to nursing, especially in community nursing and the ILTC sector. Provide them with the specific skillsets required for community nursing and allow flexible work arrangements. Though the return-to-work programme has been fairly successful in healthcare, we can tweak it to make it more attractive for such groups of non-practising nurses who are mainly housewives. Third, tap the mature workforce to create supporting roles, such as healthcare assistants or healthcare attendants. Provide training for them so they have the relevant skills. These are decent jobs that will allow our mature workers to join the healthcare sector. Last but not least, I would like to put forward the idea of setting up a Healthcare Academy at the Tripartite level with the participation of relevant stakeholders. I mooted this suggestion at the last Budget debate. I would like to re-ignite this, especially after having gathered more ground feedback from various professional groups of workers and relevant stakeholders. The two key objectives of the Healthcare Academy are: one, to provide enhanced skills training to all healthcare professionals identified in the Healthcare ITM; and two, to standardise the foundational core skills training for identified healthcare professionals, especially in the ILTC sector.[+29 sentences] The verticals of the skillset training must be seen in parallel with the horizontals of the soft skillset. This is all the more important as we are seeing an increasing number of healthcare professionals bringing healthcare services to patients at home. As the home setting is an uncontrolled environment compared to a controlled hospital setting, we need to equip our healthcare professionals with the relevant skills to deal with unforeseen situations and in managing their emotional and mental well-being. Let me now touch on the topic of Women at Work. As a society, we embrace inclusivity and, as corporations, we should embrace corporate social responsibility where human capital, regardless of gender, has to be nurtured and retained. I concur with Labour Member Desmond Choo that more can be done to help our young parents thrive in the new economy. It is particularly challenging for women who often have to juggle work and family commitments. I will be speaking mainly on family-friendly workplaces and the employment and employability of women. Value the family behind every worker. The topic on family-friendly workplace has been a discussion point without much yield. The slow adoption of the Tripartite Standards on Flexi-work Arrangement is rather concerning. Singapore remains a rather conservative country when it comes to caring for and valuing the family that is behind every worker. The burden of caring for the young and elderly often fall on the shoulders of women. Companies in various sectors can do more to help female workers. I would like to share a case where a nurse working in a healthcare setting had to give up her job because she was not granted flexible work arrangements as she had to look after her children. The relationship with her Reporting Officer (RO) became strained after her RO refused to grant her flexible work arrangement as she could not find any person to take up parts of her duties. She related her experience to the union but decided not to take it up with the human resource department as she did not want to cause any trouble. Sir, I shall speak in Tamil. (In Tamil): At this juncture, I would like to share a case of a nurse whom I know working in a healthcare setting who had to give up her job because she was not granted flexible work arrangements as she had to look after her children. The relationship with her employer became bitter after her reporting officer refused to grant her flexible work arrangements as she could not find any other nurse to take up part of her duties. She related her experience to the union but decided not to take it up with the higher-ups as she did not want to cause any trouble. (In English): Similarly, another female staff, who devoted most of her working life to one employer had requested for flexible work arrangements as she has to look after her school-going children and ailing mother-in-law. She, too, had had her request turned down. What do these anecdotal stories tell us? While the top management of most companies are supportive of flexible work arrangements in principle, however, it does not seem that such support trickles down to every level within the organisation. Departments and supervisors do not know exactly how to implement flexible work arrangements successfully. They have KPIs to meet and, therefore, tend to take a hard stand with such requests. In both cases, they typically involve women who are burdened and who are financially strapped. These women will need support throughout their lifetime if they are not working or fall out of employment for such reasons. On mandating the right to request for flexible work arrangements, I urge the Government to commission a study on the plight of these working women so as to better understand the issues faced by different industries.[+2 sentences] I agree there must be progressive efforts made to create awareness. There is also a pressing need for sharing best practices in a more pervasive manner. We must have a change agent, early adopter, amongst companies and industries that have successfully rolled out FWA to share with the rest of the sectors and be a catalyst for change. I also call upon the Government to consider mandating the right to request for flexible work arrangements if all efforts – I repeat – if all efforts to persuade employers in this aspect fail.[+6 sentences] Time and tide wait for no man. Therefore, we must change before more women at child-bearing age fall out of employment. This will surely pose social problems as our population ages. On caregiving leave. A young mother, whose child was admitted to hospital due to several bouts of epileptic attacks, had to take leave to care for her child. Her supervisor was unhappy that she took too many days of leave to care for her sick child. Having been bogged down with KPIs, such as waiting time, the supervisor gave the young mother an ultimatum to resign from the job if she failed to make other childcare arrangements.[+13 sentences] The young mother needed her job so that she could continue to support her family and her child’s medical expenses. She approached the union for help and managed to settle the issue amicably with the union’s intervention. This brings me to my point about Government mandating caregiving leave. Not many employers are adopting such good practices where staff feel cared for and, in return, employers will get 100% loyalty and support from the staff when the company needs them during dire situations without counting hours worked. Generally, the behaviour of many staff will fall into the category of “good deeds beget good deeds”. As a developed country, while we are concerned about economic growth, it should not be at the expense of social needs. About 50% of our population are women and, increasingly, men, too, are embracing caregiving roles. It is, hence, essential for the Government to look at this from a broader viewpoint. The third issue which I would like to raise specifically for women is to mandate the allocation of lactation room in all new commercial buildings as well as industrial workplaces where offices are located. Can the Government consider calling on owners of the buildings to set aside a certain percentage of the gross floor area for lactation rooms, with some incentives given? For existing buildings, we should evaluate the possibility of creating space for this purpose. With lactation rooms, we are promoting breastfeeding and, inadvertently, branding the workplace as a baby-friendly workplace. We need the Government’s support in this area. Singapore has among the highest gestational diabetes rates globally. Women with gestational diabetes are up to seven times more likely to develop Type-2 diabetes. However, longer durations of breastfeeding showed a correlation with reduction in the risk of women developing Type-2 diabetes.[+13 sentences] Now, in Malay, Sir. (In Malay): The third issue which I would like to raise specifically for women is to mandate the allocation of lactation rooms in all new commercial buildings, as well as industrial workplaces where offices are located. Can the Government consider calling on owners of the buildings to set aside a certain percentage of the gross floor area for a lactation room, as well as offering some incentives to building owners? For existing buildings, we should evaluate and identify the possibility of creating a space for this purpose. By having lactation rooms, we are promoting the benefits of breastfeeding and, at the same time, branding such workplaces as workplaces that are conducive for female workers who are mothers with babies or infants. We need the Government’s support on this issue. The rate of gestational diabetes mellitus in Singapore is among the highest in the world. Mothers with this condition are also seven times more likely to develop Type-2 diabetes. However, a longer period of breastfeeding showed a correlation with a reduction in the risk of women developing Type-2 diabetes. (In English): We need companies to understand this. Studies have shown that a mother should breast feed her infant for the first six months and up to two years of the child's life for the benefit of the child and mother. With four months of maternity leave, mothers tend to give up breastfeeding and switch to baby formula because of the lack of lactation rooms at the workplace. We should not allow this to happen. Currently, the WorkPro Work-Life Grant – Developmental Grant allows owners of post-1990 buildings to tap on the funding, capped at S$20,000, to put in publicly accessible lactation facilities.[+19 sentences] Office building owners, which have not used up the permissible gross floor area will be able to tap on the funding to put in place the facilities. However, the take-up rate is very slow. Can we do more to increase the take-up rate? Let us make Singapore a socially responsible society at all levels. Make every workplace a family-friendly workplace. On women in the STEM or Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics industry. Lastly, the employment and employability of women, especially in the STEM industry is a major concern. With a shrinking workforce, the reliance on women to set foot in all industries becomes dire. I certainly would like to believe that there is no gender-specific or gender-biased industry at present in Singapore but more so the preference of women to be working in certain specific sectors. I urge the Government to do more to nurture the next generation of female students to be well-geared in STEM subjects and, at a later age, join the STEM industry. We must do all we can to change the mindset of parents, employers and workers. There is a growing need to grow the workforce in the STEM sector as future jobs are more likely to be generated in this sector. While we embark on the Return-to-Work (RTW) Programme, especially for mature women, we need to be more targeted. I would like to suggest that we work on each of the 23 industry sectors to customise the approach of training and induction as well as work trial. Mentors are of great help in those identified professions as they can handhold the individual, providing them with confidence and assurance. There should be a longer work trial period for complex jobs. I hope the Government can do more for the Return-to-Work Programme so that it can be more pervasive. Let us embrace and employ "different strokes for different folks". Mr Speaker, Sir, with this, I conclude.
Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio)989 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Speaker, one of the major shifts mentioned in this year's Budget speech is new technologies. Indeed, among the 200,000 self-employed persons or freelancers, many operate by using new technologies that either disrupted traditional businesses or created new markets. This new form of employment should not be confused with workers who have been wrongly classified. There are generally three types of self-employed persons: first group are those who chose this profession as the preferred choice; second group are those who chose it not as a preferred choice; and third, there may be those who may have been wrongly classified as freelancers.[+13 sentences] In this last category, the workers may be deployed as freelancers at the workplace and not counted as the company's headcount. However, they report for work and comply with the company's guidelines which are no different from salaried employees. These companies may have infringed the Employment Act and should be flagged out to MOM for investigations. In fact, all allegations, including possible tax evasions by freelancers who under-declare income, should be made to the relevant authorities. This is the only responsible way of ensuring that the issues are properly dealt with. We should do all we can not to wedge a divide as to which self-employed file tax properly and who under-declare their income. For hardworking cabbies, I hope we do not undermine their integrity by making unfounded, sweeping statements that they under-declare income or may have under-declared their income. On the contrary, Mr Speaker, Sir, we have been working with IRAS very closely to ensure that volunteer groups come into the taxi community to explain to the drivers how to file income tax returns and to do them properly. Fortunately, the majority of our self-employed persons ensure that they do the responsible thing and, in fact, we are glad that the majority of self-employed persons are in their preferred occupation. Day to day, they face new platform intermediaries, such as Grab, IO Talents, Caregivers Asia, that are transforming the way businesses are run, making matching of services hassle-free. More consumers and self-employed persons now go to a common platform to find each other. For example, whether you need a cleaning service, photography service or chauffeured ride service. Consumers now have easier access and more choices when it comes to selecting services. Freelancers, on the other hand, get to pitch and market their services to a bigger pool of prospective clients. These intermediaries, however, are not obliged to perform the roles of an employer, such as making CPF contributions, or providing workplace insurance cover or medical leave for the freelancers.[+10 sentences] Some, however, do so voluntarily, contributing to the self-employed persons’ MediSave account or even providing insurance cover. The majority do not do so. Instead, they can easily remove freelancers from their platforms, have huge control over payment and work arrangements, and freely set their own commission rates. Their impact will be more significant, now that the number of gig workers using such platforms may be increasing. Mr Speaker, Sir, how do we ensure that the intermediaries are fair in their practices? For example, before penalising or removing self-employed workers due to the fact that they receive poor service ratings from their customers, has there been enough thorough checks done to ensure that those allegations are properly investigated? Some freelancers shared with me that they are affected by delayed payment, unexpected cuts to the fees or the rates and changes in incentive payment at the last minute, without giving them due recognition and information ahead of time. New technologies do bring dynamism to our economy. But with only vague and non-transparent guidelines, freelancers using such platforms are potentially at risk. As these intermediaries gain bigger market share, they also grow in power and, if left unchecked, they can dictate tougher terms over the self-employed persons and even consumers who use their platforms. Having previously taken a light regulatory approach, perhaps it is more timely now for the Government agencies to review the operations of such platform intermediaries and consider getting them to take on more responsibilities.[+7 sentences] I hope to see more being done to support our self-employed persons. Fortunately, there have been several good examples. A case in point is the Tripartite Standard on the procurement of services from media freelancers that was launched in November last year. This was jointly developed by Info-communications Media Development Authority with NTUC and stakeholders. It is an industry-specific Tripartite Standard that addresses the concerns of media freelancers. Back in 2014, LTA, together with the National Taxi Association and taxi operators, also set up a mediation system to allow taxi drivers to resolve payment disputes with their taxi operators. MOM also commissioned a survey on self-employed persons in 2016 to gather more information and understand their concerns. Following that survey, the Minister last year announced a Tripartite workgroup that was formed in March 2017 to study the issues faced by this group of workers.[+8 sentences] I was a member of this workgroup. We have recently submitted our recommendations to the Minister and we look forward to more specific support and targeted assistance for self-employed persons. I will share more during the Committee of Supply when we debate on the MOM budget. Mr Speaker, it suffices to say now that we need more support for self-employed persons, such as fair practices; a formalised structure for dispute resolution; workplace injury insurance; and also to ensure that all Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) and SkillsFuture planning include self-employed persons into their thought process and their scheme of things so that self-employed persons can also access skills upgrading to stay relevant and future-ready. Budget 2018 is a Budget that prepares us for the future. We should not underestimate the value that self-employed persons bring to the economy. I hope the support for self-employed persons can be widely adopted to help them sustain their career choice and thrive in this new economy. With that, Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol)1692 words
[+14 sentences]Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today on Singapore’s Budget 2018. My fellow Labour Members of Parliament have touched on various worker groups but we must not forget our more vulnerable low-wage workers. We must value their contributions, too. One of the core missions of every labour movement anywhere in the world is to look after its workers, particularly the more vulnerable workers in its midst. It is also a responsibility that our Government shoulders and commits to this mission in order to improve the livelihood of our people. Low-wage workers will always be part of our labour landscape. Not by design but because there will always be those who form the lower tier in the income hierarchy. More importantly, the work they do forms an important part of our social fabric and contributes to our economy. Their struggles, hopes and aspirations give us reason to be their voice to pave a better future for them. Hence, for our Labour Movement, the Budget presents an opportunity for us to do good, do more and do right by them. Indeed, I believe that with everyone's help – Government, union and employers – low-wage workers can have a sense of hope that their lives will be better year after year and, more importantly, that the future for their families and themselves are that much brighter. To date, the efforts of the Labour Movement to help low-wage workers have paid off with the strong support provided by the Government and our Tripartite Partners. The long hours put in by policymakers, unions, companies and every one of us sitting here today have resulted in the implementation of many policies to better support and protect these workers’ wages and their employment rights. Let me share some of these policies and initiatives. The Progressive Wage Model (PWM) is one initiative that has improved the wages and skills of thousands of low-wage workers in the cleaning, security and landscape sectors.[+3 sentences] We believe that PWM has also caused a ripple effect that has led to the increase in wages of low-wage workers in other sectors as well. In fact, from 2012 to 2017, the wages of those in the 20th percentile have shown the largest increase. This has, hopefully, eased the ever-increasing cost of living for these workers. Recently, the Tripartite Committees have made recommendations to have a built-in wage increase for workers in the cleaning and security sectors to ensure their real wages are not eroded by inflation or experience "down-waging" when their contracts are renewed.[+8 sentences] Other schemes implemented over the years, such as Workfare Income Supplement (WIS), have also gone a fairly long way in making life easier for these low-wage workers. They have a better chance of bringing home higher salaries. Under the Workfare Training Support Scheme, they also have better opportunities for upgrading their skills through available training programmes at heavily subsidised rates, giving them some confidence to be relevant to the workforce today. Amendments to the Employment Act, such as requiring employers to issue pay slips and employment contracts, will go a long way to offer better protection to our vulnerable low-wage workers. The road to improving the lives of low-wage workers cannot just end here. The sad reality is that many of the current lowest paying jobs in our country are held by elderly workers with little education and limited skills. During our engagement with our union leaders to arrow in on the plight of low-wage workers, the issue of ensuring workers' retirement adequacy, especially for low-wage workers, stood out prominently. Of all the suggestions given on retirement adequacy for low-wage workers, there were some prominent ones that I would like to put up for the Government's consideration. First, the union leaders felt strongly that it is about time for our Tripartite Partners to set up a committee to review the employer's CPF contribution for older workers.[+5 sentences] Currently, the employer's CPF contribution rate decreases progressively after the worker reaches 55 years of age. The different CPF contribution rates tagged to different age bands were introduced in 1988 with good intentions to ensure our companies could remain competitive. However, the assumption to rationalise why older workers should have reduced employer's CPF contribution rates may no longer be valid today. Many workers, regardless of their age, are already being paid based on the job value as we have moved away from a seniority-based wage structure. Moreover, given longer life expectancy, workers need to build on their retirement savings. There are also many who still need to service their mortgage loans, as well as take care of their aged parents who are living longer. Hence, it may not be a bad idea to explore the possibility of working towards having one universal rate for employer's CPF contribution till the age of 65 years old.[+7 sentences] This would help workers build their retirement savings and would be especially beneficial for elderly low-wage workers. It is also in our best interest to ensure that workers can meet their retirement sum as it would reduce the burden on social services in later years which would have to be shouldered by the current working population. Such a review would no doubt add cost for the companies, but I believe that we need to move away from the 1988 policy which has indirectly created a class of "cheaper, older" labour. Employers must value our mature workers as an important resource who can still contribute to their businesses, especially in this tight labour market. Secondly, the union leaders also call for Annual Wage Supplement (AWS) to be made mandatory for all workers. Many of us assume that all workers get the 13th-month bonus (AWS) at the end of the year. But the sad reality is that the very group that needs it the most is not receiving it. Mandating AWS could bring about an increase of 8.3% to the salaries of low-wage workers ‒ and help reduce the widening income gap present in Singapore.[+3 sentences] I believe this 8.3% increase in salary will bring back much more than its worth in monetary value when it comes to making our vulnerable low-wage workers feel a sense of fairness, recognition and appreciation for the work they do. After all, this nation was also built on the backs of these toiling workers who had also played their part to pave the way for a better future ‒ a future that we, today, enjoy. Third, the union leaders felt that more can be done to help low-wage workers cope with medical cost. The current provision of the Employment Act only requires employers to pay for the medical consultation fees when a worker sees a doctor for outpatient treatment. Hence, the union leaders felt that the Tripartite Partners should consider amending the Employment Act to include better medical coverage for workers, by making employers pay for the full cost of non-chronic outpatient treatment at polyclinics or company-appointed clinics.[+9 sentences] While a clear majority or 86% of employers do offer outpatient benefits beyond the required statutory requirements on a voluntary basis, it is the low-wage workers who are being hurt the most by the limited coverage under the Employment Act. Mr Speaker, in this Budget, the Government is providing a lot of support for companies through all the various schemes and grants. Perhaps, the various Ministries may want to consider this as a leverage to incentivise companies to care more for their workers, particularly the low-wage workers. I am aware that the suggestions I am making may cause some pain not only to employers but also to us as final consumers. But, again, if there is no pain, there is no progress. Mr Speaker, please allow me to speak in Malay. (In Malay): The rapidly changing current economic landscape and job situation can affect many workers. I am very concerned about the fate of low-wage workers who are mostly older and do not possess higher qualifications. Although many training opportunities have been made available to help them upgrade their skills, it is essential that the training is suitable to their age group and learning capabilities. In order to ensure that low-wage workers have enough savings for their retirement, I would like to call on the Tripartite Partners to form a review committee on CPF to explore the possibility of having one universal rate for employer’s CPF contribution for all workers up to the age of 65 years old. I would also like to suggest making the 13th month bonus or the Annual Wage Supplement mandatory, in order to boost the retirement savings of low-wage workers.[+17 sentences] Helping low-wage workers, by having employers pay for the costs of their outpatient treatment at polyclinics, can also relieve their burden. (In English): In conclusion, in the past and also very recently, I have written several blogs to highlight the bread-and-butter issues of low-wage workers. I know that some of my entries might have caused some discomfort to some readers, particularly my most recent post entitled "Slavery of the poor". But there is nothing I would change about the message I intended to convey. It was not a blog post I wanted people to scroll past, nor was it a post to exaggerate the struggles faced by these workers. It was a post that echoes the sentiments of our low-wage and elderly outsourced workers who exist in our society. These workers are real. Their families are real. The problems they face are real. We must not fool ourselves to think that, as a society, we are doing enough in being fair to all our workers. While there are policies in place today to help our low-wage workers, many of them are still being taken advantage of. They struggle to make ends meet, let alone save for retirement, no matter how hard they work. The stark realities faced by vulnerable workers do not have to persist year after year. We are not powerless to help them. We must have a bigger heart and mind to ease their livelihood. We must value their contributions and think more about them and less about us. Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Tanjong Pagar)1666 words
[+7 sentences]Mr Speaker, Budget 2018 was presented as a strategic Budget that is meant to guide Singapore as we transit into the next decade. But while we continue in our quest to peer into the crystal ball and try to divine the future, we must not forget that the bedrock of our industries, present and future, are our workers. My fellow Labour Members of Parliament have, in turn, argued for the various initiatives that the Government should embark on to enable workers to take on the jobs of the future – low-wage workers, high-age workers, middle-income, middle-aged workers, PMEs, including freelancers. They have also highlighted the value that each of our workers brings to the table. However, we will need a fit and healthy workforce in order to be able to take on these jobs in the first place. Singapore is suffering from two worrying trends that will continue to have a profound impact on our labour force. First, we have a shrinking population. Our total fertility rate dipped to just 1.2 in 2016, despite having a relatively higher number of marriages and a slew of Government incentives to encourage parenthood.[+6 sentences] Second, we have a rapidly ageing population. A Business Times news report published late last year forecasted that 2018, this year, will see, for the first time in our history, the same percentage of those aged 65 years and above matching those younger than 15 years old. Mr Speaker, if we place these two trends together, it becomes obvious that our labour force is set to shrink and each working adult will be expected to contribute more to support the older generation. Every worker is, therefore, a precious resource and we must value the life of each and every worker. As many of us spend most of our waking hours at the workplace, we need to do more in terms of workplace safety and health to keep our precious resource safe and healthy. Let me first start with the need for safer workplaces. Earlier this month, the MOM reported that the number of workplace fatalities in 2017 had dropped to 42. This is the lowest figure in over a decade. This lowers our workplace fatality rate from 1.9 per 100,000 workers in 2014 to 1.2 in 2017.[+4 sentences] It is certainly encouraging to see that the sustained collective efforts by our Tripartite Partners to tackle workplace fatalities have borne some fruit. However, every death is a tragedy and every accident is preventable. We must, and we should, do more to ensure that our workplaces are safer. One area that we can do better moving forward is to encourage better near-miss reporting, so that we can reduce the occurrence of accidents. While workplace fatalities have decreased in 2017, MOM’s report also showed that the number of workplace injury cases remains high. There were close to 12,500 workplace injury cases in 2017, with 574 workers sustaining serious injuries.[+36 sentences] This can be a worrying sign. Does it mean that the dip in fatal accidents was simply down to luck? A structured and well-participated near-miss reporting regime would help to better identify dangerous work conditions, and early interventions can help bring down the accident rate. To make the next quantum leap in reducing workplace fatalities in the next decade, we will need bolder strategies to make Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) more pervasive in every workplace. During a recent Tripartite study visit to Finland, we learnt that Finland mandates that there must be one elected Occupational Safety and Health representative in workplaces where there are at least 10 employees working regularly. This has helped Finland achieve a workplace fatality rate of below 1.0 per 100,000 workers. Should Singapore, too, have a mandatory WSH officer in every company? For a start, perhaps a more practical approach would be to make it compulsory for companies to appoint a WSH representative as part of the certification for BizSAFE Level 3. There is, currently, no such provision for companies applying for BizSAFE Level 3. For now, companies must appoint a Risk Management Champion (RMC) for BizSAFE Level 2. With proper training, the role of these RMCs can be expanded to serve as WSH representatives. While it is important to have preventive measures to mitigate workplace injuries, it is also equally important to help workers return to work in the unfortunate event of an accident at the workplace. This is where we can do more to improve the Return-To-Work (RTW) Programme, which was recently started in November 2017. The RTW grant is currently restricted to Small and Medium Enterprises. To promote and deepen the RTW culture, the Government should consider extending the grant to large corporations, too. In the event an injured worker requires a change of employer and work scope due to a workplace accident, the current RTW grant does not cover vocational rehabilitation. The RTW grant should be extended to cover such cases. Mr Speaker, much of our WSH efforts today focus on workplace safety. And "Health", as the final letter in "WSH", often gets neglected. Talks of occupational health issues, such as physical health and mental well-being, are often missing in our WSH conversations. But as our workforce ages faster than before, we will most certainly see more workplace health issues in the next decade. We must, therefore, act now. Let me first start by talking about physical health. With many workers today doing desk-bound jobs and leading a sedentary lifestyle, it is important that we encourage regular exercise to prevent health problems, such as high cholesterol and high blood pressure, as we age. The Health Promotion Board (HPB) has a Healthy Workplace Ecosystem programme to encourage busy office workers to take part in physical activities and eat healthier options. To date, there are 30 participating Healthy Workplace Ecosystems. But more needs to be done to get more companies and employers on board to bring healthy lifestyle programmes to our workplaces. It was announced recently that Singapore is one of the founding cities of the Active Citizens Worldwide project, which seeks to get people in cities to be more active. This is a good step forward and I encourage Sport Singapore to partner HPB to create more workplace healthy lifestyle programmes for our workers. Of course, a big part of being healthy means eating healthy. As we continue in our war against diabetes, we must do more to help shape the eating habits of Singaporeans and lower the barriers to healthy eating. In many of my union visits, I have seen many staff canteens at the workplaces. A good place to start would be to encourage these staff canteens to sell healthier food. We check on what food and drinks are sold in school canteens to ensure that our children eat well in school. Perhaps it is time that we start a Healthy Canteen programme at our workplaces to ensure that there are healthier food options at our staff canteens. One common complaint is that healthy food is often more expensive. To address that, the National Transport Workers' Union (NTWU), which operates 45 canteens islandwide, introduced brown rice at a subsidised rate.[+7 sentences] If you eat at our NTWU canteens, it is cheaper to buy brown rice than white rice. We also encourage our canteen operators to serve coffee and tea without sugar as the base drink. But if you want to add sugar, there is a sugar counter at the side. But of course, we also put up posters at the sugar counter to remind you of diabetes. So, please do not add too much sugar when you go to the sugar counter. For individuals, one of the biggest push factors for them to embark on a healthy lifestyle comes from knowing their own health status. This is why health screenings are important. In a joint project with the HPB and our public transport operators, the union organised a free health screening for 1,000 of our bus captains, testing them for their blood pressure, blood sugar and cholesterol. Sadly, but not unexpected, 80% of the bus captains tested failed at least one of the three health indicators.[+1 sentence] And surprisingly, 80% of these bus captains who had issues with their health, were doing a health screening for their first time. What is heartening to note is that after going through a period of health coaching, a third of these bus captains managed to achieve a pass in all three health indicators after six months.[+12 sentences] This shows the importance of early detection and early intervention. I, therefore, urge all employers to make free annual health screening a norm in their staff welfare benefits. The final big pillar of occupational health that is rarely broached in most of our WSH conversations is the issue of mental health. The stressors of everyday life can take a toll on even the most strong-willed individuals. Like physical health, we must focus our attention on the early detection and prevention of mental health issues. A study was recently launched by the Institute of Mental Health and the NUS School of Public Health to examine the association between physical health and mental health, with the results expected to be released in 2021. As we work on the major physical health pillars under the umbrella of occupational health, the benefits to mental health should also be examined in the coming years, as our workforce faces increasing stress, having to adapt constantly to the rapidly changing economy. Mr Speaker, the foundation of our economy – past, present, and future – has always and will always be our workforce. Every worker is precious and more can be done to value the life of each and every worker. As we work on upskilling our workers and transitioning to the new economy, we must also not forget to ensure that we have safe workplaces and healthy workers. We should and must do more to provide safer workplaces and build an ecosystem for all our workers to stay healthy. With that, Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade)1770 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I support Budget 2018. With the recent spike in en bloc activity and the general meteoric rise in asking prices of properties, what is the simplest way to make sure that such gains go towards the majority of Singaporeans, rather than the rich who buy and sell property? How do we ensure that we are able to stretch the value of every Budget dollar, every tax dollar, for all Singaporeans to lead better lives? The stamp duty is a progressive, simple tax which allows the Government to reap about $400 million in tax revenues is just one such example.[+30 sentences] This is the sort of simple socialism which has informed Singapore policymaking since our Independence and still does much of the heavy lifting in the redistribution of wealth today. Our socialism is captured by one simple phrase ─ that all of us work together for the well-being of that individual Singaporean who needs help. There are two elements which I would like to speak on today that relates to this year’s Budget ─ the use of NIRC and the need for greater equality in Singapore today. The heavy redistribution that our socialism demands takes place today, in the main, within one generation, that is, the rich of today are taxed to help the poor of today. There is also a sense in which the rich of today are taxed to help the poor of yesterday, that is, those a generation or two earlier than them. But by and large, our socialism does not leap over time. We make each generation pay its own way, as far as possible. This is the first characteristic of Singapore's socialism and that is why we resist the populist call to spend more of our NIRC. Since 2008, we have seen an increasing reliance on the NIRC. This is, as we all now know, our number one source and contributor to our revenue base. My views and questions to our Finance Minister are as follows. Is this sustainable? What if the investment climate takes a turn for the worse? Would we be able to continue to finance or do we need to draw down on some of our welfare programmes? And is it fair to deprive future generations of the wealth that they would have enjoyed had we allowed the interest to compound? Since the 2008 amendment to our Constitution, we have taken a less conservative approach to the use of the income from our reserves. We have, since then, seen about 11 instances where the percentage of NIRC to be used has come up in Parliamentary debates. Members of Parliament from either side of the House have called for this percentage to be increased. Such an argument is, in a way, understandable because it is an easy and popular course of action. Why keep saving? Why not start spending? I think our socialism commits us to raising the percentage at some point but we do not know when or by how much. That is to say, it does not commit us to holding steadfast to a certain percentage, only to a certain way of spending. Which brings me to the second characteristic of our simple socialism – the striving towards a more equal society. I have spoken before about how complete equality is an impossibility because human beings are not widgets and we are irreducible into one another. What we can do, however, is to strive towards equality in basic human experiences – a safe home, a good and meaningful job, a chance for our children to prosper and find their purpose in life; to value each and every one of our Singaporeans and ensure that, for generations to come, they are able to build better lives in this garden city we call home. And this means that we need to put flesh on what it means to have a collective destiny. This means we need to address the challenges of poverty, the lack of opportunity; we need to compensate for the poor luck that fate might have dealt on any Singaporean – whether an illness or an abusive spouse, or even with an addiction to gambling. As a society, we help those who are most vulnerable. It may be true that Singapore as a whole is so affluent that a family with a five-figure income may still feel deprived and feel entitled to even more subsidies. Our simple socialism, however, requires us to address not just felt deprivation relative to others, but real social needs.[+1 sentence] Let me tell you a story about a friend of mine, Peter. He is 52 years old and earns less than $2,700 a month.[+4 sentences] He has two boys: one in Primary school and the other a teenage – in Secondary school. His wife does not work. He has an HDB flat, just $60,000 shy of full payment. But he has to pay the financial institution 4% in finance costs for his loan. This is very high, because the current housing loan interest is around 2%. He went to all the major banks to try and refinance but there were no takers because his is a 2-room flat and the amount is less than $100,000.[+4 sentences] Peter had originally taken this private loan over an HDB loan because, at that point in time, the starting interest rate offered by the financial institution was 1.17% and the housing agent then had told him that it was a better deal. Of course, over time, the interest rate went up. Incidentally, I should add here that although I would consider Peter a savvy man about finance, it is well-known that the cognitive tax on the lower-income is higher. When Peter tried to refinance with HDB, unfortunately it was not approved. Peter has never taken a loan from HDB but our current rules are such that if you have taken a housing loan from a bank, you will not be allowed to refinance your flat with a housing loan from HDB.[+5 sentences] While I understand the need for some of our policies to follow the principles of efficiency of the market, our commitment to equality demands that we change this rule to bring about greater equality. The financial institution is a commercial profit-making entity, but I think HDB can perhaps take a different goal as its guiding objective. I also understand that one cannot pick and choose; that if you enjoy low interest when the market is flushed with capital, you cannot decline when the rate is hiked. The choice is between stability and perhaps a slightly higher rate with HDB and the ups and downs of the private market. Or is it? There is an easy way to break this false choice. We could, for example, allow a means-tested way to facilitate the shift of private loans back to HDB, especially when their interest rates are so high above HDB rates.[+7 sentences] To do so does not require us to incur more expenditure ─ it merely shifts the interest profits from the bank and puts half of this in Peter’s pocket and, the other half, in a sense, in the Government. This, of course, may over simplify the process, and I do oversimplify the process. Of course, this shifting of loans will mean messier policy implementation. I merely sound this out as a possibility for the Ministers here to consider. It is something that will be of great help to some lower-income families, like Peter, struggling to pay the monthly loans they had taken with commercial financial institutions. Second, Peter usually pays $40 a month for his boy's school bus. He also enjoys a few other benefits under the MOE financial assistance scheme ─ free text books, a waiver for fees and 50% subsidies for buses. He is very appreciative and grateful for all these help from the Government. This year, however, he has to pay $166.50 a month, and he has lost all the other benefits.[+2 sentences] Why? Because he earned $75 dollars a month too much last year due to overtime pay. The means test is at $675 per capita a month ─ Peter came in at $750 a month.[+6 sentences] He won but he also lost. Mr Speaker, Sir, this is not a man who has a maid or a car. This is a man who has bought health insurance for both his wife and his sons. In fact, he has planned carefully so that when he is 65, he can count on an endowment policy maturing. Peter ha,s in a way, planned, has prospered slowly and carefully. But he has also laboured under some rules that weigh a bit more heavily on him. He pays more in interest than his rich neighbour – we can change this. He loses benefits by a whisker of overtime pay – we can change this, too.[+14 sentences] This requires a new way, possibly a whole-of-Government approach to dealing with such specific instances. There is much that remains to be done in Singapore to make our society more equal. Our simple socialism demands that we make difficult choices. We must recognise that even relatively well-off people can have a legitimate experience of relative deprivation, when compared to the very wealthy. At the same time, we must see the need to allocate resources more urgently to men like Peter. It is only when we do not have enough to cater to men like Peter that I feel we should consider raising the percentage – not as a means of populist hot air balloon for everyone who demands a specious equality with their neighbour. Herman Daly wrote that there should be a moral limit to growth. So too, should there be a moral limit to the consumptive nature of man. In the 52 years since the founding of Singapore, our socialism has evolved, with our welfare net cast a lot wider and deeper than before. This is as it should be, as our resources and wealth have grown over time. At the same time, we must recognise that the NIRC is already called into service to a very large extent. In this, we ought to be more generous to men like Peter and find ever more ways in the name of equality and justice to bring him and his family along with us and ensure his two boys fight for a land they believe in. If we do, indeed, collectively care for his family, all for one, and value the contributions that they have contributed to this country; then, in return, they will feel that they are Singaporean and work for our collective future. Sir, I support Budget 2018.
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member)1976 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, we live in interesting times. Of course, human beings in every era view their era as a time of modernity and change. But the era we are living through is seeing many fundamental economic and geopolitical changes to the post-World War II status quo, changes that are making the past a less and less reliable guide to the future, changes that underline ever more strongly that the strategies that brought us here today will not be the same ones that enable us to navigate successfully tomorrow. The world is seeing the emergence of disruptive industries using new technology or new business models, like the sharing economy, industries that may reshape the economy – destroying old jobs and stodgy companies, but also creating new ones.[+13 sentences] Geopolitical and economic weight is shifting towards Asia, particularly China, and to a lesser extent, India; while Japan and Korea remain major economies. Regional powers, including ASEAN, have the potential to carry much more weight. Meanwhile, inequality, both within and between countries, is adding to the unpredictability, triggering political shifts like what happened in the US with the election of President Trump and, in the UK, with Brexit. And climate change marches on, even as the world struggles to cope, using the Paris accords that the US abandoned. The first broad point I would like to make in my speech is, while we pay special attention to Asia – and I agree that we should do this – as our home region and the world's fastest growing major economic region, let us not write off the West. In spite of the structural issues faced by some western countries – which range from fiscal deficits and state debt to low productivity growth to inequality-fuelled populism and chronic crime in some cities – western countries still have unmatched soft power. In fields, such as R&D, entertainment, academia and information and communications technology (ICT), not to mention military technology and diplomatic clout, the West still leads the world, even if the size of that lead is diminishing. We should ensure that our efforts to engage North America and Europe are well-maintained, so as to draw learnings and forge partnerships, whether in the public or private sector realms. We should not assume that Asia will continue to outgrow the West in a linear fashion. Some western countries have shown a tremendous resilience, an ability to rebound from setbacks. The recent victory of President Macron in France underlines that ability to self-correct and renew. Next, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to talk about industry disruption but, specifically, in the context of Asia and, in particular, ASEAN. The world economy is teeming with disruption, which both destroys and creates anew. Some emerging technologies and business models that are disrupting the world include big data analytics, the Internet of Things (iOT) which collects big data, artificial intelligence (AI) which is fed by big data, drones, autonomous vehicles, robotics including social robotics, 3D printing, virtual and augmented reality, cloud computing, crypto-currencies, genetic editing and renewable energy technologies like cutting-edge solar cells coupled with cutting-edge battery technology.[+13 sentences] Many of these are coming together in interesting ways. For example, iOT could generate vast quantities of data for AI to work on so as to improve processes. And this is not even mentioning sharing economy industries like private car-hire, whose disruptive effect is already quite mature in some cities. As these technologies become increasingly mainstream, they will transform the economies of Asia. Indeed, that is already happening, in both mature and emerging Asian economies. How can Singapore be relevant to this process of the unfolding of disruption in Asia? There are a number of ways. Firstly, as a hub for R&D and localisation; secondly, as a test-bed to trial new products; thirdly, as a management headquarters for regional companies; fourthly, as a manufacturing base for high-tech, high-value added exports; fifthly, as a service export hub for things like analytics, professional and business services; and, lastly, as a financing centre. Our economic agencies have, for a long time, conceived and implemented initiatives to help Singapore develop a role vis-à-vis the Asian region in these respects. These initiatives have helped to create and sustain many good-quality jobs and high value-added economic activities. How could Singapore position itself to play such roles vis-à-vis the unfolding of disruptive industries in Asia? For a start – and this is the second broad point in my speech – we could focus on ASEAN above all. I was glad to note some ASEAN-related initiatives in the Budget speech. ASEAN has over 600 million people, about 8% of the world’s population.[+8 sentences] It is our region and our destiny is inextricably linked to its. It is also the region where our efforts to make Singapore’s economy relevant are pushing on an open door, given the vast size, presence of strong domestic industry players and market barriers that exist in other regions of Asia, such as China, India, Japan and Korea. A Singapore that is deeply engaged and co-prospering with ASEAN will help ensure that ASEAN will be a fruitful intersection point between the great powers of China, India and Japan, rather than becoming in the future their battleground at some point in the decades to come. How can Singapore be relevant to the rise of disruptive industries in ASEAN? The example of Grab may hold a lesson. Grab is a Singapore-based firm, with Singapore being its largest R&D centre. Grab has embarked on growth initiatives in the region. Along the way, it launched a new business model in Indonesia which is uniquely suited to that vast market – motorcycle-hire, which competes with local firm GO-JEK and others. Today, Grab operates in over 50 cities across Indonesia.[+3 sentences] It also acquired Indonesian shopping app firm Kudo. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore could be a hub for disruptive industry players as they plan and execute ASEAN-wide penetration strategies. As such, Singapore could host data centres, management teams, R&D labs, financing hubs and so on. Singapore could also produce and supply to the region the most advanced, high value-added and IP-sensitive components, materials and services.[+7 sentences] Singapore, with its multi-ethnic make-up, could also be a test-bed to trial products. For a start – and this brings me to my third broad point – Singapore could galvanise our base of Autonomous Universities, think-tanks, private consultancies, research agencies and so on, to focus on mapping out the paths which disruption could take in ASEAN. At this point, I declare that I am the CEO of a research and consulting firm which operates in the Asia Pacific region and global emerging markets. We could cultivate the soft power of working in a multi-disciplinary fashion to collect and analyse all relevant data on how disruptive industries could rise in ASEAN countries. ASEAN has 10 states of which only two have more than 15% of the total population, meaning it is a rather fragmented region, population-wise. Each ASEAN state has a different economic, business, financial, technology, governmental and cultural landscape. Such studies could indicate the alternative pathways down which disruptive industries could evolve in ASEAN countries – leading to outcomes like Grab and GO-JEK’s motorcycle private-hire in Indonesia. My fourth point is that Singapore could consider suggesting a bold, visionary project that aims to transform the ASEAN region itself into a test-bed for innovation.[+14 sentences] The thing about big projects is that they can serve to galvanise a people and boost the economy. President Kennedy’s goal of sending a man to the moon helped galvanise a massive scientific and organisational effort in the US. While the goal, by itself, served a symbolic, nationalistic purpose, along the way, it helped seed an aerospace industry in the US that has, over the decades, yielded many new technologies that US industry has made use of, like the business of launching commercial satellites today and the current US private sector space industry. In Europe, 22 member countries have come together to create the European Space Agency (ESA) for researching and exploring space, which has registered 82 successful commercial satellite launches till 2018. The Europeans also established the world’s largest particle accelerator in 2008, the 27-km long Large Hadron Collider, as well as other particle accelerators in a complex known as CERN. CERN focuses on high-end physics research. More recently, CERN has become a pioneer in grid computing or distributed computing. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not suggesting that we launch an ASEAN space effort or particle collider and I hope my speech will not be caricaturised as calling for that. But the examples of NASA, ESA and CERN show us what ingredients can go into a bold project that has broad economic spin-off benefits. We could propose a project that would enable Singapore to serve as a test-bed and hub as the project is rolled out across ASEAN. I know that it is never easy or fast to get things off the ground in ASEAN. But such a proposal could build on the precedents that have been set and the learning curve that has been gained from pioneering the ASEAN Innovation Network, the ASEAN Financial Information Network and the ASEAN Agreement on E-commerce. Some ideas for such an ASEAN-wide initiative that Singapore could champion are as follows. Firstly, an ASEAN autonomous vehicles initiative, some or all of which could be electric vehicles. Singapore could help to test-bed autonomous vehicles, pioneering the establishment and maintenance of refuelling stations as well as the associated regulatory framework.[+16 sentences] The financing for such an ASEAN-wide project could be raised in Singapore. The know-how and supply of parts and services for refuelling or, perhaps, I should say, recharging stations as well as manufacture of critical components for the vehicles could be undertaken in Singapore. One of Singapore’s core competencies seems to be design, project management and servicing of urban infrastructure, a point I have alluded to in earlier speeches in this House. Secondly, we could propose an ASEAN urban solar panel initiative where Singapore test-beds new technologies for solar power generation in dense urban environments – I made a similar though not identical argument in this House in 2016. We could pioneer new technologies and processes in manufacturing, deployment and maintenance of solar panels. For example, though it need not take this particular form, such an initiative could use perovskite technology, which some scientists believe has major advantages over traditional silicon-based solar cells. Some scientists hold that perovskite cells can generate more energy from sunlight on low-light days, which may be helpful, given Southeast Asia's weather patterns. Though there are also disadvantages of perovskite, like a greater susceptibility to temperature- and humidity-induced instability, which scientists are in the process of overcoming. The point is Singapore could pioneer best practices in the manufacture, deployment and maintenance of solar panels in dense, urban environments in ASEAN's largely tropical weather conditions. These could be used as a model for deployment in major cities across ASEAN. I offer these suggestions in the spirit of demonstrating the contours that a major ASEAN-wide initiative could take, without asserting that these are necessarily the only or best candidates for such an initiative. Lastly, and in conclusion ‒ in moving away from the main theme of my speech, Sir ‒ I would like to pose two questions for the Minister for Finance. Firstly, why the need to lower the tax exemption for start-ups now from 100% on the first $100,000 to 75%? Is there evidence that we have passed a certain threshold in terms of our effort to cultivate a vibrant start-up landscape? It would be helpful to understand the background to this change, coming at this time. Secondly, the Minister for Finance did not mention the gig economy in his speech. Could he touch on how the Government views the gig economy and what would be the broad thrust of Government policy towards this sector? 3.17 pm
Mr Lee Yi Shyan (East Coast)1728 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, on 13 February, The Straits Times headline reads: "China tourists top arrivals here, surpassing Indonesia". It went on to say: "The world's most populous country has become the biggest source of visitors to Singapore for the very first time, while its tourists remain the biggest spenders here". With the rising affluence of its middle-class, Chinese outbound tourism is rising rapidly. In this Chinese New year alone, an estimated 6.5 million will leave China. This number will rise for a long time, given that only 5% of the Chinese population currently holds international passports, compared to 40% in the US. In the broader context, China’s economic heft has been felt around the world. For instance, it became the largest trading partner to 120 countries in 2014. In 2015, it exported more capital than it received. HSBC projected that China's Belt and Road Initiative will further change the face of global trade, with 900 planned projects, $4 trillion of investments, $8 trillion of infrastructure and $2.5 trillion of trade annually.[+9 sentences] We are entering a new era of global economy, anchored by two juggernauts across the Pacific – China and the US ‒ which will be of the same size in economic terms by 2030. For Singapore, we will have to make adjustments swiftly and decisively to leverage China’s rise. For a long period after WWII, the US, Western Europe and Japan were the main sources of capital and know-how. A good command of English connected us to the advanced economies. As a result, we industrialised and developed our workforce skills in a relatively short time. Unlike the West, which is at least 12 hours' flight time away, the Chinese economy is merely 3.5 hours away. Such proximity gives us immediate access to the market. As China exports its capital to the region, Singapore will also benefit. Of course, this presumes we know how to add value in this two-way process. In a 2016 Government survey, it was found that less than 35% of Singaporeans spoke Mandarin at home.[+20 sentences] While this percentage remained stable over the years, many observed that our standard of Applied Chinese had declined sharply. The same observation was also made of the usage of Malay at home. Is this trend good for Singapore? Perhaps, we could consider the comments from the Low brothers. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin please. (In Mandarin): Lianhe Zaobao published an interview on 23 February titled "Worries for Singaporeans: the Loss of Hunger". It said: "China is growing ever stronger. The Low brothers were lucky enough to be able to board this gigantic ship sailing into the world. While working in China, they were amazed to see how fast China had progressed over the years. At the same time, they were worried for Singaporeans." Low Er Wei said, "In the old days, when we went to China, we felt superior because we felt we were better educated, could speak English and lived in a good environment. The situation now is totally different. China is overtaking us in every aspect of life. Speaking English? There are many people who can speak English better than we can, not to mention Mandarin. We have lost the advantage we once possessed." Low Mi Lun said frankly that when they first set up the company in China, they only wanted to employ Singaporeans because they felt the cost of communication would be low. However, in the past seven or eight years, the learning capability of the Chinese people has made a great leap. Compelled by tough competition, the Chinese people have demonstrated stunning learning abilities and surpassed Singaporeans very quickly. Low Er Wei said: "Singaporeans find it increasingly difficult to adapt to local conditions. They are used to comfort and cannot take hardships. Now I don't want to hire Singaporeans at all.[+12 sentences] They are complacent and have become a stumbling block for progress. Furthermore, Singaporeans have been comfortable for too long and lost the sense of hunger. This is our biggest worry." Low Mi Lun also lamented that, currently, there are still many Singaporeans who believed that they were great and even take pride in not being able to speak Chinese. He said, when you compare China with Singapore, you will see how differently people see and do things, showing up Singapore's weaknesses. (In English): I do not know the two brothers. I thought they perhaps could have established a stronger link with Singapore. However, the Lows' rather forthright and uncomplimentary comments were rather similar to some of the feedback I received from Singaporean businessmen doing business in China. Their messages to me are: "China is developing faster than we care to know"; "Singapore faces very keen competition"; "Complacency will set us back"; and "We do not know what we do not know". These blind spots, perceived or real, have serious implications for us in Singapore. It affects our ability to engage effectively with a fast-rising economy. Our ability to value-add as a knowledge-, investment- and trade-hub to the rising trade and investment flows in the region is not a given, and can be challenged or replaced. In fact, the late Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew made this comment in his book "My Lifelong Challenge" more than 10 years ago: "While Singaporeans are more bilingual than before, we do not have enough who understand the Chinese at a deep enough level to deal effectively with them.[+7 sentences] Knowing the language is insufficient; it is equally important to know how the other side thinks and negotiates. The Suzhou Industrial Park project taught us this". To shore up our shortcomings, I propose that the Government consider three broad measures. One, to support the use of mother tongues outside classrooms and in the larger society. In Chinese, I will call it "活学活用, 学以致用". We have succeeded in adopting English as the lingua franca among all races. English is now established and a given. Our next phase of development will require us to level up our second language proficiency beyond a textbook subject to a live tool used in commerce and business.[+4 sentences] Obviously, mastering Chinese will help us connect to its 1.3 billion population. Mastering Malay will help connect us with 300 million population in Southeast Asia. Likewise, Tamil for southern India. At the strategic level, it is enhancing our ability to connect with the steadily growing markets of Asia. Being bilingual or trilingual has to be a key component of our overall competitiveness.[+12 sentences] Many successful small nations speak multiple languages and thrive. Some examples are Luxembourg, Switzerland and the Netherlands. For a start, we should promote the use of mother tongues at Government service counters and public places. With programmable signboards, we can easily require multiple language displays without space constraints. Frequent practice in translation from English to our three other official languages, or even selected international languages at some places, will also help people broaden their mindset and promote inter-racial harmony. Our public sector will also make less, at times, embarrassing translation errors with constant practice. In the public broadcast and media space, we should also encourage the correct use of mother tongues. Funding of Public Service Broadcast (PBS) should not be based on viewership alone. On the contrary, investing in good programming to promote correct language usage will multiply the effectiveness of our bilingual programmes in schools. Two, encourage learning by immersion and internship (鼓励浸濡, 就地实习). For decades, we have sent our best and brightest students to the top universities in the west. This has helped us build up a pool of talents familiar with the West which is synonymous with entrepreneurial capital, advanced technology and know-how. Going forward, we need to systematically develop our pool of talents, both in public and private sectors, who would study and understand Chinese ways of doing things. I would go further to suggest that our three G-to-G projects – Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park (SIP), Tianjin Eco-City and Chongqing Connectivity Initiative – offer ready platforms for our Public Service Leadership Officers for a meaningful period of internship and exchange.[+21 sentences] All multinationals I know make it a requirement for their top talents to have overseas tours of duty. There is no reason why we cannot know Shenzhen as well as we know the Bay Area, and Beijing as well as we know Boston. Three, invest in infrastructure to access world news, business information and global affairs, especially business news from the region and China, 掌握资讯 帷幄千里. While it is true that news consumption is mostly local, Singaporeans, as a people, must not suffer from a myopic view of the world. The more we know about the vastness of the world, the larger our ambition. The more we know about competition, the faster we run and make changes. As a trading hub for centuries, Singapore thrives on making continual adjustments to external market signal stimuli. Staying open and connected to the world has become our lifeline. As soon as we turn inward and insular, we will stagnate and decline. The question is: how can we read the world as it is, without subconscious "filtering" or "selective reading"? Could we create a media environment where our population watches the news, documentaries and business analyses as if we were part of some larger markets? Besides Channel NewsAsia, could we access Caixin Global, 财新传媒, Bloomberg or CNBC for free and on a daily basis? Our news source shapes our worldview and our biases. Could we invest more in our local media for analytical programming of China and the regional businesses to promote widespread learning? Mr Speaker, Sir, what I have proposed might sound like a departure from a long-held policy on language use. But, in reality, they are, in essence, extensions of our bilingual policy beyond the classrooms into society. Constructing a multilingual environment can only be an advantage for Singapore. After 50 years of bilingual education, I think we are ready to introduce the next phase of language application. Singapore will soon celebrate its 200 years of founding. In the past two centuries, Singapore raced ahead of the region to be an oasis of investments and trade. Now that the region has caught up, China has risen, we need to make continual and further adjustments to our strategy to sharpen our competitiveness. Being multilingual and deeply connected to the regional hinterlands must be our strategic priority.[+1 sentence] I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker45 words
[+5 sentences]Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.50 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 3.30 pm until 3.50 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.50 pm
Mr Kok Heng Leun (Nominated Member)2511 words
[+8 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker, for giving me this opportunity to speak. This is probably my last Budget speech. I thank Minister Heng for preparing a comprehensive Budget for the year ahead. Mr Speaker, Sir, I was really appreciative when during his speech, the Minister for Finance said that "A strong economy is not an end in itself". Usually, the emphasis on "economy" and "economics" is so overwhelming. We hear it on the news, we talk about it with our colleagues, and even the Government tends to use economic benchmarks as a marker for Singapore's success. But if "a strong economy is not an end in itself", then what is the end? Why work so hard to attain a strong, robust economy? The answer comes in the Minister's next line, which I quote: “It is a means to build a better home and provide a better quality of life for all our people.” So, there is a certain social contract, forged between the people of Singapore and the Government.[+13 sentences] In this social contract, when the economy is strong, the fruits of our labour must be shared with everyone, so that we can all achieve a better quality of life. Let me emphasise that point – it is for "all our people", not "some", not "a privileged group", not "our supporters". It is not conditional. As a nation, we progress with everyone hand in hand. We each have a role to play in society, in building our economy. Some provide capital, some contribute labour, some succeed and some fail. But, as we move ahead, no one should be left behind. When we benefit from this system, we should give back to the society, to give a leg up to those who are less privileged. Our social contract recognises that we are all part of a larger whole. As such, we need to take care of those who fall between the cracks. Only then can we say, true to our pledge, that there is justice and equality. Yet, the fact is, we are some ways away from achieving this ideal. We pride ourselves for building a "compassionate meritocracy", one which is kinder, more inclusive and more redistributive. If I may quote Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam's Budget Speech back in 2015, we seek to "complement a culture of personal effort and responsibility with stronger collective responsibility".[+19 sentences] Yes, we hold meritocracy as an important tenet of the society. But our meritocracy rewards only those who have made achievements – those who have done well in school, those who have succeeded in their jobs. What about those who continue to fail in school? What about those who work two jobs and still cannot earn enough to feed their family? There is no guarantee of equal opportunity when there is no guarantee of an equal starting point. There is no level playing field. Those who are better off can and will use their privilege to go to better schools, live in better neighbourhoods, get better internships and job opportunities. Where does that leave those who begin their journeys on more rocky ground? Those who cannot rise above their circumstances despite their hard work? Those who never achieve because the odds are perpetually stacked against them? Let us not forget that privilege comes in myriad forms — socioeconomic status, family history, gender, race, class, sexual orientation, political affiliation and so on. How do we honour our social compact where meritocracy fails? Now is the time to examine our social compact, to see how meritocracy benefits or fails it. What is the quality of life lower-income families have at the moment? They are squeezed in tiny rental flats. The children are deprived of privacy and a conducive environment to study. Some do not even have a meal to come home to after school. How do you tell these children that meritocracy will help them succeed? There are various Government schemes which low-income families can qualify for based on their income level. Yet, these families bear a heavy burden on their shoulders. They worry that when they get salary increments they may no longer qualify for financial aid and other assistance.[+10 sentences] They worry that despite their hard work, their incomes do not match the increasing costs of living. How do we tell them that our meritocratic system benefits them, when it does nothing to improve their current living conditions and, ironically, adds to their insecurity? With our greying population, we also encounter more elderly people, particularly seniors who are alone and living in poverty. Some of them share a home with another elderly person because they cannot afford to buy their own property. Others may realise that escalating healthcare costs have to be financed by the sale of their greatest assets – their homes. The sense of displacement that these seniors face can be extremely detrimental to their mental health. In some cases, they take on manual low-paying labour to make a living. How do we explain to these senior citizens that despite all their years of work, they are now left on the margins, because they are simply not as productive or competitive as others? Have our social support structures been developed to cater for these seniors? Or do our meritocratic convictions in self-reliance and responsibility mean that they should find solutions to their own problems? Currently, the Government has adopted the "many helping hands" approach to plug the gaps where Government schemes are less able to deliver.[+20 sentences] That is to say, funding and activation of manpower are provided for self-help community groups to address these areas. Encouraging community engagement and volunteerism is important. But we need to provide care and support in a sustained and meaningful way. More importantly, how can we provide assistance without making those who need help feel that they have to prove that “they have worked hard but not achieved enough and hence, is worthy of support?” We have been inculcated with the values of meritocracy: hard work will be rewarded, self-reliance and personal achievement are key to our success. Have we also then made those who have failed to achieve believe in the narrative that it was because of personal failing that one cannot do better and accept this narrative that it is not a dignified existence? How then do we tell those who do not succeed by society’s standards that they have not failed? How do we tell them there should be no shame in seeking help? Or do we look at them, and say, "You are not working hard enough, so you do not deserve support"? My point is that there are people in our midst who do not succeed despite their best efforts. Maybe they grew up in a poor household, unable to afford books, educational toys and enrichment classes. Maybe they grew up in a broken home, with little parental supervision, so they spend their days and nights at the playground. By the time these people go to school, by the time they leave school, by the time they enter the workforce, I do not have to say it. We know what the outcome is. For every one person who says, "I came from a poor upbringing but now I am a success", there are many others who did not succeed. To use an analogy, we are, each of us, individual parts of a machine that has been working well in the course of our history. Each of us has a different function and capability. If this machine is successful, it is because of all the parts, not just the shiny parts, not just the big parts, not just the loud parts. Every single person plays a role in making an economy successful – from the CEOs to the coffeeshop cleaners, from the highly salaried to the hourly-paid labourers. Let us not sweeten meritocracy by adding a descriptive word like "compassionate". While we want to uphold meritocracy to promote growth, we should also then look at systematic approaches to eradicate inequality, so that meritocracy can be more equitable, so that we can help achieve a better quality of life for all people.[+6 sentences] How do we then achieve a better quality of life for all whilst we grapple with growing inequality? Is universal coverage of essential services to certain groups the answer to these problems? I believe it should be one amongst other options that Singaporeans should start considering and we should be having conversations on these, deeply. We should not just ask what we want for ourselves. I hope this conversation will start with us looking around us. Looking at what, besides ourselves, is needed to bring a better quality of life, to all people. The reserves we have accumulated belong to Singaporeans, especially when they are contributions from the older generations.[+22 sentences] We work hard now, hoping to save for the future. The Government has said that there will be more expenditure and even have plans for 100 years ahead. Where is the assurance that the hard work of Singaporeans will contribute to their well-being in the future? This larger conversation must be one that involves all Singaporeans across all demographics of society. It should also be one that is open to difference. The different ethnic groups, the different religions and beliefs, the different genders, the different sexual orientations and the different political ideology. No one should feel or be made to feel left out. This conversation must also not exclude foreigners. The construction workers who build our homes and roads, the domestic workers who tend to our children and seniors. Singapore has a diverse make-up. It is this diversity that enriches our humanity. It is this diversity that powers our innovation. When we support one another regardless of our differences, we all benefit by becoming collectively stronger. This diversity is what will make or break Singapore. We are a land-scarce nation, with no natural resources. But what we do have is our people. We need to create a conducive space for them to be creative and innovative, for people to take risks and be applauded for failures as much as successes. Innovation should not just happen in the workforce in the economy. We need to be innovative in life, in the social sector and in dealing with our social and political problems. To think critically, to ask the right questions, to break rules and challenge the status quo, if necessary. Do we have such an environment? Are we able to ask the hard questions? Here, I would like to cite what Minister Ong Ye Kung shared in his keynote speech at the last Public Service Conference. I quote, "The main obstacle is ourselves – our organisation and all our entrenched processes, bureaucracy and a culture of being afraid to fail because all these years we have succeeded." Indeed, our biggest stumbling blocks are ourselves.[+2 sentences] An innovative culture is one that does not shy away from asking difficult questions. Innovators often demonstrate different points of views from the conventional or the establishment. As a functioning democratic system, we need to safeguard spaces for such discourses, not only because we should respect differences, not only because it is politically expedient to do so, but because we can learn from differing views, widen our perspective and become stronger in the process.[+16 sentences] Here, I would like to highlight the work of an important group of people, the NGOs and the activists on the ground. They have worked incredibly hard against all odds, over many years, to find means of addressing the plights of the less privileged or accepted groups of people amongst us – the poor, disabled, LGBT people, foreign workers, inmates facing the death penalty and so on. Some of them have been working at this for more than 30, 40 or 50 years. Sometimes, their work, while not in opposition to the Government, can confront the Government's position. So, why do they do it? Are they agitators who are just concerned about themselves? No. They do this because they have the same vision that Minister Heng had mentioned: to "build a better home and provide for a better quality of life for our people". They raise issues to highlight hidden problems, make the invisible visible. They are concerned about solving problems and eradicating prejudice and injustice. Activists by and large do not want to incite trouble. They do not want to be at loggerheads with the state. In fact, they want to get the state on their side, so that policies can be changed. They ask questions because they are patriotic. At the core of their activism lies the deep belief in achieving happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation, through a system that is just and equal to all. Sometimes, when activists feel that they are not heard, they appeal for support from the public, hoping that the public will hear them out. This is what a functioning democracy is all about. Democracy is not just about votes and electorates, but a system that allows different groups of people to pose their questions and opinions, to start a discourse, hoping more people will be more aware of our social problems, get involved and make a difference.[+13 sentences] This is patriotism. Patriotism is not always convenient or comfortable. Patriotism can sometimes come in the form of thorns in our sides. But patriotism comes from a good place and demands that we all do better – not only for ourselves, but for our fellowmen and, most importantly, for our country. So, what then is the role of the Government in this? How can the state encourage constructive questioning? This is where my experience as an artist comes in useful. Asking hard questions always begins with messiness. We first need to acknowledge the mess. Then, together, we wade through the messiness, sort things out and listen to different views. Soon, we will find and agree on one brilliant idea. But we need more than just one brilliant idea. We need many ideas, working together, serving as many people as possible. Patriotism is not just about flag-waving and National Day celebrations; patriotism is not about the pursuit to be the best, the richest, the fastest, the smartest or the most advanced.[+7 sentences] There are many patriotic people like that in Singapore. But this country also needs patriotic people of a different kind. Those who try to grapple with the increasing inequalities in our midst, those who are compassionate, innovative, fearless in their questioning. Those who embrace the mess. Those who want to improve our system for one and all Singaporeans. And, lastly, I would like to appeal to this Government to participate in this dialogue; let yourself be a vulnerable observer, a vulnerable listener. Listen to the voices, to the stories and narratives by first acknowledging your vulnerability as a human being. Allow your values to be challenged, be confronted and to invest into the emotional truths of the activists and the underserved, before making judgement and proposing solutions. Only with vulnerable listening, then the policies formulated can be more humane, more just, more equal.
