Full transcript, 1,032,119 characters — every turn. Summarised passages are
highlighted: 1,050 passages across 115 turns, covering
16.7% of what was said. The rest is the record itself.
Open on 1,059 sentences (16.7%
of the characters). 7,096 sentences in 974 stretches are folded
inline — tap a [+N sentences] to read them where they sit.
1 further highlight held back as procedure or repetition (1 restatement) — collapsed, not removed. Every topic below is closed until you open it.
[+2 sentences][(proc text) "to provide for the issue from the Consolidated Fund and the Development Fund of the sums necessary to meet the estimated expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023," (proc text)] [(proc text) recommendation of President signified; presented by the Second Minister for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah); read the First time; to be read a Second time after the conclusion of proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for FY2022/23, and to be printed. (proc text)]
[+2 sentences][(proc text) recommendation of President signified; presented by the Second Minister for Finance (Ms Indranee Rajah); read the First time; to be read a Second time after the conclusion of proceedings on the Estimates of Expenditure for FY2021/22, and to be printed. (proc text)]
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, what caught my attention about the Budget speech was the Minister for Finance's characterisation of the Budget as a first step to renew and strengthen Singapore's social compact towards a fairer, more sustainable and more inclusive society. The Workers' Party agrees with this important direction in pathfinding the way forward for our little red dot. Workers' Party Chair and Member of Parliament for Aljunied GRC, Ms Sylvia Lim, will speak further on this, with inputs on inclusivity and innovation in her Budget debate speech tomorrow. However, there are aspects of the Budget that are of concern to us. We disagree with the decision to raise the Goods and Services Tax, especially at this time, and the Workers' Party Members of Parliament who speak after me will put forward alternative ideas for revenue generation.[+8 sentences] I will outline the Workers' Party's position on the GST and briefly introduce the areas that Workers' Party Members of Parliament will speak on. Then, I will share my views on the main prongs of the Budget. First, the GST increase. While the GST hike was anticipated, it comes at a difficult time for our people. Inflation is on the upswing and prices are high. Supply chain disruptions are having an outsized impact on people's purses. There is real concern on the ground that the announcement to raise the GST will lead to price rises across the board. In fact, some price rises have already occurred, with speculation that these were in anticipation of a GST hike. The Workers' Party's position is that the Government need not raise the GST.[+19 sentences] There are other options for raising revenue. A Straits Times column last month discussed the urgency of rebuilding public finances in the face of Budget deficits and the drawdown of reserves. The GST was held up as being one of the largest and most stable revenue sources, difficult to replace with any other kind of tax. The impression created by the article and similar arguments was that raising the GST is the only viable option for financing offset packages for the needy and healthcare, and to balance the Budget. We disagree that there are no other options. The Workers' Party has previously raised several proposals in this House, both on taxes, as well as adjustments to the reserves framework. These options do not constitute a raiding of the reserves, as the PAP enthusiastically and inaccurately portrays. We have supported the call for fiscal prudence as a principle of governance. But we also believe that the judicious use of progressive tax measures can achieve wider societal goals in Singapore. Within this term of Parliament, we have proposed a wealth tax and raised the prospect of more progressive corporate tax policies. We have also supported the carbon tax. The Government, for its part, has not rejected further wealth taxes outright but spoke of the difficulties of implementing some of these tax measures. These will have to be proactively explored, particularly in view of the limited impact of some measures announced in the Budget, which had been characterised as a tax on wealth. For example, on the additional registration fee, or ARF tier, for luxury cars announced by the Minister for Finance, a senior manager of a large car dealership which includes luxury vehicles in its stable, was asked if the higher ARF would curb spending on high-end cars. He was quoted in The Business Times as saying: "It is possible, but I think there's still enough wealth going around". As the Government continues to explore wealth taxes, the Workers' Party's view is that a distinction needs to be made between different types of wealth taxes. We should recognise the legitimate accumulation of wealth through effort and tangible business activity, especially that which creates jobs for Singaporeans. Even as there remains scope for wealth taxes, the values of entrepreneurship and equitable reward for hard work can, nonetheless, be recognised and even promoted through tax rebates or relief for such individuals. However, wealth accumulated through capital appreciation should be dealt with differently and taxed accordingly in the name of a fairer and more inclusive society. The Workers' Party has also previously asked if we can tweak the reserves framework and the way reserves contribute to our Budget. We have proposed including a portion of land sales into recurrent revenue and also an adjustment of the Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) allowed for recurrent spending to be raised to 60% from the current 50%.[+4 sentences] The Government has disagreed with these reasonable suggestions. In 2001, then-Prime Minister Goh referred to the reserves as a golden goose. The Workers' Party remains of the mind that we can continue to grow the golden goose, but at a slower rate. The impending population bulge for our seniors portends stress lines for our healthcare needs and our welfare system. The Minister projected that, starting from current levels of healthcare spending and assuming increases at a similar rate in the next 10 years, the Government could be spending $27 billion on healthcare yearly by 2030, compared to $11.3 billion in 2019.[+7 sentences] But, the fact is that our population is getting older and living longer. While it is responsible to ensure that wastage is minimised as far as possible, our healthcare needs will likely be on an upward trajectory. For the very Singaporeans whose energies contributed to the reserves and who have played their part to fatten the golden goose, spending for them in their golden years and at their time of need should not even be a question. Moderating the growth of the reserves also improves intergenerational equity and accounts for the changing needs of Singapore and its people. It must be noted that the Government has shown, over time, that they are of a similar mind. At the 2001 National Day Rally, then-Prime Minister Goh said that the reserves must be protected and fattened. However, changes to the reserves scheme have been implemented by subsequent PAP Governments. The 2008 change of the Net Investment Income to Net Investment Returns (NIR) with the immediate conclusion of up to 50% of NIR contributions from MAS and GIC and the inclusion of Temasek in the NIRC formula in 2015 were all deliberate moves. These changes have made the NIRC component the largest source of revenue for the yearly Budget from around $2 billion in 2006 to close to $22 billion for the upcoming financial year.[+9 sentences] This number will only continue rising. This is despite the fact that the Government's adjustments have slowed the rate at which the reserves grow. Here, I ask that the Government not rule out changes to our Budget framework. Just as we should not kill the golden goose, we should also not fatten the golden goose at the expense of the people's well-being. On the necessity of a GST hike, the Workers' Party has also made the point that the Government should lay out its revenue and expenditure projections for the rest of the decade. This is so that the necessity of a GST hike can be considered properly and with greater introspection. We note that the Government has resisted the publication of such revenue and expenditure projections, but the publication of such information is not unusual in other jurisdictions. Just last week, on 23 February, the Hong Kong government issued its budget statement. At Appendix A, the Hong Kong budget includes a medium range forecast of its revenue and expenditure positions for each subsequent year up to fiscal year 2026 to 2027, with assumptions laid out. Can the Minister tell us why MOF does not make such medium-term forecasting a part of our public-facing budgetary process?[+14 sentences] And, more specifically, does MOF have such projections at least up to five years in the future? And what is the hesitation in publishing these projections? Doing so would allow the public to have an in-depth insight as to the need to raise GST and the sustainability of public finances in the years to come. The question of projections with respect to public finances must also be considered in the context of the absolute necessity of raising the GST at this point in time. For example, a Business Times article today advanced the view held by market watchers that Singapore could potentially make a net gain in terms of revenue from the global move to introduce a standardised minimum corporate tax rate. Even so, it is of little doubt that the GST has been put to good use by the Government to finance spending. But after more than two decades, its drawbacks remain. The GST is a regressive tax that hits lower-income earners harder. And this fact has been recognised since the GST was introduced in the early 1990s. My colleague, Sengkang GRC Member of Parliament, Ms He Ting Ru, will speak more about the GST. Like now, the concerns back in the 1990s were about the average Singaporean worker who was vulnerable to increases in the prices of necessities. Today, with offset packages targeting low- and middle-income Singaporeans, it is the middle-class that is particularly anxious. In spite of the headline-grabbing GST offset package announced at this Budget, there is an anxiety as to how much prices will rise in future over the period the offset package would cover. In addition to the concerns about spikes for specific Consumer Price Index (CPI) items, there are also concerns about minor price hikes across the board that will hurt cumulatively, not too different from the analogy of the frog in a pot of gradually boiling water. Should the aggregate of price rises be significant, the impact of the additional offsets may not be as optimistic as highlighted in Annex F–2 of the Budget Statement for 3-room and 4-room HDB households where the enhanced Assurance Package is estimated to offset the GST hike of 11.8 and 7.9 years respectively.[+13 sentences] As Singaporeans well know, no offset package lasts forever. The Government expects that, in time, Singaporeans will internalise the GST hike. At this Budget debate, the Workers' Party will raise additional alternative proposals to raise revenue so as to stave off the GST hike. In particular, Sengkang GRC Members of Parliament, Louis Chua and Jamus Lim, would explore other levers for revenue generation. Apart from the reserves' framework, the alternatives proposed are not inconsistent with the principle that recurrent expenditures should be backed by recurrent revenues. What continues to weigh heavily on Singaporeans today is the rising cost of living, including for the middle-income or "sandwiched" class. Cost increases in electricity, gas and transport were thrust upon Singaporeans last year and over the last few months. Energy prices continue to rise. The enthusiasm with which the Government spoke of the electricity retail market in 2018 as a means to manage the cost of living has become decidedly more muted with the exit of multiple retail players. In December, the electricity tariff for households was raised by 0.6% and there was a recent revision of household refuse collection fees which took effect last month after a previous hike in 2017. A TODAY article from late October last year quoted the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) predicting that food, preschool and healthcare costs may go up this year. In view of the current economic outlook, it is safe to say that this is a foregone conclusion. According to data released by the MAS and MTI last week, the headline CPI remains at what it was last December at 4%. CPI data from last month show that utilities and other fuels rose 11.8% compared to a year earlier and transport is up 12.7% year-on-year.[+2 sentences] Lower-income Singaporeans, working Singaporeans and middle-class Singaporeans are all being hit very, very hard. There is also a pattern of increasing public transport fares over the last three years, as shown in information from the Public Transport Council. While adult card fares were alternatingly increased and reduced between 2014 and 2017, they were raised by six cents in 2018, a further nine cents in 2019 and then another three to four cents in 2020.[+30 sentences] While measured in cents, these increases are by no means small to many who have to incur these costs every day – not as a luxury or as discretionary spending, but as an unavoidable expense simply to get to work and back. About three weeks ago, ComfortDelGro Taxi announced an increase in fares by 8%. Just last Friday, all the other taxi companies announced that they would follow suit. All these and the other inevitable price hikes to come over the next five to 10 years will blunt the impact of the GST Assurance Package, to say nothing of the psychological impact of the package's reduced effectiveness against a backdrop of rising prices. The Workers' Party's position on the GST notwithstanding, I welcome the announcement of the formation of a Committee Against Profiteering to address concerns that some businesses could use GST as a cover to raise prices. I would like to raise a few issues relating to the Committee. First, in order for this Committee to be effective, the public should be clearly informed as to what evidence they would need to file a complaint with the Committee. Otherwise, it would be a case of the word of a person against that of a business. Second, at a time when inflation due to the supply chain crunch is a real concern, some businesses may have good reason to raise prices, or a legitimate reason to raise prices. For example, because of the rising price of raw materials and not under the pretext of the GST hike. This may cause misunderstanding amongst the public about resorting to the Committee to investigate the price hikes. But if rising business costs are due to supply chain woes, then prices should correct in time and even fall as the supply chain crunch eases. If they do not, then it would be legitimate for the Committee to inquire why this is the case. Third, the Committee should look into the businesses that move to raise prices before the GST hike is introduced. It should not rule out looking into complaints of such pre-emptive price rises that try to bypass the Committee's terms of reference. SMEs, hawkers and sole proprietors should be allowed to respond to the Committee if they have been falsely or unfairly accused of raising prices. Finally, the Committee should closely track price rises at heartland shops where many Singaporeans purchase food and essentials. Minister of State Ms Low Yen Ling has written to me to nominate one Member from the Opposition benches to sit on this Committee. I have extended this invitation to our Parliamentary colleagues from the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) and Non-Constituency Member of Parliament Ms Hazel Poa has agreed to sit on the Committee. Let me now move to topics other than the GST. The Workers' Party is of the view that the Budget is broad-based in providing assistance to individuals and businesses to address both immediate as well as short to medium term concerns. Specifically, it provides a useful transitional support such as the Small Business Recovery Grant to businesses in eligible sectors that have been hit hard by COVID-19. One input we have is to ask the Government to actively consider appeals from businesses that fall outside the eligibility criteria on a more flexible and case-by-case basis as far as possible. We also support CPF transition offsets to help phase in the raising of employer and employee CPF contribution rates for senior workers. This raising of rates is vitally important in supporting the retirement adequacy of senior workers. What was not fleshed out in significant detail was the Minister's commitment that the Government intends to refine how Employment Pass (EP) applications are assessed to increase certainty and transparency for businesses. Even while it is a given that Singapore will always be open to foreign talent, we must always prioritise Singaporean talent who represent the Singapore Core. If a Singaporean can do the job or be trained to do the job, the Government should not inadvertently make it easier or more convenient to resort to hiring foreigners. I hope Minister will share more details of the Government's thinking on the new EP framework in his wrap-up speech. The Budget also renders important support to businesses to ensure that our workers at the lower end of the salary spectrum will see meaningful salary increments. In this regard, I hope the Minister for Finance can consider moving more decisively to ensure that Singaporean workers who take home less than $1,300 can rely on the PWM Credit Scheme to raise their wages immediately.[+2 sentences] With the PWM Credit Scheme as announced by this Budget, I would argue that this can be achieved forthwith instead of waiting for all PWM sectors to be rolled out incrementally before the low-wage situation for these workers is addressed. Let me explain. Assuming that we want to provide immediate relief to the 32,000 full-time Singaporean workers who earn less than $1,300 with a generous $400 a month wage hike for 13 months each financial year, a back-of-the-envelope calculation shows that it would require about $167 million year to significantly uplift the well-being of these lower-income workers. This sum would constitute 8% of the $2 billion set aside under the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) Credit Scheme and only 9.2% of the $1.8 billion that the Government has committed each year over the next five years for this scheme.[+3 sentences] I hope the Government is persuaded to move quickly on this even as discussions on PWM sectors are ongoing. As they already earn very low salaries, these 32,000 workers can and should be supported with higher wages immediately. A second intervention I would suggest for low-income workers amongst us concerns the changes to the Workfare Income Supplement. The Finance Minister has introduced a new minimum income criterion of $500 a month.[+8 sentences] There was no such criterion in the past. The Minister has said that the policy intent of this is to encourage part-timers and casual workers to take up regular full-time work. However, this new criterion will penalise part-timers and casual workers significantly. There are legitimate reasons why Singaporeans take up part time or casual work. Some may be caregivers who do not have the flexibility to take up the full-time work. Others may not be able to stand for eight hours a day, for example, in a food and beverage setting for various reasons, including their advanced years. For some individuals, full-time work can be gruelling; for others, retraining is easier said than done. Yet some others simply cannot find full-time work in the limited areas they are qualified for and take what part-time or casual work they can find. According to the MOM Labour Force, Singapore 2021 data set, there were 46,600 residents who earned less than $500 a month last year. The new criterion will deny the work for Workfare Income Supplement to these workers.[+6 sentences] I would urge the Minister for Finance to remove this criterion so that our most financially vulnerable workers can benefit from Workfare. The Workers' Party believes that the Government can move the needle for these low-income earning Singaporeans in a decisive way. It would be consistent with the philosophy of this Budget: "Charting our way towards a fairer, more sustainable and more inclusive society" to alleviate the financial stress of our most vulnerable Singaporeans. In his Budget speech, Aljunied GRC Member of Parliament, Mr Faisal Manap, will speak on other segments of Singaporeans who continue to be left behind because their plight has not been adequately addressed. Next, the carbon tax. Singapore's net carbon emission goal, as part of our green transition, recognises the important shifts that are taking place across the globe. The Budget announcement of a carbon tax of $50 to $80 per tonne of emissions by 2030 is consistent with a commitment to mitigate the climate emergency.[+28 sentences] Hougang Single Member Constituency Member of Parliament, Mr Dennis Tan, will focus on Singapore's transition to the green economy in his Budget speech. More generally, Workers' Party Members of Parliament have made several interventions and suggestions during the debate on the climate Motion in this House last month, covering subjects such as greenwashing, just transition and accelerating electric vehicles (EVs) adoption, amongst others. I note the Finance Minister's commitment to provide U-save rebates to the cushion the impact of the carbon tax on households from 2023. Going by the Government's own calculations taken in a linear way, it would follow that a carbon tax of about $ 75 per tonne could potentially increase utility bills by $2 a month. However, unlike the new tiers for personal income tax, the upper end property taxes and ARF hikes for luxury cars announced at the Budget, the Minister did not reveal the absolute quantum of revenue the carbon tax is projected to bring in up to 2030. The Government should reveal these figures. This is not only for the purpose of showing how the carbon tax revenue would be utilised to support decarbonisation, this information will allow meaningful debate to take place on the funding for these decarbonisation measures and whether and how cost of living pressures for the average Singaporean could be further alleviated through the carbon tax. Before concluding, I am reminded that in Singapore, "A"s are not usually given for effort, but for outcomes. With this Budget position as a first step in renewing and strengthening Singapore's social compact, the Government should reveal how it reports on initiatives that were previously announced and whether they met their goals. The new social compact ought to require a report card that goes into far greater detail than the bi-yearly Singapore Public Sector Outcomes Review. Let me explain using the Industry Transformation Maps, or ITMs, as an example. A transition is taking place from the original ITM to ITM 2.0, which is now dubbed the ITM 2025. I wish to ask if there is it is a report card of what has been achieved by the initial ITM, especially for deliverables where Singaporean workers are supposed to benefit. In previous exchanges in this House, notably in 2020, we received assurances that Singaporeans are benefiting and are prioritised in such efforts to generate quality jobs so there was no need to worry. To date, however, we do not have a detailed data set, sector-by-sector of how many jobs were generated by ITM 1.0 since its inception in 2016, 2017, and how many of those jobs went to Singaporeans and at what wage levels? The ITM 1.0 roadmap set out to develop new and redesigned jobs with better wages provide more overseas opportunities and more strongly support Singaporean workers' upgrading and skills deepening. Without numbers, however, it is hard to tell whether these broad and lofty goals were achieved. The overall picture maybe rosy with rising wages and low unemployment maintained. But the precise deliverables of the ITM have to be followed up upon, to know whether outcomes have been meaningful or whether alternative approaches to improve outcomes should be considered. A significant goal of the ITM was to further the interests of Singaporean workers. To this end, the timely reporting of ITM 2025 outcomes should be made a key objective of this Government. When I asked for specific figures for the first ITM outcomes and what it has achieved for Singaporean workers, MOM stated that more time was needed before we could obtain the full data. Surely, enough time has passed for such data to be available, as the planning for ITM 2025 is well underway? If such data is released, it can ameliorate the persistent angst surrounding competition between Singaporeans and foreigners over job opportunities. Further, making such information accessible will help Singaporeans better understand the overall economic landscape so that they can develop their skills in specific industries. This is really about empowering the Singaporean worker to make informed choices surrounding their economic future in line with the nation's. In this regard, the announcement of further adjustments to foreign manpower policies announced by the Finance Minister is instructive. The value proposition for businesses to hire Singaporean workers ought to become more compelling, given the anticipated increases of S Pass qualifying salaries and separately, foreign worker levy hikes announced in the Budget. With the minimum qualifying salary for new S Pass holders increasing from $2,500 to $3,000 this September and further increases already forecasted for September 2024 and 2025, it would be useful for the ITM framework to proactively track, disclose and identify which are the ITM sectors are more reliant on S Pass holders and where there could be opportunities for Singaporean workers.[+1 sentence] Businesses will also benefit from this information as they can be incentivised to redesign jobs to attract Singaporeans. The same expectation should be set aside for the large taxpayers' dollars set aside for national plans like the Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2025 Plan where $25 billion has been allocated from 2021 to 2025.[+15 sentences] The outcomes of such initiatives should be a major feature of the new post-pandemic social compact where the Government seeks to renew between citizens and the Government. My colleague, Aljunied Member of Parliament Mr Leon Perera will explore the national goals the Government should focus on aggressively, including poverty alleviation, inequality and social mobility. Ready access to data on outcomes of Government initiatives, including multi-year ones will greatly support all three prongs that Mr Perera will advance. To conclude, COVID-19 was and remains a generational crisis. But it has also proven to be a priceless opportunity to reflect on the robustness of our social compact and the live reality of Singaporeans, particularly at the lower- and lower to middle-income levels. It is also an opportunity to reflect on our values as a people. How much do we value the efforts and contributions of those around us, regardless of social economic class or nationality? How does the Singapore system recognise the effort and labour of those who work with their hands like our conservancy and landscape workers, or those who invest their lives in looking after the needs of others or nurturing future generations of Singaporeans, such as our teachers and our nurses? What about our artists and sporting talents? And what about the foreign workers in our midst? Their living and working conditions must be a priority for not just their well-being, but our well-being too. I say for our well-being too because caring for others establishes the standards that we set for ourselves on the type of people we wish to be. While COVID-19 has been debilitating for the economy and for many families, from a community perspective, it reminded us of the nurse, the teacher, the cleaner, the security guard, the bus captain and so many others who continue working to keep Singapore on an even keel. The efforts of these Singaporeans make my colleagues in the Workers' Party and I proud to the Singaporeans. These times have shown the resilience of our people, a subject my colleague, Aljunied GRC Member of Parliament, Mr Gerald Giam, will peg his Budget speech upon. The Workers' Party notes the broad thrust of the Budget and supports the call of greater fairness, sustainability and a more inclusive society, a philosophy that comes with much promise of the future. However, the Workers' Party will object to the Budget as we disagree with the decision to raise the GST.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang)2720 words
[+5 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, following the Budget Statement on 18 February, we have watched, with grave concerns the tragic developments in Ukraine. I echo the statement by the Foreign Affairs Minister that we are shocked and appalled by the blatant aggression and are saddened by the loss of lives and destruction there. It once again reminded us of the importance of our own ability and our will to defend our sovereignty and our independence. We must expect no one else but ourselves to defend what is ours. Sir, the conflict may be half the world away from us, but its implications and ramifications will impact us in many ways, amongst others, its' effect on the global economic recovery as well as the elevated oil and gas prices. Can I ask the Finance Minister for an update, notwithstanding the Foreign Affairs Minister's Statement, as to whether the Ukraine situation will have a bearing on the Budget that he delivered on 18 February; and also, what other implication or impact will there be for our economy?[+12 sentences] Sir, now my take on the Budget. Social compact is not a new concept to us. It has always been the underpinning core values of the Government, manifested in many of our policy formulations. It is a vision that galvanises us as a nation and unites us in our commitment to care for each other. Yet, after listening to the Finance Minister's Budget Statement speech, the meaning of social compact took on a refreshed and more tangible feel and operationalised versions of sorts or more realisable. Over the last decade, countries and democracies around the world including Singapore, have been grappling with three deep-seated issues. Firstly, the widening income and wealth inequality brought about by globalisation and the proliferation of knowledge-based economy. Secondly, the stagnation of very slow wage growth for our lower-wage workers. Thirdly, climate change crisis. How do we manage the pace and the trade-off to pivot to a low or net-zero carbon society? Budget 2022 will stand out for how we have made decisive and bold moves to tackle these issues head-on and to build a fair, inclusive and sustainable society. Let me start with the tax changes announced. In the Budget, we saw significant increases in the income tax rate as well as the wealth taxes: property tax, luxuries car taxes in the ARF. These increases will bring in an additional revenue of $600 million for the Government, not quite a needle-moving number that can pay for the projected rise in expenditure due to its narrow base.[+3 sentences] But it helps to steepen the overall progressivity of our tax structure and towards a fairer system. Corporate tax changes are also expected to come next. The two-percentage point increase in GST will happen in 2023 and 2024, by one-percentage point step each. Coupled with this increase will be the massive upsized $6.6 billion Assurance Package to cushion the impact of the GST increase.[+23 sentences] The GST increase and the upsized Assurance Package put together, actually further enhance the overall progressivity of our tax structure. This is because the Assurance Package will have more than adequate payouts and rebates to cover at least five years of additional GST expenses for the majority of Singaporean households and about 10 years for the lower-income households. The existing permanent GST Voucher scheme will also be enhanced to provide continuing offsets for the GST expenses of the lower- to middle-income household and the retirees' household. On the other hand, the higher income and the wealthier will pay more GST, especially with the two-percentage point increase, as they tend to be higher spenders, bigger consumers and hence, will contribute more to GST. Sir, over the last decade, we have been adding more social support features into our social security structure, which has helped improve the progressivity of the overall system, such as Workfare for the low-wage workers which, in essence is a negative tax; Silver Support Scheme, which targets Singaporeans in the lower 20% in terms of lifelong income; higher permanent GST offsets targeted at lower-incomes, seniors and smaller housing types; means-tested subsidies in public housing, healthcare, education, tilted in favour of lower-income and that majority of Singaporeans do not not pay income taxes. Taken together, it attested to the system of social compact that we have always wanted where the better-off contribute more and those with less contribute less and will receive more benefits and support to help them cope with life. In recent years, as income and wealth disparities continue to widen, the view that the better-off should contribute more in taxes has gained traction and it is heartening that in Singapore, we are also hearing calls from the high-income earners and those who are wealthy themselves. This reflects our values and mutual responsibility amongst ourselves as a society and as a nation. Of course, there is often this argument that rising income or wealth taxes may diminish our competitiveness, or that wealth is mobile and can be easily moved to a jurisdiction with no or low taxes. Yes, we have to be watchful of this possibility but we should also not underprice ourselves. Singapore has its very compelling proposition as a triple-A rated global hub, excellent infrastructures, deep and diverse talent pool, trusted and enforceable legal and regulatory structure, strong and stable Government, amongst others. We are rated among the best place to live in the world and we are a nation that is always passionate about excelling ourselves and constantly charting ahead and investing for a better future. And this is the Singapore premium. We cannot just count on low taxes or lower costs as a way to attract investments and talent. It is not sustainable. The significant moves on tax structure in Budget 2022 demonstrates our confidence and also our self-assuredness as to what Singapore can offer. We have to keep working on strengthening each of these fundamental propositions and not only safeguard but also keep growing the value of this premium. Sir, the other major move in this year's Budget is in the uplifting of income for the lower-wage workers and to tackle inequality. In a globally connected and knowledge-driven world, those equipped with in-demand skills and know-how tend to be duly compensated for their expertise. Salaries of the top earners have seen their income rise at much faster pace. We are not averse to that. On the other hand, the incomes of our lower-wage workers continue to stay stagnant or not keeping up with the rise in cost to live a better life. We are concerned with this widening income inequality and that is why we have Workfare and other skills upgrading programmes, among others, to intervene and uplift the wages of low-income Singaporeans. In this Budget, we saw significant expansions to the Progressive Wage Model (PWM). It will be extended to more sectors with an aim to cover 94% of our full-time lower-wage workers and through an accelerated pace of implementation.[+1 sentence] The Government will co-fund the wage increase of low-wage workers through the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS). Businesses with workers earning up to $2,500 per month will be assisted with co-funding of 50% in the first two years and 30% in the next two years.[+1 sentence] Those earning between $2,500 and $3,000 will also receive support, but at a lower co-funding ratio. In a related move, companies who employ foreign workers will now be required to pay all their local employees at least the local qualifying salary of $1,400 per month.[+1 sentence] And to complement the Progressive Wages move, the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) will also be significantly enhanced. The qualifying income gap will be increased to $2,500 and also extending to younger workers, aged 30, as well as increased payouts amongst the various WIS enhancements. These various measures amounted to a very substantial package to uplift the wages of the lower-income workers about $1.8 billion per year over the next five years or totalling $9 billion for both PWCS and enhanced Workfare.[+5 sentences] Of course, fiscal interventions alone cannot be the only way to uplift wages. Businesses and consumers will also have to contribute their share to help raise the income of our lower-wage workers. And we should continue to encourage and support our lower-wage workers to upskill, so that they can also move up the wage ladder. Sir, this is a realisable step to strengthen our social compact and to tackle inequality. On decarbonising Singapore, I applaud the bold moves by the Government. The announced carbon tax increases are steep, increasing five-folds, from $5 to $25 per tonne in 2024 and thereafter, by ten-folds and more by around 2030.[+34 sentences] It is thick enough to bite or hurt and can nudge and change behaviours and business practices. The sharp carbon tax increases demonstrates the Government's resolve to achieve net-zero emission by around mid-century. Since our founding, we have always kept long-term environmental sustainability in mind and, in fact, have been ahead of the curve. In the 1970s, we have already scaled up the greening of our island by sustained tree-planting programmes and safeguarding our nature reserves. We mounted ambitious efforts to clean up our rivers, build comprehensive sewage, waste infrastructure, amongst others. But this coming series of carbon tax increases will be our most ambitious move. It will have significant cost implications to businesses and households. Hence, without transitory support, some businesses may not be able to cope and some may exit. So, I welcome the clarification by the Finance Minister that the Government does not expect to derive additional revenue from the carbon tax levy. The carbon tax raise will be used to cushion the impact to households and businesses, as well as make decisive investments in new, low-carbon, more energy-efficient solutions. Sir, although Singapore accounts for around 0.11% of the global carbon emissions, we strongly believe in contributing to the global efforts and see it as our moral obligations as citizens of the world. We should leverage on this major decarbonisation effort to catalyse the development of the green economy and to entrench ourselves in this global green transition and to create jobs, create opportunities. Finally, Sir, I would like to touch on the current waves of cost increases. I have raised this concern in earlier Parliament Sittings, including whether we can delay the increase of GST, given the cost pressures at the moment. I thank the Finance Minister for listening to the feedback from Singaporeans and on the ground, firstly to delay the GST to start from 2023 and in two staggered one percentage point steps; and secondly, to introduce the $560 million Household Support Package to help Singaporeans to cope with their daily expenses arising from the current cost pressures. Sir, allow me to continue in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, the recent spate of price increases is a cause for great concern for Singaporeans. Whether it is electricity, food or transport, we can feel the overall trend of inflation and the pressure of rising cost of living. Most of the goods we consume are imported, so any rise in international inflation, especially energy prices, will have a direct impact on domestic consumer prices. While we have comprehensive measures to cope with the inflation, such as using a strong Singapore dollar to offset rising prices of imported goods, expanding and diversifying our sources of imports, and a slew of packages to help the low-income group, they do not fully offset external inflationary pressures. Fortunately, in this year's Budget, the Finance Minister has added a $560 million Household Support Package to help Singaporeans cope with rising cost of living. The package offers up to $285 worth of U-Save rebate per household living in HDB flats, an additional $200 top-up to every child and student's Edusave account and another $100 CDC voucher which is very popular among Singaporeans. As the international situation and global supply chains continue to be unstable, I hope the Government will continue to pay close attention to consumer price fluctuations, especially utilities, and expand the package when necessary to help Singaporeans cope and tide over this difficult period. Mr Speaker, I am also glad that the Finance Minister has responded positively to Singaporeans' concerns about the impact of raising GST this year. He has postponed the timetable to next year and the following year and will raise the GST one-percentage point per year in two years' time. This will significantly reduce the inflationary pressure. Many Singaporeans feel that while GST increase is inevitable, it is better later than early. It is better to raise it in two tranches than two-percentage points in one go. Most importantly, we will have a $6.6 billion enhanced Assurance Package to help most Singaporeans offset the impact of higher GST. For example, under this package, each adult Singaporean will receive a cash grant of between $700 and $1,600. The Government will also give out $600 to $900 in GST vouchers to lower-income elderly Singaporeans. Other subsidies include a U-Save rebate of up to $570, and $200 worth of CDC Vouchers for each household next year and the following year. The total amount of these rebates is substantial and will be sufficient to offset the increased GST amount that most Singaporeans will have to pay over the next five years. For low-income families, the increased GST amount can be offset over the next 10 years. For example, a family living in a 3-room flat with two children will receive nearly $5,000 worth of assistance from this Assurance Package, but roughly, this family will only have to pay an additional $400 GST.[+2 sentences] In other words, the subsidy that this family will receive is more than 10 times the additional GST they need to pay. Retirees living in 4-room flats will receive subsidies that can fully offset the extra GST they have to pay. For utilities, 1-room and 2-room households will receive rebates of up to eight to 10 months, 3-room and 4-room households will receive rebates of up to four to six months, and 5-room households will receive rebates of three months.[+4 sentences] Mr Speaker, our tax and grant regime has always been inclined to helping the poor. The tax changes this time round further strengthen this characteristic by raising the income tax and wealth taxes for high-income earners on one hand and expanding the assistance and subsidies for lower- and middle-income families on the other hand. Those with better incomes or wealth can afford higher taxes because of their better economic conditions. Most of them are also consumers who spend more, so their GST contributions are also higher than those of the lower-income groups. According to MOF figures, 60% of the GST collected come from high-income earners and tourists. Under our overall tax and grant system, low-income earners will receive a $4 subsidy for every $1 of tax paid.[+12 sentences] The middle 20 percentile will receive a $2 subsidy for every $1 of tax paid. High-income earners will receive a subsidy of $0.30 for every $1 of tax paid. These figures demonstrate vividly that our tax and grant system is really focused on taking care of lower-middle-income Singaporeans. I think this is a fair tax system that we aspire to. This year's Budget reflects our pursuit of the spirit of social cohesion and joint advancement of all Singaporeans. (In English): Sir, Budget 2022 to charge the new wave forward to realise our vision as a fairer, greener and more inclusive society, we want to level up our society, secure the well-being of our people and at the same time, we need to grow our economy, create exciting future opportunities to build our best home. Every of the above that we want to do for the good of Singapore and for the good of people require financial resources. It is meaningless to have big plans and big ideas, but does not come with sound and sustainable financial plan to fund them. We need to have a clear mind how we intend to charge the way forward. But at the same time, we also need to have a clear mind how we can find the means to pay for these new ways. Budget 2022 strengthens the foundations of our long-term funding plan, which is sustainable and fair, and it opens up further exciting possibility ahead for Singaporeans and Singapore. Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Foo Mee Har.
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast)1717 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Budget 2022 will be remembered for the significant tax changes announced. One of the main Budget announcements was that the GST rate hike will be delayed and spread out over two steps – one-percentage point per step on 1 January 2023 and another one on 1 January 2024.[+5 sentences] This move by the Finance Minister brought some relief to concerns amidst rising prices. We all know that it would have been more expedient for the Government to effect the total increase in one go and the earlier the better for the Government. But we appreciate the sensitivity shown to delay it and do it in two separate steps. So, this is appreciated. Sir, Budget 2022 takes decisive steps towards strengthening our social compact. It unveiled a slew of taxes that impacts the wealthy – ranging from personal income tax, property tax as well as luxury car tax. These taxes are expected to raise $600 million of additional tax revenue per year when implemented.[+3 sentences] Taken by itself, this amount may not appear large. However, property-related taxes such as Additional Buyer Stamp Duty (ABSD) have in fact contributed significantly to our revenue base over the years. Let me share. In 2021, Stamp Duty collection increased to $6.45 billion, that means a $2.55 billion increase in one year as compared to 2020, and that is 66% increase in one year.[+11 sentences] ABSD was further increased just a few months ago in December across all categories except for first-time local home buyers. The ABSD rate for foreign buyers now sits at 30%. As ABSD targets mainly property investors, this has effectively become a form of wealth tax, apart from acting as a policy measure to cool the property market. Whilst I know the Government may not consider this as a stable form of revenue base for the Government, I think investors should not hold out much hope for the ABSD to be lifted, as it is now a significant part of Government revenue. In fact, we should expect more to come on the property front, including the low hanging fruit of injecting further progressivity to the basic buyer's stamp duty from the current 4% for properties valued at $1 million and above, for higher tiers to apply to more luxury homes. Sir, our tax structures continue to be more progressive over the years. It was only recently in 2017, when the top tier personal income tax bracket was increased to 22%. Yet, this Budget proposes to increase it again, further to 24% from 2024. In Singapore, top 10% income earners who pay Personal Income Tax already foot approximately 80% of total personal income tax collected. Sir, our unique system of taxes and transfers have been effective in addressing income inequality. We have seen a steady decline in our Gini coefficient from 0.45 in 2010 to 0.38 in 2020, after transfers and taxes. In this Budget, the Assurance Package – designed to cushion GST impact for middle- and low-income households, was boosted to $6.6 billion.[+25 sentences] Another $9.5 billion over five years is being set aside to support the Progressive Wage Model and Workfare Income Supplement scheme, benefiting 94% of full-time low-income workers. Sir, this is commendable and well-timed. Our system is designed such that for every dollar of tax paid, the bottom 20% of our residents receive about $4 of benefits back, the middle-income residents get about $2 and the top 20% receive about 30 cents of benefits. I think we have all understood how it works, my colleague mentioned this earlier too. The principle of helping those with less inherent in our system of taxes and transfers has gone some way to moderate the vagaries of globalisation and inequality. Mr Speaker, rather than depend so heavily on taxes to redistribute wealth, can we also not tap on strong spirit of giving amongst wealthy families? Globally, increasing numbers of wealthy individuals are engaging in philanthropy. A "Global Philanthropy Report" by Harvard identifies some 260,000 foundations with total assets of more than US$1.5 trillion. In Singapore, we have also seen more privileged individuals "giving back", including the setting up of private charity funds with $200,000 and more. More and more family offices are setting up in Singapore, with strong mandates to do good and to give back to society. We should therefore enhance our philanthropic policy framework to accommodate new forms of giving and encourage the establishment of more foundations, of greater sophistication. Currently, our policies are geared towards straightforward forms of giving. But wealthy families aspire to make significant contributions beyond plain chequebook giving. They hope to tap their financial resources, unique capabilities and networks, in creative ways to make an impact. They want their gifts to be transformational and so do we. Enhancing our policies around philanthropy can help establish Singapore as a philanthropic hub – a pillar of excellence to build alongside our hub status for finance and sustainability. This intent to promote Singapore as a philanthropic hub is not new. Several changes to taxation and regulatory framework were indeed made by then-Second Minister for Finance, Tharman Shanmugaratnam, in Budget 2007. However, the concept of philanthropy has evolved rapidly over the years. Wealthy families and philanthropists are keen to explore new models such as social impact bonds, impact investing, venture philanthropy and so on. Have our current policies kept up with the times? In its early days, Singapore benefited in similar ways from generous giving by visionary philanthropists and organisations, such as Tan Kah Kee, Govindasamy Pillai and Ngee Ann Kongsi, to build our communities, our schools and our hospitals. Today, we have a window of opportunity to work alongside a new generation of philanthropists, using modern, innovative and creative ideas, so that their contributions can be a fulfilling experience for both the donor and the beneficiary. Mr Speaker, Budget 2022 sends the strongest signals yet to businesses about the need to get serious about transformation and going green. The Finance Minister announced Singapore's commitment to sustainability by bringing forward the timeline for the country to attain net-zero carbon emissions by and around mid-century. To achieve this, the carbon tax will be raised progressively to $50 to $80 per tonne of emissions by 2030, higher, much higher than many had expected.[+11 sentences] The higher carbon taxes will accelerate our drive towards a greener economy. Sir, I support the Finance Minister's ambition to sharpen our competitive edge and capture growth opportunities in the green transition. We should aspire to be the leading location in Asia for expertise in carbon services and be the trusted regional marketplace for carbon credits. However, we need to carefully navigate this journey to go green, to avoid dislocating our industries or losing our attractiveness as an investment destination. We will need to take an ecosystem approach for the transition, laying clear frameworks, standards, roadmaps and sector-based solutions to build green capabilities and collaborations. We will need to champion green financing and be the preferred issuer of green bonds to enable sustainable investments across sectors. We will need incentives – incentives to green our buildings and step up investments in sustainable development and renewable energy. Sir, the higher carbon tax will translate to elevated energy prices impacting businesses and households, and the increase will be significant. This is especially so for the manufacturing sector with utilities making up to around 9% to 10% of their operating costs. So, I urge the Government to ensure transition measures will be in place to cushion the increase in electricity costs. Sir, in many of my interactions with businesses large and small, the most frequently cited concerns relate to manpower constraints, an issue that has been further exacerbated by COVID-19 restrictions. The planned increases in qualifying salaries for employment pass and S Pass holders, which will take effect from September, will hurt.[+9 sentences] With the tight labour market, employers shared that the $500 dollar increase in work pass qualifying salaries will likely translate to just "forced" salary increases for their foreign workforce, as there are few alternatives in the foreseeable future. Sir, the use of salary thresholds is a blunt instrument that does not take into account specific skills requirements and gaps in the market. A points system which considers a range of non-salary factors will make the work pass system more transparent and economical. The higher work pass thresholds have triggered international firms to review the sustainability of their operations in Singapore. Many businesses worry about how they may weather the storm in the coming years. Increase in taxes, higher carbon and energy prices, as well as higher local and foreign manpower costs are the main challenges. Companies need urgent help to fast track digitalisation, reskilling of local workers as well as job matching to aid their transformation. They are also screaming for the Government to calibrate the timing, the timing of new policies to provide some breathing space for the transitions. Mr Speaker, the outlook for rising costs is worrisome. After reaching a near-decade high of 2.4% in January, Singapore's core inflation is anticipated to possibly exceed 3% and above in the second quarter.[+1 sentence] More economists are predicting that given the externally driven inflation catalysts, they expect inflation will be sustained at high levels for up to two years. With the Russia-Ukraine crisis, crude oil prices have been soaring and hitting over US$100 today.[+6 sentences] Sir, I would like to ask the Finance Minister whether the Government will do more to help households and businesses if inflation turns out to be more persistent and higher than expected? Finally, Budget 2022 is estimated to be the third straight budget-deficit year for this term of Government. Whilst I do agree with the expansionary policy to ensure that recovery will be sustained, so I support the Budget, it is equally important that we do not lose sight of the fiscal prudence that has defined Singapore's approach to budgeting. The Government commonly accumulates surpluses in the early years of its term to ensure that the constitutional requirement to achieve a balanced Budget is achieved. Sir, I would like to ask the Finance Minister, given the new emerging risks to our recovery and growth, especially given the Russia-Ukraine crisis, how will the Government respond, if we will not be able to achieve a balanced Budget for this term of Government? With that, Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Janet Ang.