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong)2049 words
[+39 sentences]Mr Speaker, growth still matters because it creates opportunities for young Singaporeans to rise; the means to maintain our defence and infrastructure; resources for fiscal redistribution – for the poor, the lost, the least – to build a more inclusive society. And growth itself can shape inequality. As I shared two years ago in the Budget debate, "When a society is low on opportunity, it is the rent-seekers and owners of old capital who extract profits." But how we grow also shapes how equal a society we become. For example, economist César Hidalgo at MIT has found that countries with higher economic complexity tend to have lower inequality. Some of this is because complex industries need skilled workers and supporting enterprises – which means the workers and SMEs have more stake in a more equitable economic structure. This also contrasts with less complex economies, simpler economies where the income distribution may follow the controlling interests of resource ownership – who owns an oil well, who owns farmland, who owns production facilities. Another finding from Hidalgo's team is that when you study economic structure, you can see how the pattern of exports evolves over time – usually along what they call adjacencies, which means it diversifies towards products which are similar to the existing exports. But what are the lessons for Singapore? Firstly, good quality growth can reduce income inequality. When you have a diverse economy, more paths for people to rise, more paths for workers and students to do well. Everyone building deep skills, everyone having a stake in the workplace, in industry and in the economy. Secondly, we can also see that, left to the market alone, the structure of an economy evolves bit by bit, stepwise along adjacencies – which means, to transform, there has to be bold efforts by industry and Government. And Mr Speaker, we do need to transform. Because, today, all around, there is disruption and also opportunity. So, how do we get ready for the next 50 years? Looking back, for two centuries, Singapore benefited from geography. Gateway – East and West. Trading port, trans-shipment hub, air hub. But supply chains are being disrupted. Trade routes, many more point-to-point these days. Bespoke and distributed manufacturing 3-D printing where you can build parts next to where they are going to be assembled. In many Western countries, the mood is not so good about trade. And technology continues to disrupt jobs every day. Furthermore, the very idea of economic geography is also being disrupted. Digital data flow is going to create a parallel world economic order, a world economic order that is digital in parallel to existing geography – whether it is collaboration, competition or opportunity. Not just digitising today's businesses, but creating new business models. For example, if you look at life sciences: data science is what turned DNA sequencing into genomics and is what drives personalised medicine, helping patients around the world. E-commerce and retail are more than just going cashless. It is about knowing your customers even better than they know themselves. Artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things will change factories – assembly lines that adapt, maintenance that predicts what parts are going to fail and better quality control. So, Mr Speaker, how do we ride the wave? We must ensure that Singapore has a strong position in this new digital economic world order. This means good external connectivity, good pipelines for data. That means when we spend on digital infrastructure, we must see it as an investment and not consumption – the same way we invest in the Tuas Port and growing Changi Airport. Obvious next steps for a data hub include machine learning and artificial intelligence (AI). In 2015, the New York Times reported the US Federal Government spent US$1 billion on AI research. South Korea, a similar amount. China, even more. AI can empower many sectors: drug discovery, factory design, service innovation. I propose that the Government invest in an AI technology hub, in the same way that we invested many years ago in building the Biopolis. Because there is strategic value in Singapore maintaining public-sector ownership in AI research, whether it is intellectual property or the insights.[+7 sentences] Trust and rule of law still matter. So, we must maintain our reputation as a trusted jurisdiction for intellectual property and data protection. Because in the future, when someone sequences all three billion base pairs of his personal genome, who will they trust, where will they trust that data with? This means legislation that is up to date or even one step ahead. It also means investing in better communication security because communication is being disrupted, too. Traditional public key encryption which your "https" and other forms of online secured socket layers depend on – all that presumes that factorising large numbers into individual prime numbers takes a long time, even with a fast computer. But quantum computing is promising to disrupt this, by doing that factorising faster than was thought possible. On the flip side, quantum-secured communications are also on the rise – sharing information such that eavesdropping can be detected. So, can the Government tell us if we will continue funding research like what the NRF is doing at the Centre for Quantum Technologies?[+5 sentences] This may seem like "blue skies research", but I see some of this as what I call "blue ocean research" – practical applications and a big harvest for those who can catch the dividends early enough. Mr Speaker, all these elements of a world-class digital data hub are already within our grasp. Firstly, it does not need much land, compared to traditional industry. Our fiscal position is better than many other developed economies. So, the next step is to invest and converge investments, technology, talent, infrastructure, to create that critical mass of opportunities for Singaporeans and for Singapore. Furthermore, by being a trusted, neutral party, a trusted first mover, we can establish common standards in ASEAN with our ASEAN partners, whether it is e-payments, data protection across jurisdictions and so on.[+5 sentences] Collaborating, learning from each other, working together. We may be a little red dot, but we can help build an ecosystem of inter-operable systems to benefit all stakeholders in the region. You might even call it: "One dot, one web: One shining little red dot, one web of partnerships and networks". Mr Speaker, I would like to continue in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, today, the digital economy is developing rapidly. We should respond appropriately to the situation and prepare early so that we can become a world-class digital centre. We should increase investment in digital infrastructure and legislate in advance so that Singapore can sustain its reputation of being a safe and reliable hub, hence, becoming the top choice in the region for data storage.[+16 sentences] With this, Singapore can continuously increase its prestige and influence. At the same time, Singapore should also take advantage of being a first mover and work with neighbouring countries to establish common standards in ASEAN and to establish an ecosystem of inter-operable systems. You can call it One Dot, One Web: "One shining little red dot, One Web of partnerships and networks". Please allow me to continue in English. (In English): The Government has a dual role: minimise risk, maximise opportunity. Both of these help prevent market failure. When we minimise risk, we prevent a race to the bottom. But, if there is too much bureaucracy, too many administrative barriers, it gets in the way of people and businesses racing to the top. So, today, more than ever, the Government can and must be an enabler of opportunity, innovation and growth. That means the speed of decision-making matters. We need to be fast and we need to be able to act fast, especially when speed matters because, in the private sector, in Industry 4.0, a "slow decision" is often the same as "no decision". And if there is "no decision", after a while, it becomes a "no" decision when people take their business and opportunities elsewhere. Mr Speaker, our civil servants and Statutory Board staff work very hard and try their best. So, we must keep on finding ways to empower that Team Singapore to do even better. Can we be better at nurturing and promoting our own unicorns – start-ups that are valued at $1 billion or more? How can we be more competitive on this? As a first step, I propose that we establish an expedited fast-track pathway, so that potential unicorns can quickly negotiate an initial public offering (IPO) in Singapore, especially if the IPO brings strategic value with the company, whether it is the valuation, stimulating the local ecosystem, or growing our national prestige, reputation and position.[+3 sentences] Financial overheads matter. How easy is it for SMEs and start-ups to access credit and funding, especially during the early years of the so-called "valley of death", when many enterprises do not quite make it before taking flight? Can we reduce land cost and rental overheads for businesses? Land has to be priced appropriately, but we can be innovative as well. I call upon the Government to diversify the approach to industrial-commercial land use and leasing.[+19 sentences] We can have a market for different kinds of leasing models. There is traditional upfront capital expenditure, but there can also be models with discounted upfront costs in return for profit sharing, or even some extent of equity ownership, and that equity could even be conventional or preferred stock. We can have a market of different models to see what works. Mr Speaker, we also need to keep Singapore open to world-class talent. We must be a home – a home where the brightest talent of tomorrow will want to settle down and raise children in, while creating jobs, wealth and opportunities for Singaporeans. It starts upstream. Because when a bright young spark grows up in Singapore, there is that emotional attachment to the little red dot. Sometimes, it is home ‒ home ties ‒ more than any financial incentive that decides whether a company founder keeps that Singapore footprint, even after the start-up goes regional or global. Mr Speaker, let us look at Razer – world-class gaming hardware company. As disclosure, I should mention that I do use a Razer mouse. Razer, a world-class gaming hardware company bought THX, the audio company founded by George Lucas. Razer's founder, Tan Min-Liang, grew up in Singapore. If he had grown up elsewhere, we would have one fewer star in our constellation of entrepreneurs. Mr Speaker, entrepreneurship is also about equality because when there is innovation and entrepreneurship together, it creates value, wealth and opportunities, not just for the owners, but the employees and the whole ecosystem. But entrepreneurship is a skillset as well. The World Management Survey by John Van Reenen at the London School of Economics studied 12,000 organisations, 34 countries. They found that basic management skills account for large differences in productivity and output per worker. But we also know that children from less well-off families do not get the same access to parental support, to parental experience of having run a business, to other forms of social capital. Fewer chances to learn how to run a business or get an apprenticeship at an SME through networks. Our school system can help bridge that gap. So, I call upon the Government to study how we can nurture entrepreneurship and skills in our schools, how our education system can facilitate the sharing of skills, the sharing of experiences, so that young Singaporeans have a less steep learning curve on that journey to entrepreneurship because such skills should not just be the domain of those with prior experience or pre-existing social networks.[+6 sentences] This is another way we can reduce inequality, grow entrepreneurship, help young Singaporeans to rise up and do well. Mr Speaker, once upon a time, when Independence was thrust upon us, we dared, as a matter of survival. Today, the economy is being transformed, many policies, many transformations. But beyond this Budget, we all must have the audacity to dream big. To dream big and boldly go where we can position ourselves to ride new trends and new journeys over the next 50 years. And so, I stand in support of this Budget.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio)1288 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, this year's Budget is set against the backdrop of shifting global economic dynamics, emerging technologies and an ageing population. With these challenges in mind, the Budget has laid out specific initiatives targeted at ensuring that Singapore will continue to have a robust and vibrant economy, as well as a healthy stream of tax revenue that we could tap on to support our long-term social objectives. In this regard, this year's Budget is fiscally prudent, measured and well-balanced, with emphasis given to address both immediate concerns and long-term needs. Two initiatives, in particular, have created much talk on the ground ─ the SG Bonus and the impending rise in GST. Some chatter has likened these two initiatives to the well-worn analogy of giving a chicken wing and taking back a chicken. While this analogy may draw a few chuckles, I think that it is a somewhat facile one. The Singapore Government has always been committed to sharing the fruits of the country’s development with Singaporeans and the SG Bonus is yet another instance of this commitment. Linking the SG Bonus with the proposed rise in GST, however, gives an inaccurate perception of a relationship between the two issues. The adjustments in GST is important and necessary to help Singapore secure a robust tax revenue to support our future social spending. However, I believe that while the lower-income and middle-income group will pay more of this consumption tax when GST is eventually increased, the Government must continue its current policy, such that they receive a corresponding increase in tax transfers and subsidies, so that the increase in GST will result in a positive net transfer to this group.[+5 sentences] As this proposed increase will not take place for a few years, I would like to now shift my focus to the present and to look at three specific aspects of the Budget in my speech. First of all, a vibrant and innovative economy. Digital technologies have disrupted traditional business models, changed the ways business decisions are made and have transformed how goods and services are delivered and consumed. Many businesses are struggling to keep up with these transformative changes and it is crucial that our firms, especially our SMEs, develop digital capabilities and competencies to compete in this digital era. The SMEs Go Digital programme has been a timely shot-in-the-arm to help our businesses ramp up their digital capabilities. This is especially important for our SMEs that might not have the same corporate resources and knowledge as MNCs to initiate large-scale upgrading and transformation. I hope that the scale of this programme can be ramped up to go beyond supporting the 650 companies that it is already benefiting.[+6 sentences] While we help businesses transform, we also need to ensure that we have the talent base with the right skills to support that transformation. I believe that we need to focus on two areas: to up-skill and re-skill our workforce. Firstly, we need to put in place a robust continuous education framework to benefit employees working in industries where jobs are increasingly being automated. These employees need to be up-skilled and re-skilled to take on technologically-enhanced roles so that they can continue to add value to their employers. We also need to help employees who are displaced by technological changes and innovations to learn new skills. The Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) have been developed to help 23 industries reinvent themselves. Can the Government use the ITMs to identify jobs that will be made obsolete and redundant in these industries and help employees in those jobs transit into new roles in other sectors where demand for manpower is growing?[+14 sentences] As Singapore moves into its next phase of growth, we must ensure that we have the right mix of human capital to support that growth. The development of human capital is imperative and should also be done in tandem with the development of digital skills. The second area is to focus on the benefits for families in the area of education. As an educator, I strongly believe that education is an important leveller that enables social mobility. While the increase in Edusave contributions will benefit all students, it would also be ideal if we could provide targeted help in larger quantums to those in our community who need an additional leg-up. For example, can we consider an enhanced financial assistance scheme where there are different tiers of Edusave grants and top-ups, depending on family income? Other initiatives that we could consider would include making student care more accessible and affordable by giving higher levels of subsidies to lower-income families and prioritising student care services for children of single working-parents because these families typically do not have the same level of social support that dual-parent families have. The final area I would like to focus on is that of the enhanced Proximity Housing Grant (PHG) designed to benefit families. I welcome the different enhancements that the Budget has made to the PHG. I believe that these enhancements will, in the long run, promote family ties and encourage family members to live near one another. Having an extended family living close to one another will provide a much-needed social support network. This is especially important in Singapore’s ageing society where dual-income families are norms rather than exceptions. As such, grandparents are great sources of support for grandchildren when parents are out at work and the daily interaction between grandchildren and grandparents are wonderful ways to keep the elderly mentally and physically active and engaged. Singles, too, can also play their part in an extended family network. One of the new initiatives in the PHG is the introduction of the $10,000 subsidy for singles who are buying resale flats to live near their parents. While this will no doubt encourage singles to live in proximity to their parents, the impact of the subsidy on actual purchases will be different, depending on the differing prices of the estate where the parents live. For example, someone whose parents live in a mature estate could expect to pay a lot more for a basic flat to live near their parents, as compared to someone who is buying an equivalent flat to live near their parents in a non-mature estate.[+1 sentence] The difference could be in the tens of thousands, which is quite substantial for a single individual. Instead of a fixed amount, could the Government consider having a PHG that is based on the percentage of the selling price of the resale flat, subject to a minimum of the original base of $10,000 and a maximum ceiling? This would be helpful for those who have little choice but to buy flats in more mature estates because their parents happen to be living in those estates.[+6 sentences] Ideally, this principle can eventually be applied to other proximity-based housing grants as well in the future. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the unexpected Budget surplus that we have this year is exceptional and we must not assume that we will have a surplus of this quantum again. Indeed, the next decade will see Singapore undertake several major projects to upgrade our healthcare systems, transportation network, infrastructure and to beef up various aspects of our security. I understand that the only way for us to ensure that we do not overly burden our future generation is to ensure that we have a fiscally sustainable and prudent Budget now. Having said that, it is important that the Government also remembers to temper any future tax increases with the appropriate measures and schemes to help those who need assistance and help when that day comes. With that, Mr Deputy Speaker, I conclude my speech in support of the Budget.
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Nee Soon)1501 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Budget. I would like to talk about shifting our youths' mindset towards ASEAN. But before that, I would like to make three brief points about the Budget. One, we must be wary about dipping more into our reserve income.[+12 sentences] We can argue about the precise percentage of NIRC to use, but the important thing is we must continue to grow our reserves. If our reserves do not grow, it may not continue to anchor the stability of our growing economy. As a small city-state, Singapore has been described as a small boat in a large ocean. During the last big storm, the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, our reserves served as an anchor, thereby providing us with much-needed stability. Recently, some have commented that our reserves have already gotten too much and we can afford to spend a little bit more of our reserve income. However, I feel that many commentators did not talk about the fact that Singapore's economy is still growing and we are actually a small ship that is continuing to grow in size. With geographical uncertainty and the rolling back of financial regulations in US, the only certainty is that bigger and larger financial storms will eventually come to our shores. So, if our reserves fail to keep up with our growing economy, maybe not at the next crisis, but a few crises down the road, our reserves may not be of a sufficient size to anchor the bigger Singapore economy then. And if Singapore flounders, who will save us? The International Monetary Fund (IMF) or World Bank? Even if they do, at what cost, especially for the average Singaporean? Therefore, we must be wary of the serious implications of not growing our reserves. My second point is that our Government must actively help our seniors to monetise their assets to pay for their retirement.[+5 sentences] Because retirees have no income, they are more impacted by the GST, compared to other Singaporeans. Some retirees, even those living in private estates, are asset-rich and cash-poor. To help them manage the cost of living, I hope our Government can help put some urgency in helping them monetise their assets. I have spoken about this issue in depth during the recent February Parliamentary Motion on "Support for Senior Citizens". Therefore, I hope the Government can continue to actively ensure that such options exist in Singapore, either through reverse mortgage of larger flats in private estates, or through specialised reverse mortgage funds like those done in France. Third, I hope we can all recognise that ITMs are a long-term economic transformation plan and not push for immediate results, especially in terms of economic output numbers.[+18 sentences] Recently, some commentators have spoken about the effectiveness of the ITMs. I would like to point out that any major economic transformation needs at least three to five years before it is fully illustrated and flows into the economic numbers, especially economic output numbers. Let me illustrate. For example, the Government can launch a new programme to encourage businesses to use Artificial Intelligence in, let us say, year one. Major businesses, with their budgetary process, will need up to a year to make major shifts to take advantage of that programme. The efforts of the business will also take time to impact the bottom line. After the bottom line is made, it would still take many more months, even one to two years, before the improvements are reflected in any company’s audited accounts. And then, more time is needed before the numbers are finally submitted to ACRA and to our Department of Statistics. That is why we need three to five years before we can fully comment on the effectiveness of programmes, in terms of economic output numbers – whether it is GDP, Value Added per worker or productivity numbers. In the meantime, I feel that our debate should focus on input indicators of economic transformation, by which I mean the quality and the accessibility of transformation programmes for our businesses and workers. And let us not get fixed on immediate economic output numbers. Let me now touch on my main point on the speech today, which is getting Singaporeans to "think ASEAN". I agree with Minister Heng that Singapore should be a Global-Asia Node of technology, innovation and enterprise. By and large, I think we are making good progress. However, I think we can do more to tap a rising ASEAN. I am glad that our economic policies are keeping up with a rising ASEAN. Beyond the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC), we are also setting up the Infrastructure Office, which is contributing to more infrastructure development within ASEAN. We are expanding our Global Innovative Alliance into ASEAN's Innovation Network and we are pushing for the creation of an ASEAN e-Commerce platform. Beyond the announced measures, I would like to further suggest, as ASEAN Chair this year, that Singapore encourage other major ASEAN economies to increase funding for the ASEAN Secretariat.[+14 sentences] A stronger secretariat will improve ASEAN's ability to track and execute various commitments, so as to unlock the full potential of agreed measures. For example, a stronger secretariat will be able to help us better coordinate action in response to non-tariff protectionist measures within the AEC. I am also heartened to see the strengthening of talent development programmes. This includes Professional Conversion Programme (PCP) for Southeast Asian Ready Talent, SkillsFuture ASEAN Leadership Programme, GOASEAN Award, Young Talent Programme, and Infrastructure Development Internship. I hope that should these programmes prove successful, the Government can quickly scale them up. The creation of Enterprise Singapore, as well as the rollout of more programmes to support companies to internationalise, will strengthen our efforts. However, I feel that much more work is needed for Singaporeans to "Think ASEAN". Today, there is a dichotomy between the tremendous opportunities offered by ASEAN and the perception of ASEAN by everyday Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans I speak to, associate our neighbouring countries with affordable holiday destinations or places where we go abroad to do community service. In fact, many Singaporeans assume that many parts of ASEAN are backward regions and will stay so for a long time. But many parts of ASEAN are growing quickly, and these assumptions are no longer true. As such, it is very important for us to change the mindset, especially among our youths. After all, while our Government and our companies are more involved in ASEAN, the full benefits can truly be realised if our Singaporeans are personally involved in the opportunities. So, I would like to propose five ways we can encourage our people, especially our youths and PMETS, to see the possibilities in ASEAN. One, we could shift the balance of tertiary education internships, study trips and exchange programmes towards developing countries, especially ASEAN.[+5 sentences] And when they go abroad, we should ensure that our youths see the bright spots and centre of innovations within ASEAN. Two, we can promote exchanges between student leaders. As a young Singaporean studying in the US many years ago, I was deeply involved in the largest student leader exchange between the US and China. That allowed me to understand that lifelong friendships can be forged over time, if the programme is executed well. There is scope to do such a programme, linking the future leaders of Singapore with those of our neighbouring ASEAN countries. Three, we should encourage more interactions between our students and officials from ASEAN countries who are currently studying in Singapore.[+2 sentences] Today, many ASEAN officials spend short training stints in Singapore and they are here because they are slated for greater things back in their home country. Therefore, there is scope for us to network our students with them, so that we can benefit from their in-depth insights that are not frequently covered publicly. Four, we should encourage the teaching of ASEAN-specific knowledge.[+5 sentences] By that, I mean getting our tertiary institutions to teach ASEAN languages, business cultures and political culture through both formal courses and guest speaker series. Singapore has deep expertise in the region through many excellent institutions, such as the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Asia Competitiveness Institute (ACI) and Institute of Southeast Asian Studies (ISEAS). We also have multilateral institutes, such as World Bank, which has a deep presence in Singapore. Our leading bankers, lawyers and management consultants have tremendous experience working in ASEAN. Therefore, we can tap on these institutions and our experts to open up courses and talks to our students and young entrepreneurs. My last recommendation is to create an annual Business ASEAN conference, much like the successful Business China Conference series, which put an annual spotlight on the exciting developments in ASEAN.[+3 sentences] The goal of all of these is to get our people to "Think ASEAN". If we can use our year as ASEAN Chair to start this mindset shift, the opportunities for Singapore and Singaporeans will naturally follow. With that, Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker11 words
[+2 sentences]Ms Sylvia Lim, not present. All right, Mr Chong Kee Hiong.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh)1106 words
[+6 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this is a well-considered and strategic Budget which positions Singapore for the medium and long term. I am in agreement with the Budget, which has been carefully calibrated and aligned with our key goals. While we enable innovation and support our enterprises to seize future opportunities, we are also preparing to deal with increasing expenditures in healthcare, national security and infrastructure. Indeed, as the Minister had emphasised, we are at a transition point which will present unprecedented opportunities and challenges. Some hard choices, such as raising the GST, will have to be made to ensure that we stay in the black and continue to build up our fiscal fitness. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): The Minister for Finance has announced that the GST will have to be raised in the next few years.[+3 sentences] GST is one of our key sources of revenue. This advance notice will help investors, businesses and residents to plan expected expenditures. The Minister has mentioned that the exact timing of the increase has not been confirmed and will depend on the state of our economy, our future expenditures and the revenue from existing taxes. Is the Government considering the possibility of postponing the GST increase beyond the projected timeframe if our future economic performance is better than expected?[+15 sentences] The GST was introduced in 1994 at the rate of 3%. It was increased nine years later in 2003 to 4% and, subsequently, in quick succession, to 5% the next year in 2004 and 7% another three years later in 2007. It will be over 10 years by the time it will be raised again. Under what circumstances can the Government use other combinations of income instruments to replace the tax contribution from the GST increase? Also, what is the expected GDP contribution arising from the large-scale infrastructure projects, such as Changi Airport Terminal 5, Tuas mega port and the Kuala Lumpur-Singapore High Speed Rail (HSR)? How would these go to reduce our reliance on future GST increases? In addition, will the Government consider a cap on the proportion of GST contribution to total revenue, since there will be future returns on investments made with our current reserves and the infrastructure investments we are embarking on? We also have to consider if we should set a ceiling on our GST rate in the future. For now, even after increasing it to 9%, our GST is at the low end of the spectrum, compared to many other developed countries. European countries’ GST or Value-Added Tax (VAT) is between 10% and 20%. The standard rates in Denmark and Sweden are 25%. While Denmark's VAT is set at one rate, other countries, such as Sweden, Germany and France, have reduced rates applied to essential goods, such as food. I agree with our Government’s decision to keep our GST at one flat rate to minimise administrative and compliance costs. However, going forward, should our GST continue to increase, we should review and examine other GST models with lower rates on essential goods and services to reduce the burden on the lower-income groups. In planning for GST increases, we have to take into account both the pace of wage increases that can be attained and the projected inflation rate, so as to reduce the impact of the increase in the cost of living on our citizens. (In English): I am heartened to note that our labour productivity grew 4.5% last year, a seven-year high.[+2 sentences] We must continue our investments in innovation and our efforts in structural reforms to boost productivity growth for the long term. Wage increases and productivity gains must grow in tandem. Does the Ministry have details of how much of the wage increases in the past year can be attributed to the 4.5% increase in productivity? I fully support the decision to extend the Wage Credit Scheme which co-funds salary increases for Singaporean employees, up to a gross monthly wage of $4,000.[+16 sentences] The scheme aims to encourage employers to share productivity gains with staff. The gradual reduction in co-funding by the Government, from 20% this year to 10% in 2020, will ease cost pressures on companies while they undergo transformation to raise productivity. Another important scheme is the Progressive Wage Model (PWM). I hope the Government will consider expanding this productivity-based wage progression pathway to sectors beyond cleaning, security and landscape sectors. Doing so will help the low-wage workers in other sectors who are vulnerable and not equipped to negotiate for training, upgrading, better or more productive work designs. Next, the plan to both save and borrow for future infrastructural projects is a sound one. I agree that the plan to borrow by our Statutory Boards and Government-owned companies involved in infrastructure will achieve twin benefits. Firstly, spreading out the costs to better match the timing of the accrual of investment benefits; and secondly, developing our bond market. Providing Government guarantees backed by our reserves would certainly kill two birds with one stone – providing assurance to investors while preserving our reserves to generate future returns. How will the Government decide which entities and projects will receive these guarantees, the amounts and the timeframes for repayments? In addition, will there be a cap on the total amount of guarantees to be provided? As infrastructure projects are supposed to be utilised well into the future, it is important to also apply our vision of building a Smart, Green and Liveable City on such projects as they will certainly impact how we live, work and play. I would like to suggest that we consider designating a proportion of the borrowings for such projects to be in Green Bonds issuance which, in turn, supports the Monetary Authority of Singapore's initiative to grow the green bond market in Singapore. This would help develop a green bond market of a significant size and add to the vibrancy of the bond market with greater variety of products attracting different investors. Finally, I would like to ask the Minister about the necessity of growing our Ministries' Budgets at 0.3 times gross domestic product (GDP) growth. Is it necessary to expand Budgets every year, as long as they are pegged to inflation rates? Is it not possible for each Ministry to continue its operations within the allocated Budget to strive for cost-effectiveness through work design improvements and taking advantage of technological innovations? Instead of pegging departments' budgets to GDP growth, it may be better to review and justify investments and expenditures annually, even in years when there is GDP growth.[+1 sentence] I would like to conclude with my support for the Budget.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon)1991 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for this strategic Budget plan, which is a practical and far-sighted approach at preparing Singapore to continue to do well in the future. Young Singaporeans, in particular, will be excited about building their careers, businesses, fulfilling their dreams in the innovative and vibrant economy which the Minister is planning for. A greener and cleaner living environment will certainly be a significant boost to our living standards. In the face of increasing costs of living and a challenging economy, I am heartened that the Government plans to set aside more resources for those in need. This is a Budget that is forward-looking and filled with optimism. Let me start by discussing some of the plans in relation to the economy. I share the Minister's opinion that regional and international partnerships will certainly help to open doors to new opportunities. I am pleased to see that he is implementing some schemes to achieve this. Collaborations on infrastructure development is good news for our construction industry, that is, if there are plans to have local engineering and other consultants as well as construction firms to be actively involved. I note that an Infrastructure Office will be established to bring together local and international firms from across the value chain.[+8 sentences] I would like to ask the Minister: who will this Office serve – Government-linked companies? Temasek-linked companies like Surbana Jurong? Or our private sector? How will local consultants and contractors benefit? Next, even before the Budget, the Government has shared plans to transform industries through the development of Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs). These are aimed at addressing issues within each industry and fostering deeper partnerships between the Government, firms, industries, trade associations and chambers. This is good in principle, but implementation would not be so straightforward, given that every industry, every business, every individual has different levels of expectations and commitment. Communication and engagement between the different bodies will always pose challenges. It is unrealistic to put together a plan on paper and expect everybody to go through with it and resolve the problems by themselves. Thus, I propose there should be a full-time secretariat for each industry's ITM, to visit the trade associations and speak with the ground, to help resolve differences and administrative issues and ensure that each partnership is as effective and efficient as possible.[+4 sentences] SkillsFuture will remain a crucial component to help Singaporeans adjust and adapt to the Future Economy. Thus far, those who have utilised their SkillsFuture credits have found the scheme to be encouraging and, more importantly, they have gained useful skills that will help them in their careers, or even just to enrich their lives and learn something new. I hope the Government will consider investing more resources in SkillsFuture, such as giving more credits to those who have already used theirs. I would now like to move on to social issues. First of all, housing, an integral part of our lives and an asset that supposedly gives us financial security in old age. I am disappointed that there is no new commitment to a Home Improvement Programme for HDB flats built after 1986.[+12 sentences] Some of these flats are now at least 30 years old and prone to defects and safety issues. Can the Minister share future plans for HIP for ageing flats? Nee Soon South is in a very unique situation. Half of my flats are built in 1986 and the other half in 1987. So, half are enjoying the HIP while the other half are still waiting, 还痴痴地在等. I am also concerned about those who have a house but are cash-tight and have little options to right size. This is becoming increasingly common in the older private estates, where the land lease is expiring and it is difficult to sell their house. There are also people who live in older HDB flats with a lease of less than 60 years and they find it very challenging to sell their flats. This is not about monetising the house but getting some money from the sales to cover the cost for the next house. As more housing estates start to age, this problem will become more rampant. While there is Silver Housing Scheme (SHS) for residents who are 55 years old and above, this scheme requires most of the proceeds to be topped up into the CPF and may not meet the needs of all elderly. How does the Government intend to address these issues? Next, I would like to ask how the decision to raise the Buyer's Stamp Duty for residential properties above $1 million was derived.[+16 sentences] What were the factors that were taken into consideration? The perception from the public is that this is just an exercise to take a cut from all the en bloc homeowners. It is likely that these en bloc owners have to buy another apartment to move to and they will end up being penalised if they buy above $1 million. Rising living costs and inflation are persistent concerns for every country. During my interaction with residents, by and large, residents understand the need for the Government to raise the GST. However, they worry about businesses profiteering by raising prices excessively and, in some cases, in advance. Back when it was announced that prices of water would be increased, residents said some businesses took the opportunity to raise prices even before the increase kicked in. I hope the Government can look into a taskforce to ensure commercial entities do not use the GST increase as an excuse to exploit consumers. The Government is enhancing various financial support and grants which would help mitigate the GST increase in some ways. I would like to propose that when deciding on the income eligibility of applicants, we do not be so fixated on the applicant’s household income. An applicant may have obtained a new job or wage increase which results in disqualification from a scheme, but he or she may have only obtained that income increase recently and still has many outstanding bills to pay off. I think we should also look at other criteria, such as minimum working period. Ultimately, we do not want to end up penalising people for getting a job or a better paying one. Our end-goal is to ensure that children in these low-income families have a conducive environment where they can focus on their studies and self-development without being affected by their parents’ worries. Beneficiaries should thus be encouraged to find better means to support their family and not feel worried that they will be cut off from much-needed financial support once they do so. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Malay, please. (In Malay): The Government has just recently announced that the GST increase will be implemented between 2021 and 2025, but I am concerned that businesses will take the opportunity to increase prices in advance and engage in profiteering.[+4 sentences] This happened last year when the water price increases were announced. I hope that the Government can monitor this situation to ensure that commercial entities do not use the GST increases as an excuse to exploit consumers. The Government will also increase various financial support and assistance, which can help mitigate the impact of the GST increase. I would like to suggest that Government agencies be more compassionate when assessing applications for assistance. Please do not use household income solely as the benchmark, because our fixation on the household income resulted in some applicants becoming ineligible.[+10 sentences] For example, a person who may have just obtained a new job or wage increase could become ineligible. But we should look deeper whether the person has to settle any outstanding bills that came about when the person was retrenched. I propose that, apart from the household income, we should look at the person’s period of employment. Ultimately, we do not wish to penalise someone who manages to secure a better job. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Chinese, please. (In Mandarin): This Budget pays attention to the ageing issue. Hence, I would like to raise a few related points. Firstly, I would like to talk about seniors who live in old houses. Old houses tend to have shorter leases and are difficult to fetch a good price, no matter whether it is a private property or an HDB flat. Hence, it is a challenge for their owners to downsize to a smaller unit and get additional cash. Even though we have the Silver Housing Bonus, the scheme requires that most of the proceeds be topped up into the CPF and may not meet the needs of all the elderly.[+1 sentence] Old HDB units built between 1987 and 1990 face a special problem. As HIP is only applicable to units built before 1986, units built after 1987, although very old, they have not been renovated with low costs.[+39 sentences] This has affected the quality of life and safety of the owners and that is why I said that old flats face a special problem. But the flats are located in Nee Soon South, half built in 1986 and half in 1987. One-half is qualified for HIP but the other half will not qualify. In addition, some illnesses troubling the seniors are not covered by the Government's medical subsidies. For example, many seniors suffer incontinence and need long-term treatment. Otherwise, it may cause other health problems. I hope the Government can pay attention to this and provide some subsidies. After the Government announced the plan to raise GST, some unscrupulous businesses may increase their prices even before the actual GST hike. This happened when the water prices increased last year. Can the Government consider establishing a task force to study this problem? I would like to share a story with you. This is a conversation between a husband and a housewife. The wife said to the husband, "Dear, dear my mother is ageing and my mother has to visit doctors very frequently. Our children are growing up in their developing age. I need to buy more fish and meat for their development. I need to have more money from you." Husband looked at the wife with a smile and he said, "No problem. Sure. I have a piece of good news to share with you. Last Saturday, early in the morning, as I was at the Community Club, I met our Member of Parliament. Our Member of Parliament came to visit us before 8 o'clock. The licence plate wrote '4188'. It was quite a beautiful number. So, I decided to follow that number. I went to buy the 4D and the number came out as 8481. I felt that I had hit the jackpot." The wife looked at the husband and she said, "Dear, what I want is the current expenses, I am not talking about one-off type of expenses. So, are you telling me that if you do not win the lottery, my mother does not need to see the doctor? Are you telling me that if you do not hit the jackpot, my children do not need to eat extra protein?" And the husband said, "That is not a problem. We still have a house, an asset we can sell." I think this is the problem that one of our Members has described that is worrying. The understanding is: not a problem; if we do need to finance expenses, we can just utilise the proceeds from the land sale. The population's age and Government costs are always rising, but no problem! The Government can solve them by just selling land. One of my residents seems to have seen this coming. Last Saturday, when I was visiting the coffeeshop, he told me, "Sister Wah, you must remember, even a mountain of gold can be depleted. People shouldn't keep thinking about using the savings our grandfather left us. Don't let us become the unfilial sons who squander the family wealth!"
Mr Ong Teng Koon (Marsiling-Yew Tee)1107 words
[+28 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak in support of the Budget. It is vital that we are discussing this Budget from a position of strength, with a large surplus. We are unique among developed economies. Prudent policies have enabled us to continue to accrue surpluses even as the economy and population mature. This gives us vital breathing room to manoeuvre as future challenges loom. This is especially critical as one mega-trend is likely to fundamentally change our world. In the words of Mr Masayoshi Son of Softbank: AI is coming, and it is coming Big Time! And it will combine with robotics and automation to change how we work. AI will change our world. While technology is always creating new jobs and destroying old ones, there is reason to believe that the current phase of development is different. AI is developing at an accelerating pace. With machine learning, computers can teach themselves faster than humans can teach them. DeepBlue, which beat the chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov in 1996, was rule-based and human programmers taught it how to win at chess. In contrast, AlphaGo beat the world champion at Go after teaching itself the game. AlphaGo Zero taught itself how to beat AlphaGo in 40 days without using a single data from a single human game. It is clear that the impact of technology on the economy and the labour market will be broader, deeper and more rapid than previous technological advances. Broad – because it will affect many sectors simultaneously. Deep – because it will affect many different job functions within each industry. And Rapid – because the rate of adoption of software or cloud solutions is not hindered by the need for physical rollout. What will result is not just traditional structural or cyclical unemployment. We will experience a permanent secular shift in the economy, which will change what jobs are available and what skills are in demand. History has shown that technological progress has always led to new jobs and an overall improvement in our lives in the long run. But all of us are going to be there in the long run. And in the meantime, the transitional pain is going to be very, very real. Consider an area, such as manufacturing. According to research by The Boston Consulting Group, jobs will be lost in roles such as machine operator, production planner, while new roles will be created, such as data scientist and robot coordinator. But therein lies the challenge. Many of those displaced will struggle to take on the new emerging roles. For others, a series of part-time or freelance gigs will become their permanent reality.[+1 sentence] Let us take a specific example. We have around 75,000 taxi and private hire drivers in Singapore.[+8 sentences] The recently-emerged private hire car industry has served as a refuge for those who have been displaced from other lines of work. This has allowed them to continue to earn an income. This has helped mitigate the pressure of job losses from sectors that have been struggling, such as marine and offshore. However, we are not far from the day when all cars will be able to drive themselves. The move towards Autonomous Vehicles (AV) will have a profound impact on the labour force it will displace. What happens to the drivers then? Is there another industry that can absorb so many jobseekers who may not have any specific marketable skills? The gig economy – freelance or part-time work – can help cushion the impact, but it is not a long-term solution for many. According to a 2016 study by McKinsey, 30% of gig economy workers were in the gig economy out of necessity; they had no choice and they were not happy about it.[+6 sentences] They are individuals who are trapped in an endless hamster wheel with no hope of advancement. This then becomes very fertile ground for radicalisation. We can, therefore, expect to see a displaced underclass who will struggle to make ends meet. This Government has had the foresight to put in place SkillsFuture and emphasise training and reskilling. We are leading the world in this area. But we need to recognise that a large segment of the population will struggle to learn and apply these new skills. Out of our 2.2 million labour force, around 700,000 workers are over 50 years old or have less than Secondary school education.[+8 sentences] Many of them will struggle to learn. And when you factor in their families and dependants, the number of people affected gets really, really big. What do we do for them? This raises vital questions around the whole approach to social spending. Short-term cushioning may not be enough, since we cannot trampoline them back into economic health. Any support would need to be sustained as well. Current trend is towards a broad spread of small subsidies. Is this still the right prioritisation going forward? Do we need to consider alternative revenue sources, such as a wealth tax?[+11 sentences] As technology advances, wages will likely fall as a share of GDP. Then, it becomes only right that the owners of land and capital pay a greater share of the burden. What steps are we taking to prepare for this, in terms of fiscal policy and of preparing the ground and the rhetoric for this possibility? And what are we doing to prepare the next generation for this new reality? Our education system has served us well, but can it equip the young for the new challenges? If you believe that things are changing more quickly, then what is needed is not specific knowledge, but imagination and the ability to learn. How do we inculcate the values needed for the future, such as curiosity, imagination, critical thinking and persistence? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we, may disagree on how many people will be displaced or how quickly. But the advent of AI is inevitable and there will be consequences. We cannot be complacent and assume that new jobs will automatically be created. In many cases, AI will supplement and augment our capabilities. There will be many cases where humans will struggle to compete. We need to ensure that the displaced have meaningful roles that will allow them to retain their dignity. I feel truly that we need to tackle this problem head on and decide as a nation on how to respond. I do not have the answers, but we need to have a serious conversation and not just repeat comforting platitudes. It is imperative that we do this from a position of strength.[+2 sentences] So, now is the time to talk about AI. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang)2319 words
[+3 sentences]Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. I rise in support of the Budget. This Budget is unique in a few respects. The most important is that this is a Budget not just for the year ahead but one which deals with the next 10 years.[+5 sentences] And not only that, but which is quite upfront about some of the bad news for the next 10 years. So, it is a very straightforward Budget but the most important part of it is the message. The message is one of optimism, that Singapore is ready for the decade ahead, notwithstanding the challenges we face. I also think there is a risk that in this Budget, people may take, sometimes, perhaps, too much comfort. It is also important for people to realise what some of the important changes mean and what impact these will have on them. The Minister rightfully identified the three megatrends that will shape the future, including the move towards Asia, automation. I think herein lies opportunities but the biggest challenge is the third – our demographic challenge.[+8 sentences] So, how do all these things interplay? First of all, of course, if this vision succeeds, we will have a vibrant innovative economy and a smart, green and liveable city, which sounds very nice. But that is the picture of success. If we fail, of course, the consequences could be dire. The opportunities could move to other parts of Asia. In fact, what you see in places like the European Union, for example, is that opportunities move to the developing parts of that Union. So, there is a chance that even though there is a move towards Asia, we may lose those opportunities because we are less competitive than other parts of Asia. We may lose opportunities to countries that are cheaper but which can still produce better value than us. If we fail, there is a chance that Singapore could be irrelevant.[+30 sentences] We have to succeed. We have to find the way to succeed. But even if we succeed, the path will not always be smooth-sailing and I think it is important for individuals and companies to recognise that they have an important part themselves in this process. The Government can lay the foundation, it can create opportunities for workers to improve their skills. It can also create opportunities for businesses to improve and digitise. These are all gentle nudges. But, ultimately, the people who will benefit from doing so are the workers and the businesses themselves. Even if a business succeeds in digitising and a worker succeeds in picking up skills, it is important for both businesses and workers to realise that this success is not permanent, nor is it guaranteed to last. Business cycles are very short. So, the business that may be successful today may not be successful in a few years' time. Even if we look at just the last 15 years. Fifteen years ago, at the turn of this new millennium, some of the more successful companies were, indeed, tech sector, and everyone thought back then in 1999 and 2000 that tech was the way to go. The Nasdaq valuations of many companies exceeded even the mainboard-listed New York Stock Exchange companies. But that was a very short cycle at that time. It lasted maybe two or three years before the dot-com bubble burst and many people who had invested in picking up the skills to succeed in that environment were, all of a sudden, jobless. This is the reality of the new market and this cycle has repeated itself many times over, even in the last 10 years. Shortly after that, from 2004 onwards, a commodity megacycle started, and suddenly, oil and commodity prices started rising and everyone thought that commodity, oil and gas were the way to go. Massive investments took place in this sector. But in the last three or four years, this sector has had a big pullback as well. A lot of the investments in that sector will be wasted. There will be distressed assets going out and this is the reality of the future economy. Even if workers pick up the skills, even if businesses adapt, they must understand that success is not permanent. What works this year may not even work in the next year. Therefore, it is very important to be nimble. The fact that you have picked up a skill and that skill has paid off for a few years is a good thing. The fact that it does not pay off for a lifetime is to be expected. This is the reality of the future that we are going to live with. This is what will happen even if we succeed in having a vibrant and innovative economy. The nuts and bolts of being vibrant and innovative are the reality that you or your business could become irrelevant very soon because someone else has come up with an innovation that makes you irrelevant. For countries and big economies that have invested heavily in one area, one sector, for example, the Scandinavian countries back in the days of Nokia and Ericsson, they have also paid a heavy price when those sectors subsequently pulled back when the iPhone, for example, came and took the mobile phone market away. The reality about the globalised economy is that no matter how hard you work, your rice bowl can be stolen at any time.[+36 sentences] So, even if we succeed, it is important for individuals and businesses to know that things may happen beyond your control that will change the playing field dynamically. While the Government can enable you to pick up new skills even in that situation, it is normal for this to happen and you have to be able to adapt to that. Related to this is the second important thing that I think Government can do, and this is part of the Budget – Being a Caring and Cohesive Society. There are two underlying threads in this. On the one hand, of course, the Government is saying that we will try and be there as a safety net. For those who have low-income, there will be social transfers to help. Education is still of fundamental importance. Education is now being provided at an even earlier stage, even extending to the preschool sector. If we start enabling education at an earlier age, that will, hopefully, reduce the risk of inequalities, even at the time people enter Primary 1. All this is necessary. If one studied the Greek wisdom, Plato's Republic is said to be the ideal republic, all children will be taken away from their parents and put into institutions, so that everyone has an equal footing. Of course, that is theoretical; it is unlikely to happen in practice. I do not think any parent would want their children taken away. But the reality is the more you equalise the education playing field, the better you are to have at least equality at the starting point. This Budget is making important steps in that respect. Accessible Primary 1 education was the best way to do it 30, 40 years ago. Now, we have gone even further. More than that, the second part that is important is also the sense of social responsibility. There are gentle nudges in this respect in terms of encouraging charitable and community work and participation. It is important for people who succeed to also realise that their success is not just because of their own efforts or abilities, but also because of the environment they lived in and also because of luck. The dynamism in the modern economy, the line between success and failure is sometimes not easy to identify. Good people may fail, notwithstanding the best of efforts. People may succeed one year and fail the next. It is important for people to realise when they succeed that that is a time to be generous and to give back. This sense of responsibility is something the successful have to understand and accept. That is probably going to be the key to being a truly caring society. When you succeed, you must understand that it was not you alone and "It is time for me to give back". And when that success disappears, maybe someone else will be kind to you at a time when you need it. This is the core of a caring and cohesive society. But we must realise that our success is not our own and our misery is not always someone else's fault. So, we must take responsibility for our success while, at the same time, be gracious when we succeed. Let me also address the final aspect of the Budget which I am heartened by and that is fiscal sustainability which is one of the things that many of us are worried about. With the ageing population, with a shrinking workforce, how were we going to actually fund the increasing social spending needs. We have been blessed to have had a very generous amount in reserves and we have been able to use a fair bit of this through the Net Investment Returns Framework. The big question is: will this be sustainable and, if so, for how long? I am grateful the Finance Minister has put forward a plan – to me a fairly reasonable plan – to explain how this can be made sustainable. Many of us were anticipating a rise in taxes and it is good to know upfront that the anticipated rise is 2% in GST plus a few other taxes on cigarettes, carbon and other areas. It is good for us to understand that this is going to be the cost to be sustainable for, say, the next 10 years, at least up to 2025.[+6 sentences] These things are dynamic but it is good to know that this is what we have to prepare for. A tax increase is never popular. It is never an easy thing to do. Of course, it is natural for there to be some push-back, for people to say, "Why do we not look at some alternatives?" The Workers' Party has suggested using land sale revenues upfront. I think my colleague Lim Biow Chuan has addressed this. I should add, I would not laugh this suggestion off because, previously, I had considered this myself at one point. But I agree fundamentally that it is wrong in principle to sell land and spend that capital upfront.[+5 sentences] Some other countries do it but I do not think that is a reason for us to follow suit. It is more responsible for us to put the revenue from land sales or anything we get into the reserves and use any income we have from that. Because, ultimately, land is an asset, and, I think as some speakers have said, it is our most finite asset. The best we can do is treat that as an asset even after it is sold, and if there is income, then we can use that as part of the NIR Framework. So, in that sense, all this goes towards making sure that we have a financially sustainable Budget. All our expenses should be paid for with our annual operating revenues.[+12 sentences] If there are investments in long-term infrastructure, then, of course, for this, we can use hybrid models, including, perhaps, borrowing to be paid for with future income from that investment. All these are financially sustainable ways and that is probably what the next generation will be most comforted by, that we will do our best to improve Singapore, to create opportunities in Singapore, to make it a place where they and their children will have opportunities. Even if we succeed, there will be people who will have difficulties and it is important for us to be generous in that respect, with both ourselves as well as the Government, and to make sure that these people have a chance to get back up again. That is the best we can do. We have had many analogies from different people on pushing the car, so that it runs on its own as well as a trampoline. But I think these are all important analogies to let our people know what the real message is, that, ultimately, it is for you to be self-sufficient and to sustain yourself, but there are people there to give you a hand when you are down. Mr Deputy Speaker, I will conclude with a few words in Tamil. (In Tamil): This is an important Budget because it plans not only for the next year, but for beyond the next decade. The world is changing rapidly and Singapore is changing, too. The rise of automation is going to change the nature of work and, if our businesses and workers do not adapt, the jobs and opportunities will go elsewhere. It is, therefore, important for both our businesses and workers to take advantage of the opportunities available to keep up and keep ahead of the times. Singapore, too, is changing, the biggest being the demographic change. As our population ages, we will have a much higher demand for healthcare needs at a time when our working population will fall. There will also be a much greater need for infrastructure spending, both to renew ageing infrastructure as well as to build new ones, so Singapore can continue to stay ahead of the curve.[+1 sentence] These are big financial demands. However, this Budget gives us hope for optimism because it shows the Government’s plan for dealing with these demographic changes. This includes rises in taxes, including GST, and looking for other new forms of income to pay for infrastructure. This Budget sets out a roadmap for dealing with our long-term challenges in the decade ahead and to help Singapore not only overcome these challenges, but to remain a special place.[+1 sentence] Mr Deputy Speaker, I support this Budget.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon)1885 words
[+1 sentence]Sir, I am thankful for a Budget which is forward-looking and focuses not only on the dollars and cents but, very importantly, also on the heartware of this nation, about caring for others, about looking after those who have helped to build Singapore. This year, I have 18 specific recommendations for the Government and have filed 18 cuts.[+9 sentences] These recommendations, however, are not mine but those of members of the public and civil society organisations. Together, we have brainstormed, edited and edited and edited and crystalised them into these 18 recommendations. My heartfelt thanks to members of the public and groups, such as Architects of Life, Autoimmune Illness Support Group Singapore, Singapore Youth for Climate Action, AWARE and TWC2. I thank them wholeheartedly for being a part of this. Sir, in my speech last year, I spoke about the Public Service. The Public Service is the heart of our entire system; they play a crucial role. The success of this Budget and Singapore relies heavily on them and, this year, I will again focus my speech on how we can strengthen our Public Service. In the past year, I have reached out to public servants through closed door dialogue sessions to better understand their concerns, the difficulties they face and their aspirations. I am grateful that they have shared their views with me very honestly and candidly. Almost without fail, I will be asked two questions: the first is, "Will I get into trouble if I speak up and share my thoughts with you?" And for those we met, there is a general consensus that people will get into trouble if they speak up in the Public Service.[+21 sentences] They fear that they will be labelled as troublemakers, that their bosses will get angry; they fear that it will affect their appraisal and their promotion. This fear is troubling, extremely troubling. In fact, Sir, after I delivered my Budget speech about the Public Service last year, there were Facebook comments and I received messages telling me to be careful, I will get into trouble for speaking up too much. My sister was also passing me messages from her friends, telling me to be careful. I made it a point to publicly say that I did not get into trouble for speaking up, that this fear is mythical. Having said that, this fear of speaking up, whether we want to acknowledge it or accept it, is very real. A panel of academics and former senior civil servants echoed the same sentiments at a forum last year, "that Singapore needs more people to speak up and challenge authority. They lamented the reluctance of civil servants to pose contrarian views when facing political office holders". But Prime Minister's wish for Singapore is that we "be blessed with a 'divine discontent' ─ always not quite satisfied with what we have, always driven to do better". We do have this "divine discontent" but what we need to work on is ensuring we are able to hear it and that people are not afraid to speak up, that they do not accept the status quo and that they will fight for changes that will lead to an even better Singapore. This fear of showing this "divine discontent" was also present in my meetings with the public servants. I remember one sharing his views during the meeting, which was contrary to mine and halfway through he stopped and said, "Actually, I’m feeling quite afraid of opposing your views, as you are a Member of Parliament. And I realise that, subconsciously, I started my sentence by saying 'With all due respect, Sir', in the hope that you will be less offended with what I was about to say". This culture of being afraid, of keeping quiet, of not rocking the boat, is detrimental to the Public Service, to any organisation and, most of all, detrimental to Singapore. This culture results in the loss of good ideas, of better ways of doing things and the loss of good public servants. As the Prime Minister has so rightly said, "I try not to surround myself with 'yes, Sir' men. That is important because if all you have are people who say, 'three bags full, Sir', then, soon, you start to believe them and that is disastrous. You need people who have their own views, whose views you respect, whom you can have a productive disagreement with and work on ideas which you might not have come up with, or who improve on ideas you had". We need to make sure we do not have a Public Service filled with "yes, Sir" men and women. To demolish this culture, we need to break our entrenched processes and bureaucracy – the same entrenched processes and bureaucracy Minister Ong Ye Kung spoke about at the Public Service Conference in 2017. We urgently need to cut the extremely long red tape that may be frustrating not just for members of the public but also our public servants. One suggestion from the public servants is a revamp of the appraisal system, which, they feel, prevents them from speaking up. I suggest that we redesign the Public Service appraisal system by studying the 360-degree appraisal review used by the private sector in MNCs like Google and Alibaba.[+4 sentences] This will allow employees to review and grade their direct managers, resulting in a holistic 360-degree review, instead of just a one-way top-down appraisal system. We do have some 360-degree appraisals currently but I understand that this is not regular and does not seem to include all public servants. Deputy Prime Minister Teo had said that "leaders receive 360-degree feedback on their leadership qualities when they attend milestone leadership development programmes". Again, many public servants I have spoken to fear a bad appraisal if they speak up, oppose their bosses' views and challenge the status quo. Hence, they do not speak up although their suggestions may, in fact, improve the lives of their fellow countrymen. This current appraisal system does not incentivise risk-taking and innovation, and I suggest we change it.[+9 sentences] Urgently. So, that is first question I am asked, "Will I get into trouble if I speak up and share my thoughts with you". The second question is, "Even if I meet you and share my thoughts, nothing will change. So, what’s the point?" The second question to be honest is much more troubling than the first. It shows that these public servants have given up. They are thinking: why care? Why try, then get frustrated and then get upset for nothing? We are in danger of becoming what Calvin, in the comic book Calvin and Hobbes, said, "If you care, you just get disappointed all the time. If you don’t care, nothing matters, so you are never upset". We need to make sure that, one, we make it easier for public servants to voice their concerns and, two, make sure that we follow up on the concerns they raise.[+8 sentences] We need to ensure they feel empowered. Some public servants I met also told me directly that it is almost impossible to feel motivated to do more because mediocrity is rewarded. Status quo is a prized possession. They want to make a difference, which is why they joined the Public Service, but they do not feel empowered to do so. Through these meetings, I also learnt that each Ministry or Statutory Board functions differently. Some public servants shared that they have regular dialogues with their CEO and Permanent Secretaries. They have pigeonhole sessions where they can share their views openly. Moving forward, we should continue this open and transparent practice of having all-hands staff meetings frequently, where all levels of public servants have direct communication channels with senior management. This should also be made available to all public servants, not just in some Ministries or Statutory Boards. I also suggest that we have an internal Quality Service Manager (QSM) within Ministries and Statutory Boards.[+1 sentence] We are all aware of the existing roles QSMs play. They focus on external feedback from members of the public. I suggest we put in place internal QSMs to follow up on feedback given by public servants and, similar to how we handle public feedback, they ensure that the feedback is looked into and the loop is closed. They will help give our public servants a voice and ensure that their views, feedback and suggestions are looked into so that the Public Service is strengthened.[+21 sentences] Sir, whatever I have shared here is what I have heard directly from the public servants themselves and is perhaps not new. These sentiments are already in the public domain and let me share parts of what Joanne Poh wrote a few weeks ago, in a post entitled "Civil Service: The Ins and Outs of the Iron Rice Bowl", where she provided advice on whether a career in the civil service is for you. She said: "While there are many perks of working in the civil service, be prepared to work in an environment that some find stifling. There tends to be a very strict top-down hierarchy where things are done 100% by-the-book. So, if you’re a young upstart who is dreaming of doing great things, be prepared to know your place, shut up and just do what your bosses tell you to." "Some people are happy just to be quiet and do as they’re told in exchange for a stable job with good pay and perks. But if you’re the type who wants to be a superhero and change the world, you won’t find the outlet you seek in the service. It’s ironic that MPs are calling for civil servants to be 'less rigid' and to 'think outside the box'. Recently, MP Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, in an interview, even suggested that civil servants give 'cut and paste' answers. Ask any young civil servant and they’ll tell you that their superiors frown upon those who speak up or try to introduce fresh ideas." Sir, we urgently need to change this perception, change this system, recognise that we need to empower our public servants and ensure that the Public Service attracts superheroes and people who want to change the world. We have called for the Public Service to innovate. And Minister Ong Ye Kung told public servants that, "The main obstacle is ourselves". It is, indeed. We, and by "we", I mean us in this House and the senior management in the Public Service – need to make sure that our public servants work in a system where everyone can speak up and where everyone can be heard. Sir, let me end with a quote, as always. In the words of Napoleon, "The world suffers a lot, not because of the violence of bad people, but because of the silence of good people". Our public servants are good people. As I had shared in my Budget speech last year, "These are a rare breed who devote their lives towards serving Singapore". But we now need to make sure that they do not work in a system where they feel they need to be silent, where they feel they need to be "Yes, Sir" men or women and where they feel that nothing will change even if they speak up. Sir, I support this Budget.
Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar)1928 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of the Motion raised by Finance Minister, Mr Heng Swee Keat. Today, I would like to speak on the Finance Minister’s announcements on the overall national effort to better support our ageing population. MOH will take on policy ownership of the spectrum of aged-care services across both the health and social domains from April this year.[+8 sentences] I agree with this new approach, provided the agendas and the targeted outcomes are spelt out clearly from the beginning and the execution details are adhered to in order to achieve the desired aim. I shall elaborate. I would like to request the relevant Ministries to use this new approach to enable our seniors to have healthier and happier lives. Lives where seniors, with increasing years, can still enjoy active, healthy and fulfilling days, live in their own homes and environment within the community and have little or no dependence on institutional care. Many seniors prefer such independent living with their loved ones and friends in the community. This is achievable by advocating preventive healthcare. The ideal outcome will be a happy populace living well and gracefully. I want to share my observations and experience in such care. MSF will transfer its functions under the Senior Cluster Network (SCN), which include the policies and planning of Senior Activity Centres (SACs), Cluster Support and Caring Assistance from Neighbours (CAN), Carers and other programmes, such as befriending services, to MOH.[+14 sentences] In Kreta Ayer-Kim Seng (KAKS) constituency my grassroots leaders and I started Senior Activity Centres with the concept of promoting physical, mental and social well-being of our residents. The first one was started 20 years ago with the help of Thye Hua Kwan Moral Care. Three more SACs, run by grassroots leaders using the same concept, were added over the years at different precincts of our constituency. I have always been an advocate of preventive healthcare because I am a medical doctor. Hence, we have applied this concept at our SACs from the very beginning and have practised it till today. The concept of physical, mental and social well-being is to facilitate our seniors to stay healthy through having daily balanced nutrition, getting physical activity and receiving cognitive stimulation. So, daily meals and programmes are provided with this aim in mind. Balanced nutrition wards off diseases. Physical exercise keeps the bones and muscles strong to minimise falls and fractures and to facilitate good mobility and independence. Social and mental well-being prevents isolation and depression. Together, all these will enable mobile seniors to be active, healthy and happy and to remain in the community by warding off frailty and dependency. Sir, whilst growing in age is a norm, becoming frail with age is not necessarily so. Frailty is a geriatric syndrome where organ function drops below a healthy level. When key organs, such as the heart, kidneys, lungs, muscles and brains, start to function below optimal levels, there will be reduced resistance to diseases, with increased incidence of incapacity and dependency. The Singapore Longitudinal Ageing Studies (SLAS) by NUS examined 250 seniors above 65.[+10 sentences] Those who adopted a regimen of good nutrition, physical activity and cognitive stimulation were less frail than those who did not. In mild cases, their frailty could even be reversed. Those who fulfilled only one factor, such as eating well but not exercising regularly, did not fare as well as those who managed all three. Assoc Prof Ng Tze Pin, who led the studies, said, "Frailty is not an inevitable part of ageing and, with the right intervention, we can reduce the number of elderly who need to seek treatment for this syndrome". The SLAS, which was conducted from 2010 to 2013 and was first published in 2015 in the American Journal of Medicine, determined that a healthy diet for seniors is one that has sufficient calories and protein. Assoc Prof Ng Tze Pin explained that, with old age, the body becomes less effective in converting amino acids into muscle, causing the seniors to be more susceptible to muscle degeneration. One way to slow down this degeneration would be to consume enough protein. Through my observations over the years, I noted many of our seniors do not consume enough protein. One of the reasons is that protein is more costly. This nutritional deficit is even more pronounced with those seniors living in 1- or 2-room rental flats. SLAS followed 3,000 Singaporean residents aged 55 and above and found that older adults from lower-income groups, who are single and have no formal education, tend to suffer from physical frailty. And 41.1% of the frail subjects lived in 1- or 2-room public housing.[+16 sentences] In contrast, 16.7% of the robust ones were living in other housing types. Since Kreta Ayer-Kim Seng SACs have been catering to seniors living alone in the 1- or 2-room rental flats all these years, it will be interesting to find out the incidence of frailty for the seniors living at Indus, Chin Swee and Kreta Ayer precincts. Perhaps, Prof Ng can be persuaded to send his team there for a comparison study. Now that MOH will be taking ownership of the Senior Cluster Network (SCN), I hope MOH will promote this concept of promoting physical, mental and social well-being of our seniors and keeping them healthy, active and happy. This will need the concerted efforts of SCN staff and stakeholders coming on board with a shared mission. Execution of the programmes daily can run into many challenges as seniors may have their own preferences. For instance, one of our difficulties in our SACs is to get our seniors to do more exercises daily. They prefer more sedentary and fun activities. Some just want to only pick and choose the subsidised daily meals and outings, but are reluctant to participate in daily exercises. Hence, SAC staff must adhere to the concept of physical, mental and social well-being through coupling the exercise programmes with meals, outings and fun activities to achieve this mission. Incentives had to be introduced over the years to cajole more to take part in the daily exercises. Activity, especially in exercise, is much reduced after retirement for many seniors to the detriment of their well-being. Getting the involvement of grassroots, VWOs, volunteers and befrienders will add value to the SCNs. Community involvement, especially grassroots assistance, will add a human touch and care to the seniors, especially those in need. Taking them to festive activities organised by grassroots organisations can bring cheer to many, especially those living alone. Visiting them, especially by familiar grassroots leaders or befrienders, at their homes when they fail to show up at the centres and giving them medical or social assistance quickly if they are ill are very useful. Occasionally, sprucing up or eradicating bed bugs from their homes by volunteers can help in home-care. I am very glad that the Finance Minister has mentioned setting up Community Networks for Seniors (CNS) programmes nationwide by 2020. CNS was piloted in 2016 with the aim of connecting different stakeholders in a community to jointly engage and support our seniors.[+2 sentences] SACs are the choice centres for coordinating befrienders with the seniors and will be a one-stop centre for a targeted approach, preventing duplication for the best outcome. I hope to see MOH expanding preventive healthcare and community care by setting up more SACs islandwide, especially at 1- or 2-room housing precincts. The Minister for Finance also said that the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) will be the central implementation agency to reach out to seniors and their caregivers as well as coordinate the social and health-related services to them.[+24 sentences] Aged-care providers can now work with AIC as the single agency on the delivery of holistic aged-care services to seniors across both the health and social domains. Sir, this is, indeed, a welcome boon for holistic care services and will enable many, who may otherwise need institutional care, to remain in their own homes for as long as possible, even despite illnesses or mobility difficulties. Let me elaborate. Preventive healthcare means to prevent getting diseases or disability. Preventive healthcare also means a better chance of partial or even full recovery if treatment is provided quickly should one get sick. Mr Tan, not his real name, is aged 88 and a member of Chin Swee SAC. He suddenly stopped turning up and was missed at the centre some 10 years ago. On visiting him, he was found to have suffered a stroke. He was in bed and could not walk. He lived alone. Social help was arranged for his daily living and food was sent to him daily. A physiotherapist visited regularly for his rehabilitation. Within six months, from being immobile, he could slowly walk again. Today, 10 years later, after his stroke, he is attending his SAC and other events organised by the Kreta Ayer-Kim Seng grassroots. My appreciation to all my Kreta Ayer-Kim Seng grassroots volunteers here. Best of all, Mr Tan could continue to live independently by himself, albeit walking with a limp from the stroke episode. I attribute his achieving partial recovery and independence to the appropriate assistance and support given to him at the very early stage of his illness. I have other stories similar to Mr Tan’s but, due to time constraint, I can only mention just this one. With AIC under MOH being the agency in charge of SACs, seniors like Mr Tan can be referred quickly from the SACs for the assistance required to achieve better outcomes. This is vital to prevent irreversible conditions resulting in permanent immobility. Our ageing demographic profile will increase the number of seniors who require assistance in their own homes. This is inevitable, especially in precincts with many seniors, such as Chin Swee precinct. Over the years, many more residents have become “housebound” due to medical conditions and chronic diseases like diabetes and hypertension. Thus, the need for homecare that enables these seniors to remain in their homes. Mr Heng Swee Keat launched Ageing Gracefully@Home (AGH) programme at Chin Swee in 2014 − I notice that the Finance Minister is nodding, that means you remember, thank you − with Temasek Care supporting it for three years and AIC since then.[+10 sentences] I want to register my thanks to both Temasek Care and AIC here. Ageing Gracefully@Home (AGH) is a grassroots initiative of Kreta Ayer-Kim Seng Constituency that is intended to benefit weak seniors living alone in HDB rental flats in Chin Swee, Kreta Ayer and Jalan Kukoh precincts. It is a holistic care programme for seniors who are staying alone and are unable to take care of themselves. AGH provides, where required, one or more of the following services: daily meals, daily supervision, including daily home visits, befriender services, blood pressure checks, medicine intake checks, home counselling, nursing and homecare, transportation to and from hospital and physical improvements in the home. We paired an active elderly, or AGH Befriender, with a frail or immobile one, or AGH Beneficiary, so that the Befriender will visit and socialise with his or her Beneficiary each day. We also have a team of full-time healthcare aides and nurses to look after these residents. This programme enables seniors, who would otherwise be hospitalised or be given some institutional care, to remain in their own homes. This programme makes seniors happy with graceful ageing in place. I hope AIC will be duplicating this at other precincts, especially those with 1- or 2-room flats. In conclusion, Sir, let us make Singapore the best place for all our seniors to live in their silver years.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Leader of the House.
Adjournment of Debate›Motions5 turns · 43w
· 0 highlighted
motion-868
The Leader of the House (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien)16 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Deputy Speaker, may I seek your consent to move that the debate be now adjourned.
Mr Deputy Speaker17 words
[+2 sentences]I give my consent. Resolved, "That the debate be now adjourned." −
Mr Deputy Speaker5 words
[+1 sentence]Resumption of debate, what day?
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien2 words
[+1 sentence]Tomorrow, Sir.
Mr Deputy Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]So be it.
Adjournment›Motions1 turns · 25w
· 0 highlighted
motion-869
Speaker not recorded25 words
[+2 sentences]. (proc text)] Adjourned accordingly at 5.55 pm.
False Information Provided to Secure Primary School Places›Oral Answers to Questions4 turns · 282w
· 4 highlighted
oral-answer-1469
Mr Darryl David71 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Education (Schools) (a) in the past five years, how many parents have provided false information to secure a place for their child in a school; (b) how are such cases handled by the authorities; and (c) whether the child in question is allowed to remain in the school that he or she has been enrolled in when the parents have been found guilty of providing false information.
The Minister for Education (Schools) (Mr Ng Chee Meng)98 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, MOE takes a serious view towards parents who intentionally falsify any information for the purpose of Primary 1 (P1) registration. In the last 10 years, there were less than 10 such reported cases. Where there is reason to believe that false information may have been used, MOE will refer the case to the Police for their investigation and action. In cases where the verdict is finalised and the parent is convicted of the charge, the child who was previously registered in a school based on false information would be transferred to another school with available vacancies.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio)73 words
[+5 sentences]I thank the Minister for the answer. I have a couple of supplementary questions. First, in such cases, does the Ministry or the school provide counselling services for the child that is affected by this rather unfortunate turn of circumstances? Does the Ministry then follow up to see whether the child is adjusting well in the new school? My concern, of course, is coming from the perspective of the welfare of the child.
Mr Ng Chee Meng40 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for the clarification. Yes, if needed, we will extend the necessary support both educationally and emotionally to the child affected.[+1 sentence] After all, he or she is still the centre of the purpose of education.
Trespass and Unauthorised Access to Private Properties and Restricted Areas›Oral Answers to Questions4 turns · 511w
· 9 highlighted
oral-answer-1470
Ms Joan Pereira87 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) in each of the last five years, how many cases of trespass and unauthorised access to private properties and restricted areas, such as rooftops and military areas, have been reported to the Police; (b) how many cases involved (i) death (ii) injuries and (iii) damage to properties; (c) what are the main reasons for such trespass; (d) how many of these cases involved minors; and (e) what are the measures put in place to enhance the security of these sites.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin) (for the Minister for Home Affairs)246 words
Over the past five years, an average of about 580 cases of trespass were reported to the Police annually.[+1 sentence] This includes cases of unauthorised access to private properties and restricted areas. Of these, an average of 30 cases each year involved acts which caused some damage to properties, that is, mischief and vandalism. Police do not track trespass cases by whether they involve death and injuries. Each year, over the past five years, there was an average of about 700 persons arrested for trespassing and about 12% were youths under the age of 16 years old. Police's experience suggests that cases of trespass committed by youths were often due to peer influence or a desire to seek thrill in their free time.[+1 sentence] These youths would trespass into unoccupied schools, rooftops and other places. Individuals may also have trespassed into private land and state land for various other reasons, including illicit activities, such as vice, or less malicious reasons, such as to access fishing sites at the beaches or to pick durians. Where appropriate, Police work with stakeholders to enhance the security of sites to prevent and deter trespass.[+2 sentences] For example, there are signs in restricted areas, such as military installations and training grounds, as well as SLA's state lands, to warn the public against trespassing. Police have also put up Crime Alert signages at areas where there have been incidents, and work with Town Councils to ensure that HDB rooftops are secured to prevent unauthorised access.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar)49 words
[+3 sentences]I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. I have one supplementary question. May I know how often reviews are carried out at protected areas to ensure they are secured and adequately guarded against intrusions, especially in this day and age when drones are becoming increasingly an accessible equipment.
Mr Amrin Amin129 words
[+1 sentence]I thank the Member for the question. The Home Team works together with owners of security-sensitive locations to regularly review their adequacy of security measures based on the prevailing threat assessment. This includes threats from unmanned aircraft which are prohibited from flying over security-sensitive locations without a permit under the Air Navigation Act.[+3 sentences] Law enforcement officers can end the flight or assume control of an unmanned aircraft if it poses a risk to the public or is flown in a way that contravenes regulations under the Air Navigation Act. Enforcement agencies have also been building up their capability to counter safety and security threats posed by unmanned aircraft. This includes the ability to detect and identify the unmanned aircraft, to locate its operator or take down the aircraft safely.
Sexual Harassment Cases at Workplace and Through Use of Technology›Oral Answers to Questions4 turns · 253w
· 8 highlighted
oral-answer-1471
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar55 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Home Affairs in the last five years (a) how many Police reports have been made involving sexual harassment or insults of modesty (i) through the use of technology and (ii) which occurred at the workplace respectively; and (b) how many of such reports have been made by women and men respectively.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Amrin Amin) (for Minister for Home Affairs)95 words
Sexual harassment and insults of modesty are offences under the Protection from Harassment Act and section 509 of the Penal Code respectively. The Police do not track how many such cases involved technology specifically. However, from 2013 to 2017, an average of about 100 Police reports were filed annually for upskirting, with the use of mobile phones or other image capturing devices. In the same period, an average of about 20 Police reports were filed annually involving harassment or insults of modesty occurring at the workplace. Around 97% of these reports were made by females.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio)55 words
[+3 sentences]I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the answer. Are there other incidents of sexual harassment that have been reported to the Police that are outside of the use of technology or beyond the workplace? And are there plans to strengthen section 509 of the Penal Code to include men as victims of insult of modesty?
Mr Amrin Amin48 words
Places where outrage of modesty occurs include on public transport, at workplaces and various places. We are reviewing the Penal Code and one of these sections that we are looking at is that particular section. So, we will review it holistically and see what we need to strengthen.
Tuition Assistance at Relevant Ethnic Self-help Group for Mother Tongue Language›Oral Answers to Questions2 turns · 114w
· 0 highlighted
oral-answer-1472
Mr Leon Perera47 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth whether the Ministry will consider allowing students studying a particular Mother Tongue at school to obtain tuition assistance from the ethnic self-help group associated with that Mother Tongue even if the student does not belong to that ethnic group.
The Senior Minister of State for Culture, Community and Youth (Ms Sim Ann) (for the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth)67 words
[+3 sentences]The Government does not direct the Self-Help groups (SHGs). Hence, it is not for the Ministry to allow or disallow students from obtaining tuition assistance from a self-help group of a different ethnic group. I understand that students, regardless of the Mother Tongue they study in school, are eligible to enrol for tuition programmes offered under the Collaborative Tuition Programme, a scheme jointly organised by the SHGs.
Accountability of Food Delivery and Courier Service Companies for Work-related Traffic Accidents›Oral Answers to Questions4 turns · 421w
· 10 highlighted
oral-answer-1473
Ms Joan Pereira71 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what are the findings on the safety of delivery riders/drivers from the Ministry's inspection of 50 food delivery and courier service companies between July and September 2017; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider introducing legislation to ensure that food delivery and courier service companies be accountable for work-related traffic accidents involving their deliverymen, including part-timers and contract personnel, on bicycles and personal mobility devices.
The Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong) (for the Minister for Manpower)198 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, MOM inspected 50 food delivery and courier service companies last year and issued 71 notices to 44 errant companies for infringement of Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) regulations. More than 70% of the infringements were related to the lack of or inadequate risk assessment. These companies did not conduct risk assessment to identify hazards which can affect the safety and health of their employees and contract personnel. Without risk assessments, the companies are not able to put in place the necessary preventive actions against accidents. These errant companies have since rectified the safety lapses and conducted proper risk assessments for their employees and contracted parties directly working under them. We will conduct similar operations this year on other delivery companies and couriers to ensure that they also adopt proper WSH measures at their workplaces. On the need for legislation, the Workplace Safety and Health Act (WSHA) already requires food delivery and courier service companies to ensure the safety and health of their workers, including part-time employees and contract personnel.[+1 sentence] The safety measures include ensuring that their workers have taken adequate safety measures and have sufficient training on the use of bicycles and personal mobility devices.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar)45 words
[+2 sentences]I thank the Minister of State. I have one supplementary question. Will MOM consider making it mandatory for our employers to buy special insurance policies for their delivery men to cover third-party risks so that the victims can make claims should there be an accident?
Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong107 words
[+2 sentences]Sir, under the existing law, third-party risks are already covered by motor insurance if the delivery men use vehicles, such as vans, lorries, cars and so on, to carry out their work. So, this is covered. However, there is one group of delivery men not covered under the current law and these are the delivery men using personal mobility devices to perform their tasks. This issue is being studied by the Active Mobility Advisory Panel under MOT. I understand that the study is due to be completed by the end of this year.[+1 sentence] By then, we should have more information on how this gap can be closed.
Higher Standard of Living while Maintaining Lower Cost of Living›Oral Answers to Questions2 turns · 458w
· 8 highlighted
oral-answer-1474
Mr Gan Thiam Poh81 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade) (a) whether there has been a significant rise in the average cost of living for Singaporeans since 2010 in terms of basic necessities/staple food, transportation, housing and medical care relative to other major cities with and without the same standard of living and full accessibility of goods and services respectively; and (b) how will the Government continue to provide Singaporeans with a higher standard of living and maintaining a lower cost of living.
The Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Ms Sim Ann) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry (Trade))377 words
[+1 sentence]The Consumer Price Index can be used as a proxy for changes in the cost of living in Singapore. Between 2010 and 2017, the Consumer Price Index (CPI-All Items) inflation rate was 1.8% per annum.[+1 sentence] However, most of the inflation over this period occurred in the earlier years. Last year, the inflation rate was lower, at 0.6%, following two years of negative inflation.[+2 sentences] The Member asked about the inflation experience of other major cities. As most national statistical offices do not publish inflation data at the city level, we will look at the experiences of the three Newly Industrialised Economies (NIEs) of Hong Kong, South Korea and Taiwan instead. Over the period of 2010 to 2017, the inflation rates of South Korea and Taiwan, at 1.8% and 1.0% per annum respectively, were comparable to or lower than Singapore’s. On the other hand, Hong Kong's inflation rate was higher, at 3.6% per annum.[+2 sentences] Apart from looking at the cost of living, we should also consider households' income growth which affects their ability to meet these costs. Between 2010 and 2017, resident households’ incomes increased faster than the inflation rate, leading to positive real income growth. For instance, median resident household income from work per member grew by 3.7% per year in real terms, while that for the lower income deciles rose by between 3.6% and 4.0% per annum.[+2 sentences] Nonetheless, the Government recognises that cost of living may be of concern for some groups, particularly retirees and lower income households. The Government provides significant support for Singaporeans, such as in pre-school, education, housing, healthcare and public transport, to ensure that these are affordable. Direct social transfers, such as the GST Voucher, Workfare Income Supplement and Silver Support Schemes, provide additional support to the lower income.[+1 sentence] For needy families who require more support due to their unique circumstances, additional help is available at our Social Service Offices. The Government will continue to monitor trends in inflation and cost of living closely and provide help to Singaporeans where required. In addition, the Government will continue to ensure that our economy remains competitive and dynamic, so as to provide good job opportunities with sustained income growth for Singaporeans.[+1 sentence] This will, in turn, help to ensure a higher standard of living for Singaporeans.
Rental as Percentage of Total Expenses of SMEs›Oral Answers to Questions4 turns · 716w
· 8 highlighted
oral-answer-1475
Mr Leon Perera53 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry) how do the absolute and relative costs – as a percentage of total expenses – of owning or renting property borne by SMEs and startups in Singapore compared to countries with a strong startup and SME sector, including Germany, Switzerland, Israel, Japan and the USA.
The Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry))423 words
In line with global norms, purchases of property are considered as additions to fixed assets and do not form part of business costs. As for rental costs, these generally make up a small share of total business costs for SMEs in Singapore. In 2016, rental costs contributed to between 0.4% and 5.3% of SMEs' business costs in the manufacturing sector and 8% or less of SMEs' business costs in most services sector. Although the rental cost share for SMEs in the retail sector was higher at around 30%, retail rents have been on a decline in recent years, falling by 16% from 2014 to 2017. Similarly, office rents have fallen by about 14% since peaking in 2015, while those for industrial land decreased by 13% since peaking in 2014.[+2 sentences] In absolute figures, the median rental per square foot per month in the last quarter of 2017 was about $9 for office space in Core Business areas and close to $5.50 in other areas; almost $10 for retail space in Orchard Road and about $5.50 in other parts of the Central area. For industrial space, the median rental per square foot per month in the last quarter of 2017 was about $2 for a multiple-user factory space and about $4 for Business Park space. On the back of the decline in rentals, only 13% of the 2,500 SME respondents in the 2017 SME Development Survey conducted by DP Information Group cited high rental costs as one of the top business concerns in 2017, representing a decrease from 18% in 2015. While the Government does not collect data on rental costs borne by SMEs and startups in other countries, property consultancy studies show that Singapore’s rents are generally competitive or comparable to similar cities in the United States, Switzerland and Japan.[+6 sentences] To ensure that there continues to be sufficient flow of commercial and industrial space to meet demand and support economic growth, the Government releases land for private-sector developments through the Government Land Sales (GLS) programmes. JTC also develops innovative industrial facilities with shared services to help SMEs reduce capital expenditure and operating costs. To support startups, JTC has developed startup clusters known as LaunchPads. As startups may have different space requirements, JTC offers options ranging from bare units to units with air-conditioning and ready power provision. The startup community has taken well to the Launchpads. The Government will continue to closely monitor the industrial and commercial property markets and ensure the stability and sustainability of rentals for businesses over the medium to longer term.
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member)142 words
[+6 sentences]I thank the Minister of State for his comprehensive reply. Just one supplementary question. The Minister of State mentioned that the rental costs are comparable to major cities in the US, Japan and Switzerland. I think in some of these countries, SMEs may have the option of moving to the outskirts of the city and renting industrial property or even light industrial or commercial properties. I am not sure if that has been factored into the statistical comparison that the Minister of State mentioned. So, my question is: will the Ministry consider studying the comparison between rental costs here and rental costs in key cities in these other countries, including the outskirts, and monitor that and study if that level of rental costs that we have is serving as an impediment to entrepreneurship or people wanting to continue in SMEs going forward.
Dr Koh Poh Koon98 words
[+3 sentences]Sir, I think we have provided for a good quantity of startup spaces that enable entrepreneurs to start their business, so one of the ideas is to start Launchpads. We are beginning to create more space for new entrepreneurs to start their businesses and Launchpads for innovation. I think that has been well received by entrepreneurs. The take-up rate in one-north area is almost 90%.[+1 sentence] JTC will continue to look at the demand and if there is more demand, we will see how best we can create some spaces for innovation and Launchpads for entrepreneurs to take off.
Growth in International Passenger Numbers at Changi Airport›Oral Answers to Questions4 turns · 371w
· 7 highlighted
oral-answer-1476
Mr Leon Perera53 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Transport (a) what has been the number of international passengers for Changi Airport in 2017; and (b) what are the growth rates for international passengers for the past five years for Changi Airport compared to the same data for competing regional air hubs, including Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Jakarta.
The Second Minister for Transport (Mr Ng Chee Meng) (for the Minister for Transport)98 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, between 2012 and 2017, the number of passengers at Changi Airport grew at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 4%, reaching 62.2 million passengers in 2017. In the same period, the number of overseas visitors who came to Singapore by air grew at a CAGR of 4.1%. The five-year CAGR for international passengers handled at the Bangkok, Kuala Lumpur and Jakarta airports were 10.2%, 7.4% and 3.5% for the period 2011 to 2016, based on publicly available full-year data. We do not have data on the number of overseas visitors the three foreign airports handled.
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member)60 words
[+3 sentences]I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response. Given that the CAGR for Bangkok and Jakarta are quite substantially higher than Changi Airport, does the Ministry have any concerns that, over time, the competitiveness of our air hub will be eroded vis-à-vis Bangkok and Jakarta? What are some of the plans that the Ministry is looking into to mitigate that?
Mr Ng Chee Meng160 words
[+1 sentence]Indeed, the region's airports grow at different rates but, contextually, we must look at the growth conditions as well. Bangkok and Singapore Changi Airport are at about the same base but, in Bangkok, they have two different airports to serve the domestic and the international market at Don Muang and Suvarnabhumi Airports. With this advantage and also the domestic growth of LCCs, they have a 10.2% growth.[+1 sentence] We are watching this – as we always do – to make sure that Changi is competitive. Whereas for Jakarta, it starts at a lower base, much lower numbers of passengers per year.[+1 sentence] When it starts off with different initial conditions, we have different growth rates. Nevertheless, what we want to do for Changi is to anchor it as a premier air hub, as we have done for so many years, which, also in time to come, will involve building a T5 for the expanded capacities to handle increased projected volumes of passengers.
Impact of SkillsFuture on Employability of Graduates above Age 40›Oral Answers to Questions4 turns · 642w
· 9 highlighted
oral-answer-1477
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar58 words
asked the Minister for Manpower of the number of university graduates aged 40 years and above in 2016 who had left their jobs or were retrenched in that year, how many have managed to secure employment thereafter in (i) the same industry they were in or (ii) a different industry respectively as a result of the SkillsFuture movement.
The Second Minister for Manpower (Mrs Josephine Teo) (for the Minister for Manpower)158 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, data on the number of employees who left their jobs but who were not retrenched is not available. There were about 5,000 retrenched local PMETs aged 40 and above in 2016. About one-third of those who subsequently found jobs re-entered the same industry, while the rest took up jobs in a different industry.[+1 sentence] Singaporeans looking for a new job or career can tap on the Adapt and Grow initiative to supplement their own efforts. In 2017, more than 6,000 PMETs aged 40 and above found jobs through career matching services or programmes, such as the Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) and Career Support Programme (CSP), which provide training and wage support to bridge mismatches in skills or wage expectations. This is an increase of almost 50% compared to 2016.[+1 sentence] Individuals also have access to a wide range of courses and initiatives under SkillsFuture to enhance or acquire new skills to stay relevant as the job market evolves.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio)122 words
[+4 sentences]I thank the Second Minister for the answer. It is quite heartening to know that there are Singaporeans being emplaced with jobs even after they are retrenched. However, in conversations with residents and some volunteers, not many are aware of the whole slew of SkillsFuture initiatives and schemes available. Whenever we mention SkillsFuture, the first thing that comes to mind is the $500 SkillsFuture Credit. Is there any data that the Ministry has to show the level of awareness and knowledge that Singaporeans have about the various schemes and programmes under SkillsFuture? And are there plans to increase outreach or roadshows to inform and explain to Singaporeans that there are many different schemes and programmes under SkillsFuture that they can tap on?
Mrs Josephine Teo304 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for her questions. Actually, for SkillsFuture, the Minister is seated right here and he is better placed to answer that question. But I will try my best. We work as a team. Indeed, if you consider the fact that SkillsFuture is a relatively new movement, the fact that so many people know of its existence is, to my mind, quite remarkable. Notwithstanding the fact that the one thing that is on their top of mind recall is the $500 credit. I think, increasingly, individuals are beginning to learn more about SkillsFuture. If you look at the perspective of the students, if the student is in a Polytechnic, he would know that there are programmes, such as Earn and Learn, which is one of the SkillsFuture programmes. If they are already in the workforce, SkillsFuture has launched two major initiatives. One is an advisory for individuals; second, there is an initiative to reach out to businesses to help them, in turn, help their own employees make better use of the many schemes that are available under SkillsFuture.[+3 sentences] Of course, at the same time, the Member correctly pointed out we would need to do things like roadshows and reach out to as many people as possible to help them understand how they can take advantage of the schemes. I should add that, in addition to SkillsFuture, likewise, we also conduct outreach on Adapt and Grow initiatives because, depending on individuals, whether they are actively looking for a job or they are just seeking to replenish their repertoire of skills in order to be ready for a transition in the future, I think it is worth our while to reach out to all of them. Many different types of approaches and channels will have to be exercised for that purpose.
Safeguard Working Conditions of Postmen›Oral Answers to Questions5 turns · 556w
· 9 highlighted
oral-answer-1478
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang68 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) whether IMDA places a limit on the number of mailboxes a postman has to cover each day; (b) whether there are regulations in place to safeguard the working conditions of postmen; and (c) how does IMDA plan to support SingPost in adopting technology or redesigning jobs to improve accuracy and efficiency of mail sorting and delivery to ease existing workloads.
The Minister for Communications and Information (Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim)335 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, the Info-communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) does not limit the number of letter boxes each postman serves. As a licensee, SingPost is required to plan and optimise its operations to meet the IMDA's Postal Quality of Service (QoS) standards, namely, to deliver 100% of all basic letters within two working days of posting. IMDA will take regulatory actions, such as imposing financial penalties, if SingPost fails to meet these standards.[+1 sentence] Sir, I understand that SingPost recently reviewed its postman delivery routes to ensure that the daily delivery workload is equitably distributed amongst its postmen. Currently, each postman delivers mail items to approximately 2,000 dwelling units, or roughly 20 HDB blocks daily. In designing a postman's delivery route, SingPost ensures that each postman is able to complete his delivery within a standard six-hour delivery window. During peak periods where there are higher mail volumes, SingPost may engage temporary postal workers for sorting duties, redeploy staff or request postmen to work overtime to ensure that mail is delivered in a timely manner.[+4 sentences] Postmen who work overtime are given overtime pay. The Member asked about regulations to safeguard the working conditions of postmen. Mr Speaker, SingPost has to comply with prevailing labour legislation that protects the rights and welfare of its workers. I am told that over the past few years, SingPost has increased the postmen’s salary and that MOM has not received any valid salary-related complaints over the last five years. The Member also asked about leveraging technology to improve mail operations. I understand that SingPost has been actively adopting technology and has invested $100 million over the last few years to improve its operational efficiency. For instance, SingPost invested in a $45-million mail sorting machine that has automated 95% of the mail sorting process. To make it easier for its postmen to deliver mail, SingPost has also introduced more delivery vehicles, such as three-wheel scooters and customised mail delivery trolleys.[+1 sentence] IMDA is fully supportive of SingPost's on-going efforts to adopt technology and redesign jobs.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon)59 words
[+3 sentences]I thank the Minister for the reply. IMDA has also stated that it would be conducting a full investigation into the incident where the postman was dismissed for throwing away mail. Can the Minister share what the scope of the investigation is and, based on this investigation, if SingPost will be further reviewing the workload of postmen and postwomen?
Assoc Prof Dr Yaacob Ibrahim85 words
[+5 sentences]IMDA is doing the investigations. I do not have the details as yet. But once we are finished with the investigations, we will communicate the outcome to SingPost. And if there are further remedial measures that SingPost will have to take, we will ask SingPost to comply with them. At the end of the day, as I have mentioned earlier, we control the outcome through our Quality of Service standards and, if there are lapses in SingPost, we will have to deal with it accordingly.
Mr Speaker9 words
[+3 sentences]Order. End of Question Time. Introduction of Government Bills.
Plans to Cover Domestic Workers under Employment Act›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 203w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-4211
Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef17 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Manpower whether there are plans to cover domestic workers under the Employment Act.
Mr Lim Swee Say186 words
[+8 sentences]The Employment Act (EA) stipulates certain core provisions and working conditions for employees. We regularly review the EA to keep pace with the changing labour force profile and employment landscape. Domestic workers, including foreign domestic workers (FDWs), are not covered by the EA. This is because, given the personalised nature of domestic work, it is not practical to regulate certain aspects of their work, such as hours of work and work on public holidays, as we do in the EA. This has not changed. The vast majority of domestic workers in Singapore are live-in FDWs whose rights and well-being are protected under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (EFMA). In recognition that FDWs can be vulnerable, as most of them work alone and they live-in with their employers, the EFMA stipulates relevant provisions as found in the EA, such as prompt payment of salary and rest days, as well as enhanced protections, including requirements for employers to provide food and proper accommodation with adequate space and privacy. Domestic workers who encounter issues with their employers should approach MOM for advice and assistance as soon as possible.
Compliance Rate of Employers in Cases of Non-Payment of Arrears›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 189w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-4212
Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef32 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Manpower for workers who have not been paid by their employers and have had their cases heard, what is the compliance rate of these employers paying them appropriately.
Mr Lim Swee Say157 words
[+8 sentences]Between April and December 2017, the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) and the Employment Claims Tribunal (ECT) concluded 3,750 employee salary claims where the employer was ordered to make payment to the worker. Salaries were fully recovered in about 92% of these orders. The remaining claims involved 139 employers. A hundred and thirty-three of these employers ceased operations or faced business failure due to financial difficulties. TADM works with U Care Centre (UCC) of the National Trades Union Congress or the Migrant Workers’ Centre (MWC) to provide financial relief to lower-income workers who are unable to recover their salaries. Of the remaining six employers, one has appealed to the High Court. For the remaining five employers who did not pay even though they were not in financial difficulty, MOM will be prosecuting them under the Employment Act. At the same time, TADM is working with UCC and MWC to enforce the order against these five employers.
Authenticity and Accuracy of Description of Jobs Advertised on Internet-based Job Portals›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 201w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-4213
Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef25 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Manpower whether there are checks and balances to ensure that jobs advertised on Internet-based job portals are authentic and accurately described.
Mr Lim Swee Say176 words
[+8 sentences]The national Jobs Bank has been designed to reduce the likelihood of having job postings that are inaccurate or advertise for positions that do not exist. Employers have to be Singapore-registered companies and provide their Unique Entity Number (UEN) to post jobs on Jobs Bank for accountability. Similarly, jobseekers apply for jobs only after logging in via SingPass. This creates an environment where jobseekers and employers can search for matches confidently. Jobs Bank users may also, at the click of a button, report to Workforce Singapore (WSG) regarding Jobs Bank advertisements which contain false information. Upon receiving such cases, WSG will work with the relevant agencies to investigate and, where necessary, take action against the company responsible for the job advertisement. Jobseekers who choose to use other Internet-based job portals are advised to select reputable sites where job advertisements are more likely to be authentic and accurately described. While MOM does not license Internet-based job portals, the advertising of fake jobs with criminal intent, such as cheating, may be subject to penalties under the Penal Code.
Profile and Success Rate of Singapore Startups›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 314w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-4214
Ms Foo Mee Har35 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (Industry) what is Singapore's trend of young people joining startups and the success rate of our startups as compared to that of other countries, including US and Israel.
Mr S Iswaran279 words
[+14 sentences]Singapore's startup ecosystem has seen significant progress over the past decade. This is due, in part, to the concerted efforts of the Government, industry and other stakeholders to create an environment that is conducive for innovation and entrepreneurship. Young Singaporeans increasingly recognise entrepreneurship as a viable career pathway. Between 2010 and 2016, the proportion of startup owners who are locals aged 35 and below rose from 20% to 23%1. Surveys of young people in Singapore also affirm their growing entrepreneurial aspirations. For example, an NUS survey among tertiary students in Singapore reported that between 2011 and 2014, the percentage of students from Singapore Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs)with strong entrepreneurial intent rose from 37.5% to 62.5%2. A global survey in 2016 also found that 74% of millennials in Singapore aim to become their own boss within a decade, compared to 50% globally3. While there is no standard definition of success for startups, Singapore's startup landscape has grown steadily over the past decade. Between 2003 and 2016, the total number of startups in Singapore doubled from 22,000 to 43,000. In particular, the number of high-tech startups4 increased from 2,800 to 4,300 over the same period. Singapore has also nurtured four of the five unicorns5 in Southeast Asia, namely, Sea (formerly known as Garena), Razer, Lazada and Grab. Given Singapore's fairly recent entry into the startup scene, Singapore has fared well in international benchmarking studies of global startup ecosystems. For example, in Startup Genome's 2017 Global Startup Ecosystem Report6, Singapore is ranked 12th overall, just below cities like Seattle and Paris and above Stockholm and Vancouver. Silicon Valley and New York City are the top-ranked cities, with Tel Aviv ranking 6th.
Criteria for Retention of Central Cluster over Other Buildings in Dakota Crescent›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 249w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-4215
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang68 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for National Development with regard to Dakota Crescent (a) what criteria were used in deciding to retain the central cluster over other buildings in the estate; (b) how have stakeholder consultations with residents and Save Dakota Crescent factored into redevelopment and conservation decisions; and (c) how does the Ministry intend to work with stakeholders in deciding the future uses of the central cluster of buildings.
Mr Lawrence Wong181 words
[+9 sentences]In the planning of mature estates, such as Dakota Crescent, we have to find a balance between preserving the built heritage and identity of the area, and injecting new facilities and homes to rejuvenate the precinct. To understand what was important to the community, URA engaged the grassroots advisor, grassroots leaders, community and heritage interest groups, residents and other relevant stakeholders. A common feedback was that the central courtyard, where the Dove Playground was located, holds special meaning for the residents as it was where they used to gather. The central courtyard includes a cluster of six blocks which contains all the distinctive building typologies and architectural features of the Singapore Improvement Trust (SIT) flats found in the estate. Hence, the decision to keep the central courtyard and the six blocks. We have received suggestions for the central cluster of buildings to be put to civic and institutional related uses. This is currently being studied. The Government will continue to work closely with the relevant stakeholders in planning such uses. The remaining land will be redeveloped and intensified for public housing.
Update on Plans to Enhance Mandatory Waste Reporting Requirements by Supermarkets›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 205w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-4216
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang51 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources (a) whether he can provide an update on the Ministry's plans to enhance the mandatory waste reporting requirements by supermarkets; and (b) whether the Ministry plans to extend waste reporting to other premises that generate large amounts of waste, including food waste.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M154 words
[+7 sentences]Under the mandatory waste reporting requirements, owners of certain premises which generate large amounts of waste must report their waste and recyclable tonnages, waste reduction plans and waste reduction targets to NEA. This is to encourage them to improve their waste management systems, by drawing attention to the amount of waste produced and the potential for improvement. Currently, only shopping malls with a net lettable area of more than 4,600 square metres and hotels with more than 200 rooms are subject to these requirements. Supermarkets located in malls would have their waste data accounted for under the malls’ tonnage. There are no plans to introduce mandatory waste reporting requirements specifically for supermarkets. We will continue to monitor the waste generation of premises subjected to mandatory waste reporting. We will also consider extending the reporting requirements to other premises that generate large amounts of waste, such as industrial premises, bearing in mind the compliance costs.
Root Cause of Human Error that Led to NETS Service Outage and Preventive Measures for Future Recurrence›Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer Not Answered by End of Question Time2 turns · 451w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-na-4207
Dr Tan Wu Meng65 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Prime Minister with regard to the interruption to NETS services on 2 February 2018 due to "inadvertent human error" during system maintenance (a) whether MAS has identified root causes which predispose the system to human error; and (b) what measures MAS is taking to ensure reliability of cashless transaction providers with significant market share where interruptions can significantly impact businesses and end users.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister)386 words
[+19 sentences]Following the NETS Electronic Funds Transfer at Point Of Sale (NETS EFTPOS) outage, NETS has conducted their investigations. The investigations have established that the outage happened because while preparing for a planned system change activity, a system administrator inadvertently executed a command that abruptly terminated a communications module which is required for connectivity to the banks. In other words, it is due to a human error. MAS takes very seriously the reliability of our payments infrastructure as it forms a critical part of our financial system and economy. Payment systems that are considered important for financial stability or for public confidence are designated under the Payment Systems (Oversight) Act as Designated Payment Systems (DPS). Examples include Singapore Dollar Cheque Clearing, Inter-bank GIRO, Fast And Secure Transfers (FAST) and the NETS EFTPOS. All DPS operators have to adhere to MAS’ requirements on recoverability and reliability. DPS operators have to ensure that the systems are able to resume operations within four hours following any disruption. DPS operators are also restricted to a maximum downtime of no more than four hours across a period of 12 months. In this case, NETS EFTPOS has not breached our regulatory standards. NETS was prompt in notifying the public about the outage, providing updates, and most EFTPOS' services were recovered in about one-and-a-half hours. NETS EFTPOS has not experienced a similar outage since being designated as a DPS in 2010. Notwithstanding, we need to learn from this episode and ensure that similar incidences will not happen in future. MAS has instructed NETS to appoint an independent consultant to determine how controls could be enhanced to minimise the chances of human errors and to mitigate the consequences if an error does occur. In the interim, NETS has scheduled all system administrator access to off-peak hours and tightened controls over system administrator IDs. Together, this should prevent a similar incident from happening. MAS will closely monitor NETS' remediation of the identified gaps and issue supervisory directives to NETS as needed. Separately, recognising that no payment system is infallible, it is important to ensure that alternative payment methods are in place. During the NETS EFTPOS incident, many affected consumers were able to switch to other electronic payment instruments, such as debit or credit cards, as well as stored value facilities, such as transport cards and e-wallets.
Rise in Security Expenditure and Impact on Cost of Living in Singapore›Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer Not Answered by End of Question Time2 turns · 174w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-na-4208
Mr Gan Thiam Poh42 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Finance (a) what has been the average cost of security expenditure per Singaporean compared to other major cities; and (b) whether the rise in security spending will have a direct impact on the cost of living in Singapore.
Mr Heng Swee Keat132 words
[+6 sentences]Singapore is a city state and our security spending has to cover both national defence and homeland security. So, it would not be appropriate to compare our security expenditure with that of other major cities. We ensure prudent use of our security budget for cost-effective and sustainable solutions. Our security agencies also work together to share intelligence, develop joint operational commands and conduct joint exercises, for optimisation of resources. We do not expect the increase in Government spending in security to have a direct impact on the cost of living for Singaporeans, as security spending is not part of the typical consumer basket of goods and services that households consume. More importantly, the resources allocated to security assure Singaporeans of a safe and secure home to live and raise our families in.
Investigations into Cause for Escalators Catching Fire›Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer Not Answered by End of Question Time2 turns · 221w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-na-4209
Ms Joan Pereira48 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the outcome of SCDF's investigations into why escalators catch fire; (b) how can this be prevented; (c) what measures are taken to address the underlying problems; and (d) how many escalators have caught fire in the past five years.
Mr K Shanmugam173 words
[+12 sentences]In the past five years, there were four fire incidents involving escalators. In all four cases, the fires were localised and quickly extinguished. In one case, the fire was caused by sparks from welding works. Two other fires had electrical origins, involving electrical components of the escalator. The most recent escalator fire occurred on 5 February 2018 at Ang Mo Kio MRT station. Investigations into this case are still ongoing. Regular maintenance is important to ensure that all components of the escalator are in good operating condition. Since November 2016, all escalators must undergo monthly maintenance by a registered escalator service contractor. This includes checking all escalator parts for corrosion or wear and tear. The machinery is also inspected to ensure cleanliness and that the safety components are functioning properly. All escalators must undergo annual examination, inspection and testing by a registered escalator contractor, in the presence of an independent Authorised Examiner. Escalator owners and registered escalator service contractors are also required to inform the Commissioner of Buildings of all reportable escalator incidents.
Follow-up Medical Care for Released Prison Inmates›Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer Not Answered by End of Question Time2 turns · 159w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-na-4210
Dr Tan Wu Meng55 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Home Affairs with regard to prison inmates who are approaching release and who have multiple medical conditions and follow-up medical appointments, what measures are in place to facilitate the handover and streamlining of medical care to a restructured hospital, family medicine centre or polyclinic near to their homes upon their release.
Mr K Shanmugam104 words
[+5 sentences]The Singapore Prison Service (SPS) facilitates medical referrals for inmates who require follow-up upon release. For primary care, an inmate would typically be given a referral letter, which he can bring to a polyclinic or family physician of his choice. An inmate who requires specialist or tertiary care follow-up would usually be referred to Changi General Hospital (CGH) for continuity of care, as CGH provides treatment for inmates during incarceration. An inmate may be referred to another restructured hospital should the inmate require treatment under a specialty not available in CGH. The inmate can also request that CGH transfer his care to another hospital.
[+12 sentences]Mr Speaker, I shall deliver my speech in English and Malay. First and foremost, my appreciation to Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat for the delivery of Budget 2018. I must admit that I am impressed. In fact, I would say it is a very clever Budget, especially on the fundamental change in the way major projects are to be financed in the future. It is a Budget that I consider as inclusive and progressive. It is heartening to see a well-balanced palette of offers and initiatives being laid down for all Singaporeans. Primarily, this Budget prepares us into the future, both in capacity and economics, based on the three major shifts in the coming decade and yet mindful of the well-being of fellow Singaporeans. Though I mentioned I am positively impressed with the Budget, I am of the opinion that it is not a perfect one. There is still room for improvements. I shall not and will avoid being too picky. Rather, I shall mention those which I believe warrant attention and I hope Minister Heng can reconsider them. Let me touch on the issue of overcoming near-term challenges. The move to extend the Wage Credit Scheme (WCS) and all other related initiatives in continuation of support to firms in coping with near-term costs is rightfully addressed as they are directly linked to manpower, for example, Foreign Worker Levy (FWL), which is one of the major components of business operating costs. I thought one component which is as critical, if not even more so, is premises rental.[+1 sentence] I feel this is missing and I believe this would make a big difference if the Budget could take this as one of the many initiatives to help businesses in the near term. As we know, two major components of business costs in Singapore are manpower cost and premises rental cost. These two will take up at least 50% of any business operation costs in Singapore. Thus, Mr Speaker, I would like to suggest on any form of financial help to be formulated for business operators, especially the small and medium enterprises (SMEs), to lessen their burden due to premises rental.[+46 sentences] I would even go one step further – it would be great if we can find a structural solution to this. Hopefully, we can hear good news in the next Budget year. Next, I would like to touch on fostering pervasive innovation. I was glad and delighted when I learned that innovation is mooted as one of the suggested initiatives in pushing forward towards a vibrant and innovative economy. Upon scrutinising the numerous offerings, while I am appreciative and glad to see good ones on the table, I still felt incomplete. From financial tax deduction to the promotion of National Robotics Programme, I thought these are initiatives that touch on the surface. At most, it will only give a scratch. What I thought was missing is the soul of innovation. Mr Speaker, I hope I am not being taken wrongly. Like I said, the numerous initiatives being suggested are all good. In fact, I support them. Being a person myself who has been involved in technology and innovation for more than 30 years, I am very passionate about innovation. What I thought worth mentioning is the creation of the innovation spirit. Unfortunately, I am unable to relate nor equate any initiative which supports the creation and building of the innovation spirit. I had expected more to be done in our education system and curriculum that foster the spirit of innovation. I was looking forward to a more fundamental shift which is so pervasive that it will become a basis in reshaping our innovation landscape. In Budget 2016, when I was a rookie Parliamentarian then, I did bring up the same topic on innovation and the culture of inquisitiveness. I mentioned that innovation is an intangible capability and competence which needed to be nurtured with time. And it is important that this starts at a very young age and in schools. I had also suggested five actions then. I hope the suggested actions can be taken up for further discussion and reconsideration. While I am not rejecting nor dismissing any of the suggested initiatives, I thought the fundamental approach to fostering pervasive innovation is still missing. Thus, Mr Speaker, I would like to suggest that a more fundamental approach towards fostering pervasive innovation to be reconsidered. With what is suggested today, I am not confident we will have a sustainable pervasive innovation landscape. Let us do the right thing and do it right together. Mr Speaker, the thing that melted my heart about the Budget, albeit all the economics and business concerns and the slew of initiatives and suggestions to ensure us and our future generation a better future, is the re-affirmation by the Government towards achieving a caring and cohesive society. It is so heart-warming to see current running and new programmes and initiatives being rolled out concertedly, either enhanced or finetuned. The SG Cares initiative has proven to be alive and serves as a national platform towards the spirit of a caring and giving nation. Be it for individuals and families or senior citizens, there is always something for everyone. While it may not be complete, I believe the carpet has been rolled out and we just have to improve it year on year. Our success as a nation should not only be measured by economic indicators alone. We must instil the sense of civic duty and ensure that everyone is not left behind. Be it young or senior, able or disabled, capable or not, everyone must and should be taken care of. And we have SG Cares as a platform to help us formulate and sustain our system of caring. Let us make it a success, together. The feedback from my interaction with various and numerous community leaders on this matter has been very positive and encouraging. The continuation of support programmes is highly appreciated. It is also worth mentioning that the effort of integration of healthcare and social support for seniors has been very much welcomed. This is expected to improve efficiency and efficacy when dealing with intertwined eldercare programmes, which have proven to be needed in our ageing society. While we move up the ladder to becoming a gracious and caring society, we should not and must not be over dependent on the Government to fork out grants and subsidies. Instead, I believe we need to build an ecosystem in which a substantial part of giving is to be generated from the society itself. We need to find a way and establish a system which is sustainable, where giving is becoming a pleasure, and giving is highly motivated. A system of recognition and reward should be explored in trying to encourage giving. Mr Speaker, I suggest we should look into how donation can be made more interesting. Perhaps a progressive tax system for donors may be worth studying. I shall be elaborating on this in more detail during the Committee of Supply (COS) Sitting. The surplus of $9.6 billion accumulated in our financial year 2017 is very surprising to me.[+1 sentence] While this is good news, I believe it is not a guaranteed recurring item. Henceforth, the decision to save part of the surplus for savings ahead is a right move. However, the sharing of $700 million with Singaporeans, which only accounts for 7% of the total $9.6 billion, I thought that is on the lower side.[+4 sentences] Perhaps more should be considered. What should it be? From my experience in business, it is quite normal for a business organisation to share between 15% and 20% of its net income profit to its shareholders as dividend. Likewise, the same rule can be applied here, with the remaining to be retained as savings for use in financing near-term programmes. What struck me about Budget 2018 is the fundamental change in the way how major and infrastructural projects are to be financed in future.[+35 sentences] I thought this is a clever way of managing our finances. However, this can only be true if our Reserves yield a return which is higher than the cost of borrowing by the various Ministries when undertaking the major and infrastructural projects. Based on past data on return on investment on the Reserves, I am confident that this is the case. What I would like to point out is that there will be costs incurred for any borrowing. It is not free. There is no such thing as a free lunch. As major and infrastructural projects will have to be financed through borrowing, thus, the overall cost of these projects will be inflated by an additional amount equivalent to the cost of borrowing. As we all know, at the end of the day, whatever cost incurred will have to be borne by the customer or consumer. Be it the new high-speed rail project or Changi Terminal 5, it will be no surprise that this additional cost will be at the consumer’s cost. Mr Speaker, I would like to suggest that the cost of borrowing under such circumstances to be financed through the return generated from the investment of the Reserves. In this case, the consumer will not be burdened by the additional cost of borrowing, which is the result of a new financial framework on expenditure of major infrastructural projects. Mr Speaker, I shall now deliver the following speech in Malay. (In Malay): First and foremost, I would like to express my appreciation to Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat for the delivery of Budget 2018. It is, by and large, a very interesting one. In my view, Budget 2018 is an inclusive and progressive Budget. What is even more interesting is the new approach towards financing major and infrastructural projects in the future. The current SG Care programme is also being finetuned and enhanced. New offerings are introduced to further complement self-help efforts by the people, with the aim of making it comprehensive. Generally, it is quite balanced. Primarily, this Budget aims to prepare Singaporeans into the future, in terms of an advanced and progressive economy, as well as in terms of capabilities. It is based on the three major shifts in the coming decade, which are: a global economy that appears to be tilting towards Asia; the emergence of new technologies that are expected to change how we live, as well as the way we work and play; and ageing. I would like to touch on and give my views on several worrying issues, if these have not been addressed or given close attention. As a corporate executive who has been involved in the engineering field for a long time, as well as in the largest Asian market, China, I would like to share my experiences. My disadvantage at the present moment is that I am unable to communicate fluently in Mandarin. I am quite weak in the Chinese language and I know only a little bit. Even so, I was determined and explored the China market. To be frank, I faced difficulties. I feel that mastery of the Chinese language can act as a catalyst if one wishes to explore the China market, which is and will continue to grow rapidly. The China market and its state economy have been developing rapidly over the past 20 years. At the moment, this largest global economic nation in Asia, will continue to expand on the basis of its own economic policies. Its policies are rather different compared to capitalist economic policies practised in the West. Its economic policies with a communist character will continue to be implemented so that China can develop into the largest global economy and overtake the United States (US) economy. In my view, this appears to be its long-term objective. If this occurs, we will have no choice but to face this outcome and deal with it. During an economic forum organised by the New York Economic Society in 2015, the Chairman of Alibaba – which is one of the largest firms in the world – Mr Jack Ma said that his country is making preparations so that China will not only remain as a manufacturing and exporting country, but it will also continue to rise and it dreams of being a country that can import and consume. At the moment, statistics show that the consumer segment in China will grow from 50 million people to 300 million in the coming years.[+3 sentences] When this happens, China’s purchasing power will become a very huge attraction. It will also become the centre of the global market which will change the way we do business in the future. This is a development that we cannot ignore. I suggest that our people, including the Malay community, pay close attention towards this development. Therefore, I suggest that our young Malays be exposed to and learn to master the Chinese language.[+1 sentence] This can increase the possibility that, in the future, our children can compete more confidently. Can the Council for the Development of the Singapore Malay/Muslim Community (MENDAKI) take steps to offer classes and sessions that teach the Chinese language?[+3 sentences] I am sure that if our children can at least converse in Mandarin, they will become more confident and have more opportunities in the future. (In English): Mr Speaker, the Singapore spirit is prevalent in Budget 2018, as highlighted by Minister Heng. In wanting to move forward and progress into the future with certainty, clear themes and strategic initiatives have been outlined and, at the same time, not forgetting to be rooted and stay humane as a caring society. While I opine that there is still room for further improvements, I believe it is a Budget which is inclusive and progressive. Notwithstanding the points I have highlighted, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Jessica Tan.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast)1784 words
[+11 sentences]Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to speak on the Budget. There is much in Budget 2018 covering key priorities which Minister Heng Swee Keat has outlined in his Budget Statement. In my speech today, I would like to focus my discussion on social mobility and opportunity. There is growing concern that the divide across Singapore society driven by inequality of opportunity is leading to social stratification by class. The very fabric of Singapore and the Singapore Story is based on our people and how they have worked hard to build Singapore and a better life for themselves and their families. Hence, it is important that our systems and structures must continue to ensure access to opportunity for all Singaporeans to do better and move up in society based on ability and hard work. When we talk about social mobility, we can give our attention to growth and how we make the pie bigger for everyone. I do, however, hesitate to say that the rising tide will lift all boats as we have seen examples in many countries, including Singapore, where this has not always been the case. While growth is important, if we are to be able to address the widening inequality, growth has to be coupled with access to and, more importantly, the ability of all Singaporeans to take advantage of the opportunities, if social mobility is to be achieved. The Budget Statement each year outlines the Government’s revenue and expenditure for the upcoming financial year and the Budget measures. Each year, when I listen to the Budget, I pay a lot of attention to the measures because the measures outlined the aspirations of what the Budget sets out to achieve for Singapore. I was very happy that Minister Heng Swee Keat clearly stated that Budget 2018 is about laying the foundation for our nation’s development in the next decade. He outlined the three major shifts which are confronting us: the shift in global economic weight towards Asia, accompanied by broader shifts in the global order; emergence of new technologies; and our ageing population.[+2 sentences] These will provide opportunities and challenges for all Singaporeans. These shifts could improve social mobility or cause an even greater socioeconomic divide. Budget 2018's strategy is to anchor Singapore as a node for innovation, technology and enterprise.[+8 sentences] This will focus our efforts as a country to capture the opportunities presented by the shifts and capture them not just in Singapore but beyond. It will also create opportunities by developing and attracting growth to Singapore and transform our businesses to be manpower-lean, to enable older workers to continue to contribute. While this strategy cannot guarantee success, these policies seek to provide appropriate support and equalise access to opportunity. The measures outline the Government’s intent to enable businesses and individuals to transform, build capabilities and tap on partnerships both locally and abroad to be able to engage and capture new opportunities. These measures, as the hon Member Mr Azmoon had mentioned, are not exhaustive but they do set out the foundation and direction. They will need to be refined and to evolve, given the pace and scale of the shifts that confront us. But if they are implemented effectively, they will enable companies and individuals to take advantage of these opportunities and have a very good chance at success. Minister Heng outlined several measures to foster pervasive innovation to support businesses to innovate across the entire value chain. Additionally, the pilot of the Open Innovation Platform will also encourage the co-creation of digital solutions by providing that virtual crowdsourcing platform to help companies find partners to address specific challenges they face.[+12 sentences] I would like to touch on the increase in tax deduction on licensing payments for commercial use of intellectual property (IP) which is capped at $100,000 of licensing payments per year. Minister Heng did indicate in his Budget Statement that this cap is to ensure that smaller businesses will benefit more from this measure. The feedback from SMEs on this measure as well as the increase of tax deduction for IP registration fees and for qualifying expenses on research and development (R&D) done in Singapore, is that for many of the SMEs that are developing in this space, many have little or no profits. Hence, they would not be able to benefit from these tax deductions. More targeted grants oriented for IP and R&D-related cost would better benefit these smaller companies. The new opportunities that are presenting themselves would also require new skills, know-how and relationships. Building deep capability both for our businesses and workers is necessary to enable them to compete on value and skills and not cost. The various measures announced focus on capability development in internationalisation, digitalisation and productivity improvement. These skills are needed to equip Singaporeans and our businesses to be able to have the know-how and skills to take advantage of these new opportunities in Singapore, regionally and globally, and to create value to differentiate and compete. Another important factor that Minister Heng touched on as well was partnerships, both locally and abroad, to allow our companies to harness one another’s capability. Why is that important? It is important for scale. But more important is speed, because the pace of change is happening so quickly and continuously that trying to do it ourselves is not going to be tenable. There have been many measures but I was glad to see the focus, even for SkillsFuture, on areas of developing talent for being Asia-ready and developing talent for us to be able to compete and engage in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region.[+12 sentences] Because what is important is not just know-how but, to operate regionally, we will also need to build networks and plans that will allow these expansions. I would now like to touch on the topic of our seniors. There has been much discussion in the Budget Debate over the last two days on our ageing population and the need to strengthen the support for our seniors. While I agree that this is important, I do want to talk about how companies can benefit from the mature workers in their workforce. I have spoken about the movie "The Intern" in this Chamber before and I would like to use the example again. First of all, because I do not watch that many movies, so I do not have that many movies to give examples on but, actually, I thought it would help illustrate the point on the value of a diverse intergenerational workforce. I believe this is an area that we have not tapped. In the movie, Robert De Niro played a retiree who applies for a position in a "Senior Intern Programme" at an e-commerce company. He reports to the young successful founder of the company. Although he is not familiar with the digital world, he makes the effort to learn and adapts well to the work and his colleagues. In the movie while he is adapting to the digital world, what he has done is he has applied his experience, his experience as a businessman, his sharing of knowledge and, most importantly, his coaching to help the young founder get through difficult times in her business. And why do I say "coaching"? Because it is also the "how do you work together". That is the important piece and I really firmly believe that our more mature workers today have a wealth of experience and knowledge.[+1 sentence] If tapped well, this intergenerational diverse workforce can make a lot of difference. By bringing together a diverse workforce of both young and older employees, companies can tap on these new perspectives and the skills of their younger workforce and the wealth of knowledge and experience of older workers for a more effective work environment.[+16 sentences] All these measures, I was really quite excited about. You may ask, "Why is she linking social mobility to all these things about innovation?" It is because, ultimately, if we provide the platform, we enable with skills and we allow that collaboration to happen, then, ultimately, that spirit of innovation will depend on businesses and Singaporeans to do our part, to put in the effort to make the best of these opportunities, and then do better for both the country and for ourselves. If done well, I believe that this is social mobility in action. In this new world, with the shifts we are facing, what we are seeing is that when you do not have legacy, you can move a lot faster. Therefore, it will allow that disruption to allow people to actually do better. The opportunity to do better can be there. But creating the environment to do it is what Budget 2018 is laying the foundation for. Let me just touch on one more point. I was very pleasantly surprised when the Minister shared the emphasis on the need to build capability and skills in the area of preparing our people to prepare for their financial needs at key stages in their lives. Financial planning and making informed financial decisions are core skills and have profound impact on the lives of individuals and their families. This is not a matter of whether you are rich or poor. In many of the Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) cases that I have seen over the years as a Member of Parliament (MP), much of the hardship and challenges faced by our residents and their families are usually a matter of lack of financial planning. When situations like sudden illnesses, loss of job or unfortunate circumstances occur, individuals or their families have problems coping if they had not done financial planning. This impacts the person and the entire family in managing their day-to-day expenses, as well as longer-term commitments like housing and medical needs. So, it is good that financial education curriculum will start with our youths, as financial planning must start early. Can the Minister share more information on the financial education curriculum that is planned for our youths in our polytechnics and ITEs? Is there a reason why the junior colleges are not included?[+4 sentences] What are the enhancements to existing services at Housing and Development Board (HDB) and Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board to enable Singaporeans to also make better informed decisions in the purchase of their flats and retirement respectively that were mentioned in the Budget? So, Mr Speaker, Budget 2018 sets out to build the foundation and position Singapore for the future and for growth. By providing an environment to support access to opportunities and the ability to seize these opportunities will provide Singaporeans with hope and I hope also the aspiration to do better for themselves and their families. With that, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang)1490 words