Ms Janet Ang (Nominated Member)3212 words
[+12 sentences]Mr Speaker, I am honoured to join in on this year's Budget debate. I would like to declare that I am Council Member of Singapore Business Federation (SBF) and hope to represent the business community's perspective. If I may start with a quote from Martin Luther King, who once said: "The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy." I believe that men and women, we all are standing at times of challenge and controversy right now. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Singapore business community is very appreciative of the strong and decisive actions by the Government in dealing with survival issues in 2020 and preparing to emerge stronger with "Test, Trace and Vaccinate" in 2021. Singapore is amongst one of the most inoculated against COVID-19 with, I believe, 86.1% of population vaccinated and with low casualties. Still, we see how the Omicron strain, while fortunately not as deadly as Delta, is causing stress in our healthcare system and a slow-down in our easing of safe management measures and opening up of borders. We cannot afford to be complacent. Our muscle for alertness and resilience has been developed and put to the test time and again over the past two years, and we must continue to keep it well-oiled and ready for action, but at the same time, not be paralysed by fear. So, gratitude to everyone from the Multi-Ministry Task Force, to our healthcare workers and essential workers on the front lines who have helped keep the lights on and the rest of us safe. A big thank you, from all of us, to all of you. Mr Speaker, my personal take on this year's Budget announced by Minister Lawrence Wong is the following: one, it is a Budget that balances short-term and longer-term objectives; two, it is a Budget that recalibrates Singapore's financial and fiscal policies to ensure sustainability going forward; three, it is a Budget where all Singaporeans can play a part in returning our economy to a state of readiness for growth while caring for those amongst us who are more vulnerable and who have less; and four, it is a Budget that invests in the future of our people and our businesses to be ready for new engines of growth even as Singapore continues to have to strengthen our healthcare defences to tackle the evolving pandemic situation and maintain public health stability. Whether it is the $500 million Jobs and Business Support, or the timing of the GST rate hikes; whether it is the carbon tax increase to signal the urgent action for de-carbonisation, or the R&D budget for the Singapore Green Plan 2030; whether it is the investment in new capabilities of our people and our local enterprises, or the rollout of the Assurance Package and the uplifting low-wage workers with Progressive Wage Model implementation, it is a Budget that has taken an integral development approach to ensure that our people, our environment and our economy progress in tandem and in harmony.[+1 sentence] Whether Budget 2022 delivers on its design now depends on how well Team Singapore executes. In the latest National Business Study conducted by SBF, businesses that reported being negatively impacted by COVID-19 declined from 63% in 2020 to 32%. There is growing optimism as eight in 10 firms are confident about sustaining their operations in 2022, compared to seven in 10 firms in the previous survey.[+16 sentences] Nearly half, about 47%, of businesses are confident that the economy will improve in 2022, compared to 31% of businesses in the previous survey. I must add that the survey was pre-Russia-Ukraine situation. Businesses adopt a cautious outlook towards global and regional economic climate. In the survey, businesses reported that manpower cost and availability are key challenges that they face, along with demand uncertainty, travel restrictions and changing regulatory environment. However, 2022 will expect to see more job openings and better compensations as businesses look to build up their human capital. Companies are focusing on digitalisation, re-engineering of work processes and diversifying supply chains as key areas of business transformation. Even though most firms are aware of the importance for digitalisation, many lack manpower and resources to transform their businesses. Businesses need Government support in technology adoption and development of human capital as they push towards a more digitalised future. So, assistance with digitalisation remains the top area of support reported by businesses, with 43% desiring Government help in this aspect. Support towards human capital development rose to be among the top three areas of business support needed in 2022, with 37% of businesses reporting a need for such assistance. The level of business internationalisation remains consistent with 2020. This is another area that they are counting on Government and the whole-of-society's support. There is no evident drop-off even in the face of travel restrictions. China, Vietnam, Indonesia and Malaysia continue to be the popular destinations for expansion. Meanwhile, geopolitical risks including the US-China continued trade tensions, the acceleration of inflationary risks, the escalating costs of energy and the recent Russian-Ukraine military conflict will dampen the optimism going forward. Still, we need to focus on what we can influence and keep moving forward. Budget 2022 does cover many of the areas that the businesses have called out for Government support: (a) everyone is relieved to hear Minister Lawrence Wong announce deferring and staging GST rate hike implementation; (b) the continued support for businesses to invest in new capabilities like digitalisation and automation is very much welcomed by the business community but the escalating costs of IT manpower and the shortage of IT skills continue to be a challenge; (c) Singapore being open to the best global talents to complement our local workforce gets the thumbs-up by both local business leaders and leaders of MNCs, though they still worry about policies not being aligned to the goal; and (d) a Budget carrying both the stick and the carrot to rally our businesses into action toward achieving our Singapore Green Plan 2030 is acknowledged as inevitable and that there is a lot of work ahead of all of us.[+5 sentences] For the purpose of my speech today, I would like to speak on four issues and put forward some ideas which have come up in my discussions with industry leaders and trade associations and chambers (TACs). We hope the Government can support and help to address these. First up is manpower availability and costs. The business community in general is concerned with manpower availability and costs as it is. Some sectors in particular, F&B and construction, are very concerned with the adjustment to Foreign Worker Policies (FWP) in this year's Budget. These industries have been hit hard with labour shortage, exacerbated by border restrictions. And many companies in these industries have participated actively in WSG-organised recruitment fairs over the past two years in an attempt to hire more Singaporeans to fill the open positions but have had little success.[+13 sentences] These industries are local industries, and their manpower cannot be offshored. Our restaurants and our BTO flats depend on them being able to have the workers. It is hoped that the Government can look into sectorial differentiation when implementing the changes to the FWP at least for the foreseeable short- to medium-term. Some manufacturing companies which are more labour intensive are concerned that there may be a hollowing out of manufacturing to lower-cost locations. Perhaps, we might have to accept that outcome as inevitable considering Singapore's scarce labour resources. Meanwhile, I would like to suggest that Government and industry could get together to review the costs across the entire supply chain of our key industries and consider our strategic competitiveness end-to-end. This will also help identify supply chain risks and identify actions to mitigate supply chain disruptions which we have experienced during the pandemic. There is also a suggestion by TACs for an Alliance for Action (AfA) to be set up to look into manpower issues for overlapping industries. Next point – SMEs need capital and credit, talent and network. Singapore has had an aspiration to grow global champions from amongst our local enterprises. Temasek-linked companies have done Singapore proud in putting Singapore on the map, whether it be DBS or SIA, pre-COVID-19, or Keppel or Singtel. Outside of tech companies like SEA or Grab or Carousell and other tech companies, the question is why our Singapore medium-sized companies do not get the same lift? It boils down to a lack of capital, talent and network. Last year during the Committee of Supply, I applauded the $1 billion "Local Enterprises Funding Platform" set up by Temasek and the Government.[+11 sentences] I did suggest for the support be extended beyond the large local enterprises (LLEs) to include our local SMEs, or at least, the medium-sized companies. In Singapore, we have promising mid-size companies which may be "stuck" due to a lack of capital, lack of access to tools and networks especially for going beyond Singapore, and lack of leadership and expert capabilities needed to break out and stand out. With some support by way of talent, capital and network, we give ourselves a better pipeline of global champions in-the-making. Let me segue to share with you two stories, which saddened me a little, but I thought I should share. The first story is the story of the M&A journey of a Singapore mid-size company. When they were looking for partners, they received 40-over NDAs signed by companies from all over the world but none from Singapore. The next story starts off well with how the Government's Temporary Bridging Loans (TBLs) and Enterprise Financing Scheme (EFS) were going to help our local companies tide over the difficult COVID-19 times. Unfortunately, the relief was short-lived as the companies found their commercial credit lines with their banks terminated and transferred to the Temporary Bridging Loans (TBLs) and Enterprise Financing Scheme (EFS) offered by the Government. I am sure these are sound credit risk decisions made by the bankers. But for the SMEs, they are in a tight spot. Perhaps there are misunderstandings in the implementation of TBL and EFS that needs both sides to dialogue and move forward. It would be interesting to see how many of such cases did happen. That said, the SMEs do welcome the announcement that Minister Lawrence Wong made in this year's Budget that EFS will be enhanced to include Merger and Acquisition and Trade Loans. Talent is a big topic and a big challenge. I will focus today on one small suggestion: that is, getting our cohort of Public Service scholars to get their feet wet and their hands dirty by being assigned to our promising SMEs for a year or two, or even six months, as part of their bond.[+27 sentences] This experience will, in fact, equip them with the empathy they will need when crafting policies for the country and sharing the talented resources with our SMEs. Leveraging IP is also an exciting opportunity for our companies but our local enterprises who have attempted to do so, share that IP filing and registration need deep pockets. Some of the TACs have requested for Government to consider providing funding support to guide and enable businesses to actively leverage on intangible assets as a competitive advantage. This would include leveraging on overseas IP owned by Singapore companies. I believe that MinLaw and IPOS are already supporting but perhaps SMEs can be made more aware. Point three, going green. Our businesses have woken up to the Singapore Green Plan 2030 vision as a call to action for today. It is no longer something to think about tomorrow. The carbon tax rate increase and the roadmap ahead are a clear conviction that sustainability is a matter of importance and of immediate action. The writing is on the wall. COP26 targets are not just the Government's business. They are everyone's business. Sir, our companies, however, need help from getting educated on everything "green and sustainable" to how to set their net-zero plan. Financial support for green transition is critical for businesses as they map out their net-zero plans. I will speak more about what is needed during my cut with MSE. For now, suffice to say that the "Made-in-Singapore" brand needs to soon carry a new mark of global sustainable standard. My fourth point, investing in our people for the future. To navigate a tight labour market, businesses are turning towards building a strong local core through enhancing recruitment efforts and offering competitive wages. Businesses will continue to upgrade their team's skills and upgrade their expertise and knowledge, and the support by Government via the SkillsFuture Enterprise Credits, the newly set-up NTUC administered grant for transformation plans and other programmes, for example: schemes to support ICT, will all go a long way. Minister for Education Chan Chun Seng has in recent speeches called out the key role that the IHLs – ITE, Polytechnics and Universities – can play in partnering our enterprises to skill up and transform. I would like to share a couple of examples of Industry-IHL partnerships targeting at addressing skills gaps in the industry, with the hope of inspiring more to do so. I declare that I am the Chairman of Singapore Polytechnic (SP) and so, pardon me if my examples are from SP. The first example is how industry can proactively work with IHLs on their curriculum to enable the students to be work-ready, job-ready when they graduate. The SP faculty at the School of Chemical and Life Sciences developed an opportunity for deeper linkage with industry via the Diploma in Perfumery and Cosmetic Science. The School co-created the Industry Now Curriculum (INC) with industry experts like IFF-Lucas Meyer Cosmetics and Johnson & Johnson Pte Ltd. The innovation involves three semesters of learning in class and lab, one semester of a co-supervised "live" industry projects sponsored by industry partners including start-up companies like NUSMETICS Pte Ltd. The students then go on to complete their final two semesters in a year-long internship with an industry partner. The feedback has been very positive and to-date, 41% of the first cohort graduating May this year are already offered jobs. With the positive feedback on the course, the second cohort of students undergoing INC have doubled in size.[+3 sentences] The second example is a bold eco-system collaboration. SP designed and setup an Advanced Manufacturing Centre in collaboration with 16 industry partners including experts like TÜV SÜD Digital Service, ASTech Pte Ltd, Bosch Rexroth, Delta Electronics and Onn Wah Tech Pte Ltd, and others. Together, they curated the "Advanced Manufacturing Learning Journey" curriculum focused on enabling companies to re-imagine and re-think manufacturing processes. Since the launch in October 2020, 177 companies and 632 professionals have gone through the "Advanced Manufacturing Learning Journey". More than 20 companies have taken the next step to work with SP to assess where they are and have gone on to develop projects with SP staff, some involving SP final Students as part of their Final Year Projects (FYPs), while others have SP students working projects as part of their internships.[+41 sentences] There are many initiatives which all the IHLs have rolled out to support industry. The call to action is for all our Singapore companies to accelerate the reskilling of their workforce for transformation and for the Singapore workers to seize the day and get re-skilled to stay relevant in the dynamic, fast-moving workplace. The Government has put their money squarely on investing in our people to be ready for the future. So, it takes all to work together. Mr Speaker, while we are in this Chamber, there are people, businesses, homes and institutions in the cities of Ukraine being bombarded by artillery and aggression of the Russians. How can this be happening? If it can happen to Ukraine, can it happen to us? I shudder at that thought. Singaporeans must not think it could never happen. What are the lessons for us to draw on? One thing for sure is that our total defence and diplomatic corps cannot be over-emphasised. Singaporeans cannot take our existence as a nation for granted. Our founding fathers, Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his old-guard colleagues wrote our Singapore story. They had the courage to dream big, to create a "First World oasis in a Third World region". Their rallying cry was for this "mudflat to become a metropolis". We were poor then, but we were certainly rich in spirit. Many of our forefathers were immigrants. Many were the Work Permit holders, Employment Pass (EP) holders and S Pass holders of their time. Some may have come as workers, others as merchants and traders from afar. Yet others came as missionaries, as teachers and nurses. Singapore had nothing then. We were nothing. Why did they come? I will wait for Mediacorp screenwriters to tell that story! Whatever the reasons that brought them here to our shores, they had the grit to defy all odds and in spite of the diversity of race, cultures, language, religions, our forefathers and mothers, uncles and aunties bonded together behind that big dream. And so, here we are today, having inherited a Singapore that is one of the world's globally recognised city state with strong governance, high trust, smart, innovative and hardworking people, though a little "kiasu" or risk adverse at times. Through the COVID-19 crisis, we saw how well we could ride the rolling waves of the pandemic with our reserves and the resilience of our people; the reserves that have been built over years of prudent fiscal discipline and strong monetary and economic excellence. In the wake of the pandemic, we saw the hearts and minds of Singapore citizens and residents reflect the care, the generosity, the empathy and the love for neighbour – whether our essential workers or our migrant communities. Going through the storm is one thing. Building back up is where we are now, and we must not fall into potholes of narcissism, discouragement and pessimism. I believe that Singaporeans at the core have a strong sense of integrity and a deep sense of responsibility to our work, to our family, to each other, to our country. As we learn to live with COVID-19, we must learn fast to tackle this next pandemic of climate change that is already upon us. We must take responsibility for the development of our own skills, leveraging the support that the Government is providing. Together, let us not wait for the fish to be handed to us but let us learn to fish for ourselves, our family and our neighbours, and live the dream that our forefathers could only imagine. Let me close with a few lines from our NDP 2021 theme song, which I hope will inspire us to join our hands as we "Chart our New Way Forward Together". I will not sing for you, but here are the words: "There were times we were uncertain, But we just kept walking on. It's always darkest just before the dawn. See this island, every grain of sand. Hear this anthem, it's the voices of our friends. Come whatever on the road ahead, We did it before, and we’ll do it again." With this I conclude with my support for the Budget 2022.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang)3005 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, in my speech, I wish to explain why raising GST is a bad idea at this point in time, how it will also be bad for working families and what we can do as alternatives to raising GST to meet our fiscal needs. Minister Wong began his speech by painting a cautiously optimistic picture of both Singapore's as well as the global economy. We grew by 7.6% last year, exceeding even the upper bound of MTI's forecast.[+4 sentences] Unemployment also plunged to 3.2%, close to pre-COVID-19 levels. And exports, the traditional engine of growth for our economy, expanded by around 12%. With growth, employment and trade figures strong, there is some justification for a renewed sense of confidence as we emerge from the pandemic. But the economic picture is not all peaches and roses. In January, inflation clocked in at 4% compared to prices a year ago and the highest prices in almost a decade.[+21 sentences] Higher prices have been exacerbated by an overall increase in the cost of living in the city, which has already been rated as one of the most expensive in the world. And tailwinds from the generous fiscal stimulus as well as the favourable external environment will fade further. Growth, accordingly, is expected to fall to around half that of last year. It therefore strikes me as premature to be contemplating any form of tightening in the stance of fiscal policy at this time. While the removal of wage support for all but the most hard-hit sectors of the economy was prudent and economically sound, going in the other direction of making fiscal policies more contractionary takes a sensible argument to an absurd conclusion. Doing so would introduce unnecessary frictions into what is still a nascent recovery. It runs the risk of shooting ourselves in the foot, of scoring an own goal. But this is precisely what will occur with an increase in our Goods and Services Tax (GST). The example of Japan is prescient here. Japan applied consumption tax hikes – their equivalent of the GST – three times in recent history: first in 1997, then in 2014 and subsequently in 2019. The first two times, GDP collapsed and the economy promptly went into a recession. Inflation also jumped. What is worst, the subsequent collapse in output meant that the tax increase itself failed to produce sufficient revenue to justify its increase. The most recent time was also accompanied by a recession, although this time, the effects were exacerbated by the onset of COVID-19. While the most recent Omicron variant has turned out to be less detrimental to economic performance than earlier ones, this episode is a reminder to us that a GST hike would rob us of the precious opportunity to revive support for the economy if, knock on wood, some unforeseen Pi or Rho variant – and I understand I am showing off my very limited knowledge of the Greek alphabet here – were to emerge. In Singapore, we last hiked GST in 2007. This did not trigger a recession the following year. The economy eked out a 1.1% growth rate in 2008. But it nevertheless represented a sharp drop in activity compared to 7.8% the year before. Back then, we were helped by the fact that on both years, global growth remained in positive territory. This time round, the global environment may be less favourable. The International Monetary Fund forecasts a slowing of world GDP growth from an anticipated 4.4% this year, to just 2% in 2023 and 1.6% in 2024.[+6 sentences] Thus, global growth will be slowing just as the burden of an increase GST will be kicking in. A hike in GST is unarguably a contractionary fiscal policy that could offset what had hitherto been a very healthy consumption and investment growth over 2021. The private sector, by anticipating the anticipated tax changes and the need to save more, could further scale back on spending today. A GST hike is also particularly ill-timed because it holds the potential to stoke already elevated inflation. While the direction of inflation in the future is anybody's guess – and economists have a particularly dismal track record of predicting price dynamics, one that would make a weather forecaster blush – it would not be surprising if inflation remains elevated through till year end. Supply chain constraints have not resolved as quickly as previously anticipated; energy prices are high and could rise more in response to geopolitical tensions and the likelihood of global sanctions; labour markets are tightening, spurred by the global great resignation and lying flat movements. Indeed, MAS expects as much, having raised its latest forecast of inflation to the 2.5% to 3.5% range.[+20 sentences] Moreover, this state of affairs may even become a more lasting fixture. There is a risk that inflation expectations have become unmoored from the traditional 2% health by advanced economies worldwide and is now permanently higher by up to half a percentage point, compared to prior the pandemic. And if this turns out to be the reality, then rolling out a GST hike at this time will only add fuel to the inflation flame, which is already starting to burn uncomfortably hot. It is for this reason that any delay of the hike, were it to occur, is critical, as opposed to the historical pattern of rolling out increases in July. Doing so in a staggered fashion – 1% in 2023 and another in 2024 – will certainly cushion the impact. And this measured approach is echoed by economists and observers, and SMEs have also expressed their relief about the delay. But the key question, Mr Speaker, here that remains is this: will the Government stand ready to potentially re-examine the timing with a view toward an even more significant delay should macroeconomic conditions remain unfavourable for a tax hike come 2023 and 2024? Should the Government proceed with a tax hike at the pre-announced dates, will they complement the hike with a justification based on the contemporaneous economic situation? But why raise GST at all? The reason provided by MOF is that our revenue needs have risen, especially with regard to providing healthcare for a rapidly ageing population. There is no doubt that we should do more to take care of the elderly among us – the Merdeka and Pioneer Generations that have contributed so much to bringing Singapore to where it is today, as well as generations that will enter their twilight years in the future. My concern, Mr Speaker, is whether GST is the ideal instrument for doing so. On its face, GST fulfills many of the criteria economists traditionally look for, in optimal public finance. It is efficient because taxing all of consumption usually does not distort spending behaviour compared to taxing income or other taxes specific to certain goods and services. It is broad-based, meaning that it can raise significant revenue across a large population and it is simple. Unlike income, we do not need to futz around with appropriate measurements and exemptions. You just pay a fixed fraction of what you buy, period. While this is precisely why we do not rely on GST alone to raise income, there are also some problems. It is generally sound to diversify the Government's revenue stream as opposed to relying on narrow forms of taxation, more recent research has questioned whether consumption taxes are truly more efficient, especially if we relax some of the standard assumptions. But perhaps, most importantly, most people believe that it is actually easier to ensure that income taxes are progressive, that is, those who are better able to afford a higher tax burden, pay more. The GST is a flat tax rate applied to all purchases of goods and services, which hits lower-income households disproportionately more.[+3 sentences] In and of itself, it is, therefore, regressive. The Government's solution to addressing regressivity has been to pair GST with a voucher system, where cash rebates of a certain amount albeit not matched directly to actual spending, are issued to lower-income households. This transfer can indeed be progressive and it may be the case that the overall tax system, even after raising GST, will remain progressive. But an increase in GST will, in and of itself, reduce progressivity, which means we end up less progressive than compared to the status quo. I, therefore, welcome the Ministry to clarify if the plan to raise GST while expanding the scope of the permanent GST Voucher (GSTV) scheme would be net for the nation as a whole be more or less progressive, relative to a scenario of not increasing GST at all. This is because we all understand that the generous $6.6 billion Assurance Package, while certainly welcome during the transitional period, will not last forever.[+8 sentences] After all, the earnings of lower-income groups have been eroded comparatively more as a result of the pandemic. Prices are rising everywhere and furthermore, support payments via the COVID-19 Recovery Grants will expire by year end. I have focused much of my remarks on the importance of supporting the less fortunate, not just because of some heightened notion of equity. Many studies have pointed out pandemic-induced changes will have lasting effects on incomes, savings, educational attainment and other socio-economic outcomes for poorer households. Mr Speaker, the poor were already relatively behind prior to the pandemic. As a society, we can ill afford to have them fall further behind. It will be an affront to our sense of equality, of opportunity and genuine meritocracy as well as a stain on the morals and values we hold as a society. Finally, it is worth recognising that the permanent GSTV scheme leaves important gaps for certain groups that fall beyond the remit of the programme. Income threshold for qualifying for GSTV will exclude those above the 40% percentile of earners. This means that those earning more than around $2,800 a month – a decent but hardly comfortable salary – will face the full force of the GST increase once the transition period concludes.[+10 sentences] While cut-offs have to occur somewhere, it is worth remembering that many households in this income bracket are also in the "sandwiched generation", who face expenses of supporting their aged and retired parents, as well as their young, school-going children. One alternative – but admittedly more complicated – scheme for enhancing the progressivity of the GST is to consider GST where progressivity is built right in. This means the purchase of goods and services that the wealthy are much more likely to purchase – fancy cars, high-end properties, first class tickets and luxury experiences – be subject to a higher rate of taxation. The Government has in this Budget and over the past year taken some significant steps in this direction. An increase in the Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) by 5% and 10% for the second and third properties is welcome, if a little blunt, since it does not entail any associated minimum value, and PR and foreign purchasers confront even steeper rates. The Budget further sharply increases property taxes for homes with annual value exceeding $30,000. It remains to be evaluated whether these additional taxes successfully target the wealthy, or whether much like the ill-fated estate tax, they end up affecting mainly upper-middle and marginally higher-income households while the ultra-rich retained their ability to shield themselves from progressive taxation. It will also be valuable to revisit in a few years' time whether such taxes move the needle, in terms of freezing and reversing the rising income and wealth inequality in Singapore. The other question that inevitably arises is, are there no alternatives to a GST hike? Mr Speaker, I will submit that there are. My colleagues at the Workers' Party have in the spirit of providing credible alternatives work out several additional levers, where if deployed, could stave off the need to increase GST. We have worked out the revenue possibilities for each of these levers which could amount to close to the $3.6 billion expected in revenue from a GST hike.[+11 sentences] One lever which we call, say, "the corporate tax lever", accepts the broad premise of the OECD-led effort to implement a global minimum corporate tax rate of 15% known as BEPS. We assume a reasonable loss of corporate and personal income taxes arising from the agreement of 20% and 10% respectively and full compliance of the corporate tax rate to the new global minimum for multinational corporations, which amounts to about the two-thirds increase in the effective rate from current levels. However, we allow small and medium enterprises to retain their current 3% effective rate. This could generate $3.45 billion. Another lever which we call "the wealth tax lever" puts asset taxation at the front and centre of revenue generation. We adopt the Government's current threshold of 10 years required for land leases to be classified as permanent, above which land sales receipt must be fully channelled into reserves and extract just the first nine years for recurrent expenditure, while redirecting the remainder into reserves. We also incorporate the Government's proposed property tax changes expected to generate an additional $380 million. And finally, we follow the net wealth tiers that had been previously proposed in this House to derive revenue from this channel under very modest recovery assumptions and this could generate $3.7 billion. A third lever, which is the reserves' contribution lever, the Workers' Party had spoken at length about this possibility before. To reiterate, we can reduce the share of reserves interest income that we send straight back to reserves currently held at 50%, to a lower but absolutely still respectable 40%. Importantly, this does not constitute a draw on the reserves stock. The level of reserves will not go down, but merely represents a reduction in the rate of accumulation of reserves and this alone could generate $4.31 billion.[+1 sentence] The final lever, which we call "the externalities lever", entails increasing so-called sin taxes – those levied on gambling, alcohol and tobacco – as well as carbon-generating activities for which we apply an increase to $80 a tonne but channel only half the revenues towards mitigating the transition and encouraging the adoption of green technologies. We limit the increases in each of these channels to no more than 28%, which is what the GST increase will entail. And these additional increases will then allow us to increase the effective corporate tax rate to just 8% and this would generate $3.65 billion.[+2 sentences] Of course, I would be the first to admit that the Government, with its army of Ministry analysts and superior access to data and information, would be able to fault some or all of the assumptions underlying these scenarios. What then is the purpose of this exercise? First, it is to put on the table the tantalising possibility that we can, in fact, choose not to raise GST by adjusting some of the levers available to us. We have deliberately worked out the math behind each of these alternatives such that any single one of these levers will be sufficient to meet the revenue needs that raising GST will offer.[+18 sentences] Second, we will also show that even when we mix and match among the proposals to craft a revenue mix that we can accept – after all, the math suggests that any single one of the levers will be sufficient to fill the GST hole, much less alternative permutations and combinations of them. And third, and perhaps most importantly, is to underscore our desire to engage in good faith debate on whether there are genuine options available to us in meeting the revenue hole, other than raising GST. The most thing for us is to cease stating "I wish", but to start stating "I will". We must instead consider nothing impossible and treat possibilities as probabilities. Allow me to end with a few quick reflections on several aspects of this year's Budget. In last year's Committee of Supply debate, I flagged the importance of elevating our national R&D expenditures to a share closer to that of most innovative nations in the world. I am happy to hear that the Government will continue to increase public R&D spending but I will only add three points. First, more can be done given how we still lag the OECD average for total R&D spending; although, of course, we need to ensure that our outcomes match our inputs. Second, we should ideally direct this towards downstream activities that the part of R&D, and hence, the stated goal of elevating local firm R&D is the right one. And third, the guiding principles of the BEPS agreement means that one acceptable way to lower the effective tax rate for our SMEs and to continue attracting foreign investment is to do so through R&D tax credits. I am, likewise, heartened to hear of the continued efforts to improve the lot of our low-wage workers. The Workers' Party has repeatedly called for a roll-out of the minimum wage for Singaporeans and the Local Qualifying Salary (LQS) effectively institutes such a floor for a significant majority of Singaporeans. Progressive Wage Model (PWM) is being rolled out to additional sectors, but I am left to wonder if the Ministry has evaluated how many workers would still remain uncovered by either the LQS or PWM stipulations. If there is room to increase the LQS to an amount of $1,600, which roughly corresponds to a take-home salary of $1,300. Finally, I believe that the Small Business Recovery Grant targeted at SMEs in the sectors hardest hit by COVID-19 is a good example of how fiscal policies should be timely, targeted and temporary. Simplifying the qualification process for this application, however, would surely be welcome. Mr Speaker, there is much to like in this Budget which has embedded many elements that I believe will help us improve both efficiency as well as equity in our economy. But stubborn reliance on raising the GST in spite of alternative, more progressive forms of revenue generation is the fundamental reason why I cannot lend my support.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Christopher de Souza.
Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah)2483 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, this was not an easy speech to draft, but I hope it will be taken in the right spirit. We can have all the right fiscal policies in place and the mettle to see them through, notwithstanding the pain and pinch, but what we have not sorted out is political succession. Singapore has the unique capability to plan decades in advance across many policies – manpower, trade, climate change, defence, to name a few. But we must ensure that we have successive generations of leaders to see those policies to fruition and, Mr Speaker, I say that political succession planning is key in this regard. Just last year, I stood here to talk about what I had hoped to see in our 5G Prime Minister. That race should not matter, that he or she should be able to lead the leaders into 2040 and beyond. I focused on 5G because at the time it looked as if the 4G Prime Minister was secured – Deputy Prime Minister Heng. Yet just a few weeks later, the bombshell came. Deputy Prime Minister Heng had taken himself out of the running citing several reasons.[+3 sentences] Do not get me wrong. I respect the Deputy Prime Minister for that. It was an act of selflessness in the face of a force majeure, being the pandemic. In short, the Deputy Prime Minister said the next Prime Minister should have a longer runway to the premiership and a long run in the premiership.[+3 sentences] That he, meaning the Deputy Prime Minister, was not getting any younger and the pandemic was still getting longer. So, Singapore was at the heart of Deputy Prime Minister's decision. I respect that but it does not solve the issue of succession. To make Singapore's long-term plans work, such as those contained in this year's Budget, Singapore must have a long-term leadership succession plan.[+40 sentences] These are not my own personal musings. A recently published book by Shashi Jayakumar entitled "A History of the People's Action Party, 1985-2021" was launched by the Prime Minister late last year. Dr Jayakumar is not one to mince his words. He had to be as accurate in his analysis as he could be because many of the people that he wrote about are still alive. What was a central focus of his book? Renewal – principally, leadership renewal. I was at the book launch and should at this point, declare that I have known Dr Shashi Jayakumar for 20 years. We were University mates and I count him as a close friend. But putting personal affiliations aside, there were several themes that struck me as I listened to the three speeches given at the book launch. The first speech was given by Peter Schoppert, Director of NUS Press, the publisher. Let me quote two poignant points he made which put into context why the book and themes such as renewal had to be accurately recounted. This is what Schoppert said, and I quote: "It's a brave historian who writes a contemporary history. That historian is brave on at least two fronts. First, the contemporary historian writes about people who are very much with us. You will see in the book that interviews form a very important source for the book and, of course, interviewees have their own views and they can read what you said about them, they can answer back. They might even be in the room when you launch the book. They might even be invited to launch the book for you. Secondly, the contemporary historian must give a judgement on events as they are still current, as they are still playing out." Being the author, Dr Shashi Jayakumar was invited to deliver a speech about the book at its launch. What he chose to focus on was insightful and piercing. I quote: "There are many themes and ideas in this book and I do not have time to enumerate on all of them, but I did briefly want to highlight two points. The first is renewal – this is felt to be an urgent imperative. From the very beginning, Party files showed that Mr Lee Kuan Yew was thinking about the issue at an extraordinarily early point, from the early 1960s in fact. I really find this amazing. In this area of renewal, things that would see fruition much later, time and again, would be thought of by Mr Lee and others within the Party from a very early stage." Prime Minister was invited to launch the book and Prime Minister, too, picked up on the importance of renewal. I quote Prime Minister: "A pivotal general election had just taken place in December 1984. In that election, many of the PAP old guards either retired from politics or stepped down from leadership roles. In the new Cabinet, from the founding generation – only Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Mr S Rajaratnam and Mr EW Barker remained. After the election, the younger Ministers chose Mr Goh Chok Tong to be the leader and he became the first Deputy Prime Minister." Two Opposition candidates were elected. Mr JB Jeyaretnam in Anson re-elected and Mr Chiam See Tong in Potong Pasir for the first time. At the post-election press conference, Mr Lee interpreted the election results using a biblical reference. He described it as the inevitable transition from the Independence generation to a new generation of voters who knew not Joseph. Prime Minister went on to say, "The Party's early years, pre-1985, were full of drama and excitement, whereas the post-1985 story has been one of relative calm and stability. Year after year, Singapore continued to sustain its strong growth and rapid transformation. We carried out two leadership transitions smoothly – from the 1G to the 2G, and then from the 2G to the 3G. This has been a story of stability and progress. Of evolution, not revolution. Of patient building and improving. Of ensuring that tomorrow will be better than today. This book recounts how the PAP continuously transformed and renewed itself over the decades." So, renewal is key, Sir, and we need to concretise the plans for it.[+33 sentences] Before I go into the meat of my speech, let me respectfully ask a few questions. What if Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean were 15 years younger? What if Senior Minister Tharman were 15 years younger? They would be ideal candidates for the 4G Prime Minister-ship. Or what if Minister K Shanmugam, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan or Dr Ng Eng Hen were just 10 years younger? They, too, would be ideal candidates for the 4G Prime Minister-ship. The point I am getting at is that I can appreciate that there are many constraints in choosing a leader – age, years in politics, circumstances beyond one's control. To get my point across, let me share what leadership means to me. And here, I offer a very humble parallel through the lens of sports. In secondary school, Junior College (JC) and in the club leagues, I was asked to captain hockey teams. I accepted the invitations. Was I the best hockey player on the team? No. In every team I captained, there were three or four players better than me. So, why was I asked? Maybe because I could read the game; maybe because I had deep friendships with everyone on the team; maybe because I was able to decipher what our potential as a team was and worked our guts out to materialise that potential. Whatever the reason, I gave it my best shot and the players better than me also became part of the team's cause. When I moved on to play for Singapore in the men's national hockey team, we chose the best person for the captaincy. It was not me. There were four or five of my teammates who were better players than the captain who was chosen. So, why was he chosen? Because he could read the game better than any one of us. He could gel a team better than any one of us and he understood his opponents and their tactics well. The point I am getting at is that we cared less about who the captain was. We were more concerned about how Singapore was faring on the scoreboard and, when we played in Malaysia and India, the matches could get very tense. Sure, choosing the right teammate to wear the captain's armband is important. But what mattered more was the whole team's performance. What mattered in any stadium we played in, whether on home soil or internationally, was what was on the scoreboard. What is Singapore's score? Is Singapore up or is Singapore down? What do we need to do better for our performance as a team? For whom? Ourselves? No. For Singapore and the Singapore flag we wore over our chest. The point I am making is that you, the 4G, can choose someone who is not necessarily the smartest, but you need to choose someone who is the best fit to bring together a team.[+11 sentences] You have in your ranks hon Members – Chan Chun Sing, Lawrence Wong, Ong Ye Kung, Tan Chuan-Jin, Desmond Lee, Edwin Tong, Tan See Leng, Indranee Rajah and many others. There was Ng Chee Meng but we had sadly lost him in Sengkang. Among the 5G, you have hon Members Sim Ann, Chee Hong Tat, Zaqy Mohamad, Janil Puthucheary, Alvin Tan, Desmond Lee, Sun Xueling and many others, first among equals – primus inter pares – team effort. We lost Amrin Amin and Lam Pin Min who would have been key members of the 5G team. I miss Amrin and Pin Min. They were exceptional Members of Parliament. Now, please do not get me wrong. I, for one, have no ambition whatsoever to be Prime Minister, in case that is already not obvious. Here is another caveat. If I did not mention a Member's name in the speech, please do not read anything into it. I only have 20 minutes to give the speech and I do not want to breach the time limit. The point I am making here, and the point behind this speech is: for us in Parliament to show the world that, in the middle of this pandemic, we can even sort out the succession plan.[+13 sentences] We do not need to think variant-to-variant, day-by-day, month-by-month; rather, Singapore plans decade-by-decade. The manifestation of such far-sightedness is our leadership renewal. We must get it right and we must make the world aware of the succession plan. Please do not mistake me. Do I think we have the best man as Prime Minister now? Yes, absolutely. Around the dinner table, when we meet over a meal, my father and mother would say to me, "Is Prime Minister alright? Is Teo Chee Hean alright?" These questions come up, especially when Singapore is going through tough times and tough spells. These are real concerns. It is a concern for the person. My response to my parents is that: "Prime Minister and Senior Minister are fighting fit but that the load is heavy to carry." Please do not misinterpret me. The point I am making is that we have solid leadership now, but we must, with utmost imperative, line up the future Prime Minister and his or her deputies, so that they get the longest runway possible before taking over the controls in the cockpit.[+10 sentences] Again, so as not to be misunderstood, I would hope that even when the 4G is in place and holding the reins, Prime Minister, Senior Minister Teo, Senior Minister Tharman and the seniors in Cabinet will stay on as Senior Ministers or Coordinating Ministers to shepherd the new team. Allow me to move to a different but somewhat related point. Allow me to share some private-sector perspective on this. I am a lawyer at Lee & Lee. My clients, including MNCs, look very carefully at political predictability when making decisions as regards which country to invest in. Time and again, my clients have shared that Singapore's predictable political environment gives them confidence to invest their business, human capital and infrastructure long term in Singapore. Germane to that is their understanding of Singapore's political succession planning. And, here, I am talking about political succession planning within the PAP. Is this a speech better suited for a Party conference or a speech in Parliament? I would say it is an appropriate and relevant speech to be made in Parliament because the PAP and its succession planning have been organic to Singapore's success story. Along with PAP's effort, coupled with the sweat of Singaporeans, Singapore has transitioned from third world to first and become a choice destination to invest in the 2020s. It is with this belief and principle in mind that I make the propositions today, that is, the ruling party of the day – the PAP, must swiftly choose the next Prime Minister and next Deputy Prime Ministers and give them as long a runway as our current Prime Minister can manage.[+7 sentences] This reminds me of a conversation I had with hon Member Sitoh Yih Pin in Morocco. We were there to learn counterterrorism measures and whether Morocco's counterterror tactics could be deployed in Singapore. In between the busy schedule, Sitoh and I spoke about political succession among the 4G. Why? Because we like to play political chess games? No. The backbenchers discuss these things between themselves because we want to see Singapore succeed. Sitoh is a real fighter. He has no need to mince his words.[+2 sentences] So, we talk frankly. Sir, I have been in politics longer than many of the potential candidates for the 4G Prime Minister-ship. I entered in 2006 at the age of 30, at the request of the Prime Minister. Many of the candidates for the 4G Prime Minister entered in 2011 and 2015.[+4 sentences] I come with no personal agenda. I make this speech with no personal agenda. Here, in this Chamber, I have, for years, been pushing for causes and policy changes under the steady hands of four Speakers and under the watchful eyes of five Whips. Members, please know, in articulating these views, I have Singapore at heart. My humble message to the 4G is this: please apply your minds to succession planning and articulate swiftly your thinking and choice as regards to the leadership to Singaporeans.[+3 sentences] They deserve nothing less. In conclusion, Sir, I support the Budget but we are capable of so much more. Let us show the world what Singapore is made of. In the throes of a crisis, we can pick a future leader and the core team to take Singapore through its next chapter and beyond.[+3 sentences] That shows the world that we have mettle. That shows the world our ballast in a time of crisis. That shows the world our deep reservoir of resolve and our steely determination to persevere and fight on.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Ms He Ting Ru.
Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang)3331 words
[+11 sentences]Mr Speaker, the last few years have sometimes felt like something straight out of a storybook: it was the best of times as we witnessed Singaporeans stepping up and volunteering to help the vulnerable amongst us during lockdown. It was the worst of times as we watched the early outbreak in the dormitories unfold, together with reports of terrible living conditions. It was the spring of hope, as we opened up to Phase Three at the end of 2020. It was the winter of despair as, in particular, our key workers and restaurants suffered many reverses and took many steps back in our path towards reopening. Old certainties have been shaken, the script had to be torn up multiple times and many a time, we have been left wondering – and perhaps still are – if the light at the end of the tunnel was actually that of an oncoming train. And today, even as we struggle to stay afloat amid what feels like endless price increases, we are also faced with understandable anxiety over climate change, the situation in the Ukraine, as we wonder whether we are witnessing the birth of the great conflict of our times. Today, more than ever, we have seen that the way we react when we are threatened, the actions we take when we are under pressure, are the most accurate reflection of our characters, of who we are as individuals, organisations and as a society. It has not been easy. The various peaks and troughs which we have experienced since COVID-19 hit us have been exhausting and there will be more to come still. Our path to living with COVID-19 is a long one and the fatigue experienced by many of us – from our frontline care workers, young parents, teachers, business owners – is real. It is also troubling to hear pleas, both online and offline, for our leaders and policy-makers to "come down from the ivory towers" to see what the situation is on the ground. The situation where our people feel and perceive that this Chamber is an ivory tower that is out of touch with reality is highly concerning and one which cannot be allowed to carry on.[+7 sentences] We should adopt a reflective approach on the possible drivers for this feeling amongst the public and work together to overcome it. The Budget this year is entitled "Charting Our New Way Forward Together". It acknowledges that a "New Way Forward" is required and that we, in this House, have a duty to ensure that we do so together and that we do not leave anyone behind. This is something we can all get behind. Indeed, the Workers' Party's 2020 Election manifesto's preamble is entitled "A Singapore For All". But the key is to ensure that the formulation of our policies and their effects on the ground move us decisively towards achieving this aim. As a society, we need to decide together how best to invest in our people, how we should spend our tax dollars. After all, what does it say about us as a society that our senior residents come to us and tell us as a matter of course that they have requested for their medication dosages to be cut down because they cannot afford to pay for the full dosages that doctors have prescribed to them to treat their medical ailments? What does it say about us when our young parents have to make daily choices about how to apply the last dollars in their bank accounts as they cannot afford to buy both nappies and formula for their newborns, when the family is hit by an unexpected job loss through no fault of their own?[+9 sentences] These are real-life scenarios that all of us have seen our residents tackle. And while it is true that many helping hands are available, we are often told that much time, energy and stress is involved in navigating the support system. While these systems are in place to prevent abuse – and quite rightly so – we must also ask ourselves and continue to ask ourselves important questions: who we are as a people and what values do we stand for? Do we want our policies to empower Singaporeans to be our best selves or do we restrict Singaporeans from being our worst selves? As we think about our new way forward together, it is still a key principle that Singaporeans must be self-reliant and we must be responsible. Is this consistent with our laws and policies that are formulated with the assumption that everyone is out there to game the system, on the lookout for unfair advantage for themselves to the detriment of others? Does this approach not build a culture of Singaporeans trying to figure out what is legal or allowed, rather than applying their own mind to what make sense and is reasonable for both themselves and their fellow citizens? Another clear example is the current debate surrounding our medical certificate (MC) culture. The requirement for many employers for the doctor's note for any absences from the workplace due to medical reasons stands in stark contrast to my experience in my first job in the city of London. Indeed, in the UK, employers are only allowed to ask for "fit notes" if employees are sick for more than seven days.[+18 sentences] Workers are asked to self-certify if they are sick for less than seven days. In fact, it was not unheard of for employers to offer "duvet days" to their employees: days off not because they are ill, but because employees sometimes just need some time to rest. These are often structured in a way that works best for their firm or industry, and have been shown to actually increase productivity and the mental and physical well-being of workers. I am not advocating a wholesale copying of these approaches, but I believe it is worth looking at our own labour market to see what positive changes we can make by studying these examples. To those who worry that these practices may result in people taking advantage, I observed that these practices appeared to work well in a highly dynamic, profitable and productive environment, as the common understanding was that people were serious about their jobs and were willing to work hard in order to progress in their careers. Indeed, we cannot discount that the financial services coming out of London remain world-leading and innovative. If the argument that these are the things that could not work for Singapore, then we should take a long hard look at ourselves and ask: "why not?", followed by "how do we get there?". How do we move to a society where people are empowered to exercise good judgement and be truly responsible? How do we ensure that people do not succumb to the temptation to indulge in corrupt practices because it is the right thing to do, and not because they have a high salary preventing them from being tempted? Against this backdrop, I would like to turn to the most pressing problems and issues facing Singaporeans as we emerge from the COVID-19 years. In particular, our residents in Sengkang keenly feel the press of having to deal with lasting financial and social effects of the pandemic. Many of them are members of both the "sandwich" class and also the "sandwich generation", and rising prices have and will continue to hit them hard while they struggle to provide for both the elderly and the very young in their families. For these Singaporeans, the concept of inter-generational equity, or intergenerational solidarity, is extremely important in ensuring that one generation does not unduly bear the brunt of paying for expenditure of either a future or previous generation. My colleagues have and will continue to touch on these issues. But while this concept may appear to be remote in Singapore at the moment, I would also note that as we restructure our economy and society, we should be wary of allowing a situation to develop where political outcomes and opinions are, or are seen to be divided strongly along intergenerational lines. This has been seen in the West in the phenomenon of "Boomer blaming" for everything – from Brexit to toxic work environments that degrade mental health, and only serves to exacerbate generational grievances. And we need to tackle this matter in a holistic way, ranging from creating more opportunities and spaces for the generations to learn from and support each other, and to ensure that our fiscal policies do not, and do not get interpreted as unfairly favouring one generation to the detriment of other generations. Coming back to the issues surrounding the here and now, the ever-increasing cost of living is a topic that we hear feedback about time and again. Individuals, households and businesses have approached us for assistance with juggling the impact of relentless price increases. They have noted that a final 2% tax increase means a 28% increase in the amount of tax to be paid.[+1 sentence] They have also noted that there have already been price increases prior to the tax hike taking effect. Just the other day, I noted during one of my estate walks that a Buangkok coffeeshop stall has put up a sign stating that rising prices have obliged them to increase the price of all items by 50 cents, which definitely far exceeds 2%.[+4 sentences] Furthermore, global brands such as Nestle have also sounded the alarm and announced that they will increase prices of their products – and these increments will not be captured by any GST Voucher scheme. I fear that the cascading and knock-on effect that such cost increases will be devastating on households already on a knife edge. Additionally, the war in the Ukraine, which has finally come to a head last week, will only lead to more supply chain disruptions and global price rises, and if it proves to be prolonged, it may end up having a far larger effect than predicted or catered for. We will not be spared in Singapore. Already, crude oil has hit multi-year highs of over $100 a barrel and stock markets have reacted with volatility.[+4 sentences] Food prices will not be spared, as Russia and the Ukraine are major exporters of agricultural products, and Russia is one of the largest exporters of fertiliser globally – any drop in supply would lead to an increase in costs, which means farmers will pay more and have to pass it down to the end consumer. Russia is also a major supplier of natural gas, which has implications for us in Singapore, as around 95% of our energy needs are still powered by natural gas. This will only add to the woes currently experienced by our households and the businesses already grappling with huge increases in their energy bills. Notably, politicians in Germany are already advocating a natural gas reserve to shelter consumers from price shocks in the wake of the conflict. All these further underscores the need for our green transformation to take place urgently.[+1 sentence] The situation is grim in the near-term. It is why the Workers' Party cannot agree to a GST hike – whether delayed or staggered – especially as we believe not all other alternatives have been exhausted.[+11 sentences] Yet we also acknowledge that there are long-term pressures on our public purse strings, as we search for a shift towards long-term sustainability on all fronts, be it environmental, demographic or economic. After all, the world cannot keep growing endlessly, a fact illustrated by figures released in November last year which have shown that India's fertility rate has dropped to below replacement rate for the first time ever. In view of this, we also believe there is room to make our GST system less regressive beyond the current approach to further ease the burden on the lower-income groups. It is why we have to consider if our GST can start allowing for exemptions on certain essential items – treatment that is often seen in the case of other economies. The list of items should be kept to essentials such as food supplies, healthcare and care services, including childcare. This is what economies, such as the UK, Australia and Japan, currently do and their experiences should inform us as we come up with our own list of exemptions that would be most beneficial to more vulnerable Singaporeans, and to avoid the pitfalls some countries have come across while deciding which items should be exempt and which not. Exempting items such as healthcare, infant care and childcare will also help to ease current and future cost pressures in industries that struggle to fill their manpower requirements with local workers. And I note there are stark implications for those industries with the foreign worker policies which are being tightened by the measures just announced in this Budget. Additionally, I note that exemptions applying to children's products and childcare would surely be welcome relief for parents or prospective parents and go towards addressing our low total fertility rate (TFR), as financial concerns are often cited as one of the key reasons why people delay having children or decide not to have them. I need hardly add that raising our TFR is an existential problem for us that we have been unsuccessfully trying to solve for decades. Consumption taxes are regressive by nature. While it is true that exempting essential items from GST is regressive, the alternative of keeping our existing system of no exemptions is likely to be even more regressive. This is because those who are on a lower income spend a far larger proportion of their income on consumption, which is always taxed in our case. Therefore, exempting key essential items from being taxed will significantly reduce the impact on lower-income groups.[+21 sentences] Additionally, while it is true that higher-income earners also benefit from such exemptions, these items, being essential in nature, should result in any derived benefits being self-limiting – after all, how much more rice can a rich person eat? Another argument is that it is too expensive to implement these exemptions and that this will increase compliance costs for businesses. However, with the advent of AI and advances in technology, these costs should be much lower compared with when GST was first introduced and any upgrades to accounting or associated software should be a one-time cost for both Government and businesses. Additionally, compliance costs will likely be of far greater concern to smaller enterprises, and I note too that small businesses with turnovers of less than $1,000,000 are not required to register for GST. How can it be that a country such as Singapore, which has long-prided itself ourselves on having targeted, efficient – even convoluted at times – policymaking, could shy away from implementing a system of GST-exempt items by saying that it is too much effort? Turning now to how we measure our spending and our progress, I repeat previous calls made in this House to rethink the long-term sustainability of how we measure our progress. Since its adoption in 1944 at the Bretton Woods Conference as the formal measure of a country's economy, gross domestic product (GDP) has proved to be a useful measure of the progress made by a country. And Singapore has done extremely well from our difficult beginnings. Yet, in recent years, there has been a sense amongst many of us that GDP does not tell the full picture by any means. In particular, healthy GDP figures in 2021 and 2022, especially compared against the depressed bases in 2020, leave out the entire story of our country. There is a growing acknowledgement that beyond economic growth and survival, we should also thrive as a society and be mindful of the impact that we have on our planet. GDP measurements alone fail to address these shifting values in our current world. GDP alone also does not capture the full picture of how we care for our people. To illustrate this point, many may not realise that GDP does not measure things, such as planting a tree, and that it does not measure the unpaid household and care labour undertaken by so many of our fellow Singaporeans. Yet, one would be hard-pressed to argue that these do not matter in how we measure our progress as a society. How do we, therefore, determine whether enough has been done to address concerns about, for example, mental health and well-being? After all, it is clear that there is much work to be done in Singapore, judging by the number of registered psychologists and psychiatrists in Singapore, especially in the public sector. There are also long waits to see counsellors in schools and tertiary education institutes, and concerns have been raised about the quality of support received. These are but some examples of what should matter to us as we measure our society and how we measure our holistic progress. Many economists have been advocating for years that countries start developing a dashboard which contains a variety of other measures for how well an economy and society has been doing. Yes, GDP matters, but it does not do well in measuring our human, social and natural assets. A uniquely Singapore dashboard should, therefore, be developed and published together with GDP results. This can contain quarterly or annual measurements of our progress in terms of poverty reduction, social mobility and wealth distribution in an easy-to-understand way, allowing us as a people to understand at a glance what our targets are and the progress we have made or failed to make beyond GDP figures.[+2 sentences] The dashboard should also contain measurements of the impact that we have on our environment and planetary health. Lessons can be learned from the introduction and abandonment of the "Green GDP" by China in the early part of the century. Our impact dashboard could, for example, contain indices relating to our emissions, land use changes, waste reduction efforts and have specific measures on how well we are doing in our transition to a green economy – a topic that my colleague Dennis Tan will elaborate more on.[+9 sentences] Finally, we need to move from being merely a circular economy – as outlined by MTI in 2019 – to what I think of as a "circular society". This means that while we aim for zero waste in terms of material use and energy resources, we also need to ensure we do not waste wealth, technology and knowledge, have a thriving knowledge commons and a strong culture of philanthropy. The last point in particular is something I note that this Budget aims to promote through various tweaks to tax incentives and co-funding measures. To know how successful the increase in spending has been, philanthropic indicators on the dashboard could include details such as trends relating to donations and the nature of who is donating. As little is currently known about how a circular economy or society can promote better social equity, more research is certainly needed – particularly in the local context. Narratives of a circular society can and should be developed, as the long-term sustainability of our country and planet is at stake. We must stop assuming that infinite economic growth is possible and start shifting towards formally measuring our progress on other things that matter. Mr Speaker, we are indeed at the crossroads, and it will be negligent of us not to put our heads together to figure out how best to chart out a sustainable way forward for Singapore. Headwinds will be strong and frequent in the years to come, and our people will need to demonstrate grit and fortitude to survive and thrive. The difficult environment we see ahead of us will test us and we should not add further to the financial and other burdens of our people by raising our GST when there are other available options. It is therefore regrettable that we must vote no to a GST increase and therefore cannot support this Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Jessica Tan.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast)2098 words
[+26 sentences]Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to participate in the Budget debate. We are still dealing with the pandemic and it has been challenging for business and individuals. We need to continue to support those still impacted. But we must position Singapore for the future and we must grow our economy to provide opportunities and quality of life for Singaporeans. Beyond growth, we must also ensure that Singaporeans and Singapore have the capability to seize these opportunities. I will focus on three topics in my speech today. One, investing for growth and the future. Two, strengthening our social compact. Three, inclusion and ensuring that no one is left behind. Investing for growth and the future. In the Budget debate last year, I spoke about the need for Singapore to grow and to step up the momentum for businesses and individuals to build capability to seize opportunities when the economy opens up. One year on, this call is more urgent. While COVID-19 is still with us, Singapore continues to attract investments in electronics and biomedical manufacturing, as well as new investments across sectors such as agri-food, chemicals and materials. These create new jobs and opportunities. Many of these new jobs are PMET jobs and require relevant skills and competencies. But to be able to seize these opportunities, our businesses and workforce must have the relevant capabilities. Let me touch on building capabilities. The pace of digitalisation has accelerated as businesses were propelled to go digital to adapt in order to be able to operate in the pandemic. Many are still in the midst of their digital transformation. Now, with climate change, high global energy prices and the Ukraine situation, there is a pressing need for businesses to become more sustainable. We have seen that companies that had invested in digital were better able to pivot and do business in the pandemic. For companies to become greener, it will require not only funding but more importantly know-how, rethinking of how work is done, how goods are produced and services delivered. Processes and, more importantly, behaviours need to change. We do not want to have to wait for another crisis for our businesses to become more sustainable. Digital can also help with more sustainable business practices. The two are not mutually exclusive. The ambition, as outlined in the Budget, is to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.[+6 sentences] How can we ensure that we do not leave our small businesses behind? With the new carbon tax, if businesses do not transition and invest in clean technologies, they will definitely find it hard to survive. Businesses tend to see sustainability as the need for compliance and cost. What can be done to help businesses understand the benefits, competitive advantage and growth opportunities? In the joint study that was done by Economic Development Board (EDB) and Enterprise Singapore (ESG), it outlined the role that Singapore can play to become a key carbon service hub. Carbon services can generate new businesses and jobs in Singapore. The estimates are that economic opportunities from carbon services could create a projected gross value added (GVA) of between US$1.8 billion to US$5.6 billion in Singapore by 2050.[+12 sentences] What can we do to help our businesses build the capabilities to participate in these opportunities and more importantly, to thrive? Let me now touch on a more immediate challenge that businesses across many sectors are facing, that is, getting the manpower to meet the business demands. The feedback from companies across industries is the difficulty to meet their manpower needs. These range from tech talent to roles across different segments. This is impacting their ability to operate effectively. The impact of the pandemic on manpower and the level of Omicron infections has made the situation even more pressing. As business picks up, the situation will not allow our businesses to address demand and will impact their ability to grow. What targeted support can be given to allow viable businesses to address these current manpower constraints to transform and more importantly, to grow? Minister Wong in his Budget Statement stressed the need to "redouble our efforts to invest in new capabilities". Technology and digitalisation have picked up pace across all sectors in Singapore. Workers even in non-tech jobs need to understand and know how to use technology in order to do their work. This is not just about how to use the latest technologies and devices as they will continually change. While there will be an additional $200 million to fund enhanced schemes to build digital capabilities in our businesses and workers, I think we also need to look at what support will be given to companies to help workers, especially those in the workforce gain the knowledge and skills they need in this new world of work.[+8 sentences] These skills are not about having deep technology skills in artificial intelligence, data analytics, or any future technologies but rather how to work with these new and ever-changing technologies to be able to do their work and thrive. With the greater reliance on digital, the security and resilience of our digital infrastructures are crucial. We need to continually invest and strengthen our digital infrastructures. Minister shared that broadband access speeds will be increased and investments made in future technologies. Can Minister Wong also share what investments will be made to strengthen the reliability and the security of our digital infrastructures? Let me move on to the point about strengthening our social compact. I thank Minister for a Budget that has heard the challenges and recognised the current cost and inflationary pressures that Singaporeans are facing and for delaying the start of the GST increase to 2030, with the two-step implementation. I would like to make a few points about the Assurance Package. While the support in the Assurance Package should and does provide more for the lower-income, the Assurance Package does also signal the Government's intent to also cushion the impact of the GST increase to include more middle-income households.[+7 sentences] This is demonstrated in the components of the Assurance Package of Cash Payout, Additional GST U-Save Vouchers, GST Cash Vouchers for seniors in the Senior Bonus, Medisave Top-ups; and the Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers to address essential expenditure of families in areas of utilities, groceries, education and health. A subtle but important point to note is that the cash payout eligibility is on assessable income and property ownership, rather than the annual value of residence. Annual value (AV) of the property is used as the main criterion for means testing and eligibility for many support schemes. While I do not disagree that the value of the property reflects one's means, it does not always mean that all who live in these properties have the means or have more. A point that I have raised previously is the application of the AV criterion for those who live with their extended families in properties with annual value above $21,000. These persons could be elderly parents or siblings who live with relatives as they need care or cannot afford housing. In some of these cases, they do not have means but because of their residential address, they do not qualify for any support. An example is the COVID-19 Support Grant (CSG). Those who have lost their jobs and meet the CSG eligibility criteria, but live in a home of AV above $21,000, regardless of ownership, are not eligible for the COVID-19 Support Grant.[+22 sentences] With the trend of smaller families and people marrying later, we do have more couples who have to provide for both their young children and senior parents or relatives. Some call this the "sandwiched generation". I do have such families in my constituency who live in private properties with annual value between $21,000 and $30,000. In the spirit of renewing and strengthening the social compact, Minister Wong has said: "we want every Singaporean to know and feel that he or she has a stake in our society, and that they will not be left to fend for themselves when times are down". I would like to ask if there can be refinement of the use of the AV criterion for eligibility of support schemes? I am not asking for the AV to be removed but rather can it be refined to apply to home ownership rather than residence for extended family members or higher AV for the "sandwiched generation". I must make a point here. As we look to the Government to continue to provide and support Singaporeans when they need it, as part of the social compact, we too, need to do our part and balance that with what each of us can do. So, as we talk about cost pressures and one of the biggest cost pressures that is now facing us is fuel cost. As a taker, I do also say that individuals and businesses, apart from asking for support – and I will continue to ask for support for businesses and individuals, we all need to do our part to also finds ways to conserve, to be greener. Otherwise, it is just addressing cost but not finding better ways to do things; otherwise, it is not sustainable. I am not talking about "green". I am talking about being able to fund this. Let me move to my last point about inclusion and ensuring that no one is left behind. Mr Speaker, Singapore has a rapidly ageing population, the employment landscape of our workforce has changed. Those above 55 years of age make up 25.7% of the workforce in 2020. As part of PAP.sg efforts to better understand senior employability, in the last quarter of 2021, we conducted an online survey with seniors aged 50 years and older; 934 people responded to the survey and 98% of respondents are Singaporeans, 60% are currently working and almost 60% of them have post-Secondary education. We have a balance of male and female respondents. The respondents are from a variety of industries, working in a diverse range of occupations; 98% liked the work they are doing, citing meaningful work and having relevant experience; 60% of respondents who are working face challenges at work, with about one-fifth of them citing challenges like needing to learn new skills, dealing with changes and new norms. Amid the challenge of learning new things, the most commonly cited skills-gap is in learning new digital skills. With digitalisation and the drive for sustainability, can we rethink how we prepare and enable matured and senior workers – who want and can work – to actively participate in quality jobs in the growth sectors in the post-COVID-19 economy? I welcome the enhanced announcement in Budget 2022 for the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS). The rise in qualifying income cap from $2,300 to $2,500, and the extension to younger workers aged 30 to 34 will definitely benefit workers and the increased payouts for each tier will provide more support for lower-wage workers. I do, however, want to appeal to Minister Wong to reconsider the introduction of the minimum income criterion of $500 per month.[+8 sentences] This will impact older low-waged workers or those who are caregivers and need to the flexibility of part-time work. For this group of workers, while they can and do want to work, part-time work may be more suitable for them. Let me give the example of one of my residents, Mdm Lee – this is not her real name. She is 69 years of age and works as a relief programme coordinator at an eldercare centre. She covers the duties of staff who are on leave or medical leave. Her estimated monthly income ranges from $200 to a little over $500 a month. She is currently eligible for WIS and is appreciative of the support. However, with the minimum income criterion, Mdm Lee is concerned as she will not be eligible for WIS. Will Minister consider a review of the minimum income criterion for WIS, as it will impact those that the scheme is intended to support.[+3 sentences] Mr Speaker, I started my speech touching on the importance of economic growth. Economic success is necessary, but on its own, it is not sufficient for Singaporeans to make Singapore home. If we focus only on economic growth, our people will just leave Singapore and go where the economic opportunities present themselves. Budget 2022 sets out to "charting our way forward" I thank Minister Wong for a Budget the aims to "realising our vision of a fairer, more sustainable, and more inclusive society", to "see through the pandemic today" and more importantly, "to build a better Singapore tomorrow." I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Tan Wu Meng.
Dr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong)1373 words
[+31 sentences]Mr Speaker, today I will speak on the climate crisis, our climate ambition, our energy security and our survival. Last year, I spoke about Singapore's burning platform, a world on fire with COVID-19. With natural habitats being destroyed, we must expect more pandemics, some worse than COVID-19. But climate change is a graver challenge than any disease. So, we need to stress-test our assumptions, test our plans for the future before the future tests us. So, we need to move quickly and boldly. An earlier generation spoke of mudflats to metropolis in one generation. It happened. And now we face a new ambition, again, born of necessity and survival. Can we go from carbon-positive to carbon-neutral? From what is unsustainable to what is sustainable within one generation? Because that is the implication of reaching carbon net-zero by the middle of this century. There is not much time and we need to be seriously bold because the climate crisis is about Singapore's survival, whether we stay above water. In 2019, a research paper in the journal, Nature Communications, showed very vividly, with maps, how hundreds of millions of people around the world would be underwater by the end of this century and that is just assuming a low-carbon emissions scenario. It is our economic survival, too. In a world where carbon border adjustment taxes are being talked about; in a world where consumers choose what to buy, where to work, how to invest based on sustainability; in a world where narratives can shift from free trade to sustainable trade. We need to be ready and it means Singapore needs to raise our ambition to stay above water, to survive and to thrive. We can only do this fast enough, within one generation, by moving boldly and ahead of the market. Mr Speaker, our climate response must stand up to stress tests: energy security – for a carbon-constrained world; pandemic security – for a world with new diseases; social security – to ensure a just transition. All these link up with our Total Defence because, if Singapore is underwater, if we cannot keep the lights on, we are not even going to be at the starting line in a challenge. If we are laid low by a pandemic or our people are splintered and divided, we are not going to be able to deal with whatever threats come our way, kinetic or otherwise. I spoke on pandemic security during last year's Budget. I have spoken on social security over the years. Today, I will focus on our energy security. Mr Speaker, energy security has been a big issue around the world in recent years, and especially in recent days. Energy security is existential for Singapore. Not just keeping the lights on in our hospitals, in our homes. It keeps our NEWater plants, our desalination plants going. Our water security depends on our energy security. We know what it means if Singapore's water supply is ever called into question. And we need to think about energy security that way too. Today, from public domain data, about 95% of Singapore's electricity is generated using natural gas.[+4 sentences] Supplies by pipeline, also LNG terminal, but it is still almost all natural gas – 95%. Some would say it is a serious concentration of risk. Recent events around the world, market shifts, events in Eastern Europe, are a reminder of this. Electric vehicles (EVs) will further concentrate this risk because EVs also draw energy from the electricity grid. But if the pandemic has taught us one thing, it is that we need to move from "just in time" to "just in case". There is a case for Singapore to further diversify our electricity sources and to do so ahead of the market – for energy resilience, energy security, also to reduce our carbon footprint as part of the climate crisis response.[+14 sentences] Sir, there are no illusions about it. There is a price for "just in case". There is a cost to preparing in advance for danger and for crisis. But by strengthening social support in a progressive way, we can help Singaporean families even as Singapore proceeds through a necessary transition, a just transition. Sir, so, how do we diversify our energy security, reduce our carbon footprint, raise our climate ambition? Solar is part of the solution, but Singapore is small, we are solar-constrained. Even with solar photovoltaic panels on every building's rooftop, on every external surface of every building, solar alone would not be enough. Regional power grids can be useful, but they do have limitations. When there is an energy crunch, some regional grids will come under the same market pressures as our own. Even if you use an undersea cable, a high-voltage direct current (HVDC) transmission line, that line is still one underwater dredging accident or incident away from being unplugged. So, we need to look at other options, too. In July 2021, I had asked in Parliament about Singapore's potential as a hydrogen hub, in particular, low-carbon hydrogen, and whether we should move ahead of existing market conditions. We already have established capabilities in the energy and chemicals sector and in transshipment. Mr Speaker, indeed, there is already interest in hydrogen around us and in the region. Reuters News Agency recently reported that a Japanese-Australian venture has been testing transport of hydrogen, using a ship as a liquid hydrogen carrier. They reported that just this past week, a Japanese-built ship, the Suiso Frontier, delivered the world's first long-distance liquefied hydrogen cargo from Australia to Japan.[+1 sentence] Early days, but proof of concept. American think-tank, CSIS, in October 2021, published a commentary. They assess that Australia, by 2030, could well be a "major player" in global hydrogen production and trade.[+8 sentences] Their green hydrogen, when exported, will need to be shipped to destination markets. So, the question is, which cities in Southeast Asia have the potential to be a hydrogen hub in the hydrogen economy? Is Singapore among them? And, if so, do we want to be first mover, second mover or too late to move? Moving ahead of the market will help Singapore build capabilities, reduce the risk that we will be left behind. Starting up hydrogen-based electricity generation and fuel-cell capability will help us build the experience to scale up when we need to. Because the most difficult step is going from no capability to having some hydrogen capability. On other developments, Mr Speaker, we should also keep a very close watch on developments in nuclear energy, both fission as well as fusion. The International Energy Agency (IEA) in 2021 observed that nuclear power output avoided about 55 gigatonnes – 55 billion tonnes – of carbon emissions over the past 50 years, nearly equal to two years of global energy-related CO2 emissions. For nuclear fission, we should continue assessing the safety of small modular reactors and whether a future generation of small modular reactors can be safely deployed in the Singapore context.[+2 sentences] We should keep on looking at this. For nuclear fusion, it is still early days, but promising prospects. In December 2021, a team at the Joint European Torus (JET) facility near Oxford generated 59 megajoules of energy for five seconds – enough energy to power 35,000 homes for those five seconds.[+8 sentences] Again, early days, but notable developments. Sir, we need not decide yet, but we need to understand and build analyses and skills regarding these evolving and emerging technologies, so that when the time comes, Singapore can make informed choices, even hard choices, about these new energy technologies. Mr Speaker, when I was born, the global carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere was 333 parts per million (ppm). Today, you look at the Keeling Curve, the CO2 concentration is 420 ppm. It is still going up. Climate crisis – still ongoing. Singapore needs to be ready. In last year's Budget debate, I said: "…we must also ask ourselves beyond what is possible today, what is necessary for tomorrow. What do we need to do, that we cannot yet do?" Sir, the climate crisis and our climate ambition means we need new capabilities for our energy security and our decarbonisation.[+2 sentences] Necessary dreams as we face up to necessary realities. I stand in support of this Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang)3456 words
[+6 sentences]"It was the best of times, it was the worst of times". Mr Speaker, those were the opening lines from the novel by Charles Dickens, A Tale of Two Cities. Lines which I find to be quite apt to describe the situation we find ourselves in today. Two years into the pandemic, we are still battling the latest wave of infections brought about by the Omicron variant, with many of our healthcare workers struggling to cope with the stressful working conditions today. COVID-19 fatigue has also meant that many of us cannot help but feel overwhelmed at times even as we try so valiantly to live with endemic COVID-19. On the economic front, it seems that economic growth is starting to pick up again. Singapore's GDP grew by 7.6% in 2021, with the Government projecting an above-trend 3% to 5% growth for 2022, with total employment seeing the highest quarterly growth – since 2014 – of 47,400 workers in the fourth quarter.[+15 sentences] Yet, the rosy headline numbers belies the risk to the fragile global and local economic recovery, not least because of geopolitical tensions and rising concerns over inflation, among others, and one cannot rule out the tail risk of a recession in the near future. Inflation and the rising cost of living, in particular, have been of grave concern to policy-makers globally and the man-on-the-street alike. As shared in one of my speeches in November last year, it was unclear if the current inflationary pressures in the market are transitory or permanent, though the US Federal Reserve has since then dropped the term "transitory" in its description of inflation and with concerns about stagflation now appearing in the market lexicon instead. Locally, the MAS has been concerned enough about inflation to surprise the market with a tightening of monetary policy in October, given that external and domestic cost pressures are accumulating. And soon after its first tightening in three years, MAS acted again in its second tightening in three months, given upside risk of inflation. Even if what Minister of State Low Yen Ling shared in this House ensues and that inflation is expected to ease in the later part of this year, it does not mean prices are going to come down. It just means that prices will still rise but not jump and still continue to eat into the real incomes of Singaporeans. Who can forget the slew of price increase signs being put up at coffeeshops since the start of the year and the more than 30% increase in fuel prices or the 23% increase in electricity prices since a year ago? In the context of rising inflation and an uncertain global economic recovery, a GST hike, while delayed, would still be counterproductive, given the potential drag on private incomes, consumption and, ultimately, our GDP. As my fellow Workers' Party colleagues have shared earlier, there are alternative revenue sources that can and should be considered beyond the regressive tax that is GST, with options to use more of Singapore's existing physical headroom, for example, having the added benefit of minimising the impact to our local households and economy alike. My speech will thus focus on three main areas which warrant urgent consideration. Minister Wong made adjustments to residential property taxes and the Additional Registration Fees (ARF) for cars as part of Singapore's answer to wealth taxes. I welcome these changes. When viewed from a glass half-full perspective, it is a step in the right direction when it comes to tackling wealth inequality and strengthening our social fabric – albeit a small step. However, when viewed from a glass half-empty perspective, the measures are a tokenism rather than a meaningful attempt at wealth taxes in Singapore. Higher property taxes and ARF are expected to result in a $430 million increase in annual revenues and, even if we include higher personal income tax rates, the total annual increase is just about $600 million.[+1 sentence] This is significantly below what some academics have put forth as possibilities in our conservative estimates of what the net wealth tax could bring at about $1.2 billion annually. For example, in a November 2021 CNA article, Assoc Prof Walter Theseira from SUSS noted that a wealth tax might conceivably pull in a similar amount to raising the GST by a few percentage points, while a Bloomberg article on 16 February quoted Mr Christopher Gee, Senior Research Fellow at the IPS, as sharing that a similar wealth tax rate in Singapore, as that of Switzerland presumably, would generate $2.7 billion in Government revenues.[+4 sentences] Consider the case of property taxes which, as the Minister said, is currently Singapore's principal means of taxing wealth. As what Business Times' correspondent Ben Paul shared in his article, "As an owner/occupier of a modest apartment in the core central region, property tax is not a particularly big expense for me. In fact, it is nothing, compared to the maintenance fees and costs of general upkeep for my unit." While the increase in the headline marginal property tax rates appear high, the actual impact on the households involved are unlikely to be material. As noted in Annex C-2 of the Budget Statement, an owner-occupied condominium in a central location is only expected to see an increase of $200 a year while a very large, landed property is expected to see a $15,400 increase.[+9 sentences] The corresponding numbers for non-owner-occupied properties are $1,004 and $19,200 respectively. Based on my analysis, a centrally located condominium in Cairnhill that is being leased out as an investment property, only raised rents by 2% to offset the higher property tax rates while that of a luxury development located on Nassim Road commanding monthly rentals of almost $20,000 a month need only raise rents by 7% to offset the higher property taxes. To put into context, rents in 2021 for a private residential property already rose by 10%. The other tax change is that of introducing a new ARF tier for cars. For a Bentley Flying Spur, which retails for almost $900,000 without COE, the new ARF tier is expected to increase ARF by about $59,000, a fairly large number in itself but represents just about 6%-7% of the cost of the car. For someone who is prepared to pay almost $1 million for an asset that depreciates rapidly over 10 years, is it even meaningful in the grand scheme of things for this person? Thirdly, higher personal income tax rates are not wealth taxes per se. But I do agree with the principle that those who earn more should contribute more and it is a fine example of what progressive taxes look like. However, the increase appears to be very modest once again, once you work through the mathematics. For example, someone making $1 million in chargeable income would pay a grand total of $5,000 more in personal income taxes, or 0.5% of chargeable income, while someone making $1.5 million would only pay $15,000 more, or about 1% of chargeable income. I would even argue that the last increase in personal income tax rates in Budget 2015, where the top marginal personal income tax rates were raised to 22% among others, was an even bolder move than what we have today, raising more revenues at $400 million a year back then, as compared to $117 million a year, with today's change.[+12 sentences] Also bearing in mind that from 2015 to 2019, that is, the latest available year on SingStat, the number of individuals with assessed income of more than $300,000 has increased by 22% within this timespan as well. I recognise that the Government will continue to study the experiences of other countries and explore options to tax wealth effectively. And I sincerely hope that more meaningful efforts to change our tax system and raise wealth taxes can be made sooner than later. Yes, I agree that taxing wealth has its challenges. But consider a hypothetical case of a multi-billionaire tech founder who made a windfall after his start-up's IPO and has retired from the firm. From time to time, he collects dividends as his income while continuing to hold shares in the listed company, which accounts for the vast majority of his wealth. Meanwhile, he is renting multiple luxury apartments instead of owning just one place of residence. And does our tax system adequately capture the wealth of what could be one of Singapore's richest? Would this person even be paying income or wealth taxes at all? If we think about the Forbes' 50 richest list in Singapore, just how much of their wealth is in their residential addresses or the cars that they drive? As highlighted by a 2018 OECD report on the role and design of net wealth taxes, which provide for certain tax design recommendations, in countries where capital gains are not taxed, there may be a stronger justification for levying a net-wealth tax. A similar argument can be made for countries that do not levy taxes on inheritances. Singapore will fit into both of these cases as a country with no capital gains tax, no tax on dividends, no inheritance tax, no estate duties and still has one of the lowest effective personal income tax rates globally.[+8 sentences] We must guard against only going through the motions when we move towards addressing wealth inequality, while still leaving the least fortunate among us still pleading, "Please, Sir, I want some more". Let me now speak about corporate income taxes amidst BEPS 2.0, of which Singapore is one of 141 members of the OECD G20 inclusive framework on BEPS. Corporate income taxes have consistently been the largest contributor to the Government's operating revenues and 2022 is no different, at an estimated $18 billion, or 22% of operating revenues. However, while part of the goals of this Budget is to build a fairer and more resilient tax system where those with greater means contribute a larger share, could there be more scope for certain corporates to pay their fairer share of taxes, especially against the context of a looming GST hike, which ultimately, is borne by the end-consumer and not the corporates? To be clear, I fully recognise that many local SMEs and small businesses, especially those in the retail and F&B scene, have been struggling to make ends meet amidst the pandemic and the changing safe management measures (SMMs) rules over the past two years. And I applaud efforts by the Government to strengthen our local enterprises. However, it is interesting to note that while more than $29 billion of Job Support Scheme (JSS) funding was provided to corporates in the last two years, it appears that corporate profitability, as a whole, did not fare too badly. In FY2020, while the Government expected cooperate income tax (CIT) revenues to fall by 18% year-on-year or around $3 billion to $13.7 billion in FY 2020, the actual CIT revenue turned out to be $16 billion, not too far from FY2019 levels. Revised FY2021 CIT revenues are expected to exceed FY2019 levels at $17.5 billion, growing by 9% year-on-year or $1.4 billion, and this is expected to continue into FY2022, reaching a new high of $18.2 billion.[+4 sentences] This brings me to my key point on BEPS 2.0. I acknowledge the Minister's comments that the Government needs more time to study these issues thoroughly and will announce changes in the corporate tax system when we are ready. However, if things go according to plan, BEPS 2.0 is already on the horizon, with the implementation of the two-pillar solution targeted to start in 2023 next year. I thank MOF and IRAS for patiently addressing my various Parliamentary Questions over the past year on this issue and, I believe, the various public officers involved have done plenty of detailed analysis and scenario planning on this issue by now. With less than a year to go before the implementation of the two-pillar solution and with OECD already having published in December last year the model rules for domestic implementation of the 15% global minimum tax, my question is, what is the Government's current estimates or range of estimates of the net impact of pillar one and pillar two to our CIT revenues?[+9 sentences] While Minister Lawrence Wong noted that pillar one will result in a negative revenue impact to Singapore, this is, firstly, limited in scope, as it is expected to apply only to global MNEs with a global turnover of more than €20 billion, with just around 100 of such companies globally. Secondly, it is only 25% of the profits in excess of 10% of revenues that will be allocated away. And, thirdly, I do not believe that profits are being artificially inflated here in Singapore, given rigorous transfer pricing rules. On the other hand, for pillar two – this applies to a much larger group of MNEs. Any company with over €750 of annual revenue would now be subject to a global minimum corporate tax. In Singapore alone, the Government shared that there are over 1,800 such multinational enterprise (MNE) groups operating here that are unlikely to be affected. As I have shared in this House last year, I hope that the Government will view the global minimum tax reforms as an opportunity rather than a threat, given Singapore's strong non-tax advantages and attractiveness to MNEs, bearing in mind the current average effective corporate tax rate is closer to 3% in YA2019. If we look at the subset of non-SMEs or those with revenues exceeding $100 million and making an accounting profit, then in YA2019, the average effective corporate tax rate is even lower, at 2%. Profitable non-SMEs contributed $10.4 billion or 64% of total CIT paid by all companies. If we assume a 15% tax rate instead, this could hypothetically balloon seven times to $71.5 billion.[+5 sentences] Of course, this is purely hypothetical, since obviously, not all companies will be scoped into the rules and there could be some slippage from both pillar one and pillar two rules and the actual impact will be much lower. But the point remains that, technically, even a small shift towards the proposed global minimum rate of 15% could result in significantly higher corporate tax receipts for the Government. Beyond the dollars and cents, the more important conceptual point to me is this: if a global MNE is already operating in Singapore, what incentive would it have to incur additional relocation costs, when the minimum corporate tax rate of 15% would be normalised globally? And with tax considerations out of the way, why would not a global MNE keen to tap on the attractive growth prospects in Asia, base their headquarters here in Singapore? The World Bank has consistently placed Singapore as among the best places in the world to do business and I am confident that our competitive strengths and strong non-tax advantages will continue to provide a competitive edge to companies seeking a place of business. Lastly, let me touch on the other elephants in the room, the Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) and our reserves. It is comforting to note that instead of a $54 billion draw on the reserves, as announced in Budget 2021, the actual amount we utilised across three years was $43 billion, savings of about $11 billion.[+5 sentences] It was previously said that we have drawn on our reserves equivalent to over 20 years of past Budget surpluses. We have used a generation's worth of savings to combat a crisis of a generation. I asked Deputy Prime Minister Heng during last year's Budget debate, after accounting from the draw, where would our reserves be, compared to five years ago and 10 years ago, though I do not think there was a direct answer to the question. Hence, I would like to ask Minister Lawrence Wong, after considering the $43 million drawn on our past reserves, are our reserves today higher or lower, compared to five years ago? I ask this because it is important to put into context the growth in our reserves as we debate the source of funding for our future expenditures, even if the Government continues to be guarded over disclosing the absolute size of the reserves itself. It is not that I disagree with the need to be prudent and I agree we should not take our reserves for granted. But just looking at the MAS Official Foreign Reserves (OFR), they stand at around $566 billion as of January 2022, an increase of $185 billion or close to 50%, compared to two years ago.[+6 sentences] Temasek's net portfolio value as of March 2021 stands at $381 billion, up to $75 billion or 25%, compared to a year ago. And I believe GIC would have grown its portfolio as well, given generally supportive market conditions in the last two years. Yes, I understand that the design of the NIRC framework is to provide a stable, sustainable source of income to our Budget, smoothed out over market cycles. But it is also helpful to remind Members of this House that our financial reserves grow not just from the balance 50% of NIRC not utilised, but also from inflows directly into the reserves, such as from land sales which averaged around $13 billion a year in the past 10 years and from MAS interventions in the foreign exchange market to dampen appreciation pressures, given Singapore's excess of domestic savings, over investments and persistent capital inflow. If the goal of this Budget is to ensure a fairer revenue structured, that means everyone chips in and contributes to a vibrant economy and strengthen the social compact, but those with great means contribute a larger share. If so, should we not revisit the contribution of our investment returns as opposed to the individual Singaporean who is grappling with the rising cost of living? Over the past five years, the NIRC provided an average revenue stream of around $17 billion, or 3.5% of our GDP.[+8 sentences] If the assumption is that Government spending is at 18% of GDP today, but expected to go to more than 20% of GDP by 2030, could we not raise the contributions from the NIRC to the Budget and raise its share of GDP too? I hope that Minister Wong will agree with me that raising the NIRC contribution rate will not result in a drawdown of the reserves and will, in fact, still allow us to continue building our reserves. So, to belabour with the point, this will not mean that we will not get a steady stream of income from the reserves to benefit today's generation of Singaporeans and our children and our grandchildren. On the contrary, as Minister Wong has said, it is about being able to invest even more in our people and social infrastructure. It is to me about ensuring that we invest not only in financial assets overseas but in our people, Singaporeans, who to me are the most important resource of this country. It is simply about sustaining the value of our financial reserves and sustaining the lives and livelihoods of our fellow Singaporeans. Mr Speaker, allow me to conclude in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): We are still in the amidst of the COVID-19 pandemic. While economic growth seems to have started to pick up again, there are also some underlying concerns. Hence, we are very concerned about the risk of raising GST when the pandemic is still ongoing and there are many uncertainties with the economic recovery.[+4 sentences] Instead of raising GST, Workers' Party Members of Parliament suggest that alternative sources of government revenue be considered. In Budget 2022, the Finance Minister will adjust the Additional Registration Fee for luxury cars and the property tax as a way to collect wealth tax. While I welcome these changes, I also feel that there is much room for improvement. I talked about corporate tax and NIRC. Our effective corporate tax rate is close to 3%, well below the global minimum tax rate of 15% announced by the OECD. If Singapore imposes a global minimum tax of 15% on MNCs subject to the tax reform, it will not only raise our corporate tax revenue significantly, but also achieve the objective of this Budget, which is to build a fairer and more resilient tax regime where people wealthier will contribute more.[+5 sentences] Singapore has strong non-tax advantages and appeals to MNCs. Therefore, the Government should view the tax reform on global minimum tax rate as an opportunity, not a threat. Finally, I suggest that we consider increasing the NIRC component to our Budget. This will not reduce our reserves; instead, we can continue to grow our reserves steadily while ensuring that we use our national resources more effectively to help sustain Singaporeans' livelihood. Our people are Singapore's most important asset.