[+15 sentences]Mr Speaker, I rise in support of this very balanced Budget, which invests in our people, businesses, infrastructures and environment. It clearly takes into account the need to keep up with rapid changes. From digitalisation to upskilling, to adoption of smart technologies. The pressure to make major changes within a short period of time is daunting. On top of that, talks of increased spending in various crucial areas like healthcare, enhanced social safety nets and massive infrastructural developments, as well as the possible Goods and Services (GST) hike, have got Singaporeans waiting for this year’s Budget with apprehension. Amidst a climate of uncertainty, the Minister for Finance has crafted a practical Budget that addresses all these challenges. He has outlined ways in which we can keep our economy innovative and vibrant, which means more opportunities for businesses and, in turn, a better future for all Singaporeans. Businesses will certainly appreciate the strong focus on the available support for pursuing innovation and increased digital capabilities. We will be making bigger steps towards our vision of a Smart City that is also green and liveable. A few days ago, Hong Kong announced their financial position as well. They have achieved a $28-billion surplus. In fact, one of the key focuses when I read up on it was how do they continue to invest in innovation? So, Singapore has our competition. At a dialogue session with my residents in Sembawang after the Budget Statement was released, one concern among the residents was naturally on the proposed future GST hike. The residents were asking whether this was going to make Singapore an even more expensive place for businesses and for us to stay and for tourism as well. In 2007, when the GST was raised from 5% to 7%, consumer price index (CPI) inflation rose to 2.6% in July 2007 from 1.3% in June, reflecting the 2% GST hike. How will the proposed GST increase from 7% to 9% affect Singapore’s competitiveness? Will the increase deter foreign direct investments into Singapore and hurt our tourism and the Meetings, Incentives, Conferences and Exhibitions (MICE) industry? How will the proposed GST increase impact our CPI and inflation when implemented?[+30 sentences] The appeal from the residents was to delay the GST increase as far as possible. If it is not 2021, is it possible to push it to 2025? Better still, have plans to grow the economy, grow the income of Singaporeans, grow the revenues and incomes of all businesses and also let the revenues of the country grow concurrently. So, if we can, we can deter the GST increase indefinitely. I support the Government's ambitious plan to develop a number of mega infrastructure projects and I support the financing framework proposed. I think it is fair. But the more we build, the more we need to maintain. Did the Government take into account the maintenance cost after the construction? And I am a little bit concerned whether our construction sector and manpower can handle so many infrastructure projects at the same time. We are worried about whether we have the resources to do so, not just about finance, but also the space and the manpower. Can we space all these developments a bit further apart? Next, I would like to move on to our environment, a topic that I have been following closely with every Budget for the last 12 years. Environmental issues are closely related to our sustainability and living standards. Hence, it is important for us to continue to review and improve policies regarding this aspect. The carbon tax, scheduled for 2019, was announced last year, and this year's Budget revealed further details on it. The carbon tax will no doubt serve as a deterrent for big emitters of greenhouse gases. But we need to do more to push for more measures to help companies and households to reduce their energy usage and use renewable energy. Will the Government introduce incentive measures like grants for projects to help households as well as businesses to achieve lower carbon emissions? At last year’s Budget, I spoke about exploring the use of solar energy, and I am glad tangible progress has been made. It is heartening news that the private sector, Town Councils and various Government agencies have been major contributors to expand solar capacity in Singapore in recent years. The private sector accounts for 45.9% of total installed capacity, while Town Councils and Government agencies like HDB account for 44.7%. The residential sector, comprised primarily of private homes, accounts for 589 installations, but that is less than 5% of total installed capacity. The way forward is to keep the momentum and increase take-up rates. Understandably, space constraint remains a challenge. While smaller rooftop systems are less economical than larger ones, making them seem to be poor investments in the short term, increasing awareness on cost-saving abilities and installation procedures can help to generate more interest among private home owners. In the United Kingdom (UK), the National Network for Low-Carbon Open Homes, an initiative by the Centre for Sustainable Energy, provides a platform for people with energy-homes to share about the technology they use, their experiences and to answer questions. For Singaporeans, the use of renewable energy is still in its infancy stage. So, perhaps a similar platform could help to generate awareness and interest. I hope the Government can consider subsidised or free energy consultation to encourage more buy-in from the public. The Government should also work closely with private developers and residents to facilitate convenient and affordable installation of solar panels for condominiums and other private residential apartments and commercial buildings. On a related note, from the middle of this year, Singaporean households will be able to choose which provider to buy their power from.[+8 sentences] They can tap on the e-commerce platform for electricity to pick their provider. So, now would be an appropriate time to step up on public education and encourage households to make more eco-friendly decisions. I note that many such clean energy projects are still in the testbed or pilot stage, and awareness and presence are lacking. Not many residents are aware that their homes are being powered by or will eventually be powered by solar panels on roof tops. How many are aware that they will soon have a choice to use renewable energy in their homes and plan to make the switch? More importantly, how many Singaporeans see this as a good thing? It is important to get Singaporeans excited about renewable energy, and this can only be achieved through greater transparency and public education, even for early-stage projects. My next topic is on encouraging acts of charity in Singapore. On behalf of my residents, I would like to thank the Government, and especially Mr Heng Swee Keat, for giving an early ang pow of $100 to $300 to all eligible Singaporeans aged 21 and above.[+3 sentences] I know the schools have encouraged students to donate an ang pow during the Chinese New Year period to the welfare fund so that needy students can benefit from the fund. In the same spirit of caring and giving, I would like to propose that the Government facilitate giving by providing an easy option for Singaporeans who are keen to donate their SG bonus ang pow to local charities like the Community Chest or even the President’s Challenge 2018. Maybe the Government can provide dollar-for-dollar matching to encourage the public to donate. Next, I am glad that the Government intends to extend WCS.[+6 sentences] The goal of the scheme is to encourage employers to give wage increases to their employees. However, I would like to know if any study has been done on the effectiveness of the scheme. How many employers are doling out salary increases because of the scheme? On the flip side, many employers are also concerned with raising salaries as this will permanently increase their manpower cost, whereas WCS is a temporary one. Most employers would prefer to share the company’s profits with the staff by special bonuses which are one-off and will not permanently increase their manpower cost. Does WCS include such one-off bonuses? Lastly, with all the talk about SkillsFuture and upgrading, there was disappointment felt by my residents that there were no enhancement and no top-up in SkillsFuture credits.[+7 sentences] There are Singaporeans who have utilised all their credits, and there are some, on the other hand, who are waiting for a perfect course to come by. They are afraid to waste their current credit on a course that may not benefit them. Why not top up their SkillsFuture credits since there is a Budget surplus? This is investing in our people. Mr Speaker, the Budget reveals practical and forward-looking measures that guide us towards a future that is economically and environmentally sustainable. It also promises to shape a nation that is more compassionate and empathetic towards the less fortunate, with the Government taking the lead. I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio)1853 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister and his team for a very carefully crafted Budget to cater to Singapore's immediate and long-term needs. Whether we are considering the impending increase of the GST or the methods to finance future infrastructure projects, the issue of our rapidly ageing population informs every decision we make. In Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): On the new Budget announced by the Minister for Finance, from the impending increase of the GST, to how to finance future infrastructure projects, the consideration behind these issues is for our rapidly-ageing population. The number of Singaporeans aged 65 and above is expected to double from 440,000 in 2015 to 900,000 by 2030. Our citizen to old-age support ratio, that is, the ratio of citizens in the working ages to each elderly citizen, is projected to fall to 2.1 in 2030.[+15 sentences] An ageing population and a shrinking labour market will bring about social impact and increase the burden on the next generation. I would like to ask the Minister whether the Government will continue to implement multiple measures, including those that encourage parenthood and immigration, to maintain the dependency ratio of six to one. There are many Government policies aimed at improving productivity, encouraging the adoption of technology and lifelong learning to maintain sustainable economic growth. As the saying goes, "It takes 10 years to grow a tree and 100 years to educate a person". After 2030, will this ratio still be a good one to allow Singapore to continue to be a liveable and prosperous nation? Will Singaporeans still enjoy a good quality of life without burdening the next generation? I would like to ask the Minister, if it is not the case, what would be the ideal ratio which will be good for Singapore? (In English): We have to address the problem of our ageing population through a combination of raising the fertility rate and controlled regulated measures in selective immigration policies. Accept those who are self-reliant financially, can contribute good tax revenue for Singapore or who could create quality jobs for Singapore. Measures, such as ensuring more healthy golden years for seniors by upgrading their skills, boosting productivity and utilising technology, are all very well and good. However, there is no replacing having more babies, youths and an active workforce in our population. Would the Minister elaborate on what other options have been considered, resulting in GST being the preferred choice? What is the average charity donation to IPCs made by Singaporeans per year for the past 10 years and whether it is stable or rising? Will the Government set up another charity fund to support ageing Singaporeans with public donations so that it may help mitigate the need of a GST increase? In Mandarin, again. (In Mandarin): A recent study by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) in January this year showed that while 40% of Singaporeans think that the Government should tap into the Reserves, and not increase tax, to cope with the social expenditure on an ageing population, 34% of Singaporeans hold the opposite view. Forty-one percent of respondents believe that each generation should be self-reliant and not rely on another generation.[+43 sentences] Thirty-eight percent hold the opposite view. These survey results lead us to ponder whether the many good traditions left by our forefathers will be affected by the changes in society. These good traditions have laid a solid foundation for us. Will these values disappear in the future? (In English): An article that I read in The Straits Times written by a very young writer by the name of Ng Chia Wee, I quote, "The family is an economically important societal entity. Strong families are the bedrock of national fiscal sustainability. If the family abandons its responsibility to care for its aged members, the Government will have no choice but to step in, leading to greater spending and thus revenue-raising… rising Government involvement in healthcare does not mean falling family involvement. As Minister Heng remarked, rising amounts of healthcare and social expenditure will place greater demands on families and the Government." Sir, let me go back to speaking in Mandarin again. (In Mandarin): The important value of filial piety is still very strong in our community and is deep-rooted. Repaying our parents is universal, regardless of ethnic and religious backgrounds. Except for a small number, Singaporeans shoulder the primary responsibility of caring for elderly parents. With small families of only one or two children and increasing life expectancy for our aged, the road ahead will be filled with challenges. On the other hand, parents love their children and will normally not want to become a burden to them. Many senior citizens I have met told me that they do not want to cause any inconvenience or trouble for their children, and they also want to leave something for their children and grandchildren. This is the case even for those whose children are doing well financially. In fact, there is a very meaningful tradition in our Chinese community. I believe most Members would have heard of it – the last batch of things or money left behind by the deceased – the shouweiqian (手尾钱). It is the money or things placed in the hands of the deceased before nailing the coffin; the coins are called 手尾钱. This money will be distributed to the children and grandchildren. And the ritual is called fen shouwei (分手尾). The tradition believes that things left behind by the deceased will bring good luck for the family. It symbolises the love from the older generation to the next generations, and also the responsibility on the part of the children to carry on the traditions. To be able to bring luck and fortune to the next generations is considered a virtue according to traditional values which should be passed from generation to generation. (In English): The same article in The Straits Times that I read, and I quote: "those who do not desire to support the older generation (must) consider that they themselves have, in fact, been supported by this very generation many times over. Would young people have been able to enjoy the quality education, the vibrant economy, the high-paying jobs Singapore has to offer if not for the values and revenue generated by the work put in by those who came before them? Paying more to support the elderly is merely a form of giving back… paying more now would mean paying less in future because it prevents additional problems arising in future which would require even more revenue-raising... policies to improve the healthcare infrastructure and social safety net will not just ensure better care for today's elderly but also ensure there are proper systems put in place to meet the needs of tomorrow's elderly. Although more top-ups would be needed to maintain these systems, the fact that these systems would already be in place will make things a lot easier for the elderly of tomorrow. Young people are, in fact, indirectly contributing to their own future care." Next, I would like to voice my support for the plan to borrow for new infrastructure projects. Currently, some Statutory Boards are already borrowing, but doing so on a bigger scale is certainly the way forward. As the Minister had pointed out, this would help to preserve our Reserves while spreading the costs over many years. It will benefit other generations, too. With Singapore’s triple-A credit rating, we will be able to attract strong interest and promote our local bond market. I would like to ask the Minister if the bonds will only be sold to institutions or be open to individual investors as well for Singaporeans to participate. If so, we have to be selective about which projects to be made accessible to the man-in-the-street. Not all projects will be suitable for individual investors. For projects involving participation across borders, such as Changi Airport Terminal 5, the Kuala Lumpur (KL)-Singapore High Speed Rail, the Johor Bahru (JB)-Singapore Rapid Transit System Link, foreign entities and investors should certainly be allowed to participate and subscribe. However, for bonds to finance projects like local transportation, we have to be careful that we are not too commercialised in our offerings. I agree that it is important to keep half of our earnings from our Reserves. We must be mindful to grow it not only for ourselves but also for our future generations, as we earn the substantial interest income in perpetuity. Having a large, ever-expanding pile of Reserves is our best guarantee against an uncertain future. It is the mountain backing up our Singapore dollar, ensuring its stability and strength. The advantages include affordable imported goods and the leeway to draw upon these savings in times of emergencies. It is important to remind ourselves and the younger generation that during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, with our Reserves, the Government could back the $150 billion guarantee for all bank deposits here and, in 2009, funded the $4 billion Jobs Credit Scheme and Special Risk-Sharing Initiative.[+11 sentences] When foreigners know that we have a good fiscal system, a prudent and responsible Government, they will not speculate against our currency. Our reputation has meant the Singapore passport has been rated the most powerful in the world. Spending is easier than saving. We have to continue our public education effort to teach Singaporeans the value of preserving and growing our national piggy bank – our Reserves. Yesterday, our hon Members have suggested that we use part of the land sale to finance recurrent expenditures. It may be good to know the pros and cons of the proposal. From the prudent and disciplined financial planning angle, the proposal sounds similar to the concept of reducing mortgage policy, enabling long-term asset to meet the recurrent expenditure for retirement needs. So, one must know, and I do not think Singapore is going into retirement. Hence, one may ask whether it is the best policy as we need to work together to bring many more good years together to our children, to our next generation and to Singaporeans. In the finance industry, even if you ask for a short-term loan using a long-term asset, a bank or lender would ask for a repayment plan for this short-term loan. And this is also one of their prime conditions for granting approval. Presently, there are other taxes, such as Buyer’s Stamp Duty (BSD), Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty (ABSD) and Additional Seller's Stamp Duty (ASSD), that will help us preserve our capital while allowing revenue to fund for social expenditure, such as the many different types of subsidy and special HDB CPF grants for our younger generation to buy HDB flats.[+1 sentence] For retirees, there are also many options, such as the Lease Buyback Scheme, to support their retirement. On that note, may I ask the Minister if for every dollar paid by the low-income group, they will get $4 or more in benefit, in return? Likewise, for every dollar spent by the middle-income group, they will get back $2 or more in benefit, in return.[+1 sentence] With that, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker43 words
[+3 sentences]I know Member Lee Yi Shyan encouraged us to use more Mandarin, but I am not sure whether toggling back and forth is what he meant. But thank you to Mr Gan for keeping our interpreters on the ball. Mr Png Eng Huat.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied)22 words
[+1 sentence]Sir, I believe that Mr Png has asked for excuse from Speaker because he has a family matter to attend to urgently.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+2 sentences]Okay. Miss Cheryl Chan.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan)2116 words
[+16 sentences]Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Budget. Minister Heng Swee Keat referred to the 2018 Budget as a strategic and integrated financial plan for the long term. Singapore has long prided itself for planning with a long horizon and being prudent with our fiscal spending, to the extent that some sceptics may say we are very conservative. In the 2018 Budget, the statistics provided and plans announced are all focused to meet the projected needs in 2030. We know there are technological shifts that will impact our economy, an ageing population looms and we need to foster a caring society to strengthen the social aspects supplementing the Government’s efforts. But beyond awareness of trends, surely, we must do something about it. When I first began working, I used to ask myself what is Singapore's Budget about and how does it impact me? What is this annual ritual that gets people talking and fussing around the same time of the year? Like others, short-term handouts and schemes that directly impact us are what we are looking out for. Longer-term plans that are announced usually do not retain in our thoughts for very long. After all, the Finance Minister announces many initiatives or schemes in each annual Budget. To many, the crux of the Budget is how much will I receive and how much will the Government take in return? Herein lies the problem. To many, they view our Budget on a transactional basis rather than one that is about participative nation-building. Recently, I had a dialogue with a group of 30 youths and young working adults. At the dialogue, we did an instant poll to understand what concerns them most about their future and Singapore. The results showed three areas of concern: one, future uncertainty – their jobs and Singapore's economy; two, cost of living; and three, shrinking family support.[+25 sentences] Upon further discussion, I understood where their concerns arise from. It is heartening to know that some of our younger generation do look forward to understanding what Singapore’s future is and think about how their future fits in the big picture. Given that Singapore is a mature economy and the nature of jobs are rapidly changing, many are worried whether the economy can sustain at healthy rates and jobs remain available over time. Unless we maintain a high employment rate and have reasonable income growing in line with inflation, it will be difficult for the working class to manage their living costs, contribute for future needs and save adequately for retirement. For a developed economy to maintain a sustainable growth rate of 1% to 3% is not an easy feat. Today, our competition is no longer local. The real competition is dynamic and beyond our shores. Regional, global markets with substantive scale and an active hunt for talents are what constitute our competition. As workers, we cannot rest on our laurels and expect jobs to remain status quo or to remain readily available for us. Instead, creating opportunities, being innovative and staying relevant are the new normal that we must learn to adapt to. We must possess the passion and drive to hunt for the next new and big thing. Thus, the need for constant upgrading of job skills, value adding in our work scope have readily become a requirement on our part to keep abreast with time. Let me share a personal account of my own. Many of you know that traditional engineering jobs involve extensive work with long hours. When I started out as a fresh engineer, there were many situations that I encountered which are not taught in books. It seemed there were always new applications to learn, new situations to grapple with that required me to think on my own feet. I recalled one incident where I was struggling and about to give up. This was what my then line manager told me: "Do not shy away from the issues. Be keen to learn or do more. Always think and go beyond your assigned tasks, continue to evolve, build your skills frequently as the company or even the global market changes. Someday, you will realise that you are the ultimate beneficiary of all the knowledge and skills that you have acquired in the process." I am glad to have heeded his advice as it has been one of the most practical and useful advice and has since been my mantra for skills upgrade and constant learning even before SkillsFuture emerged. It has been one and a half years since the economic restructuring efforts began. To have a future-ready economy, we need more than just future-ready workers. The companies also need to be forward-looking and continue in job creation. Can Minister Heng provide more insights on how our economic restructuring efforts have been, and how we have been encouraging partnerships in the private sector? Have more jobs been created in different sectors, particularly for those in the middle-age group to senior workers?[+1 sentence] In this Budget, much has been spoken about seniors aged 65 and above. From 500,000 seniors today to 900,000 by 2030, this is not an insignificant increase in a decade.[+6 sentences] Earlier this month, a Motion about strengthening support for seniors was raised in this House. In the Motion, we said that we should treasure and value our seniors, leverage and build upon the knowledge that they possess. But where senior workers are concerned, I do not think the society has fully embraced this. It is true that skills gaps do exist in the marketplace today. But when the workers are equipped with new skills, will the industry hire those without prior direct experience or in the same field? I feel that the largest gap in the restructuring efforts lies with the current hiring process. Tripartite efforts with the private and public sectors are a necessary partnership. However, beyond encouragement from the Government, jobs creation for middle-age and senior workers can never be effected without a fundamental shift in the hiring process.[+10 sentences] Today, hiring managers are very focused on past relevant experience and not the potential or the value-add that each individual candidate can bring to the job. This will limit how we can leverage the skills of individuals in adapting to uncertainty at the workplace. I believe this is also one of the factors that stereotype and keep many in the mindset assuming older workers are a burden, whether in terms of health, efficiency or knowledge. Way back in 1998, Amazon Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Jeff Bezos hired people with a different perspective. Before he says yes to a new hire, there are three typical questions that he would ask: one, will you admire this person? Two, will this person raise the average level of effectiveness of the group they are entering? Three, along what dimension might this person be a superstar? Today, these questions remain relevant in hiring. He focuses on the value the individual can bring to the team, rather than what they have done in the past. With a limited and ageing workforce, I urge all hiring managers across the industries to keep an open mind, begin rethinking and take concrete actions around this topic, as you, the hiring managers, are the most direct and effective channel to create such change that we truly need in retaining the talents of both young and old. Apart from the various initiatives, like Place-and-Train, Adapt and Grow, that help some mid-career switchers or displaced workers, what more can be done? I suggest that the public and private sectors consider allocating some workdays off for their staff to attend relevant upgrading classes, or for collaboration between companies and course providers to offer customised courses in modules within the companies or the same industry in order to benefit more workers.[+26 sentences] As we move from growth to sustainability for the future, have we, as a country and Government, done sufficiently to enable this? For sustainable outcomes, I believe it is prejudiced to measure the outcomes purely on monetary terms. I would view this from three dimensions. First, we are building a social ecosystem, not an infrastructure. It is right to begin with the end game in mind. This will necessitate the need to plan, design and build ahead of demand. Take today’s healthcare in context, our healthcare capacity has yet to achieve an optimal point that supports all near-term needs, much less the future. As we build more hospitals, nursing homes and care centres, it is equally important to look beyond the hardware infrastructure. It is the holistic care ecosystem that we want our seniors to be able to age successfully in. What this means is that we must radically initiate at least one generation of healthy active seniors, where their needs are not dependent on healthcare infrastructure to manage multiple chronic illnesses or sickly conditions. Instead, we want to build an ecosystem that provides quality social care that caters for their well-being, one which is less medically dependent as the seniors are socially active and mentally healthy. Such an ecosystem will require investments of a different scale and in communal activities where the community or corporate organisations can be more actively involved. Second, continuous improvement on value-for-money projects. Over time, we are seeing more value-for-money projects which are large in both physical and financial scale. We often raise questions when large expenditures are in view. Naturally, people will look immediately to cost-cutting measures and easily follow the pursuit of low-cost solutions when, in fact, what we need is a balance between cost effectiveness and execution efficiency. On one hand, we understand the need to constantly scrutinise the projects under planning and development. We know the need to check whether projects are within budget, on time or whether any base parameters have changed with time and thus requiring adjustments to serve the primary purpose. On the other hand, as projects become more complex, what is not obvious and easily overlooked is how effective have we coordinated the execution efforts as a project team. How then, in the long run, can we ensure there is no wastage that collectively delivers more value than us purely squeezing the last dollar? Lastly, the changing fabric of our social safety net. With shrinking family sizes, the nature of support required also evolves. Over time, the social safety net may not be meant only for the low-income bracket. We should consider if strengthening this net signifies some intervention for the middle working class. As we continue to ensure social mobility is a key pillar within our society, the changing demographics do justify the need of changing the fabric of our safety net to give it the composite strength, without which, it can be difficult for working family members, especially those who are the sole caregiver, to juggle between their work, children and caring for aged parents without external support. I would like to ask if the Ministries will consider policy changes in these areas. First, to mandate that companies allow employees to convert unused medical leave to family care leave or eldercare leave for their immediate family members.[+6 sentences] Second, to enhance tax relief to children who are not living with their parents but are the primary caregivers. Third, to consider modelling a time bank incentive scheme that provides rebates or care options for families who have contributed their time for other elderly within the community when they are still able. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would conclude in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, as a Singaporean, everyone has a part to play for the country’s development. We need to plan ahead and think not only for ourselves, but also for the future generation. However, the country's future development is full of challenges. How can we sustain the multifaceted developments without burdening the next generation?[+1 sentence] The short answer is: we must take charge of our lives and be responsible for our own future first. Next, we will plan for our family’s future and work hard for it to create a better life. Hence, we should uphold the same principle, work hard and build strong reserves for future generations.[+2 sentences] As the saying goes, "The forefathers plant the trees and the descendants enjoy the shades". At the same time, we should have foresights to plan ahead and build more with less resources. Our forefathers did exactly that, and here we are today, enjoying the fruits of their labour. This is not a rhetorical question, but one that makes us think about the need for wealth preservation and beyond our entitlements. Unless we are prepared to do this for our children and grandchildren, the urge to tap on the Reserves and current surplus will always be tempting.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio)1902 words
[+24 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Minister Heng Swee Keat for sharing with us Budget 2018. It is a prudent and inclusive Budget that aptly refocuses our attention on providing for the under-served and the elderly and looking at how taxes can help supplement Government revenues so that we are able to fund much needed and increasing social spending. I support the Budget, but I also wish to speak on three areas that I feel we need to take a closer look at, whether in this Budget or future ones. These areas are: one, older workers; two, women and flexi-work; and three, making taxes even more progressive. One, older workers. In an earlier Sitting this month, some of our esteemed Members in the House filed a Members' Motion on the elderly, which is timely. I had the privilege of speaking on the Motion, and I wish to reiterate some of the points I raised then here. Sir, the elderly among us are largely an untapped source of invaluable knowledge, experience and human resource. While I applaud the numerous schemes, programmes and initiatives to retrain older workers to help them reskill or cross-skill or deep-skill, what they also need are beyond skills and training. More importantly, our older workers need opportunities – opportunities to be given continued employment or job redesign or even opportunities to be mentors to younger workers. The amount of knowledge, wisdom and experience they have garnered over years of working should be put to better use, specifically for our younger workers to learn from. To elaborate, for older workers who may not be able to carry on with work that is rather physically demanding, they can undergo job redesign to become mentors or trainers to younger workers. The organisation they work in can redeploy them as mentors or trainers who are able to train within the context and institutional knowledge of the organisation and be granted SkillsFuture grants for employee training, rather than engaging external training vendors who may deploy trainers who lack the experience, the contextual understanding or institutional knowledge of the organisation. Another example is to retrain our older workers who are keen to explore working in a different industry, to be trained as early childhood teaching assistants or educarers, for example. I have brought this up before in this House. Personally, I believe that older persons have much more patience to work with young children, compared to their younger counterparts. Other than patience to nurture and help take care of the young children, it also provides the older persons an opportunity to laugh at the antics of the young ones and feel young again. In 2016, Bangor University in the UK carried out an experiment in letting the elderly in a seniors day care centre and young children in Plant Parciau nursery in Caernarfon, Wales, a childcare centre, to interact and spend time together over several days. It was found that, for the seniors, they felt happier and had a better sense of well-being. For the young children, significant benefits were: one, there was an improvement in learning language, particularly dialects, and, in this case, it was Welsh; and two, a boost in their confidence levels. This was because the children had almost undivided attention and encouragement by their elderly friends as they played. I am heartened that our Government is already piloting the co-location of childcare and elderly care centres over the next few years. However, I would also implore the Government to ensure the employment of more older workers in these dual-service care centres. There are many jobs that provide meaningful work for older Singaporeans to do, be it in mentoring, training or caregiving, beyond menial work, such as cardboard collecting or cleaning jobs, that some of our seniors feel they are destined to do once they reach their late 50s or early 60s. On the subject of continued employment of older workers, I would urge the Government to review the CPF contribution rates for employees above 55 years old. Currently, once a worker hits 56 years old, their employer CPF contribution is slashed from 17% to 13%, while their employee CPF contribution is cut from 20% to 13%. In total, there is a drastic cut of 11% in CPF contribution overall. That is a huge cut when you cross 55 to 56 years old. I would propose that the CPF contributions not be cut until much later, say, when they are at least 60 years old.[+24 sentences] It does not make sense that when our average life expectancy is at least 80 years old, our CPF contribution rates are cut at 56 years old. It is too premature. Alternatively, if not cutting the CPF contribution rates may render our older workers less attractive to be employed, then at least make the reduction progressive over four or five years, rather than the drastic 11% cut in just over one year. With more Singaporeans marrying later and having children later, it is quite inevitable that at age 55 or 56, we would still be supporting school-going children and elderly parents, as well as financing our housing loans. Women and flexi-work. The proportion of women who are actively working has been almost constant around 60% for the past few years. In comparison, the proportion of men who are actively working is around 75%. There are various reasons that women may choose not to work or be employed. These reasons range from childcare or elderly care responsibilities, to the decision to have a better work-life balance and work from home on a flexi-work basis. Whatever the reasons, sufficient support must be given to our women in managing their numerous responsibilities. In addition, we need to continue our push to ensure better parity between men and women, be it in terms of salaries earned or in terms of familial responsibilities. Men cannot be expected to always earn more than women in the household. And women cannot be expected to take care of the family more than the men in the family. Another concern that I have is that women are still not seen as a valuable source of manpower in the workplace. Looking at the manpower statistics of 2017, there are still more women earning lower salaries compared to men. I will speak about this in the COS debates. While salaries are competitive and are based on merit and experience, there is still much that the Government can do to lead by example in closing the income gap between men and women, and in changing the perception of what women and men are capable of doing in the workplace. For instance, there can be more women appointed to senior Civil Service or Administrative Service positions, the boards of companies and organisations, and even as ambassadors to other countries or to international organisations. Other than appointments, the Government would also need to lead by example in allowing for more flexi-work for public sector and Civil Service employees, for both male and female employees. Currently, flexi-work is more widely accepted in the teaching service. This would send two very significant signals. One, that flexi-work is acceptable and can still render effective contribution at work; and two, that flexi-work is meant for both men and women, so that they are able to better manage work and familial responsibilities. Three, making taxes more progressive. Taxes seem to weigh heavily on the minds of many Singaporeans, even in the lead up to the Budget announcement. Many have been worried about possible increase of the GST, and an increase in personal or corporate income tax rates. I am aware that the last increment in personal income tax rates came into effect for year of assessment 2017, where those whose assessable income is more than $320,000 are taxed at 22%.[+3 sentences] Comparing similar economies as Singapore, that is Taiwan and Hong Kong, there is room for personal income tax rates for high-income earners to increase. In Taiwan, those whose assessable income is between S$105,000 to almost S$200,000, have to pay a personal income tax rate of 30%. Those whose assessable income is more than S$200,000 would have to pay a maximum personal income tax rate of 40%. In Hong Kong, the maximum personal income tax rate is 17% and this is applicable to those whose assessable income is more than S$33,000. Hence, I feel there is room to increase the personal income tax rates for higher income earners. For instance, those whose assessable income is more than $320,000 and up to $500,000, can be charged a personal income tax rate of 22%.[+8 sentences] Those whose assessable income is more than $500,000 and up to $1 million can be charged a personal income tax rate of 24%. Those whose assessable income is more than $1 million can be charged a personal income tax rate of 26%. In comparison, in Malaysia, the maximum personal income tax rate is 28% for those whose assessable income is more than RM1 million or S$335,000. Another comparison, in Taiwan, the maximum personal income tax rate is 40% for those who assessable income is more than S$203,000. Other than increasing personal income tax rates for higher-income earners, the Government can review the corporate tax rates, particularly for multinational corporations (MNCs) or large firms. The current corporate tax rate for Singapore is 17%, flat. Comparatively, the rate for Taiwan is 17% while that for Hong Kong is 16.5%. While it may make it less competitive for Singapore to increase our corporate tax rate across the board, we can consider making it more progressive. For MNCs or large firms, especially those that are earning annual revenues of more than $1 billion annually, which are among the top 1,000 earning firms in Singapore, they can be charged a higher corporate tax rate. These MNCs or large firms that are earning in excess of $1 billion annually, can be charged a corporate tax rate of 17.5% to 18%.[+10 sentences] It is a small increase, in order to keep Singapore globally competitive for businesses, but the revenue that can be generated to fund Government expenditure and social spending is significant even with this half to one percentage point increase. Since personal income tax has already been made progressive, corporate income tax should also be made progressive, rather than the current flat rate that benefits high income earning MNCs or large firms significantly more than smaller firms. For the imminent GST change, I can understand the need for the increase. However, the GST increment should be made gradual. For instance, the GST can be increased 1% for one to two years, then another 1% for the next one to two years. This staggered increment will give people more time to adjust to the increased GST and better manage their finances and expenses. In addition, I would implore the Government to look at how GST for e-commerce, especially in the buying and selling of luxury items, such as branded bags and accessories, can be enforced and collected. While I do not have the data on this, I believe there is a substantial amount of revenue lost through e-commerce transactions, especially for large quantum amounts involving branded items. There is still room for tax revenues to increase to front higher and increasing social spending, and I hope the Government will explore the suggestions I have made, even if not for this year's Budget, then for future ones. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Ganesh Rajaram.
Mr Ganesh Rajaram (Nominated Member)2213 words
[+5 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for the opportunity to speak in this Budget Debate. Mr Speaker, in recent months, and even in this House yesterday and today, there has been a fair bit of debate and discussion on the class divide in Singapore. I am very pleased that this year's Budget Statement by Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat aims at narrowing this divide. From supporting needy individuals, seniors and families, to encouraging the spirit of giving among Singaporeans, this Budget goes a long way towards enabling social mobility, which would narrow the class divide. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government alone cannot bridge this gap. In an Institute of Policy Studies’ (IPS') study on Social Capital in Singapore conducted in December last year, it was found that the most acute social divisions in Singapore were now based on class, and not on race or religion. National University of Singapore sociologist Vincent Chua, one of the study's researchers, noted that while Singapore has done “a pretty good job of fostering multiculturialism and mixing between ethnic groups, the next step now is to increase efforts to increase mixing between classes”.[+5 sentences] Mr Speaker, Sir, in my speech today, I would like to focus on the class divide, and the roles that we, Singaporeans, can play in narrowing this gap. Inequality is not a new phenomenon, nor is it unique to Singapore. However, I would like to suggest that the country today is much better equipped to deal with this division than ever before. As Prime Minister Lee has pointed out just earlier this month, there is a concerted and coordinated effort by the Government to tackle the challenges of income inequality, social mobility and social integration together. The Government has intervened to help those who are less well-off in the areas of home ownership, healthcare and education, as well as means-tested assistance schemes for Singaporeans from lower-income households. Programmes, such as Workfare, the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) and self-help groups, such as the Council for the Development of the Singapore Malay/Muslim Community (MENDAKI), the Singapore Indian Development Association (SINDA) and the Chinese Development Assistance Council (CDAC) also provide support through a variety of schemes from financial assistance to learning enhancement programmes.[+29 sentences] But still, many Singaporeans look to the Government to resolve this class divide, a legacy perhaps of a time not so long ago when we looked to the Government's lead to transform mudflats into a metropolis. While there is trust between the Government and its people, there is also concern that, as The Straits Times opinion editor Chua Mui Hoong noted in a recent column, "today's citizens may be expecting too much of their leaders, thinking back to the pioneering generation.' In much of the discussion on inequality and the class division, many experts and Singaporeans have noted that the Government would need to do more to address inequality, which, left unchecked, would pose a serious threat to the country's social cohesion. There was markedly less chatter about what Singaporeans ourselves can do to address this divide. Mr Speaker, Sir, governments around the world strive for income growth and social mobility because these are two key pillars of a thriving, progressive society. High social mobility in any country is influenced by structural as well as individual factors. The Government is already intervening more aggressively in structural and systematic policies. But what can Singaporeans, what can we do to address the individual factors? I am reminded of the words that we so readily recite every morning in the schools and once a year on 9 August. We each say, hand on heart, that "We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge ourselves as one united people, regardless of race, language or religion, to build a society based on justice and equality, so as to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation". The emphasis is on "we". We, the citizens of Singapore, pledge to build a society. For as good as our Government may be, a community can achieve progress only if we acknowledge that change will come when we take ownership and make a collective effort to address inequality. And I would like to suggest that we begin where it always starts, at home. Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore has had an amazing transformation since our founding as a nation in 1965. And as the country progressed, so did its people. Social mobility matched economic growth as Singapore and Singaporeans worked hard to build their country and their lives. We have many inspiring stories of Singaporeans who have become shining examples of what it would take to succeed in spite of humble beginnings. Our President, Mdm Halimah Yacob, the former Speaker of this House, is one clear example. Her work ethics, resilience and consistent concern for the less privileged serve as a benchmark for many of us in this House, and an inspiration for every child who dreams of becoming President of Singapore. What has moved many Singaporeans, in particular, is the credit that Mdm President gives to her mother for the person she is today. There has been much written about how parenting styles influence a child's development and social mobility. Some may refer to this as parenting with heart and backbone, while others may say that it is about building resilience through positive psychology. It is really about learning how to get up when you fall, or to keep your chin up in times of adversity. Many in this House might be familiar with this parenting style. But I wonder if "conscious parenting", as I would like to call it, is all that common in our very busy Singaporean households. As a business executive with no background in psychology or sociology, I can only share with Members my personal encounter with this particular style of upbringing. It might help explain why a person from a minority community, from an impoverished upbringing, with no "connections", and someone who is not a Government scholar, is in this Chamber today. The class divide in the early days were stark. Home, for me, was a 1-room rental flat until I was in Primary 3.[+16 sentences] We were poor. But my parents kept us focused on the future. Study hard, they said. Do your best in whatever you do. What we lacked materially did not seem too much because we always knew that things would get better if we worked hard enough at it. Education and meritocracy, even in the early days of nationhood, served families like us – people who did not have much – very well. I went to a mainstream primary school and never really felt out of place. Most of the kids were from the same neighbourhood and we had similar backgrounds. I was an average student from an early age. I was far more interested in sports than I was in books. So, I did well enough to get into a good secondary school but not the school that my father wanted me to get into – the elite, top boys' school in Singapore. You see, Mr Speaker, my father, who came from an even more impoverished background, had, through merit, made it into the top boys' school for his secondary education, and he wanted his son to do the same. Of course, it did not help that my eldest sister had made it to the elite top girls' school! My father did not openly show his disappointment, though I could feel it. It was my first real lesson in "failure". It inspired me to work hard and I ended up in the elite junior college (JC). The look on my father's face when he saw the metal badge on my shirt made the hard work worthwhile. But Mr Speaker, Sir, much like the findings in the IPS study, it was in this elite school that I first experienced the class divide.[+26 sentences] My first day at the JC was horrible. The majority of the kids came from the elite secondary schools and many of them were reluctant to mix. Most knew one another because they moved in the same social circles and were family friends. They were driven to school, wore the latest sneakers and carried the trendiest school bags. I went home after that first day of school and told my father that maybe I had made the wrong choice and should have gone to a more mainstream JC. My father said to me, "I did not bring you up to be a quitter. You got there on your own merit and you deserve a place in the school. Just work hard, and the rest will take care of itself." So, I stuck with the school and, over time, I began to fit in. I still did not get invited to the "cool" parties at the country clubs, but I made new friends – people from different races and different social backgrounds. Many of these I made through school sports. Mr Speaker, Sir, as Minister Grace Fu acknowledged in her reaction to the IPS study, sports is one of the best platforms for people of different backgrounds to integrate. And sports certainly played a key role in my integration in school when I faced a very stark class divide. Through sports, being on the school team and playing in national tournaments meant that where I came from, where I lived in, what shoes I wore did not matter. We were teammates. We trained together, we won and lost together. We became brothers both on and off the field. Some of my best friends today are friends I made playing sports. Mr Speaker, Sir, the early failures and challenges I faced as a child from a lower-income family could have been devastating. What I am today is very much the result of how my parents brought me up. Their insistence that I face and overcome challenges, coupled with the positive reinforcement and support at home, taught me again and again that the positivity, perseverance and resilience would light the way to where I wanted to go. It is parenting with heart and backbone. My parents never once allowed me to feel like I did not belong among the smartest or richest kids in Singapore. Self-pity was not in their vocabulary. They encouraged me to dream big and to take ownership of what I wanted to do and where I wanted to go. My teachers never held my background against me and the education system gave me the tools to succeed. Parents and teachers are a powerful combination, and they form the core of a special support group that is essential if we are to narrow the class divide.[+5 sentences] Mr Speaker, Sir, the starting point for Singaporeans is already a lot better than many others in the world. Many Singaporeans own their own homes, enjoy a high standard of education and healthcare, and go about their daily lives in a safe and secure environment. Yes, there is income inequality and there always will be. But the Government has taken the lead in addressing these issues with policies and assistance at every level and touchpoint. We have a meritocratic system that offers multiple pathways to social mobility. At the end of the day, bridging a class divide can only truly happen if Singaporeans work together to ensure that every single child from a low-income family is equipped with the perseverance, confidence and resilience to succeed.[+1 sentence] At the same time, we must also create more opportunities for children of all income backgrounds to mingle and build lasting friendships. Encouraging greater participation in team sports and team-building activities would help engender a sense of community and help narrow the social division.[+13 sentences] Mr Speaker, Sir, in Tamil, please. (In Tamil): There is an ongoing debate in Singapore about the gap between the well-to-do and the less fortunate. There are many negative comments on this gap about the Government. The gist of it is that they say that the Government has not done much about it. What is true is that the Government alone cannot correct the situation. Our contribution is also necessary. I did not come from a well-to-do family and, in fact, the Government's policies have been the very reason that made me stand here and make this speech. To correct this situation, parents like us, communities, societies must encourage our youths to have faith in the programmes that the Government provides. We must make our youths as caring humanitarians. If they lead such a life, the gap between us will be reduced. They will also realise their dreams progressively. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore was built on the values and hard work of our fathers and mothers. In striving to narrow inequality and class divisions, we need an all-in, whole-of-Singapore approach. Singaporeans expect much of our Government in this pressing matter, and rightly so. But can we not also expect just as much, if not more, from our people? Building a society based on justice and equality, to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress for our nation, will take time and involve more than just the leadership of the Singapore Government. It will need the entire collective will of the citizens of Singapore, with heart and backbone.[+1 sentence] Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker24 words
[+3 sentences]I am sure we are all now very intrigued about which school you went to. But please google outside of Chambers. Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied)2016 words
[+18 sentences]Mr Speaker, before I commence on my speech proper, I wish to refer to a report in The Straits Times today that erroneously mentioned that I was scheduled to speak on the Budget yesterday. I think we had an arrangement with the Government Whip that under the original schedule, I would be speaking today. So, I think The Straits Times was not aware of this. But I hope that they would print a correction to correct any misimpression that has been generated by this report. So, Sir, I would focus my Budget speech on inequality. This Budget has, as its third plan, a fostering of a caring and cohesive society. The concept of care and cohesion, though not new, is timely, given the current public discussion of a class divide in Singapore. The recent study on social capital by IPS confirms what we already anecdotally knew. It found, for instance, that, on average, Singaporeans who live in public housing have fewer than one friend who lives in private housing. It found that people who study in elite schools also tend to be less close to those in non-elite schools and vice versa. And earlier, the Member, Mr Ganesh Rajaram also shared his own experience, coming from a non-elite background going to such an elite JC. Sir, this Budget explicitly highlights inequality and social mobility as a concern. We also see some measures in this Budget in the direction of mitigating the class divide. For instance, tax measures, such as raising the top marginal BSD rate by 1% for residential properties valued at above $1 million are geared towards requiring the better-off to pay more taxes. Another long-standing policy to mitigate inequality is that Government transfers are generally weighted in favour of those who live in lower-cost housing or have lower income, such as the GST Vouchers and service and conservancy charge (S&CC) rebates. But, for all these moves made now and over the years, how well are we doing to reduce inequality and how much do we really know about the inequality that exists in Singapore? What else do we need to look at or change? Discussions on the status of inequality have tended to focus on numerical data, such as the Gini coefficient, which measures income inequality. Our Gini coefficient in 2017 stood at 0.459 before Government transfers and 0.402 after transfers, which has improved from 2013.[+1 sentence] Nevertheless, Prime Minister Lee acknowledged in January that our Gini coefficient was still higher than that of many developed countries. If one looks at household income from work, in 2017, the household income for the top 10% is more than $13,000 per person per month while that for the 20th percentile at the lower end is about $1,000 per person per month, or 12 times more unequal. Our national gross domestic product (GDP) per capita last year was nearly $80,000, which means that the national GDP, when averaged out per person, is $80,000 per person per year. However, when we look at median income or the halfway point for households, the Department of Statistics' data shows that for 2017, the median income per household member was only $32,400 per year, based on a monthly median per person of about $2,700.[+1 sentence] All these point to high levels of income inequality. The Department of Statistics' data on key household income trends indicated that in 2017, there was a slower pace of income growth for the bottom 15% of households, showing a widening income gap.[+28 sentences] Beyond numbers, it is also necessary to dig deep into the daily lives of poor Singaporeans and evaluate the reasons why they do not seem to be able to catch up with the rest of society. In her recent book, "This is what inequality looks like", sociologist Prof Teo You Yenn shares powerful stories from her years of field work with families living in HDB rental housing. She writes, and I quote, "I saw how tough it is for them trying to balance wage work and care responsibilities. By hearing their stories about jobs, I saw how hard they have to work and how little they get in return for their labour. By asking them about their children, I saw how much their kids struggled in school and how worried parents are that they would eventually have difficult lives. By listening to them talk about their crises, I heard about their feelings with humiliation, trying to access social assistance. In paying attention to their everyday experiences, I saw how little dignity they are accorded in our society." What Prof Teo observed resonates with what we see, too. While better-off Singaporeans plan for family holidays with their children, poorer families feel demoralised that they cannot afford to buy needed items that their children ask for. While better-off parents are busy at weekends, sending children from one enrichment activity to another, poorer parents spend weekends working and worrying about whether their unsupervised children will fall into bad company. Many of our lower-income residents work hard and even two jobs but may still be unable to pay their bills. Richer children are served and even spoilt by domestic help. Poorer children shoulder responsibilities, like caring for younger siblings and even being spokesmen for their parents who do not speak English. In a Parliamentary answer in February this year, Prime Minister Lee emphasised, and I quote, "Every citizen, no matter what his social background is, must have the opportunity to do better and move up in society based on his efforts and talent. Nobody should feel that his social position is fixed based on his parents' income level or position in life." Can we say today that the lot of our poorest fellow Singaporeans is due to their lack of ambition or talent? Or does the system itself inadvertently make it difficult for them to succeed and thus perpetuate inequality? For example, do Government policies support poor families with adequate and sustainable care for children? Does our education system penalise those who did not have a leg-up in preschool? Do housing policies unjustly discriminate against those whose marriages fail? How have children been impacted by their parents' circumstances and were they supported or facilitated to break out of the poverty trap? Earlier, the Member Mr Ganesh Rajaram shared his own experience of social mobility. And I do not know how old he is. But looking just at physical appearance, he could be born between the 1960s and 1970s. And I think we can all agree that for persons born during that period, there was probably significant social mobility when compared to parents of the earlier generation. But an important question is, moving forward today, for the new generations of Singaporeans, is social mobility still there or is it becoming more and more difficult for people to move out of certain social classes? These are serious questions deserving our serious study. To get answers to these critical questions, it is important to do longitudinal studies to track the fate of families over time. In 2013, the Government told Parliament that it intends to do longitudinal studies.[+23 sentences] What has the Government done since then? Has the Government, for example, started commissioning independent studies on social mobility using longitudinal data? The Government has noted in the past that we must not allow an underclass to form, and so, the Government has to show commitment to this goal. Sir, I should add here that where there is lack of social mobility, it is not only the poorer families that are stressed, even those higher up in the income chain, including the middle class, have the stress of ensuring that they retain their current positions or climb up. The competition in the education system is high. Just look at the money spent on private tuition and other enrichment classes which, in turn, adds to the economic stress that families face. Why is it so important to show a commitment to the goal of reducing inequality and increasing social mobility? Because it is vital to our very existence as a nation. We recite the words of the pledge daily. How can we say these things about justice and equality, happiness, prosperity and progress for the nation, if we are perpetuating a society where citizens are not equal, where some are seemingly having little hope and doomed for failure, while others boom ahead? Will there eventually be an erosion of trust where a class divide makes it harder for people at the bottom and the middle to identify with those at the top? We fiercely guard our sovereignty and expect Singaporeans to defend Singapore. But will the day come when Singaporeans, who find Singapore a cold and cruel place, have no motivation to defend it? This will be a disaster at all levels. Sir, next, I move on to one aspect of inequality that I believe needs to be reviewed and, that is, healthcare coverage under medical insurance. If one compares the coverage of private insurance plans and the coverage under MediShield Life, one will observe that there is significant inequality in access to healthcare that affects the poorer and older Singaporeans. As regards insurance coverage, there are some practices in the healthcare industry that need looking at. One such practice is that of some insurance policies providing full coverage for hospitalisation bills. Such insurance policies undertake to pay for surgeries as long as they are done as day surgeries or if the patients stay at the hospital. All charges will be paid by the insurance company "as charged". Such policies do not require the patient to pay any deductible or make any co-payment. In contrast, MediShield Life understandably has deductibles and co-insurance to avoid over-consumption. One feature of MediShield Life, however, is that the annual deductible rises when one passes 80 years old. While the annual deductible for persons aged 80 and below is between $1,500 and $2,000, the annual deductible for those aged 80 and above is between $2,000 and $3,000. Thus, the most senior of our people, aged 81 and above, who have the least income and most health problems, have to foot bills up to this higher deductible before MediShield Life will kick in.[+4 sentences] Has the Government analysed how this increased deductible has affected the consumption and delivery of medical services to our most senior citizens? To give one specific example, operating on a trigger finger release usually costs less than $2,000. So, those aged 80 and above cannot claim the expenses for the surgery, but those who are younger can claim part of the expense as the deductible is lower for younger people. Premiums are already higher for older people. Why are deductibles also higher when, in general, the older people have less financial ability to pay?[+12 sentences] Why this reverse discrimination for our older citizens? Coming back to the private "as charged" insurance policies, there is another aspect that needs review. Has the Government studied the effect of such full coverage policy on the behaviour of patients and its implications? When a person has to undergo a minor surgery which could be done at the outpatient clinic, does he choose instead to do it as a day surgery or as an inpatient in a hospital, so as to be able to tap on the insurance for full coverage? Does such insurance result in some unnecessary surgeries when more conservative treatments will suffice? Are there inefficiency and a waste of expensive resources caused by such policies? Sir, I am not suggesting that patients or the medical profession is doing anything unethical, as this behaviour is sanctioned by the regulators of the insurance industry. It is important to review the kinds of insurance schemes in the market, so as to discourage over-consumption and inefficient use of resources. There have to be deductibles and co-payments for all medical insurance schemes. Regulators have to direct their attention to this area. Sir, in conclusion, I would like to emphasise that inequality is a threat to our solidarity as a nation. We have to drill deeper into the sources of inequality and take concrete steps to remedy it.
[+6 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I would, first, like to declare my interest as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of ComfortDelGro Taxi business. As a stakeholder in the private sector and a Member of this House, I am particularly interested in the Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) that are supposed to pave the way for 23 industries to be future-ready. Sir, I would like to offer my take on ITMs, which can be distilled into a simple ABC: "A" is to adapt to digital disruption; "B" is to blur the boundaries, and "C" is to be competitive beyond Singapore. Industry players and Singaporeans need to "A" adapt to the reality of technology disruptions and embrace the benefits of digital transformation. Many industries are experiencing digital disruption, from print newspapers to television (TV) broadcasts, to brick-and-mortar shops, and traditional taxi services. Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong said during the 2016 National Day Rally that digital disruption is the "defining challenge" facing Singapore's growth. A few months later, the inaugural Asian Digital Transformation Index found that Singapore was top among Asian countries, including South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and Hong Kong, for its ability to transform itself amid digital disruptions. However, a Microsoft Asia Digital Transformation Study published in April 2017 found that while 75% of Singapore business leaders believed that they needed to transform to a digital business to enable future growth, only 34% had a full digital strategy in place.[+9 sentences] There is no doubt that companies need to embrace digital technology, otherwise, their expiry date is near. You either embrace it or be erased. We also need to help the workers to adapt. At the same time, the Government needs to be flexible and even-handed in their regulatory framework in managing the digital economy, which is the topic of my next section. Regulators need to "B" blur the boundaries when it comes to regulating industry players, which no longer operate in industry-specific silos, but extend their tentacles into the provision of all sorts of conveniences for the consumers. The most successful companies are those providing services across different industries, building an ecosystem. Take Alibaba as an example. Starting out as an e-commerce marketplace in 1999 in the form of Taobao, it now also operates Tmall, search engine eTao and, more famously, Alipay, which is China’s biggest online payment system. It has further ventured into finance and banking with its Ant Financial Group. Between 2016 and 2017, in one single year, Alibaba enjoyed a stunning 56% increase in revenue to over US$22 billion.[+13 sentences] Closer to home, we have an Indonesian ride-hailing company Go-Jek. It started off as a modest motorcycle-hailing company in 2010. Today, it offers private cars and cabs, as well as on-demand services, from beauty treatments and massages to home cleaning and food and cargo deliveries. Like Alibaba, Go-Jek also launched an e-wallet called Go-Pay. Go-Pay even facilitates mobile transfers between accounts and cash withdrawals from automated teller machines (ATMs) at partnering banks. Go-Jek is now worth US$2.5 billion. We need to encourage such creative diversification from our own entrepreneurs. Hence, regulatory bodies need to rethink how to regulate such multimodal industries or "ecosystems" differently. It is important to strike a balance between over-regulation which would stifle creativity, and under-regulation which might create unfair competition to existing players. We have some way to go. Let me cite an example in the taxi industry. Given the onslaught of cheap money under the guise of ride-hailing technology, all the taxi companies in Singapore have no choice, but to form an alliance with the two dominant ride-hailing companies. For commuters, it means more choices as they can now hail taxis from the taxi stands, on the roads, on the streets and from the taxi company's call centre or app, as well as through the ride-hailing companies, under different pricing mechanisms. This is pleasing to the commuters, but it puts taxi companies in a tight spot. This is because taxi companies are regulated by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) under its Quality of Service (QoS) framework, and one of the criteria to demonstrate good quality of service is that at least 92% of taxi requests made by commuters through the phone have to be matched with taxis.[+12 sentences] Out of 100 calls, 92 calls must be matched with taxis. However, with a good proportion of taxis responding to third-party ride-hailing app, it means that there are fewer taxis on the road to take on requests coming in through the taxi companies' app or call centre, which is what LTA looks at only. This means that the taxi companies are more susceptible to failing QoS because of the effort to provide more choices to the commuters. Ideally, LTA needs to consider taxi booking data from both the taxi companies and third-party ride hailing companies that dispatch taxis collectively. This is an example of how the incumbent industry players are over-regulated while the new players, disguised as "technology companies" are under-regulated. The reverse could be true in other industries. What it means is that regulators need to keep up with the times. Indeed, an article in The Financial Times suggests that traditional rule-making is unable to keep up with digital businesses. One suggestion put forth for greater flexibility is that the Government can monitor the achievement of established targets, for example, accident rate, but it should not prescribe the means of achieving such targets. Instead, the regulator could consider allowing the industry players to design their own approach. "C" for competitive. One of the ultimate outcomes of the ITMs ought to be making our local companies more competitive not just locally but also regionally and perhaps even globally. Coming back to the transport industry, we note that the Minister for Finance has set aside $5 billion from the 2017 Budget surplus to set up a new Rail Infrastructure Fund. The Ministry of Transport (MOT) is also planning to double the rail network length to 360 kilometres (km) by 2030.[+16 sentences] However, are there efforts being made to nurture local firms as we expand the rail network? Can local firms eventually construct Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) tunnels? Can homegrown technology companies eventually build trains or provide the signalling systems? Let us look at train tunnels alone. Most of the tunnelling works in Singapore are undertaken by foreign contractors like Japan-based Nishimatsu Construction, China-based Shanghai Tunnel Engineering Co, and German-based Zublin. Local construction companies typically take on the role of a sub-contractor to these foreign companies. Similarly, for rolling stock, such as the physical train itself, and the signalling system which is the brain of the train system, they are primarily provided by foreign firms, such as Thales from France, Alstom or Siemens from Germany, Bombardier from Canada and Kawasaki from Japan. From the inception of our MRT system until today, 30 years has passed, we have to rely on these foreign companies to replenish our rolling stock, upgrade our train or upgrade our signalling system. In fact, the current signalling system in many MRT lines is like a black box to us. In 12 years' time, when we double our train network length, will we face the same problem. Many of these large international companies grew with government support. Thales, for example, formerly known as Thomson CSF and Thomson SA, had the support of its government to privatise in 1998. The move had helped the company to expand globally. For Alstom and Siemens, they are competitors, but they merged the train building business recently with the support of their governments in order to compete better with China. Bombardier was founded in 1942 and, as recently as last year, the Canadian government provided interest-free loans worth over $370 million to the company to support its projects. How about Singapore? Given our size and our market, we may not be able to nurture a local company to be as big as Bombardier overnight. However, could the Government require overseas firms involved in future train projects to form joint ventures with our local companies?[+10 sentences] Of course, this would be advantageous, as working with these MNCs will allow us to learn their expertise, technologies and processes. For the first 180 km of MRT lines, our local firms played a supplementary role in building, supplying and upgrading the MRT system. For the next 180 km, I hope our local companies can play a significant role in building, supplying and upgrading our Singapore MRT system that we can be proud of. The same goes for other industries where we think that it is important to acquire our own expertise, build on it and compete globally. Finance Minister Mr Heng Swee Keat had said that ITMs have "to prepare our companies for a new phase of growth". ITMs have to help companies and Singaporeans "A" adapt to the new reality of digital transformation, "B" regulators need to blur the boundaries when regulating companies in the digital economy, and "C", ultimately, ITMs have to nurture local companies to be competitive not just locally but also to win contracts and business in the region and the world. Perhaps, the ABC for ITMs could be seen as part of the foundation to propel us into the future. Mr Speaker, Sir, before I end my speech, I would like to comment on what Ms Sylvia Lim said about inequality in society. She noted that the income gap of the rich and the poor is increasing and asked what the Government has done to narrow the gap. I just want to explain to her that I also have 462 units of 1- to 2-room rental flats in my division, and we have been taking advantage of some of the Government's policies to help our rental flat residents. For example, there is the Fresh Start Housing Scheme that helps the rental flat residents to buy a new flat.[+2 sentences] I always tell them it will be a success if I can help them move out of the rental flats. There is another scheme on childcare subsidy that helps co-pay the childcare centres' fee. If the income level is less than $2,500, which applies to all the rental flat residents because the criterion to qualify for the Housing and Development Board (HDB) Rental scheme is household income of $1,500 and below, so they are able to qualify for the $3 co-payment for the childcare centres' fee, which is very affordable.[+9 sentences] We have been helping a lot of the children to go into childcare centres. In addition, all Members of Parliament who have rental flats also work very hard with different voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) to help the residents to upgrade. There is a kidsREAD Programme, for example, which is spearheaded by the National Library Board (NLB), and we have capitalised on it and have volunteers to help the children from the low-income background to read better, so that when they go to Primary 1, they can do better. In my division, we also have this project "Hand-in-Hand", where we get many volunteers and donors to give food to our residents every month or every other month. We also set up, for example, a provision care corner to help the rental flat residents in the primary school to learn piano, guitar and robotics, so that they can have more confidence and, subsequently, do better in school. We also have a youth centre for vulnerable teenagers in my division. All these probably are not confined to my own division. Many other Members of Parliament who are hardworking on the ground will be able to take advantage of the Government's policies and grants to help rental flat residents to do better in life. With this, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Yes, Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim100 words
[+2 sentences]Very briefly, Sir. I would like to clarify with Mr Ang Wei Neng that I never said that the Government is not doing anything, and I do not disagree with him that there are schemes available to help the lower-income. My question was: what efforts have been made by the Government to study the longitudinal fate of families over time? Also, there are some care gaps, for example, workers who work shifts. What care arrangements can be made for the children at night?[+2 sentences] These are things that we need to discuss further. So, I just wanted to clarify that point.
Mr Speaker6 words
[+2 sentences]Thank you. Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Ang Wei Neng48 words
[+1 sentence]I thank the Member for the clarification. She was at first saying that the Government is not doing enough but now say that these are the schemes that are available. But I also agree with her that we could do a longitudinal study and both can come together.
Mr Speaker5 words
[+2 sentences]Thank you. Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member)2994 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Speaker, in my speech today, I will be speaking on two different topics – care for our elderly and challenges for our maritime industry. I will first touch on the area of care for our elderly. In his Budget speech, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat cited ageing as one of the three major shifts that we must prepare for. We are told that the number of seniors living alone more than doubled between 2006 and 2016 to 47,400.[+8 sentences] I believe the trend will continue to grow. Together with a projected increase in our elderly population relative to other age groups in the coming years, it is important that we get our policies on elderly care right. The Government seems to be still finding its way in deciding how extensive the role of the State should be when it comes to caregiving. If it prefers to continue to rely substantially on caregiving through an individual’s family care network, it should consider giving more support at every level to the supporting family as well as to caregivers, including supporting the caregiver who has to stop work, and deciding what is a decent level of support for the caregiver. Further, with the growing number of elderly or elderly singles living alone, the Government needs to put in place adequate resources and the infrastructural support for assisted living. Government policies often involve drawing a line between competing imperatives. When it comes to policies affecting elderly care and their well-being, may I implore the Government to give priority to the consideration of enhancing elderly care efforts? The enhancement of the Proximity Scheme Grant for both families and singles will ultimately benefit our seniors as children are encouraged or assisted by the enhancement of the grant. As HDB flats in mature estates are usually more expensive, the enhancement of the Proximity Scheme grant will hopefully assist and persuade more families to live with or near their parents even in the mature estates. I am glad that singles who buy a resale public housing flat to live near their parents will now receive $10,000 under the enhanced grant.[+1 sentence] Before the announcement, the one-time grant is currently given only to singles who buy a resale flat to live with their parents. The grant for singles buying a resale flat to live with their parents has also been increased to $15,000.[+8 sentences] While it is good that the Government now recognises that singles are often a key source of caregiving support within their families, in my view, many singles end up taking a larger role in caregiving support than their married siblings who may be bogged down with caring for their children. Hence, such singles do not deserve a lesser grant than their married counterparts, whether they are living near or with their elderly parents. In fact, arguably, many married siblings benefit more from living near their parents than their single siblings as they benefit from their parents helping out in caring for their children. Whatever rationale the Government chooses to use to give married children a higher grant, I hope the Government will consider equalising the grant for the reasons I have given. Ultimately, when we make things easier for the caregiver, single or otherwise, the ultimate beneficiaries are the elderly parents of the caregiver. Without the caregiver, the state or the society may also end up having to provide additional resources. We should always take care that our policies, however well-intentioned they are, do not become too rigid that it becomes a burden or a source of stress for our elderly and seniors or their caregivers. The Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW) levy will be increased in two ways. The FDW levy for the second FDW employed without levy concession will go up from $265 to $450.[+20 sentences] The increase is hefty, about 70%. I am concerned this may affect households employing two helpers, one to handle all the housework and one to look after elderly parents who may be bedridden or even just require attentive care at all times while their children are working. If the second FDW is not allowed levy concession, this increase in levy will add to the financial burden of their children. Can the levy increase be exercised more equitably in favour of families needing two FDWs to look after elderly parents as well as doing housework? Can the Government not distinguish the example I mentioned from the situation of, say, a wealthy family living in a big house requiring more than one FDW? Again, I hope the Government will regard enhancing elderly care efforts in priority to other considerations on this issue. A Fengshan resident shared with me his frustration of having to pay the full Singles Premium for his 2-room flexi flat. He is approaching retirement in a few years. To prepare for retirement, he is trying to save up as much as he can from his modest monthly income of $700. His existing savings are precious to him for the same reason. His excitement at getting a new 2-room flexi flat was somewhat dampened by the burden of the additional $15,000 Singles Premium he had to pay. It eats into his retirement funds. While I fully understand the rationale of having the Singles Premium, must it always be rigidly enforced against people of all ages from 35 upwards? I hope the Government will relook how it applies its Singles Premium policy on elderly singles. Elderly singles may require more support from the Government. They will likely have fewer options than their married counterparts insofar as family financial support or family caregivers are concerned. When they are not self-sufficient or cannot care for themselves, the state may ultimately have to step in anyway. Can we apply a little more flexibility for the benefit of these single seniors? Can we place a greater premium on elderly care and welfare in such a case? For example, the Government can consider helping all singles aged 55 and above purchasing 2-room flexi flats for the first time on a shorter lease by reducing the Singles Premium. A premium reduction of, say, upwards to $5,000, based on their income levels and length of lease, upholds the rationale of the Singles Premium, but reduces its impact for our elderly poor singles who can then use their savings for their retirement.[+22 sentences] Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): In his Budget Statement, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat said that the ageing population is a challenge that we have to face. From 2006 to 2016, the number of senior citizens who live alone will more than double to nearly 50,000. The Government estimates that the ageing population will continue to grow in the next few years, and we need to have more comprehensive measures to take care of our senior citizens. At this point, it appears that the Government has yet to reach a conclusion on what kind of extensive role the Government should take on, in terms of caring for the elderly. If the policy objective of the Government is for elderly Singaporeans to be cared for by their own family members, more support should be given to each of these families in all aspects. These include helping caregivers who have to quit their jobs to take care of their elderly family members. In addition, with more senior citizens and single senior citizens living alone, the Government also needs to provide adequate resources and develop related infrastructure and facilities. The Government needs to balance various needs in policymaking. With regard to policies that affect the elderly, I urge the Government to prioritise the enhancement of policies related to caregiving. Generally, prices of flats in mature estates tend to be higher. The Proximity Housing Grant encourages more families and singles to live close to their parents or live together with them in order to take care of them. I am delighted to see that singles can now enjoy Proximity Housing Grants of $15,000 when they purchase a resale flat near their parents. For singles who purchase a resale flat to stay with their parents, the grant has also increased to $15,000. It is encouraging to know that the Government is aware that senior citizens are often cared for by their unmarried children. Singles tend to shoulder heavier responsibilities because their married siblings are probably caught up with taking care of their own children and are, therefore, unable to share the responsibilities. Therefore, I believe singles should enjoy the same amount of housing grants as those who are married. Regardless of the basis for giving more housing grants to married couples, the same amount of grants should be given to singles who wish to live near or with their parents. So, I would like to ask the Government to consider increasing the subsidy for singles who choose to live near their parents. When help is provided to the caregivers, regardless of whether they are single or married, their elderly parents will ultimately benefit. If they are unable to care for their parents, the Government and welfare organisations may eventually need to render more assistance. The Government needs to exercise flexibility in the implementation of policies. Otherwise, elderly Singaporeans or their caregivers may feel stressed out. We know that the Foreign Domestic Worker Levy will be raised from $265 to $450.[+14 sentences] This is an increase of about 70%. I am concerned that this will affect families that employ two FDWs. These families may require one helper to do the household chores, while another takes care of the elderly family member who is bedridden or needs to be cared for round the clock. If they cannot enjoy the subsidised rate when employing a second helper, it could increase their financial burden. Therefore, I would like to urge the Government to reconsider this decision. Is it possible to consider more reasonably the needs of families which require a helper to care for their elderly family member? These families are different from the wealthier families that need two helpers because they have a bigger house. A Fengshan resident shared with me that when he purchased a 2-room flexi HDB flat from the Government, he had to pay an extra premium of $15,000. As he only earns a monthly income of $700, he needs to save as much as he can because he is retiring in a few years' time. To him, this premium is a huge burden. I understand the objective of this premium, but I also hope that the Government can review this policy. Older singles are different from those who are married with a family, who can be supported financially by other family members. These singles need more Government assistance. Therefore, I feel that the Government should adopt a more flexible approach. For singles aged above 55 who are buying 2-room flats with shorter leases for the first time, the Government should consider lowering the premium according to the buyer’s income and the leasehold of the flat, with the reduction in premiums capped at $5,000.[+3 sentences] By doing so, the Government can maintain the policy, while helping elderly singles who are less well-off to buy a home they can retire in. (In English): Mr Speaker, in English. I declare my interest as a shipping lawyer. In his Budget Statement, the Finance Minister mentioned the launch of the Maritime Transformation Programme (MTP) to enhance the overall competitiveness of Singapore as a maritime hub, accelerate industry transformation and deepen maritime research and development (R&D) capabilities.[+8 sentences] The MTP looks to using automation, digitalisation and artificial intelligence (AI) to develop new technologies, designs and operations concepts that can be deployed in Tuas and Jurong Port. With the emphasis on strengthening maritime traffic management capabilities and enhancing operation efficiency and improving safety and security, it should benefit our port operators and related auxiliary industries in automation, AI and robotics. We have one of the world's leading ports. Thus far, despite our charges being relatively higher than our competitors, we managed to stay ahead through technology and efficiency, helped by our favourable location. How long will we continue to enjoy this location advantage is anyone's guess. Will the proposed deep sea port in Malacca pose any problem for us in the future, especially if Chinese or other players can help to overturn the deficiencies which have long bugged the Malaysian ports? When will the Northern Sea route start pulling away vessel traffic now passing the Strait of Singapore? With polar caps melting further in future, will technology-enhanced port operational efficiency and traffic management alone always be sufficient to fight off challenges, such as savings of substantial travel time of 30% with the Northern Sea route? Minister Heng also mentioned that foreign worker levy increases for shipyards will be deferred for another year.[+2 sentences] Our leading shipyards are the yards owned by the Keppel and Sembcorp Marine groups which are reputable leaders in offshore-related buildings, like oil rigs and semi-submersible and Floating Business Storage and Offloading (FBSO) conversions. With uncertain offshore markets, our leading shipyards should focus on developing new niche areas of ship and offshore building, like the way it developed its niche in offshore building over the years. The ITM for marine and offshore engineering which is launched on 22 February has identified liquified natural gas (LNG) and offshore renewables as two growth areas. Minister Iswaran said that Keppel and Sembcorp Marine have already ventured into the LNG segment.[+23 sentences] It remains to be seen whether this will become their new niche areas or be able to contribute to the level of growth that offshore building afforded them in the past one and a half decade. The search to develop new niche areas should not be confined to our leading shipyards. Business has been patchy for our other small players in recent years and the rampant demand for tug building a few years ago has subsided. While the use of shipyard facilities in nearby Batam has helped some of our shipyards in managing their costs, competition by yards in other countries, especially China, meant that our yards are not in the market for the building of cargo or passenger vessels, with the exception of tugs. For most of these firms, in recent years, they have been occupied with repairs, conversions and the odd small building jobs. How many of our small and medium enterprises (SMEs) are in the position to compete in the LNG and offshore renewables identified in the ITM for marine and offshore engineering? Besides this area, what are the future options that SMEs should prepare for? Our maritime business community consists of many more SMEs up and down the value chain, beyond ship and offshore building and port management. I agree with the current push for innovation, building on autonomous systems, robotics and AI and data analytics, as well as for digitalisation under the current sea transport ITM. But we must not forget those who may not benefit from this development. Many SMEs are players specialising in certain specific areas of business or capability. Unlike Government-linked companies, the size of SMEs may limit their ability to scale up in order to compete for businesses with bigger or established players internationally. The Straits Times report of the launch of the ITM for marine and offshore engineering cited a pressing need for smaller firms to build up their capabilities so that they can benefit from this trend. Perhaps, for some SMEs especially, it is not merely about building up alone but needing to work together with other players providing different expertise to take on bigger projects. I would like to suggest the Government can help to put different SMEs in our maritime business community together on an appropriate platform, jointly develop products; and two, with the view to pitching for bigger projects internationally at a consortium level. Our local banks can help with the financial support and the Government can consider providing initial funding and support for setting up. This is different from efforts aiming to help SMEs directly as individual businesses. SMEs with different specialisations can be integrated to work together, develop products and pitch for bigger businesses and contracts internationally, as a consortium, tapping on one another's expertise and sharing economies of scale. Such a programme can include both existing SMEs from the maritime industry as well as those which are currently outside the sector. A firm from outside the industry may well bring with them different ideas or different ways of handling comparable projects. The Technology Centre for Offshore Marine Singapore can definitely play a role in providing appropriate support for SMEs. There has been much talk about the Belt and Road initiative and potential benefits. How can our shipping and logistics and offshore businesses make use of our relative strengths and resources to work hand in hand with our Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) neighbours in the Belt and Road initiative around Southeast Asia and beyond? The Government can use its position as ASEAN Chair to help create opportunities for better cooperation with ASEAN companies.[+2 sentences] The Government can lead a study into the likely opportunities for our involvement in Belt and Road projects in the region and consider how our businesses can jointly market ourselves to complement and value-add to ASEAN companies to take on Belt and Road projects. Mr Speaker, in closing, we need to encourage SMEs to think beyond traditional categories on maritime businesses to come up with products and services that straddle across or even go beyond traditional categorisations. My colleague, Leon Perera, spoke about disruptive economy. We also cannot underestimate how the disruptive economy can affect what we do in the maritime and offshore sectors and bring changes. It may not be sufficient fighting today's battle to stay ahead in the current competition by merely being more efficient, cheaper, faster and better. Will we be able to ride the wave and think out of the box to create new relationships, opportunities, products, niche areas and new ways of doing business?
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Miss Cheng Li Hui.
Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines)1514 words
[+9 sentences]Mr Speaker, I rise to speak in response to the Budget that the Minister for Finance has presented. I wish to address two issues: one, the elderly, and two, leadership. The Minister has identified ageing as one of the major shifts that will affect our future. He has rolled out a whole series of initiatives to address the issue, including more money for hospitals and senior care centres; strengthening the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) and expanding the scope of the Pioneer Generation Office (PGO) and the Community Network for Seniors (CNS). These initiatives will have a direct impact on the elderly over the coming months and years. I have spoken about them several times in this House and I am glad that this is happening. However, I believe there is more we can do. For a start, can we look at the issue a little differently? We know the statistics. By 2030, 27% of the population will be above 65 years old. One out of four persons will be over 65.[+26 sentences] But I wonder, is it time for us to reconsider the definition of elderly as those being 65? Should it be 70 or even 75? If we look around us, we can begin to observe many in their late 60s and 70s who are still healthy, active and gainfully employed. I believe that the elderly of today is not a good proxy for the elderly of tomorrow. In 20 years’ time, many Members in this House would be in their 60s and 70s. Using ourselves as examples, the 40-year-olds of today are smart, tech-savvy and self-sufficient. In 20 years' time, we will have a host of capable people who are mobile and independent. The challenge for us is to build a society that encourages our seniors of the future to thrive and live active lives. There are five areas we should think about: (a) healthcare, (b) communities, (c) education, (d) volunteerism, and (e) connecting the four is technology. First, healthcare. In his Budget Statement, the Finance Minister has put the focus on infrastructure – more hospitals, eldercare centres and so on. While this is definitely necessary now, the future elderly in Singapore will need soft skills, especially an increased shift towards self-sufficiency. I hope that more attention and resources will be spent to drive the improvement of soft skills in the healthcare sector. Second, communities. We need to provide the elderly with the means to connect, engage and encourage one another. The Minister has outlined three areas that contribute to this: the Silver Generation Office, the Community Silver Trust and the focus on Social Services Offices (SSOs). I support these enhanced initiatives. Third, education. I hope we can encourage our elderly to continue their lifelong journey of learning. But the areas of study, objectives and methods of teaching for the elderly are different, especially as the number of highly educated and enabled elderly increases. Next, volunteerism. There exists among our elderly a pool of talent and skills that is largely untapped. They are our retirees from the Civil Service as well as from industry. They are professionals, managers, skilled workers and so on. They should be encouraged to contribute not just to earn some extra pocket money, but also to pass on their skills, experience and wisdom. Finally, technology. The Finance Minister has announced a $100-million top-up to the Seniors Mobility and Enabling Fund.[+8 sentences] This is an area that will grow fast and we will need to review the scope of this Fund. I spoke about this last month during the Motion on the Elderly. We should aim to be one of the global leaders in technology-assisted elderly living. Sir, I would like to applaud the Finance Minister for the very strong support of the elderly in Singapore. The road ahead is still long, but I believe this Budget has taken some important steps towards making Singapore a good place to grow old in. Mr Speaker, this Budget is an unusual Budget. Most Budgets looked at how to meet next year’s needs or, at most, the next few years. This Budget looks at the future needs of Singapore beyond the term of this Government. A British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) World Service Report dated 20 February 2018 put it this way: “Where else do you get a democratically elected government that puts a tax increase in, in four years' time? ….[+35 sentences] This is a very mature democracy which takes medium- to long-term decisions, in a way in which governments in the UK and America are not able to do because they are always worried about the next election…. It’s a nice Budget because it has a good medium- to long-term view”. After the Budget was presented last week, I sat down with my volunteers and asked them what they thought. I explained that we will be spending more, especially on healthcare, education and infrastructure. I said we will need more money in future, hence the need for an increase in GST. They asked why the Government is raising GST when we have so much money. Why not spend some of our Reserves? This is a valid question which the Prime Minister and the Ministers have answered and must continue to explain. As their Member of Parliament (MP), I will try to convince them, too. But what we need to do is to ask ourselves where did the Reserves come from in the first place? The answer, of course, is that it was the hard work of our Pioneer Generations working hand in hand with the Government to grow our economy and create wealth, and to spend within our means, and always putting something away for a rainy day. These three cardinal principles – growth, surplus, savings – have been followed faithfully by successive People's Action Party (PAP) Governments for over 50 years since Independence. It has not been easy. I remember during General Elections (GE), some Opposition members would come out with many ideas about how to spend the Reserves while the Government tries hard to convince the people to work hard and save. Fortunately, the people have kept faith with the PAP. This is why good leaders are critical for Singapore. We are a small country. But because of good leaders, we are a strong country. If we want to continue to grow, we need leaders who are prepared to tell people the not-so-nice things, leaders who take a long-term view, leaders who must convince people that they do care, but care in a responsible way. We need leaders with vision, who can plan for a future Singapore which is more beautiful, sustainable and liveable than today. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Prime Minister has publicly stated many times that he intends to retire after the next GE when he turns 70. Now, I personally feel that 70 is still too young to retire but that is not for me to decide. The question of who will be our next Prime Minister has been the subject of much talk, from coffee shops to board rooms. There has been speculation as to why a decision has not been made yet. The Prime Minister, the Emeritus Senior Minister and the 4th generation (4G) team have all said something. But instead of making the situation clearer, people read the tea leaves and speculate even further. Sir, I think we are all asking the wrong question. Why do I say this? Because I think that the Prime Minister and his colleagues have been steadily building up a strong team to take us into the future. As the BBC commentator suggested, we are quite a unique democracy. We have been planning for leadership succession of the team for many years. It is not just about one man or woman. It is about the team. And we should ask ourselves, is the team ready to take over? Mr Speaker, Sir, Budget 2018 follows the three cardinal principles I mentioned earlier. It gives us a road map on how to grow, given the challenges we face. It spends less than it earns and, where money may not be enough, it proposes an increase in GST, not now but in four years' time. And it continues to build up our Reserves. What Budget 2018 does not touch on is leadership succession. However, the Finance Minister has said in an interview with The Straits Times on 20 February that Budget 2018 is a team effort, involving the whole-of-Government. He has consulted the 4G Ministers who have backed the Budget, including the GST increase.[+7 sentences] They are the ones who will have to implement this difficult decision and follow through on all the other difficult steps on this road map to a better Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe we have a strong team to take us forward. It is a team that is prepared to take difficult decisions and to take a long-term view. It is a team that has a vision for Singapore. Leadership succession is in place. I am confident that we are in good hands. Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Rahayu Mahzam.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong)1936 words
[+21 sentences]Mr Speaker, during one of my house visits last week, I was greeted by three adorable children who stood in front of the door of their flat and recited a 10-line Chinese New Year greeting to me. Before, I could even say hello, they went: Yi – Fan Feng Shun; Er – Long Teng Fei; San – Yang Kai Tai and so on. It was delightful watching them. Their father shared that the youngest one had learnt it in school and taught the greeting to the siblings. The eldest child, a girl, is eight years old. Her brother, the second child, is six years old and the youngest girl is five years old. The father recently had heart surgery and is not working but is actively looking for a job. The mother is working in sales. Some time ago, they had sought higher subsidies from the eldest child’s school for student care fees but were not successful. Now, after the surgery and with the husband not working, the family is feeling the financial pinch. They have some debts to clear as they had previously paid for various bills in the past with credit cards. The father expressed his concerns as it was getting financially challenging for the family to afford the children’s expenses as their needs increase. My team is making the appropriate appeals and referrals to assist the family. Their circumstances are specific to them, but some of the issues that they faced are not uncommon. An unexpected event, especially a health-related one, often derails a family’s financial plan. A bad financial decision in the past may continue to haunt the family for a long time. Sometimes, financial assistance is not immediately available because of the eligibility criteria, though I have seen exceptions been made in appropriate circumstances. So, when we talk about the Budget or the various policies or programmes to help families, we must always bear in mind what happens on the ground, what is the impact on people, will this Budget and the various programmes help people in the long run? I believe this Budget does. There are many elements in this Budget that can help the family I spoke about. There will be increased support for education. In particular, the Ministry of Education (MOE) Financial Assistance Scheme will be reviewed and one of the outcomes is that the eligibility criteria will be raised to cover more families. This family can expect to receive some assistance that will reduce at least the eldest child’s school expenses. The extension of the service and conservancy charges (S&CC) rebate will also go some way in alleviating their household expenses. The father could also avail himself of the schemes within the Adapt and Grow programme and find a suitable job that will help to improve the family’s finances.[+37 sentences] Indirectly, the other initiatives targeted at supporting businesses for growing a vibrant and innovative economy like the extension of the Wage Credit Scheme, enhancement of corporate income tax rebate and the Enterprise Development Grant will all help to create a more conducive environment to look for a job and stay employed. Hopefully, by the time the GST increases kick in, the family is financially stable. Even if they are not, the GST offset package, amongst other things, would be in place to support them. I am glad that there are reviews and extensions of existing schemes within this Budget. Policies and schemes need to be tweaked and retweaked. We need to make sure that the policies and the various progammes match the needs of our people. Eligibility criteria may need to be reviewed from time to time. New initiatives may need to be put in place. This is constant work in progress. It is important to always be mindful to ensure that the Budget and any policy changes continue to improve the day-to-day lives of Singaporeans. I trust that this Government will do just that. It is an attractive notion to argue for more to be done to help everyone. Of course, we want to help everyone. But should we and can we? I am acutely aware that the Government has to cater to all these needs whilst balancing the need to ensure fiscal feasibility and sustainability of the country. The inevitable announcement has thus been made regarding the increase in GST. There has been a lot of buzz regarding this, and many views have been put forth. I think beyond just the banter of assent and dissent, and alternative suggestions, there is an opportunity to talk about our values and what defines us as Singaporeans. The Budget is not just about the economy and our fiscal needs but also about the principles that guide us. I feel that this Budget and the recent Budget statements in the past few years have gotten all of us thinking about important questions relating to Singapore's future: what do Singaporeans expect of the Government, what do we do in difficult times, what do we do in good times? There is an opportunity to ride on this and consciously involve the youths in these discussions and create for them a platform where they can be meaningfully involved in policy formulation. After all, many of the things we are doing is for the future generation. I am aware that there is already a lot of effort in engaging the youths, for example, through the efforts of the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) and the National Youth Council (NYC), of which I am a council member. I believe though there is scope to enhance such engagements by having targeted approaches for the different archetypes of youths. Not all young people are the same. Not all are vocal and not all may be interested in giving their views. But they should be interested and their views matter. We could look at sharing information and obtaining feedback in a medium that is more suitable and comfortable for the different groups. This could mean repackaging information in bite size forms and engaging them through social media. It means we go to them, have discussion sessions where they hang out after school, or where they seek recreation. We should also be open to implement meaningful ideas generated from the discussions. This could encourage more mature and constructive discussions in the youths here. Such discussions will hopefully help to shape views and instill the youths with the same sense of responsibility and ownership of our Pioneer Generation. This sense of responsibility and ownership is necessary if Singapore is to survive. The community needs to come together and do its part. We have many schemes and programmes in place but there will always be gaps and those who fall through the cracks. The community plays an important role to complete the support network and close the gaps. At the end of last year, some families in Bukit Batok East sought my assistance to buy school books and items for their children to use in the new school year. They did not meet the criteria to receive financial assistance from the schools and I had submitted appeals to the schools, which were eventually successful. I had also referred these requests to the Giveaway Gateway platform at Bukit Batok East, where the requests for assistance were conveyed to other residents.[+19 sentences] Many came forward without hesitation to help their fellow residents in need. During one of my ang pow presentation sessions to the elderly in the past weeks, one senior citizen approached me. He told me he had brought walking sticks to be donated to the Residents Committee (RC) and asked that I tell the RC members to give them out to anyone who needs them. It may seem like a small gesture. But this is, in fact, a significant show of caring and sharing. This is the spirit of giving that the Minister for Finance spoke about in his Budget Statement. I am happy to note that there is an allocation of effort in fostering this value and encouraging everyone to contribute to the community. In particular, I look forward to the enhancement of SG Cares and the one-stop platform Giving.sg. If I may suggest, we could look at the data available from this platform and understand behavioural inclinations. This information could then be used to curate social nudges that may further create awareness of the different community efforts and encourage the spirit of giving. Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to say a few words in Malay. (In Malay): A subject that became a hot topic recently was the issue of the GST rate increase which will be implemented within a four-year period. Many have voiced their views on this matter. Clearly, discussions about the Budget gave us an opportunity to think about matters that are important to our nation. Will our country continue to survive in the coming years? How can we continue to ensure that our country can still compete internationally in an ever-changing world? What should we do to provide a good life for our children who will inherit this nation from us? There are three things that I would like to emphasise. First, it is important for us to think about the long-term impact of each decision made for our country. The Government needs to balance efforts to look after the well-being of the people, with the efforts to ensure that this nation stays strong for future generations. Therefore, we must understand the need to increase the rate of GST to achieve long-term benefits.[+23 sentences] We need to be prepared for a rainy day. Some have asked, "Is there no other way?" Various suggestions may have been raised, but all of them will have an impact on the nation’s assets. There are those who rejected the increase in the GST but, in the same breath, they asked the Government to enhance social assistance measures. The Government sometimes have to make decisions that are less popular but are important for the good of the nation in the long term. Second, at the individual and family level, we also need to stay prepared for the future. We must be open-minded, work hard to acquire new knowledge and upgrade our skills. We need to pay attention to our children’s education, so that they will not be left behind in this current of rapid change. In this regard, I welcome the Council for the Development of the Singapore Malay/Muslim Community's (MENDAKI's) efforts to enhance our community’s education. I hope that MENDAKI and other Malay/Muslim organisations can continue to update the information and knowledge that can be conveyed to our community. For my third and final point, I think that it is important for the people to continue playing a role in complementing efforts to assist the community. We can contribute in many ways, be it through donations or by helping out. We must encourage the spirit of helping one another. I am confident that with the joint effort of the Government, families and community, a comprehensive support network can be established. Let me conclude in English. (In English): Mr Speaker, let me conclude in English. My grassroots leaders translated the meaning of the greetings which the three children recited to me. They were wishes of good luck and blessings. I certainly hope all the good wishes that the children wished for me also come true for the family and for Singapore. May the five blessings arrive at our doors! And may good fortune come from all directions! Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for Finance for the Budget Statement. I stand in support of the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Low Thia Khiang.
Mr Low Thia Khiang (Aljunied)1289 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, first, the Vision of Global-Asia Singapore. This Budget catches my attention for several reasons. But one thing that really jumps up at me was when the Minister for Finance said, and I quote, "We must anchor Singapore as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise, welcome investments, talent and ideas to Singapore, and be bold in venturing out into new markets." Sir, I believe that the Government has accurately identified the major international shifts that will change the world for our children.[+16 sentences] These are the shifting of global economic weight to Asia and the emergence of new technologies. I interpret this interesting phrase "Global-Asia" as positioning Singapore to catch the growth in Asia with a global outlook. The convergence of these two shifts, indeed, is the shifting of the global economic weight to Asia and the emergence of new technologies, in which the Fourth Industrial Revolution is taking place in the region stretching from South Asia to Northeast Asia through Southeast Asia. For the first time in modern history, the Asian economies combined are developing more robustly than Western economies. The Asian engine is driving the global economy and transforming Asia from being a volatile region into a dynamic global centre. At the heart of Global-Asia is China. The opening up of China to global capitalism by Deng Xiaoping also opened up the minds of the Chinese people to the world. Many overseas Chinese talents returned from the developed countries of the West to China, bringing with them the knowledge and culture to advance China’s science and technology. The political will to succeed and the hunger of the Chinese people to learn and live better lives fuelled rapid economic development. China is fast becoming an economic and military superpower. Singapore has thrived in the past 50 years by making ourselves useful to global capitalism, especially by correctly identifying future trends before others do. We made ourselves useful to American-led capitalism in Southeast Asia and East Asia during the Cold War and, in the process, helped to transform ASEAN from a political grouping into an aspiring economic community. In the last three decades, Singapore correctly predicted the rise of China and was one of the first countries to share the know-how of economic development with China. We have reaped a lot of benefits from this first-mover advantage. But I am afraid this advantage is now irrelevant. China is leading the region to become the centre of global capitalism. Global-Asia also means competitive pressures and realities, especially when the value chain of global production in the region diversifies even as the value chain reorients to centre on China. China’s One Belt One Road Initiative expresses this, with the many lines of economic flow being re-imagined and reorganised as starting from China and extending in different directions westwards, southwards and northwards. We have to make ourselves useful again in this new Asian capitalism centred on China by fundamentally transforming our economy.[+4 sentences] As a small city-state nation, this also means transforming our culture and human capital, as well as our diplomatic relationships with the economic powers and interpersonal friendships between national leaders and citizens. In the past 50 years, Singaporeans’ ability to speak English well has contributed to fostering our relationships with Western countries at the centre of global capitalism in the region. We have a new challenge today. There is a unique ethnic connection between Chinese Singaporeans and the Chinese in China due to ancestral and linguistic ties. But many people have observed that this kinship advantage is fading fast as China modernises. I agree with Lee Yi Shyan, Member for East Coast Group Representation Constituency (GRC), that the learning of Mandarin should be part of the overall strategy of anchoring Singapore as a Global-Asia node, as it will help us to connect to the 1.3 billion Chinese.[+11 sentences] I would even go further to argue that we should also learn our dialects as well. In China, speaking Mandarin ‒ Putong Hua ‒ is just the official language in official dealings. If one would like to connect better to the Chinese, not just rationally, but also affectionately, then the language to use is the local dialect. That said, we must also bear in mind that Singapore is, first and foremost, a multiracial and multilingual society. What does the rise of China as an economic and political superpower mean for a small state, such as Singapore? My view is that Singapore is, politically at heart, a Southeast Asian nation, defined by commercial trade winds, tropical hospitality, openness of the seas and the diversity of cultures. I believe that the ethnic politics and international frictions in our region will subside in time and ASEAN will soon become a more integrated community to protect our own interests against external dominance. As a Chinese-educated Singaporean, I am delighted to see Chinese being used in many countries today, especially in places where they see the value of Chinese tourists and investment dollars. The Chinese language is, today, one of the most popular languages being learned by people all over the world. Chinese culture is fast becoming less a scholarly curiosity but more a tool of soft power today. This has helped perhaps some Chinese-educated Singaporeans feel that they are finally freed of the feeling of inferiority. They are excited that the so-called "Sick man of Asia" has now been fully awakened with the full force of 5,000 years of rich Chinese culture. However, Sir, many overseas Chinese are also concerned about the intention of China, especially under one-party rule and as a superpower, in her policy and attitude towards weaker states.[+3 sentences] Will China seek to turn the tables on its experience of European imperialism and become an imperialist power itself? This is not far-fetched if we consider that Japan did just that in the first half of the 20th Century. Will China revive its old tributary empire and use sharp power to compel small states to submit to its will and pay it the equivalent of tribute today? How China behaves will have serious implications on small states in the region like Singapore in the near future. I am personally wary of the political ambitions of China as a Global-Asia superpower. I am worried that Singapore, if we are not careful and if we fail in our economic strategy to become a Global-Asia node, would become a pawn on the chessboard of great power games in Southeast Asia.[+5 sentences] Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully agree with the Minister for Finance that we must anchor Singapore as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise. There is a need to transform the Singapore industrial-era mindset and culture to make us relevant and useful to the future economy and contribute to the economic dynamism of the region. But besides focusing on economic opportunities, we should also have the new political scenario in mind while anchoring Singapore as a Global-Asia node. It is important that we see the political economy of the major shifts, instead of just the economic challenges and opportunities. I appreciate the Government's vision statements and the articulation of how Singapore should strategically position itself in the new era. This is a forward-looking Budget to anchor Singapore firmly in the future and for the future.[+1 sentence] Sir, the unfortunate thing about this Budget is that it is looking forward too hastily for future revenue streams by prematurely announcing the GST hike. This has become an unnecessary distraction from the vision articulated in this Budget, and as a real distraction causing the Government to lose its focus in getting buy-in for the vision because it has to explain the future GST hike instead.[+1 sentence] Do not let this opportunity to lead Singapore with this vision go to waste.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Sun Xueling.
Ms Sun Xueling (Pasir Ris-Punggol)2053 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Speaker, the Government is transparent about what it sees on the horizon – that our spending needs will continue to increase due to healthcare expenditures for an ageing population and the need to renew infrastructure. Some Members before me have spoken about how they wish more can be done for our seniors, about what more can be done to address inequality. We will have to match these needs with the resources that are needed to do so.[+1 sentence] That is the responsible thing to do. And that is why the Minister for Finance has announced the need to raise GST in the foreseeable future to be able to match this increasing expenditure needs.[+12 sentences] In my speech, I would like to touch on how we grow our economy so that we have more resources, jobs and tax revenues from a more buoyant economy to meet our needs so that we will have more to address the various issues that Members have raised before me. Second, I would also like to touch on how we ensure Government spending is used effectively and efficiently. This is so that resources collected from the public can be used to best address needs. Mr Low Thia Khiang, who has spoken before me, spoke on the importance of leveraging ideas and new technology. I have a specific suggestion. We cannot grow in a vacuum. We need to have contact points into globally innovative cities as so to have global access to ideas and technology. The Minister for Finance and his team have spelt out their plans through the Global Innovation Alliance (GIA) and the ASEAN Innovation Network. I support the GIA and the ASEAN Innovation Network which are ways for us to be plugged into the ecosystem of ideas and new technologies. We currently have many Singaporeans working and studying in the region, Singaporeans familiar with the venture capital and private equity circuits and Singaporean firms and their partners with investments in these cities. Apart from strengthening our bilingual and bicultural skills, I suggest we more deliberately build our networks and leverage them to sense-make and get a better grasp of emerging trends in Asia – open platforms to bring in various partners to widen our reach and understanding of new developments and establish linkages back into Singapore to provide more opportunities for businesses and partnerships. Second, we should invest in priority areas which are central to our economy and which can also develop new adjacent avenues of growth. Our aviation and maritime industries today account for 10% of gross domestic product (GDP) and close to 170,000 jobs. Our mega investments in Changi Airport Terminal 5 and Tuas Megaport will continue to build on these strategic sectors.[+19 sentences] Our investments in these sectors can provide us with a strong platform to develop new avenues of growth if we continuously reassess what the most valued part of the sector is. Data and the use of data, for instance, have emerged as a change agent for many industries and spawned new businesses and business models. For airports and ports, there is a lot of data from the travellers and trade that pass through our shores. Can this data be monetised? For instance, can we create our own global online travel company, given the amount of data we have about the preferences of travellers? We can also leverage data to market to travellers even after they have left our shores. The Aviation and Maritime Transformation Programme described in this year's Budget thus builds on our capabilities in the airport and seaport. We should challenge ourselves to mine these sectors for new development opportunities. Third, we should equip our people and our companies to take advantage of new opportunities. Continuous skills upgrading is thus critical. Skills upgrading allows workers at different stages of their work life to catch up on skills gaps which, if left unaddressed, could lead to long-term income gaps. Skills upgrading and training have thus been a key initiative in successive Budget plans. I would like to suggest that to maximise outcomes from training, that we encourage company-based training as training initiated, envisaged and monitored by companies are most closely tied to market needs. Further, to ensure that our young Singaporeans are ready for the workforce, I would like to suggest that internships be made available to all youths above 18 years old from the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs). Internships can provide youths a reality check on the skills needed for the workforce and complement the education they receive from IHLs. Lastly, I support the Capability Transfer Programmes that are being piloted in certain specialised fields. This is used, for instance, to bring in experts in data analytics, machine learning and AI to facilitate the transfer of specialised knowledge to our local professionals in fintech. This is timely help for our companies and industries which are facing skillset gaps in certain important fields. I would next like to discuss how we can ensure that Government spending is used effectively and efficiently. Monies collected could have been left in our citizens' pockets, as their personal savings or for their own care for their families. I appreciate the value-for-money initiatives the Minister for Finance explained in his Budget Statement and acknowledge that, at 19% of GDP, our Government expenditures are prudent comparatively.[+7 sentences] However, I hope that Government agencies can constantly challenge themselves to manage costs while delivering good quality services. I have three micro-level implementation suggestions. First, Government agencies should always strive to negotiate the best deal with suppliers when it comes to Government procurement for the benefit of taxpayers. For instance, with the need to build more healthcare facilities for an ageing population, there is scope for economies of scale via centralised procurement of hospital supplies, equipment and information technology (IT) software. And as the country steps up public renewal works, there is scope to demand discover what various agencies are procuring and if there are overlaps which allow more streamlined purchasing and better leverage. A well-thought through centralised procurement process may go beyond simple demand aggregation to require standardisation of product needs across institutions. I hope that the Ministry of Finance (MOF) can look into this actively to ensure that we are not being charged different prices across different institutions. The Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) and the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS) recently launched a certificate in procurement for public servants.[+1 sentence] I hope more will be trained through such a programme. Second, I would like to stress the importance of assessing asset purchases via a lifecycle approach so that costs are managed over the entire lifecycle of the asset. This is especially important when we look at assets that have a long lifecycle, like lifts and rail parts, which are intended to last 25 to 30 years.[+22 sentences] Cash flow projections should take into account their maintenance costs and the lifespan of their replacement parts. Given the challenges in projecting cash flows, inhouse expertise may be required to make a fair assessment. Government agencies, such as HDB, for instance, should consider having businesses, such as Essential Maintenance Service (EMS) develop lift expertise so that they are able to make a reasoned assessment on the costs of maintenance and replacement. In the meantime, greater care and scrutiny need to be put into purchase contracts to bind suppliers to their promises. Third, I would like to see greater collaboration between the public, private and community sectors to configure resources to deliver optimal outcomes. The Finance Minister described the CNS. I have also seen how private operators, like Grab Shuttle Plus, complement our national transport infrastructure by introducing buses to Punggol during off-peak hours and serving residents who stay in less populous areas. And in Gambas, the community came together to buy and share umbrellas rather than spend public monies building a high sheltered linkway which may not provide good cover for residents from the rain. We should be open and enthusiastic in encouraging different configurations of public, private, community contributions to deliver optimal outcomes for citizens while minimising the burden on public monies. At the end of the day, everybody wins. Mr Speaker, no one likes higher taxes. If increased spending is here to stay because we have to take care of our elderly and renew our infrastructure, let us seize the opportunities to grow our economy and revenues and, at the same time, make every tax dollar count. Let us be united in our vision and apply our energies correctly. Only then, can we overcome the challenges we face and create a stronger, better Singapore. Mr Speaker, in Chinese, please. (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, some Members expressed hope that more can be done to help the elderly and the disadvantaged. This Budget is precisely about how to allocate our resources optimally to create the biggest economic pie to support increasing expenditure, so that we can look after our senior citizens and the disadvantaged effectively. Therefore, I would like to discuss two points. Firstly, to ensure that our economy continues to prosper, we should be bold in taking advantage of major long-term trends to develop new growth opportunities and strengthen the competitiveness of Singapore’s key industries. After decades of hard work, Singapore has made great strides in our ports and aviation industries. These were achieved by our forefathers who were bold to explore in the face of great uncertainty. As the new generation of Singaporeans, if we do not pursue success boldly, we will become mediocre. As such, I support the Government’s plans to invest in Changi Airport Terminal 5 and the Tuas Mega Port.[+6 sentences] These demonstrate Singapore’s determination to stay ahead and constantly strive to be stronger and better. Of course, the value chain of today is very different from 50 years ago. Even if you compare it to 10 years ago, there has been tremendous changes, with the Internet and big data creating disruptive impact on the transport industry. As people say in Chinese ni shui xing zhou, bu jin ze tui (when you are sailing against the current, you must keep forging ahead, or you will be falling behind). We should keep up with the major long-term trends and actively pursue new business opportunities in the value chain, for example, investment opportunities in transportation big data, online travel services and more. Only by doing so can we stay ahead in the face of global competition. To seize opportunities in the major long-term trends, we need to link Singapore up with international innovation hubs. This is why I support the GIA programme.[+12 sentences] In addition, I also suggest setting up an international network for Singaporeans under GIA, so that overseas Singaporeans can also contribute to our development. It is also important to nurture our local talent. We should ensure that both working adults who are currently employed and young people entering the labour market are better able to meet market demand, and that job training programmes are market-driven. Secondly, with the growing Government expenditure, we must ensure efficiency in Government spending, such that every effort is made to ensure that every dollar contributed by taxpayers is well-spent. Government revenue comes from taxpayer’s hard-earned money. Therefore, to rein in costs, the Government not only needs a sound system, but it also needs to take a micro view to incentivise every public officer to save public funds. For example, based on the premise of procuring quality products and services, Government agencies should always strive to negotiate for the best deal with suppliers, while achieving economies of scale and reducing procurement costs through centralised procurement and product standardisation. At the same time, the Government should adopt a lifecycle approach in procurement cost evaluation and control long-term costs effectively. The Government can also work with community and private sectors to optimise the use of resources. Mr Speaker, Sir, money is earned based on one’s ability and should be spent efficiently. I hope that we will not be trapped in a zero-sum game. With Government expenditure growing steadily, we must make greater efforts to save public funds, be more meticulous in planning expenditure, and constantly challenge ourselves to improve the efficiency of money spent. In the face of increasing global competition, we must be bold enough to increase investment, embrace new trends and technologies and strive relentlessly to improve ourselves.
Mr Speaker44 words
[+2 sentences]I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 2.50 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 2.30 pm until 2.50 pm.[+1 sentence] Sitting resumed at 2.50 pm
Mr Sitoh Yih Pin (Potong Pasir)1077 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, as I reflect on the Budget Statement, several key themes stand out. They are integrity, fiscal sustainability and vision. Sir, our Government stated some time ago that it had sufficient funds to meet its public expenditure needs for the current term. That is why the GST increase of 2%, announced in the Budget Statement, does not need to come into effect during this term of Government.[+19 sentences] As the Prime Minister and his Cabinet colleagues have signalled for some time, our taxes must rise to pay for our future public spending needs. Sir, I am not aware of any government in any part of the world that announces GST increases three to four years ahead of time. Not only does this approach demonstrate our Government’s ability to plan for the long term, it also demonstrates, once again, its integrity. Our Government does what it says it will do. Our Government means what it says. And our Government keeps faith with Singaporeans whom it both represents and serves. This is, Mr Speaker, Sir, only right and proper. It should and must always be the Singapore norm. But it is by no means the norm elsewhere. Singaporeans can be justly proud of their Government’s record of integrity, especially at a time when flip-flopping on policy decisions and policy positions is the order of the day in some countries. Sir, the same integrity is demonstrated in the measures announced in the Budget to benefit Singaporeans. Our Government is fulfilling its role of always acting in the best long-term interests of Singaporeans. It is right that we invest in our children because they will form the core of our future. It is right that we take measures to help workers stay relevant. It is right that we take measures to respect and help our senior citizens who have contributed so much to making Singapore what it is today. It is right that we square up to and act to increase inclusivity by looking after those less fortunate to reduce income inequality and strengthen community cohesion. It is also right, Mr Speaker, that public expenditure is governed by the principle of fiscal sustainability. Every citizen understands that, whether they are managing a household's accounts or those of a business. To paraphrase Charles Dickens’ character Mr Micawber of David Copperfield: "Monthly income $5,000, monthly expenditure $4,500, result happiness. Monthly income $5,000, monthly expenditure $5,500, result misery." On another note, Sir, I am most encouraged by our Government’s proposed innovative approach to using our country’s Reserves to guarantee loans for large-scale infrastructure projects.[+29 sentences] This is eminently preferable to spending our Reserves and reducing the very source of net investment returns (NIR) which contribute so much to this country’s Budget revenue. Utilising our Reserves as guarantees for loans to fund long-term, large-scale infrastructure projects is both innovative and wise. As the Minister stated in his announcement, this approach should enhance the Singapore Bond Market. The approach is also fairer to all Singaporeans as it spreads the burden of costs across the generations in an equitable manner. Sir, let me now turn to the theme of vision. The Budget Statement demonstrated our Government’s commitment to sustaining a vibrant and innovative economy in two key ways. Firstly, by a range of measures to support our SMEs, which form the backbone of any country's economy. Secondly, by maintaining Singapore’s attractiveness to foreign direct investment (FDI) by keeping taxation competitive. Our SMEs and the FDI which the Economic Development Board (EDB) works tirelessly to attract and retain are two sides of the same coin. Our economy needs both to stay successful. The focus on sustaining a vibrant and innovative economy is the vital component to ensuring our country’s goals are achieved and, indeed, to ensuring its continued survival. It is only with a vibrant and innovative economy that we can support and defend ourselves. It is only with a vibrant and innovative economy that the little red dot can continue to punch above its weight internationally. It is only with a vibrant and innovative economy that the Singapore passport allows visa-free entry to more countries than most other passports. Mr Speaker, Sir, I think Singapore needs to benchmark itself not only against large developed economies as has been the practice to date but also against other global cities. If we are to do this, we would quickly discover that our rates of economic growth are less than other global cities. I am well aware that other cities do not need to incur big ticket items, such as defence, in their budgets. However, Sir, for us to ultimately continuously punch above our weight, we need to compare ourselves with what other cities are doing. With this in mind, it becomes even more important that Singaporeans work together and find ever more visionary ways to grow our economy. The need for continual innovation becomes even more imperative. Many people here and abroad have complemented Singapore on its ITMs. The amount of work which has gone into producing these ITMs is considerable and very impressive. However, how will they be implemented? My sense, from talking with businesses, is that there may well be a gap of understanding as to which ITM is relevant to them and what they should be doing. This is an opportunity for the Government and businesses to deepen their existing collaboration and roll out targeted, quality communication on ITM execution. The communication model could be that of the excellent quality of communication from MOF's team for this year’s Budget. Mr Speaker, Sir, I contend that this House needs to build on the vision expressed in the Budget Statement about the impact of our ageing population. This is another vital component in sustaining all that Singaporeans and its Government have built since 1965. Sir, I think this may well be the first year since Independence that the number of Singaporeans aged 65 and above is greater than the number of Singaporeans aged 15 and below. As the Minister said in his Budget Statement, by 2030, we will have 900,000 Singaporeans aged 65 and above.[+2 sentences] These facts are a cause for concern. They certainly are of concern for our SMEs which provide most jobs for Singaporeans and for those businesses which invest in Singapore and which also provide jobs for Singaporeans. In closing, Mr Speaker, Sir, I commend the Minister for an integrated and strategic Budget which benefits Singaporeans and the economy of Singapore.[+1 sentence] I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Teo Ho Pin.
Dr Teo Ho Pin (Bukit Panjang)1457 words
[+18 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Budget. I support the key thrust of the Budget which is about sustainability. Sir, the key questions we have to ask ourselves are: first, how do we make our fiscal position sustainable so that the Government has a steady stream of revenue even while facing increased Government expenditure arising from both an ageing population and ageing infrastructure? Second, how should we support local firms to sustain and grow their businesses in order to provide better jobs and wages for Singaporeans? Third, how can we build a sustainable environment where Singaporeans can live, work and play? First, fiscal sustainability. Sir, I support the proposed increase in GST to 9%. Doing so will provide a stable income for the Government to fund the increase in expenditure, particularly in the healthcare and security areas. However, more has to be done to help low-income Singaporeans cope with the potential increase in prices. As more Singaporeans are eating out these days, I propose that the permanent GST Voucher Scheme take into consideration the increase in cooked food and drink prices, especially in relation to serving sizes, when determining the quantum of assistance. Second, sustaining business growth and providing jobs. Sir, as highlighted by the Finance Minister, there will be three major shifts affecting Singapore: first, a shift in global economic weight; second, a shift in the emergence of new technologies; and three, an increasing ageing population. All these shifts will pose immense challenges to our local businesses, especially the SMEs. Sir, despite the introduction of many SME assistance schemes, SMEs have been slow in building up their capabilities. Many SMEs are still not coming forward to develop competitive edges and prepare for overseas business expansion. Many of them also do not understand how they can seize business opportunities under the 23 ITMs. I would urge the Government to step up its efforts to engage and help our SMEs more effectively. Sir, in 2017, the North West Community Development Council (CDC) SME centre engaged 1,080 SMEs to provide information on various SME assistance schemes. Only 148 firms took up assistance schemes designed to upgrade their firms and staff.[+2 sentences] Many are reluctant to upgrade or expand their businesses. From the feedback gathered, while SMEs are keen on solutions, they are afraid of the process of adopting these changes. This trend is unhealthy as it affects the survival of our SMEs and results in wastage of resources through inefficient processes.[+1 sentence] Sir, one of the key challenges faced by SMEs is the recruitment and retention of talent. I propose that the Wage Credit Scheme be extended to help SMEs retain staff by including performance and loyalty-based bonuses as part of the scheme.[+2 sentences] Third, sustainable environment. Sir, I am pleased that this year’s Budget has placed emphasis on making Singapore a Smart, Green and Liveable city. As a global city with a compact built environment, it is crucial for all stakeholders of our society to adopt sustainable solutions to make Singapore an eco-friendly city.[+1 sentence] Sir, there are four major contributors of greenhouse gases and particulate matter (PM)2.5 emissions in our built environment, namely, first, power plants; second, industries; third, transportation; and fourth, buildings. I support the introduction of the carbon tax to encourage businesses to adopt cleaner technologies.[+22 sentences] This will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, especially from power plants and industries. However, the carbon tax may not be as effective in reducing emissions generated from transportation and buildings. Sir, emissions from transportation and buildings constitute an estimated 16% of all emissions in Singapore. We must act fast and take bold steps to make our transportation and buildings eco-friendlier. As of 2017, we have about 160,000 goods vehicles and buses on Singapore roads. Many of these vehicles are not green-certified and emit PM2.5 which is detrimental to the health and well-being of Singaporeans. Sir, this problem is further aggravated by heavy trucks that travel between Singapore and Malaysia. Many of these vehicles travel at night and in the early hours of the morning. Pollution is less visible during these hours and our enforcement officers may not be present at these hours to enforce air pollution controls. Sir, we must adopt sustainable solutions to convert our fleet of goods vehicles and buses into green vehicles. As goods vehicles and buses are costly to replace or upgrade, the Government can consider providing low interest loans and subsidies to accelerate the replacement of our existing fleet of heavy vehicles. Sir, moving on to buildings, we have an estimated 5,000 high-rise buildings and skyscrapers in Singapore and over 5,000 other buildings and amenities. Many of these buildings date back to the 1970s and are not equipped with eco-friendly features. Only about 25% of our buildings, that is, about 2,400 buildings, are certified green under the Building and Construction Authority's (BCA's) Green Mark Scheme. To further expedite the greening of our buildings, I propose that BCA compile best practices on green building designs, mechanical and electrical installations, interior fittings and maintainable designs in order to guide developers, consultants, contractors and facilities managers. These best practices should also be included as part of the Green Mark Scheme. Buildings, especially air-conditioned ones, consume large amounts of energy and contribute significantly to the overall greenhouse gas emissions. In Singapore, our hot and humid climate encourages more people to spend more time indoors in air-conditioned places, such as offices, shopping centres, restaurants. More HDB flat owners are also installing air-conditioners in their flats. The proliferation of air-conditioners will undoubtedly increase energy demand and add to emissions. To ensure the more efficient and prudent use of air-conditioning, we should encourage the installation of energy monitoring systems that will help building owners to track their electricity consumption and reduce wastages. An example of such a system is the Home Energy Management System (HEMS) in Japan, which allows for the control of electrical appliances, such as air-conditioners and lights, to reach optimal energy efficiency. The Energy Conservation Center Japan cites an 11% reduction in energy usage in facilities equipped with HEMS after a 12-month study.[+9 sentences] To fight climate change, we need to expedite the adoption of renewable energy sources, such as solar energy. HDB has started the installation of solar panels on HDB rooftops. However, the progress is slow due to various financing constraints and pricing problems when solar energy is sold to PowerGrid. I hope the Ministry will address these problems and scale up the installation of solar panels in all high-rise buildings so as to build more solar energy banks. Sir, to further enhance sustainability in our built environment, we need to take a multi-pronged approach to engage all stakeholders to adopt Green Living practices. We can learn from many Japanese cities which have embarked on various successful eco-sustainability policies, incentives and education. In 2008, Japan selected 13 cities under the FutureCity Initiative to transform Japan into a low-carbon society. These are some examples of projects undertaken by the various cities. First, Toyota city has encouraged the use of eco-friendly cars through programmes which assist buyers in purchasing such vehicles. Two, Kyoto has tapped into its budget to incentivise schools, neighbourhood businesses and organisations to become eco-friendlier.[+2 sentences] It has integrated eco-friendliness as part of its cultural identity under the "Do You Kyoto" project. In addition, Kyoto also subsidises households which utilise solar energy. As of 2013, over 7,000 households have taken up the subsidy programme, making a seven-time increase over five years. Three, Yokohama provides economic incentives, such as lower property taxes for houses, if they meet certain energy-efficiency standards. Four, Chiyoda has developed measures for both new and existing buildings to become eco-friendlier and provide assistance in the form of technical support under its "Greenstock" Strategy.[+8 sentences] Many Japanese cities have also adopted the Comprehensive Assessment System for Built Environment Efficiency (CASBEE) to measure eco-friendliness. CASBEE may be used to assess eco-friendliness at various scales, ranging from individual buildings to entire cities. Sir, studying CASBEE and the method by which it evaluates and rates the environmental performance of buildings and subsequently adopting it for use in Singapore may be of value in allowing us to become a Greener city. Sir, over the last 10 years, North West CDC has been championing many green programmes to promote a green living lifestyle among our residents. We have worked with our people, public and private (3P) partners to organise resource conservation projects, recycling and climate change education programmes to promote environmental ownership. I would urge the Government to provide more funding support to the community to champion green projects. Sir, this year’s Budget is a good and strategic Budget. I hope that more initiatives to make Singapore an eco-friendlier nation could be included within the Budget to make Singapore a sustainable green city.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin (Nominated Member)3829 words
[+38 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, to prepare for this speech, I talked to young Singaporeans from 18 to 35 years old, students as well as young millennials in our workforce, about what was their own sensing of their future in our country and what they most cared about our country getting right. Their answers were varied, fresh and often very surprising. But I admit that it can be overwhelming to try to make sense of the conflicting forest of everyone’s different answers to the “How” and “What” questions about our economy. How should we encourage innovation or tackle inequality? What is the best way to manage our Reserves or the best tax system for us? I find that the questions I keep circling back to – the ones that give me some compass of clear direction to help me navigate my own uncertainty and confusion – are always the questions of "Who" and "Why". Why do we care about encouraging innovation? Or give a damn about inequality? Why must we keep such high Reserves? Who do our Reserves or tax system serve? And at the heart of it all, who are we? Who is not part of our "we"? Who do we most want to be? Taking the time to slow down from our usual pace in Parliament to dwell on questions of purpose and identity may seem frivolous. But I suggest to Members, they are the most crucial questions. Because they bring us back into a space of choosing from what matters most to us. I have found that whether we are debating about how we should spend our own personal dollars or the dollars of our nation, the core question we must keep returning back to is, "What is the meaning we care to make with all our money in the first place?" Our greatest fear should not be of failure but of success at things in life that we realise did not really matter to us at all. So, I fully support the Finance Minister's wonderful reflection in his speech that "a strong economy is not an end in itself; it is a means to build a better home and provide a better quality of life for all our people.” If our economy is a means to an end, then should we not discuss every year at Budget whether we as a people still share the same end-goals? In my first Budget speech in 2015, I shared my hope that, "Our country spent the first 50 years of our history getting rich. I would love to see us spend our next 50 years charting our course towards becoming truly wealthy." My desire still stands. So, what is this vision of true wealth that we are longing for at the end of all our days of economic hustling? With each year, do we know and do we care to know whether we are moving closer to or further away from that end? I find that one visionary end-state still resonates for most young Singaporeans across different beliefs and backgrounds and, that is, the one that was still that written down more than half a century ago which invited us to imagine that there will be a day when "We", the citizens of Singapore would find ourselves as one united people; able to regard one another less by race, language or religion; and more as fellow builders of a democracy, that was based on justice and equality. And we would be happy. Truly, surprisingly, profoundly happy. Because we had somehow learnt that this life we got to live was never about creating prosperity and progress for its own sake, or for the sake of bettering only ourselves, but for the sake of bettering others alongside because we finally believed we were better together – rather than apart – as a nation. Sir, the pledge represents our dream of a Singapore as it should be. It is our North Star, an ambitious promise we ask every young student to spend each morning putting their hand on the heart and swear that we will do whatever it takes and take on whatever cost to bring to life this vision. And yet, as each young student ages into a young working professional, many of them feel their idealism for themselves and for the country being challenged at different levels of the Singapore system. Along the line, we sense that the Singapore way is more like a tense high-wire act where we must learn to calibrate our ideals of communitarianism, democracy and egalitarianism on one end with the realities of individualism, authoritarianism and elitism on the other end. So far, our country has managed to advance forward without falling off the line. And even our critics concede that that is no small feat. But whether our performance has been a gracefully balanced act or one ungracefully tilted too much towards pragmatism has been the fodder of much debate. I have heard it said jokingly that pragmatism is our official religion. And you know it is certainly part of our cultural DNA when you can hear it, not just in the voice of our parents and our policymakers, but in ourselves and our children. The decision to raise GST taxes to 9% has been justified as a pragmatic decision in the face of growing national needs in the future. And the decision to not raise our Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) beyond the 50% mark has also been justified as a pragmatic decision for the sake of signalling to currency markets the strength of our Singapore dollar. And the decision to not implement capital gains tax or raise more wealth taxes as yet another alternative has also been justified as a pragmatic decision to maintain our attractiveness as a wealth management hub.[+4 sentences] And every tilt towards the side of pragmatism is simultaneously a tilt away from the side of our ideals. And I want to stress I do not presume pragmatism to be bad and idealism to be good. Every healthy individual learns to hold both options in tension within their mental construct and make their hard choices. But I believe our idealistic young professionals and students who make up both our current and future tax base have the right to question us. When will it ever be the right time to tilt our balance just a little more towards our ideals rather than always towards what is pragmatic?[+17 sentences] And, if not now, while we have substantial surpluses, then when? If not later, then are we saying never? I came across an article online called "The Limits of Ideology: Lessons from Singapore" by an American CEO called Margaret Heffernan. She concluded her article like this – "What Singapore holds in reserve…is an asset western leaders would give their eye teeth for: a national surplus accrued over many years of fastidious economic management. How will this wealth be used? And while western leaders use insolvency as a perennial alibi for their failure to make coherent strategic choices, Singapore's Government has the money and the power to effect real change. And should it fail to do so… no politicians in Singapore will be able to claim they did not see their chance. If, with the freedom to spend that most western leaders lack, Singapore cannot address its problems, then the principles it espouses will be discredited for good." And I get it. She is really cutting, but I can concede that she has a point. Thanks to the prudence of our forefathers, we, of all nations, indeed, have a unique chance right here and right now, to set an example once more to the world of how a small nation can effect real change, impacting real people in real time. And this substantial gift is given unto us for a reason and maybe it holds a meaning larger than our present imagination. So, we have quite a First World problem on our hands. Should we spend more to help the people we have with us today or store more so we can help the people of tomorrow? And it is a hard choice, because both are equally good choices. But it is healthy to ask ourselves if we notice that we are in the habit of overestimating for the future. Could we also be underestimating what we can do in the present? Every reasonable Singaporean believes in protecting our Reserves, and I am totally not supportive of any willful call to squander this once-in-a-lifetime inheritance on populist promises and things that would not last. So, I agree with the Finance Minister's argument that using 100% of NIR is not a good idea because "the principal sum of Reserves will stagnate over time and the NIRC, as a share of GDP, will consequently fall as our economy grows". But I can also appreciate economist Donald Low's perspective that "the current rule of spending only up to 50% of NIR means that the Reserves are still growing quite considerably every year… and just because 100% is not prudent does not mean 50% is right either." We would still be adding to the principal of the Reserves, even if it was at 60%.[+3 sentences] The choice is really about whether we believe in growing our Reserves faster or slower. I want to admit I am a terrible economics student, so I do need help in making sense of all of these. I struggled to understand the International Monetary Fund's (IMF's) surveillance of member states' foreign exchange reserves adequacy because in IMF's assessment, it says we are excessively prudent. IMF's opinion is that a good enough amount of reserves would be 27% of our GDP or S$113 billion. I do not know the size of our Reserves but I read that the Monetary Authority of Singapore's (MAS') foreign exchange reserves alone are around S$369 billion or 88% of GDP.[+24 sentences] So, that is about three times over IMF's recommendation. And I want to stress again that I am not assuming that IMF is right and the Government is wrong. I am certainly not saying let us just take whatever a foreign institution says as gospel truth because I am sure as heck I do not know enough to make any kind of proper assessment. I think it is helpful for the Government to provide a thoughtful and easy to understand response to the IMF's assessment because it does open up an important and deeply profound question for us to consider. How much then is enough for us? What is this final number we need in our Reserves that will make us feel complete and secure? And who would we be prepared to re-examine that number for? When we build up our own family's savings, how do we decide when is a good time to tap into it to spend on our children now, versus storing it up for them to use for their future children? And we might say, well, that really depends on how urgent are the needs of my children now, is it not? Is it life or death? Is there a golden opportunity they need to seize? We would probably take out a significant percentage of the investment returns of our own savings – while prudently protecting a baseline sum, of course – in a heartbeat if we believed doing so would make a significant and immediate difference to the well-being of our children in the present, particularly if it would help save their life, because no point saving for their future if they die in the present, right? It is human to be much more liberal when it comes to spending on our own children and much more conservative when we choose how to spend on other people's children. I deeply admire the Government’s devotion to long-term strategic over-planning and I get the deep anxieties we have around under-planning. I appreciate that we cannot afford to get the mathematics wrong, but we cannot afford to get the meaning under the mathematics wrong either, because people do not listen to mathematics, they listen to meaning. If we hope to galvanise the support of the young idealists who make up our future tax base, we have to give them a braver and broader vision that warrants the bigness of our Reserves. Otherwise, they can mistake it to be a story that is just about growth of Reserves for growth's sake. So, I hope that the Government can help us understand what is the real story better. Inequality is a deeply emotional issue for many young Singaporeans and I dare say it is one of the biggest issues they care about. So, now is the time to really go talk to the next generation of Singapore taxpayers before 2021 hits, and to listen in to what really matters to them. A sociologist, Teo You Yenn's book, "This Is What Inequality Looks Like” is sold out and I have seen dog-eared copies already making their rounds among thoughtful young Singaporeans and some of them are buying one copy to keep and another to loan. Because what she is saying in there about a need to deal with inequality through a systemic lens is resonating and connecting with them. The Straits Times' journalist Chua Mui Hoong cited it in her own article, "Inequality is a threat – name it and face it", recommending it as a must-read for every politician and civil servant. I am really glad that the Prime Minister himself is making inequality a "critical" issue to look at. In his written response to a Parliamentary Question this month, he said, "If we fail – if widening income inequalities result in a rigid and stratified social system, with each class ignoring the others or pursuing its interests at the expense of others – our politics will turn vicious, our society will fracture and our nation will wither." A recent Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) study on Social Capital in Singapore concluded that the sharpest social divisions here may no longer be race or religion, but class.[+6 sentences] Our youths who have lived in public housing, gone to neighbourhood schools and depended on public transport all their lives will say that they did not need an official study to tell them what they have seen for a long time. They can sense-make the class differences in everyday, ordinary interactions because it is the difference they feel at the doorway between the teenager who gets to order from Foodpanda and the teenager who rides through the rain to deliver it to him. It is the difference felt by the young intern every lunchtime when she struggles over how to tell her colleagues that she has a very different idea from all of them about what is an affordable place to dine. Even some of our more privileged youths are not comfortable with the growing divide either and they are driven to do something different about it through the system. They are well-acquainted with how money can buy through tuition classes, college prep coaches, yearly overseas trips and diverse life experiences for someone else in their generation who is taking that same national examination, fighting for that same national trophy and going for the same interviews that they are. They, too, want to jailbreak this pragmatic arms race of "every man for himself" meritocracy. The Chairman of the Public Service Commission (PSC), Eddie Teo, made a speech in 2015 where he shared his insights from his yearly interviews with the 350 young people vying for scholarships each year. He said of these potential future public sector leaders that they "think critically and question what is happening in Singapore…our socioeconomic disparities, our educational policy and system, and our political environment…And when they worry about social inequality and the lack of social mobility, some may have already moved away from one cardinal belief that our founding fathers had, that social welfare should be discouraged because it breeds a poor work ethic and a dependence on Government handouts….they believe that the Government should do more for the poor because they feel it is just." So, the young recognise the goodness of ad hoc help like SG Bonus, but they are also clear that such help is short-lived and unlikely to create deep satisfaction.[+4 sentences] The lower-income youths welcome the $300 but they know how fast it disappears in a few bill payments. So, no once-off voucher can truly soothe the blow of a GST increase that hits them with every transaction on a day-to-day basis. And meanwhile, they know, in the land of the rich, many treat the $100 as just chump change. For the short-term and disproportionate impact that they have, ad hoc packages are not cheap. Seven hundred million dollars is a substantial sum that could have gone into, say, a Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) programme that focuses on making a more significant, long-term difference.[+4 sentences] So, are our well-intended ad hoc transfers drawing resources and attention away from dealing with challenges in a more sustained and structured manner? Every year, after the GCE "A" level results, the media loves highlighting stories of kids who excelled in their examinations despite the most challenging of circumstances. This year, I came across a story of a 19-year-old Singaporean girl who grew up under an alcoholic Singaporean father who constantly abused her Indonesian mother. And in primary school, she witnessed her desperate mother attempting suicide. Her parents divorced and her mother had to take care of her and her brother on a cleaner's salary of less than $1,000, the bulk of which went into paying rental for a two-room flat.[+4 sentences] This girl lived on a daily allowance of $2 and survived on loaves of bread and treats from friends. She studied in school all the time so she could help her mother save on electricity bills. She recounted that the temptation to join gangs was always present, but she had the presence of mind to ask herself, "Is that what I really want to be in the future, and is this how I want to define myself?" With the help of a resilient and loving mother, supportive friends and teachers, she ended up not just excelling at the GCE "A" levels, but she even joined Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS), interned at MSF, did volunteer work and reconciled with her father. This girl is amazing, she is phenomenal and she is now looking for a way to fund her university studies. I share her story to have us first consider, not just her amazing achievement but her mom's achievement as well as an individual beating the odds, but second, I would have us to consider all the multiple points in her story where we would have wanted to know whether the system did come alongside to aid this mother and child's heroic journey.[+3 sentences] Why is it that we recognise this girl's story as an exceptional story, rather than the norm? And do we want stories like hers to be more of a norm? And if we do, what are we prepared to do at a systemic level? Can we believe there are actually more children out there who are capable of having a story like hers if we choose to believe in them and invest more systemic state support to care for parents and children who do not quite fit into our checkboxes of assumed indicators of future success? Do we believe that the child growing up in the worst circumstances has just as much to offer our country as the child who grew up in the best?[+4 sentences] I have met children growing up in rental flats with potential to live up very big dreams, a girl whose ambition is to become a criminal lawyer, an articulate boy who learnt public speaking because he binge-watched Technology, Entertainment and Design (TED) videos. I met a neighbourhood school teenager who floored me with his serious conviction that someday he will enter Parliament to be, in his own words, "a voice for the voiceless". They are there. Singaporean children of low-income moms, single moms, and foreign moms. They are all our children and they and their mothers are part of the "We" that we are pledged to serve. So, give them the housing and the education and the possibility of rising into positions of power so that they, too, can play their part in our country's success story.[+23 sentences] We are a nation struggling with infertility. Why should we not take any and every child born into Singapore with equal honour and belief and blessing? Our young Singaporeans get it that we are a small and vulnerable nation and they get it that we need a monstrous amount of money just in case a perfect storm of horrors truly hit – and they are so many horrors out there: sea levels rising, global economy tumbling, silver tsunami, total fertility rate flatlines. I mean, they get it; they have heard it. We are a nation so well-versed with fears – a motivating force. We have come very far in surviving as a country by not ignoring our fears. But it is not the only emotion worth listening into. Fear alone cannot bring us past that space of survival into a space of true thriving. When I live-poll young people in junior colleges (JCs), polytechnics and Institutes of Technical Education (ITEs) about what is that one word they associate with the future of Singapore, do you know what word consistently emerges as the biggest on their word cloud? It is the word "uncertain". So, yes, I think we have succeeded in engraining in them the message of our vulnerabilities. They got it. And the emotion of fear, while useful, can become uninspiring and paralysing as a mood. Our youths are hungry for a new kind of certainty. That certainty can only come from the promise of a new story, a story of a "Who" and a "Why" that is bigger than the sum of all of our fears about "What's" and "How's". Our youths need to hear the greater story of all the things that we want to do for love, not just fear. And the story needs to come straight from the heart of every leader in the land about all of the meaning that money can buy, not just for ourselves, but for one another. At some point, we have to decide when to stop just operating in fear that the bottom will fall out of Our Singapore Story. There is a time for fear, and there also is a time for courage ‒ courage born from the fire of fighting for our ideals ‒ to simply say, in the face of fear, that "That is enough. We have enough. We are enough. And it is time to let more of us have enough, too." And in that space of sufficiency, we shall find our satisfaction.