Mr Speaker45 words
[+5 sentences]Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.30 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.04 pm until 4.30 pm. Sitting resumed at 4.30 pm.
Prof Hoon Hian Teck (Nominated Member)1957 words
[+14 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, giving his Budget Statement the title "Charting Our New Way Forward Together", the Minister for Finance devoted much space in his Budget speech to talk about the need for revenue to bring all the plans that he had laid out to fruition. That prompts the question: "why raise taxes?" This is a fundamental question in political economy. I think that we can offer three answers. First, we raise taxes to create the fiscal capacity to support a well-functioning society. Second, we raise taxes to achieve economic inclusion. Third, and particularly relevant in the Singapore context, we raise taxes to pay for recurrent spending so that we can prioritise the use of our national reserves to manage external shocks as we remain integrated with the global economy. First, building fiscal capacity. We can take a cross-country perspective and an intertemporal perspective. When a country's income per capita is low, the need to raise taxes is great so that the country has the resources to provide public goods like national defence, law and order as well as relief for the poor. Yet, the viable tax base is small because the tax administration and enforcement ability is low at this stage of economic development. Historically, countries that are starting on the path of development turn to trade taxes in order to generate government revenue to pay for their expenditure. Trade taxes have tended to make up a larger share of total revenue at the early stages of economic development because it is relatively easy to keep track of the flow of goods at major shipping ports. These countries then shifted to greater reliance on direct taxation of income which happened late in the 19th century and broad-based consumption taxes which happened from the middle of the 20th century. In Singapore, when we became a newly independent country in 1965, customs and excise duties made up more than 50% of the share of total tax revenue. It steadily declined through the decades and now make up less than 5% of tax revenue. Consumption taxes were introduced in Singapore only later in 1994.[+22 sentences] There is a sense in which the way the tax revenues are spent, notably on education which has been a priority in the very early Budgets. It is a form of investment in building fiscal capacity. Spending on public schooling generates a virtuous cycle. As the human capital base is expanded, the size of the economic pie grows so the tax base correspondingly increases. At this stage of our development, boosting innovative activities will play a bigger role in growing the economy and thus, the tax base in the post-COVID-19 world. The support given in Budget 2022 to further strengthen the collaboration in engaging in R&D projects between SMEs and our Polytechnics and ITEs ultimately expands our fiscal capacity. The initiative dubbed "Singapore Global Enterprises" provides fiscal support for our large local enterprises (LLEs) to break into overseas markets. As our LLEs expand into overseas markets and become bigger and more productive, they become more profitable and can afford to pay their workers more. It is a statistical and practical fact that larger firms doing the same business, tend to pay their workers more, because they are more productive and they tend to break into overseas markets. The tax base is accordingly expanded. However, there are there are also factors acting to contract our fiscal capacity. One is the demographic transition and increased life expectancy. With a bigger share of the population becoming economically inactive, the tax base becomes relatively smaller. That is a fact well recognised by many. Another factor that can reduce our fiscal capacity comes from the harm that is caused by climate change, a point that many Members have alluded to. The proposed schedule of increases in carbon taxes introduced in Budget 2022 can be justified on the basis of helping businesses internalise the negative externalities caused by emission of greenhouse gases. Unlike a tax on labour income, as an example, which reduces economic efficiency because people respond by working fewer hours when their take-home pay is reduced. A carbon tax, nevertheless, increases efficiency because it reduces activities that society wants to reduce. Roughly speaking, an efficient outcome is for the carbon tax on firms to be set equal to the amount of external damage caused by the greenhouse gas emission. Another point is that a carbon tax also has the effect of giving incentives for upstream firms to develop green technology by discouraging downstream firms from using devices that embody environmentally unfriendly technology. Second, achieving economic inclusion. There is a classic trade-off between equity and efficiency when we use fiscal tools to achieve economic inclusion. Budget 2022 raises the marginal tax rate of the highest income earners, among other measures.[+7 sentences] While this narrows the income gap, there are microeconomic distortions caused by such tax increases, also called excess burden. It is a standard concept in public finance. The idea is that the quantity of an economic activity, such as labour supply decreases when there is an increase in income tax rate. In designing an optimal tax policy, the Government has to take into account the fact that raising the tax rate has consequences for the tax base because if the income tax on income earners goes up, as an example, they work less, the tax base shrinks, so there is an efficiency loss. Nevertheless, despite the loss in efficiency, every society has still got to choose a point on the equity efficiency frontier, sacrificing some efficiency in order to attain a desired level of equity. Since the excess burden of a given tax rate increase rises more than proportionately, it is optimal to broaden the tax mix from this perspective, such as relying also on other tax instruments, like raising consumption taxes and wealth taxes to pay for higher social spending. That argument calls for some diversification of tax instruments rather than a dependence on a very narrow particular tax. Budget 2022 seeks to avoid the regressive nature of the increase in consumption tax rate with the Assurance Package and by boosting the permanent GST Vouchers (GSTV).[+3 sentences] Since the beginning of the 20th century and especially in the post-war period, in international cross-sections of countries there has not been a clear negative relationship between the level or growth of tax-based social spending and GDP per capita. In other words, looking historically – particularly over the last century and across countries as a whole, broadly, the message is that the social cost of financing higher social spending through taxes does not appear to be especially high, although obviously, to achieve a certain point on the equity efficiency frontier, there is an efficiency loss and society has to make its own calculation. Being engaged in work confers non-pecuniary, that is non-monetary benefits that go beyond receiving wages. From that perspective, the use of wage subsidies or wage credits extended to firms as in the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS) announced in Budget 2022 to co-fund wage increases for certain lower-wage workers, as well as the wage income supplements extended to workers through the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme boost workers' take-home wage earnings without discouraging work.[+15 sentences] For me, it is significant that the WIS Scheme will be extended to younger workers aged 30 to 34. Another point, investment in children from low-income families facilitates upward social mobility and, in that way, boosts future fiscal capacity when these children, having received help to overcome the initial disadvantages, take up good careers and pay taxes when they become adults. Health spending, as a share of total Government expenditure, is expected to rise with the demographic transition. Enabling our senior citizens to live healthily adds to the country stock of social capital. It can be argued that even the younger segment of the current population may want the Government to raise taxes to pay for health spending going to the elderly so as to lighten the financial burden of providing care to their parents. Third, and my final point, prioritising use of national reserves to manage external shocks, particularly negative external shocks. Remaining integrated with a global economy presents Singapore with the opportunity to grow. It is undeniable that much of our catchup from third world to first world was facilitated by international integration, but the earliest stage was very much about technology transfer. In the next stage, we will have to generate innovative activities. But in order to have a steady contribution to growth of the economy, our firms will have to be integrated into the global economy, selling not only domestically but into the region and into the world as well. But remaining integrated with the global economy will come at a cost of sometimes sharp recessionary shocks. Responding to the global financial crisis from 2007 to 2009 and currently in the last two years, the COVID-19 health shock, if we were to respond to these negative shocks by raising taxes to finance the national efforts to save jobs, that would be tantamount to incurring huge excess burden on taxpayers – recall that the excess burden rises more than proportionately by every unit increase in the tax rate. So, being able to draw down our reserves to fund these schemes to save jobs and especially in coping the global financial crisis for the Government to share some financial risk, allows us to smoothen the tax rate across business cycles. When the economy has recovered, it would be necessary to tax finance recurrent spending in order to keep our reserves for rainy days. The fact that our social security system, the Central Provident Fund (CPF), is a fully funded rather than a pay-as-you-go old age retirement scheme contributes to our national savings and thus, adds to the stock of reserves. Even as the share of the ageing population increases and life expectancy rises, I note that Budget 2022, in increasing the employer and employee CPF contribution rates of workers aged 55 to 70, will boost their retirement adequacy.[+1 sentence] One context in which there is justification for the Government to borrow rather than tax finance is raising taxes for infrastructure investment which serves to mitigate the adverse effects of climate change, such as sea walls and dykes. Inter-generational distributive justice provides a basis for the Significant Infrastructure Government Loan Act (SINGA) passed in Parliament last year.[+8 sentences] Mr Speaker, Sir, we each function as an individual within a society. The emphasis in that last statement is on the words "individual" and "society". Much of real life is not well represented by the story of Robinson Crusoe, a story that we tend to use in teaching international trade in the classroom. He was, of course, a castaway who lived alone on a deserted island for many years. As entertaining as the novel by Daniel Defoe is, Budget 2022 is built on the premise that we can build a dynamic economy, although more mature now, we have transited from third world to first world, the challenges are bigger and we need now to generate our own indigenous innovation to propel the productivity growth that we will continue to need in order to grow the economy, in order that our citizens will flourish. But such an economy with social collaboration results in creating a surplus. So, the economy is not an individual living on an island trading with another, although that helps. But within the society, we each have different capacities, we each have different strengths. A society enables that social collaboration so that we create this social surplus. And that social surplus can be utilised through the fiscal system to leave everyone better off than if we had each functioned in isolation.[+1 sentence] I stand in support of the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member)1541 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) will not support this Budget because of the GST hike. Middle class Singaporeans will have to bear an additional GST burden of $1.2 billion per year.[+8 sentences] On top of that, many Singaporeans living in private properties who are asset rich but cash strapped, will bear a significant part of the $380 million property tax increase per year. This Budget is a feeble attempt to increase the taxes on the rich after three decades of favourable tax policy towards them. The additional personal income tax raised is only $170 million per year, which many Singaporeans cynically pointed out, was not enough to pay for the $180 million per year funding for SPH Media Trust. The Additional Registration Fee increases for luxury cars is not really a burden to the rich, because the fee is transferable to future owners. Not enough has been done on foreign manpower policy too. The increase in the minimum qualifying salary for Employment Pass (EP) holders is too little to be effective. I am also surprised that S Pass holders are needed in the finance industry where many Singaporeans are hoping to work. The more effective way to manage the quality of our EP holders is to ensure fair competition between the EPs and Singaporeans through imposing a standard wage levy on all EPs who do not make CPF contributions. If we impose a monthly $1,200 EP levy, as I had recommended in the Budget debate last year, and then again in the Foreign Talent and Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) debate, the levy will raise almost $3 billion and make the GST hike unnecessary.[+12 sentences] As global inflation is on an upcycle, we will have to do more to help Singaporeans to cope with the rising cost of living and asset inflation. This is the best timing to share with Singaporeans a small part of the huge windfall profits chalked up by GIC, MAS and Temasek last year. However, not only did the Government not do that, it also increased the tax burden on Singaporeans. This is incomprehensible to me. The Government used healthcare costs as the main rationale for raising taxes. However, Singaporeans have paid and are still paying dearly for healthcare. Is it fair to ask them to pay more taxes for healthcare again, especially in these challenging times? Look at the facts: $100 billion of the Singaporeans' CPF funds are locked up in MediSave accounts, and Singaporeans contribute $10 billion to MediSave every year; $10 billion of reserves have been accumulated in MediShield and CareShield, while Singaporeans continue to pay $3 billion of CareShield premiums every year and the premiums are likely to rise every five years. Singaporeans also pay billions of dollars in private healthcare insurance. Singapore is actually in a very strong financial position. We have the resources to pay for even the large healthcare cost increases forecasted by the Government. Look at the facts again. The Government reported $1.4 trillion of financial assets as of 31 March 2021.[+4 sentences] This is an indication of the size of our national reserves. Our nation's financial assets are currently closer to $1.6 trillion, due to an increase of $200 billion of reserves over the last two years, despite and after the COVID-19 drawdowns. Net investment income from these assets is now more than $40 billion a year. Half of the net investment return, or $20 billion, is recycled back into the reserves. Another $10 billion of annual land sales proceeds is put into the reserves directly and not used for the current year spending. Thus, even without touching the growing reserves, we have a total of $30 billion of unutilised revenue annually, which can be deployed for the current year spending in the future.[+18 sentences] We can actually provide for our current generation while continuing to save for future generations at the same time. Hence, the Government's argument for the future generation does not hold water. The virtue of frugality preached by the Finance Minister is telling cash strapped Singaporeans to tighten their belts again while the Government is sitting on massive reserves and unutilitsed revenues. Of course, we cannot rest on our laurels and rely on our reserves and unused revenues all the time. I only want to stress that we have the buffer and time to make better long-term plans. Those plans should include the Government focusing on fiscal efficiency and discipline. While the Government has been running Budget surpluses these years, public spending cuts have not been discussed openly. Our Budget has increased by about 7% per year over the last two decades to about $100 billion for FY2022. There is, thus, ample room for us to cut down on existing spending. The Finance Minister has disclosed he is imposing a 3% cut on existing expenditure from next year. If he can achieve that every year, we will have a saving of $3 billion per year. Again, there is no need for the GST hike. We can probably do more cuts than 3%. We advocate setting clear socio-economic targets for each expenditure. That is the reason we supported the SINGA scheme, which will bring big infrastructural projects under stricter financial discipline. For example, many Singaporeans are asking, what are the socio-economic targets for SPH Media Trust, to which the Government is committing $900 million over the next five years? How about the billions of dollars of taxpayer money spent on local Universities that have relied heavily on foreign talent, but do not seem to be producing sufficient local skills and talent needed for our economy? When public funds are used to support or rescue a commercial organisation, are there plans to claw back the funds when the commercial organisation starts to make money? For the COVID-19 spending, many Singaporeans have questioned why the $30 billion Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) is used to support profitable companies without a claw back feature.[+14 sentences] The clawed back funds could have been used to help many more Singaporeans who needed help. So, as the amount of resources at the disposal of the Government grow larger, we need to check on the expenditures more closely. We are also against the goody bag approach that is adopted by the Government to convince Singaporeans to accept the GST hike. Handing out short-term ad hoc goodies to Singaporeans instead of using permanent schemes, will not produce resilient Singaporeans but dependent Singaporeans. Let me give you a specific example. I have been recommending a minimum living wage of $1,800 per month in take-home pay for all Singaporean workers. This works out to about $2,250 in gross wage per month. This may appear high, but if you add Workfare Supplement, GST Voucher (GSTV), U-Save rebate, CDC Voucher, and now, Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS), you could easily reach the $2,250 gross wage per month. Hence, instead of handing out drips and drabs to Singaporeans, the Government could have provided a lump sum to top up the average worker's gross wage to $2,250 per month. A permanent monthly wage of $2,250 will give workers more clarity in making personal financial plans for himself and for his family. That is how we make Singaporeans more resilient. Mr Speaker, in conclusion: one, the PSP does not support this Budget because there is no need for the GST hike; two, our country is in a very strong financial position, but Singaporeans need all the help they can get to overcome their current financial challenges; three, with this Budget, the Government is asking Singaporean to tighten their belts again while it sits on massive reserve and unutilised revenues; four, as Singaporeans are already burdened with high healthcare cost, the Government should first control the escalating cost of healthcare by changing the way our healthcare system works; and finally, PSP thinks that Singapore can have a new financial compact which is better than this Budget. Speaker, Chinese, please. (In Mandarin): The PSP is against the GST hike and therefore does not support this Budget. By increasing the GST, the Government will add $1.2 billion tax burden onto middle-class Singaporeans a year. At the same time, income tax and wealth tax increases for the rich are expected to increase by less than $600 million a year.[+2 sentences] Singapore's fiscal position is good. At a time when Singaporeans are still facing various difficulties, we should try to come up with better fiscal solutions to help them. At the moment, we have at least $1.6 trillion reserves and $30 billion unutilised annual revenues.[+8 sentences] Why does the Government want Singaporeans to tighten their belt at this juncture when it is sitting on this gold mountain? Singaporeans have already spent a lot on their current and future medical needs. Hence, our focus should first be on reducing rising healthcare costs, rather than adding to the burden of Singaporeans. Government expenditure has grown rapidly by 7% per annum over the past 20 years. It is time to see how we can reduce non-social and non-medical expenditures. Of these, the Government's $100 billion Covid-19 relief package needs to be properly accounted for. We are looking for a new financial compact that distributes national resources more equitably and benefits all segments of society. (In English): Singaporeans deserve better.
Mr Speaker8 words
[+3 sentences]Prof Koh Lian Pin. Sorry. Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh)14 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, please allow me to seek a clarification from Mr Leong Mun Wai?
Mr Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Please do.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat50 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Leong Mun Wai mentioned that the GST hike will result in $1.2 billion in tax burden on middle-class Singaporeans in the long run. Can he share with us how he got that $1.2 billion figure as I do not seem to be able to find it in published material?
Mr Leong Mun Wai102 words
[+1 sentence]I thank the Member Mr Saktiandi for the question. Speaker, I got the data by calculating from the ratio given by the Minister for Finance in terms of the share of the GST paid by the top 20% and the bottom 80%.[+2 sentences] It was in the ratio of 60%:40%. So, 40% to the bottom 80% and 60% to the top 20%. If the total amount of GST revenue to be raised from a two-percentage point increase in GST, will be about $3 billion, so, 40% of $3 billion, I got my $1.2 billion.[+1 sentence] Yes, that is how I got my $1.2 billion.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat55 words
[+1 sentence]Sir, I have a second additional clarification, please. Can I ask Mr Leong whether he can confirm that his calculations do not take into account the amounts that middle-income residents of Singapore will receive under the Assurance Package and the permanent GSTV scheme?[+1 sentence] I just want to confirm that his calculations do not include those.
Mr Leong Mun Wai102 words
Speaker, yes, the calculations do not take that into consideration.[+5 sentences] But I presume that the GST Vouchers and all the compensation payments will only apply to the lower-income Singaporeans. There are some applying to the middle-income, but the permanent GST Vouchers belong to only to the lower-income. So, at the end of the day, when the Government argues that this is not regressive, it is not true, because apart from the top 20%, who are the people who are there, the remaining 40% of the GST increase? It must be the middle class Singaporeans. I hope that answers Mr Saktiandi Supaat's question.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat2838 words
[+12 sentences]I thank Mr Leong for his answer. The reason why I asked is that I just want to have an understanding. The way I interpret the Budget booklet and the Statement that Minister Lawrence Wong highlighted is that the Assurance Package and the permanent GSTV in some ways neutralise the impact on the majority, including the middle-income as well. Mr Speaker, let me proceed with my speech. Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for Finance for presenting the strategic yet empathetic Budget that is aimed at securing the long-term interests of Singaporeans as a whole as we face various global disruptions and uncertainties from various fronts. Budget 2022 is an ambitious Budget plan. It seeks to strike a fine balance between helping our businesses and people emerge from the pandemic and investing in our longer-term objectives by taking tough decisions today. In my speech, I will start by addressing the concerns of Singaporeans namely the middle-income segment amid rising costs of living – including the GST increase, and one of the reasons why I sought clarifications from Mr Leong is because the middle-income segment is something that will be a theme in my speech, Mr Speaker – and the need to focus on real wage growth to combat rising costs. I will then turn to the brave decisions we are taking to build a fair, inclusive and sustainable society. Thereafter, I will round up with some thoughts on maintaining Singapore's hub status. First, on the rising costs of living. As the economy recovers from COVID-19 both domestically and globally, we can expect inflationary pressures to drive prices up. MAS is projecting a 2% to 3% increase in prices this year, led in part by rising energy prices due to geopolitical tensions, continuing supply bottlenecks and a recovery in global demand.[+3 sentences] Against this backdrop of rising costs of living, the GST increase has generated great public attention. The GST was last raised to 7% in 2007, some 15 years ago. While the increase to 9% – announced as early as 2018 in light of our ageing population and increased healthcare and social spending – will still be lower than the GST or VAT in many other countries such as Australia and the UK, but it is still a very visible price increase for the average Singaporean and Singaporeans are understandably concerned. In this regard, I would like to thank the Minister for Finance for pushing back the start date and also staggering the GST increase across 2023 and 2024, as well as topping up the $6 billion Assurance Package that was announced in 2020, where the distribution of cash, rebates and vouchers will help households to offset five to 10 years of additional GST expenses.[+4 sentences] But we cannot just stop there. To help Singaporeans cope with rising costs of living in a sustained manner, we must focus on growing their wages. Based on MOM's data, the real growth in our full-time employed resident's median gross monthly income has slowed down in the last five years. This looks at the income of a typical worker in the middle, after all workers are ranked by their income. After adjusting for inflation, the median gross monthly income has only increased 2.1% year-on-year between 2016 and 2021, down from 3.1% in the 2011 to 2016 period.[+9 sentences] Mr Speaker, so, middle-income households also require more help, not just the low-income. The last two years have not been easy for everyone. While I am happy to hear that we will uplift lower-wage workers by extending the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) to security officers, drivers and workers in the retail and food services sector, what are we doing to boost the wages of our middle-income workers? On that note, I have a few suggestions to make. One, as a start, and probably to nudge the public and private sectors, we could raise the salaries of our frontline workers, regardless of whether they are lower-wage workers. I am mindful that it needs to be paid from somewhere. This includes our wider range of healthcare workers and Adult Educators (AEs) who are private-sector individuals working across the Early Childhood, Student Care, Universities, Private Education Institutions and International Schools and who are represented by the NTUC-affiliated Education Services Union (ESU). The nature of their occupation meant that these AEs, who are largely aged 35 and above, were one of the first to return to their workplaces as this pandemic dragged on. Increased remuneration would recognise their invaluable societal contributions in this pandemic and extend our appreciation to them like how we did for our nurses last year. Second, I also welcome the raising of the minimum qualifying salary for foreigners to work in Singapore on Employment Passes (EP) or S Passes.[+8 sentences] Theoretically, this means that jobs which previously paid between the old and new salary thresholds – which could have gone to a foreign employee previously – will now have to filled by a local. However, will the Government consider further differentiation of sectors beyond just carving out the financial services sector? Different sectors pay vastly different salary scales and the point at which they require foreign labour or expertise may vary significantly. Having a single uniform qualifying salary may also penalise sectors where Singaporeans are less interested in those jobs, while those employers cannot get pass holders to do the jobs. Third, another way to raise wages is to ensure that our workers can quickly and smoothly transition from their existing industry – which may be a sunset industry with stagnating wages – to emerging growth areas. In facilitating our current and future workers' transition and upskilling, why is there no further focus on the Professional Conversion Programme or the Capability Transfer Programme in this year's Budget? Over the years, I see value in these programmes, especially as we face the risk of structural unemployment and an economy in transition and faced with global disruptions. How are these programmes going to sit alongside the new SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme announced by the Minister for Finance? Fourth, given the context of an economy in transition, individuals may experience volatility in income levels or in employment altogether. It may be useful to relook at the option of assessing personal income tax on a current-year, pay-as-you-earn basis.[+12 sentences] And I have mentioned this in many of my Budget debate speeches. It is like a broken record; I have been raising this point. This is as opposed to a preceding-year basis, this system can help taxpayers – a significant proportion being middle- and upper-middle income Singaporeans – so that they can better manage their cash flow by matching tax payments with contemporaneous income. Finally, we cannot forget our freelancers. Before the pandemic, the number of freelancers was already on the rise, reaching 8% of Singapore's working residents. Through the pandemic, I have heard from residents that they or their family members have turned to delivery and private hire driving "gigs". The launch of apps to connect gig workers and clients have only accelerated the growth of freelancing. As an advisor to the NTUC-affiliated Education Services Union (ESU), one of the first groups of people that come to my mind are the private-sector individuals working across the Early Childhood, Student Care, Universities, Private Education Institutions and International Schools – otherwise known as AEs. The nature of the sector lends itself to freelancing as training providers and institutions are increasingly reluctant to hire these individuals as employees. Some AEs may even be compelled to start their own sole proprietor company and enter a business-to-business transaction just to get the job. Common problems faced by freelancers include not getting paid on time, and onerous, unclear contractual provisions, such as those that unfairly appropriate the freelancer's materials or intellectual property. Unlike employees who have some protections under employment law, freelancers often fall back on contractual terms that they agree with their clients. Is it possible for MOM to augment its "key terms of engagement form template for self-employed persons", to provide default contractual wording which freelancers can rely on to be the market standard and which they can rely on if the matter goes to the Court or the Small Claims Tribunal?[+4 sentences] For AEs in particular, I understand that the ESU is currently working with SkillsFuture Singapore to formulate Tripartite Standards for freelance AEs. When that is done, I hope the Government can take the lead and require training providers to adopt the Tripartite Standards before they are eligible for SkillsFuture funding. Mr Speaker, Budget 2022 also demonstrates our Government's resolve to tackle the tough but necessary decisions to build the fair, inclusive and sustainable society we want. I am proud that our Government is "walking the talk" when it comes to addressing inequality – with higher taxes targeting the top 1.2% of earners; luxury cars, investment properties and on the top 7% of most valuable homes. These progressive measures will ensure that "those with more will contribute more", while "those with less will still contribute, but a lesser amount, and they will receive more benefits in return". But on the Minister's point that there is some difficulty in valuing and taxing wealth accurately, may I ask if we are rethinking our 2008 decision to repeal estate duty, also known as inheritance tax?[+15 sentences] A recent OECD report has observed estate duty can be a particularly efficient way of enhancing equity and raising revenue if the class of exempted assets are minimised and the tax base is kept broad. Besides being a fair and inclusive society, we also want to be a sustainable community. Just last month, many Members, including myself, spoke on the Motion for an "inclusive transition" to a low-carbon society. I am grateful that the Government has taken on board the suggestion to announce our carbon tax plans in advance, in order to give businesses the runway to plan ahead. While the contemplated measures to help businesses – such as emissions allowances and support for green investments – are welcome, are we also looking at adjustment measures to prevent carbon leakage to other countries with "looser" requirements? For example, Indonesia's carbon tax is going to be set at US$2.10 per tonne, come April 2022. If businesses simply "offshore" their operations away from Singapore, not only do we lose jobs associated with such operations, we may also fall short of our goal to manage climate change. In addition, further details would be useful to assuage concerns that exemptions to companies using LNG, diesel and petrol may undermine our efforts in this space. Finally, I turn to the longer-term priority to maintain Singapore's status and relevance as a leading hub, in order to survive and thrive as a resource-scarce nation. Positioning ourselves at the forefront of sustainability trends by developing into a go-to regional marketplace for the trading of carbon credits is essential. I had previously mentioned in the House that the global carbon credit market could be worth more than US$50 billion come 2030. In our efforts to build a carbon trading ecosystem in Singapore, as we are in such early stages, I would suggest organising a dedicated inter-agency taskforce now to coordinate these efforts. The creation of a vibrant marketplace with many active participants depends on a range of issues that we will need our different agencies to work out. I will be filing a cut on this during the Committee of Supply debate to address this in greater detail. Second, on Singapore's overall attractiveness for foreign investments following the implementation of the agreed global tax reform, or BEPS 2.0. What are the Government's plans to preserve Singapore's attractiveness as an investment destination in view of this erosion of our corporate tax competitiveness?[+10 sentences] Is it possible to repackage some of these tax incentives, so that agencies like the Economic Development Board (EDB) can still continue to have these "carrots" in the bag as they pitch to foreign investors? What will happen to the investment tax credits with the changes? The fairness of the global tax reform under BEPS 2.0, and the achievement of its stated aims, will depend on exactly how individual countries choose to implement the two pillars. As we consider our own implementation steps, I hope we can adopt a "wait and see" approach – to consider how other countries are implementing BEPS 2.0 before tailoring our implementation steps in tandem, rather than pioneer an implementation model ahead of the rest of the world. Operationally, supposedly 1,800 companies are going to be affected, but no indication which sectors and type of companies they are and how hard they will be hit. Mr Speaker, before I conclude this part of my speech, I would like to address an assertion made by Mr Leong and Progress Singapore Party (PSP), which is that the GST increase will be borne by middle-income Singaporeans. Sir, given the statements and information previously provided by MOF, I think that statement is neither a fair nor an accurate assessment. As you can see – and I have mentioned it earlier at the start of my speech and previous Budget speeches mentioned by Minister Lawrence and other Ministers for Finance, I have requested for more help to be given to the middle-income. I recalled in her response speech to an Adjournment Motion on "Taxation for a Dynamic and fair 21st Century Economy" just three months ago, Second Minister for Finance, Ms Indranee Rajah, clarified that over 60% of the net GST from households and individuals is estimated to be collected from the top 20% of resident households, foreigners residing in Singapore and tourists. That was not the first time this information has been given to the House. The Deputy Prime Minister Heng also highlighted this two years ago in his 2020 Budget debate response speech. Also, all the Finance Ministers have explained that the Assurance Package will cover the majority of Singaporeans for five years' worth of GST increase and the lower-income for at least 10 years' worth.[+8 sentences] This, effectively, neutralises the GST increase for these groups for those durations and, in some cases, for even longer; and not to mention the permanent GSTV scheme which will add on to that Assurance Package as well. So, to get a sense of how much the different households will receive, colleagues and Members, you may find it useful to refer to the infographics, and I have seen the infographics on MOF's website. In addition to the middle- and lower-income, they will receive offsets under the permanent GSTV scheme, over and above the amounts under the Assurance Package. So, it is not right to say that the GST increase will be borne by the middle-income without taking into consideration some of these transfers and some of these longer-term and permanent transfers, which is quite unique for Singapore – the permanent GSTV scheme. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): I am glad that the Government has listened to the people's concerns and delayed the GST increase start date and staggered it over two years. I am also heartened that, under the Assurance Package, the majority of households will get five years' worth of offsets and the lower-income will get at least 10 years' worth of offsets. For example, let us take a Singaporean couple with two young children, who live in a 4-room HDB flat and earn the combined household income of $8,000 per month. Even though they would have to pay $806 in additional GST per year with the GST increase, they could receive payments and rebates of $3,850 over five years under the enhanced $6.6 billion Assurance Package. A three-generation family with two school-going children living in a 5-room flat could receive $6,740 over five years, offsetting about seven years of GST increase.[+1 sentence] This is the middle-income group that I mentioned earlier. In another example, a lower-income couple with two young children, who live in a 3-room HDB flat and earn a household income of $2,300 stands to receive $5,010 of payments and rebates offsetting about 12 years in GST increase![+8 sentences] This does not include the permanent GSTV scheme which they will also receive for a longer period beyond that. If I can just summarise this using two Malay quatrains. The first quatrain speaks about many segments of our society receiving extraordinary support. The second quatrain states that the amount spent on the Budget is worth it because it makes us stronger and gives us hope. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, in the last two years, we have dipped into our reserves and Singaporeans have worked very hard to pull Singapore through the COVID-19 challenges. I am glad to read that our collective efforts have paid off in buttressing the recession as well as resident unemployment. We must now turn our attention to middle- to long-term goals and uplift our citizens' well-being, as well as to continue to help Singaporeans out of the long shadow of COVID-19. On that note, I support Budget 2022 which aims to secure the welfare and the future of Singapore and Singaporeans.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai45 words
[+4 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, I think we got to clarify who is going to pay the $3 billion GST increase, since Member Saktiandi say even the middle-class is not paying. Who is paying for the $3 billion? Can anyone from the Government clarify?