Mr Deputy Speaker7 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Kuik, you have one more minute.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin76 words
[+3 sentences]I want to say that I see the heart of the Minister for Finance for the people. I believe in his openness to find new ways forward and I trust his courage to make hard choices. So, my hope is that he and this Government can work together with a new generation of idealists and pragmatists to help them dream of a better future that they will all be so very proud to call their own.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Chia Yong Yong.
Ms Chia Yong Yong2667 words
[+17 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Budget 2018 is about building for the next decade without limiting our planning for the future. It is, therefore, apt that Budget 2018 is also an inclusive Budget and, perhaps more than any other, I will remember this Budget as one in which the Minister for Finance named VWOs as one of the stakeholders, alongside workers, businesses, the Government and citizens, to build a better Singapore for everyone. I thank the Minister of Finance for his recognition of the role of VWOs in nation-building, not just as recipients of charity and public funds. Here, I declare my interest as the President of the Society for the Physically Disabled (SPD) and a Board Member of SgEnable. So, how do I see the role of VWOs in nation-building? It lies in social cohesion. I liken this to a family, where one parent looks after the welfare of the family and keeps the house in order, while the other parent brings home the dough. VWOs, by virtue of their being on the ground, are best placed to increase and strengthen intra-community networks and bonding. We must, therefore, strategically develop this role, collaborate with grassroots organisations. We can, and we should, build the kampung spirit, the neighbourhood care network. It is part of civil defence. How tragic it would be if a person were to perish in a natural disaster because the neighbours did not know he had existed. I do not need to say any more. Is this the kind of neighbourhood that we live in? It has been a few years since we popularised the term "kampung spirit". Let us step up to the plate and just do it. Mr Deputy Speaker, at this juncture, I wish to refer to the speech made by my hon colleague, Assoc Prof Randolph Tan, in yesterday's debate, wherein he drew the attention of the House to the amount and increases in the Budget on social development spending. From the perspective of the social service sector, such social development spending is overdue.[+7 sentences] It is welcomed. In the days of nation-building and consolidation, social development spending was way below that of other Ministries. But this has changed. The Government has recognised the importance of building up the vulnerable and weak segments within our society. Hence, the increased spending. We are still playing catch up. Money is still not enough. But having said that, I agree with the hon Member that we need to be prudent in our spending.[+1 sentence] The money has to come from somewhere. Hence, I again advocate for the need for the social service sector to be sustainable, to generate their own revenue without compromising their mission to serve the disadvantaged and the vulnerable, to reduce their reliance on public funding. So, I still request for resources, but not to be invested into a black hole. I request for resources to invest in capability-building to achieve sustainability in the long term.[+29 sentences] It remains my dream that, one day, charities will not depend on charity. Mr Deputy Speaker, nation-building is both a privilege and a responsibility of all stakeholders. The same set of challenges facing us, as the Minister for Finance says, can be turned into opportunities for us. But it seems to me that the four strategies laid out in the Budget will not work if we are only implementing the schemes, if we are only encouraging take-up by individuals and organisations. We need to radically change our mindsets and world views. We need to change the way we do things. In the face of disruption, we must be prepared to disrupt the way we do things, disrupt our own comfort zones. Let me refer to the three key enablers referred to by the Minister for Finance as laying the foundation for all ITMs: pervasive innovation, deep capabilities and strong partnerships. These are terminologies not alien to us, having been frequently spoken of and discoursed. Unfortunately, familiarity sometimes has a way of immunising us against the true import of the terms. When we talk about innovation, we frequently think in terms of acquisition and effective, efficient use of technology. But innovation is more than that. I use my mobile phone without a clue as to what happens inside in cyberspace and, where applicable, even in the virtual world. My purchase of a mobile phone, and any proficiency – which I do not claim I have – in using the phone and the downloaded apps, do not make me innovative. Embracing change, such as upgrading to the latest version, does not make me innovative. Now, if I can tweak my mobile phone and change it into a loudhailer, that might be innovation, but it might also explode in my face. So, what is innovation? It is when I embark on a quest for the better, for the best, when I say nothing is impossible, when I dare to dream, when I dare to fail, then I might – I might – innovate. And yet, I might not, for I might fail. It is imperative that we develop this psyche. If we cannot, whether as businesses or individuals, we will have neither the courage nor the drive to innovate. We will be nothing more than buyers and users of technology, machines and skills. We will be nothing more than persons attending training courses. The Government schemes will be tapped upon for expenditure, but we will not achieve our aim of fostering pervasive innovation throughout our economy. Sir, this mindset change must happen at every level in every age group and every segment of our community. But we can also catalyse such change upstream, through education. MOE has done good work. It has continued to review its curriculum and pedagogy to prepare future-ready leaders. Hence, I have a few suggestions which I hope MOE will consider. Despite living in Industrial 4.0, our schools continue to certify competencies relevant to models of earlier industrial economies.[+22 sentences] While basic subjects remain important, I submit we should review our curriculum and make structural changes to our education landscape. Before I go further, Mr Deputy Speaker, allow me to talk about Deepmind's AlphaGo. AlphaGo is not just a computer game of Go. It is a programme that defeated the reigning three-time European champion, Mr Fan Hui, in October 2015 in a 5-0 win and, just last year, it defeated the legendary grandmaster Mr Lee Sedol, winner of 18 world titles and widely considered to be the greatest player of the past decade. It was a 4-1 victory. AlphaGo earns a ninth-Dan professional ranking that is the highest certification ever for a Go player, a computer programme getting a ranking over a human being. Now, there is AlphaGo Zero. Unlike AlphaGo, AlphaGo Zero did not learn to play Go using human amateur and professional games. It learnt to play Go simply by playing games against itself, starting from completely random play. It is now arguably the strongest player of all time. Just a game of Go – really? It gives us a glimpse into what world we are living in, what world our children will live in. Think of our children facing AI in their lives, careers and challenges. We communicate with human beings in human languages; our children will need to communicate with machines in their languages. We need doctors when our bodily functions are compromised; we need machine physicians to intervene and fix machines when functions have been compromised. We apply human psychology in interactions with one another; our children will need to understand the psychology of machines. Our children facing AI. Language, physiology, psychology – I use words hitherto applied to human beings. Could it be that, in the world to come, there may be little differentiation? Human intelligence versus AI. Human psychology versus the psychology of machines. How can we, our young people, live, thrive and harness AI in such a world which is no longer science fiction? Schools, ITEs and IHLs should, therefore, ensure that every student knows some machine basics, with differentiated routes for deeper learning. In addition, courses, in general, may be restructured to allow differentiated exits into other courses, just as we currently allow differentiated entries into schools, institutions of learning and courses.[+13 sentences] This could potentially broaden the skillsets and perspectives of our students. With industrial 4.0, we need more than academic competencies. We need to nurture from young the appetite for risk, the comfort level for problems, the courage to fall and to stand again. In line with curriculum change, therefore, we must effect environmental change. The environment in which children cram or are hothoused for better grades should be changed to a "push-frontier" environment, in which children challenge one another by creating problems and by devising solutions to those problems, an environment in which children are challenged with different risk permutations and are allowed to grapple with defective or inadequate responses, simulations of real-life scenarios in which they analyse, brainstorm, role play and make judgement calls. Instead of clearly defined experiments within each subject, students could be challenged to use a combination of their knowledge and skills across subjects to achieve certain outcomes. A push frontier environment will encourage creative thinking, the ability to conceptualise problems, create problems, solve problems, and live with problems. It will build confidence and the courage to be different. The courage to create will shape a different world view, a different view of success and failure. To be sustainable, this environment must be housed in the school. I note the already heavy commitment of students. May I suggest that schools convert to full-day schools, in which all the homework is done and completed within school hours. No outside school homework. With time and resources allocated for push frontier practicals, housing push frontier environment in school and converting schools to full-day sessions, have another advantage: it enables the levelling of the playing field among students.[+6 sentences] The Government has done much to try to level the playing field. But the fact remains that, all things being equal, children from more advantaged backgrounds will have access to more enrichment and tuition classes, and, when assessed on the current academic models, outperform their peers. As long as this situation persists, we run the risk of not harnessing the potential of all our young people. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, every school is a good school. But not every home is equal. The current system has been abused such that inequity continues to be perpetuated and deepened. A full-day school can be a good tool to eliminate a part of that inequity.[+30 sentences] We have children study together, grow together, spend time together ‒ greater opportunity to level up, greater opportunity to bond. When they go home, parents should be encouraged to reduce reliance on external contractors in providing additional teaching and hothousing and use the time for family bonding. All this requires a mindset change. We require a change in the way we define success and failure. The Chinese have a saying,行行出状元, meaning there are top scholars from every trade. I had previously used this to encourage those who did not perform academically. I do not anymore. To my mind, it connotes that one is only valued if one is at the top of one’s trade. I disagree. Everyone is important, not just those at the top. I am not encouraging sloppy or irresponsible performance. But I am saying that everyone is to be valued, regardless of whether you are at the top or at the bottom. Each time we get into the car, we put our lives in the hands of the last mechanic who serviced it. Most of us do not need a mechanic who is top of his trade. We just need one who is competent and responsible. We should also value "failure" as an alternative outcome. Penicillin may not have been discovered but for a messed-up experience on something else. Of course, Dr Fleming was not the only one to be credited. The rest of the team were hardly to be known as 状 元.. We should also re-examine scholarship criteria used in Government, commercial and IHL scholarships. What criteria qualities do we want in our future leaders? Academic and extracurricular performance? Responsibility, courage, risk-taking, the ability to fall and stand again? How would we view? Are we prepared to grant a scholarship to a student with a B-score, in place of one with straight As? If the first student had scored his Bs because he had to overcome an illness, or because he had to work to supplement his family income, or because he had to care for a sickly parent or a sibling, are we prepared to have scholarships for students on the basis of courage and risk-taking? Unless we review our scholarship criteria, I submit we may not have, and we would be hard put to find leaders that we will need in the age to come. Sir, let me now move on to developing the Singaporean Core. I welcome the measures in Budget 2018 and, in particular, await more information regarding the Capability Transfer Programme. I would like to know how we will measure the transfer of skills and knowledge to local workers. In addition to the Capability Transfer Programme, perhaps whether the Government also consider that Employment and S Pass holders may be required to train those under their reporting lines.[+1 sentence] In relation to the forging of strong partnerships, can I request that we take a long hard look at how we now attract foreign companies to Singapore? Despite our success in the five decades, it could be timely for us to review our policies so that foreign companies which set up businesses in Singapore to take advantage of the various financial privileges and incentives, will leave an enduring legacy and enduring positive impact when they cease to operate in Singapore? I urge the Government to consider implementing a systematic, targeted, evaluated system to transfer knowledge and skills to Singaporean businesses and workers. Key performance indicators (KPIs) of officers should, therefore, not be how many partnerships have been forged, but how the terms of such partnerships have been negotiated to achieve win-win for both parties, as well as the impact of implementation of such terms.[+2 sentences] We could consider a progressive model of ensuring that the right to the grant of privileges or to continue to enjoy such privileges is reciprocated by an increase in the transfer of knowledge and skills to employees and local enterprises. We could require vigilance in systematic and structured training and transfer of such skills to local employees and enterprises. Measurables could include an increase in local hires for higher positions, an increase in the number of local employees trained and promoted from year zero, and year-on-year.[+17 sentences] Next, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, a few short words about migrant workers. Migrant workers could range from Work Permit holders to senior executives. Singapore has benefited from open doors. We have never been xenophobic, and despite vociferous noises from certain quarters, we must never be. Our forefathers came from their homelands. Singapore’s shores welcomed them. Some of our friends returned to their homelands, but our forefathers stayed on. We are the children of migrant workers. Today, our children and loved ones work and live overseas as migrant workers. We hope for them, our children and loved ones, to be cared for and respected in those communities, and we hope for them to do well. Let us then be hospitable to migrant workers in our midst and hope that they, too, will do well. And to our migrant worker friends, you are our guests. Please respect our culture, our rules and even our accent. Whether you eat or drink, cross the road or cycle, please respect our culture, please respect our rules. There are many among us who have carried themselves honourably and they are our shining examples. They are our good friends. And we are confident that with mutual respect, together, we can achieve a win-win for all.
Mr Deputy Speaker7 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Chia, you have one more minute.
Ms Chia Yong Yong168 words
[+15 sentences]Thank you, Sir. In conclusion, in order for Budget 2018 to succeed, we must begin to think differently – a quest, a thirst, with something bigger and better, a mind unafraid to dream, a heart unafraid to fail. An aim around us, hearts big enough to accept someone who has failed, minds broad enough to see alternatives, rather than failure. No one can change us, only ourselves. The Government may pave the way for us, but how we take that road and where we find our destination are up to us. Let us take this journey together as Singaporeans. We will support one another. We must. We will celebrate and sorrow together. We will fall, but we will lift one another up. Our forefathers succeeded against all odds. So will we. We will succeed in honour of their memory, we would succeed for ourselves, and we would succeed for our children. Because with the Singapore spirit, we will triumph. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker10 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Tan, do you have a clarification for Ms Chia?
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong)15 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to raise a clarification for Ms Kuik Shiao Yin.
Mr Deputy Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Please do so.
Dr Tan Wu Meng55 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Deputy Speaker, I listened with great interest to Ms Kuik's speech and she mentioned that some economists were citing an IMF recommendation relating to Singapore's Reserves. From what I understand of social media, I was wondering if she is referring to the IMF's June 2016 Guidance Note on the Assessment of Reserve Adequacy, please.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin5 words
[+1 sentence]Yes, that is the one.
Dr Tan Wu Meng138 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Deputy Speaker, I happened to have seen this online over the weekend as well and, it being a part of some serious-minded commentaries, I took some time to read it, even though there is no SkillsFuture Credit involved. [restates an earlier point]I noted that on page 6 of the report, it mentioned that foreign assets in the form of reserves can form an important part of a country's savings to ensure intergenerational equity; and secondly, that in a later part of the report, it also mentioned on page 22 that the recommended ratio of 20% of broad money M2 is in relation to capital flight risks.[+1 sentence] As far as I understand it, not being an economist myself, nowhere in the report does it mention protection against currency speculation and other forms of stress which may subject a country's reserves to.
Mr Deputy Speaker7 words
[+1 sentence]So, what is your clarification, Dr Tan?
Dr Tan Wu Meng47 words
[+1 sentence]My clarification, Mr Deputy Speaker, is that I am not sure, at least speaking as a lay person, how Ms Kuik's speech in mentioning the IMF and Singapore's Reserves lead to the recommended conclusion that we might not be maintaining the Reserves as much as we should?
Mr Deputy Speaker7 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Kuik, would you want to respond?
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin31 words
[+4 sentences]I have no idea what the Member is asking. So, could the Member clarify that again? I am sorry, it is me. I could not hear what he wanted to ask.
Mr Deputy Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Tan.
Dr Tan Wu Meng60 words
[+3 sentences]Or alternatively, it might be just me because I fully acknowledge that, like Ms Kuik, I am also not trained as an economist. As an interested lay person, I am trying to understand the argument better. But would Ms Kuik agree that maybe we shall leave it more to the expert folk to educate both of us on this issue?
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin45 words
[+2 sentences]I think in the speech, I said quite clearly I was a terrible economics student and I do not really know much. I really would appreciate the Government's clear and easy-to-understand response to that because I did not know how to make sense of it.
Mr Deputy Speaker14 words
[+2 sentences]Ms Chia, you are an economics student? Do you want to raise a clarification?
Ms Chia Yong Yong67 words
[+6 sentences]Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. You would not want to know my economics grade! But I do have a clarification. I do not know whether, on a Point of Order, it is proper for me to ask. I do not direct it to any particular Member, but to various Members who spoke largely about equality or inequality within our community. Am I permitted to seek the clarification?
Mr Deputy Speaker29 words
[+2 sentences]Ms Chia, you can seek a clarification if you are asking someone to clarify. But if you are asking the general House, no one would want to answer you.
Ms Chia Yong Yong86 words
[+4 sentences]Thank you, Sir. If I may ask the hon Member, Ms Kuik, and if I recall correctly, also Ms Sylvia Lim, I think there had been much discourse on inequality in our community. I am wondering whether the hon Members were thinking of inequality or inequity. Are they thinking about the Government or the society not having taken enough measures to make sure that everyone is equal or are they talking about not taking enough measures to equip and level up each child to their potential?
Mr Deputy Speaker30 words
[+2 sentences]Ms Kuik, I am afraid Ms Sylvia Lim is not in the House, so you would have to answer. Ms Chia asked either of you, and only you are here.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin58 words
[+4 sentences]I guess we may differ in our thinking about how much is enough help for people. I speak especially for children with single mothers and foreign mothers. We have talked a long time in this House about the differences of views about why they cannot get adequate housing and all that. I think more help could be given.
Mr Deputy Speaker8 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Chia, are you happy with the answer?
Ms Chia Yong Yong5 words
[+1 sentence]May I seek another clarification?
Mr Deputy Speaker6 words
[+2 sentences]Yes. Only to Ms Kuik, though.
Ms Chia Yong Yong50 words
[+5 sentences]Yes. The point I wanted to make was that there is a difference between an inequity and equality. Nobody is equal and I do not think it is ever possible to make everyone equal. So, perhaps, the Member could be referring to inequity rather than inequality. Would that be correct?
Mr Deputy Speaker24 words
[+3 sentences]Ms Kuik, are you referring to inequality or inequity? Would you want to clarify? Are you clear on the clarification raised by Ms Chia?
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin12 words
[+1 sentence]Could the Member redefine "inequity" and "inequality" in your point of view?
Mr Deputy Speaker8 words
[+1 sentence]So, she is asking Ms Chia to clarify.
Ms Chia Yong Yong67 words
[+1 sentence]Thank you. My understanding of "equality" is that everyone gets the same treatment. When we talk about equitable treatment, people may not get the same treatment, but it is desired to achieve the same outcome.[+1 sentence] So, perhaps you could be thinking of requesting for more equitable treatment rather than equal treatment. Because when people come from different backgrounds, giving equal treatment will result in a larger gap.
Mr Deputy Speaker6 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Kuik, is that clarification clear?
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin27 words
[+2 sentences]I do not want to hold up the debate. I am quite happy to discuss with the Member in the Members' Room later about inequity and inequality.
Mr Deputy Speaker5 words
[+3 sentences]Okay. Thank you. Mr Vikram.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang)138 words
[+9 sentences]I will try my best to keep things simple. I think, listening to the debate, I suspect the question from Dr Tan to Ms Kuik was actually whether she thinks MAS is putting too much away in Reserves. I understand that was the point in the speech. But I guess she can clarify and the Finance Minister can answer that question. That is the only clarification, does Ms Kuik think that MAS is putting aside too much? From what I understand from Ms Chia's point is that equity is about fairness. So, if someone does more, he deserves more, whereas equality is everyone gets the same. I think what Ms Chia is asking Ms Kuik is whether or not she is looking for fairness to everyone as opposed to equality. That is my contribution to clarify for everyone.
Mr Deputy Speaker29 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Vikram, you are seeking a clarification from Ms Kuik or you are trying to clarify Ms Chia's clarification? Do you have a specific clarification required from Ms Kuik?
Mr Vikram Nair18 words
I guess if both say yes, then the problem is solved.[+1 sentence] It is to both of them, yes.
Mr Deputy Speaker25 words
[+2 sentences]I think Ms Kuik is happily seated and we will not let the debate carry on upon the clarifications. Next speaker, Ms Tin Pei Ling.
Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson)2804 words
[+5 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Finance Minister’s Budget Statement. This year’s Budget is a courageous statement. In no other democracy will a Finance Minister announce a tax increase four or more years in advance, with a general election in between. No government will willingly announce a decision to raise taxes and especially not one which wants to continue to be in government. To do so takes integrity and courage to be willing to lay upfront the challenges facing our nation and explain what we need to do to surmount these challenges. Many Singaporeans are unhappy with the move to raise GST by 2% sometime between 2021 and 2025.[+21 sentences] Faced with high costs of living, such a move is painful and worries many. Enhancing financial assistance and support packages would, therefore, be imperative in helping our low-income and perhaps even our middle-income families and Singaporeans to cope. But emotions and concerns aside, we know that money needs to be raised to fund new projects and programmes. There is always a tradeoff. The Finance Minister had, in his speech, explained in detail why he has taken such an unprecedented move. Indeed, we are faced with many challenges – technological disruptions, rapid ageing in our population, mature infrastructure that needs to be maintained, new infrastructure that needs to be built, and more. We need to respond decisively, as one people. How we respond now will determine if Singapore can continue to be a thriving nation amidst a highly competitive world, one in which our young will continue to have a bright future and our seniors are properly taken care of in their old age. Budget 2018 takes a long-term and strategic view. It sets out a programme to transform and revitalise our economy; to boost infrastructure and build a Smart Nation; to strengthen our hardware and social infrastructure and prepare for an ageing population. These are important priorities, to keep Singapore strong and viable, and the best home for all Singaporeans. To fund these priorities, we need to raise revenue. The Finance Minister has set out three ways to do this. First, impose spending controls and cutting Ministries' budget growth; second, finance some of the infrastructure developments through bonds; and third, raise GST. My view is that we should do these three ways in that order. In other words, first, ensure that our Ministries and Statutory Boards are run in the most efficient manner. Be brutal in cutting waste and inefficiencies. Encourage innovative ways to raise productivity. I do not advocate starving the public services of much needed resources to do their jobs properly. But if we are to raise taxes, we owe it to Singaporeans to make sure that what the Government has already collected is not squandered. In the same vein, could we make better use of this year’s surplus? One big irony of Budget 2018 is that we report a surplus of $9.6 billion, even as we make an advance announcement of an increase in GST to raise revenue.[+1 sentence] I understand from the Finance Minister that this is an exceptional surplus, and we cannot always count on having exceptional surpluses. Still, could we, say, direct this surplus and any others in future, into a fund separate from the Reserves, perhaps find ways to invest it to build it further to fund our increased needs and, hence, defer any GST hike to a later date?[+3 sentences] Second, the Minister announced that bonds will be issued to fund infrastructure projects. So far, market reports appear to be positive, with some believing that this will "turbo-charge" the debt market. However, we need proper safeguards. We must not make borrowing an easy way out and put future generations of Singaporeans in deep debt. Hence, I would like to ask whether this move will significantly increase our national debt, how will the bonds be paid out, whether this will mean higher interest rates and higher risk of having to raise more tax in future.[+16 sentences] What safeguards are in place to ensure that we are able to meet the payments and also fulfil our projects going ahead? Hard truths, hard decisions. I believe Singaporeans will understand the rationale and tradeoffs for raising GST, however painful it is for our citizens, provided that the Government works very hard to deliver on promises and prove that every revenue dollar raised is efficiently and effectively used for the public good. Singaporeans have trusted this Government for decades and made many painful sacrifices for our nation’s long-term good. We must never squander this trust and must do our best to protect Singaporeans. Deputy Speaker, allow me to continue in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): Deputy Speaker, Sir, how society respects the elderly and care for the disadvantaged not only shows how civilised we are but also reflects on our moral upbringing and common beliefs. However, respecting the elderly and caring for the disadvantaged cannot just be empty talk, but must be put into practice. We must "walk the talk" through the institutions, policies and actions to ensure that our seniors and the disadvantaged are well looked after. With our population ageing rapidly, the Government must introduce policies and adjust the allocation of resources decisively, and perhaps even carry out a major "facelift" to prepare for an ageing population. With regard to caring for our elderly, the Government has done a lot and has accumulated a lot of valuable experiences. It has also made many improvements in healthcare subsidies and pro-elderly services. For example, with the launch of the enhanced healthcare subsidies, many elderly residents no longer require help from the Macpherson ComCare Fund, which we initiated voluntarily to help low-income senior citizens defray medical costs. In addition, the CNS pilot programme launched by the Government also produced good results, and Macpherson is honoured to be part of the trial. In the past, we used to have to approach the Ministries separately to seek help for our elderly residents. If a certain Ministry does not have enough resources, we had to knock on the door of other Ministries. Scheduling meetings took a lot of time and effort. Now, with better coordination among Government Ministries, the process has become smoother and faster, and our senior citizens’ problems can be resolved quickly.[+29 sentences] CNS has been able to provide regular health checks for seniors, and they have become healthier and more active. With the help of neighbourhood volunteers recruited through the network, the elderly who live alone no longer feel lonely and helpless. From what we can see, the Government can help turn our common ideals into reality and, thankfully, the Government has worked on this relentlessly. However, it is also equally apparent that the people's response and support are of vital importance. If nobody is willing to donate money, then the Macpherson ComCare Fund will not be able to help the elderly who cannot afford to see a doctor. If no one volunteered, then we cannot take care of senior citizens who live alone, on a large-scale and organised way. On a higher level, if people do not support the Government, national programmes cannot be implemented, no matter how great they are. It is the duty of elected leaders to set the future direction and strategies of a country, and the responsibility of the entire Government to implement policies effectively. However, the success of a country’s strategy is not just dependent on the Government. Support of the nation is key. Otherwise, the Government would be speaking without a voice and punching without weight. How then can they implement necessary policies for the long-term good of the country? How then can they ensure the disadvantaged or minorities whose interests are at odds with the majority, are taken care of? How then can they implement programmes that ensure the competitive advantage of the country and its people, or even the ability to compete effectively in the international arena? We all know what the Government has done to take care of our senior citizens. But I also hope that the Government can do more to create a more pro-elderly environment. As we grow old, we inevitably face limits in terms of physical strength, but that does not mean we no longer have a part to play, nor does that mean it is the end of life. If we can make the necessary adjustments, our twilight years can also be interesting. Some elderly Singaporeans may choose to continue working, some choose to be volunteers, while others choose to learn new things, and some may even pursue dreams that were out of reach when they were young. Regardless of what they choose to do, we should ensure that our environment supports and not limit them, so that they can do what they are good at and continue to make a difference. In this way, our senior citizens will not develop a negative attitude. Instead, they will maintain active lifestyles, live more meaningful lives and become truly happy senior citizens. (In English): As we justify the need for hard measures in order to sustain fiscal sustainability, I hope we will not inadvertently attribute the cause to our elderly, which is the primary narrative on the ground now. An ageing population is one of the key contributing factors, but we know that it is not the only one. And we must recognise that being old is not being useless. We need a paradigm shift across all levels and sectors of our society that seniors are assets and not liabilities. We just need to create the right and enabling environment for them. Much of what we have today, including hardware and social infrastructure, was designed decades ago when our population was still young. It is time to refresh these to welcome a different population landscape with a different set of requirements. With Singapore undergoing rapid ageing, it is important that we set the right policies, put in the right resources and organise ourselves the right way sooner than later.[+3 sentences] We need to ensure adequate support for our elderly today and tomorrow, so that we are all empowered to age gracefully and actively in the comfort of our own homes and community. Given our expectations on social spending, it is imperative that we maximise the impact of every dollar spent. We must enable our elderly today and tomorrow to continue leading an independent and graceful life. For a start, I laud the Government’s move to integrate health and social care for seniors under one agency.[+3 sentences] This will ensure effective use of resources and better planning. In any case, it is the same target stakeholder group. From policies to qualifying criteria and service standards, AIC is better positioned to design and deliver a seamless suite of programmes to care for our seniors holistically. On the ground, we have seen preliminary results of integrating services for seniors through the CNS pilot, which will soon be implemented nation-wide.[+5 sentences] MacPherson is fortunate to have been one of the pilot sites for CNS. Within just over six months of implementation, we have observed tangible benefits on the ground and received positive feedback. At the agency level, AIC plays a coordinating role, though it is very much a "deal maker" as well. In the past, if seniors have needs or encounter issues requiring our assistance, we have to approach the agencies one by one and be subjected to their available resources, which is time consuming. Most of the time, it would be extremely challenging to get a common date that the agencies can agree on. Moreover, some agencies may not have sufficient resources or provide the right type of help. Now, with AIC’s help, the process is much smoother, more coordinated and faster.[+10 sentences] At the local level, our seniors with different needs are matched to the local VWOs for further engagement or services according to their organisational strengths. This is more targeted and demonstrates the many-helping-hands approach. In terms of benefits to seniors, services are more structured and holistic, with proper follow-ups. Seniors do not just go through health screenings, they are given practical advice on suitable diet and exercise, and there are dedicated people who would follow up or check in on them to ensure follow through. Seniors, so far, have been very appreciative of this. Beyond health services, our single elderly are now more socially connected and better cared for. Take Mr Toh, a 66-year-old senior in MacPherson, for instance. He lives alone and expressed that he felt lonely with nobody to talk to. This was brought up to CNS and a befriender was arranged to visit him on a monthly basis. He was also invited to join active ageing activities at the MacPherson Community Club or in the community. In addition, he was enrolled in the 24/7 Eastern Health Alliance (EHA) Care Line service, which he can dial into when he feels lonely at night.[+14 sentences] Mr Toh is now a much happier person. This is an example from MacPherson. With the integration at the national level, I believe the benefits will be much more. But I hope the Government will go further in creating an enabling environment for seniors to continue to thrive in. First, let us design to include and empower mainstream elder-friendly designs and make them pervasive, so that seniors can lead a normal and productive life regardless of where they are. Apply elderly-friendly designs to the development of common spaces, facilities, machine interfaces, workflows, public processes and more. There are some inevitable physical constraints as one ages, but that does not necessarily mean that one can no longer do meaningful work or lead an active life after becoming old. With the right environment, these constraints can be compensated and seniors can continue to thrive. No institution or country so far has been an authority in terms of setting elderly-friendly design standards. Singapore can take the lead in setting elderly-friendly standards and be the authority in this area. Second, create a favourable environment and employment opportunities for seniors. Stem out ageism. There are seniors who want to work, either out of passion, or sadly, out of financial need. Regardless, given that we have seniors who do want to work, let us help them. The Government can take the lead in testing how work environment, workflows, job role designs and even compensation and benefits, such as health benefits, CPF contribution, and leave conversion can be adapted and optimised for senior workers.[+2 sentences] Third, and this is more for seniors who are less independent, proliferate digital eldercare to supplement shortage of eldercare manpower and help more seniors live independently. There may soon be a point in time when there are more who need care than those who can care. By leveraging technology and AI more effectively, we can drastically change how care is provided and help even more Singaporeans to age in place.[+18 sentences] I have spoken at length during the Motion on Support for Senior Citizens earlier this month, and I will speak about it again during the Committee of Supply (COS). But the point is that if you can leverage technology more, if you can leverage digital eldercare more, we can help more elderly Singaporeans, those who may have difficulties moving around, and even paraplegics or those who may be semi-paralysed, to be more independent and continue to enjoy the comfort of their own homes. Of course, it is not enough for the Government alone to work on it. It takes two hands to clap. Our seniors need to believe in themselves and step up, too. I firmly believe that our seniors are much more capable than being mere recipients of care. As we enhance our healthcare, we can expect longer and more healthy years. As our economy evolves, there will be less reliance on physical strength at the workplace but more use of intellect and wisdom. As each population becomes better educated and more savvy in the digital space, there will be less fear and deeper entrenchment of technology in our everyday lives. I am also against self-defeating thoughts, such as lao le bu zhong yong 老了不中用, which means that we are useless after we aged, which can be self-fulfilling. Whether it is to remain active economically or socially, it is a choice our seniors have to make. But the point is that we need to keep active and we need to keep trying. Being active brings meaning to life, it helps us look forward to every new day. Is this not wonderful? In conclusion, Singapore is extraordinary because of the indomitable will of our forefathers, their resilience and discipline. Singapore weathered through many disruptions and we have transformed time and again. Hence, I hope we will continue to possess the quality of resilience and discipline, so that we can deliver a progressive yet compassionate Singapore. With this, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar)1384 words
[+22 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank our Finance Minister for his vision and boldness to take the necessary steps to ensure that our generation and the generations after us will continue to grow and benefit from the prudence and pragmatic approach taken in drawing up Budget 2018. I also note that the Minister and his Ministry are putting in a lot of effort in communicating his ideas and the rationale in his decisions through various channels to engage our people. As we grow our economy and meet the challenges ahead, there will be demand for more skilled manpower. I see a growing pool of retirees, whom we should look to, to rely on, as a good source to meet our skilled manpower needs. Many of our retirees are healthy, well-educated, well-informed and with good work ethos. I would like to suggest that we consider giving these retirees a second career if they wish to return to the workforce. For example, an accountant may have a passion to teach preschoolers, or an engineer, a passion in the nursing profession. With more childcare and healthcare facilities being built, we definitely need extra manpower. For some of our retirees, it is not always about the money. Rather, it is about doing the things that they have always wanted to do and are prepared to be retrained to take on this new career. Let me share this experience of one of my residents, Mdm Morin Tan, aged 69, living in Strathmore Avenue. Mdm Tan used to work as a personal assistant to the regional head of the credit risk department in a bank and had always cared for her grandchildren and babysit her neighbours' children whenever she had the time. After her retirement, she became a full-time caregiver to her two grandchildren. Her neighbours knew she doted on children and would occasionally ask her to babysit for them when they had errands to run. Morin has always obliged as she loves children very much. Last year, Morin approached the Henderson-Dawson PAP Community Foundation (PCF) Childcare Centre at her block to volunteer her services. As the teachers saw a gem in her who had so much love for the children, the centre offered her a job and she readily took up the offer. She now interacts with the children, plays with them, keeps them comfortable, and gives them all the love and tender care, like how she cared for her grandchildren when they were young. She also assists in the overall maintenance and hygiene of the centre, including sanitising the play equipment and kitchen utensils. Morin has been working in the Henderson-Dawson PCF Childcare Centre since February 2017, and is enjoying every day of it. At 69 today, she is healthy, experienced and committed. She sees her work with PCF as a second career. She will be very happy if she can be offered a career path, so that she can develop herself. So, I hope the Government offers retirees, like Mdm Morin Tan, a second career and develop a career path for them, just like any young applicant.[+14 sentences] If they are prepared to take the flight to a new beginning, then let us offer them the conversion training and be the wind beneath their wings. I now turn to the subject of "Building a liveable city and a smart nation. Thus far, we have done well. We have done much to make our home a truly liveable city, from having a strong economy, building good infrastructure ranging from affordable housing, healthcare and education institutions to a host of other amenities. Our elderly, the generation of Baby Boomers born in the 1940s to 1950s and, among them, a good number belong to the group who missed formal education, were working in manual work and are somewhat struggling to understand and keep up with the new digital age. It is a vicious cycle where because they were doing harsh manual work, it took a toll on their health. Because they were not earning much, they do not have the luxury to afford many things and they lead a spartan life. Some do not have good family support and have to fend for themselves. In my Henderson-Dawson ward, many of them I meet enjoy walking around the neighbourhood parks, chatting with neighbours at the void decks or markets and the coffee shops or visiting the community centres (CCs) and senior activity centres (SACs) to socialise and enjoy the liveable city. And that is good. But more can be done for them in our Smart Nation journey. All the talk about the Digital Age, the Information Age frightens some of them. These residents are just spectators in the high-speed world of information, connectivity through smartphones, smart TV, iPads, chat apps, quick response (QR) codes, e-banking. Our CCs and SACs have been running computer classes and given many of them hands-on opportunity to touch and navigate through the “www”. But, without a chance to keep using their new-found skills, they will soon forget what they have learnt. Therefore, I would like to ask the Government to consider allocating financial resources to look into how we can install some form of IT or computer system for the elderly in our rental units, just like the installation of fire alarms in these homes. They do not need a desktop with a big gigabyte or a high-speed broadband, but just a simple screen, keyboard, mouse for them to also be “on-the-go”.[+10 sentences] At the CC or library, there are silver Internet hotspots, but the operating hours may not suit their time schedule. Plus, mobility may be an issue for some. Seniors need their own time and space to tinker and learn at their own pace and in the comfort of their own homes. I fully empathise with this group. In helping them to get into the Digital Age, it would also help to bring them closer to the younger generation. This may be their children or grandchildren. They can talk to them about some basics of the Internet of Things. The key is that the seniors would not be alienated. In fact, getting them on board would help them better engage and participate in the various Government initiatives. For example, they can gain access to health information and be empowered to care for themselves or their spouse. On this important topic of communication, I would like to suggest that one way to get the public engaged is to have interactive questions put forth to them, just as it is done in the National Geographic programme “Do or Die” episodes on cable TV.[+8 sentences] In this show, they will pose a set of three questions for viewers to think what would be the correct answer. For example, real-life freak accidents are shown with morbid three-dimentional (3D) graphics. There are episodes which even captured real phone calls, so you can hear what fear and anxiety sound like. Then, the viewer is given a choice of three possible options, two of which result in death or serious injury. One initiative I have in mind for “Do or Die” show is for our SG Secure. We can play out the scenario of a major fire catastrophe, sudden cardiac arrest or choking incident. After watching the show, I believe what is learnt in a fun and audio-visual way is likely to stay in the mind. The lessons learnt will enhance and contribute to our Total Defence strategy. I wrap up on a very hopeful note. I am pleased that my request last year for a continuum of service for the elderly will now be a reality with the move of senior-related social support services from MSF to the Ministry of Health (MOH) from April to streamline care for the elderly. I had also recently asked for a review of the nomenclature for ElderShield in my Motion on Support for Senior Citizens speech at the last Parliament Sitting, and I am hopeful that this, too, could be done following their review. Therefore, I hope my suggestions for a second career for retirees, the Silver Computer Scheme and the very engaging and interactive TV platform to engage our citizens will be given consideration.[+2 sentences] One is never too old to dream another dream and make that come true. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar)2939 words
[+8 sentences]Deputy Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of the Budget proposed by Minister Heng Swee Keat and his team. I would like to speak on what makes for good, better and the best types of Budgets. First, on what constitute good Budgets. Let me take reference from some readings from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF blog in April 2017 attempted to define several key principles underlying good fiscal policies and smart fiscal policies. The blog read that in a world of dramatic economic disruptions and globalisation, smart and good fiscal policies facilitate change, harness a country's growth potential and protect people who are hurt by the disruptions. There is a call by IMF for more room to install more growth-friendly, inclusive, strong and prudent fiscal policies around the world. National budgets are the key means by which fiscal measures, such as spendings and taxation, are implemented. By world standards, Singapore's Budget 2018 is growth-friendly, relevant, futuristic and prudent.[+3 sentences] Budget 2018 continues with the aim of building a vibrant and innovative economy through a slew of more than 20 initiatives to anchor Singapore as a Global-Asia enterprise node. It continues with its aggressive plan to train more Singaporeans in a world of technological and business disruptions. Budget 2018 also passes the test of promoting inclusion. It not only supports employers who give wage increases to Singaporeans; it provides greater financial support to students from lower- and middle-income families through higher Edusave and financial and meals programmes. It continues with the various rebate schemes for household expenditure, promises a permanent GST rebate scheme and shares $700 million of last year's Budget surplus with every citizen.[+5 sentences] But Budget 2018 is, at the same time, prudent. By putting a cap on Ministry budgets, it encourages public servants to do more with less, respecting that money is hard-earned, whether at the national or personal levels. In addition, by having the AIC to coordinate activities for seniors and strengthening the Social Service Offices (SSOs) to link up the Many Helping Hands on the ground, Budget 2018 reduces overlaps and directs resources to where support is most needed on the ground. In a sense, Budget 2018, Mr Deputy Speaker, is somewhat "better than good". I believe that better national budgets are those which confront issues head on; and takes the courage to put in measures important, sometimes unpopular, to secure our future; going beyond the here and now. The team behind Budget 2018 took courage by announcing the 2% GST hike, creating what some analysts call a constant "thorn" in the side of the ruling Government, for the next several years to come.[+1 sentence] But at the same time, it promises Singaporeans that those in the lower- and average-income brackets will not have to bear the cost of this GST hike because it has the permanent GST rebate feature that comes with it. As a better-than-good budget, Budget 2018 incorporates, too, measures that align behaviours to the values that our society wishes to promote: the Proximity Housing grant, for instance, to encourage more family members to live with or near one another; the Carbon Tax, for instance, in support of the global and national movement to create a green and more liveable city; the raising of the cap and matching grants to the five CDCs so that they can raise more funds to meet gaps in the local district and support more assist, bond and connect initiatives.[+16 sentences] On the best budget. For Budget 2018 to be the best ever, I have several inputs for the Minister to consider for incorporation, especially during implementation. Not all of these inputs fall under the direct purview of MOF, but I am hoping the Minister will help to facilitate some of these inputs. Most of them concern mindsets because, as they say, the real battlefield is often in our minds. First, on a culture of innovation. As a member of the Council for the Future Economy (CFE), I have personally witnessed the painstaking efforts by Council members and their subcommittees in developing ITMs to anchor Singapore as an innovation, technology and enterprise node. But maps are maps, and they need tangible support and resources to become realities. Budget 2018, with its slew of 17 measures in this space, is certainly moving in the right direction to support the making of a vibrant and innovative economy. However, Sir, a vibrant and innovative economy is not developed from Budget allocations and programmes. It is not developed from only speaking up, and Member Mr Louis Ng spoke about that earlier. Although that is a good starting point, it requires a conducive setting of a culture of pervasive innovation, and we know that cultures are not built overnight. In fact, research says that a purposeful attempt at culture-building takes at least three to five years. As in raising a child, fostering a culture of pervasive innovation takes a village. Fostering pervasive innovation requires more than plug-and-play solutions. It needs a whole society to create an environment that encourages and celebrates a sense of playing, tinkering and experimenting, something that preschools, like My First Skool and MOE Kindergartens, are starting to do. So, I think Budget 2018 should actually allocate more resources to do a deep independent dive on what is stopping us from seeing more pervasive innovation in, one, the private sector, especially amongst our SMEs; two, in education institutions from young to older ones, and families, and especially, in the Public Service which is watching over this space. In my years as an MP, I suspect the key hindrance to fostering more pervasive innovation in the Public Service is a four-letter word "FEAR" – fear of criticism by the public, by online critics, by even Members of this House from both the ruling party or otherwise; fear of making mistakes, fear of failing, fear of being judged and punished; or even fear of making it to the Auditor-General's Office's (AGC's) annual "name and shame" list of agencies and staff who are less than perfect.[+10 sentences] Another hindrance to fostering a culture of pervasive innovation is likely the lack of vision and limitations caused by existing processes and tools. There is a story of a man who went fishing. Each time he caught a big fish, he will throw it back into the water. And if it is a smaller fish, he kept it. So, an observer nearby found this incredulous and asked him why he did that, why throw back the big fish and keep the small fish? And this man replied, "Sir, you do not understand. The dish in my kitchen for the fish is only seven inches long, and if the fish is any bigger, then it would not fit in my dish!" That is why he threw it back. Sir, such is the mentality of people who lack imagination and limit themselves and other people in the pursuit of innovation. The question then remains: how can we achieve a better balance between being fearless and visionary and having to be accountable and answer for one's actions, especially failure? But if we do not settle this issue and find that balance, then we will continue to say that we want innovation in our society, in our country but, unknowingly, through our mindsets, actions, systems and processes, reward those who play safe and not try anything new nor rock the boat. I, therefore, seek the Minister's views on how we can allocate some resources to analyse the root causes of why a culture of innovation is not pervasive in the various segments of the Singapore society.[+8 sentences] And that may lead us to having more results and outcomes in trying to build a culture of innovation and ensuring innovative outcomes in all of our different aspects of the Budget. Second, on asset expenditure, a 2017 report by the Centre of Creative Leadership says that newer business models are presenting threats to traditional models, and the traditional models are the ones that are centred around assets, for example, a hotel property; services, for example, a recruitment company or online retail mall or technology products, such as an Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) system. This report states that in a rapidly sharing economy, a "network orchestra" model that provides platforms to bring partners together for transactions and collaborations is almost now a new normal. Hence, the rise of highly valued assets which do not themselves own physical assets, companies, such as Uber, AirBnB, Expedia and the like, are on the rise. I, therefore, cannot help but notice that, in Budget 2018, several of the big-ticket infrastructure expenditure revolve around physical infrastructure – the high-speed rail, the airport and the mega Tuas port. Needless to say, to operate these physical assets would require the corresponding software infrastructure. But there still ought to be a sharper focus on creating non-physical assets and investments. Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam, at an IMF conference just a couple of days ago in Jakarta, spoke about the huge opportunity offered by the vision of a single digital economy for ASEAN and the potential of financial technology (Fintech) and other financial innovations. If Singapore aspires to be a Smart city and nation, playing big not just in our own country but in the region or world-wide, what non-physical assets, especially in digitalisation, are we investing in and creating?[+2 sentences] What are we doing to position ourselves as a leader in the provision and export of non-physical assets to serve not only ASEAN but the rest of the world? Are there any ways by which good solutions that we use internally in Government or in the Public Service can be developed with export as a goal and monetised to add to the national coffer? I know, for instance, of good work done by MOE and the Government Technology Agency (GovTech) in education, such as learning management systems, that I see have the potential to go beyond internal consumption, or even healthcare solutions, for that matter. I, therefore, seek the views of the Minister on how more balance can be granted to the development or investment in non-physical infrastructure assets and how good Government capabilities and solutions can be developed for export as one of the sources for our national revenue.[+5 sentences] Thirdly, on building a future for the vulnerable. In executing our five CDCs' charter to enhance awareness and adoption of SkillsFuture, I find that not enough Singaporeans actually believe or fully appreciate the speed of change and the risk we are all in in a disruptive new economy – jobs that have disappeared or will be disappearing, like word processors and typists, data entry operators, some travel agents, insurance agents; jobs that we see today that never existed before, such as digital market specialists, drone operators, content creators, data scientists, app developers, Uber drivers, driverless car engineers. At the macro level, even if the economy looks good and the unemployment rate looks good – lo, Minister Lim Swee Say had famously said many times that the labour market is not short of jobs, it is short of citizens who possess the appropriate skills, the right skills, to fill the jobs of the new economy. If ordinary Singaporeans are affected by all these massive changes, what more those who are not as mobile, not as adaptable, not as culturally-sensitive to work in the global market or cognitively able – the vulnerable and the lowly-skilled, not out of choice but out of circumstances, what will happen to them? How do we ensure that, indeed, when the tide rises, all boats will rise? In the context of the Singapore economy, as opportunities abound due to technology, due to the rise of the Asian/ASEAN economies, how do we ensure that each Singaporean has a boat to ride the tide with? I, therefore, seek the Minister to consider if a task force or a workgroup can be set up within CFE to specifically seek job opportunities for the vulnerable, the lowly-skilled elderly, the disabled and those who are not as endowed, those who are at risk or vulnerable, so that they will not be left behind, so that they do not simply just become welfare recipients.[+5 sentences] Fourthly, Sir, on bringing out the best in Singaporeans. I am not certain how many Singaporeans, especially those in the middle- and higher-income brackets, are appreciative of Budget 2018's gift of the SG ang pow as a sharing of surplus from the last financial year. But I am almost certain that there will be no end of critics who say the ang pow is too little or too much. A $100 SG Bonus "hongbao", for some, could mean just an additional dinner out for the family or for himself. But to another citizen, the bonus adds to the cash flow to purchase that milk powder or diapers for the family baby or disabled elderly parent. So, let us bring out the best in Singaporeans.[+1 sentence] Just a small request. I seek the Minister to give Singaporeans a choice to donate their SG "hongbao" (the bonus) to their favourite charities, before the SG Bonus is credited to citizens.[+21 sentences] Sir, Budget 2018 should help move Singapore from success to significance and bring out the best in each of us. This is not a job for the Government alone. It is a job for all of us – Singaporeans. It is for all of us, as a country, to imagine that we can become even better versions of ourselves. There is the story of a farmer who often wins awards for growing the best corn in his locale. So, when a journalist asked him for his secret of success for growing this best corn, the farmer replied, to the journalist's surprise, that he shared the corns with his neighbour farmers. The journalist was surprised and asked, "How can you, Mr Farmer, afford to share your best seeds with your neighbours when they are your competitors?" To this, the farmer explained, "Sir, you need to know this. The wind picks up pollen from ripening corns and blows them from field to field. If my neighbours grow inferior corn, the cross-pollination will affect the quality of my own corn." And herein lies the story of successful people and nations – why they should never just stick to Success, worldly Success, but move to Significance. Like the farmer, if we wish to grow good corn, we must help our neighbours grow good corn. Life is all connected. If we want a peaceful life, we must help our neighbours be peaceful as well. If we want to do well, we must seek to help others do well, too. It is not a zero-sum game. In the world of business, I saw many top busy local business leaders, some of them in the Council for the Future Economy, some in the CDC I work with. They are busy business leaders but they gave unselfishly to causes beyond themselves – leaders like Mr Robert Yap from YCH Group who helped start the Logistics Academy for the logistics sector, many of whom are his competitors. Leaders like Mr Vincent Tan of Select Group who is unselfish in encouraging the food and beverage (F&B) sector to try out new technology and SkillsFuture initiatives; leaders like Mr Kang Puay Seng and his partner who, during their days starting Mr Bean, trained and supported adults with disabilities to prepare and sell soya bean products; and leaders like Mr Wee Ee Cheong and Ms Wee Wei Ling who used their business platforms in the banks and hotels to create jobs for the disabled. There are many more giants like them with whom I engage in my CDC and charity work. In North Carolina in the United States (US), students in a school’s technology centre create prosthetic arms using 3D printing for others in need and, at the same time, hone their advanced manufacturing skills. Singapore, as the chair of ASEAN this year, beyond the regional digitalisation plan that Deputy Prime Minister Tharman spoke about in the IMF meeting this week, should look into setting up a fund to encourage Singaporeans to go serve others in ASEAN.[+4 sentences] Two young staff of mine in the CDC, Caleb and Sherlyn Yap, a couple, help villagers in Thailand and Cambodia start chicken farms as a livelihood. Each year, they use their annual leave to do that. I see in this young Singaporean couple not only kindness and contentment but also a sense of purpose and a sense of meaning. Budget 2018 had put in six measures, no less, to foster a spirit of giving. My fellow Mayors and I are thankful that the Minister had paid some attention to the CDCs and increased the funding cap so that the Government will match grants for donations that the CDCs are able to raise.[+1 sentence] It will come in useful for the emerging and existing needs that we identify in each of our Districts. In Central Singapore CDC where I serve, we started a series called ENOUGH TALK to encourage people to not just criticise but take action on issues that they care about, such as the low-skilled elderly who might be doing very manual difficult work at the hawker centres and toilets, and the cardboard collectors, the homeless, the hungry; and such as urging Singapore to support climate action by simply going "plastic-light" or finding ways to reduce styrofoam plates and boxes used at the many buffets and food distribution charity activities for the needy.[+2 sentences] Our Camp Explore programme curates good enrichment classes, holiday programmes. I remember Ms Sylvia Lim and Ms Kuik Shiao Yin have been talking about these to close the inequality gap.
Mr Deputy Speaker7 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Phua, you have one more minute.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng159 words
Good enrichment classes for children from lower-income families so that they, too, have equal access to opportunities and holiday enrichment opportunities like their peers from the more affluent families. Therefore, the CDCs and other members of the SG Cares movement encourage Singaporeans to join us to help our neighbours grow good crop.[+2 sentences] They say it is possible to give away and become wealthier, richer. It is also possible to hold on too tight to what we own and lose them all. So, Singapore, do give in order to become wealthier.[+1 sentence] In conclusion, Sir, I thank the Minister and his team for this “better-than-good” Budget. I know the team had put in tremendous efforts seeking views, way before the Budget was stitched, and mulled over the many options and even spent much time preparing communications materials so that Singaporeans will comprehend and partake in the post-Budget discussions.[+2 sentences] For that, please accept my deepest appreciation. I strongly support the Budget, Sir.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan.
Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan (Nominated Member)2158 words
[+13 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, as I rise in support of this year's Budget Statement, allow me, first, to record my thanks to all the translators who are working so hard over the next few days. I record my thanks as well to the to the Tamil translators, in particular, led by Mr Palaniappan, for preparing, with the Tamil Language Council, a very useful glossary of English-to-Tamil translated words. Anything that I say from this point onwards in Tamil that may sound intelligent is thanks to them. Anything which I may say which does not sound sensible is my fault alone! Having said this, it is only fitting, Mr Deputy Speaker, that I begin my speech with a few words in the longest surviving classical language in the world, an official vernacular in Singapore, and my mother tongue language, Tamil. (In Tamil): Mr Deputy Speaker, last week, Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat gave a praiseworthy, forward-thinking Budget Statement. The Statement reminded me of a couplet written by a great sage called "Thiruvalluvar" which says that the best way to guard oneself is not to slight the powerful or the elders. Applied to the Budget Statement, this means we should not abandon our respected elders who sacrificed for our nation's progress, do not ignore their advice, understand their dilemmas and, importantly, do not forget their dreams. In this regard, the Budget policy serves as a supportive "walking stick" for elders. I believe it will encourage a spirit of giving in every Singaporean. Through this Budget policy, this fundamental tenet is not only reserved for this year, but, like a banyan tree, can grow roots deep into the community and support a fiscally sustainable and secure future for all of us as well. It will also support our gurus or our elders. I will continue my speech in English. (In English): Mr Deputy Speaker, among other things, Minister Heng has asked the Government to accept an "integrated" plan, one that could pool together resources and pool efforts across stakeholders. I am delighted, for example, that senior care services will be led by a single Ministry, MOH, to "enable these services to be planned and delivered holistically", an eminently sensible first step, Mr Deputy Speaker, as those of us who are caregivers to elderly parents and relatives will acknowledge.[+2 sentences] Let me share a personal experience, if I may, about the role of caretakers of the elderly, which extends beyond their medical or palliative care alone. I was one such caregiver to a grand aunt and a grand uncle. The face of a caregiver is usually seen through a child. But increasingly, given that one in four Singaporeans by the year 2030, as we know, is going to be above the age of 65, and soon many of us will not just have elderly parents or grandparents, we will also have extended families who deserve and need urgent medical care but increasingly financial assistance.[+4 sentences] One such example in my case is with my grand aunt and grand uncle. They are fortunate because there are quite a few members around but they do not have children of their own. So, they turned to family members who do not live with them. They have an extremely good Town Council in a mature HDB estate where they live. They have an MP whom they greatly respect and admire whom I shall not name, in case I am playing favourites. But what I will say is that after numerous visits to the HDB office to talk about how to talk about reverse mortgages and a sell-back package which are both financially beneficial for them in the next years in their twilight years – they are both above the age of 85 – there is one question that breaks the heart, and that question is when they asked a grand nephew: "What happens if I live beyond the 15 years that have been promised in my last lease I can take?" It is especially hard and tough to swallow because this is the third house they have gone through because of rightsizing.[+7 sentences] As an example, they had not planned for their financial retirement. So, every time they needed money, the one asset they would use would be the one that is over their head. So, you sell your house and use the income that you have for the next few years. How many Singaporeans may be in the same boat but may not have the same kind of MP who would sit down with them and explain to them what they could do, or may not have family members who are either legally trained or professionally trained to guide them over the next steps? This is the question that troubles me, Mr Deputy Speaker. I think this is something that we should be thinking about. As we look at the next steps beyond our elderly – and I firmly believe and support the welfare-centric Budget that Minister Heng has put before us but I do think and I will speak about this in a moment – we have to spend more time communicating the importance of such a Budget to Singaporeans. When I speak to my fellow Singaporean friends, colleagues, a question that has emerged with this year’s Budget Statement and which has been repeated time and time again is: "Why are we tightening the purse strings now?" This is a natural question, Mr Deputy Speaker, because we have done so remarkably well this financial year.[+13 sentences] And I must record my thanks at this point to, beyond everyone else, the Jurong Town Corporation and the Monetary Authority of Singapore. Yes, it may be one-off. It may not ever happen again. But the question still comes: when we are not combating a deficit, why are we tightening the purse strings? Is it because we fear that our small and open economy is vulnerable to fluctuations in the global economy and financial markets? Of course, it is. But this is not new to us. We are accustomed to Singapore and its limitations as a low-lying, small island state. What stands out to me in this Budget that Minister Heng has put before us is that it does not seem to be driven only by fears. And this, I celebrate. On the contrary, there is a savvy inherent in his proposed measures. Minister Heng suggests, for example, that Government Ministries, much like private enterprises, will need to look for more productive and innovative ways to run their own agencies. Simply put, they should adopt a corporate work ethic. He does not use these words, but it is inherent in the Budget speech that there should be this corporate work ethic and innovation that should be infused within Government-owned infrastructure companies, for example, Government agencies, to ensure that, very much like how private companies fund acquisition and expansion, so should our Statutory Boards and infrastructure companies.[+1 sentence] Mr Deputy Speaker, many professionals and business persons will see the merit of Minister Heng’s financial plan and they actually welcome it. But I do ask this: how will this message be communicated from this point onwards to the non-professionals, to the non-business people, to everyday Singaporeans who would have to deal with the direct taxation that will be coming in 2021 to 2025?[+3 sentences] Beyond adopting a corporate culture, Mr Deputy Speaker, the Government has a solemn responsibility to explain, in plain and practical terms, how these taxes tomorrow will benefit us, our elderly and our children in further time to come. The Government may wish to explain why Singaporeans should go from maintaining their own parents alone, which is their current social and legal compact, to assisting with the maintenance of the nation’s elderly as a whole. The Government should explain whether Singapore will continue to be a "liveable" city if we are consistently ranked amongst the most expensive cities in the world. Is there a real likelihood, many have asked me, on the current projections as to whether GST could be further raised beyond 2021 if, despite prudent spending and the "save and borrow" scheme and the policy we have for infrastructure projects, new gaps emerge?[+27 sentences] If there are new gaps, will the Government then think about revising upwards the current GST, as an example? If the answer is, which I imagine it should be, "well, yes, it will be reviewed from time to time", the recurrent question that Singaporeans will ask, and they will ask it now is: why not rely a little more heavily, not completely, but a little more heavily, on NIRC? Why can they not be increased to finance our needs? This will come back again and again every time there is an increase in GST and in any other tax. Alternatively, they will ask "should we not have more progressive wealth taxes"? So, the best way to deal with this now, when we are planning for 2021, is to speak to Singaporeans at this point. In all honesty, Mr Deputy Speaker, the questions and clarifications that I am raising, while directed at Minister Heng and MOF, really are at the Government as a whole, because they warrant a broader conversation. Singaporeans’ concerns over public expenditure are real, and they need to be heard, if possible, so that they can be addressed. They need to be heard in a context where this message can be unpacked. And I say "unpacked" because I enjoyed the healthy debate that we had today. The clarification over inequality and inequity ‒ that is interesting to me. But that is because I am an academic, Mr Deputy Speaker. That is because I am legally trained, and that is because of the people who spoke. I know from my own experience that two of them are expert JC debaters and one is a really good lawyer. That is the instinct, Mr Deputy Speaker. But what about every other Singaporean? Minister Heng mentioned in his speech that "Our Singapore Conversation" (OSC) in 2011 or 2012, if I remember, gave him a window into what Singaporeans were thinking at that time. It gave him a unique opportunity, in his words, "to converse with Singaporeans about their aspirations for themselves and for Singapore”. As a member of that Committee, together with many other people in this House, I would affirm the value of the OSC as a participatory process, and I would ask the Government to take measures to ensure that new dialogues could signal some semblance of "participatory budgeting". These conversations would perhaps be by the Ministries individually with groups that have relevant concerns: where persons, Singaporeans, are given a sense that their views matter and could one day help determine how public finances are spent and how Budgets are implemented; where it is made plain that welfare-centric expenditure tracks demographic trends. We have heard this, and I believe it to be true, as I am experiencing it as a caregiver. But this has to be explained to people who may not have the same burdens or the same considerations on their mind all the time, beginning with the needy aged. So, that is the first demographic trend that we have all agreed on. But in time to come, I am sure there will be other demographic trends which require our welfare-centric concern. Singaporeans are not fully accustomed to responding to these welfare-centric trends, and we should take the time to explain the importance of doing so. Traditionally, Mr Deputy Speaker, socioeconomic issues have fallen solely within the remit of the Government and, sometimes, through civil society. But going beyond this, surely our corporate citizens also have a role to play, and they should be giving back in some way or the other. Just as Singaporeans are asked to give back to society, I, therefore, welcome initiatives that encourage corporate giving. But I would ask that beyond the Business and Institutions of a Public Character (BIPC) Partnership Scheme, the Ministry could consider a national action plan on corporate social responsibility. To prosper over time, corporations should not only deliver financial performance but should also see how they could make a positive societal contribution. Just as the Public Service in Singapore is being encouraged to adopt, as I have mentioned earlier, a corporate ethic and culture to "do well", corporations, too, should be encouraged, Mr Deputy Speaker, or perhaps even required, to adopt the core culture of the Public Service, that is, an unstinting commitment to "do good" in the public interest.[+2 sentences] Finally, Mr Deputy Speaker, as we look forward to the next generation of this nation’s political leadership, Singaporeans want to be in safe hands, to be led by a team, by people whom they can trust to understand the financial opportunities, brace for the headwinds that may lie ahead, but, above all, who have Singaporeans’ welfare and contentment chief in their minds and in their hearts. I support the Budget, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Mr Deputy Speaker16 words
[+1 sentence]We also want to thank the Tamil interpreter for helping to translate what you said earlier.
Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan3 words
[+1 sentence]Of course, Sir.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Christopher de Souza.
Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah)2293 words
[+50 sentences]Sir, this year's Budget is flexible. It is clinical in its approach to dealing with what Singapore needs in the future. It is not bogged down with theoretical purity. It is relevant and bold. It provides assistance to those who need it most. It does not discourage prosperity nor does it discourage diligence. It allows Singapore to remain competitive. In short, this years’ Budget is ambidextrous – a mix of left- and right-leaning policies. It shows that we are not concerned as much about theoretical purity as we are about doing what is correct in each circumstance. Sir, unbridled capitalism, as well as extreme socialism, are to be avoided. Both have negative effects on populations. There are problems with either extremes in economic theories. From the now-dissolved Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), we can see that there is a problem with socialism in the form of Marxist Communism. Even in China, we see the need for exceptions to socialism in the form of free economic zones in Shenzhen and other designated cities and the Special Administrative Region in Hong Kong. Today, Shenzhen is known as the Silicon Delta. Hence, even socialism needs exceptions to survive. On the other extreme, we see the breakdowns of pure capitalism ‒ unbridled capitalism. According to David Korten, extreme capitalism has the same problems as that of extreme Marxist socialism. For example, economic power concentrates in unaccountable centralised institutions – the state, in the case of Marxism; and the transnational corporation, in the case of capitalism. The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer. This is because those who control wealth accumulate it at a faster rate than the economy can produce it. This trend continues, unless something disrupts the status quo. Muller, the author of "The Mind and the Market: Capitalism in Western Thought", says it this way: "Inequality is an inevitable product of capitalist activity...Indeed, one of the most robust findings of contemporary social scientific inquiry is that as the gap between high-income and low-income families has increased, the educational and employment achievement gaps between the children of these families have increased even more." Hence, pure, unbridled capitalism has its problems ‒ that of extreme, entrenched income divides. Therefore, what we need in Singapore is to have a flexible fiscal policy. We cannot be rigid or be slaves to fiscal ideology just for ideology’s sake. And this is, in my view, what this Budget seeks to achieve. Financial analyst Ram Ramesh wrote in the Trinidad Express and he expresses it this way: "Labels, such as socialism and capitalism, are making men in power forget that their role is to administer the right medicine regardless of what label it carries… In these times, it is not the philosophical underpinnings that will guarantee survival but their own ability to adapt to the rapidly changing economic landscapes. Not adapting can cause them their very survival." In other words, when we are too inflexible, we are unable to respond to changing situations. When we are too concerned about avoiding a certain label or fitting into a particular mould, we tie ourselves to a deadweight and we lose. Therefore, what we need is a flexible approach – an economic policy for our time, for our future, and for the best for Singapore. An array of fiscal options should be on the table with one caveat – that our foundations do not change. What are these foundations? One, a strong military. Two, securing our water supply. Three, stewardship, that is, making difficult national decisions today for the sake of a better future tomorrow. Four, freedom of religion. Five, education. There are more foundations, but, to me, these are among the most crucial. Therefore, what we need is a flexible fiscal policy anchored onto unshakeable foundations but without a single-minded fixation on theoretical purity. Dr Goh Keng Swee was known for being a practical economist, doing what works and not necessarily aiming for theoretical purity in economics. An example is in how he "envisioned an important role for the state-government promotion of public goods and externalities… through institutions as the Economic Development Board (EDB) and the Jurong Town Corporation (JTC)" while being “for the most part… a believer in the efficacy of the markets and the private enterprise system.” This illustrates how we should not be afraid to try less popular policies and be free to think out of the box. Just as that economic policy was suited for its time, we, too, need an economic policy that speaks to our time ‒ not just our current needs but for our future together as well. This year's Budget is flexible. It is clinical in its approach to dealing with what Singapore needs in the future. In short, this years' Budget is ambidextrous, as I have said, a mix of left- and right-leaning policies. On the one hand, we have policies leaning towards the left. And, on the other hand, we have policies leaning towards the right. As regards the left, the increase in GST will be implemented in a way that tries to ease the extra burden on lower-income families ‒ the permanent GST Voucher scheme will be increased and offset packages will help families adjust to the increase. The Budget also looks to render more support for healthcare and education by having more meal coverage for secondary school students under the Schools Meal Programme and increasing the merit bursary quantum for pre-university students. There is also a review on subsidising premiums to ElderShield for the lower- and middle-income to keep healthcare affordable.[+2 sentences] We are doing all these while also retaining and preserving some right-leaning policies, for example, personal income tax was not increased. Nor was corporate tax. Indeed, this Budget continues to subsidise business costs, employers and business owners through the continuation of the Wage Credit Scheme, the enhanced and extended Corporate Income Tax Rebate, and the Productivity Solutions Grant.[+8 sentences] This is why I view the budget as a strategic fiscal plan to meet the needs of Singapore and Singaporeans present and future. It is also the reason why I do not agree with Mr Pritam Singh's criticism of the Budget. If I heard correctly, Mr Singh mentioned that he is unable to support the GST hike at this point in time. I take that to mean that he is not closed to a GST hike but just not "at this point in time". I also take it that Mr Singh knows that we are not raising the GST now. Therefore, the real query for us to answer is this: why are we announcing now a hike that is to take place three years or more from today? The answer is stewardship, honesty and being upfront with the people we serve. These are the expenditures we must meet. One, healthcare for all Singaporeans, including those who helped to build Singapore, the budget for MOH has grown from $4 billion in 2010 to $10 billion this year, to "at least" $13 billion from 2020.[+4 sentences] This includes expanding healthcare infrastructure, such as public hospital, community hospital and nursing home capacity; enhanced subsidies for specialised outpatient clinics, as well as intermediate and long-term care and subsidies on premiums on MediShield Life. These also accommodate longer life expectancy and an ageing population. Two, security. There is even more need to "take action" and strengthen our security and defence in the face of "turbulent geopolitics" and the threat of a terror attack at its highest. In 2010, spending by the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), the Ministry of Defence (Mindef) and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) on security was $14.8 billion and it has since increased to $19.5 billion, or 32%, on security in 2016, amounting to about a quarter of the national Budget.[+6 sentences] More cameras are being installed. Video Trawling and Analytics System to detect, track and recognise faces is being developed; and officers are being trained with simulations and are being equipped with pistols that can hold more bullets. Further, all MHA departments are expected to be housed at a single complex by 2023 for better coordinated responses in a crisis. Expenditure number three, education. To help everyone reach his or her potential, expenditure per child has increased. This starts even at a young age. By 2020, spending on the preschool sector will be at $1.7 billion per year.[+36 sentences] It is a colossal task to give every child a good foundation from a younger age, especially preschool. But we are doing just that. We are also rolling out programmes to increase financial literacy, digital skills in helping mid-career Singaporeans reskill and upskill in the changing economic landscape. So, revenue raising must go up. One way is to raise GST. And we are being upfront with the people we serve. That is honest politics. That is why I disagree with Mr Low Thia Khiang's position that we should not have disclosed the future GST increase now so as to get "buy-in" for the broader vision of this Budget. But my counter is this. We cannot conceal from the people we serve that this revenue will be needed in three or more years. That is transparent politics. Much of the increased expenditure is important for meeting the needs of Singaporeans in the long term, for the future. That principle of stewardship is not to be scoffed at or dismissed lightly. It is a very rare commodity. Mr Pritam Singh also mentioned that we keep on piling accolades on people at the top. That took me by surprise and I would like to respond to that point because the statement goes against a lot of what I and many in this House stand for. In fact, many of us in this House stand for the uplifting of the vulnerable. We do speak for the voiceless and we celebrate each step taken towards a better life. Let me give a concrete constituency example, which also responds to Ms Sylvia Lim's point about rental home dwellers. A resident whom I serve currently stays in a rental flat with his wife and three daughters – all five of them. Their daughters are all studying at the moment, one in JC, the other in polytechnic and the eldest at university. Recently, he shared with me that the family has secured a HDB loan and they will be moving to a flat they can call their own. So, he would be a home owner. It reminds me of another family, a single mother who works as a security guard to raise her family, living in a rental flat. We worked hard to piece together and appealed to HDB for her to purchase her own HDB flat. The approval was given. I should say thank you to HDB for that, and she is now a home owner. We both celebrated when we heard the news. That is upward mobility. That is social mobility. How could that happen? Flexible economic policies. Caring for the lower-income and, at the same time, being business-friendly so that the economy thrives, and being honest with the people we serve about Singaporeans' future needs and how to meet them. Mr Pritam Singh has suggested using the revenue raised from land sales to fund expenditure. In particular, Mr Singh suggested a cap on the amount of earnings that can be used, such as not more than 20% of the value of average land sales over 20 years or 20% of land sales for that year, whichever is lower. The point here is that we do not want to build in a formula which promotes indiscriminate or rash sales of land to increase revenue for immediate spending. The suggestion on 20% of land sales for that year does not solve that issue; neither would value of average land sales over 20 years resolve that issue as, one, land sales revenue can fluctuate over a long period of time; and two, even if it is pegged to the average land sales over 20 years, this average can be pushed upward each year to more and more sales.[+2 sentences] Hence, instead of building in a formula which promotes possible indiscriminate quick sales of land to increase revenue for immediate spending, it is more fiscally prudent to allow land sales to form part of the Reserves and then investing those Reserves to achieve healthy NIRC. Ms Sylvia Lim is of the view that because the reversionary title of 10- or 99-year leases return to the Government, land sales is not one-off, that we can use the revenue from land sales and not put all of that in our Reserves. The point is not that the reversionary lease returns to the Government but that the reversionary lease only returns to the Government 100 years later or 10 years later and you would have spent the income from the sales this year. This does not lend itself to financial prudence. It is better to treat revenue generated from land sales as Reserves, invest it and use the net income from it up to 50%.[+3 sentences] Sir, as stewards of our resources for the next generation of Singaporeans, we need to be accountable and responsible to make Singapore even more liveable and stronger for the next generation. As stewards, we cannot have a single-minded fixation on theoretical purity. Sir, when we see someone's success or progress is benefiting the community, we win as a people. When the Government projects far into the future and takes decisive fiscal action now, we win as a state.[+1 sentence] And when we are able to see that where we are born is not where we will end, we win as a nation. On the basis that we are called to be stewards in this House, I support the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Minister Ng Chee Meng.
The Minister for Education (Schools) and Second Minister for Transport (Mr Ng Chee Meng)288 words
[+14 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, I have not intended to speak, but as I listened to the Workers' Party's speeches, I get increasingly baffled. I hear across the different speeches that they essentially agree with the many programmes proposed in the Budget. In fact, they want the Government to do more – in education, take care of the elderly, doing more for the women, more for the disadvantaged. And in one Member's speech, she focused her speech on inequality and emphasised that inequality is a threat to our nation, that we have to "take concrete steps to remedy it". The Workers' Party agrees with many of the Budget proposals. Mr Low Thia Khiang said that this is a forward-looking Budget to anchor Singapore firmly in the future. But, yet, the Workers' Party says that the GST is a distraction. Mr Deputy Speaker, our Government has put together a concrete forward-looking Budget so that we can resource all these programmes for Singaporeans. In this Budget, we have outlined to Singaporeans how we can take care of our seniors, to better prepare our children for the future, to prime our businesses, to help our workers in the dramatic economic changes taking place and the technological disruptions. We want to help the disadvantaged in society more. And yet, after all the speeches that I have listened carefully to in this Chamber, the Workers' Party thinks that finding the ways to fund all these programmes is a distraction. They agree with the programmes but that talking about how to fund these programmes is a distraction. I find it baffling. I think it is critical, honest and right that we outline to Singaporeans how we intend to chart Singapore's future forward in a sustainable manner.
Mr Low Thia Khiang15 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to seek a clarification to what the Minister said.
Mr Deputy Speaker7 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Low, do you want a clarification?
Mr Low Thia Khiang218 words
[+1 sentence]Yes, because the Minister is referring to my speech where I said it is a distraction. I thought the most important part of this Budget is anchoring Singapore. I am not saying that revenue is not important, but GST is not part of the Budget measures at this Budget.[+4 sentences] So, I thought it would be better that you announce the intended GST increase of two percentage points at another time. We can then have a full debate here. Thus, I wonder whether it is better to announce it separately and have a debate here, or to debate it at the Budget. We have never said that the Government will have to fund everything without any revenue. What we are saying, and we are questioning whether or not, is there any other avenue to look at instead of raising GST because it affects a lot of people.[+6 sentences] We are looking at whether there are possibilities of other revenues. Some Members have spoken about it. And I think we can explore it. We can have a full debate on this. My point was that this is an important Budget, a Budget that is looking forward to the future. But the GST increase can be a distraction because then we end up debating whether there is a need to increase GST.
Mr Deputy Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Minister Ng.
Mr Ng Chee Meng66 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, I have in hand what Mr Low Thia Khiang said in the 2017 COS debate on the MOF cut. I quote, "I hope he", meaning the Minister for Finance, "can be upfront with Singaporeans now so that they are not blindsided by the Government as they were with the sudden 30% increase in water price". You cannot have the cake and eat it.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Low Thia Khiang.
Mr Low Thia Khiang139 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand by what I said. I am not asking you to hide the increase or intended increase in GST. I am not asking the Government to do that. What I am saying is that, by all means, announce it well before you want to increase it. It is good to announce it beforehand but the question is whether you need to announce it together with this Budget.[+1 sentence] Mr Deputy Speaker, I have asked whether the Government will increase GST at the last election. And I think Deputy Prime Minister Tharman promised that we have enough money to spend, we will not increase GST. The next election is 2020 or 2021, so you are going to increase it after the next election, good to announce it now.[+1 sentence] Then, we can debate it at the election rally.
[+14 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, being the penultimate speaker in this marathon Budget Debate stretching to a third day, there is always this pressure not to cover the same ground as the speakers who have gone before me. I had to revise my speech several times. I realised through the revisions, they have helped me better understand what is at stake in this year’s Budget. So, it is not all that bad being the second last speaker. I cannot speak for Mr Saktiandi Supaat though. This House has heard impassioned pleas from hon Members on the focus areas for this year’s Budget. For instance, there have been clarion calls to further increase social spending to take care of less fortunate people and improve their social mobility, address more issues associated with the ageing population, and providing better opportunities for all, young and old. At the same time, all hon Members have agreed that we need to ensure that the Budget is financially prudent. There are divergent views on how this can be achieved. It is important that we in this House try our best to build a consensus on at least the broad areas of strategy that this Budget represents. Everyone must agree that we should not dissent for the sake of dissent. So, what should be the framework for us Members to build this consensus? I will return to this question shortly. But before that, I want to, first, deal with a point made by hon Member Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin in her speech yesterday. It may be useful to outline her speech first. She said the Government's decision to increase the Goods and Services Tax (GST) to 9% is justified as a pragmatic decision. She said the Government's decision not to raise the Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) to above the 50% mark is also justified as a pragmatic decision.[+31 sentences] She further cites a report in support of the view that the Government is excessively prudent with its large Reserves. She then asked how much is then enough for us. She also said "every tilt towards the side of pragmatism is simultaneously a tilt away from the side of our ideals". With respect, I do not see pragmatism on one hand and being true to our ideals on the other as binary choices giving rise to a zero-sum game. This kind of approach would give rise to polarising views which would make it harder for us to reach a consensus on what is the right approach to be taken in our Budget. Let me explain by dealing with the example of Reserves that she raised in her speech. Ms Kuik asked how much is enough for us. From my perspective, no one can tell. In a financial crisis, the value of assets, especially those marked to market will shrink. We saw that in the Global Financial Crisis when the international bank shares dropped. We cannot predict with any certainty how much we need to overcome the next big crisis that will hit us. As an analogy, think of the Indian Ocean tsunami. Nobody predicted that. We can only make an educated guess. Using the pragmatism/idealism dichotomy that she raised, what should the Government then do? Should it be idealistic, assume that the world is kind and, if Singapore, a small country with no natural resources, needs help to prop up its finances, it will get help, and it will be treated fairly, equally and equitably? With due respect, is this a realistic assumption? Or should it be pragmatic, because it is a steward of 3.6 million Singaporean lives and that of their progeny, and ensure that the Reserves can be tapped to save us from the next crises whenever it may happen? As a father who has a stake in the future of his children, I am clear in my mind what the Government should do. What is more important, I would respectfully suggest, is to appreciate whether the approach taken in this Budget is in keeping with our values. This is how I suggest we can forge a consensus as Members on the Budget. I would like to quote former United States (US) Vice President Joe Biden, who said, "Don’t tell me what you value, show me your budget and I’ll tell you what you value". Members of this House would recall the debate on the Government White Paper on Shared Values in 1991 in this House during the tenure of the second-generation leaders led by Emeritus Senior Minister Goh as Prime Minister. The first three shared values are: (a) nation before community and society above self; (b) family as the basic unit of society; and (c) community support and respect for the individual. The Budget reflects these values. Investment in economy and infrastructure is needed to secure the future of Singapore as a nation. This is not growth for growth’s sake, as emphasised by Minister Heng. It is about making sure that our families remain intact and we and our family members enjoy a good standard of living. There is also a healthy dose of idealism in this Budget. Just look at the plans that the Minister has suggested to take advantage of the opportunities within Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). At same time, the funding of the investments is done in a prudent way, which is also in keeping with our values in putting our nation first. The GST is proposed to be increased in the next term of Government after carefully studying all other options.[+8 sentences] The hon Member for Aljunied, Mr Low Thia Khiang, said reference to this is a distraction and unnecessary. With respect, I fail to see how this can be so. We have already been committing to expenditure well into the 2030 and beyond. Surely, a responsible Government should also signal how it plans to raise the revenue for the same period. Reserves are not being used to fund expenses. I endorse this forceful point that was made by hon Member Mr Christopher de Souza yesterday on the danger of using proceeds from land sales, which make up our Reserves, to fund expenditure. That is not to say Reserves cannot be used. The way the Budget is pitched, it represents a fair usage of Reserves and allocation of responsibilities between the present and future generations. Borrowings for infrastructural developments are to be secured by guarantee, subject to the President's approval, which, in turn, is secured by the Reserves.[+25 sentences] Payment obligations on the loans would also fall on the future generations. The 50% NIRC rate, in my view, represents a fair balance between ensuring a bright future as a nation and the present funding needs of the community. There is no loading in favour of one or another. This better represents our Asian values. Once we change this, it will be a slippery slope and there will be a tendency to adjust a higher percentage to accommodate for higher expenditure. This is my answer to the hon Member Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan who suggested in his speech yesterday that the Government listen to views expressed by some Singaporeans that the NIRC rate should be increased. Mr Speaker, may I speak in Tamil, please. (In Tamil): Yesterday, Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan spoke about the Government listening to the people's concern on raising revenue. I agree but this is not enough. There are several opinions on this. As such, the Government should consider and decide which approach will be suitable for the people, and then the Government should explain its decision clearly to the people. (In English): Next, the concrete steps in providing greater support for families recognise the primacy of the family as the basic unit of society and the important role it plays in nation-building. Finally, the programmes to support individuals, especially our seniors, are consonant with the values of community support and respect for the individuals. For these reasons, I support the Budget because it accords with our shared values. Before I leave this point, I would like to return to an aspect of the speech Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin made in reference to JC and polytechnic students she spoke to, constantly using the word "uncertain" when asked to describe their future. If I were there at the discussion, I would acknowledge that, indeed, our future as a nation and as individuals has and will always be uncertain. This has been the case since 1965. We survived because we remained together, worked hard putting the nation before community and community before self. I would point out that we are in a better situation than before because of a prudent and forward-thinking Government. I would highlight the importance of being resilient and the need for the students to be the best they can be for themselves, their families and our country. If our youths can accept this, we can be sure that we will have a strong future. Having said that, I have three observations to make on the Budget. First, the Wage Credit Scheme (WCS). Minister Heng decided to extend WCS to overcome near-term challenges because, in his words, "Some firms remain concerned about business costs" even though our economy has picked up. We, therefore, will see a second extension of WCS which has been running since 2013. Based on estimates, the Government would have committed up to $7.2 billion for this programme. For the period 2013 to 2015, it is about $3.6 billion; 2016 to 2017, it is $1.8 billion; and an additional $1.8 billion for the next three years.[+9 sentences] In 2015, when the Government first proposed the extension of WCS in Parliament, concerns were raised in this House. The hon Member Assoc Prof Randolph Tan warned that WCS may land up in delaying the adjustments that businesses should make in order to complete restructuring. In other words, WCS should not unwittingly become a wage subsidy crutch. The hon Deputy Prime Minister Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam explained then that there is a need to adopt a phased approach whilst the foreign manpower policy is tightened and the labour market becomes tighter. Otherwise, there would be an impact on weaker businesses, especially startups. There is also a need to support those who are rejoining the economy and may need time to enhance their skills and increase their productivity. I support this approach but, given that this is the second time an extension is being sought, I am of the view that the WCS criteria should be sharpened so that we focus on the firms which are concerned about business costs. I do not see why a muscular company, say, a Government-linked company or a listed company, can benefit from WCS in the same way as a small enterprise. Also, the drivers for WCS, when implemented in 2013, were the need to improve productivity and the tight labour market. Productivity growth for 2017 is 4.5%, highest since 2010. Citizen unemployment rate for 2017, based on the Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) preliminary figures, stands at 3.3%, better than in 2013 when it was 2.9%.[+23 sentences] In light of the improved situation, why does the Government see a need to further extend WCS by another three years, which is a year longer than the first extension, which was for two years? Second point, promoting partnership. Minister Heng Swee Keat identified the forging of strong partnerships as a third key enabler to capture future opportunities, especially in Asia and ASEAN in particular. He pointed out: "Competition is not the only driving force in our economy. Cooperation is also key." He went on to identify platforms for partnership, such as Partnerships for Capability Transformation (PACT), Global Innovation Alliance, ASEAN Innovation Network, and announced the setting up of the Infrastructure Office. I support the focus on capturing future opportunities in Asia and ASEAN to grow the Singapore economy. There is, however, a need to overcome the default mindset of companies which are used to competing with one another. This will not be easy. Also, PACT contemplates large organisations to partner small companies. This is not a partnership of equals. Recognising this, in a Business Times article published on 8 November 2016, Mr Lim Hwee Seng and Ms Bernadine Huang of PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), stated as follows: "This scheme remains out of the reach of the smaller-scale small and medium enterprises (SMEs). More often than not, large organisations will choose to work with the bigger SMEs, and not the smaller ones. We suggest for PACT to be extended to allow bigger-scale SMEs to work together with smaller-scale SMEs and not just large organisations vis-a-vis SMEs." How would the Government promote the forging of strong partnerships in these circumstances? In particular, how would it ensure that the smaller SMEs would benefit from PACT? This is especially important in the technology space where there are a good number of startups and small companies which could potentially benefit from venturing overseas in partnership with large organisations. I note that the 2001 Economic Review Committee, in its report which was issued in 2003, a similar call was made. It promoted a cluster approach amongst companies venturing overseas, where larger companies lead a cluster of enterprises, including SMEs. May I ask what has been the Government’s experience in promoting such partnerships? What lessons can we draw from the past? Final point ‒ strengthening social safety nets for those in need. I am very heartened to note the concrete plans for Budget 2018 to build on the SG Cares movement. On the aspect of financial support for charities, I note that the total donations have increased from $2 billion in 2011 to $2.7 billion in 2017.[+1 sentence] One big contributor is Tote Board, through its grant-making activities across sectors, such as Arts, Community Development, Education, Health, Social Service and Sports. In financial year (FY) 2016/2017, Tote Board approved disbursements of $459 million to these sectors.[+1 sentence] This amounts to about 17% of the donations. In the past five financial years beginning from 2012, Tote Board collected an average of about $150 million from casino entry levies per year, which is used to fund its grant-making activities.[+2 sentences] Casino entry levies have not changed since 2010, not even adjusted for inflation over the past eight years. May I ask why this is so? Increasing the casino entry levy will enhance the safeguard to protect Singaporeans and Permanent Residents (PRs) from the ill-effects of gambling and, at the same time, allow charities to be better supported through Tote Board’s grant-making activities.[+1 sentence] With that, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker6 words
[+1 sentence]And finally, we have Mr Saktiandi.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh)64 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, like what Mr Murali Pillai has mentioned, I think it is a great honour to be the last speaker. But I think Mr Murali has done great justice in terms of trying to wrap up some of the points made by other Members. I am not sure whether I should try and keep it brief or try to be on point.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Brief is always good.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat2266 words
[+7 sentences]But I find that the Budget takes a very detailed approach to the challenges that Singapore will face in the next five years and the Minister for Finance has scrutinised the various revenue platforms and carefully considered how best we should manage this against our expenditure, especially on building the infrastructure necessary for the future and the rising expenditure on healthcare and security. The hallmark of this Government has always been to plan ahead, including this time round, providing forward guidance on its fiscal plans. Based on the past two days' debate, I think it has also led to a healthy discussion on our fiscal sustainability and reserve adequacy as well. This is an important issue to lay bare, in particular, for a small and open economy such as Singapore, as huge amounts of money move in and out of Singapore all the time. This is of benefit to us, especially as a financial centre, but it can bring with it risks that we need to buffer against, so as not to take risk leading to major job losses. And I think that is the penultimate key issue ‒ the job losses that might arise from this. After yesterday's debate, I was looking at statistics overnight. For example, to put things in perspective, based on 2016 data, Singapore's foreign direct investment (FDI) stock is S$1.4 trillion.[+3 sentences] This is quite substantial. This is no fun and games. This is a huge amount. If there is a loss of confidence or catastrophe and, let us say, 30% only of the FDIs were to move out, it will wipe out S$400 billion. And we should note that the Monetary Authority of Singapore's (MAS') official foreign reserves are only $370 billion, and this is just 30% of the FDIs. "FDI", if I may define it, is actually the amount of investments by foreign multinational companies (MNCs) or multinational enterprises investing in Singapore.[+7 sentences] This S$400 billion is what actually leaves Singapore's shores, and we will need money to rebuild for jobs if this goes out. And I remind Members again that this is only 30% of the FDI amount. So, we are fortunate to have a good team handling our Reserves. They have been able to secure good returns from year to year to supplement our Reserves. I must, at this point, congratulate them and the Ministry of Finance (MOF) for an excellent job. The point made by Ms Kuik Shiao Yin in her speech yesterday about being pragmatic and shifting from pragmatism and moving away from idealism, I think is the point that I shared just now in terms of statistics. So, being pragmatic today is actually quite important so that tomorrow's kids can have a space to realise their dreams and ideals. That is an important point I want to share today from that perspective. I am glad also with the Minister for Finance's assurance in his speech that we need to take the right approach to have future generations in part bear financial responsibility for infrastructure projects that are built for future needs.[+34 sentences] At this juncture, Mr Speaker, please bear with me. I am trying to share a bit in terms of using a localised version of the island parable sketched by the late American economist Paul Samuelson of Massachusetts Institute of Technology to set the context about the overlapping generational issues that we face before my comments and questions later on. Let us assume we have this island which is home to unusually tall rambutan trees ‒ Samuelson uses cocoa trees and I am using rambutan trees here to give a localised version ‒ and also hungry people ‒ one young and one old generation ‒ and little else. The rambutan trees are our surpluses and reserves, and the fruits are our returns from our reserves. The trees reflect the island's strong fundamental. So, the young among the people would climb the trees and pick the fruits. Take note that the fruit must be eaten quickly before it is spoilt by the hot weather. The older people are physically incapable to climb and pick the fruit. Neither could they buy fruit from the young, as they have nothing to offer in exchange. So, if the elders had saved the fruit from their youth, it would not work. The stockpile would have rotted with the passage of time. So, the solution: the young gives to the old the fruit they pick and, in return, the next generation will do the same for them when they, too, grow old. Thus, the young sort of pays it forward. This also serves as a link between two generations. The scheme works, Samuelson pointed out, only because “new generations are always coming along”. I will pause at this moment and say this may be an oversimplified world I am painting, but the same core values and principles have been applied in Singapore. So, past and current generations always looking forward and thinking about the future and caring for the less fortunate. In Singapore’s context, things have evolved with practical policies introduced in the past 50 years. Our young can acquire a durable asset, say, a Housing and Development Board (HDB) flat, and our Government buys reserve assets and can replant half the rambutan fruits or seeds to grow more rambutan trees. At a future date, they sell these to cash out and take care of themselves. Thus, when the young get older, they can rent or sell the HDB flat to the next generation. In most cases, this kind of saving and investing does far better to serve the people. Capital accumulation enlarges the economy’s productive capacity, thereby creating wealth. Saving and investing both store value and add to it, turning one rambutan fruit into a whole tree. Retirees can, therefore, expect to get more out of their investment than they put in, not to mention other long-term initiatives that we have already built up over the years, such as Central Provident Fund (CPF) and ElderShield, for future retirement and healthcare needs. So, Mr Speaker, my first question is related to the fruits from the replanting of the rambutan trees. We should make sure we continue to plant more rambutan trees and not go down the path of eating too much rambutans. In fact, we should have a balanced diet ‒ our NIRC (or rambutans) ‒ when we can find other sources of food or tax revenue. After all, too much rambutans may not be good for us. We can get a sore throat. Besides, even when we take other sources of food from other plantations or trees, we have consistently taken care of those plantations with fertilisers and tender loving care by offsets and other measures to ensure all is well and more fruits can be produced in the future. So, back to my first question to the Minster, will the trees continue to bear fruits at a rate we need? Can we and future generations continue to plant trees, even as some of the older trees wither and die? It would be good, too, if the Minister could say whether or not we can continue to expect such returns from the Government Investment Corporation (GIC), MAS and Temasek in the next few years or decades. If this is achievable, then perhaps there could be a chance for the proposed GST hike to be deferred to a later date.[+16 sentences] I wholeheartedly agree that it is important to save for rainy days and keep a substantial Reserve. I am glad that the Government is looking at ways to address the overlapping generation usage of our future infrastructure, especially in the next economic phase of Singapore. This Budget is a good start. In particular, the issue is about optimal financing and that the user pays. Rather than just building up funds now for future infrastructure projects, I am glad that the Budget highlighted efforts to fund infrastructure projects by a debt structure to finance the construction of infrastructure. In principle, under such a debt structure, the cost of funding the infrastructure project should be amortised over time, so that each generation pays for the benefits they get from using the infrastructure project. In our case, it may be useful to earmark a certain amount of Reserves or NIRC to use to “guarantee” the bonds or borrowings for an infrastructure project. To segment spending for infrastructure projects and other expenditures in our Budget explicitly would give taxpayers a better picture of where their money is going to, and how they will benefit from it. In fact, this is a feedback from one of my residents ‒ trying to give a better picture of where the money is spent and how you benefit and the usage of Reserves as well. So, the key word here is “earmark” for the guarantee to lower the financing costs. But the returns from the infrastructure project must make sense. If future users cannot afford to pay, lenders can tap on that collateral and assume ownership of it. For example, in the context of the rambutan story, build a fence around one rambutan tree and use that as collateral to borrow money to construct the bridge to the next island, so that we can build more rambutan trees there, and not sell the rambutan tree. We can use the toll for the bridge to next island to eventually pay for the bridge. Most importantly, the future users of that bridge will pay for the bridge. No need to chop down the rambutan tree. As mentioned in the Budget speech, borrowing arrangements for Statutory Boards and Government-owned companies which build infrastructure would form one part of the solution for funding large investments. However, contingent liability is a potential future issue that must be taken into account, given the unpredictable nature of the global economy and the financial markets.[+8 sentences] So, it is an issue and concern I have. Contingency liabilities could build up for future generations, affecting the ability to obtain funds in future. Does the Ministry see an issue in the build-up of contingent liabilities for future generations? Moving ahead, we will also have to evaluate how a GST increase in the near future would impact on the lower-income and middle-income groups. If GST is to be increased, how much of it is expected to be ploughed back to reach those in need? Will more resources be pumped into existing assistance schemes to mitigate the impact of rising living costs? It would be prudent to explore means to collect the revenue efficiently, and quickly and fairly allocate it to reduce further inequalities. Furthermore, as the Government moderates the pace of various Ministries' budget growth and looks out for ways to be more efficient and effective, there will be decision inflexion points with tradeoffs at the margins. I am concerned if some of the decision points and tradeoffs may lead to reduced spending in specific areas of education and skills training, in particular, the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) segment of the student population. They constitute about 25% of the post-secondary cohort each year and are a significant future labour force with key skillsets for us to be future-ready.[+3 sentences] I have visited and met students and staff of ITE as part of the Council for the Development of the Singapore Malay/Muslim Community's (Yayasan MENDAKI’s) Future Ready Unit's efforts to enhance the awareness of the younger generation about being future-ready and to instill the importance of SkillsFuture and lifelong learning. Without a doubt, the Government has provided excellent support and resources to ITE. In the last 25 years, ITE has made tremendous progress to provide skills training for full-time students and Continuing Education and Training (CET) skills upgrade for in-service workers. Recently, ITE had made further advancement by providing new upgrading pathways for its alumni and in-service workers through the programme called Work-Learn Technical Diploma (WLTD), which is a path towards higher certification through apprenticeship model.[+2 sentences] Another ITE programme, which in my view is excellent, is the Global Education Programme (GEP). This programme provides ITE students with a holistic education by exposing them to new skills, global mindsets and perspectives, and a better understanding of the culture and lifestyle in other countries. It has proven to be life-changing for some of the students and is impactful, especially for those who come from humble backgrounds. So, I hope the Government will ensure that the support for programmes like those in ITE and, for example, programmes like the ITE WLTD and GEP, will not be affected, and future demands for development resources will continue to be given to ITE.[+2 sentences] This is even more important in Singapore’s next phase of development where skills meritocracy is essential. Another resource that I hope will not be affected are the financial assistance support for ITE students. More than 50% of ITE students qualify for some form of financial assistance and they generally come from diverse challenging backgrounds.[+1 sentence] The application and checks because of means testing can be very onerous for these families. So, the ITE schemes allow more direct assistance to the students and their families. I do hope that tradeoffs from the reduction in the budget growth do not lead to reductions in the ITE Opportunity Funds, for example.[+4 sentences] Mr Speaker, this is a progressive Budget that seeks to prepare Singapore to cope with significant future expenditure growth. The Government is clearly seeking solutions to do so without putting too much burden on the current generation and these efforts should be lauded. I hope there will be no more rambutan trees being cut. Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker15 words
[+1 sentence]After 54 speakers and a short detour on how speakers are rostered, Minister for Finance.
The Minister for Finance (Mr Heng Swee Keat)88 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, first, let me thank Members of the House for the thoughtful and wide-ranging debate over the past two and a half days. As you said, over 50 Members have spoken for more than 10 hours, and if I were to do a point-to-point discussion, it will take us beyond 10.00 pm tonight. So, in line with my Ministry's policy of limiting Ministries' budget growth to 30% of gross domestic product (GDP) growth, I shall try to keep it to about 30% of 10 hours.
Mr Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Thank you.
Mr Heng Swee Keat11263 words
[+19 sentences]I am glad that the Budget has sparked many thoughtful conversations among citizens and fellow Singaporeans. Many Singaporeans have shared their perspectives with me in the course of various consultations and engagements, as well as with the other Ministers. I am grateful for the feedback that has helped us to refine our thinking and ideas along the way. This is important because the Budget is not an accounting exercise. It is a strategic and integrated plan for the future, about how all of us can come together to achieve our shared aspirations. As we learned in Our Singapore Conversation, many aspire for a home where we can make a good living and fulfil our potential, regardless of where we start in life; where we can live purposeful lives, and enjoy our silver years surrounded by the care of family and community; and where we feel assured that our aspirations and needs can be met. This Budget is about how we allocate resources to achieve these aspirations, through: (a) a vibrant and innovative economy, with diverse opportunities for all; (b) a smart, green and liveable city that we can be proud to live in; (c) a caring and cohesive society where people look after one another, especially the disadvantaged and the vulnerable; and (d) a sound fiscal system that provides for Singapore’s needs in a fair and sustainable way. Our Budget theme is "Together, a Better Future". I am glad that many Members agree that we can achieve a better future if we work together. I would like to cover three key themes in this debate. My Ministerial colleagues will talk about the respective issues under their purviews at the Committee of Supply (COS). First, I will explain our approach to revenues and taxes, and why this is the sustainable, responsible and fair way to meet our future needs. Second, I will talk about the urgency of transforming our economy. Third, I will speak about how we can, together, build a more caring and cohesive society. Let me start with our fiscal strategy. In this debate, two main questions have been raised: why do we need to spend more? What are the roles of taxes, Reserves and borrowing in meeting our revenue needs? First, let me explain why we need to spend more. I explained in the Budget Statement that we face structural and sustained increases in expenditure in a number of areas – healthcare, security and other social spending. Government healthcare spending is projected to rise by nearly 0.8 percentage points of GDP from 2.2% of GDP today to around 3% in the next decade. That is $3.6 billion more in today’s dollars.[+3 sentences] Why this rise? First, we will spend more due to an ageing population. Already, Government subsidies for seniors' healthcare needs are more than six times that of a young person. From now till 2030, the number of seniors will double from about 450,000 to 900,000.[+14 sentences] This alone will increase healthcare spending significantly. Second, the number of citizens who have chronic conditions is rising. Without taking action on diabetes, the number of diabetic patients aged 18 and above could rise from 450,000 in 2015 to 670,000 in 2030. We are working hard to arrest these trends. Third, new medical technologies, new treatments, procedures, diagnostic tools and drugs can lead to a higher quality of life, but they could also cost more. Next, annual security spending is also expected to rise by about 0.2 percentage points of GDP as we invest more to counter rising threats. The scale and magnitude of terror attacks around the world in recent years are signs that the terrorism threat has heightened. This threat has come closer to our shores, given the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria's (ISIS’) ambition to establish a caliphate in the region encompassing Singapore. As ISIS loses ground in Syria and Iraq, ISIS fighters’ return to Southeast Asia presents a serious threat to Singapore. The recent Marawi crisis in southern Philippines is a sign that extremist terrorism is now endemic in the region and may take many years before the security problem is rooted out. Around the region and at home, we have also seen more cases of self-radicalisation. In addition, the range of threats has widened. In recent years, we have seen an increasing number of high-profile and damaging cyberattacks around the world, like the WannaCry ransomware incident, which affected computer systems around the world. With rising security threats and a wider range of threats, we will need to continue to invest in security to keep Singapore safe. Preschool spending is expected to double in the next five years to $1.7 billion a year in 2022, an increase of about 0.1 percentage point of GDP from today.[+11 sentences] This is a vital investment in our future generations, ensuring that they have a good start in life. Two in three preschoolers will have a place in a Government or Government-supported quality preschool, up from one in two today. Apart from these recurrent expenditures, we are investing in key infrastructure to build a better home and ensure we remain one of the world’s leading global cities. And we have to be prepared that expenditures could rise further than what we project now. Healthcare spending, even in countries that are prudent like Japan and Germany, is around 10%-12% of GDP. New medical technologies could accelerate spending trends. A sudden escalation in terrorist threats or geopolitical tensions could significantly increase the security spending required. A decade ago, we could not have predicted the rise of ISIS and the speed with which terrorism has spread and evolved around the world. Our responsibility is to ensure that we make timely decisions and have enough revenues to meet our future expenditure needs readily, amid an uncertain future. In making the additional investment, we are doing so on a strong foundation. Government spending to date has achieved good outcomes. Indeed, as Miss Cheryl Chan has noted, it is not about how much we spend, but how well we spend. We achieve very credible outcomes, with overall expenditures of about 19% of GDP in FY2018.[+20 sentences] This is less than half of what the OECD countries typically spend. We think carefully about how to design and organise our underlying delivery and funding systems and consider the roles of all stakeholders. Let me illustrate this in three areas: education, healthcare and law and order. This is a chart showing how 15-year-olds from different countries do on the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) test for science, compared with how much the government spends on education. One group is the Nordic countries, which typically spend about 7% to 8% of GDP. Various OECD countries form a second group, around the OECD average. They typically spend about 4% to 6% of GDP. A third group comprises East Asian societies – Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea. They tend to spend less, with PISA scores on the higher end. Where is Singapore? We spend about 3% of GDP and do well compared to other countries. The conclusion is the same even after we consider private expenditure on education, such as enrichment classes. It is not just in taking tests that our students do well, but other skills like collaborative problem-solving. And this does not capture the immeasurable character-building work that our schools do in cultivating traits in our students, such as perseverance, responsibility and valuing hard work. The next chart shows healthy life expectancy against government and statutory healthcare spending. Countries to the right of the chart spend more of their GDP on healthcare, while those to the left spend less. The higher up a country is on the chart, the longer its residents live in good health. Green points represent the younger societies, while red points are the more aged ones, and amber ones are somewhere in between. Many governments spend around 6% to 10% of their GDP on healthcare. As Members can see from the charts – 6% to 10%. Compared to other countries shown on this chart, Singapore spends less on healthcare, yet achieves a high healthy life expectancy, higher than the OECD average.[+1 sentence] Even with population ageing, we expect to spend less than other countries with similarly aged populations. Similarly, we are able to get effective outcomes for our spending on policing. We were ranked top in the 2017 Gallup Global Law and Order Index, which gauges people’s sense of personal security and their experiences with crime and law enforcement when living in their respective jurisdictions.[+23 sentences] This is despite our spending being at the lower end when compared to various jurisdictions. That said, Singapore must stay vigilant as a society and as a country. How have we been able to achieve this so far? It is through a whole-of-society effort. In education, we achieve good outcomes because we have invested in our schools and a dedicated corps of educators who believe in developing every child to their fullest potential. We have engaged parents who do their best for their children’s education. We have community groups, charitable foundations and individual donors who support students and families in need. In healthcare, we are able to lead long and healthy lives because we have a well-designed healthcare system and dedicated healthcare professionals, with a system of incentives aimed at delivering value, rather than volume of treatments. We have citizens who take responsibility for their own health and strong families who look after their aged parents. And we have caring and dedicated voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) that run many services in the community. In security, we enjoy safety today, not only because we have built up robust and sophisticated systems and a strong corps of Home Team officers. It is also because we have National Servicemen and volunteers who serve with pride, and a united, law-abiding and vigilant community that stands against crime. This is the power of partnership, and of a whole system that encourages everyone to take responsibility. It explains how a tiny country like Singapore with no natural resources can have world-leading outcomes with moderate levels of taxation and spending. This is the Singapore way and we must continue to build on this ethos. In particular, managing the cost of healthcare must be a whole-of-nation effort. We all need to do our part to keep healthcare cost growth sustainable. In this respect, I appreciate the useful suggestions by Ms Sun Xueling on how we can be more efficient, effective and smart in spending. The Ministry of Finance (MOF) will elaborate more on how we are doing so at the Committee of Supply. While we must instill prudence as a value in managing our resources, we must also appreciate that the major structural expenditure drivers that I have spoken of will entail billions of dollars of additional spending a year. The needs they address cannot be met by just squeezing more out of every dollar. Having explained why we need to spend more, let me now talk about how we plan to finance this in a fair and sustainable manner. Ms Tin Pei Ling and other commentators have asked if we could fund the increased spending for the future with a windfall surplus like the one we had in FY2017. The surplus in FY2017 was largely due to one-off, exceptional factors that we do not expect to occur every year.[+4 sentences] The main increase came from an exceptional Statutory Board Contribution from MAS due to unexpected currency translation gains and investment gains from a global rally in equity and bond markets. The increase in Stamp Duty collections was generated by the recent property market pick-up. We cannot fund our plans to secure Singapore’s future on the basis of episodic windfalls. If we are fortunate to have these occasional windfalls, we should do the responsible thing and save most of it for our future needs. We should not plan for our future in the hope that markets will always continue to move in Singapore’s favour. That is why we are reserving the bulk of the FY2017 surplus for future needs like the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) development plans and ElderShield subsidies.[+29 sentences] The Government is also sharing some of the surpluses through the SG Bonus. Let me explain at this point our approach to financing our needs. There are essentially three ways of doing so: raise taxes; borrow; or draw on our Reserves. Each of these ways serves a purpose; each involves risks and tradeoffs. We have decided on our approach only after deep and serious study – first, of our spending needs, followed by the options available to fund them. Mr Louis Ng can be assured that in the process, many public officers from MOF, MOF agencies like the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA), Customs and the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore, and other agencies spanning different policy and operational areas, debated the ideas rigorously with me and their own bosses. In the process, they pushed back on many ideas but also gave me fresh perspectives and feedback. They were certainly not afraid of speaking up or disagreeing with me or with the other Ministers for that matter. So, let me now turn to the roles of each of these methods – taxes, borrowing and Reserves. Let me, first, explain why we have decided to raise taxes. This is not an option that we have taken lightly. Not just because raising taxes is unpopular, but because the Government should, as far as possible, avoid taking people’s hard-earned money and deciding on their behalf how the money should be spent, unless it has to do so for critical social, economic or national needs. Certainly, we should not shy away from addressing the need for taxes, where we see areas of collective need that can be better met by Government provision. These include areas like healthcare, supporting the elderly and retirees, investing in our people through preschools and SkillsFuture, and strengthening our security. As Mr Liang Eng Hwa reminded us, many Members in this House have fought for the Government to do more in these areas. But we should also consider the costs and how to fund them. Looking ahead, we have needs that occur year after year. The responsible way for us to fund such spending is to raise taxes. As Er Dr Lee Bee Wah pithily reminded us, you do not fund recurrent spending needs by hoping to strike 4D. Or by borrowing with your credit card. Each generation should strive to pay for its own spending through sustainable means, instead of drawing down more than is prudent from the Reserves or by borrowing and passing on the cost of current spending to future generations. In particular, for the broad-based needs that I have mentioned, a broad-based tax like the GST is appropriate. As then-Minister for Trade and Industry, Mr S Dhanabalan, said at the Debate on the GST Bill in 1993, it is critical to have a “tax system that will make an immediate and direct connection between demands for public service and the private purse”. This is important so that we understand that whenever we increase demands for public services, we should also pay more. Mr Lim Biow Chuan gave us all a timely reminder that when the Government pays, it is the taxpayers who pay. Let me now address some key questions that have been raised with respect to the GST increase and other tax changes: first, how we decided on the timing of the GST increase and its announcement; second, how we sized the GST increase relative to our needs; third, how we take care of our lower-income and ensure that our overall taxes and benefits system remains progressive; fourth, how the tax changes will affect our competitiveness. First, there have been questions on the timing of the GST increase that I have announced. In planning our finances, we take the long view. We seek to understand major trends holistically and how they may affect Singaporeans. We assess carefully what we need to do in response and how we should find the resources to support our plans. This is how we had determined that we will need to raise GST sometime in the period from 2021 to 2025.[+13 sentences] By announcing the GST increase early, we are being honest and upfront about our national needs and setting out what needs to be done. We are giving ample notice to citizens and businesses that we will need to raise GST. Members of Parliament (MPs), such as Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Asst Prof Mahdev Mohan, have spoken about why we need to do this, to set out a clear direction for the future. I hope that it helps everyone to understand our shared challenges in the coming years. Indeed, we must have such important discussions about our future, well in advance. This is important because it is not just Government finances that will be impacted by trends like ageing, but individual citizens and their families. We must all prepare for what is to come. This will also help us to better determine an appropriate offset package that can help with the adjustment. But we know that there are always uncertainties. That is why we have given a timeframe of 2021 to 2025 as to when this increase would need to take place. I would like to assure Members that, just as the decision to raise GST was not made lightly, the Government will exercise care in deciding the timing for its implementation. Before we move to raise GST, we will carefully assess the prevailing economic conditions as well as our needs at that point. Second, let me address questions over how the GST increase is sized relative to our needs. As mentioned, a two-percentage point increase in GST rate is expected to raise revenues worth about 0.7% of GDP per annum.[+1 sentence] This estimated amount is before we account for the amount needed to fund the enhanced GST Voucher (GSTV). On the other hand, the expenditure drivers that I earlier mentioned – healthcare, security and preschools – already exceed this amount. These are serious commitments that we must budget for, and there are risks that overall spending could rise further. So, the two-percentage point GST increase will not fully cover our expenditure needs, but only make the fiscal gap more manageable, in conjunction with other measures to manage expenditure.[+18 sentences] It is thus the prudent and responsible approach to raise GST in good time, instead of hoping for expenditure to fall. Third, let me address concerns over the fairness and progressivity of an increase in GST. I understand that some are worried about the impact of a GST increase on the cost of living, not just among the lower-income, but also among many middle-income households. Let me assure everyone that we are mindful of the impact of tax changes on households, particularly the lower-income, and will help them to adjust while maintaining a fair and progressive system of taxes and transfers. As I have mentioned in my Budget Statement, GST should be seen together with the rest of our taxes and transfers system, including the GST Voucher scheme. The Government provides structural GST offsets through the GST Voucher. This is a permanent scheme, an integral complement to GST. For the lower-income, we provide substantial offsets. This is a targeted way of making the GST package a progressive one. For retiree households, they also get significant GST offsets. In addition, we have schemes and programmes to support the less well-off. This includes the Workfare Income Supplement and Silver Support. From education to healthcare and housing, our social programmes provide higher levels of support for the lower- and middle-income households than they do for the well-off, with lower-income households benefiting the most. We also provide support for the middle-income. First and foremost, our approach to supporting the middle-income is to create good economic growth, as the best form of social security is a good job. Second, we keep the tax burden low, so that Singaporeans get to keep as much as possible of what they earn. Finally, in recent years, we have expanded the support for Singaporeans to take care of their children and aged parents, easing the burden on the "sandwich generation" which Mr Desmond Choo spoke about. So, when you look at the overall balance of taxes and transfers, lower- and middle-income households receive significantly more benefits from transfers than what they pay in taxes. The middle-income group gets $2 in benefits for every dollar of tax that they pay. The lower-income group gets about $4 in benefits for every dollar of tax.[+14 sentences] As I have mentioned in the Budget Statement, we will continue to absorb GST on publicly subsidised education and healthcare. When we eventually raise the GST, we will enhance the permanent GST Voucher scheme to provide more help to lower-income households and seniors. We will also implement a transitional offset package, with lower- and middle-income households receiving more support, to help them adjust. Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah also asked if we intend to set up a Committee Against Profiteering (CAP) to combat any illegal profiteering due to GST hikes. When we last raised the GST in July 2007, most businesses did not use GST as an excuse to raise prices beyond the GST increase. The then-CAP looked into the complaints to manage profiteering. Similarly, when we raise the GST to 9%, we expect businesses not to exploit the situation and use the GST as a cover to raise prices. If necessary, the Government is prepared to convene a similar CAP. There have also been concerns that consumers may choose to shop abroad for daily products and there will be more attempts to evade GST. Today, we limit the value of goods that can be brought into Singapore for their personal use without GST. Customs and Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) officers enforce this, and we will continue to have an appropriate level of enforcement when the GST is raised. While we have announced the GST increase this time, we continually consider all other taxes and sources of revenues to meet our expenditure needs. Some Members have asked if we are doing enough to tax wealth, and if those with higher income are contributing a fair share. Dr Intan Mokhtar has suggested raising personal income taxes (PIT). We have raised PIT in recent years to further enhance progressivity. We increased the marginal tax rates for higher-income earners with chargeable income exceeding $160,000 and raised the top marginal rate from 20% to 22% for those with chargeable income exceeding $320,000.[+14 sentences] This took effect from YA2017. We also introduced a cap of $80,000 on PIT reliefs, taking effect from YA2018. Under the present PIT structure, about half of our workers do not pay personal income tax. Among those who do, the top 10% pay about 80% of our PIT revenue. Any review of PIT rates must ensure that Singapore remains attractive. Just yesterday, Hong Kong has announced a reduction in PIT in their Budget. We will be moving in the opposite direction if we are to raise PIT when all jurisdictions are competing for talent, including our Singaporean talent. We will continue to monitor and review our rates but, for now, our view is that PIT rates are reasonable for us to remain attractive, given the intense global competition for talent. Mr Ong Teng Koon and Mr Yee Chia Hsing suggested that we look closely at wealth taxes. Aside from taxing income, our current approach to taxing wealth is mainly through taxes on assets that cannot be tax-planned away easily, unlike other methods like estate duties. That is why we have enhanced our property tax regime in the last decade to make it more progressive, and to meet our spending needs. For residential properties, 86% of property tax collected comes from non-owner-occupied residential properties, and owner-occupied residential properties with an annual value of $30,000 and above. In this Budget, we have made moves to improve the progressivity of our stamp duty regime, so that those who can afford a higher-value residential property pay more taxes on their purchase. I thank Mr Seah Kian Peng and Mr Yee Chia Hsing for their strong support for this move. On average, we collected about $8 billion in recent years from property tax and stamp duty.