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Prof Koh Lian Pin.
Prof Koh Lian Pin (Nominated Member)1773 words
[+24 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I declare my interest as a professor at NUS. Budget 2022 introduces measures that reflect the many challenges and opportunities that Singapore faces as we emerge from this pandemic. The Budget addresses important bread-and-butter issues by investing in immediate support for our businesses, our workforce and our households. These measures will help Singaporeans manage the cost of living, ensure we continue to track a strong and steady economic recovery and create new jobs and opportunities for all. At the same time, the Budget also acknowledges several additional priorities, such as strengthening our social support system, transitioning to a greener economy and tackling climate change as a global emergency. These social, economic and environmental sustainability measures are hugely important, because they help build our resilience against present and future shocks to the well-being of our fellow Singaporeans, our economy and our natural environment. Achieving these goals will not be easy and requires careful consideration of the many trade-offs, particularly when different priorities require common and limited resources, such as our land. Some of these new measures may also require businesses to acknowledge the environmental costs of their activities. Faced with these challenges, it may be useful to look back at the most testing times in Singapore's history, for insights and inspiration that may guide us forward decisively and successfully. In his speech to the Singapore Press Club in February 1972, former Senior Minister, the late Mr S Rajaratnam, noted that he once believed Singapore as a small city state – and I quote, "… without a natural hinterland, without a large domestic market and no raw materials to speak of, has a near-zero chance of survival politically, economically or militarily" – end quote. However, when Mr Rajaratnam made that speech, he immediately acknowledged that he had already been proven wrong. Singapore had, in fact, not only survived, but also begun to thrive. The reason for that, as Mr Rajaratnam observed, is because we had been transforming ourselves into a new kind of city – the Global City. We had begun to view ourselves, not as a self-contained city state, not as a regional city, but rather, as a world embracing Global City. Fast forward to today, as we embark on our sustainability journey, we may wish to consider that Singapore can be a "Global City for Sustainability". In the same way that Singapore has had to transform ourselves when faced with an existential crisis half a century ago, we have to pivot ourselves yet again today as we face the existential crisis of climate change. By working with other Global Cities as our eager collaborators, our allies, our co-inventors of new knowledge, new technologies and new opportunities, we can leverage our respective strengths, overcome our individual weaknesses and amplify our capacity to meet our challenges. As a Global City for Sustainability, size matters not, because the world is our hinterland. We can free ourselves from the shackles of our geographic limitations. We can expand the canvass of our imagination through innovation. We can collaborate with other Global Cities to address the emerging sustainability challenges that the world faces. Singapore as a Global City for Sustainability is not just a thought experiment. The transformation has already begun. Let me highlight a few examples in the areas of research, education and actions. The Cities of Tomorrow R&D programme is a multi-agency effort led by MND, to identify challenges that cities face and to develop solutions to address these challenges. This programme has several research focus areas that address our sustainability goals.[+7 sentences] For example, the programme will develop solutions for creating a more people-centric and pleasant living environment, by addressing the impacts of climate change in cities, while considering the social sentiments and needs of the people and communities. As Minister Desmond Lee noted during the Urban Sustainability R&D Symposia 2021, and I quote, "We aspire to build a city that not only meets our physical needs, but that also enables us to forge strong relationships and deep emotional connections with each other". The programme will also support our transformation into a City in Nature, by developing the necessary tools and techniques for enhancing biodiversity and our natural environment and implementing nature-based solutions to tackle climate change. These are timely and important goals that will undoubtedly deliver new insights and innovations to benefit Singapore. In fact, as a Global City for Sustainability, we may want to be even more ambitious, by not only developing solutions that cater to Singapore's needs, but also exporting the solutions we develop, to meet the needs of other cities around the world. This requires our Universities and research institutes to work collaboratively with our public, private and people sectors towards a common vision of transforming Singapore into a Global City for Sustainability. Another area that requires close collaboration between these different sectors, is education. During the Straits Times Education Forum 2022 held in February this year, Minister Chan Chun Sing highlighted the need for Singapore to retrain about half a million adult learners each year, through continuing education and training programmes. As Minister Chan noted, and I quote, "The skills to learn fast, unlearn and relearn, become more important than getting a particular grade at a particular point in life".[+2 sentences] This is especially true in our nascent but rapidly growing sustainability sector, where the need and demand for the upskilling of our workforce may prove to be the greatest. Fortunately, our educational institutions have already been rising to the challenge. For example, Ngee Ann Polytechnic offers a specialist diploma in "Sustainable Facilities Management"; Temasek Polytechnic offers a diploma in "Energy Management and Sustainable Design"; SMU offers an executive education programme on "Sustainability and Sustainable Businesses"; and NUS offers a Master of Science programme on "Sustainable and Green Finance", just to name a few.[+14 sentences] Many of these training programmes are taught by both academics and industry specialists, who are eager to share their perspectives, knowledge and experience in the field of sustainability. There is clearly more to be done, to build capacity on sustainability across different sectors and value chains. My recent discussions with stakeholders in Singapore, point to three main buckets of skills gap, as follows. First, the most basic and foundational knowledge on climate change and sustainability that every worker should possess. Second, function-specific skillsets to ensure the capacity of corporate function departments to support the rest of the company in developing and deploying sustainability initiatives. And third, sector-specific competencies to enable the successful transition of key industries towards more sustainable business models and practices. Importantly, as we continue to develop and deploy more training programmes to fill these gaps, we should also be cognisant of the needs of other cities. By helping other cities build their capacity for addressing climate change and sustainability challenges, Singapore may also become a sustainability academy for the world. With the bold and decisive announcements in this Budget of our net-zero ambition by or around mid-century, and our revised carbon tax policy, we are signalling to the world that Singapore is absolutely serious about taking concrete actions to tackle climate change. As Minister Grace Fu recently highlighted, our carbon tax increase sends a clear signal to companies, that emissions have an explicit environmental cost. Companies must factor these costs in their business decisions. By putting an appropriate price on carbon, we are incentivising companies to transition to renewable energy, to improve their energy efficiencies and to invest in cleaner technologies. More importantly, as many of our Singapore-based companies have international value chains, these changes in corporate decision-making and behaviour can have far-reaching global impacts. But in my opinion, there is an even more important and impressive aspect of our revised carbon tax policy. From 2024, carbon tax liable businesses will be allowed to use international carbon credits to offset up to 5% of their taxable carbon emissions.[+2 sentences] This is nothing short of visionary, as also noted by Mr Mikkel Larsen, CEO of Climate Impact X. This measure will go a long way towards supporting the growth of a vibrant international carbon market to achieve climate impact at scale. Crucially, this will also create demand for high quality nature-based carbon offsets, to help support forest conservation and reforestation projects internationally. These green transition measures are well aligned with Singapore's ambition to be a Global Carbon Services and Trading Hub.[+16 sentences] Mr Speaker, Sir, to transform Singapore into a Global City for Sustainability will demand "a measure of courage, imagination and intelligence" – to borrow the words of Mr Rajaratnam. I am optimistic about the odds of our success, not least because our youth are bursting at the seams with an overwhelming sense of civic virtue, purpose and pride. In more ways than one, they are the reason we are on this sustainability journey. Ms Kate Yeo, born and raised in Singapore, is currently a first-year undergraduate student at Dartmouth College in the US. Kate is deeply passionate about environmental and sustainability issues in Singapore and has been regularly posting her explainers and thoughts on Instagram as @byobottlesg. After hearing about the green transition initiatives on Budget Day, Kate posted the following on Instagram, and I quote, "Still lots of details to be released, and of course we will still have to see how these policies will work in practice. But on the whole, I am hopeful – simply because Singapore is sometimes painfully pragmatic, and we do not set targets we cannot hit. If the Government says net zero by or around 2050, I have faith we will get there". Mr Speaker, Sir, fellow Members of Parliament and fellow Singaporeans, in these challenging times, our youth are rallying behind us, behind our measures. They are putting their trust to do the right thing and to succeed. We must not fail them. At the heart of cities are their people. While Singapore is uniquely challenged in several ways, we are also uniquely endowed in other ways, in particular, the indomitable spirit of our people has enabled us to survive and thrive throughout our history, despite all odds. As we emerge from yet another "crucible of fire", to borrow the Prime Minister's words, we will level up and emerge even stronger yet again. As Singapore confronts climate change and other sustainability challenges, we have the opportunity to be part of something bigger than ourselves, to punch above our weight once more, to achieve happiness, prosperity and progress not just for our nation, but also the world, charting our new way forward together as a bright green spark, as a Global City for Sustainability. Sir, I support the Budget and thank you for the privilege to speak.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Minister Lawrence Wong.
The Minister for Finance (Mr Lawrence Wong)107 words
[+5 sentences]Mr Speaker, if you could just permit me because Mr Leong Mun Wai had asked a question just now about the net impact of GST on the middle-income groups. And, in fact, I believe Assoc Prof Jamus Lim had asked a similar question on the broad impact of the GST and the GST Voucher (GSTV) changes as well as other text changes. Sir, all of these are relevant important questions. In fact, many Members would probably surface them in their subsequent speeches too. But I just want to assure Members that I will give a full response to all of this when I deliver my round-up speech.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Henry Kwek.
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Kebun Baru)1104 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, we currently are at the height of the Omicron wave. I know many residents who contracted Omicron or know someone who has. But Omicron too, will pass. If the experience of US and Europe is applicable, Singapore will be in better shape within weeks or months. And once we get pass Omicron, experts globally have forecast a period of relative stability for this year, compared to the challenging last two years. Therefore, it is time for us to start considering how to best encourage Singaporeans involved in COVID-19 management to go back to their industries.[+9 sentences] When COVID-19 first struck around Budget 2020's period of time, I asked the Government to hire many displaced Singaporeans, especially mid-careers Singaporeans. There are others who made the same suggestion. Our Government wisely hired many Singaporeans to implement SMMs, to supplement our healthcare and social services, and to help our migrant workers cope. With Omicron, the situation is now quite different. A large part of our SMMs may no longer be as preventing the hyper-contagious Omicron and we have to learn to coexist with COVID-19. And today, most of our industries are in a much better shape compared to 2020 and 2021. In fact, some industries are experiencing a shortage of staff. This contributes to rising business cost. This leads to higher domestic inflation. Of course, a large part of this inflation we see is largely due to global supply bottlenecks, as well as surging energy costs. But getting a number of Singaporeans currently involved in COVID-19 management back to the industries will certainly help our companies better manage manpower cost, thereby mitigating the rising cost of living.[+6 sentences] Also, MOF's spending has done an exceptional job in preventing economic scarring in the lives of our people. I believe it is also equally important that these Singaporeans I mention do not stay away from their respective industries for too long, which diminishes their skills in the long run. And this is all the more important, because I believe our local labour supply will stop growing within a few years, even after the planned increase in retirement and re-employment ages. To be clear, I am not suggesting transiting everybody transiting back to their private sector from this group of people involved in COVID-19 management. A core team can remain. The rest can transit back in phases, based on whether their previous industries are ready for them and whether they need to be reskilled before going to a different one. We can also supplement this core team with non-Singaporeans from neighbouring countries, much like how non-Singaporeans serve as Auxiliary Police Officers (APOs) in some situations to supplement our Singapore Police Force (SPF) officers. And the non-Singaporeans involved in COVID-19 management can be brought in using additional work pass or S Pass, but with clear sunset clauses that their permits are tied to whether or not there is a continued need for COVID-19 management.[+2 sentences] That brings me to my next point about reducing the cost and complexity for businesses through a decisive streamlining of safe management measures (SMMs), so as to fight rising inflation. Our Multi-Ministry Task Force (MTF) chairs have done an excellent job simplifying our SMMs and healthcare protocols as the virus evolves. Recently, our Minister for Finance and other MTF Ministers have indicated that they will do a thorough review of SMMs after the Omicron wave subsides.[+2 sentences] I am in full agreement. Let us go decisive on this. I hope our MTF can come up with a carefully considered list of "no-go" activities and settings, but allow everything else to proceed.[+15 sentences] Such clarity will help our civil servants achieve a quick, decisive but effective relaxation of SMMs when the time is right. My final point is about our SG Green Plan and our participations in climate change negotiations. Over the past few months, I have met a number of Singaporeans and international climate change groups and organisations, and recently many of them told me they were absolutely delighted to hear about our new net-zero pledge. Given that I have spoken on a number of occasions about the importance of carbon offsets and carbon trading, I am also heartened to hear that our Government was involved in the negotiation of Article 6 of COP26, because it unlocks the possibility for Singapore to fight climate change internationally, while having this contribution potentially recognised under our National Determined Contributions (NDCs). Article 6, as it stands today, mentions bilateral negotiation, but based on my understanding, without mentioning a large number of details, if bilateral negotiations determine how two countries, the one that contributes to projects and the other where the project is based, splits contributions to their respective NDCs, then I hope our Government can start bilateral negotiation with a sizeable number of countries, some from our immediate region and some from beyond. Doing so will ensure that our overseas climate contributions are not all in one single basket, so to speak and will not be disadvantaged in negotiations with any one country in the future. Mr Speaker, let me now conclude with a few general remarks on our Budget. Many people I spoke to were relieved to hear that the GST increase will be staggered and only starting in 2023, especially given where inflation is today. Tax increases are never popular. But many Singaporeans acknowledge our pressing and fast-growing needs. Just to name a few – it is not just increasing healthcare costs, it is not just paying for ageing infrastructure, it is not just investing for future capabilities. But, let us not also forget that there will be less Singaporeans working in the future to support more people. Less Singaporean taxpayers supporting more people. By now, many Singaporeans are aware that our uniquely Singaporean GST model is progressive. It is, in fact, a tiered GST system where the well-to-do pays more. Some careful observers are also heartened to see that the Government took a number of other steps first before implementing the GST which affects many Singaporeans. These steps include: one, financing long-term lumpy infrastructure projects through bonds; two, transferring a sizeable amount of MAS foreign reserves to GIC, so that we can generate more future income through our reserves; three, implementing wealth tax in a measured and practical way; and four, getting the very successful to contribute their fair share of income tax.[+2 sentences] All these show that our Government has listened carefully to people from all walks of life, balanced our country's needs with the complex global situation and come up with practical ways to make Singapore better. With that, I offer my strong support for this Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Minister Gan Kim Yong.
The Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Gan Kim Yong)2045 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to speak at the Budget debate. I rise in support of the Budget. Please allow me to speak on the impact the conflict in Ukraine has on Singapore's economy. I will also respond to Members' comments on what we can do to help businesses and Singaporeans to cope with the rising inflation and the challenges ahead. Let me start with the situation in Ukraine. Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, had earlier delivered a Ministerial Statement on the matter. I will focus on its potential impact on Singapore's economy. We are closely monitoring the rapidly unfolding situation. Our initial assessment is that the immediate and direct impact on our economy and firms has been manageable for now.[+7 sentences] Singapore companies have a limited presence in Ukraine, and we do not import many essential supplies from Ukraine and the region. We have adopted a multi-prong strategy to manage supply chain risks, especially for essential goods which we had enhanced during the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes diversifying our imports, stockpiling and producing locally where viable, and working with major importers and retailers to ramp up supply from alternative sources if necessary. Having said that, the conflict is still evolving and the situation could change very quickly. Make no mistake. While Ukraine may seem very far away from Singapore, the conflict there will have real and significant impact on all of us. With the sanctions being imposed on Russia by various countries and the disruption to supplies, global prices of energy and other products are set to rise in the coming weeks. Earlier today, Minister Vivian Balakrishnan announced that we will act in concert with like-minded countries to impose appropriate sanctions and restrictions on Russia.[+4 sentences] These measures will certainly come at a cost to us too. But I hope Singaporeans will understand why we need to make a clear stand, even if there is a price to pay, as Minister Balakrishnan has explained. One key area we will be significantly impacted by the conflict in Ukraine is energy cost, as we import most of our energy needs. We have already seen in recent months a spike in the global prices of oil and natural gas, which Russia is a major exporter of. For example, liquefied natural gas (LNG) prices have doubled from about $17 dollars per one million British Thermal Units (MMBTU), around half a year ago to about $35 currently.[+11 sentences] The Brent Crude benchmark also surged past US$100 per barrel just a few days ago, compared to US$71 average we saw last year. Motorists must therefore expect pump prices for petrol and diesel here to rise in time. Electricity rates for both businesses and households will also increase in tandem with escalating global energy costs. These will undoubtedly impact Singaporeans and further raise the cost of living here. The crisis will also further strain global supply chains as Russia and Ukraine are major exporters of commodities such as wheat and metals like nickel and palladium. Supply disruptions for these commodities will raise the prices of goods that use these commodities as intermediate input. For example, a global disruption in the supply of nickel could affect the production of stainless steel used in manufacturing and construction sectors. Disruptions to palladium supply will affect the semiconductor industry and consequently, the wider technology goods market. We are working with our key companies to review their business continuity plans to minimise disruptions to their business operations. We must also be prepared for the follow-on impact on trade and investment flows. A protracted conflict will affect business confidence and weigh on global economies and impact their recovery from the pandemic. So, what does this mean for Singapore's economy? We earlier projected our GDP would grow by 3% to 5% this year with CPI all items inflation ranging between 2.4% and 3.5% and the MAS core inflation between 2% and 3%.[+17 sentences] The Ukraine crisis has clouded our economic outlook. The actual impact on Singapore's GDP growth and inflation is difficult to estimate at this stage, given significant uncertainties. A lot will depend on how the conflict unfolds, the global response to the situation, and the longer-term impact on the global economy. However, what is clear is that inflationary pressures are likely to rise further in the near-term, especially through an increase in the prices of oil-related items in the first instance. The downside risks to our economy have also increased significantly. Some may ask, can we shield Singapore from the impact of these external factors? As an open economy, we will not be able to totally insulate Singapore from the impact of higher global costs. Some ask whether we can help businesses and households. The Small Business Recovery Grant (SBRG) and the Household Support Package (HSP) we announced at the Budget will help our businesses and households, and I will talk about them shortly. We will continue to monitor the situation closely and if necessary, introduce additional measures to help them cope with the challenges. Businesses are understandably concerned. After two years of the pandemic, many have been looking forward to ride the wave of a strong recovery in the global economy this year. The conflict has added considerable volatility and stress on what is an already challenging business environment arising from supply chain disruptions, higher electricity and fuel prices, and a tight labour market. Households have been similarly affected by these inflationary pressures. The Government understands the strains that businesses and households are under and we will do our best to help them. We have put in place a multi-prong strategy to do so. First, we will work with industries and firms to keep Singapore's economy competitive so that it can continue to sustain real wage growth for Singaporeans. Despite inflation having gone up, the real median income of full-time employed residents for 2021 grew by close to 1% in a COVID-19 year. The growth was significantly higher at 4.4% for lower-income residents at the lowest 20th percentile.[+16 sentences] Second, MAS on 25 January this year, raised the rate of appreciation of the trade-weighted Singapore dollar. A stronger Singapore dollar will help moderate impact of external cost pressures. Third, the Government works with a wide range of stakeholders to carefully manage the various cost drivers. In January this year, Minister of State Low Yen Ling shared with Members in detail, our measures to address inflationary pressures. These include carefully managing the supply of industrial and commercial space to help manage rental costs, working closely with industry partners to ensure that the prices of daily necessities are competitive and affordable, including diversifying food import sources to reduce our vulnerability to global price fluctuations and working with the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) to promote price transparency and help consumers make informed decisions. Some Members expressed concerns about electricity prices. As Second Minister Tan See Leng explained to the House last year and recently in February this year, MTI and the Energy Market Authority (EMA) have put in place several measures to enhance our energy security and resilience and moderate the volatility in electricity prices. These include ensuring that the electricity gencos have sufficient fuel reserves, establishing a standby fuel facility which gencos can tap on to produce electricity and introducing the Temporary Retail Electricity Contracting Support, or TRECS Scheme. We have already extended TRECS from March to May and will extend it further if necessary. We are also working with gencos and electricity retailers to offer more supplies under such contracts. Notwithstanding these measures, with the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, electricity prices are likely to remain elevated, or even increase further. Members also spoke about the challenges that businesses faced in labour shortage and rising manpower costs. I am heartened that Members appreciate the difficult balance we need to achieve between ensuring sufficient manpower for our enterprises and uplifting the capabilities and employment outcomes of our domestic workforce, especially our lower-income workers. Singapore will continue to build a conducive environment for enterprises to grow, our economy to remain open and competitive, and for our workers to benefit from the growth. Minister for Manpower Tan See Leng will share more on what the Government is doing to help firms, especially the SMEs, manage the impact of our manpower policy changes. The Minister for Finance had also announced a suite of measures in his Budget speech to support businesses, especially SMEs to cope with higher costs. The Small Business Recovery Grant (SBRG) of $1,000 per local employee up to a cap of $10,000 per firm will help eligible firms in sectors most badly affected by COVID-19.[+8 sentences] The extension of enhanced Enterprise Loan Schemes will facilitate SMEs continued access to financing and ease their cashflow. The enhanced SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit, or SFEC, will now be available to more small and microenterprises and the enhancement of the Productivity Solutions Grant will provide support for a broader range of solutions. Together, more firms will be able to tap on Government support to improve their efficiency and reduce their reliance on manpower. To encourage take-up, the Government will intensify our outreach to SMEs by proactively reaching out to them through the trade associations and chambers, as well as through Enterprise Singapore. Households have also been affected by the rise in inflation, especially from higher utilities and grocery bills. The Government will continue to lean forward and help them manage the higher cost of living. The Household Support Package introduced as part of this Budget will help HDB households, which will receive double the quantum of their quarterly U-Save Vouchers in 2022 to help them defray the cost of higher electricity bills. The support measures are not limited to just HDB households. All Singaporean households will receive an additional $100 in Community Development Council Vouchers to help them with their daily expenses.[+8 sentences] All children under the age of 21 will receive a top-up of $200 to their Child Development Account (CDAs), Education Savings Account (ESAs) or Post-Secondary Education Account (PSEA) to help them with their education needs. This is in addition to the wide range of support measures for seniors and low-income families that the Government has enhanced such as the Silver Support (SS) Scheme and the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme. Regular support measures such as the Public Transport Vouchers and the Permanent GST Voucher (GSTV) scheme also help ease the higher cost of living for many Singaporeans. This is a reflection of our commitment to give more support to those who need it most. Households that still need extra help can also continue to apply to ComCare for financial assistance. The Government will monitor the inflation situation carefully and will not hesitate to provide more help should there be a need to. Sir, beyond the immediate challenges at hand, in the longer term, Singapore will continue to face resource constraints such as manpower. There is an urgent need for our enterprises to digitalise and improve their productivity. Firms that are resource-intensive must recognise the need to transform their businesses and workforce, so that they are able to do more with less and unlock new business opportunities and access new markets and customers. Workers must also recognise that the best way for them to compete and stay employable in an increasingly volatile environment is to constantly learn and upgrade themselves, so that they remain relevant and productive. I will share more about the challenges and economic opportunities that we see and how we will help businesses and workers overcome the challenges and capture these opportunities during the Committee of Supply debate on MTI later this week.[+1 sentence] Sir, the conflict in Ukraine is a stark reminder that as a small country and open economy, we are vulnerable to the vagaries of international developments, be they military conflict, global inflation or supply chain disruptions, or other trends like technology and climate change. It is crucial that we strengthen our defences against such external shocks and to do that, we need to build a vibrant, diversified and resilient economy as well as forge a cohesive and united society. While there are significant challenges ahead, I am confident that we can weather these headwinds if we work together – the people, the businesses and the Government.[+1 sentence] This way, we can face the future with confidence.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Derrick Goh.
Mr Derrick Goh (Nee Soon)1346 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, we are in the midst of navigating the COVID-19 pandemic. We have fared collectively well so far and I attribute this to the leadership of our Government, in the trust and cooperation of our citizens. I applaud the Government for boldly putting forward a holistic and expansionary Budget of $102.4 billion.[+11 sentences] Taken as a whole, the Budget is not only fairer, greener and more inclusive for individuals and businesses. Importantly, it tackles existing challenges and yet, prepares Singapore for opportunities that are before us. Budget 2022 is a clear step forward as it demonstrates the Government's commitment towards a fairer society, where the better off amongst us contribute more with a progressive and resilient tax system. The GST hike, higher carbon taxes and wealth tax increases as sources of funds are not immediate and this Budget has provided more clarity and certainty for individuals and firms to plan ahead. For the above reasons, this Budget, aptly titled "Charting A New Way Forward Together" resonates with me. Our plan is to ensure that no one – individual or business – will be left behind as we ride the wave into a more complex, more digital and greener world. To achieve that, I would like to highlight two areas which we will need to focus on: one, supporting and accelerating our SMEs in their recovery and growth in the new economy; and two, redoubling our efforts to tackle escalating crime trends, specifically to safeguard our citizens against digital crimes such as scams as well as to protect our youths from the perils of drug abuse. I will first speak on supporting our SMEs which are the backbone of our economy. Although Singapore's economy is projected to grow 3% to 5% in 2022, businesses are cautiously optimistic as the world opens up. Headwinds remain. SMEs expect higher business costs for macro-economic risks, such as rising energy and commodity prices, worsening geopolitical conflicts and supply chains disruptions. Locally, the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) and tighter foreign labour policies instituted will help uplift lower-wage workers and boost the hiring of residents respectively, but they translate to even greater expenses for our SMEs. I, therefore, welcome the $500 million Jobs and Business Support Package.[+1 sentence] This provides payouts to SMEs most affected by COVID-19 restrictions on top of the extension of other financing schemes. Budget 2022 is clear in its push for SMEs to strengthen its capabilities: $200 million for digitisation schemes, $600 million to expand the Productivity Solutions Grant and $100 million to company skills training.[+20 sentences] All in, support for SMEs to transform and thrive in the new economy is sizeable. Nevertheless, what may weigh on the minds of SME owners are the certainty of cost increases against the uncertain benefits of transformation. Therefore, beyond funding, what is key to realise our plans for a new economy is good execution. The Government can consider more active role to engage and transform our SMEs quicker. Mr Jimmy Goh, owner of an SME500 awardee, Sim Chwee Mini-mart, recently told me how grateful he was for the support provided by the Productivity Solutions Grant and advice from an SME Centre. This helped him to take the bold step to successfully digitised his father's traditional seafood trading business of over 30 years. While the digitalisation journey was rewarding, he shared the uncertainties that could deter SMEs, such as the heavy reliance on outsourced solution providers and, therefore, the worry of the loss of control of key business data and IT systems. Another feedback provided to me by the Association of Trade and Commerce noted that SMEs amidst the journey are unclear of the road map to digitalise, such as the need for online marketing after developing a sales website. SMEs found themselves underestimating the cost and time required to build new digital channels. As we speak about a greener future, what has hogged the media and public conversations has been above the line carbon tax increases. Looking forward, the focus for SMEs should really be about how to remain competitive and in fact capture more opportunities that are ahead. Increasingly, MNCs and governments will require SMEs to be ESG-compliant to continue to be on their panel of tenders. These standards are not easy to implement and sometimes confusing so it is no wonder that many SMEs do not quite know where to start and how to measure and report compliance. While there are different resources available to help businesses in our pursuit of a digital and green economy, SMEs still see transformation as a cost rather than a strategic investment or advantage. This is where the challenge is not about funding alone, but it is about how our Government can play a bigger role in actively engaging our SMEs. More can be done to spark a mindset shift in SMEs, to marshal them towards the right resources, shape role models in different industries and to sustain partnerships in their transformation journey. One angle is for the Government to rope in trade associations and chambers of commerce, or TACs, to contribute more as an effective bridge between our agencies and SMEs. So, I am glad Minister Gan just raised this point earlier and I hope to hear more details on this at the coming Committee of Supply debate. If we do this right, SMEs can really benefit and be ahead of the curve against regional competitors in the new economy. Sir, as important as the Budget is focused on economic progress, is the strengthening of our social resilience. This includes keeping our country safe and secure. I note that Budget 2022 has provided for modest 1.8% increase in MHA's plan expenditure.[+3 sentences] I hope that it has catered for the expending resources and capabilities to deal with evolving crime trends. At last year's Budget debate, I called for more action and resources to curb the rise of scams. For 2021, SPF reported over 46,000 crimes. While physical crimes have plunged, scams quadrupled from 2017 and victims lost over $633 billion last year. This is more than the $500 million jobs in the Business Support Package or the $560 million Households Support Package (HSP) to help our young and old.[+6 sentences] As we battle scams, it is not difficult to worry that more sophisticated cybercrimes that have emerged in other countries, such as ransomware where perpetuators steal monies and our data can also impact us. Given the above, we need to dedicate more resources, both skilled staff and capabilities, to Singapore Police Force (SPF) to build on the initial success of the Anti-Scam Centre and leverage its partnerships with other stakeholders in the digital ecosystem. We need more public engagement with both individuals, as well as businesses. Everyone has a role to play in this multi-layered strategy. An equally worrying trend is that of drug abuse by youths. We owe much thanks to CNB's effectiveness in seizing illicit drugs and apprehending offenders, particularly traffickers, to keep our community safe. Notwithstanding this, youths aged 30 continue to form about 60% of new abusers in recent years.[+2 sentences] This could be due to the more liberal attitudes they have towards drugs and the advent of new psychoactive substances could make this trend worse. We know that along with drug addiction come many social ills. We cannot allow the lives of youths, who are our future, to be marred by drugs. Therefore, more could be done in a concerted effort to engage youths and teachers at schools, as well as parents at home to deal with at-risk youths for timely intervention.[+5 sentences] There is no silver bullet to solve these challenges. We have to act swiftly and resolutely to protect our citizens. In conclusion, Sir, I am optimistic that the Budget is poised to pivot Singapore as we move towards a post-pandemic world. While challenges remain, we can take heart in the resilience and the unity they have propelled us forward and we can look ahead with renewed confidence. I support Budget 2022 and the plans in charting Singapore's new way forward together.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Chong Kee Hiong.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh)863 words
[+3 sentences](In Mandarin): Deputy Speaker, people are most worried about inflation and the rising cost of living. From time to time, we hear complaints from the public that before the implementation of the new GST rate, the prices of utilities, food, coffee and daily necessities have already gradually increased, which makes many families anxious and worried. Although the Government has announced various assistance packages to offset the impact of the GST hike next year and the year after, people are still worried that the new GST hike will increase their financial burden. I am convinced that people must be protected and have more effective recourse when they encounter profiteering situations. Hence, I sincerely hope that the Government will continue to take cases of profiteering seriously and give more resources and power to the Consumers Association and the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore, as well as the soon-to-be-established Committee Against Profiteering, to deal with consumer complaints and effectively deal with unscrupulous businessmen who seek huge profits.[+23 sentences] However, we also understand that not all price increases are for profiteering. We understand that, in fact, businesses especially SMEs, coffeeshops and hawkers, are not only affected in terms of labour shortages, but are also under pressure from increased costs of raw materials, ingredients, utility bills, logistics and transportation. Businesses often try to absorb cost increases in the short term in order to retain customers. Prices of goods and food tend not to change every year, but every few years. As a result, price increase tends to be in a step manner. Businesses must adapt to the needs of the market and, if necessary, change their business models and processes to ensure that the products, food and the services they provide are value-for-money, or even great value-for-money, in the eyes of customers. Then, even with higher prices, consumers continue to patronise their businesses. Given that almost everything in Singapore needs to be imported, we are price takers in the international market. Inflation will continue to exist. To ensure that citizens can still afford the products and food, we must ensure that workers' wages grow faster than inflation. Therefore, I call on the Government to continue to create opportunities for our workers to upgrade their skills, knowledge and their abilities. At the same time, I also call on the Government to pay close attention to and ensure that the wage growth rate and inflation rate can be balanced and that appropriate assistance can be effectively provided when needs arise. (In English): For workers' wages to outpace inflation and the rising costs of living, they need to have the skills and expertise that are in demand by the market. We need to equip and train our workers, give them the opportunity to upgrade themselves as they progress along their careers. This will allow them continued access to jobs with higher wages and better work conditions. The Government, unions and businesses must work together to explore the most suitable training models for their sectors. In this regard, I would like to give recognition to NTUC and its affiliated unions for their various initiatives, such as the Company Training Committees (CTCs). In addition to the tasks of identifying what kind of training is needed, the question is whether we can also get enough well-qualified trainers. How would the Government assist our unions in this endeavour? There are plans to establish tripartite academies for sectors where transformation is needed. How will the training be conducted and courses be accredited? Will there be collaboration with our ITEs, Polytechnics and tertiary institutions? Can the Minister share more details on this? As part of the NTUC Job Security Council (JSC), NTUC's e2i has helped match more than 46,000 workers to new or secondary jobs from February 2020 to December 2021.[+3 sentences] Do we have long-term studies to track how successful these job matches are and identify the main problems where the matches are not compatible so that we can improve on the process? For persistent unemployment, mismatched skillsets need to be addressed and retraining for the affected workers is needed to equip them with new skills for growing sectors. Next, I would like to appeal on behalf of some elderly private property owners regarding the increase in property taxes for owner-occupied residential properties. The property tax rates for the portion of Annual Value in excess of $30,000, will be raised from 4% to 16%, to 6% to 32%.[+4 sentences] These are properties that they may have bought long ago. Upon retirement, they have no income and are burdened with ever-increasing cost of living and now have to pay higher property tax as well. These are their homes, not investment properties that have rental income to offset the property taxes. Would the Government consider assisting this group of residents? Last but not least, regarding the additional GST Voucher (GSTV) – U-Save rebates under the Assurance Package and the regular GSTV – U-Save rebates, would the Government consider disbursing the rebates based on per capita household income instead of the size of the HDB flat?[+2 sentences] This would appear to be fairer and more equitable. I would like to conclude with my support for the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Poh Li San.
Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang)2025 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Budget 2022 is balanced and designed with a clear focus on better preparing Singaporeans for the future. Most measures address concerns such as a green economy, assistance for badly affected businesses and supporting skills upgrading. The Budget is fair and inclusive. The Finance Minister has shared that by raising the top-tier tax rates from 22% to 24%, an additional $170 million of tax revenue could be collected. Over the past year, there has been a 30% increase in a number of millionaires in Singapore, from around 207,000 in 2019 to 270,000 in 2020.[+19 sentences] The personal income tax rate varies in different countries. It is around 37% in the US, 40% in Switzerland, 56% in Japan and 45% in China. Comparatively, even though our top marginal personal income taxes are 24%, it is still relatively low compared to these developed countries. Singapore's top-tier owners should find the revised tax rate favourable. Over the past week, I have spoken to several high-income earning Singaporeans. It is heartening to know that most high earners agree that the business-friendly social and commercial conditions in Singapore have helped them succeed and prosper. Some are supportive of the higher taxes to provide for heavier social spending. They understand that the changes to the tax system are necessary for the sustainability and stability of Singapore's infrastructure, conducive policies, secure environment and well-developed digital infrastructure. Singapore has moved into a different phase of development. Going forward, Singaporeans should expect more tax changes to meet the demands of the changing demographics and economic conditions, with the top-tier owners expecting to contribute even more towards tax revenues. Some high-income earners may feel that they have worked very hard for their success and that is not fair to have to share with others who did not work as hard as they did. I do agree that nothing is absolutely fair and it is never possible to completely justify who should be paying more or less taxes. However, it is important to cultivate the growth mindset that those who can afford to pay a little more taxes should do so. Even with the higher tax revenue, the cost of living and doing business will still continue to rise. We will have to manage the rising inflation while maintaining our economy's competitiveness. One major area of concern is the push for productivity gains, especially in view of the curbs in foreign labour inflows, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Over the past decades, the availability of low-cost foreign workers has benefited business owners and kept businesses running competitively. To add, these foreign workers are willing to perform labour-intensive jobs, which Singaporeans tend to eschew. We have to find a way to win ourselves of the heavy reliance on foreign labour as the easy availability of foreign workers has depressed are blue-collar workers' wages and it will continue to do so. There is no easy solution and we will need to assist our low-wage Singaporean workers by slowing the supply of foreign labour. I am concerned that even with the Government's Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS) to support part of the wage increases, businesses will still have to pass along some cost increases to customers and consumers.[+17 sentences] Through the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) and the Workfare Incentives Supplement (WIS), we have been increasing wages to attract more Singaporeans to take on various jobs, especially those that are currently taken on by foreign workers. Though is a difficult period for many businesses that are facing severe manpower crunch, we should persist in this workforce transformation and build a strong Singaporean Core. We must try to continue to hire more locals. In tandem, we need to redesign the operations and job processes and improve the working conditions for lower-wage jobs or Singaporeans need to change their attitude towards low-wage jobs. Business owners should also shift their mindset and relook at how to improve the work conditions that have been deterring Singaporeans to take on such roles. Having said that, workers will always take on jobs with remuneration that justifies. I would also like to appeal to the Government to provide more support to social enterprises. Many social enterprises employ untapped resources that include post-retirement seniors and high-functioning special needs individuals. These senior workers can remain active and sharp. With some tweaks in the job roles, this particular group of workers can assist in certain jobs, previously done by foreign workers. Though easier said than done, we should automate whenever possible. Understandably, many businesses are reluctant to invest in the capital expenditure required for automation. However, new technology and improved business processes is a must. I hope the Ministry will consider providing better assistance to our SMEs to offset the upfront costs for automation and innovation. Assistance schemes could be interest-free loans or grants to partially offset initial capex investment, particularly for initial large investments required for scaling-up automation. Mr Deputy Speaker, I will now speak in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): We are heading in the correct direction in revamping our tax system, but the Government can do more. Retirees will be hit by the double impact of the rising costs of living and the GST increase after next year.[+33 sentences] The Assurance Package cash payout and GST Voucher – Cash (Senior's Bonus) will offset the expense increases. However, many retirees have limited savings, they are worried about what would happen after the period of support ends. Families with special needs members also do not have any additional help. Will the Government give more support to social enterprises that help to match interested retirees and able persons with special needs with micro jobs? For those who are able, matched with suitable tasks, they will be able to supplement their household incomes and be meaningfully engaged as they contribute to our community. (In English): We will be starting a Wellness Kampung for seniors in the Sembawang West constituency. This will be a common space at the void deck where residents come together to socialise and exercise. There will also be an urban farm on the rooftop of a multi-storey carpark next to it, that will provide micro-jobs for the seniors. It can be a modern-day kampung where residents exchange information about job opportunities like babysitting, tuition, part-time jobs, handy-man jobs and so on. I would like to ask Government agencies, such as HDB and SFA, to be supportive of such community initiatives and review their rules and regulations to facilitate more of such projects that can easily provide positive social impact. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will now move onto the topic of a greener and more sustainable Singapore. Green Capital, including carbon taxes and green bonds, is the catalyst to jumpstart our transition to a green economic ecosystem. The issuance of green bonds will allow the Government and businesses to invest in new technology and build a strong foundation for a green ecosystem. These bonds will greatly reduce the financial risks to our Government, especially for mega infrastructure investment projects for green energy production and for transition to greener business models. As an example, the transformation to a more sustainable Jurong Island. Though the newly introduced phased carbon tax increase will help businesses cope and transit more gradually to greener practices, there has been little mention of grants for developing talents needed to support the green economy. R&D for renewable energy production and energy optimisation technologies is important. Presently, many countries are fighting for talents to support their sustainability related industries. It is advisable to start positioning Singapore as a serious regional green hub. We will need the talent to build our green industries. It is also time for us to invest more in the training and nurturing of a new generation of innovators and engineers for the sustainability sector. In recent years, many young talents have pursued careers with big IT firms that have set up headquarters in Singapore. We also need to proactively plan for some of our very own Singaporeans to pursue engineering, in particular, environment engineering. Advanced technology is the key to unlocking many constraints in harnessing renewable energy and achieving circularity in waste management. The Government must do more to signal to the nation about the importance of having talents in engineering and R&D. Mr Deputy Speaker, in the final segment of my speech, I will share my concerns on the burgeoning spending on social services, in particular, in healthcare expenditure, as Singapore enters a rapid ageing phase. On top of channelling resources on geriatric care and building more community hospitals, I urge MOH to focus more on upstream prevention healthcare services, such as free annual health screening services for Singaporeans above 35 years old, as early intervention and treatments are often more effective and less expensive. The preventive efforts should also focus on encouraging the younger population to live a healthier and more active lifestyle. As we recover from the pandemic, more aggressive efforts should be put into community programmes focusing on nutrition and fitness. Although these programmes will take time and concerted efforts, this may well be the best approach to reverse the rising trend of healthcare spending resulting from diabetes and obesity. Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to say something in Malay about preventive healthcare. (In Malay): With a rapidly ageing population, it is imperative that we get all Singaporeans on early preventive healthcare in order to survive the silver tsunami. The right direction would be to plan ahead for the long term, by shifting spending towards preventive and community-based healthcare. Unfortunately, since then-Minister for Health Mr Gan Kim Yong declared "War on Diabetes" in 2016, the prevalence of diabetes is 9.5% in 2019, up from 8.6% in 2016. The prevalence of diabetes was higher among Malays and Indians at 14.4% and 14.2% respectively, compared to Chinese at 8.2%. Would the Government consider allocating more resources to customise health measures to help bring down the prevalence among the different ethnic groups?[+12 sentences] There may be genetic, diet and lifestyle differences which need to be addressed, specifically in order to target this problem more effectively. (In English): The frequent consumption of sugary drinks may cause diabetes and obesity. I am concerned about the mushrooming of bubble tea outlets all over Singapore over the past few years. Another concern is the prevalence of binge drinking amongst Singaporeans. Young adults in the 18 to 39 years age group were most likely to binge drink in pubs and bars. Binge drinking may cause a whole host of health problems, as well as unsafe acts, such as driving under the influence of alcohol. Binge drinking has risen to 10.5%. As part of a suite of preventive healthcare measures, I hope the Government is looking to regulate and reduce the number of bubble tea outlets, pubs and bars. Another major area of concern is mental health, particularly worsened due to the pandemic. Mental health issues are unseen, and it is hard to understand the real extent of this social and health malaise. It is particularly debilitating because many young people are afflicted and the damage can be very long term or dire. We have no choice but to ensure that we have qualified professionals and allocate sufficient resources in our healthcare systems to provide treatment and support for those affected. On this note, I would like to enquire from Minister for Health on the progress of the National Mental Health Competency Training Framework.[+2 sentences] Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, our people are our most precious resource and we must put in our best efforts to help them stay in good health, physically and mentally, so that they can attain their highest potential and live a happy life as Singaporeans. We are a small nation and there are only so few of us. All the more we need to take care of one another and leave no one behind. We need to stay united to survive in a competitive global environment. The Budget has established a good framework for all of us to work together for our common future.[+1 sentence] I would like to conclude with my support for the Budget.
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah)1932 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I welcome the 2022 National Budget announced by Finance Minister Lawrence Wong. This Budget builds on the strong social compact between our Government with Singaporeans. In particular, our Government has made decisive steps in the ongoing transformation of our labour market, with a clear focus on uplifting lower-wage workers. The Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS), introduced in Budget 2022, provides transitional wage support for employers to adjust to upcoming mandatory wage increases for lower-wage workers covered by the Progressive Wage Model (PWM).[+3 sentences] Employers understand their critical role in strengthening our social compact and the need for them to build business resilience through fair and progressive employment practices. The transitional wage support, along with support grants and schemes to upskill workers and raise firm level productivity will enable employers to sustain these wage increases. Speaking with other employers, these support measures give us confidence that the Government is with us as we uplift our workforce wages. The decision to stagger the increase of GST over the span of two years is another strategic choice welcomed by businesses.[+8 sentences] Many businesses, especially those in consumer-facing sectors, are still reeling from the impact of COVID-19, hence this staggered increase provides the additional time needed for businesses to respond. A one-off GST hike during a period of inflation concerns would have exacerbated concerns over a potential drop in consumer spending. Beyond immediate business challenges, we need to adopt a larger resilience agenda grounded in adaptability and decisiveness. This resilience agenda will move beyond defensive measures and short-term goals to encompass strategies aimed at achieving inclusive and sustainable growth. In my speech, I will expand on two key aspects of resilience: labour resilience and climate resilience. Labour market resilience can be characterised by a low unemployment rate, sufficient supply of skilled labour and productivity and wage growth. As observed from Budget 2022, the Government aims to instil labour market resilience through two broad strategies. Firstly, to ensure that Singaporeans who are willing and able to do the jobs, will get good jobs with higher wages and better work prospects. By calibrating the minimum qualifying salary for Employment Pass (EP) and S Pass applicants, employers are strongly encouraged to further consider the quality of foreign workers that they want to bring in and how these workers also strengthen the larger workforce with our Singaporean Core. The second strategy aims to increase the productivity of our labour force through the digitalisation of processes and skills upgrading. This strategy is materialised through schemes like the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) that subsidises the implementation of digital and automated solutions designed to raise productivity, and the SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit that offsets up to 90% of expenses for skills upgrading initiatives.[+26 sentences] While most businesses would agree with the rationale behind these strategies to strengthen labour market resilience, they face operational and structural challenges that impede their adoption of these strategies. After many conversations with business owners over the past few months, the difficulty in hiring Singaporeans is a real one. Job recruitment advertisements for Singaporeans yield low responses. In a recent meeting with a fintech startup, the entrepreneur shared of his difficulty in hiring software engineers. At the same meeting, a business owner in the manufacturing sector lamented that he was unable to hire sufficient staff to fulfil customers' orders. Anecdotes like these are repeated by employers from other industries even when all of them show eagerness to hire Singaporeans. The hiring challenges is also keenly felt in our social services sectors. In my constituency in Zhenghua, I have received numerous appeals from young parents for childcare and infant care placements. Our anchor operator has just taken possession of a large space at the new Senja BTO development, much to the delight of parents. However, parents will have to wait longer for placements as the operator is still facing challenges in hiring sufficient teaching staff. The centre is unlikely to run at its optimal capacity when it opens. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I believe Singaporeans are talented and driven, but there is simply not enough of us. This is a consequence of our ageing population and low birth rates. Our local workforce is anticipated to shrink in the coming years. While I agree that we must provide gainful employment for Singaporeans and strengthen the complimentary factor with the foreign workforce, we may soon or already have reached a point where there is simply not enough of us. Beyond complementing our local workforce, we need to look at supplementing our workforce. This is especially so for essential services and what I would term also as "enabling" services. For example, services such as childcare and infant care enables young parents to dedicate themselves to their jobs, thereby enabling them to be economically active. As we recognise and emphasise the importance of our mental health, there will be a growing need for counsellors in our schools, workplaces and in our communities. With greater mental health capabilities, we can help and enable as many Singaporeans to be at the their best mental and emotional state. One thing that I believe that all Singaporeans enjoy is our hawker food. Our hawkerpreneurs and culture is recognised by UNESCO. But will we have enough Singaporeans, especially with other sectors competing for the same local talent, take up the woks as our hawker legends hang up their ladles? Essential and enabling sectors remain highly dependent on human labour. For sectors such as healthcare, social work and early childhood, human labour is literally the commodity being traded and digital adoption is commonly seen as complementary to human labour but not a perfect substitute. There are also regulatory requirements on service provider-to-client ratios that cannot be changed despite higher levels of productivity. An example would be our early childhood sector where ECDA mandates a teacher to student ratio of one is to a range from eight to 25, depending on ages.[+1 sentence] Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, there is really not enough of us. I seek the Government to review the essential services sectors' manpower requirements and the projected needs in the coming years vis-à-vis our local workforce numbers.[+21 sentences] There is also growing concerns within the business and international community that Singapore is perceived to be closing up and foreigners are not welcomed. We need to address these concerns as such perceptions have grave consequences for Singapore. As shared, our workforce is ageing, our labour force growth is declining, and we would not have enough workers. For Singapore to stay relevant in this fast-changing world, we need access to the best talent and have them be part of our team. Domestically, we need essential and enabling workers to support Singaporeans' aspirations and care for our seniors and children. This need for Singapore to remain open has to be felt both economically and socially to build labour resilience. Singapore has always been a talent capital and being welcoming to different nationalities and races to call Singapore their new home is essential for our continuous development. Marriage data shows that we have also more Singaporeans marrying foreigners and this trend is likely to continue. All of this makes social integration and acceptance absolutely important. This acceptance of differences is occurring at all levels of our society – from preschools where I have seen children who are not yet attuned to our local languages to workplaces where respect for religious beliefs in food and practices require more sophisticated HR practices. Retaining and growing our multicultural DNA is absolutely critical and now with even more diversity in it, we need to constantly work at it from our grassroots to our policy officers. Our social compact needs to be strengthened through social integration and I believe this is where much more effort can be put in our community with active involvement by companies too. On the productivity front, the time lag between the implementation of productivity enhancement solutions and reaping their results is a very real challenge for businesses. Allow me to elaborate on this. Even when businesses successfully leverage on the productivity enhancement schemes and implement more digitisation and skills transformation programmes, there will be a lag time before digital capabilities are running at full steam and employees are up to speed with their skills transformation programmes. During this transitional period, businesses face a shortage of "plug and play" labour to meet their business needs, compounded by labour shortages and the scarcity of tech talent in Singapore. As a result, even if companies are open to adopting new technologies, there is still apprehension and resistance to operationalising such solutions because of the inability to seize revenue opportunities in the short run. Inevitably, businesses will eventually reach a tipping point for technology adoption. The COVID-19 crisis was such one crucial tipping point of historical magnitude. However, the purpose of cultivating labour market resilience is to ensure that businesses can ride on the waves of digitisation instead of being submerged under them. At present, operational and structural challenges are impeding businesses from actualising a resilient labour force. I acknowledge that a radical mindset shift on the part of businesses is needed to respond to larger global trends. However, I would like to ask the Government, what else can be done to address the short-term challenges that businesses face in building a resilient labour force?[+10 sentences] And what other measures can be put in place to guide businesses as they re-envision their business transformation roadmaps? With a clear labour shortage on our shores, what is the bigger strategy for our workforce composition that will enable us to remain competitive? Another aspect of the resilience agenda is that of climate resilience. I affirm the Government's commitment towards strengthening Singapore's net zero goals and significantly raising carbon taxes. These steps are necessary and crucial in ensuring Singapore's transition to a green economy and affirm Singapore's commitment towards climate change. Despite our efforts, the sobering reality is that it is unlikely for us to fully escape the effects of climate change. The floods that resulted from torrential rain in many states of Malaysia last December exposed the reality of extreme weather patterns caused by climate change. Hence, there is a need to strengthen our climate resilience through infrastructural interventions. The Government announced new plans in 2020 for coastal protection measures against rising sea levels to mitigate effects of climate change. The range of options to combat rising sea levels, include engineering feats such as reclamation and building sea walls, as well as nature-based solutions are being considered. The Significant Infrastructure Government Loan Act (SINGA) will allow the Government to borrow up to $90 billion to pay for infrastructure that will last for at least 50 years. To diversify the funding options for green infrastructure, Budget 2022 announced that $35 billion of green bonds will be issued by 2030 to fund public sector green infrastructure projects. This builds on the $19 billion worth of green bonds issued during Budget 2021. In relation to these new sources of funding, I would like to ask the Government to provide more details on the infrastructural projects that have been earmarked for development and specifically the opportunities for our local businesses to be involved in these developments so that they can build necessary capabilities. In addition to the other opportunities in the green economy, does the Government view engineering solutions in climate change adaption as a sector where our businesses can hone a niche in and eventually export solutions internationally?[+2 sentences] Overall, this Budget will continue to strengthen our common resilience agenda and reinforce Singapore's strong social compact. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Cheng Hsing Yao.
Mr Cheng Hsing Yao (Nominated Member)867 words
[+6 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget as outlined by the Minister for Finance. I would like to touch on a few points that I think need emphasising. In my interaction with various people in business, I can sense an admiration for Singapore. Our consistent past achievements and how we are seemingly the only Asian society that managed to move towards endemic COVID-19 are two aspects that they admire. The interest to invest or expand in Singapore is strong. However, one of the most common concerns is whether we have the manpower and talents to support the growth. The reality is that the Singaporean labour force is not big enough. Thus, I am very glad to hear in Minister for Finance’s speech that we will remain "open and welcoming to talent from around the world but we will focus on complementarity".[+7 sentences] This message is very important. I would like to urge the Government to repeat and say it more. This is because of late, the voice of xenophobia has become louder. We need the business leaders and investors to be clear where we stand. As a relatively wealthy nation, some of us might get complacent and believe that economic development is no longer the main priority. That cannot be further from the truth. The various vulnerabilities we face as an island city nation must be familiar to Members already. And we also have, as the Minister for Finance pointed out, more and more social needs that have to be paid for. We can and should look into refining our progressive and wealth tax regime, with a caveat that we need to be careful of any unintended consequences.[+10 sentences] Ultimately, unless we can develop and keep our economy vibrant, we will struggle to keep our Budget balanced and start to have surplus again. Every public policy comes with an underlying trade-off. As we become more aware of the trade-offs on the environmental and social aspects, we must not under-emphasise the economic ones. The concept of "complementarity of foreign labour" is an excellent guiding principle that ingeniously addressed all the conflicting concerns. I would like to highlight two considerations when we translate this principle into policies. Firstly, the growth and demand for talents will be extremely uneven across business sectors and companies. Even as some experience huge labour shortage, there will still be a significant number of people who are unemployed or under-employed. As businesses are being disrupted at a faster pace, so will the rate of displacement of jobs and skills. I expect the pace at which people will find their skills and knowledge getting outdated to increase going forward. For traditional sectors that we want to transform to raise productivity, the more successful we are with the transformation, the more people will be displaced by new machines and talents. When crafting our policies, we should separate the needs for growth, from the need to care for the displaced workforce, so that we do not unnecessarily limit our growth potential.[+23 sentences] Secondly, opportunities come to those who are strong and successful. Not to those who are weak and needy. To stay successful, we have to keep seizing new economic opportunities while we are still doing well. If we forego one or two opportunities, we are unlikely to sense any difference. But that is a slippery slope. By the time we have lost our appeal, it is already too late. The difficulty for the Government is to convince the public of a future-oriented policy when nothing seems to be broken yet. My final point is about a Singapore vision or dream. I want to, once again, thank the MTF and the whole of Singapore for the way we responded to the pandemic. The last two years were a big shock to Singapore and the world. In business, sometimes the best time to reform a company is after it has gone through a major disruption. Perhaps, we can use this time to put together a refreshed Singapore vision. The Minister has addressed a similar point, in terms of "renewing and strengthening our new social compact". In the 1980s, when I was in Secondary school, the Government's "Vision 1999" had a big impact on me. It was a vision that covered many different aspects. But the parts that I related to the most were the target for Singapore to achieve the Swiss standard of living then by 1999 and the plans for Singapore's New Downtown. The latter played a part in why I have become an architect and joined URA to be an urban planner. For mid-career folks like myself, who have gone from having handwritten letters to emails and then social media, what would inspire us? For the young ones who are digital natives, what would inspire them? It will be exciting to find out. As we "chart our new way forward", to "emerge stronger" and "towards a low-carbon society", it might be useful to also define the qualitative aspects and value system of our society that we want to have in future. After two years of pandemic talk, I like the idea of having a holistic, refreshed and inspiring Singapore Vision to strive towards. With this, I support the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Miss Rachel Ong.
Miss Rachel Ong (West Coast)1059 words
[+5 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a Budget of hope, social conscientiousness and sustainable growth. Several residents I spoke with shared that Budget 2022 responded to the needs and aspirations of Singaporeans. It tackled some very difficult issues that our people are concerned about and is a big step forward towards a more equitable, harmonious and progressive Singapore. It is also encouraging to note that a large part of the Budget is devoted to social well-being, particularly our seniors, who can retire better with stronger financial support and adequate healthcare. Our less privileged families and children will also not be left behind. Our lower-wage workers will be given a much desired lift through increased Government expenditures in Workfare and subsidies to help employers co-fund progressive wage increases.[+1 sentence] The other aspect of this year's Budget that struck a chord is the effort to redistribute wealth through progressive taxes on top-tier earners and expenditures, directing these to the uplifting of those most in need. Those in the top income brackets, while being asked to contribute more, are still only taxed moderately, as compared to many first-world countries. It is noteworthy that the top 10% of our income taxpayers contribute to 80% of personal income tax revenue.[+5 sentences] This is a significantly higher contribution to total income tax revenue than the top 10% of income earners of the US and the UK by at least 10 percentage points. I believe this redistribution of wealth serves well to build up the social foundation by which our people can thrive together. If I may share some observations and two considerations on advancing our green transition. Observations on carbon tax and climate resilience. As corporates around the world raced to zero in the weeks and months leading up to COP26, one glaring area of needed change to Singapore's efforts was our $5 per tonne carbon tax. With the gradual increase in carbon tax to $50 per tonne and a further $80 per tonne by 2030, this starts to address the need to price in externalities and is a laudable move.[+13 sentences] My resident and community leader who also serves as the Sustainability Director at Lendlease Singapore shared with me that Lendlease uses a shadow price of US$20 per tonne in 2020, rising to US$100 per tonne in 2030 and US$140 by 2040, which are integrated into Lendlease's investment decisions and prices in financial risks associated with climate change. Singapore should continue to assess our carbon tax on an ongoing basis, aligning with international best practices, to respond to and aid the transition towards a low-carbon economy. This recognises the ecosystem services that our environment provides and in Doughnut Economics Theory, this points to the ecological ceiling by which we should not cross. A greener living environment should also ensure that our buildings and infrastructure are climate-resilient so that our people can be. Flood risk is a significant physical climate risk that low-lying nations must contend with. I understand that at Lendlease, climate change and adaptation plans are integrated in all major developments to ensure the communities served have access to facilities in case of floods. Forward planning by the Government, as well as other private developers, should consider climate risks and ecological limits for Singapore. This goes far beyond carbon emissions to include rising water levels, biodiversity loss, amongst other ecological impacts. While we are cognisant of our limited natural resources and the need to balance economic and societal needs, applying such ecological limits may compel all of us – Government, urban planners, corporates and people sectors – to be truly creative in the way we use our resources and overcome limitations. As for the two considerations, here is the first consideration – reducing our direct emissions in tandem with electrification. Soaring electricity prices in recent months have impacted economic recovery for businesses. Even as we move towards electrification for vehicles and land transport, Singapore still has to deal with emissions arising from electricity generated. While Electric Vehicles (EVs) are inherently more sustainable, producing less emissions per kilometre, EVs still have a significant carbon footprint unless the electricity is from a renewable source. One transitional option could be reducing our Scope 1 direct emissions via the use of alternative fuels, such as renewable diesel, also known as RD, which produces only one-tenth of conventional diesel's emissions, for the land transport, logistics and construction sectors.[+5 sentences] This recommendation follows the encouraging news that our aviation sector will now have access to sustainable aviation fuel. On the land transport front, Singapore has made limited progress, despite the fact that we have Neste, one of the world's leading producers of RD, producing 1.3 million tonnes per year at our doorstep. To date, I understand that none of this diesel is meant for local consumption, since there are no local distributors, and the supplies are currently shipped to Europe and the US where there are government subsidies for RD. With oil prices rising, impacting both pump and electric prices, as well as internal combustion engines and EVs, Singapore should consider a third fuel alternative, especially when Neste is producing locally. The second consideration – accelerating the renewables market. The ability to use international carbon credits to offset up to 5% of taxable emissions will support the development of a regulated carbon market in Singapore and the region. I would also like to suggest that Singapore incorporate and consider regulating the use of International Renewable Energy Certificates, also known as IRECs, as an alternative means to carbon credits for corporate compliance in taxable emissions.[+2 sentences] This can be applied to companies which are large energy consumers, for example, those under GHG Protocol Scope 2, but not the large emitters in Scope 1. The Singapore renewable market is illiquid at the moment, with much demand and insufficient supply. Prices for Singapore RECs have doubled in the last one year, from $35 per megawatt hour (MWh) to $70 per MWh. By encouraging and regulating IRECs as an alternative environmental attribute next to carbon credits, this could provide greater liquidity in the market and also support major developers' pursuit of net-zero carbon developments.[+2 sentences] Mr Deputy Speaker, though there will always be areas where we can do better, I am fully persuaded that this Budget shows up very meaningfully for our people in such a pivotal time as this. With this, I am grateful and I support the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Shawn Huang.
Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong (Jurong)2948 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Singapore has many notable science and tech achievements. Those of my generation would fondly remember the 1989 Sound Blaster by Creative Technologies' Sim Wong Hoo. It is probably difficult to comprehend why the hype over quality music and sound over a desktop computer.[+1 sentence] Back then, this was cutting-edge. It was a computer chipboard that enabled users to play and record speech and music, selling more than 400 million Sound Blaster cards worldwide and the first Singapore company to be listed on NASDAQ.[+8 sentences] Just two decades ago, Trek 2000 International Limited, a Singapore company, invented the thumb drive. Using a USB interface, the thumb drive, the thumb-sized storage device, had a plug-and-play convenience. It was a wave that swept the floppy discs and mobile storage segments. Looking at the trend of mobile payments today, a cashless society and the rise of mobile wallets, Network for Electronic Transfers (NETS) started work on their ambition in 1986 with electronic transfers at point-of-sales; the digital or mobile wallet in the form of cash cards was then rolled out in 1996. Singapore was ahead of our time and spearheading technologies and pushing the frontier of fintech. Today, on the list of the world's 10 most valued and largest companies by market capitalisation, except for two – that is – Berkshire Hathaway and Saudi Aramco, all the rest are IT and tech companies. The future economy will be driven by the fourth IR, moving from traditional digitalisation to an intelligent era – smart home, smart factories, lights out manufacturing – a great way to mitigate manpower and environmental issues, in smart cities. The future powerhouses will be driven by innovation. According to the World Bank, in 2017, Singapore's R&D percentage spend of GDP was 1.94% or an estimated US$6.7 billion.[+28 sentences] At the same time in 2017, Israel spent US$16 billion on R&D. In 2021, Israel was 4.94%, Korea was 4.53% and Switzerland 3.37%. Slovenia, Czech Republic and Iceland ranked higher for percentage GDP spent on R&D. The OECD average is 2.4%. To further put into context, Alphabet Inc, the parent company of Google, spent US$31.5 billion on R&D; Amazon, US$42.7 billion; and Microsoft US$19 billion, just to name a few. Although highly innovative companies with substantive R&D expenditures provide much opportunities and some form of inoculation, it does not guarantee survival. Much still requires leadership. We know of Kodak, Nokia, Blackberry and Yahoo!. Interestingly, any keen observer will realise that Kodak and Fujifilm were in the same position. Kodak filed for bankruptcy but, in 2010, just when Kodak was close to bankruptcy, Fujifilm posted a 57% revenue growth between the years 2000 and 2010. This was because Fujifilm had the courage to face possible realities, act swiftly and change its business. There was no time to be incremental, no time for quick wins, no time for low-lying fruits. These methods would not have been sufficient to steer a behemoth. The management quickly downscaled production lines, closed redundant facilities and they unified their research efforts, enhanced communications and improved the culture of innovation amongst the engineers. But this was not enough. The President of the company ordered a quick stock-take of all of Fuji Film's technologies and quickly mapped out how existing in-house technologies could be used to power future markets. It was an existential moment for them and Fuji Film survived, moving into pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and functional materials. With rapid tech cycles and disruptions to industries, we must be courageous in investing and building our future capabilities. One example amongst the numerous is oil and gas. With peak oil expected to occur between 2025 and 2030, we will expect the subsequent decline of oil and gas within the next 50 years. Singapore has substantial investments and revenue from Jurong Island and this is truly one Kodak moment we want to avoid. Avoiding Kodak moments is only one small aspect. There is the imperative to recognise long-term trends and the ability to foresee and, most importantly, is Singapore technologically agile and capable to pivot rapidly? Does it have the ability to build strong networks of ecosystems to solve disruptive and multidiscipline challenges of today and the future? Is our workforce able to build expertise in different ecosystems and networks to spur collaboration and innovative capabilities? The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) ranked Singapore eighth in the Global Innovation Index in 2021. It has been top 10 in the last 14 years. More recently, Singapore is second on the Bloomberg Innovation Index. Looking further into the details of report from 2018 to 2020, WIPO ranked Singapore number one in innovation inputs but ranked 15th in innovation outputs.[+2 sentences] In a sub-segment of knowledge and technology outputs, Singapore was ranked 13th. To note, China, Korea and Japan ranked high in knowledge and technology output within Asia. Singapore produced less innovation outputs relative to its level of innovation investments.[+6 sentences] Singapore's education system, infrastructure, R&D environment as well as business ecosystems are our core strengths. And we rank very, very high on those categories. However, the ability to produce knowledge products and creative assets have been less than ideal. To achieve the high level of productivity we aspire, we must maximise our innovation potential and project tangible and quantifiable results. We must not forget that the science, technology and innovation landscape is constantly shifting. Taking China, for example, China's feat is dramatic. China's global share of research papers in the few of just one AI has vaulted from 4.26%, which is about 1,000 papers in 1997, to 27.68% in 2017.[+2 sentences] This is global – 37,343 papers, AI patents filed, surpassing any country in the world including the US, a position it continues to hold. China also consistently files more AI patents in any other country. As of March 2019, the number of Chinese AI firms has reached 1,189, second to only the US which has more than 2,000 active AI firms.[+29 sentences] Many countries are systematically gaining ground with China: Malaysia, Thailand, Turkey, Vietnam, India and Philippines, improving their rankings substantially in the last decade. Competition does not stand still. They are constantly on the move, moving at a rapid pace and gaining ground. This is from a whole country's perspective. But in reality, science and technology activities are centred around clusters, tech ecosystems that are usually defined by geographical areas. Some of them are well-known, like Tokyo-Yokohama, which is ranked first. Second, which Shenzhen, Hongkong, Guangzhou followed by Seoul, Beijing and then San Jose, the famous Silicon Valley at the fifth. Singapore is ranked at 29th, behind Dejan, Nagoya, Osaka, Nanjing, Hangzhou, Shanghai, Taipei. Singapore is ranked 47th in in science and technology intensity amongst the top 100 science and technology clusters. In terms of total IP following activity, Singapore ranks 28th behind Ukraine, Mexico and Thailand. The term "Start-up Nation" was title of a book in 2009 by Dan Senor and Saul Singer about the economy of Israel. The presence of thousands of start-ups and more engineers per capita than anywhere else in the world makes Israel a natural hub for innovation, best known for defence and military-inspired technologies. Entrepreneurs across the nation are now focused on building mixed generation applications, helped by government support, societal acceptance and presence of large numbers of multinationals eager to buy innovative technology from start-ups. Israeli companies are building a wide range of products and services for the world. So, from Creative Sound Blaster Cards to pioneering cashless payments and disrupting the data storage industry, Singapore has journeyed a long way since Independence. We progressed from being and having the ambition for innovation in the 1960s, built up a strong core of citizens in engineering and science, attract technology advanced foreign investments, a national plan for research and development the formation of A*STAR, our research investments into biomedical science or Independent Review Entity (IRE) plans. And more recently, our highly successful Smart Nation initiative and a formation of Smart Nation and Digital Government Office (SNDGO) to better serve Singaporeans in Singapore. Here are a few suggestions I would like to make. First, the breadth and depth for Singapore's research, science and technology capabilities together with our creativity, innovation ambitions are critical in ensuring we remain agile in a disruptive world, navigate global challenges and achieve our strategic and national goals. Today's problems are complex and far-reaching into different domains. There are significant long-term and substantial science and technology endeavours that require a high level of aggregating efforts at the highest level – MTI with a A*STAR and Economic Development Board (EDB); PMO with National Research Foundation (NRF) and GovTech; MCI with Cyber Security Agency (CSA) and IMDA. And depending on the sector or domain, it would require further participation of other stakeholders, such as MAS for finance; BCA for building construction or LTA for transport. Scientific America published an article on the need for the US to establish a Federal Department of science and technology as the STEM-related policies is administered by a bewildering array of entities which dilutes is effectiveness. It stated that the failures of producing COVID test kits, slow and ineffective rollout of COVID-19 vaccines and cybersecurity attacks on government agencies, despite multiple warnings. This reflects the central failure of agencies with science and technology ambitions to meet the challenges of the 21st century. Similar to events leading up to 9/11 in the US where organisational weaknesses were revealed in scattering of multiple intelligence capabilities across agencies and the federal government. As such, there is a need to better organise scientific efforts. More recently, the US has elevated the Office of Science and Technology to a Cabinet-level appointment with plans to establish a new Department of Science and Technology. Many other successful and innovative countries have done so – South Korea, Japan, Israel, India, Denmark. Given the emerging trends and existential nature of science and technology for Singapore's future, it may be timely to consider re-establishing the Ministry of Science and Technology to bring laser focus on making Singapore scientific, technology and innovation efforts more effective.[+3 sentences] Next, to succeed, we must keep our pace. In fact, we must double or triple our pace to maintain our competitiveness and relevance. These are important decisions and the choices that the Government takes on research, innovation science and technology will set the future trajectory for Singapore. One of the most important commitments is to increase the total R&D investment.[+1 sentence] To achieve and maintain global leadership requires sustained increase investments, both from a percentage GDP and also from absolute numbers. Given Singapore's relatively small GDP, we must aim to commit a much larger percent GDP spent on R&D to sustain and keep up with the competition to achieve at least the OECD average of 2.4% today and with a further commitment to increase 3% to 4% of GDP in the next five years.[+20 sentences] Third, for Singapore to maintain its competitiveness as a business destination for investments in R&D, the Government should review the speed and agility of business execution in Singapore and balance with the risk reward outcomes. Singapore must keep pace with decision cycle and execution agility of businesses today, especially so when added stability will reduce R&D investment risk, enabling businesses to invest in the long term and build innovative partnerships. These investments must be coherent with our ambitions to build up local enterprises, manpower and Singapore's overall capabilities. Fourth, building local R&D capabilities by supporting local research and development clusters, collaborate, partner and sharpen product and service quality locally, build portfolio and credentials locally for international markets and accelerate growth through regional and global networks. ST Engineering is one prime example. For decades, MINDEF has partnered ST Engineering to develop capabilities in-house. To release R&D and capability development, ST Engineering was able to scale and export capabilities overseas. We can build more of these such champions and there are numerous opportunities. For example, given that we are the largest customers of elevators in the world, there are opportunities to build a regional, if not, global elevator technology champion. Our Singapore water stories, one of the most compelling in the world, building capabilities and overcoming challenges, we have co-developed water technologies and there are opportunities to build a multibillion-dollar, Singapore water technology champion. We had a Singapore company that was a potential unicorn in the renewable energy for Singapore and the region. But today, we are not. Route and building technologies. Healthcare, such as COVID-19 test kits, high-tech hand sanitisers, and the list goes on. I have spoken to some entrepreneurs who have mentioned the difficulty that their products having to face immense scrutiny by local registry or authorities, the skepticism of being a locally made product and the fear of endorsing a product. I think we can do much more to build a collaborative environment that encourages partnerships to help these entrepreneurs navigate through difficult requirements and enable them to build on their capabilities. We must seize every opportunity to build long-term R&D partnerships and co-create capabilities with our local enterprises. Fifth, Singapore must be open to attract talent from across the world. In the United States, evidence shows that immigrants are often the most productive innovators and entrepreneurs. They are vital to competitiveness and fuel growth. In the United States, the National Foundation for American Policy finds that 55% of the billion-dollar start-up companies in the United States has at least one immigrant founder.[+1 sentence] These companies are not only valuable, but they employ a lot of people. Among privately held billion-dollar start-up companies in the United States, those with immigrant founders have created an average of 1,200 jobs per company in the US.[+9 sentences] The collective value of some of these 50 immigrant-founded companies far exceed the entire stock market of several countries. America's ability to attract international students foster entrepreneurship. About 23% of billion-dollar startup companies had a founder who first came to America as an international student – Slack, Peloton, SpaceX and WeWork are all immigrant founders. The American education system has embraced international students as part of the learning experience and cultural exchange, which results in more robust, vibrant and competitive landscape. Sixth, we must strengthen Singapore's skills and competencies by maintaining a strong supply of skilled workers, provide continued training and skills acquisition throughout their careers, build up alternate entry pathways for those who are doing mid-career switches and recognise the transferability of skills. This will provide the required opportunities for Singaporeans to remain agile and productive longer. It must also be recognised that present and future challenges are complex and multidisciplinary, which would require a team with diverse skills and expertise. We must stretch the potential Singaporeans to enable them over their lifetime on their own time to achieve the highest education and skills potential. It can be a diploma, it can be a degree, Masters or PhD or any other professional certifications, working experience that builds upon skillsets. According to World Economic Forum, percentage of PhDs and higher education OECD average was 1.1% with most innovative countries taking the lead, like Israel, US, Switzerland, Germany at 3%, 1.4% or 2%, Sweden and Denmark.[+9 sentences] This OECD average is set to increase to 2.3% by advancing knowledge and research across academia and industry. Doctoral students and holders can make economies more innovative. However, I want to caution that this is not a narrative about certifications but macro trend of increasing demand for skills and increasing competitive supply of skills worldwide. We must also be mindful not to be overly concerned with degrees and diplomas as we are all reminded by the likes of Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg, Sean Parker and Mark Darcy. None of them had University degrees, but a good combination of connective, interpersonal, self leadership and digital skills that set them apart from the rest. This opens possibilities across education, experience, skill archetypes, everyone that has a role to play. Most importantly, as we embark on this journey, we leave no one behind. I believe that everyone deserves an opportunity, an opportunity for a good job for every Singaporean. Every Singaporean including those who are neo-diverse. The last 18 months was the most rewarding journey for me, a journey that is proved to those who are new diverse and can hold good jobs that pay well and have rewarding careers, careers in ICT and cybersecurity, an industry with much promise. I work closely with sister Denise Phua and a team in Autism Resource Centre (ARC), supportive bosses, Delan and Casey, my teammates Zaishao, Arian and Ken Hwee, with leading cybersecurity company Ensign Infosecurity, with the support of Tammy and Steven, it was an open collaborative environment, where ARC identified neo-diverse individuals and together with Ensign Infosecurity, trained them and emplaced them in high-quality jobs and provided them with job support.[+2 sentences] The Ensign Infosecurity team also trained to make sure there was a conducive working environment for all it. It was a team effort and that was what made the difference, all of us doing a bit more for one another. From a small training pilot programme of four cybersecurity analysts a year, within two months, and because of these individuals' remarkable performance, we will now want to increase hiring by 400% from four per year to four for every quarter.[+2 sentences] When I heard that the programme was a success, it truly touched my heart. Be bold in investing in our future. Be bold in investing in our people and there will be a place for all of us.[+3 sentences] Geraldine, on your birthday, papa would like to wish that you have a Singapore that is tech and rich, inclusive and above all, kind, loving and in all we do, fighting for a better Singapore. Majulah Singapore! I support the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Miss Cheryl Chan.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (East Coast)1832 words
[+10 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, in the 2019 Budget debate, I spoke about the need for a "decent living wage" for the lower-income workers, in particular, those with young families, so that they can have more cash at the end of the month and not have to live hand-to-mouth. I am glad that there are actions since by the Government, implementing Progressive Wage Model (PWM) across more sectors, more social programmes to support these families, and in this current Budget, there are more schemes to uplift the lower-income group. This pandemic has seen our strong dependence on the essential workers in Singapore and globally. As we speak, the need for frontline workers to get us through this pandemic has not subsided. Let us remember, we need every segment in our society in good and bad times. Thus, I am supportive of the measures in this Budget that will drive us forward as a nation and help those that are more in need. Our ability to accept this and contribute meaningfully in our own way is what defines us as a growing country that keeps up with time. I see Budget 2022 as a crucial turning point as we adapt to a post-pandemic life, pivoting our industries to the new economy and learning what it takes to address nation building with our citizens at different life stages. A few things stood out for me in Budget 2022 – our strengthened focus on the green transition, building new capabilities for the future, involving Singaporeans to enable healthy ageing in place and addressing concerns on cost of living. Sir, as we seek to forge a new normal, the lingering effects from the pandemic and the lessons learnt must be taken dearly. With core inflation having risen to 2.1% in December 2021, and with the impending hike of the GST, it is only natural that the cost of living continues to bear on the minds of our people. While I am thankful that the Government uses tax rebates, cash payouts and other forms of aid to cushion the impact of the GST hike for a large majority of Singaporeans, particularly the low-income group, I would like to raise the following for consideration towards a multi-prong approach to address the rising cost of living on the longer-term horizon.[+4 sentences] First, strengthening resiliency in critical supply chains locally and globally. Supply chain bottlenecks have been a pertinent issue in 2021, exacerbating in the last quarter with a spill-over that may persist through a large part of 2022. The supply chain effects result in rising pressure on all fronts that touches the lives of every individual: from food, transport, utilities and more. With more severe weather patterns occurring globally and unstable political situations, the likelihood of an end to escalating inflation and costs are nowhere in sight. Singapore's scarcity of natural resources and heavy reliance on imports for necessities from food to energy, meant the impetus to redesign our supply chains and buffers to better weather the inflation due to shortages from time to time is critical.[+9 sentences] I am certain the agencies have thought about this, the need for diversification and the vulnerabilities of not doing so, as illustrated in the creation of NEWater and the "30 by 30" plan. But what I am suggesting is for a more concerted and focused approach by looking across the entire value chain and deepening our access of capabilities into the critical elements of each part of the value chain. In building these capabilities, a more intentional effort to scale up the number of local enterprises, bringing their expertise international and to better export Singapore's brand beyond education and governance. Due credit is to be given to Enterprise Singapore for its efforts in helping local enterprises internationalise and assisting the startups. The next steps would be increasing the number and breadth of the different types of enterprises to enable them to create a value chain with scale that can truly create an impact to Singapore's ability in being more self-reliant, especially in the strategic industries. While these companies' international growth is important to us, the larger benefit of their growth is the ability to tap on the resources of raw materials, labour and produce overseas to secure the supply for needs back in Singapore. There have been some successful enterprises like PSA, CapitaLand and many others, who have scaled its international operations over the years and are able to compete internationally. We need more of them and the group of enterprises to create different value chains that are significant to our own supply needs. To illustrate this, I would use an example of the food industry. The "30 by 30" plan today outlined the focus on the supply of 30% of our nutritional needs by 2030, but it does not include how we are looking at the food volume supply.[+9 sentences] In expanding the food supplies, we need to look beyond just basic procurement of supplies. Instead, help local enterprises to scale with partnership models in Southeast Asia or countries where there are swathes of land for agriculture, but they require technology to increase the yield. This would help to enable faster experimenting the growth of different crops and allow us for expansion in future, when our local shores are constrained by land availability. The second area I would like to touch on is to increase workers' ability to have more active incomes. Most people are familiar with the concept of active income during their working years until retirement. But with longer life expectancy and later retirement age, the challenge we face is multi-faceted. Often, we hear feedback about ageism at the workplace, a lack of work scope redesign that caters for part-time work, returnees from expatriate postings overseas that are unable to find suitable roles due to seniority and so on. As the world becomes more volatile and uncertain, the possibility of a young worker's career being truncated or relocated, due to the competitive external climate and remote nature of work is looming. Thus, I am glad that we continue to invest in the skills and ensuring our workers' relevance in the workforce. Over the years, much has been done to support the upskilling of workers through SkillsFuture and SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways Programmes. However, beyond that, what can be done to provide supplemental pathways to enable our workers to have additional income streams beyond their day job?[+3 sentences] In picking up freelance roles, it will also allow flexibility in learning new skills, augment their savings and buffer the slack in the workforce. For this, I do not mean those in the gig economy that are doing some of the freelance work about deliveries and those where we think more in the blue collar, but really more those in the professional sense, because age will not become a barrier for these individuals and professionals who choose to continue working in the gig economy after the official retirement age. In my previous speeches, I have also raised the need to provide micro jobs for the seniors and the special needs community to better allow more flexibility to provide them a sense of dignity in the road to independence. Could we consider how to expand the scale of micro jobs to fit the needs of part-time workers where women with family care duties and senior workers can also better participate in the workforce?[+8 sentences] Beyond the need for financial retirement adequacy, our ability to increase the worker's ability to have more active income till later years will enable them to be active, mentally and physically, for a much longer time and such interactions will only help lower their need for healthcare services and thus expenses. While it is not uncommon for senior executives to take on advisory roles during retirement, could this practice be expanded to a greater portion of the workforce? From the expat returnees guiding local enterprises that are looking for internationalisation opportunities or for them to mentor companies by domain expertise or their area of interest, their wealth of experience and network will benefit the ecosystem. This would involve a whole-of-society approach and a change in mindset as to how they perceive their golden years to be. From a time to enjoy one's retirement – of course, I am not saying that they cannot; they could if they choose to – to another tranche of lifestyle where there is a transfer of knowledge from one generation to another. Lastly, balancing the taxation structure and intensifying the use of existing resources. Rising cost of living also impacts us as a nation as the Government expenditures increase due to sociological changes in demographics and inflation. While Singapore's comparative advantage is in skilled labour and expertise and the ability to attract investments due to our stable socio-economic political climate, it also similarly exposes the risks we as a nation face. The recent Budget by Minister Lawrence Wong outlined new strategies in generating government revenues, primarily through progressive taxation on different income tiers.[+7 sentences] While this approach may help to enable a more inclusive and equitable society over time, we still run the risk of not being able to address the return of funds into our reserve that we have dipped into or cover the Budget deficits. Also, many of the highly skilled labour and multinational corporations are global citizens in nature. They have the ability to relocate or offshore services as long as the conditions and the new host countries are palatable. This undeniably would have an impact on our Government revenues in the long run and there will be new constraints or challenges to raise corporate taxes unreservedly. As we rethink our nation's taxation structure, it is equally sensible to be prudent in our use of funds and resources as well. This involves creative solutioning to problems, existing problems and new ones, working with existing resources and infrastructures instead of investing in new ones each and every time we think of solving a problem. In the longer term, it involves looking at the social compact and the partnerships between the Government and citizens, including the ones with private sectors as we move towards the green transition. To summarise, Sir, with Singapore's reliance on imports for resources, inflation and by extension, the rising cost of living would be a constant fixture in the years ahead.[+5 sentences] The way to more holistically manage this issue sustainably, in my opinion, is for us to adopt a whole-of-Government and perhaps even a whole-of-society approach. We need to become more increasingly sustainable for our own basic necessities and having some degree of independence for strategic resources by being prudent and intentional in our use of existing resources in solving our country's problems. I will end off with a quote from Charles Darwin: "It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one that is more responsive to change". I believe Singapore and Singaporeans have the ability to do so. With that, Sir, I rise in support of the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang)1592 words
[+22 sentences]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I will share three perspectives on the Budget. First, what this Budget is essentially about. Second, what we should do less of. And finally, what more can we do, to build up the Singapore we love. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as we emerge from the worst of the pandemic, we will have to increase Government spending, to strengthen our social compact and to create opportunities and growth. Managing the Budget is a zero-sum game. We consume public resources; therefore we need to pay for it. Yet, the idea of increasing taxes to fund programmes evokes resistance. In reality, revenue and expenditure are two sides of the same coin. To spend without regard for revenue, is not sustainable for the future. The question is how to raise revenue from taxes, in a fair and equitable way. One method is through a progressive tax system. This means that the wealthy and higher income earners will pay more taxes. This is a slight shift from previous Budgets in the direction of fairness and inclusivity. It brings to life our claims of a new social compact. But we must strike a balance. There will always be populist calls for wealth taxes. But if we push the narrative that the wealthy are responsible for driving inequality, we risk provoking resentment and jealousy, against those who may have accumulated wealth through hard work and sacrifices. This will only further polarise society. Our current revenue structure is a balanced one, where ultimately, everyone contributes taxes, but those who are richer contribute more. For the less privileged, I have raised concerns about the GST hike on previous occasions in Parliament. I shared my residents' sentiments that the GST hike should only be implemented after the job market stabilises. I am heartened that the Government has listened to ground feedback. It has not only delayed the GST implementation, but has staggered it over two years.[+1 sentence] This gives more time for the job market and economy to adapt and prepare. I have also previously asked whether additional assistance would be provided on top of the Assurance Package and the GST Voucher (GSTV) scheme. I am pleased that the Government will continue to absorb GST on essentials like healthcare and education. Permanent schemes like the Workfare Income Supplement and the GSTV schemes are also enhanced.[+28 sentences] Overall, it is a fair and comprehensive Budget with an eye for the future. But, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, doing more for our people does not necessarily mean we should spend more. Instead, we should challenge ourselves and think hard about what we should spend less on. This is quite a contrarian view, as the Budget is a time when we discuss how Government will increase spending in various areas. The hard truth is that while it is good to have everything, our resources are finite. We should reduce non-essential, duplicative and non-strategic initiatives. One tangible example is roadworks. Roads are often dug up and closed for various types of works, ranging from the installation of broadband cables, water pipes to electrical cables and so on. They never seem to end. Many of the works are certainly necessary. However, can we coordinate better amongst the agencies for a fixed period, where the road is dug up and all are repaired at that time? Moreover, frequent road closures slow down traffic, adding to inefficiencies. Another example is the numerous Government apps and websites sometimes offering similar services. The more there are, the more maintenance is needed. It also inconveniences residents who have to navigate numerous websites and install many apps on their phones. Can we take some inspiration from the UK government, which consolidated their 300 over websites into one in 15 months? Being prudent with finances is a virtue that is not incentivised enough. When a department receives a budget, the goal purportedly is to spend it all. The common mentality is that having surpluses would imply that the department did not work hard enough and need to find new areas to work on. We need to stop linking expenditure with KPIs. Ministries should not feel guilty about having excess money to return to the coffers. In fact, the Government should throw a grand challenge – create an award and recognise Ministries that best reduce their expenditure, streamline their operations and cut out non-essential projects. The savings can go to the people or be used for more important areas and social programmes. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, one important area which we will certainly need to do more for is for our seniors. We are a rapidly ageing society. The provision of minimum protections around risks like illnesses, unemployment and old age are better shared by society and the community, rather than individuals, families or employers. I have three suggestions. First, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we want our seniors to live well. One particular area is to facilitate meaningful employment for our seniors, who wish to work. I applaud the raising of CPF contribution rates for senior workers.[+13 sentences] But we need to go beyond monetary incentives. I wish to reiterate my hopes for the Government to play a bigger role in promoting micro jobs. Many Members have shared about this earlier. For example, to offer integrated search and listing platforms, with accreditation and training available for persons who may want to take up micro jobs in the community, such as healthcare assistants and babysitting. Next, focus on job redesign by allowing employers to hire and retain senior staff in the long-term. We need to look into stronger support for workplace redesign for senior workers. How many companies have made use of the Job Redesign Grants for older workers? Will the Government take on a more proactive approach to coax and compel companies to move in the right direction? Second, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, for those seniors who are frail and cannot work, we must ensure that we can better care for them. From my conversations with my residents, care navigation in Singapore has room for improvement. Today, Government agencies like MOH and MSF often focus on policy and administrative matters and devolve the actual provision of care to various social service agencies, or SSAs. Yet, some of these organisations have limited resources. They may also not be equipped to deal with clients saddled with multiple co-morbidities and complex social issues. Having choices and a lack of clear information complicates matters for caregivers trying to find the most suitable and affordable formal care service for their family's needs. We need a simple platform that integrates all available resources and service providers, for caregivers to seek out all the available options and do their own cost-benefit analysis.[+16 sentences] Ultimately, we need an integrated care system that works on the ground. This means better sharing of information, care plans, resources, networks and financial support schemes. Caregivers need only to browse this one-stop centre to have all their concerns addressed. A Yio Chu Kang resident, Mr K, confided that he gave up his career and went into full-time caregiving to both his aged parents. The burden fell upon him as he was the only son. He did not feel safe leaving his parents in the care of a foreign domestic worker, who may neither have the professional experience nor temperament to care for the elderly with special needs. He does not regret the decision, but it is no doubt a setback for his career. Most of us would agree that caregivers like Mr K should be applauded for prioritising family over career. But we should not take the sacrifices of caregivers for granted. As a society, we must do more to uplift caregivers. Lastly, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we need to help seniors at the end of life to leave well. In my past experience working in the healthcare sector, I see how people die badly. They die in pain, with tubes connected to all parts of their bodies in a sterile hospital environment, just to have life extended by days and at max, by weeks. It is a torture, both for the individual as well as for the families. We need to facilitate their departure to be as comfortable as possible, and for them to live out their remaining lives with dignity. We must push for higher standards of palliative care. Only four in 10 of healthcare professionals received training in palliative care, according to a 2021 survey.[+2 sentences] Consequently, most healthcare professionals did not feel prepared to give palliative care. The Singapore Hospice Council is doing good work and they are developing a training framework on palliative care. Will the Government provide more resources and funding to support this effort? How will the Government take the lead to improve the quality of palliative care and to generate more awareness in Singapore?[+9 sentences] In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the pandemic has posed many challenges to our society over the past two years. Our Budget is well-balanced and provides a path forward as we emerge from COVID-19. To be prudent, we should reflect on what we can spend less on – cut waste, reduce redundancies and for the Government to coordinate better. Resources should be channelled to areas where more help is needed. One clear area is in caring for an ageing population. The signs are already here. We may be an ageing society, but what we face need not be a "silver tsunami". It can be a "silver fountain" – one of vitality and productive longevity, where we all keep well, age well and die well. I support the Budget.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Leader of the House.