[+9 sentences] This is a significant proportion of our revenues. We will continue to review this area closely. Mr Yee Chia Hsing and Ms Foo Mee Har suggested reviewing taxes on alcohol and gambling. We regularly review such duties and we will take these suggestions into consideration. On the introduction of GST on imported services, Mr Thomas Chua mentioned the $225 billion worth of imported services reported by the Department of Statistics. I wish to clarify that this includes all business-to-business (B2B) services, and vastly overstates the imported services which we will introduce GST on. Our move to levy GST on imported services will not affect most businesses. This is because most businesses can claim full refund of the GST they incur on inputs that they procure for their businesses, including imported services. Thus, businesses affected by the GST on imported B2B services are primarily financial institutions and residential property developers which do not get such full refunds. Mr Pritam Singh asked if this will yield additional revenues. We estimate it could yield additional revenue of about $90 million per year.[+12 sentences] But let us be clear that this is a move to defend our current revenue base from being eroded as more transactions move online. Finally, let me talk about keeping our fiscal system pro-growth. Dr Intan Mokhtar has made suggestions to raise corporate income tax rates, particularly for MNCs and large firms. Let me elaborate more about our environment today. Around the world, there are significant changes and uncertainties in the global tax environment. There is ongoing discussion worldwide on international tax rules for combating tax avoidance under the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project. In 2018, the US reduced its headline corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%. It also made other changes to make it more attractive for US companies to invest at home. This may spur cuts in corporate income tax rates around the world. Singapore must remain sensitive to these global trends that impact us. We are a small and open economy, subject to the full forces of competition in a globalised economy. It is important for us to remain a competitive and business-friendly location. In 2017, $9.4 billion of fixed asset investments and $6.5 billion of total business expenditure were committed. When the projects are fully implemented, about 22,500 jobs will be created.[+39 sentences] The increase in GST is not expected to impact our competitiveness significantly, which is a concern raised by Dr Lim Wee Kiak. The future GST rate of 9% is not high by international standards as this chart shows. The OECD average is 19%. So, our new rate is less than half of that. Among countries in the region, many others have GST standard rates that exceed 9%. Some countries are also contemplating raising GST. Japan, for example, plans to raise its consumption tax rate from 8% to 10% in October 2019. In summary, we have taken a principled approach to meet the general population's future needs through a broad-based GST increase, while ensuring that our overall system of taxes and transfers remains fair and progressive and is supportive of growth. I have spoken at length on the first way of financing our needs through taxes for recurrent needs. Let me now move on to the second way, which is borrowing. Borrowing is a reasonable option for major long-lived capital investments with high capital expenses, because the benefits of these assets are enjoyed mainly by future generations, in fact, many years down the road. This is an option that we are pursuing for major long-term projects like Changi Terminal 5. Ms Tin Pei Ling and Mr Saktiandi Supaat raised concerns on whether borrowing will result in unsustainable debt and interest payments and they have raised an important point. Indeed, we aim to live within our means. We should not over-borrow and burden future generations with unsustainable debt, as we have seen in other countries. The stark difference is that unlike some other countries, we borrow not to spend on recurrent needs like healthcare, education and security, but to invest in long-term infrastructure. Such long-term investments will continue to yield economic benefits and position Singapore well for the future. We are strategically leveraging the strength of our financial position to optimise our borrowing. To reduce financing costs, the Government is considering the provision of guarantees to back borrowings by our Statutory Boards and Government-owned companies. The Government is consulting the President's Office and the Council of Presidential Advisors (CPA) on this proposal, including the details of how it will be structured. So, many of the points that Mr Saktiandi mentioned earlier on will be discussed in great detail. This way, we can tap on the Government's triple-A credit rating and the strength of our Reserves without directly using it. This is how we are helping the current and future generations. We are able to do so only because we have planned our finances soundly and accumulated strong Reserves. We are one of only 11 countries in the world, and the only Asian country, which has a triple-A credit rating, which represents the solid foundation and safety net that our forefathers left for us. We do not and cannot take our credit rating for granted. I am glad that Members, like Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Mr Ong Teng Koon, think that this is a sensible approach and recognise the value in this. Now, I will talk about the third way we have been financing our needs, which is our Reserves. Our Reserves have been painstakingly built up over half a century by our Pioneers and previous generations. We have inherited this nest egg and must act as responsible stewards. That is why, over the years, we have carefully deliberated and developed a comprehensive set of rules to safeguard and manage the use of our Reserves. Our Constitutional rules protect our financial assets and land as past Reserves. As land sales convert physical assets into financial assets, the proceeds from land sales are rightly fully protected as past Reserves as well. This principle of asset conversion is sound. It is irresponsible to mislead people that the principle suddenly does not apply when we use just, say, 20% instead of 100% of land sales proceeds. Mr Pritam Singh made such a suggestion and if I may use an analogy: suppose our forefathers left us with five plots of land and, each year, we sell one plot, 20% and use that money. In five years, there will be no land left. So, that is the fallacy of using 20%. Now, instead of using the proceeds of land sales, or any part of it, for spending, the proceeds of land sales are added to our Reserves, which are invested in a globally diversified portfolio. From the returns, we take 50% as NIRC to supplement our budgetary needs.[+2 sentences] This achieves a balance between supporting the needs of the current and future generations. Today, contributions from Reserves are already the largest contributor to our revenues. If we did not introduce the NIRC framework, we would have had to double our PIT collection or our GST collection to raise the same amount of revenues. And yet, some have suggested increasing the NIRC spending cap from the current 50% to 60% or using a portion of land sales proceeds for recurrent social spending.[+5 sentences] All this sounds very tempting. It seems relatively painless to do so compared to raising taxes. And you may be wondering why do I not take a painless way? But is it the right thing to do? Certainly not. The rules on Reserves were debated and agreed in this House.[+1 sentence] We enshrined them in the Constitution. We deliberately introduced rules on land sales and the 50% NIRC cap so that we do not succumb to the temptation to draw more from our Reserves to fund current expenditure or eat into the principal sum.[+27 sentences] To amend the rules as a first resort is ill-disciplined and unwise. This would defeat the purpose of enshrining the 50% cap in our Constitution. Moreover, if as soon as we need more money, the first thing we do is relax the rules, that is the surest way to change Singapore's basic orientation, from saving and building for the future, to living for today and letting tomorrow look after itself. We must not give in to the temptation to chip away at our strategic national asset. Indeed, as many Members agreed, we should not over-rely on NIRC, which is already the largest source of our revenues. An over-reliance will hurt our ability to respond to changing circumstances in the future. We are stewards of the Reserves for our future generations, as what our forefathers had been for us. It was thanks to the astute Dr Goh Keng Swee and other forefathers, who had the foresight of investing our Reserves in a long-term and diversified portfolio early, that Singapore has built up a nest egg. Since then, each generation of Singaporean leaders has upheld that discipline of running balanced budgets, setting aside surpluses, having professional managers manage our Reserves for long-term gain. Our founding generations resisted the temptation to spend more from our Reserves. What if Dr Goh and our other forefathers had said, "We are saving too much of our surpluses", "we should spend more on ourselves and leave less for our children and grandchildren"? Would we have this inheritance from which we are now benefiting so handsomely and debating how to use more of it? We would have nothing. Today, the constitutional arrangements for the use of Reserves represent this discipline we have set for ourselves. As the Prime Minister said in 2008, it is about "our commitment to continue growing our Reserves, while allowing the Government to tap on part of the investment income for current spending". Deviating from these rules in a sustained way will put this critical balance at risk and may compromise the long-term health of our Reserves and the country. Be it NIRC or land sales proceeds, we must uphold the discipline in tapping on our Reserves in a sustainable way. And to be clear, we prepare for the future not only within our own lifetime, but our children's and children's children. The average life expectancy of a Singaporean child born today is over 80 years. A lot can happen in such a lifetime. Just think about what the world has gone through in the last century. In the first 50 years of the 20th century, a person would have lived through two world wars and the Great Depression, the advent of nuclear weapons and the establishment of the Bretton Woods system that governs the international financial order today, including the setting up of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. In the next 50 years of the 20th century, a person would have lived through the Vietnam War, the formation of ASEAN, major advances in technology, such as the space race and the Internet, the rise and fall of communism and the Asian Financial Crisis. As we now come into the 21st century, we are moving from a unipolar world to a multipolar one, with growing tensions between major countries and concerns about global and regional stability. If anything, developments that we are witnessing today remind us that the future is ever-changing and uncertain, as recognised by Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Mr Henry Kwek. What is clear is that in the aftermath of a crisis, be it financial or geopolitical, there are usually many years of subsequent weak economic performance. Employment and economic output tend to fall for a sustained period. For example, the US unemployment rate only recovered to pre-Global Financial Crisis levels last year.[+1 sentence] It took a decade. Unemployment rates in some European Union (EU) countries have not recovered even after 10 years.[+30 sentences] In turn, with crises like these, Government revenues are likely to decrease, at the very moment when we need resources to support our people and economy, a view shared by Assoc Prof Randolph Tan. That is why our Reserves are critical to help us overcome such challenges, especially since we have no natural resources. Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin raised the IMF's general guidance on reserves adequacy. IMF's guidance is meant to specifically address capital flight risk, which is the risk that the Singapore dollar deposit holders will switch out to foreign currency because there is a loss of confidence in our currency. That is but one of many scenarios which our Reserves have to deal with. So, the examples I gave of the last century, and all the major events and the potential impact, should serve as a very important reminder about the role of our Reserves. Also, even major countries, very well-developed countries, whether it is the US or the EU, are not immune from financial or economic crises. In fact, ironically, the last global financial crisis originated in the most developed parts of the world. But its impact was felt all around the world. So, however much that Singapore develops, however much the world develops, we must be cognisant and we must be prepared to deal with unforeseen events, to deal with crises which can have a very significant impact on Singapore and around the world. We need to be prepared for crises that go beyond just a currency crisis. More importantly, we must have the humility to recognise that we can never predict what will happen in our lifetime, much less our children's lifetime, or their children's lifetime. So, what we must do is to give them the best chance of a better life, whichever way the winds of change may blow. What we have inherited from the past, we also owe to the future. That is our moral obligation. Members of the House, what I have elaborated on is on the overall approach that we are taking to fund our growing needs. I have listened carefully to the speeches of Members of the Workers' Party to see if they could offer an alternative approach. But as far as I can tell, the Workers' Party supports the thrusts that I spoke of. In fact, no one has asked the Government to cut back on any specific item. On the contrary, they have asked the Government to do even more. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked the Government to do more in many areas, like giving Silver Support to those living in large flats. Mr Dennis Tan asked the Government to enhance elderly care support. Ms Sylvia Lim spoke about inequality and what we must do. It is easy to ask for more. Not a single one of the MPs, except Mr Pritam Singh, even mentioned what it would cost, nor how to fund it. In fact, not a single one mentioned about how much it would cost for each of the ideas that you articulated. Only Mr Pritam Singh spoke about other ways of funding it. Mr Pritam Singh offered a few options. He suggested using revenues from land sales and increasing the NIRC cap. I have explained earlier, clearly, why we cannot, and should not, use this. He asked if we can rely on GST on imported services. I have explained that the yield is small, less than $100 million, and that we need to do this to protect our revenue base.[+2 sentences] He even suggested that through our Smart Nation efforts, we can increase tax collection from self-employed hawkers and taxi-drivers! Mr Pritam Singh cannot be serious. Any serious-minded person will appreciate that not one of these is a viable alternative to a GST increase.[+29 sentences] These are distractions, and Mr Low Thia Khiang asked us not to be distracted, so I hope that you could have a discussion with Mr Low Thia Khiang. Instead of taking a principled stance, Mr Pritam Singh would rather withhold his support for the GST increase by adopting a "wait-and-see" posture. It is easy to fall back on politically expedient options and pretend that they will solve our long-term challenges. But this is a dishonest and irresponsible approach. If we were to do this, future generations of Singaporeans could easily end up in serious deficit. Then, we will be having a very different conversation about our future. I think the Workers' Party should come clean to the people. Do they want the Government to increase healthcare or social spending? Does the Workers' Party want the Government to increase healthcare or social spending, as all its various MPs have spoken, item by item? If yes, how does the Workers' Party propose to pay for the increase? So, I am glad that Mr Low Thia Khiang, who is not here today, appreciates our longer-term challenges and the significance in positioning Singapore as a Global-Asia node. But I was puzzled that he characterised the GST debate as a distraction, and that he would rather debate this at election rallies. The Workers' Party MPs have been elected into Parliament! You are sitting in Parliament! Parliament is exactly the place to debate serious issues affecting our nation's future. I have set out, as clearly as possible, why our spending needs will rise and the options for meeting these needs. All your MPs have spoken and said let us do even more. I have also given very clear notice, way in advance, of the need to raise GST. And I am prepared to answer your queries. So, I really hope that the Workers' Party MPs, having run on a slogan of a First-World Parliament, is not just using attractive election slogans, with no real intent to take your Parliamentary responsibilities seriously. I hope that when the elections come around, the Workers' Party will not turn around and use the GST to distract people from the longer-term issues that we face. These are serious long-term challenges that we should do our best to address and not take this as electioneering or as political play. We owe it to Singaporeans to do the right thing. Ultimately, as many MPs and Nominated MPs have pointed out, our fiscal approach is about giving expression to our shared values. Embracing the virtue of work and responsibility, where each generation works, earns and contributes its share. And being good stewards of what we have been given today and doing our part to leave behind something better for our children and grandchildren. This approach reflects who we are as a society, not one based on narrow notions of individualism, where each generation lives for itself and demands a chunk of the pie, but one based on notions of family and mutual support, where all generations take care of one another, and come together to build a better, stronger nation. As the Malay saying goes: "Serumpun bak serai, sesusun bak sirih" − we are not only stronger when we come together as one, we look good, too. Another way in which we safeguard our future is to ensure that future generations of Singaporeans inherit a green and liveable city. With the introduction of a carbon tax at an initial rate of $5 per tonne of emissions from 2019 to 2023, we join many countries that have done the same to step up global efforts to address climate change. Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about helping businesses to reduce carbon emissions. We will set aside funds from 2019 to 2023 to support them in improving energy efficiency.[+15 sentences] This will help businesses lower their energy costs and potentially more than offset the impact of the tax. By taking early action, companies that improve energy efficiency and reduce emissions can become more competitive internationally. There are many exciting opportunities in the cleantech sector. When Deputy Prime Minister Teo and I visited the Energy Research Institute @ NTU (ERI@N) last year, we were very encouraged to see that our support for research and development (R&D) was enabling our researchers to do good work, like on perovskite cells, which Mr Leon Perera mentioned. These cells have the potential to be cost-effective in generating solar energy. These efforts will allow us to compete and collaborate with companies around the world that are making a big push on the green economy. Households can also do their part to reduce energy consumption. I hope that these moves will foster a change in mindset and our energy consumption habits and evolve into a wider green movement that will make Singapore a cleaner, greener and even more liveable city, as Dr Teo Ho Pin mentioned. The Minister for the Environment and Water Resources will share more on our efforts on environmental sustainability and the Year of Climate Action at COS. While the announced increase in GST rate has received the most attention, let me remind everyone that the most critical challenge that we are facing is in transforming our economy. Growing our economy is not only the best way of ensuring strong and sustainable revenues, it is also the most important way for our people to realise their aspirations. This task is growing more urgent by the day, as structural changes in the global economy and technological advances disrupt the status quo, as pointed out by Mr Ang Wei Neng. Our strategy is to position Singapore as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise, which Mr Lee Yi Shyan spoke about and supported. This means fostering pervasive innovation throughout our economy. It means building deeper capabilities in our firms and our people; and it means forging stronger partnerships at home and abroad, to build scale and ride on the region’s growth together. As Mr Henry Kwek pointed out, ASEAN presents great opportunities, with over 640 million people and a GDP of over US$2.5 trillion.[+4 sentences] I am glad that many Members, including Mr Sitoh Yih Pin and Assoc Prof Randolph Tan, agree with our strategies to position Singapore for the new global economy. Members have raised thoughtful questions on the progress of our economic transformation and preparing our workers for the jobs of tomorrow. Let me address these in turn. We are seeing encouraging signs of progress. In the recent Singapore Business Federation (SBF) National Business Survey, nearly three in four companies reported that they introduced new processes or training to improve efficiency.[+10 sentences] More than eight in 10 said that they had expanded their operations overseas, up from under six in 10 in 2016. As Ms Foo Mee Har highlighted, we need to urgently press on with the implementation of our Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) to achieve economic transformation. I urge all stakeholders – businesses, trade associations and chambers, the Labour Movement and Government agencies – to double down on transformation efforts and to communicate the importance and urgency of transformation to their members. Some of our companies are developing know-how to move into higher value markets. Take Esco Group, for example. From a clean room supplier for MNCs in 1978, it has reinvented itself as a developer of innovative medical devices, such as the Miri Time Lapse System, which is used to improve the success rate of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) procedures. We have seen how companies in traditional industries are transforming their businesses through innovation. One example is LHT Holdings, which started off as a saw miller in 1977. With support from the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), it became the first company in Singapore to commercialise radio frequency identification (RFID)-tagged wooden pallets in local and overseas markets. Our startup scene is also taking off. In 2017, about US$1.4 billion (S$1.85 billion) was invested in the local startup scene, more than 10 times the amount invested five years ago.[+10 sentences] This means more resources for our startups to scale. One success story is PatSnap, which has developed innovation intelligence software that uses deep learning artificial intelligence (AI) to decipher global trends in innovation. PatSnap’s founder, Jeffrey Tiong, interned in the US as part of the National University of Singapore (NUS) Overseas College Programme. There, he found intellectual property (IP) due diligence extremely cumbersome. In 2007, Jeffrey set out to develop a platform that would make IP due diligence cheaper and simpler, with support from NUS Enterprise and some initial grant support from the Government. PatSnap now has over 4,000 clients in over 40 countries, tapping on engineering talent from all across the globe. Another example is Multi-Currency Exchange and Data Acquisition (M-DAQ), a home-grown financial technology (fintech) firm headquartered in Singapore, which has developed cutting-edge foreign exchange solutions to process local currency transactions for some of the largest global e-commerce platforms. The company processes more than $3 billion worth of transactions per year from this line of business alone. Behind these successes lie the spirit of innovation that Mr Azmoon Ahmad and Ms Chia Yong Yong spoke about. We must press on with our efforts to support a culture of innovation, as Ms Denise Phua reminded us of. Internationally, people are paying attention to the increasingly vibrant innovation scene in Singapore. This year, Singapore climbed three places in the Bloomberg Innovation Index to become ranked as the third most innovative economy globally.[+19 sentences] Google has substantial operations in Singapore, with more than 1,000 staff in functions, such as engineering and R&D. Just yesterday, in collaboration with the Nanyang Technological University (NTU), Alibaba opened in Singapore its first joint research institute outside China, to undertake research on AI. These are encouraging signs of progress and we must build on this momentum. Over the years, our broad-based schemes have built awareness about productivity and innovation. In 2016, about 85% of small SMEs in the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry’s (SCCCI's) Annual Business Survey reported that they adopted productivity measures, such as automation, digitalisation and upgrading worker skills. In 2017, this increased to almost 93%. We are making a push for firms to deepen their capabilities at every stage of growth through a comprehensive range of targeted support. Even so, we must always bear in mind that Government grants are meant to catalyse companies’ transformation and should not become permanent support. Mr Murali Pillai and Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about WCS. It is a transition scheme that we extended but will taper down. It provides temporary support for businesses that raise wages for Singaporean workers while they press on with efforts to transform and become more productive, as Mr Chong Kee Hiong mentioned. We must continue to invest in our people to ensure that they are equipped with relevant skills to take advantage of new opportunities, as Ms Sun Xueling and Miss Cheryl Chan observed. Arif Rahman has made good use of such programmes. After his GCE "O" levels, Arif took various odd jobs. Last year, he underwent a Tech Skills Accelerator Web Development Immersive boot camp. Today, he is a full-time front-end web developer at Indorse, a social network for professionals to showcase their skills. The effort to upskill and reskill our workers requires close partnership among employers, the Labour Movement and the Government, as Mr Heng Chee How and Mr Patrick Tay highlighted. This tripartite approach is a key strength of our system. I am happy to see our efforts to support workers gain momentum. The number of placements through Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) in 2017 is about 3,700, more than double the placements in 2016.[+4 sentences] Even as we support Singaporeans in the pursuit of opportunities, we need to ensure that Singaporean workers remain sufficiently protected, as Mr Ang Hin Kee and Mr Ong Teng Koon spoke about. For those who are self-employed by choice, we aim to better address their concerns and challenges, for instance, in legal protection, social security and skills development. For those who would prefer regular employment, we are keen to help them do so. The tripartite workgroup we formed last year has identified several key common challenges that self-employed persons faced. MOM has accepted the recommendations in the workgroup’s report which was released last week, and will further elaborate on their strategies at COS.[+3 sentences] Mr Zainal Sapari and Dr Intan Mokhtar have brought up the situation of low-wage workers and suggested reviewing employer CPF contribution rates for older workers. We support low-wage workers by encouraging sustainable wage increases underpinned by regular work and productivity growth. We provide additional support for low-wage workers through Workfare and assistance for healthcare, housing and their children’s education. For older workers, we support their employability through the Special Employment Credit and Adapt and Grow programmes, and their training through SkillsFuture.[+6 sentences] However, in mandating higher CPF contributions for older workers and better benefits for low-wage workers, we must be mindful not to impose too many barriers to their employment. Ms K Thanaletchimi and Assoc Prof Daniel Goh have brought up the concerns of women at work, and Ms K Thanaletchimi also spoke on flexi-work arrangements. The Minister for Manpower will share more about the various schemes to help our workers at COS. Businesses have asked about the role of foreign manpower in Singapore. As Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Heng Chee How highlighted, our ageing population and shrinking resident workforce are major challenges. Economic growth will slow, unless our businesses make full use of this narrow window, before our workforce shrinks further, to redouble their efforts to raise productivity. At the same time, we need to allow for a calibrated inflow of foreign workers, especially in areas of critical shortages.[+25 sentences] China, the world’s most populous country, launched its "Thousand Talents Plan" or "千 人 计 划" in 2008, to draw in the best talent from around world for strategic projects. Today, China has far surpassed its initial targets. For us to thrive, we must be equally strategic to develop our Singaporean talent and to draw in the right complement of international talent. As Ms Foo Mee Har observed, in this way, we can draw in the skills mix to support new industries that create better jobs for Singaporeans. This is not the first time that we are making a major push to transform and upgrade our economy. All of us have a part to play: Singaporean workers, to continually upgrade their skillsets to be ready for the future; Businesses, to press on to innovate and build deep capabilities and partnerships; trade associations and chambers (TACs), to step up to encourage firms to do more, and do better together. As Dr Tan Wu Meng put it, we must move ahead boldly to safeguard our continued survival and prosperity. Let us have confidence, keep our eyes on the horizon, and move forward together. All our efforts to steward our resources and grow our economy are ultimately about forging the kind of society we want. First, we need to stay cohesive and united as a society, with opportunities for all; second, we need to build a caring society, with people who are passionate about contributing to the common good. Ms Chia Yong Yong put it well when she said that Singaporeans should have "minds unafraid to dream", surrounded by a community with hearts big enough to accept failure. Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Ganesh Rajaram, Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin and Mr Kok Heng Leun have talked about the importance of addressing inequality, fostering opportunity and enhancing social integration. I agree with them that we cannot allow social stratification and inequality of opportunity to erode our precious social harmony. Singapore must continue to be a society where everyone, regardless of background, has the opportunity to do well based on personal efforts and talent. How we achieve this is inextricably linked to our economic strategy. As Ms Jessica Tan and Dr Tan Wu Meng have pointed out, diversified and broad-based growth creates opportunities for Singaporeans to pursue their aspirations, and this is the best way to help all Singaporeans progress in life. Rather than focus on how the pie is divided, we should grow the pie so that we can all enjoy a larger slice. Mr Ganesh Rajaram shared a powerful story of how he was able to move up in life. Indeed, many in my generation were fortunate to benefit from our system of education and meritocracy. As our economy grew, and our society becomes more settled, the rate of mobility slows too, and we must redouble our efforts. Our approach is to give Singaporeans a good chance of realising their potential at various stages in life. This starts from the early years. We are investing significantly in the early childhood sector to provide our children with more accessible, affordable and quality preschool. We started the KidSTART pilot in 2016 to provide children from low-income families with early access to health, learning and development support. We ensure that all our students, whatever their family background and circumstances, have access to a quality education. The OECD PISA study found that about half of the 15-year-old Singapore students from the lowest quarter by socioeconomic status performed in the top quarter of students in all countries, after accounting for socioeconomic status.[+2 sentences] And that is the extent to which our education system and our parents' efforts have been able to uplift. So, in other words, our system and our collective effort have enabled them to surpass their international peers in a similar socioeconomic position in their own societies. For students in the lowest 20% of households by socioeconomic status, half of them in the 1985 Primary 1 cohort progressed to post-secondary education. And this rose to nine in 10 for the 2000 Primary 1 cohort.[+11 sentences] We are broadening pathways for success. Our students’ interests are diverse. Some have academic interests, some have more specific skills-based interests, others want to be entrepreneurs. We have been systematically moving beyond fixed streams and excessive focus on examinations, towards enhancing the education system to nurture all talents and skills and the holistic development of every student. This has been the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) approach for many years. Budding entrepreneurs have programmes to support their interest, including the NUS Overseas College that Mr Jeffrey Tiong of PatSnap embarked on. We prepare our students to participate in the global economy through initiatives, such as ITE GEP. Mr Saktiandi Supaat can rest assured that we will continue to invest in ITE and offer financial support to students in need. And beyond the schooling years, we are investing strongly in SkillsFuture. It gives everyone the opportunity to move into new areas of the economy in line with their aptitude and interests. Ms Sylvia Lim asked about longitudinal studies on social mobility. MOF released two occasional papers in 2012 and 2015 on social mobility. We found that cohorts from 1969 to 1982 have, indeed, experienced good social mobility.[+21 sentences] There is also an ongoing longitudinal study on child cohorts being conducted by NUS. But bridging the social divides is not just a matter of fostering opportunities and closing the income gap. As a society, we must be mindful not to allow invisible, intangible divides to fester. I agree with Mr Ganesh Rajaram that divides can only be bridged if Singaporeans work together to ensure that every child is equipped with perseverance, confidence and resilience to succeed. As the Government, we also invest heavily in our common spaces. The hawker centres which are an integral part of our daily lives and our cultural heritage; the parks which bring us together in appreciation of our City in a Garden; and the HDB neighbourhoods which eight in 10 of our resident households call their home. Apart from creating common spaces, perhaps the best way to bridge social divides is to nurture our common values, by building a caring society. A good society is not just one where each of us is able to do well for ourselves. It should be one where we all feel a sense of responsibility towards one another, a spirit of caring. Just as we have achieved good outcomes in healthcare, education and security by working together, all of us play a part in building such a society. It starts with strong families. Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Darryl David spoke about the importance of mutual care and support within the family. Indeed, most of our seniors are able to count on their family for support. And we must strive to keep families strong. The enhancements to the Proximity Housing Grant will help to do so. Mr Desmond Choo and Ms K Thanaletchimi spoke about the stress that caregivers face. Caregivers play a vital role in our society and deserve great respect for the support they give their families. We are committed to supporting caregivers. Besides the financial schemes that defray the costs of caregiving, we also offer tangible support to caregivers through respite services in some of our senior care centres and nursing homes, so that caregivers can rest and recharge. We are also expanding the Community Networks for Seniors (CNS), which will better link up different stakeholders with needs in the community. The Prime Minister's Office (PMO), MOH and the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will say more about Government support for caregivers at the COS. Many Members, such as Dr Lily Neo and Ms Chia Yong Yong, spoke of the good work that our VWOs do in the community. We recognise the invaluable contributions they make and are encouraging more support for them, through the 250% tax deduction for donations made to Institutions of a Public Character (IPCs), matching grants for donations raised, and the Business and IPC Partnership Scheme (BIPS).[+2 sentences] As Ms Joan Pereira, Ms Tin Pei Ling and Miss Cheng Li Hui have suggested, we will continue to review our policies to enable our seniors to contribute meaningfully, stay active and independent, and age with confidence. But no single stakeholder has the resources to meet the community's needs alone, to address the structural shift in our demographics, or to foster opportunities for all. The consolidation of senior-related services under the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC), and the continuing efforts to strengthen social service delivery through our Social Service Offices (SSOs) will enable us to do more with the resources we have, and better care for our seniors and vulnerable families.[+19 sentences] As Ms Rahayu Mahzam said, the community's involvement in initiatives, like the Silver Generation Ambassadors programme and CNS, is necessary to strengthen our social support networks and last-mile delivery. That is why this Budget seeks to strengthen partnerships between the Government and the community, and to encourage a spirit of giving in every Singaporean. We want to foster a caring society through the SG Cares movement, bringing together individuals, informal groups, community organisations and corporates to partner one another, and better reach out to those in need. Ms Denise Phua asked if we can encourage people to donate their SG Bonus. We are studying how to facilitate this and will provide more details later in the year. Everyone can be part of this ecosystem of giving, regardless of age or background. I met Asyraf at an ITE graduation ceremony. Asyraf dropped out of school at Primary 4 as his mother was unwell and did not even sit for his Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE). NorthLight School gave him a second chance, which he was determined to seize. He did well enough to move on to ITE, continued to excel, received a scholarship in 2014 from the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) and, in 2017, graduated from Singapore Polytechnic. Before National Service (NS), Asyraf went back to NorthLight School and volunteered his time by supporting the teachers in teaching Facility Technology, and by sharing his experience with his juniors. He is now on the NorthLight School Alumni Council, even while he serves NS. Asyraf shows us that anyone can give back. And as Ms Denise Phua and Mr Vikram Nair have reminded us, for those who have done well, it is even more important to think about how you can give of yourself to help others. This partnership and spirit of working together is not just a good to have. It is the best way forward, towards a nation which shares a set of common values, and a better home for all of us. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not quite 10.00 pm yet but let me conclude. As I said from the start, this Budget is about our future. Over the past two days and earlier this morning, this House has reaffirmed our vision for the kind of future we want. Members have expressed support for measures to position our economy for the future, so that Singaporeans will have opportunities to pursue their aspirations, regardless of where they start. We have supported moves to foster a more cohesive and caring society so that we can better care for our elderly and the vulnerable amongst us. And there has been broad support for the fiscal measures to provide for our longer-term needs.[+4 sentences] Such a future will not be ours unless we do the hard work for it and make preparations. As Mr Christopher de Souza put it, it starts with being rigorous and working on options that matter rather than being ideological. Ultimately, the test of what we do is whether it works. Our success will depend on our unity of purpose and our collective spirit of enterprise and caring. We can only make it through this journey, if we work together. It is by working together, that we have become one of the healthiest, best educated and safest countries in the world, while keeping our spending low.[+10 sentences] It is by working together, and pooling our resources, that we have built up a strong fiscal foundation and the Reserves to protect and provide for us through the ages. It is by working together and deepening partnership that we can build scale, create value and ride the growth of the region together. And it is by working together, and partnering one another as a community, that we can best reach out to and care for our fellow citizens in need. Together, we have built, and are continuing to build, a nation that we can be proud of. We have made better lives for ourselves. Together, let us make a renewed commitment to pass on a better country for our children and grandchildren – a country where a child is given the best start in life, no matter her parents’ background; where she can grow up in a green, safe and globally-connected city; where she can apply her talents in an economy full of exciting, fulfilling jobs; where she can live a long, healthy and meaningful life with many opportunities to give back to the rest of her community; and where she can have some assurance and protection from the vagaries of the world over the course of her life, through the financial provisions that we have made. This is the kind of commitment that those before us made, so that we have a better life today and a strong foundation on which we can build our dreams. This is the kind of commitment that I hope all of us, not just in the Government, not just in this House, but Singaporeans everywhere, will come together to make in this Budget to build a better future for all of us, and give our children the best chance of a better life. This is how, together, we can ensure that Singapore will continue to thrive and prosper, generation after generation. Thank you.
Mr Speaker23 words
[+2 sentences]The Question is, "That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1 April 2018—". Yes, Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied)814 words
[+12 sentences]Yes, Sir, I have clarifications for the Finance Minister. I have four clarifications for the Finance Minister. But before that, I would like to thank him for touching briefly on longitudinal studies. I will be taking this matter up further with MOE at the COS. On the first clarification, the Finance Minister referred to Mr Low Thia Khiang's speech yesterday. I am sorry Mr Low is rushing to Parliament right now after attending to some family matters. And he mentioned that somehow, the Workers' Party was not being upfront because we did not want the Government to distract this debate by announcing the GST. Now, if I heard him correctly, actually, his speech was focused on supporting the Government's accurate identification of the challenges going forward with becoming a Global-Asia node and so on. He did actually specifically say that it is fine for the Government to announce the GST hike, or intended hike, in advance of time and we can actually have a separate debate about it. His main point was that by doing it in this Budget, it distracts the debate from the other things that are being done in the Budget because everybody is focusing on this thing which is not even a Budget measure. So, that is the first thing. And of course, there was a bit of a cut and thrust about whether we should debate it at the election rally and we do welcome the early announcement because we think the voters should also make a decision on this. The second clarification is about the Party position on the announcement of the GST – and I think Mr Pritam Singh may also elaborate on this further – about why it was said by him that we cannot support the announcement at this point in time.[+11 sentences] Now, the Government itself is not definitive about when this is going to happen. It may be seven years from today. And, of course, we do note that in the run-up to the Budget discussion, there were some test balloons being floated up about the fact that the Government needs to raise revenue. And immediately the public seized on the fact that Deputy Prime Minister Tharman and perhaps other leaders had earlier said that the Government has enough money for the decade. So, the public pointed out, "Hey, you know, is this a contradiction?" And I rather suspect, myself, that the Government is stuck with that announcement. Otherwise, if the announcement had not been made, perhaps we would be debating a GST hike today. Earlier on, Minister Heng also said that the Government has not made a decision on when, because it has itself to look at prevailing conditions, economic conditions and also our needs at that time. Fair enough. Similarly, I do not think we will be in a position to take a stand on that until the information is available at the relevant point in time. So, I think it is ridiculous for the Government to expect us, as a responsible Party, to support something when all the information is still not available and we do not have a crystal ball. Related to that, I should clarify, in case anybody misunderstands, that it is our intention to support the Budget when the vote is called but this should not be mistaken as a support for this announcement of some possible GST hike in a later Budget.[+5 sentences] It should not be mistaken as such. The third clarification, I think the Minister touched on why it is not prudent to use land sales as part of Government revenue. This is an issue that we have debated before. But the analogy he gave was, we have five parcels of land and if every few years, we sell one parcel, there will be none left. But I think the Minister can clarify that it is not quite like that. Land sales actually include many leases which do come back to the Government after the tenure of the lease.[+3 sentences] It is not a case of it being gone forever. Or even 10 years for the commercial leases. Finally, my last clarification is, the Minister pointed out about the social mobility insofar as educational attainment of 15-year-olds in the performance of science in the PISA report to say that our poorer students are doing better than their poor counterparts in the OECD countries. I have filed a Parliamentary Question on this before. But I think the report also highlights that as far as equity is concerned, our poorer students seem to be further behind our richer students − the gap internally, domestically − compared to the OECD countries.[+1 sentence] So, is it not really comforting for our poorer students to tell them that they are doing better than their poorer counterparts in other countries when really, in their class, they are actually further behind them, on the average?
Mr Speaker1 words
[+1 sentence]Minister.
Mr Heng Swee Keat1309 words
[+16 sentences]I thank the Member, Ms Sylvia Lim, for her question. First, on the first point about my reference to Mr Low Thia Khiang's point. Actually, when I was listening to him yesterday, I thought, I was very happy that he supported the point that I made, about making Singapore a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise. He went on to talk about the various moves that the Government made over the years to look ahead and position Singapore to be able to meet new challenges and secure new opportunities because the world is changing very quickly. So, he made a very good speech on our engagement, particularly with China. I was very surprised that towards the end of that very good speech, he then got distracted by this statement. He said: "Sir, the unfortunate thing about this Budget is that it is looking forward too hastily for future revenue streams by prematurely announcing the GST hike. This has become an unnecessary distraction from the vision articulated in this Budget, and is a real distraction causing the Government to lose its focus in getting buy-in for the vision". This is, in fact, a real distraction because, in fact, if the Workers' Party truly believes that all the things you and your Members have advocated − spend more on this, spend more on this group, spend more on these others − and that you agree that all these will require new revenue measures, then why do you not just say that "Yes, we are very happy to support this so let's now talk about how we are going to position Singapore for the future." I will be very happy to discuss this with the Member, who can file a Motion, a separate Motion, to discuss that. But bear in mind that this is a Budget Debate and if we do not talk about a tax increase, we do not debate the tax increase in this very forum, in this very session for the Budget Debate, then where else are you going to do it? And to suggest that you do it at the election rally is just a complete distraction. Right? Does the Member want to be constructive and say that in any election we talk about serious things, about how we are going to position Singapore for the future, how we are going to create a better life for all Singaporeans? Rather than to seize on issues that will make people unhappy and say, "Oh dear, you know, the Government is going to tax you and all that and, therefore, you know, this is a bad move." You must square your position. Does the Member accept, first and foremost, all that we said, that we do need to spend more, whether it is preschool, whether it is SkillsFuture, whether it is healthcare, whether it is revamping the economy, whether it is security?[+1 sentence] Do we need to provide for that? And if it is, as I said, very clearly, in today's debate, in my round up, I said that even the two-percentage point increase in GST does not fully cover the expected increase in healthcare expenditure.[+1 sentence] Is it not right for us to say that we know that there is one item that is definitely going up and we will not even have enough to manage that one item? Can we take one measure first, and look at how we can meet that? So, Mr Pritam Singh's argument about "I can't support this at this point because it is so far away, I don't know your revenue pattern, I don't know your spending pattern and, therefore, I don't know what you can do and, therefore, I'm not going to support it." I do not think it is a rigorous or an honest position.[+3 sentences] It cannot be, right? If you know, as an individual, that you do not have enough money to even pay for your basic meals, should you not provide for some of that? Never mind that I do not know what other things we have to spend on. I mean that, that is very simple to understand and I really do not understand why you want to create this… or I must know everything before I can decide on anything. I think if I had taken that approach, if previous Finance Ministers had taken that approach, that I must know every item of expenditure before I can support you, before I know how much to raise, we would have been in serious deficit long, long ago.[+3 sentences] So, I am very grateful that previous Finance Ministers, Governments and Prime Ministers, have been extremely prudent in making sure that when we know something is coming, do not avoid it, do not pretend that it is not coming and then mislead our people and say that "Therefore, without knowing, I cannot support". The question for me is very simple, "Do you support all those increased spending? Or are you contradicting all your MPs' positions yesterday where everyone spoke about doing more? And if you do, then tell me how much is it going to cost? And even to fund a fraction of what you have suggested, where is the money going to come from, and would a two-percentage point increase help us in some ways?[+9 sentences] Do you disagree with the fact that our healthcare expenditure will go up and, if you do not disagree, then the question is how do we find the revenue sources to meet that? So, that is the answer to your first question, and also your second question about why your Party's position, about why you cannot support at this point. So, now that I know that it is your Party's position, I am even more puzzled because I wonder why all your MPs, every single one of them, spoke about "let's do more". In fact, none of them had suggested that "No, no, no, you should cut back on this item or that item.” In fact, “Very good, whatever you do, double up, do more." So, the question is, if I accept all your proposals, I have to redo the expenditure sums again and look at what else we need to do. So, I think that is quite a distraction. I hope Mr Low was not distracted somewhere. Now, as to your point about the land sales, and why my five land parcel analogy is not a correct one. The basic fact is this: most of our land sales are of pretty long leases − 99 years; for industrial land, some 30 years, some 60 years.[+1 sentence] If you sell that land for 99 years, you are not going to get back that land until 100 years later. If you are rigorous about it, you really ought to be spending no more than 1% of that land sale proceeds even if you want to use land sales proceeds because that is what the land is worth for a year. But for Mr Pritam Singh to say, "Oh, don't worry, let's take 20% of the land sales and, therefore, use that", is it not the equivalent? And you are not going to get the land back over the length of the lease. So, that stream, that upfront capital payment, ought to be considered over its lifespan and, therefore, it is not proper.[+4 sentences] Several MPs had spoken yesterday that even for building infrastructure, we should be considering lifecycle costs. So, I think we better do our financing properly. Then, on the Member's point about the PISA score and the students, we are not saying that we have a perfect education system. In fact, there are many things which I am very happy that Minister Ng Chee Meng and Minister Ong Ye Kung are continuing to do, building on the works of previous Finance Ministers, to continue to raise —
Some hon Members2 words
[+1 sentence]Education Minister.
Mr Heng Swee Keat312 words
[+17 sentences]Sorry? Education Minister, yes. Did I say "Finance"? Oh okay. I am not hinting at any changes! I got distracted! Well, they continue to build on this good work. That all these changes have taken place for many, many years and the fact that our students are doing so well, it is really a tribute to our educators, our parents, to the many self-help groups. The numbers which I have shown are done by the OECD study, not just of PISA but, in fact, of various areas in which they are looking at our kids, including in areas like collaborative problem-solving. Our kids are ranked best in the world in this. We must give credit for this. As a former Education Minister, I can tell you that the reason why collectively we are ranked so high, the very important reason is this: in every country, you can find one good school, one of the best schools which the elites would go to. In Singapore, if you look at the performance of students across our schools, you can see what a high average it is. So, when I say "Every school, a good school", it is not just a feel-good thing. Because I really think that we must give credit to all our educators, to all our principals, to all our parents for the hard work that they put in so that, regardless of which school you go to, the child has the best chance of success. Beyond the basic foundation as they move into post-secondary education, that we have many more pathways for them to excel. It is right and proper that we look at what have been achieved, rather than look at what has not been achieved and, therefore, pick on that one narrow area and discredit the work that has been going on by so many good people.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied)456 words
[+3 sentences]I would like to thank the Finance Minister for his round-up speech and the additional figures that the Finance Minister gave. Sir, I have some questions for the Finance Minister. One of the hardest things I had to do with this Budget actually was to try and assess how a GST hike can be staved off, given the Government's Budget. Just as a matter of perspective on the question of using our Reserves as a source of income, the Government's reliance on Reserves has quadrupled from 2006 to 2011, from about $2 billion to about $8 billion. Since then, to the upcoming financial year, it has doubled from that.[+2 sentences] So, when the Minister says that the Workers' Party is irresponsible and dishonest, I respectfully have to disagree with him on that account. With that as a preamble, I have five questions for the Minister. First, in his Second Reading speech, when the Constitution was amended in 2015 to include Temasek in the NIRC framework, Finance Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam said that Temasek's inclusion would increase the NIRC’s share of GDP from 2% to about 3% on average over five years.[+5 sentences] But today it stands at 3.4%. Does this tentatively suggest that the Government actually has more income from NIRC than it originally planned to have, with more likely to be realised in the future, in view of the fact that the NIR formula tends to smoothen out investment cycles? That is the first question. The second question has to do with the point I raised in my Budget speech, which is whether there is any scope for raising NIRC from 60% to 70% for a short period of time to oversee large infrastructure spending, with the view to return this back to 50% on the condition that the revenues from such infrastructure must be returned to the past Reserves. This would free up more of the Government's Budget in the respective financial years for recurrent spending and this was one suggestion I put forward to stave off the GST hike, and I am not sure whether the Minister replied to that. The third question is with reference to the NIRC portion of this year's Budget: how much in dollar terms of the $15.8 billion originated from the Net Investment Income (NII) component of NIRC, and NIR component respectively?[+3 sentences] Fourthly, how does the Government determine which investment entity – MAS, Temasek or GIC – gets a larger component of land sales revenue for investment, in view of the different risk thresholds that each entity assumes? Finally, is there a mechanism or basis by which the Government determines how much of the Reserves it requires to maintain the strength of the Singapore dollar? Is there a mechanism for that?
Mr Heng Swee Keat1293 words
[+1 sentence]I thank Mr Pritam Singh for his questions. The Member's first question, about the fact that our NIRC is, in fact, becoming an increasing source of revenue for the Government: that is correct. This number has been doubling; from $2 billion to $8 billion to $16 billion that the Member mentioned.[+14 sentences] So, in that regard, that is why I said, it is now the single largest source and, therefore, we should be careful in having a more diversified source of revenue. The Member asked about whether the fact that the overall NIRC contribution is 3.4%, when the Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam has said that it is between 2% and 3% over the five-year period. Is it because we are getting more? Well, the markets have been doing better. But bear in mind one thing, the NIRC is about long-term investment. It is about long-term investment. And, therefore, we cannot work based on short-term fluctuations and decide that well, henceforth, in the future, we would have this 3%, 4%, 5% that we can rely on. It does not work that way. I was at the MAS when the Global Financial Crisis happened. I can tell you that I spent many days and nights and weekends looking at the market and how it was going to affect us. I attended so many meetings among global central bankers, Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of companies, of financial institutions, with finance ministers in the developed world and with major central banks. You find that none foresaw the problem. There were warnings about some of these by some analysts, but none foresaw the problem, and the impact was huge. We must accept that there will be market volatility which you cannot predict. And it is not sound to build our finances on short-term fluctuations, whether up or down. That is why the NIR formula has a built-in way to smoothen these asset fluctuations.[+14 sentences] You do not want to have a situation where financial markets are doing very well, that the Government spends a lot more, and then when the markets go down, which is probably when we need the resources most, that you have very little to meet those needs. Let us be very careful about over-interpreting the number. The Member's other comment about raising the NIRC contribution to 60%-70% for a short period for infrastructure, is this not another way of touching your Reserves, changing the formula, to use it and say, at some point, I would put it back? I do not see the logic of that argument. In fact, what we are doing, or what we are hoping to do, is that we want to have proper discipline and scrutiny of borrowing for infrastructure. That is why we are going to discuss with the President and CPA. We think that a proper way of doing this is to issue bonds in the market so that investors can scrutinise those numbers and see that these are viable projects. Then, seeking the approval of the President and CPA to provide a guarantee. So, again, there is another layer of check but, at the same time, that layer of guarantee allows us to access funding at probably a better rate. So, we are using the strengths of the Reserves strategically but without touching the Reserves so that the Reserves can continue to be invested for long-term gains. That is the approach and, therefore, whether you are taking 50%, 55%, 60% or 70% for a short period of time, it sounds like it is a costless option. It is not. It cannot be done that way. The way that we are proposing is conceptually sound and financially sound. The Member asked about how the land sales proceeds get to MAS, GIC and Temasek, and how do we divide that? We have a whole-of-Government Reserves Management Committee chaired by the Prime Minister and there we look at the risks and returns of different entities, the risks and returns across the different markets and allocate it for long-term gains, taking into account both the returns as well as the risks at the current market environment.[+13 sentences] The Member's last question about the basis of the Reserves for the strength of the Singapore dollar, let me clarify. There has been a lot of misunderstanding on this point. Certainly, strong Reserves help us to anchor confidence. But MAS' needs in terms of what it does as a central bank is very different from almost all central banks in the world. All central banks in the world adopt an interest rate policy. Whether it is the US Federal Reserve (Fed), the European Central Bank (ECB) or the Bank of Japan (BOJ), the central bank announces certain policy rates and then they undertake certain operations to get to that rate if they need to, but the announcement itself and the anticipation of the announcement have very major impact on the economy. That is how they conduct monetary policy. In our case, our monetary policy is centred on the exchange rate. Again, I must give great credit to Dr Goh Keng Swee and his team very early on, for deciding on this most unusual way of dealing with our monetary policy. The reason is this: the exchange rate has a far bigger impact on the state of the economy than interest rates. We are a very open economy and, therefore, the exchange rate affects economic activity in a far more significant way. The MAS regularly updates our trade numbers and updates our economic model to see if that remains valid. From looking at the studies that they have done, I am convinced that it remains the right policy: to have an exchange rate-centred policy to be able to manage the economy. The Reserves are not just about maintaining the strength of the Singapore dollar.[+4 sentences] The MAS manages our official foreign reserves and it undertakes operations in the market in order to get to the desired band. It also makes policy announcements regularly so that the market is clear about the official assessment of the economy. The market may or may not agree and, in which case, you will see currency movements. But I must say that MAS has done a very good job over the years and so the market generally accepts MAS' policy announcements. In terms of maintaining the strength of the Singapore dollar, the Reserves play a very important crisis role which was what was tested during the Asian Financial Crisis.[+1 sentence] When speculators were speculating on the positions of other currencies, they did not touch very much the Singapore dollar because they know of two very fundamental reasons. One, our finances are sound; that our fiscal policy at the various stages of the crisis is sound. And that is why I mentioned that we are one of 11 countries with a triple-A credit rating.[+2 sentences] All these firms who are doing credit ratings look at the numbers very carefully before they give us a triple-A rating. So, that is one important anchor. Two, speculators know that should they try to attack the Singapore dollar, it is not just our official reserves that they have to contend with. We also have reserves that are invested in longer-term assets and that we will be able to mobilise, if we need to.[+2 sentences] So, those are the very important defences that we have for the Singapore dollar, and the very fact that the Singapore dollar has risen is not just because of our monetary policy. The fundamental reason is that our economy has been doing better, that the real economy has got its position correct, that we have been upgrading and revamping the economy over the years and, therefore, the currency moves up, in order to play the equilibrating role.
Mr Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Minister Shanmugam.
The Minister for Home Affairs and Minister for Law (Mr K Shanmugam)356 words
[+8 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. Can I seek a clarification from Ms Sylvia Lim who said that there was a trial balloon when the Prime Minister spoke last year, and because of the public reaction, the Government backed down but was stuck with this announcement and, therefore, this announcement has been made of a future GST increase. Can I invite her to agree that that is a thoroughly hypocritical and dishonest statement, and typical of the statements she makes in this House? Let me explain. Would Ms Sylvia Lim agree that the Prime Minister first talked about a tax increase during the National Day Rally – I think it was in 2013? And that the Finance Minister talked about the tax increase in the Budget last year, a year ago? The Prime Minister, when he spoke about the likelihood of a tax increase late last year, referenced to the Finance Minister's statement earlier in the year. Does she not know all these facts? If one, with some commonsense, puts those facts together with another set of facts, which is that Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam and the Prime Minister had said that the Government had enough funds for this term, if you put those two sets of Government positions together, is it not absolutely clear that (a) we do not need money for this term, and (b) we will need to raise taxes for the future?[+3 sentences] Given that the positions have been consistent and Ms Sylvia Lim will also know that, for example, that when we first talked about GST, it was mentioned in 1986, but it came into force much later, in 1994. So, given those sets of facts, would Ms Lim be prepared to withdraw the very serious allegations she makes, that this Government announces something late last year, trial balloon, public reacts, we quickly backed down, but we are stuck; basically, making an accusation that the Government is behaving willy nilly, dishonestly. And if she will not withdraw those baseless suggestions, will she set out what the facts are for making the suggestion, whether she still stands by the suggestion, and repeats it?
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim201 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Law Minister for his questions. I can understand why he wants to accuse me of various things, because he probably was not happy about past debates where I had disagreed with some of his legislative changes, and in typical fashion, he always accuses me of dishonesty, when, as far as I am concerned, I acted honestly. Sir, the basis for my statement was that it is my belief that the announcements by the Government earlier on, that they had enough revenues for this term of Government, have now tied their hands as to when the GST increase can kick in. One can look at the principles that our Government uses for budgeting, which are usually very conservative, and we also have heard the Finance Minister talk about the fact that we must be prepared for all contingencies, so, if those announcements had not been made, we may be facing a GST increase in this Budget Statement.[+1 sentence] As to the chronology of events that the Minister recited, I do not have them on hand, I have to go back and check – to be fair to him – but this is my honest belief.
Mr K Shanmugam31 words
Seeing what the facts are, as I have set them out, would Ms Lim agree that the suggestions are baseless, and are you prepared to withdraw that this Government behaved dishonestly?
Ms Sylvia Lim27 words
[+1 sentence]Sir, I never said that the Government behaved dishonestly. [restates an earlier point]I said that the Government is stuck with the announcement that they have enough money for the decade.
Mr K Shanmugam76 words
[+3 sentences]The implication, based on what you have said, is that a trial balloon was floated with the obvious intention that a tax increase was going to be announced now, but because of the public reaction being so severe, the Government has backtracked and has changed its mind, and has announced it as a future tax increase. Is that not what you have said? And if that is not what you are saying, please say so clearly.
Ms Sylvia Lim24 words
[+4 sentences]Sir, I clearly said that it was my suspicion. I clearly said that. You can check the Hansard. And it is my honest suspicion.
Mr Speaker8 words
[+1 sentence]If Members can wait until I call them.
Ms Sylvia Lim9 words
[+1 sentence]So, am I not entitled to have a view?
Mr Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Minister Shanmugam.
Mr K Shanmugam136 words
[+7 sentences]We now have confirmation that there was a suspicion. Does Ms Lim agree that it does not accord with the standards of a First World parliament and honest debate, for someone to come here and start talking about, "This is my suspicion", "I cannot back it up", "It is contrary to all the facts", "In fact, I have not checked the facts; now that you have recounted the facts, I'll go back and check. But I have my suspicions." Would she agree that that is contrary to the standards of a First-World parliament? Secondly, I am not the only one to accuse Ms Lim of dishonesty. I think a phrase, a Latin phrase will be ringing in her mind: "suppressio veri, suggestio falsi ". Somebody very eminent, a High Court Judge, said that about Ms Lim.
Mr Speaker11 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Sylvia Lim. Unfortunately, we do not have translators for Latin.
Ms Sylvia Lim122 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, as far as I know, there is such a thing as parliamentary privilege. And if I recall earlier debates, even People's Action Party (PAP) MPs were encouraged to come to the House to convey even rumours, so that the Government has the opportunity to refute them.[+5 sentences] This is the value of this Chamber. I do not agree with the Minister that I am somehow not up to standards. This is what we as Members of Parliament have to do to get better clarity on matters of public interest. Of course, the Government can rebut our speeches robustly – that is fine. But I do not think I am disentitled to come to Parliament to advance honestly-held beliefs or suspicions.
Mr Speaker5 words
[+2 sentences]Within limits. Minister for Finance.
Mr Heng Swee Keat385 words
[+6 sentences]Mr Speaker, thank you. I want to thank my colleague, Minister Shanmugam, for reminding me that I have not answered this part of Ms Lim's question. Ms Lim says that she is saying this on suspicion. I believe Ms Lim is a lawyer and also a Police Officer before. I, too, have been a Police Officer before. So, we both know that the first thing when we have a suspicion, is to go out and interview witnesses as part of our investigations. I want to present myself as your witness, because I have been working on this ever since I became Finance Minister. I want to confirm that the statement made by Deputy Prime Minister Tharman: that we have enough revenues till this term of Government, is correct. We have done all our projections and that is an accurate and truthful statement.[+4 sentences] If you were to look at circumstantial evidence, why did I not set a timeline for that? I said that it depends on the prevailing economic conditions, it depends on a number of factors which I will continue to carefully monitor. And that we must not get distracted with one-off events, one-off surpluses. I made that very clear in my Statement. If, indeed, we were so short, would it not be the logical thing to say, "Let's do it now" and find some ways to do it?[+1 sentence] We did not. [restates an earlier point]I said that it is between 2021 and 2025.[+1 sentence] Having told Ms Lim that I have been working on this ever since I became Finance Minister to look at all our revenue projections and expenditure projections again and discussed with the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Ministers – that the statement is correct. It is an honest assessment of our position, which remains accurate till today. That is why I did not have to do a GST increase now, in this Budget.[+5 sentences] It was not a case of floating any trial balloon. If you remember, I said it at the last Budget that we have to look for revenue measures. I said it again at a constituency visit at Cairnhill-Moulmein a few months after that. Then the Prime Minister said it in November last year. So, on the basis of all the evidence that I am offering, will Ms Lim withdraw her comments?
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim28 words
[+3 sentences]Sir, I have listened to the Finance Minister's response. I still feel that there is nothing wrong with what I have said. But I have noted his answer.
Mr Speaker8 words
[+2 sentences]Are there any other clarifications? Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin (Nominated Member)256 words
[+9 sentences]I thank the Finance Minister for the extended explanation he has given on taxes, borrowing and Reserves, I will definitely be referring to the Hansard when I prepare for future General Paper (GP) lectures. I have a request and a clarifying question. The request is: can I request that slides be made available to the public and that MOF engage with youth educators, specifically for GP, Social Studies and Economics, to help them facilitate a deeper conversation with young people about this? Because I think it is a conversation that is going to come up again and again. Many teachers actually feel very inadequate at explaining this and may give a wrong understanding. For the clarifying question, I understand that the full size of the Reserves can never be revealed for strategic reasons, but the absence of public information about the size of Reserves and the rate of return makes it quite hard for the average lay person, especially the educators, to have a meaningful conversation about it. The problem with the vacuum of information is alternative narratives are filling the gap – some are obvious, deliberate misinformation and some are just different from the Government's story. I read an Overseas-Chinese Banking Corporation (OCBC) Economist's suggestion that we could split the Reserves into two parts: one as a base for generating the NIRC that can be publicly disclosed; and the other that is used to deter currency speculations can be kept secret. I was wondering if the Finance Minister could give his take on this suggestion.
Mr Heng Swee Keat581 words
[+4 sentences]I thank Ms Kuik for her questions. On the first request: can we make the slides and the information available to our people and our educators? The answer is, certainly. And if there are particular information or analyses that she thinks are useful, I would be happy to get my colleagues to work on that, because I think an informed discussion is important. As to the second question, Ms Kuik understands the need for our Reserves numbers not to be revealed because it serves as a strategic asset.[+4 sentences] I hope she appreciates that, in a world of major currency transactions every day, even the size of our Reserves is tiny by international standards. It is tiny by the amount of transactions that are going on around the world every day. And we are an important financial centre. So, the answer to the suggestion on whether we can split it into two parts: I have actually considered that, but I do not think it is sound because there will still be speculation as to how big that part is. Two, the MAS' official foreign reserves are actually in the data.[+20 sentences] It is publicly available as to how big the MAS' official foreign reserves are. A way of thinking about it is that that forms one part of it, but, as for the rest, should we look at it more? Should we reveal more? No. Having gone through the Asian Financial Crisis – I was serving as Principal Private Secretary to Minister Mentor then – and I was looking at how various countries were managing their reserves and managing the currency speculators, it was the most important lesson for me as a young officer then. Never underestimate how the profit motive can destroy countries. It happened very, very swiftly and I have to say that, rather unfortunately, many of the countries that were very deeply affected, adopted policies that looked very good at that point in time. It seemed like they were doing the right thing, but the reserves were gone very, very quickly, and it took them years and years to rebuild them. Having gone through the Global Financial Crisis when I was running MAS, I was even more concerned. We all thought that maybe only developing countries are vulnerable to financial crises. But when this crisis happened, it originated from the most developed economies in the world, amongst the most sophisticated financial centres, in the US, in Europe, and then it spread to all the rest of us. We, in Asia, were lucky that all those new products and new innovations had not had such a strong foothold yet, although they were coming. Let us be very careful about dealing with finances, dealing with our Reserves, dealing with our global financial market. It is easy to suggest, "Let's do this, and that". But we really have to think through the implications very, very carefully, and we must continue to monitor how global financial markets are developing. Even as I speak, new rules are being made; not only about global finances but about global taxation. And these rules are going to change. In my Budget speech, I spoke about how the centre of economic activity is moving towards Asia. I also added a line that the global order will change. I think Mr Low Thia Khiang hoisted that point. Therefore, let us think very hard about all the things that we need to do and make sure that we provide sufficient buffer.
Mr Speaker22 words
[+1 sentence]And on that the note, the Question is, "That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year —"
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member)6 words
[+1 sentence]Sir, can I seek a clarification?
Mr Speaker36 words
[+3 sentences]I am moving on. The Question is, "That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1 April 2018 to 31 March 2019." As many as are of the opinion say "Aye".
Hon Members1 words
[+1 sentence]Aye.
Mr Speaker9 words
[+1 sentence]To the contrary say "No". Yes, Minister for Finance.
Mr Heng Swee Keat64 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, this is an important Motion on a very important issue. And after the debate that we have in Parliament, the Workers' Party has not made clear its stance on the Government's financial policy. So, I either have a clarification from Ms Sylvia Lim now that she supports the financial policy of the Government, or I would ask for a Division, Sir.
Mr Speaker8 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Sylvia Lim, would you like to respond?
Ms Sylvia Lim61 words
Yes, Sir, I thought I made it clear earlier that we support this Budget, as far as the measures in the Budget go.[+2 sentences] But the GST announcement was an announcement which is not being implemented in this Budget. So, in accordance with the usual procedure, I do not think we are voting on the announcement; we are voting on the measures.
Mr Speaker11 words
[+1 sentence]Minister for Finance, would you like to proceed with a Division?
Mr Heng Swee Keat56 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, this debate is a debate on the financial policy of the Government, and I have articulated in this Budget the financial policy of the Government. Therefore, the financial policy includes the policy to raise GST in the coming years, between 2021 and 2025. So, I think I will ask for a Division, Sir.
Mr Speaker18 words
[+2 sentences]Let me state my opinion on the collected voices. As many as are of that opinion say "Aye".
Hon Members1 words
[+1 sentence]Aye.
Mr Speaker5 words
[+1 sentence]To the contrary say "No".
Some hon Members1 words
[+1 sentence]No.
Ms Sylvia Lim15 words
[+1 sentence]Speaker, to make clear, we are unable to support the announcement on the GST hike.
Mr Speaker47 words
[+4 sentences]For this particular Motion, we are voting on the Budget Statement. We either vote "Yes", "No" or "Abstain". So, we will proceed with the Division. Will hon Members who support the Division, please rise in their places?
Mr Speaker15 words
[+2 sentences]Thank you. Clerk, ring the division bells.
Mr Speaker30 words
[+1 sentence]Serjeant-at-Arms, lock the doors.
Mr Speaker17 words
[+1 sentence]Minister for Finance, you have called for a Division, would you like to proceed with a Division?
Mr Heng Swee Keat2 words
[+1 sentence]Yes, Sir.
Mr Speaker58 words
[+4 sentences]May I remind Members to please sit at your designated seats. You should only start to vote when the voting buttons on your armrests start to blink. Members may now begin to vote. Members are advised to check that their names are registered according to their vote indication when the voting results are shown on the display screen.
Mr Speaker51 words
[chair housekeeping]I will proceed to declare the voting results now.[chair housekeeping]There are 89 "Ayes", eight "Noes", and zero "Abstentions".[+1 sentence] The "Ayes" have it.