The Situation in Ukraine and its Implications›Ministerial Statements23 turns · 4,996w
· 38 highlighted
ministerial-statement-1829
The Minister for Foreign Affairs (Dr Vivian Balakrishnan)2071 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, we are witnessing an unprovoked military invasion of a sovereign state as we speak. Ukraine is a large country with a multilingual and multi-religious population of approximately 44 million people. It has a long history, with complex relations with Russia and other states in the region. Ukraine became independent in 1991, with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Shortly thereafter in 1994, Ukraine was persuaded to give up its nuclear arsenal, at that time the third largest in the world, by signing on to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. In return, Russia, the US and the UK, via the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, "reaffirmed their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defence or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations (UN)" – words which perhaps ring quite hollow today.[+1 sentence] Since then, the Ukraine has faced considerable domestic political turmoil, exacerbated by the separatist movements and tensions with Russia. Twenty years after the Budapest Memorandum, Russia annexed Crimea in 2014 whilst the world watched.[+12 sentences] Conflicts on the ground in Donbas have continued for the past eight years, with episodic limited ceasefires. And beginning in spring 2021, Russia massed over 100,000 troops at its borders with Ukraine. In January 2022, cyberattacks were launched against the Ukrainian government websites. On 21 February 2022, Russia recognised two breakaway Ukrainian regions and announced that Russian troops would start performing what it called "peacekeeping operations". On 24 February 2022, Russia announced the start of a "special military operation" in Ukraine. This was followed shortly by air, land and sea attacks on multiple targets across the whole of Ukraine. Russian ground forces, including armoured formations, rapidly entered Ukraine from the north, the south and the east, and have reached the capital Kyiv. While Ukraine is far away from us, we are following the crisis with grave concern. Its economic effects can already be felt here, for example, in rising electricity and petrol prices. Minister Gan Kim Yong will address the economic issues later today. But these are not the principal reason the situation in Ukraine is important to us. The events in Ukraine go to the heart of the fundamental norms of international law and the UN Charter that prohibit the use of force and acts of aggression against another sovereign state. Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a clear and gross violation of the international norms and a completely unacceptable precedent.[+7 sentences] This is an existential issue for us. Ukraine is much smaller than Russia, but it is much bigger than Singapore. A world order based on "might is right", or where "the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must", such a world order would be profoundly inimical to the security and survival of small states. We cannot accept one country attacking another without justification, arguing that its independence was the result of "historical errors and crazy decisions". Such a rationale would go against the internationally recognised legitimacy and territorial integrity of many countries, including Singapore. That is why we are a staunch supporter of international law, and the principles enshrined in the UN Charter. The sovereignty, political independence and the territorial integrity of all countries, big and small, must be respected. Singapore must take any violation of these core principles seriously, whenever and wherever they occur. And this is why Singapore has strongly condemned Russia's unprovoked attack on Ukraine.[+16 sentences] It is heartbreaking to see the heavy casualties and loss of many innocent lives, resulting from this unjustified attack and act of war. We strongly urge Russia to cease this offensive military action immediately and to work for a peaceful settlement in accordance with the UN Charter and international law. We also call for safe and unhindered access for humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and all those in need. Singapore is doing our part. The Singapore Red Cross has pledged a contribution of US$100,000 to support communities affected by the current crisis, in cooperation with the Ukrainian Red Cross Society and the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. This will provide essential relief supplies, such as hygiene kits, family kits and household kits for the vulnerable who have been displaced by the conflict. In addition, the Singapore Red Cross has launched a public fundraising appeal to support the impending massive humanitarian operations that will be needed. The Government will also contribute US$100,000 to this humanitarian operation through the Singapore Red Cross. Mr Speaker, there are important lessons for us to draw from the current Ukrainian crisis. First, whilst international law and diplomatic principles are essential, they are not sufficient. The Budapest Memorandum was supposed to guarantee Ukraine's security by three nuclear powers – Russia, the US and the UK. But agreements are only meaningful if the parties respect them and if they can be enforced. The invasion of Ukraine demonstrates how quickly a vulnerable country can be overrun, especially when confronting a larger and more powerful opponent. This is the acute reality for all small countries and Singapore is no exception. Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 and Iraq's invasion of Kuwait in 1990 are stark reminders of this. You cannot depend on others to protect your country. Thus, we must never lose the ability to defend and look after ourselves. And this is why Singapore has invested consistently to build up a credible and strong SAF and to maintain National Service as a fundamental element of our nationhood.[+34 sentences] The capability of the SAF must be undergirded by Singaporeans' resolve – the iron determination of our people to fight and die, if need be, to defend what is ours and our way of life. Without such capability and resolve, no amount of diplomacy can save a country. Second, it is all too easy for a small country to be caught up in the geopolitical games of big powers. Small countries must avoid becoming sacrificial pawns, vassal states or "cat's paws" to be used by one side against the other. In a speech delivered in 1973, former Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew had shared his agreement with Julius Nyerere, the then-President of Tanzania, who had said, "When elephants fight, the grass suffers". This is why we work hard to maintain good relations with all our neighbours and with the big powers. When situations arise, our assessments and actions are based on clearly enunciated and consistently held principles that are in our own long-term national interests. Instead of choosing sides, we uphold principles. This is worth repeating. Instead of choosing sides, we uphold principles. Consequently, we conduct our foreign policy in a coherent and consistent manner. We also become reliable partners for those who operate on the same principles. However, there will occasions when we will have to take a stand, even if it is contrary to one or more powers on the basis of principles – as we are doing now. Third, as a young nation, it is vital for us to maintain domestic unity and cohesion, bearing in mind how easily internal divisions can be exploited by adversaries, especially in this Internet age and the advent of hybrid warfare. Dividing and weakening an opponent internally, overtly and covertly, has become a standard complement to conventional warfare. Therefore, our domestic politics must stop at our shores. And I thank all Members of Parliament for adhering to this precept. And I would share that I have also shared this point with the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Pritam Singh. Fourth, safeguarding one's sovereignty and national interests often requires some sacrifice and pain. The Ukrainians are paying the ultimate price for freedom with their lives and livelihoods. The rest of the international community that is taking a stand against naked aggression through sanctions will also have to bear some pain and pay a price. Singaporeans too must understand that standing up for our national interests may come with some cost. We must be prepared to deal with the consequences, to bear the pain, to help one another and to stand up together. We continue to value our good relations with Russia and the Russian people. However, we cannot accept such violations of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of another sovereign country. We will continue to work with our ASEAN and international partners to take a strong stance against the invasion of Ukraine, and to end further violence and bloodshed, and to de-escalate tensions. We also participate actively at the United Nations. Three days ago, a draft resolution was presented at the UN Security Council (UNSC) to condemn Russia's aggression against Ukraine. Singapore was one of 82 co-sponsors of this Security Council resolution. As expected, Russia, as a Permanent Member of the Security Council, vetoed that resolution. So, the resolution was not passed even though 11 of the 15 Security Council members voted in support and the remaining three members – China, India and the UAE – abstained. The UN General Assembly (UNGA) will be debating a similar resolution later today. General Assembly resolutions are not subject to a veto, but neither are they binding. However, as a responsible member of the international community, Singapore will comply with the spirit and the letter of the UN General Assembly's decision. Singapore has always complied fully with sanctions and decisions of the UNSC, but we have rarely acted to impose sanctions on other countries in the absence of binding Security Council decisions or directions. However, given the unprecedented gravity of the Russian attack on Ukraine and the unsurprising veto by Russia of a draft UNSC resolution, Singapore intends to act in concert with many other like-minded countries to impose appropriate sanctions and restrictions against Russia. In particular, we will impose export controls on items that can be used directly as weapons in Ukraine to inflict harm or to subjugate the Ukrainians. We will also block certain Russian banks and financial transactions connected to Russia.[+1 sentence] The specific measures are being worked out and will be announced shortly. We must expect that our measures will come at some cost and implications on our businesses, citizens and indeed to Singapore. However, unless we as a country stand up for principles that are the very foundation for the independence and sovereignty of smaller nations, our own right to exist and prosper as a nation may similarly be called into question one day.[+5 sentences] I note that Dr Lim Wee Kiak1 and Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim2 have filed Parliamentary Questions on the current situation in Ukraine, especially on the steps taken by MFA to help Singaporeans in Ukraine. I would be happy to address their concerns in a clarification after this and if the concerns are sufficiently addressed, they can consider withdrawing the subsequent Parliamentray Questions and save time. Mr Speaker, in the lead-up to Russia's military operation into Ukraine on 24 February 2022, MFA had issued two Travel Advisories on the situation in Ukraine on 26 January and 13 February respectively. We advised Singaporeans in Ukraine to leave as soon as possible via commercial means while it was still possible to do so at that point in time. Singaporeans in Ukraine were also urged to e-register with MFA, so that we could render consular assistance to them. Following our first Travel Advisory, seven Singaporeans left Ukraine via commercial options before the conflict erupted. Since the launch of the Russian invasion, another three Singaporeans have left Ukraine and made their way across the border into Poland. We are still in touch with eight Singaporeans currently in Ukraine who are spread across several cities. We are aware of at least one other person whom we are still trying to contact.[+1 sentence] Singaporeans' safety remains our priority concern. MFA has been in contact with them, and we will assist them wherever and however possible. We are also exploring options for them to leave the country if the situation permits.[+3 sentences] In the meantime, Singaporeans who are in Ukraine are advised to seek shelter in place, be vigilant and to heed the advice from the authorities. Those who have not yet e-registered with MFA should do so immediately. Mr Speaker, this is a time for us to come together and to stand up for principles, uphold principles which are core to our survival, our existence as an independent, sovereign nation.
Mr Speaker5 words
[+2 sentences]Any clarifications? Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied)70 words
[+5 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker. Given that Singapore has cordial relations with the US, Europe, Ukraine and Russia, to what extent have the recent events put our efforts out of balance? And how can we maintain our interest vis-à-vis all the parties? Secondly, are there concerns that the recent events in Ukraine might trigger similar territorial incursions elsewhere, notwithstanding different geopolitical interests and settings? And how may this impact Singapore's interests?
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan532 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Giam for his salient questions. We do have excellent relations with the US, with the EU, with Russia. And of course, we have diplomatic relations with Ukraine as well. The Member's questions on balance, I would address by bringing us back to first principles: that we do not take sides, we uphold principles. And in this case, the principles at stake are independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity.[+13 sentences] And I explained just now that Singapore's foreign policy is consistent, is coherent. In fact, it is almost always predictable. And I can tell you now, from experience, from the past six to seven years with the privilege of representing Singapore on stage, is that big powers and our neighbours and middle powers have also gotten used to the fact that it is not personal, it is professional, it is principled. We take a position based on these principles which we believe to be essential for our long-term national interest. And I can also tell you, although there is no time to go through all the details now, that even in my tenure over the past six or seven years, I have had to say no, on occasion, to every single superpower. But it has not stopped us from being able to sit at the table, look at each other's eyes, shake hands, explain where we defer, why we defer and at the same time, to pursue areas of cooperation where our interests align and where our principles are shared. So, this is not new, this is not a new posture. This in fact, is a posture that we have adopted for every single year since we have been independent. And I am maintaining that tradition. The second question: are the events in far away Ukraine possibly a model and inspiration or an invitation for similar incursions elsewhere? I will not speculate where other clashes will erupt around the world except to tell you – and I am sure you are also aware as a former diplomat yourself – that we are not short of hotspots in the world. Again, I will bring us back to this fundamental point that we talked about – deterrence. For deterrence to work, first, we ourselves must have the capability to defend ourselves. Nobody else will shed blood on our account.[+3 sentences] Secondly, having the capability – the arms, the ORBAT and all the funding that this Parliament provides to MINDEF – capability without resolve, without, as I said earlier, that iron determination to fight and die, to defend and protect what is ours and our way of life, without both capability and resolve, it would not deter anyone. And there is one additional dimension: that your partner or your protagonist on the other side must also have arrived at that same conclusion – that you have both the capability and resolve to defend. That is how you secure peace in a dangerous world. In the larger point I am making, is that, yes, we are standing on principle, and yes, we may even have to pay a price, but this is a price worth paying for the future existence, independence and prosperity of Singapore.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Vikram Nair.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang)153 words
[+6 sentences]I would like to thank the Minister for taking a very clear, principled position and explaining how Singapore stands on this. I have two clarifications. The first is the United Nations has always been an important institution, at least for setting the benchmark against aggression. But would this send a message that it will be difficult to restrain big powers from engaging in acts of aggression and is there more the world community can do in this respect? I know Singapore is just a small voice in that, but is there more that the world community can do in this engagement? The second is, in relation to specific measures that Singapore may take, this will be elaborated on later, but I think it will be important for whatever we do in this message to send the clear signal that we stand against these acts of aggression and the UN Charter must be upheld.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan258 words
[+4 sentences]I thank Mr Nair for his questions. It is always difficult to restrain big powers or emerging big powers, who will always give precedence to their national interests defined on their terms. So, let us have no illusions about this. For what it is worth, having international law, having avenues of peaceful resolution on disputes, having the United Nations with its Charter, having instruments like the Security Council and the General Assembly, capable of establishing norms, capable, sometimes – assuming there is no veto – of arriving at Security Council resolutions, is valuable. [restates an earlier point]As I have said, that is why we are such staunch supporters of international law and the United Nations. We have to be, because the alternative is "might is right" or the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must.[+6 sentences] But, my point is that you cannot rely on that alone. Every country, big or small, has to have the capability and the resolve to defend itself, then to make common cause on the basis of principle with other like-minded countries. And for what it is worth, try to establish norms of state behaviour. But human history is replete with conflicts, conflicts which when you look back in hindsight make no sense, brought far more harm than any objective that was sought at the beginning, or simply miscalculations. So, again, I am making the point that for what it is worth, we uphold principles, we do not take sides. And that is the formula to preserve our future security and prosperity.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang)186 words
[+9 sentences]I thank the Minister for the elaboration and detailed explanation. I am thankful for the answers to my Parliamentary Question as well, wherein I asked about assistance to fellow Singaporeans who are embroiled in that conflict. I have two clarifications. First is, I think both the virus and violence are taking a toll on the people in the Ukrainian region. So, it is going to be a great humanitarian crisis and the refugee situation in Eastern Europe will also be unprecedented. What can ASEAN and Singapore do to alleviate the situation over there, particularly, given that COVID-19 is still raging amongst us and there would be some need to render assistance in that regard? Secondly, I am told that for small countries, we do hold true to the principle of international law and we denounce the notion of "might is right". But at the same time, we still need to know the lay of the land and navigate our way through. So, what are the implications in terms of international order, particularly for Singapore and smaller states, given this particular crisis that is unravelling before us?
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan460 words
[+1 sentence]I thank Mr Zhulkarnain for both questions. He is right; the virus and violence are a perfect recipe of humanitarian disaster, which is occurring right now. I explained earlier in my statement that the Singapore Red Cross has contributed US$100,000. The Singapore Government will also contribute to that and I am sure members of the public will also be generous.[+1 sentence] And we will work through the Ukrainian Red Cross, the International Society of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. At the ASEAN level, ASEAN has taken a stand that there needs to be mutual respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty.[+11 sentences] I hope there will be a humanitarian impulse from ASEAN as well. Specifically, for the citizens of ASEAN who may be stranded. I just want to share one little anecdote which also illustrates the point. I said that three Singaporeans managed to cross the border in a perilous time. I can say that at least one did so in a convoy together with Malaysian citizens who were crossing the border into Poland. And I thank my counterpart in Malaysia for that. Similarly, on the ground, I am sure we will continue to work with each other, look out for citizens of ASEAN and where possible, "tumpang", "gotong royong" and help one another. I think these are teachable moments, good opportunities for ASEAN to demonstrate value and solidarity with each other where it matters. The second question on what are the implications of this crisis? Well, as I said, there are multiple. First off, we already feel the economic impact and Minister Gan will be dealing with this later today. The abrogation of international law and norms is a clear and present danger especially for small states like us and that is why we have had to take such a principled stand.[+5 sentences] As I said, standing up for principle is not cost-free. So, we also have to be prepared for that. But, if the world continues to watch with folded arms, we are headed into a much more dangerous world. After the end of the Second World War in 1945 and the establishment of the European Union, I think many people thought war on the European Continent was unthinkable. Clearly, that rosy view is wrong, and you are watching, again, war on European soil in an advanced beautiful capital today. The point is if norms are not complied with and if borders can be trifled with, on the basis of all kinds of justifications and sometimes even pretext, then it will be a much more dangerous world, and especially for us. So, bear in mind that, actually, we are taking a stand not just for this particular crisis, but we are taking a stand for our long-term survival, prosperity and peace.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang)183 words
[+12 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two clarifications. One is on Ukrainians who are currently in Singapore. I would like to know how are we providing assistance to them if their Social Pass or work pass expires. Are we going to help them to extend, while their country is currently in crisis now? Does the Minister have the numbers as to how many Ukrainians are currently in Singapore, for whatever reasons? Number two, what is the proper channel for us to channel resources to help now? The Minister mentioned about Red Cross is one resource. Will the Government have a concerted effort to have fundraising efforts from the public to help the Ukrainian, rather to have multiple websites and we do not know which is the one that is approved and authorised? Also, currently, the Ukrainian President is calling for the foreign legion to help the country, for fighters to come in. If any Singaporeans were to volunteer to become a fighter to go to Ukraine, will the Government object or will the Government stop them? What is the stand on these things?
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan250 words
[+2 sentences]That is actually three questions. I do not have the figures on Ukrainians who are currently in Singapore and the passes that they are on. This is something which ICA and MHA would look at and I am not in a position to give any blanket assurances on that. I think I will also have to reiterate our long-held position that we cannot take refugees because we are one of the most dense cities or states in the world.[+7 sentences] Nevertheless, we will look at it case-by-case, depending on the merits of the particular situation. On channels, my advice would be to support the Singapore Red Cross. I think that is clear, reputable and safe. The Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies were created precisely to have a role in such conflict situations. So, I would encourage people who are minded to provide humanitarian assistance to work through the Red Cross. On the third question about the foreign legion, again, I will have to come back to principle. Singapore does not take sides. Singapore does not allow the import of foreign politics into Singapore's domestic environment. Similarly, Singapore cannot support the promotion or organisation of armed groups, whatever their justification, into other countries.[+3 sentences] Our long-standing rules and regulatory system must continue to apply. Singapore Citizens, your duty is to Singapore, to fight and die if need be, to defend our national interests and to take a long-term view of what our national interests are. So, I will leave it at that.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied)65 words
[+4 sentences]I just have one clarification for the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Will the Government be exploring the initiation of a common position on this very grave issue with the other ASEAN member states? Is that something that is being considered? Is that something that will be looked at, in spite of the challenges in doing so, which obviously do exist and that is very clear?
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan118 words
[+1 sentence]Thank you. The short answer to that is yes, all the foreign ministers and our officials have been in intensive contact over the last few days.[+3 sentences] As I have said, we recently – in fact, I think just a day ago – issued an ASEAN common statement. I will be frank and tell you that the 10 of us will have a variety of views, but I am glad that we were able to issue a consensus statement that reaffirmed mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity. I also hope that there will be cooperation on humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and, as I said earlier, also cooperation on helping each other's citizens emerge safely from a conflict situation.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Lim Biow Chuan.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten)99 words
[+5 sentences]Sir, if I may voice my support for the Government's stand on the Ukraine situation. May I ask the Minister, considering China's stand in the United Nations on the invasion of Ukraine, how would this affect our relationship with China? Second clarification is that, would the Minister be able to clarify or explain what MFA thinks about Russia's statement that they will be "putting nuclear forces on high alert". What does that mean? Would Singaporeans who are staying in NATO countries be considered safe or would there be advice that they were to evacuate from those countries as well?
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan331 words
[+18 sentences]Mr Speaker, I am the Foreign Minister of Singapore and I would hesitate to speculate as to what China's full position and actions will be. But I can make the following observations. China abstained at the vote on the resolution that was presented to the United Nations Security Council. The second point is that China has expressed some solidarity, at least more so in recent times, and some sympathy for Russian concerns. My third observation is that I believe China does hold firmly to the principle of independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Beyond that, I do not wish to speculate but I do want to assure the Member that we have been, as always, in constant contact with my Chinese counterpart. In fact, President Halimah and I were in Beijing, I think just three weeks ago. I am not even sure that the Olympic truce has expired yet and I will not be able to reveal details. But we, certainly, had an opportunity to listen to the leadership of China's views on unfolding events. But that was three weeks ago, before the hot conflict emerged. I do not want to speculate into the Member's second question about the impact of elevation of the nuclear alert. There are nuclear powers in the world. And every time a nuclear power gets into a hot war, we need to be very, very concerned. Beyond that, I do not wish to speculate except, again, to express our hope that there is so much more to lose from letting the situation get out of control. So, our hope is that restraint will apply, there will be an immediate cessation of hostilities and violence. I believe there had been some arrangements for negotiations to occur between Ukraine and Russia at the border with Belarus, perhaps today or maybe even as we speak. I hope those negotiations will bear some fruit. The Member's point is that this is a dangerous time and we all need to be concerned.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar)70 words
[+2 sentences]Speaker, I thank the Minister for clarifying Singapore's stand. Beyond declaring our principles, I would like to ask if the Government would review the ongoing initiatives and projects, whether economic, defence or cultural, with the Russian government and any of the government-linked organisations, especially for those based in Singapore, and decide after the review, what action it will take that will support the principles that the Minister had just articulated?
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan107 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Speaker, we have spent quite a lot of time already on this subject. And as I have said, we are working through the details. So, I do not want to run ahead and I do not want to engage in speculation but to just make the point that we have no quarrel with the Russian people. I think the Member was indirectly alluding to the project that we have on the Russian Orthodox Church building and I would imagine that this is a project which, in my own view, should continue because this goes beyond the politics and the conflict which is going on right now.
Mr Speaker17 words
[+3 sentences]Order. End of Ministerial Statement. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day.
Proceedings on Ministerial Statement›Motions5 turns · 254w
· 2 highlighted
motion-1828
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah)41 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move a Motion to allow a Ministerial Statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs on "The Situation in Ukraine and its Implications" to be taken now.
Mr Speaker29 words
[+2 sentences]I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of hon Members present to so move?
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Leader, please proceed.
Ms Indranee Rajah175 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, I beg to move, "That, notwithstanding Standing Order 91(2), a Ministerial Statement by the Minister for Foreign Affairs on 'The Situation in Ukraine and its Implications' be taken now." Mr Speaker, the Minister for Foreign Affairs Mr Vivian Balakrishnan wishes to make a Ministerial Statement on "The Situation in Ukraine and Its Implications". As Members know, this matter has arisen suddenly and escalated rapidly in the last few days. Ordinarily, the Budget debate takes precedence over other business. However, given that the Ministerial Statement seeks to update Members on the Singapore Government's position on the urgent situation in Ukraine, a serious security crisis which has implications for the international order, global economic outlook and also for our national economy, it would be good for Members to hear from the Minister for Foreign Affairs before the commencement of the Budget debate.
Mr Speaker6 words
[+2 sentences]Ministerial Statement. Minister for Foreign Affairs.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah)39 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Deputy Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move a Motion to take the proceedings on the business set down on the Order Paper for today beyond the moment of interruption?
Mr Deputy Speaker83 words
[+3 sentences]I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of hon Members present to so move? (proc text)]
Adjournment of Debate›Motions5 turns · 46w
· 0 highlighted
motion-1833
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah)17 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I seek your consent to move, "That the debate be now adjourned."
Mr Deputy Speaker18 words
[+2 sentences]I give my consent. . (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker5 words
[+1 sentence]Resumption of debate what day?
Ms Indranee Rajah2 words
[+1 sentence]Tomorrow, Sir.
Mr Deputy Speaker4 words
[+2 sentences]So be it. Leader.
Adjournment›Motions1 turns · 23w
· 0 highlighted
motion-1834
Speaker not recorded23 words
[+2 sentences]. (proc text)] Adjourned accordingly at 7.53 pm.
Impact of Surge in COVID-19 Infections amongst Bus Drivers on Public Bus Transport›Oral Answers to Questions5 turns · 516w
· 9 highlighted
oral-answer-2736
Ms Joan Pereira54 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Transport with the recent surge in COVID-19 infections among bus drivers reported on 15 February 2022 (a) what has been the impact on public bus transport; (b) whether this has resulted in longer waiting times for commuters; and (c) what are the mitigating measures to ensure public bus transport availability.
The Senior Minister of State for Transport (Mr Chee Hong Tat) (for the Minister for Transport)180 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, as the Omicron variant is more infectious, we have seen an increase in the number of COVID-19 cases in the community. Due to high vaccination and booster rates, as well as tight safe management measures, infected bus captains, or BCs, account for less than 5% of the total BC population.[+1 sentence] LTA and the bus operators are watching the situation closely. If we face a large increase in the number of infected BCs, the contingency plans will be activated to ensure that essential bus services continue to operate.[+1 sentence] That is the key. And this includes lengthening of bus service headways, starting with low demand bus services. Some of these plans have already been implemented, with about 90 bus services experiencing increased waiting times of not more than three minutes. Where possible, LTA and the bus operators will also deploy more double-deck buses for services with higher loading.[+1 sentence] Sir, I would like to thank our commuters for their continued understanding and support for the hard work and sacrifices of our public transport workers, as we ride this wave together.
Mr Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar)56 words
[+3 sentences]Thank you, Speaker and I thank the Senior Minister of State. I have a supplementary question. May I know if bus companies have a group of reserved drivers or maybe even recently retired drivers that they can turn to in times of need? If not, this would be something LTA might want to consider, moving forth.
Mr Chee Hong Tat224 words
[+2 sentences]Sir, I thank Ms Pereira for her feedback, her suggestion. I think that is a good point. We do have a group of recently retired and also former BCs.[+1 sentence] We have been reaching out. As Ms Pereira is aware, we are trying to increase the number of local BCs by reaching out to more individuals to join us, to take on this important and meaningful role, to be part of the public transport workforce. At the same time, we know that it is not easy to train a BC, because it takes time.[+6 sentences] So, while we try to bring back the former BCs, retired BCs, we also need time to train new ones. This is an ongoing effort. We want to do both: we want to bring in new BCs to join us, to grow our workforce for public transport workers; and at the same time, if we can bring back some of the former BCs as well as those who are recently retired, that will also help. If I may also make a call to commuters that during this period, what is very important is to keep everybody safe on our public transport system. So, please cooperate with the safe management measures, including wearing your masks on MRTs, on trains, minimise talking. These are all simple but effective steps to keep everybody safe.
Profile of Persons whose COVID-19 Vaccination Status Had Lapsed on 14 February 2022›Oral Answers to Questions2 turns · 219w
· 3 highlighted
oral-answer-2737
Ms Joan Pereira69 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Health regarding the approximately 21,800 people aged 18 and above whose COVID-19 vaccination status had lapsed on 14 February 2022 (a) what is the general profile of these individuals; (b) whether the Ministry has information on why these people do not take their booster jabs; and (c) whether there are plans to reach out to these individuals to assist them to receive the booster jab.
The Minister for Health (Mr Ong Ye Kung)150 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, amongst the 21,800 individuals aged 18 and above, whose vaccination status had lapsed on 14 February 2022, 38% are work pass holders, 14% are Permanent Residents and the remaining are Singaporeans. The Ministry of Health (MOH) is unable to ascertain the reasons for them not getting their boosters, but indications are that many of them are overseas. As for the Singaporeans who are not boosted, the majority are seniors aged 60 years and above.[+1 sentence] A common reason for not getting booster jabs is that they seldom go out, they feel adequately protected with their primary vaccination and they prefer to delay their booster vaccination. MOH will continue to encourage individuals to come forward and take their booster shots when they are eligible, using SMS reminders, making vaccination as convenient as possible and, also importantly, deploying Mobile Vaccination Teams to the heartlands to reach out especially to seniors.
Measures to Reduce Negative Impact on Intertidal Habitats Like Changi Beach due to Increased Human Traffic›Oral Answers to Questions6 turns · 777w
· 10 highlighted
oral-answer-2738
Mr Leon Perera44 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for National Development (a) what measures are being taken to reduce the negative impact on sensitive intertidal habitats like Changi Beach in view of increased visitorship; and (b) what is the Government's position on managing public access to sensitive intertidal habitats.
Mr Yip Hon Weng91 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether visitation numbers to Changi Beach have increased in the past two years and, if so, by how much; (b) what is the impact of such an increase on marine life in the intertidal zone; (c) what are the measures implemented by NParks to curb the increase in human traffic and destructive human activity to marine wildlife; and (d) whether there are plans to extend the Parks and Trees Act to the intertidal areas of beaches in Singapore to deter destruction of marine life.
The Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee)503 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Leon Perera have asked about the management of marine wildlife at intertidal areas, such as Changi Beach. Mr Leon Perera1 has also asked about enforcement efforts against marine poaching, for a subsequent Sitting. I will address Members' questions together. Over the last two years, we have observed a general increase in the number of visitors to our beaches, including Changi Beach. There has also been an increase in visitors to the intertidal zone, especially during low tides. Most of the visitors are families that come in small groups to explore the area, during public or school holidays. We are committed to protecting the biodiversity of our coastal and marine ecosystems, including our intertidal zones.[+1 sentence] To assess the health of these ecosystems, NParks conducts long-term habitat monitoring in collaboration with academics and volunteers. Recent data indicates that our marine biodiversity is generally in good condition, with little change in the composition of the marine ecosystem within key habitats since 2016.[+1 sentence] Our native wildlife species, including threatened marine species such as sea turtles and stony corals, are also protected under the Wildlife Act. For example, individuals who are found guilty of trapping or selling protected wildlife species without approval may be subject to a fine of up to $50,000, or to an imprisonment term of up to two years, or both. Over the past five years, there have been no cases prosecuted for the poaching of marine wildlife under the Wildlife Act or its predecessor, the Wild Animals and Birds Act.[+1 sentence] We will continue to review our measures to safeguard our marine species and will take enforcement action where necessary. Since 2021, with the increase in visitorship to these areas, we have also stepped up outreach efforts at various intertidal areas to raise public awareness on protecting marine wildlife.[+3 sentences] For example, NParks has deployed more officers and galvanised many volunteers to remind visitors to refrain from touching, trampling and collecting marine wildlife. Most visitors are cooperative and return the marine wildlife when advised to do so. In addition, we have put up more signs around the intertidal areas, to educate visitors on how to interact responsibly with marine wildlife. NParks will continue to step up these efforts. We are discussing with our partners, such as the marine conservation community, volunteers, businesses and the local community, on ways to manage the number of visitors at intertidal areas, in a way that supports nature conservation while keeping these spaces open for public recreation.[+3 sentences] For example, last weekend, we held a workshop with various partners to discuss how we can work together to educate visitors on Singapore's rich marine biodiversity and to better manage our intertidal sites. We are also assessing the possibility of strengthening protection for marine organisms under the Wildlife Act. As we transform into a City in Nature, all of us have a part to play in protecting and caring for our rich biodiversity, so that our future generations can continue to enjoy our natural heritage.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang)53 words
[+5 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his response. I have a few supplementary questions. Will the Ministry consider publicising where are these areas so that public are aware that these are eco-sensitive areas? And two, will the Ministry consider working with schools to better educate children on such eco-sensitive areas?
Mr Desmond Lee82 words
[+4 sentences]Yes, we will consider both measures. On the former, publicising these areas, the media have been giving coverage to the sites that have been impacted. The low tide days and times are also well-known, publicly available information, and hence, you see the crowd converging on these sites when we reach those seasons. For schools, we continue to work with our schools through our programmes to work with young people to better understand how to relate to wildlife, including in our marine habitats.
Proposal for Prohibition against Attendance Bonus which is a Disincentive for Employees Taking Medical Leave›Oral Answers to Questions5 turns · 460w
· 10 highlighted
oral-answer-2739
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang50 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Manpower with regard to the proposed legislation on workplace discrimination which the Government is considering (a) whether the Government will consider including a prohibition against attendance bonus, which is a disincentive for employees taking medical leave when they are sick; and (b) if not, why not.
The Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Manpower)230 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, I refer the Member to MOM's earlier reply to Dr Shahira Abdullah and Mr Leon Perera on 14 February, where we explained that the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP) already require employers to appraise and remunerate employees in a fair and objective manner, taking into consideration the employees' performance and contributions. Attendance-related incentive schemes that consider sick leave utilisation are contrary to this principle. Companies should therefore review and make adjustments where necessary. From next year onwards, the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) will engage and advise employers who still continue with such schemes to stop doing so. If they continue with the practice, TAFEP will recommend to MOM to take enforcement action, which could include the suspension of work pass privileges. The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness is deliberating on the scope and design of legislation to enshrine the TGFEP in law. The key objective of this new legislation is to provide a strong statement against workplace discrimination and broaden the range of actions that can be taken when workplace discrimination on the basis of characteristics such as age, nationality or race occurs. Together with tripartite partners, we adopt a range of approaches, such as guidelines and education, that are effective in addressing various workplace issues. It is not necessary to rely on legislation as a solution to every workplace issue.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon)117 words
[+5 sentences]Thank you, Sir. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. I just worry that if we just leave it as guidelines, it does not show that we are placing enough importance on this issue. There are workers that are out there who are sick, who are going back to work, so that they can get these attendance-based incentives. And I think the Government has to step in here to show that we are putting a strong importance on this issue and to protect our workers, so that at least when they are sick, they can get enough rest. I think we can do that through legislating this into the upcoming legislation on workplace discrimination.
Dr Koh Poh Koon60 words
[+1 sentence]Sir, in my main reply, I already said that from next year onwards, the TGFEP will deem such actions as contrary to the principles of the TGFEP. So, TAFEP will engage employers and recommend that they stop doing so or we will take suspension of work pass privileges as an enforcement action on employers who continue to do this practice.
Number of Foreign Remote Employees Hired by Companies Based in Singapore and Breakdown by Industries›Oral Answers to Questions5 turns · 459w
· 10 highlighted
oral-answer-2740
Mr Yip Hon Weng49 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the current number of foreign remote employees hired by companies based in Singapore; (b) what is the number of foreign remote employees broken down by industry; and (c) what measures is the Ministry taking to discourage excessive offshoring of quality jobs.
The Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng)278 words
MOM does not track the number of foreign remote employees hired by Singapore-based companies. COVID-19 has led to remote working becoming more commonplace. This may prompt many companies to consider offshoring activities to lower cost locations, particularly for lower value-added work.[+4 sentences] This is not a new phenomenon. We have seen in the past, activities such as garment manufacturing and call centre operations being offshored to lower cost locations. At the same time, our economy transformed and shifted towards higher value-added activities such as Advanced Manufacturing and Fintech. This transformation created high value-added jobs in Singapore. As an open economy that taps into the world market, we must continue to ensure that Singapore remains the preferred location for trade and investment, and we need to continue to move up the value chain.[+3 sentences] The anchoring of global companies will help to preserve and also spur the creation of good jobs. Together with our tripartite partners, we will continue to help our local workforce to reskill and upskill for future jobs and skills. However, our success cannot be taken for granted. It is critical that Singapore remains open to global trade and be welcoming to foreign manpower that complements our local workforce. This is why MOM regularly updates our foreign workforce policies to ensure a high-quality and diverse foreign workforce together with a strong Singaporean Core. If we do not strike the right balance, firms will not only offshore the lower value-added work but may also have to bring the higher value-added work elsewhere where they can form the best team.[+1 sentence] This will mean fewer opportunities for future generations of Singaporeans and is certainly something that we would want to avoid.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang)55 words
[+4 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for the reply. My supplementary question is as such: are such workers, foreign remote employees subject to foreign workforce levers such as levies and quotas, as well as CPF payments? Will there be plans for them to subject to such levers and CPF payments in the future?
Dr Tan See Leng73 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, the answer to both the questions is no. I have covered in an earlier Parliamentary Question reply with regard to the types of employees who would require CPF contributions. However, if these companies should change the context of the contracts and the agreements that would attract levies and CPF contributions out of Singapore, we will review this. But, at this point in time, to both his questions, the answer is no.
Update on JTC's Solar Deployment Scheme and Proposal for Landlord-to-tenant Solar Energy Purchasing Guidelines›Oral Answers to Questions8 turns · 1,103w
· 11 highlighted
oral-answer-2741
Mr Leon Perera52 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether JTC's mandatory solar deployment scheme can be expanded to all tenants, with JTC offering (i) incentives for tenants with short remaining leases to make up for the inconvenience and (ii) to own solar installations and lease these to tenants with the shortest remaining leases.
Mr Leon Perera36 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether there are any plans to develop a set of landlord-to-tenant solar energy purchasing guidelines and to promote such arrangements, given the mutual benefits of lower-cost rooftop solar energy.
The Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry)17 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, can I have your permission to take Question Nos 7 and 8 together, please?
Mr Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Yes, please.
Ms Low Yen Ling393 words
[+10 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. For commercial and industrial buildings which deploy solar power on a solar leasing model, the solar developers typically sell the solar energy captured to building owners who would use it to offset the electricity consumption in common areas. For instances where the solar installation is owned by building owners, the solar energy is typically used for common areas by the owners. Electricity charges and savings are negotiated between the landlords and tenants as part of their overall tenancy agreements. With this in view, it is not appropriate for us to provide guidelines on solar savings alone. Nevertheless, landlords can consider taking reference from practices established by JTC Corporation (JTC) aimed to encourage solar adoption. JTC adopts a two-pronged approach to encourage solar adoption amongst their lessees. First, JTC runs the SolarRoof programme. This was initially started to solarise JTC's own buildings. SolarRoof was expanded in 2020 to other buildings to make solar adoption more accessible for lessees, including those with shorter leases. Today, JTC's lessees can choose between two solar deployment models, both of which do not require any upfront capital outlay if JTC's appointed solar vendor for the SolarRoof programme is used.[+2 sentences] The first model available is through rooftop licensing, where lessees can lease their space to any solar vendor for solar panel installations in return for a rental fee. The second model is solar leasing, where lessees allow vendors to install solar panels on their rooftops and they pay a discounted rate on the electricity generated which offsets their electricity consumption. JTC implemented the mandatory solar deployment scheme in 2020, as highlighted by the Member. This scheme requires lessees with a new or renewed land lease with JTC of more than 15 years, and with at least 800 square metres of contiguous rooftop area, to carry out solar deployment.[+1 sentence] Lessees can adopt the two deployment schemes under the SolarRoof programme if they do not wish to own the solar panels themselves. The Member will be glad to know that JTC is currently studying even more options to push solar adoption further, especially for lessees and tenants with short remaining tenures. The Government will continue to review ways to incentivise and promote more solar adoption, including co-creating solutions with private developers and industry players, as well as work with stakeholders to maximise solar energy adoption in Singapore.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied)158 words
[+6 sentences]I thank the Minister of State for her answer. Just one supplementary question which is in relation to creating incentives to retrofit, for those that are not covered by the mandatory rule where there is a new tender or new construction, for existing facilities where there is no mandatory rule. I think in some cases, there is an issue where the landlord is not incentivised to really do a solar deployment, which may be able to benefit the tenant. I am wondering whether this is something that the Government can look at in terms of specifying guidelines whereby the benefits can be shared by the landlord and the tenant and there may be electricity generated that goes beyond what is needed for common areas. Such guidelines may be able to incentivise both the landlord and the tenant to do a solar deployment in cases where it is not mandatory. So, is that something that we can look at?
Ms Low Yen Ling442 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, I want to thank the Member Mr Leon Perera for his supplementary question. Please allow me to share that solar energy is currently the most viable renewable energy in Singapore and the Government is committed to continue to accelerate our efforts to promote solar adoption. We are on track to achieving the solar panel deployment target of two gigawatt peak (GWp) by year 2030, which is equivalent powering 350,000 households annually. In fact, since 2015, our solar installed capacity has increased by nine times to over 560 megawatt-peak (MWp) in the third quarter of the year 2021.[+6 sentences] Earlier, I cited JTC's mandatory solar deployment scheme. I would like to share that currently a total of 224 MWp has been deployed across JTC's industrial estate – 224 MWp, compared to the 560 MWp I mentioned earlier. So, it is about 40%. This includes JTC's vacant industrial land and buildings owned by JTC and its lessees. I want to assure Mr Leon Perera that JTC's mandatory solar deployment scheme ensures that the lessees, which means the owner of the building, solarise their rooftops in line with the national efforts to increase our solar energy adoption. The prerequisite for the mandatory solar deployment scheme is established by JTC in consultation with the solar vendors. For example, as per current market practice, the typical contracting period for solar installation is between 15 years and 20 years, and a minimum of solar installation area of at least 800 square metres is required for the solar deployment for this to be viable.[+3 sentences] These requirements are needed to ensure that both the lessee as well as the solar vendor have sufficient runway and skill to amortise the upfront fixed investments into the solar panel installation. Having said that, I want to assure Mr Leon Perera that any lessee with shorter lease period of less than 15 years, or even smaller rooftop space of less than 800 square metres, they can still engage the solar vendor, including JTC's appointed solar vendor to participate in the SolarRoof Programme. I also want to reassure him that JTC is currently seeking new solar vendors who are able to service shorter contract periods so that we can benefit the lessees and the tenant of shorter compact periods. And in fact, JTC is also engaging existing tenants in land-based facilities to explore the possibility of a license fee sharing model. And in addition, as part of the SolarRoof programme Phase Three tender, which was just launched in November 2021 three months ago, both rooftop licensing and solar leasing rates for shorter contract period options of less than 10 years will be made available.
Safe Management Measures for Full-Time National Servicemen and COVID-19 Cases in Camps›Oral Answers to Questions3 turns · 360w
· 7 highlighted
oral-answer-2742
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang63 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Defence (a) whether there are any COVID-19 safe management measures in place for full-time national servicemen (NSFs) who book out but are required to return back to camp before the end of the same day; (b) if so, what are they; and (c) whether there has been an increase in COVID-19 infections in camps brought in by these NSFs.
The Senior Minister of State for Defence (Mr Heng Chee How) (for the Minister for Defence)263 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Member for the question. The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) has measures to protect its personnel, including Full-Time National Servicemen (NSFs) against COVID-19 and to prevent large outbreaks. These include vaccination, testing and safe management measures (SMMs), as well as rapid containment in the event of cases. More than 99.7% of SAF personnel have received two vaccination shots and close to 87% have received booster shots. To detect COVID-19 infections early and to minimise its spread, the SAF has also instituted regular testing and SMMs, such as smaller group sizes and mask-on policy where possible.[+3 sentences] Service personnel, including NSFs, who booked out of camps are reminded to adhere strictly to SMMs even when they are outside and to monitor their health closely. Those who fall ill, who are sick, are only allowed to return to camp when they have recovered. Those who test positive for COVID-19 are to adhere to the national protocols. Even with these measures, our weekly infection numbers have increased by about 17% from the previous week, along with the surge in community cases due to the Omicron variant. Most of these cases were brought in from the community and detected through our routine tests. While there has been limited onward transmission within our camps and bases, and the vast majority of SAF personnel who contracted the virus have exhibited either mild or no symptoms so far, we are not taking things for granted.[+2 sentences] Infections have the potential to spread. We are tracking the numbers closely and remain ready to adjust our measures if necessary.
Mr Speaker34 words
[+4 sentences]Order. End of Question Time. Introduction of Government Bills. Second Minister for Finance.
Grants to Support Banks in Developing Green and Sustainability-linked Liabilities Frameworks›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 201w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-10147
Mr Don Wee36 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Prime Minister whether MAS has plans to introduce grants that support banks in developing green and sustainability-linked liabilities frameworks so as to take in green deposits to fund banks' green and sustainability related loans.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister)165 words
[+6 sentences]Businesses accessing green and sustainability-linked financing generally face higher costs compared to conventional financing. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) therefore provides grants to the businesses to help them defray the additional expenses associated with obtaining an external review on the eligibility of the project being financed, or the monitoring, measurement and reporting of the borrower's progress in meeting the sustainability metrics. On the other hand, there is comparatively less friction for banks to offer green deposits or similar products. Indeed, some local financial institutions have introduced green and sustainability-linked deposit products given healthy interest from both corporate and retail segments. These include HSBC Singapore's Green Deposit Account launched in January 2020 for corporate clients to finance green initiatives, and OCBC's sustainability-linked structured deposit for retail investors launched in September 2021. There is currently no market failure or gap that requires MAS to support green deposits with grants, as it currently does for other sustainable and sustainability-linked solutions which face additional costs or other constraints.
Standardise Service Commitments to Feedback from Residents across Government Agencies and Statutory Boards›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 242w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-10148
Mr Yip Hon Weng62 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Prime Minister (a) whether service commitments to feedback from residents can be standardised across the various Government agencies and Statutory Boards for matters requiring a simple response; and (b) where matters are complex or delays expected, whether responses can be designed to provide more transparency and opportunity for direct follow-up so that residents know when they can expect an update.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister)180 words
[+7 sentences]The Public Service places great importance on public feedback and has a set of whole-of-Government service standards in place to ensure agencies uphold a consistent and satisfactory level of service. Every Ministry and Statutory Board is required to appoint a Quality Service Manager (QSM) of a senior level to ensure that the QSM can provide the necessary leadership and ensure that feedback is adequately and properly reviewed within the agency. The response time depends on the nature and complexity of the enquiry or the feedback received. For straightforward enquiries and feedback, both Ministries and Statutory Boards are given guidance to resolve and respond within three working days. For complex issues that require further assessment and fact-finding such as making site inspections or coordinating with more than one agency, agencies are given guidance to provide a reply within three weeks. If a solution cannot be provided, agencies should explain why the issue requires further study and be transparent with the plan of action. Agencies are also required to send interim replies if they are unable to respond within the time communicated.
Enhance Public Safety on Buses in Light of Incident where Bus Driver was Assaulted by Intoxicated Passengers›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 428w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-10149
Mr Yip Hon Weng85 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Transport in light of the incident where a bus driver was assaulted by intoxicated passengers after being advised by the operations control room to stop the bus and lock its doors (a) whether due consideration was given to the safety of the driver and passengers when the advice was given; (b) whether the Ministry will be looking into enhancing public safety under such scenarios; and (c) whether the Ministry can provide an update on the installation of protective barriers in buses.
Mr S Iswaran343 words
[+15 sentences]Public transport operators (PTOs) have standard operating procedures or SOPs in place to manage incidents that bus captains may face in the course of their duties, including physical or verbal abuse by commuters. The SOPs include de-escalation procedures to be adopted by bus captains. Incidents of physical or verbal abuse are also reported to the respective Bus Operations Control Centres (BOCCs) who will activate the Police where necessary. Where commuters remain aggressive even after attempts to de-escalate, bus captains will be advised to stop the bus at the next bus stop and wait for the Police's arrival. These procedures were followed for the incident in question, where a Go-Ahead Singapore (GAS) bus captain was assaulted by two intoxicated commuters on 2 November 2021. Where a commuter could put the safety of the bus captain or other commuters at risk, the BOCC will advise the bus captain to open the bus doors so that the bus captain and commuters can leave the bus if necessary. In the incident cited by the Member, the bus captain was assaulted when he returned to the driver cabin after reminding the two commuters to put on their masks. As the attacks happened suddenly, the BOCC did not have an opportunity to provide further guidance to the bus captain. The installation of protective barriers in buses was trialled in 2018 and 2020. However, these were discontinued as bus captains had provided feedback that the glare from the barriers posed a safety risk when driving. LTA, the National Transport Workers' Union (NTWU) and the PTOs stand united in adopting a zero-tolerance approach to abuses against public transport workers. Both assailants involved in this incident have been charged in Court. One of them was sentenced to 10 months' jail while Court proceedings for the second assailant are pending. After the conclusion of Court proceedings, we will also assist the bus captain if he wishes to pursue civil legal actions against the assailants. Strong enforcement and tough penalties are necessary to send a clear signal and deter abuses against our frontline workers.
Estimated Utilisation Rates of Unsheltered Bicycle Parking Racks at or Near Transport Facilities›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 122w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-10150
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui41 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Transport (a) what is the estimated utilisation rates of unsheltered bicycle parking racks at or near transport facilities; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider building shelters for existing bicycle parking facilities to increase usage by commuters.
Mr S Iswaran81 words
[+5 sentences]The average utilisation rate of the approximately 27,000 bicycle parking lots at key transport nodes was around 60% last year. For unsheltered lots, the utilisation rate is around 55%. These bicycle parking lots can be found at MRT and LRT stations, bus interchanges and Integrated Transport Hubs. They are provided free-of-charge to support active mobility and first-mile, last-mile connectivity. Where there is space available, it would be more cost-effective to construct them under existing covers and structures at the transport facilities.
Contingency Measures at Changi Airport's Air Cargo Processing Facilities to Minimise Disruption when Ground Staff are Infected with COVID-19›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 344w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-10151
Dr Tan Wu Meng72 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Transport (a) what contingency measures are in place at Changi Airport's air cargo processing facilities to minimise disruption from ground staff becoming infected by COVID-19; (b) what are the reasons for the reported delays in early 2022 despite this; (c) how severe have been the knock-on effects to supply chains using Singapore as a hub; and (d) will Changi Airport increase operational resilience to safeguard Singapore's hub reputation.
Mr S Iswaran272 words
[+10 sentences]Over the past two years, MOT and the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) have worked with aviation companies to keep aviation frontline workers safe and ensure that our airport and air cargo facilities can continue operating amidst a dynamic COVID-19 situation. Safeguards have been put in place to mitigate the risk of transmission including vaccination, a regime of frequent testing, donning of personal protective equipment (PPE) and safe management measures (SMMs). Aviation companies, including Changi Airport Group (CAG) and SATS, have developed business continuity plans (BCPs) in the event of staff absenteeism due to COVID-19. SATS has clarified that one of the reasons for the recent disruption at its facility at the Changi Airfreight Centre was a sudden spike in COVID-19 infections among its cargo coordinators who are specialists responsible for checking and breaking down cargo pallets at the Import Terminal. This occurred amidst a surge in cargo volume in the lead up to Chinese New Year, which was about 20% higher compared to last year. This resulted in a backlog of unprocessed cargo and delays in shipments for collection by the cargo agents and disrupted the smooth flow of goods in and out of Singapore. According to SATS almost all the cargo received between 26 January and 3 February has either been collected by the cargo agents or is ready for collection. For the remaining cargo, SATS has finalised the status of the shipments with freight forwarders. SATS will assess all claims and work closely with its insurers on possible compensation. The key aviation companies have been asked to review and further strengthen their BCPs to enhance their operational resilience.
Data on Take-up Rates on Reverse Mortgage Tie-Up between CPF and DBS›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 270w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-10152
Ms Joan Pereira69 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Prime Minister with regard to the reverse mortgage tie up between CPF and DBS to help seniors unlock equity from their private homes while they continue to live in them (a) whether the Government has data on the take-up rates since it was offered; and (b) whether the Government will implement measures to promote reverse mortgages and increase awareness among these seniors who are asset-rich but cash-strapped.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister)201 words
[+10 sentences]The DBS Home Equity Income Loan is a reverse mortgage product that allows homeowners to borrow against their fully paid private residential properties. The loan proceeds will be used to top up their CPF Retirement Sums which will be used for the CPF LIFE1 scheme, allowing them to receive monthly payouts for as long as they live. Since its launch in August 2021, we understand DBS has approved most of the reverse mortgage applications it has received from eligible private property owners. We are unable to share specific data on the take-up of the product as the information is commercially sensitive. The Government offers a range of housing monetisation options. All homeowners can consider renting out the property or a room for rental income, or right-sizing. HDB owners who right-size may enjoy a cash bonus through the Silver Housing Bonus scheme. Eligible HDB flat owners can also unlock the value of their properties by selling back part of their lease to HDB under the Lease Buyback Scheme. Homeowners can access information on these housing monetisation options on HDB's website. The Government will continue to review our policies to ensure Singaporeans have suitable housing monetisation options, especially to meet their retirement needs.
Findings on Need and Demand for Night-time Childcare in Low-income Families Area›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 183w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-10153
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang47 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what are the Ministry's findings from its assessment on the need and demand for night-time childcare, particularly in areas where low-income families reside; and (b) when will the findings be available if the assessment is not yet complete.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M136 words
[+6 sentences]As part of the nation-wide scale-up of Community Link (ComLink) to support families with children living in rental housing, we have been conducting needs assessment surveys to better understand the families' needs and aspirations. A number of families we surveyed mentioned that they had to care for family members, including young children. For these families, caregiving support could enable them to find work or take up full-time jobs. However, the number of families who need caregiving support varies across ComLink towns and it is also not clear that night-time childcare is the preferred model across the board. Thus, we will need to explore possible approaches to meet the needs of those requiring caregiving support beyond regular hours. For caregiving needs during regular working hours, parents can access centre-based childcare services which are available in all towns.
Policy for Patients under MediSave 700 Scheme to be Treated at Only One Hospital›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 133w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-10154
Mr Leon Perera41 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Health (a) whether it is a prerequisite for qualification under the MediSave700 scheme that all of a patient's conditions must be treated at only one hospital; and (b) if so, what is the reason for this policy.
Mr Ong Ye Kung92 words
[+3 sentences]Patients who seek treatment at multiple medical institutions for their chronic complex conditions are eligible for the $700 limit. We are working to enhance our claims system to automatically identify patients who are receiving treatment for different Chronic Disease Management Programme (CDMP) conditions at different medical institutions within the year. In the interim, patients with complex chronic conditions and who are unable to use up to $700 a year from their MediSave for their treatment can call the Healthcare Hotline at 1800 222 3399 to request for the higher $700 withdrawal limit.
Proposal to Study Effects of Ban on Third Party Puppy and Kitten Sales under Lucy's Law in England›Written Answers to Questions2 turns · 273w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-10155
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang56 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry will consider studying the effects of the ban on third-party puppy and kitten sales under Lucy's Law in England; (b) if so, whether the Ministry will consider implementing a similar law in Singapore which is adapted to our local context; and (c) if not, why not.
Mr Desmond Lee217 words
[+11 sentences]Lucy's Law was recently passed in England in April 2020. Hence, it is too early for us to assess its effectiveness on improving animal welfare, and its impact on the pet industry. NParks will consider regulatory developments in other jurisdictions, including Lucy's Law, when it reviews its regulations to safeguard animal welfare. In Singapore, we are similarly concerned about the welfare of pets that are bred and sold. NParks has a licensing framework in place to safeguard the health and welfare of animals at pet breeders and pet shops. In October 2021, NParks announced tightened licensing conditions for pet breeders to raise industry standards and improve the health and welfare of animals. To ensure traceability and compliance with licensing conditions, NParks conducts regular inspections on licensed pet breeders and pet shops. NParks also investigates reports of unlicensed pet breeding and sales, and also takes enforcement action against the offenders. With this regulatory framework in place, NParks does not see the need to introduce a ban on third-party puppy and kitten sales at this juncture. NParks will continue to review regulations under the Animals and Birds Act with relevant stakeholders to ensure that they remain effective in safeguarding animal health and welfare. Should the public come across animal welfare breaches, they should report them to NParks for investigation.
Body Mass Index Data in Students' Report Books and Measures to Assist Students with Weight and Body Image Issues›Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer Not Answered by End of Question Time2 turns · 354w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-na-10123
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye74 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Education in light of reports by health experts which find that physical development markers such as the Body Mass Index (BMI) can have a negative impact on a child's mental well-being (a) whether BMI data can be sent to school health services for follow-up instead of being listed in the student's report book; and (b) what is being done in schools to assist students with weight and body image issues.
Mr Chan Chun Sing280 words
[+10 sentences]Schools measure the height and weight of students twice a year to monitor their physical development, using Body Mass Index (BMI)-for-Age norms set out by the Health Promotion Board (HPB). Following the measurements, students outside the healthy range for physical growth are supported by the school to focus on healthier behaviours using strategies such as journaling, goal setting and action planning in physical activities and nutrition to bring about gradual improvement in BMI. Severely overweight and severely underweight students are referred to the HPB's Student Health Centre (SHC) for medical assessment and counselling. Schools recognise the importance of working with parents to enhance their child's holistic development and well-being. Hence, schools may reflect many indicators, not just academic indicators, but also conduct, attendance, CCA records, physical fitness test results and BMI weight indicator in the Holistic Development Profile report to inform students, update and seek their parents' support in reinforcing the holistic development of their children at home. Our schools adopt a holistic health promotion approach to improve the overall well-being of students, and to encourage them to lead an active and healthy lifestyle. Through physical education lessons, students are taught good health habits such as healthy eating, and regular participation in sports and exercise to lead an active lifestyle. Our Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) curriculum equips students with age-appropriate knowledge and skills to help them build positive body image and healthy self-esteem. Students learn to appreciate their strengths and understand the developmental changes that they experience as they grow. They also learn that their sense of worth does not need to depend on external affirmation, but can be anchored on their understanding of themselves and their intrinsic qualities.
Recovery Areas within Dormitories for Migrant Workers Infected with COVID-19›Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer Not Answered by End of Question Time2 turns · 202w
· 0 highlighted
written-answer-na-10125
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang48 words
[+1 sentence]asked the Minister for Manpower (a) where do migrant workers who are living in dormitories recover when they are infected with COVID-19; (b) what is the current capacity of such facilities or arrangements; and (c) whether there are plans to increase the capacity of such facilities or arrangements.
Dr Tan See Leng154 words
[+8 sentences]MOM has put in place a Dormitory Recovery Programme that mirrors the COVID-19 recovery in the community. Fully vaccinated COVID-19 positive workers who are asymptomatic or with mild symptoms recover in dedicated recovery facilities. Migrant workers who are at a higher risk of severe disease are conveyed to appropriate healthcare facilities such as the hospitals for medical care. We had set up recovery facilities and specifically re-purposed them from dedicated blocks in certain dormitories and segregated from workers who are not infected. COVID-19 positive workers in these recovery facilities monitor their vitals thrice daily and have access to medical services at regional medical centres or 24/7 telemedicine consultations. Mobile clinical teams may also be deployed to further augment medical care, when required. We have stood up sufficient recovery beds to accommodate COVID-19 positive migrant workers. We are monitoring the situation closely and are able to add to the capacity of recovery facilities as needed.
[+15 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. The past two years had us tackling the immediate challenge of protecting lives and livelihoods during the pandemic while building on the foundations of an economically vibrant, socially cohesive and sustainable Singapore for us to call home. In many countries, the pandemic had exposed cracks and divisions within society. There are those against being masked, as well as anti-vaxxers, voicing out against measures amidst the pandemic. What made us different? The difference was our coming together as a united society, helping each other in these exceptional times. We understood we had a responsibility and the part to play for the greater good of public health. Volunteers reached out, especially to seniors staying-alone, encouraging vaccination and ensuring the seniors do not feel isolated amidst the pandemic. Grassroot organisations distributed care packs, masks, assisted in COVID-19 Support Grants and organised career fairs for those that lost their jobs. Private organisations such as Ghifari Network, helped to obtain and distribute care packs including for the migrant workers. Industries supported each other such as aerospace workers supporting vaccination centres. Companies took in mid-career workers switching from challenged industries through the SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways Programme. There are many more instances where things could have been much worse, but by coming together and helping one another we have emerged from this pandemic stronger. However, there remains many challenges ahead. The situation in East Europe reminds us peace is fragile. The global economy is more competitive and digitalised.[+1 sentence] Climate change continues to threaten the world. We are one of the fastest ageing populations in the world with one in four Singaporeans above the age of 65 by 2030.[+16 sentences] As we emerge from this pandemic, we must position Singapore for the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. We are at an inflexion point in our history. It is for us to define how we want to grow as a society in this next phase. We must reaffirm our commitment for progress in an inclusive society. We must continue to impart the right values to the next generation. Our ageing population would increase the demand for healthcare and social care. How do we, as a society care for our seniors? How do we, support our less-privileged families and our low-wage workers? How do we continue to improve the lives of all Singaporean by growing our economy and staying relevant in an increasingly competitive global economy? How do we manage work-life harmony in a future work environment that blurs the line between work and home? How do we contribute to global efforts in tackling climate change? These are all pertinent questions we must answer but our means to provide resources for these will come under great strain as the ratio of our working population supporting aged dependents decreases. We can only get through this stronger if we remain united, helping and working together to ensure that the outcome is greater than the sum of all our efforts. Mr Speaker, Sir, this is a balanced Budget. We continue to provide support for workers, businesses and households in tackling the immediate challenges due to the pandemic while positioning ourselves to be future-ready by continuing our journey in transforming our businesses, developing new capabilities and investing in our people. This Budget also reaffirms our societal commitment towards inclusive growth: caring for our seniors, assisting our low-wage workers and preparing for increased healthcare and social care needs. Do we leave individuals to find their own way, or do we as a society collectively agree to provide stepping ladders for those in need? That being said Mr Speaker, Sir, I do worry that this is our third consecutive year running a Budget deficit and we will be digging into our reserves yet again.[+4 sentences] I have a few points for clarification. Firstly, on GST and how can we protect our residents by preventing profiteering from the GST increase? Secondly, in light of the challenges ahead, how do we remain relevant in the global economy and drive sector-specific industry transformation? And thirdly, how do we ensure inclusive growth for all? One of the concerns that has been echoed by residents is how do we prevent businesses profiteering from the GST increase at the expense of the consumers?[+3 sentences] A Pasir Ris resident, Mr Wong, shared that he worries businesses will increase prices disproportionately at each GST hike in 2023 and 2024. The outcome will result in a disproportionate increase in cost that is borne only by the end consumer. How can we prevent businesses from passing costs straight to consumers instead of everyone shouldering a bit of the pain? Can I also seek clarification from the Minister on how the Committee against Profiteering will be implemented and how will it address concerns of businesses perceived to be profiteering from the GST increase?[+17 sentences] How can the Committee against Profiteering identify the singular cause of price increase and hence, identify businesses profiteering from GST in light of increasing cost of supplies, rental, labour, energy in addition to the step increases in GST? How can we ensure the committee is effective in protecting our residents? Moving beyond GST, in light of our future challenges, how do we remain relevant in the global economy and drive sector-specific industry transformation? It was previously mentioned that the Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) will be refreshed by this year to meet the accelerated changes brought about by the pandemic. What is the progress of the ITM refresh? And given that in this year's Budget, a lot of additional resource is provided to bring about business transformation, how do we ensure companies develop capabilities in line with the refreshed ITMs to take full advantage of the opportunities available in the industry? How will the economic transformation efforts be integrated more closely with the National Research, Innovation and Enterprise (RIE) 2025 plans? Will the ITM Refresh consider workplace transformation and specifically address the upskilling, retraining and hiring of mature workers, workers with disabilities and other vulnerable workers for an inclusive transformation of the industries? How can we leverage on the 811 company training committees (CTSs) set up by NTUC and its affiliated unions to identify the training and skills workers need to keep up with the transformation. Will there be a clear direction on how to enhance sustainability efforts in our ITM Refresh? For example, in the aerospace ITM Refresh, what will be our direction on sustainability activities such as sustainable aviation fuels, electric hydrogen or hybrid propulsion. How will electric vehicles feature in our land transport industry transformation? As we position ourselves for the challenges and opportunities ahead and transform our industry, I am heartened that in this Budget, we have provisioned significant resources to renew and strengthen our social compact. Our efforts to uplift low-wage workers have been ongoing for the past decade and I believe we can continue to do more to support our low-wage workers. It is important to ensure that productivity continues to improve so that wage growth is sustainable. If real productivity is not achieved, there is a risk wage growth would drive up costs and make us less competitive in the global market. The key to sustainable wage growth is upgrading workers' skills to ensure our workers maintain a good job, earn a good wage and have the opportunity to earn more. In this Budget, we have apportioned significant resources such as $200 million for building digital capability and increasing the capacity at Polytechnics and ITE centres to engage in technology. We will also invest in an additional $100 million to support NTUC to scale up CTCs and introduce new grants to support transformation plans.[+4 sentences] How can we encourage and support SMEs to transform their businesses so that lower-wage workers can be deployed more productively, with more scope for progression? How can we get business associations to support more SMEs? I am heartened that Progressive Wage Model (PWM) will be extended and wage increase for low-wage workers will be co-funded under the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme. This will be further boosted by the Enhance Workfare Income Supplement Scheme. The qualifying monthly income cap for this scheme has been raised, age eligibility has been extended and the payouts increased especially for people with disabilities.[+19 sentences] While Companies transform to drive real productivity growth, how do we encourage low-wage workers to continuously upskill and upgrade? Can we consider a yearly workfare income supplement "bonus" or tiered supplement scheme if the worker utilise his SkillsFuture credit or attend training and courses yearly to upgrade himself or herself? Disadvantaged platform workers also need assistance to meet their housing and retirement needs as well as with getting an adequate amount of baseline coverage for work injuries. Will MOM be able to provide an update on discussions at the Advisory Committee on Platform Workers? Inclusive growth should create opportunities for seniors, workers with special needs and those with caregiving responsibilities. With the increasing prevalence of Flexible Work Arrangements including work hours, how will MOM encourage employers to sustain these arrangements? Can we create second careers for our seniors who are still able and willing to work but do not want to work full-time? Can the Ministry consider promoting flexible work arrangement, flexible work hours and work-sharing to create opportunities for these individuals? Even as we make adjustments to foreign worker policies, to increase its effectiveness, we must progress on fair employment opportunities. How are we progressing at legislating TAFEP guidelines to ensure fair employment practices and treatment at the workplace? Beyond supporting our workers, we must also ensure that students from all background are given equal opportunities to excel in the skills-based economy. How is our education system preparing our students for employment in a skills-based economy? For students in our ITEs and Polytechnics, can MOE consider apprenticeship schemes where students can work with experienced staff from industry partners, learning job-specific skills and gaining applied competency? Mr Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): In the future, Singapore will face an ageing population, with one in four Singaporeans above the age of 65 by 2030. We also believe that we need to continue to help senior citizens and less fortunate families in our society. This means that our healthcare and social needs will increase, while the resources required to support the increase will be limited. I am heartened that this Budget shows that we remain committed to inclusive economic growth. The KidSTART and UPLIFT programmes will be expanded further to help more underprivileged students. The Progressive Wage Model will be extended to other industries and wage increases for low-wage workers will be co-funded under the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme.[+2 sentences] The Workfare Income Supplement scheme will also be enhanced. The qualifying monthly income cap for the scheme has been raised, the age eligibility has been extended and the payout increased especially for persons with disabilities. These programmes, among others, aim to ensure a fair and inclusive Singapore. This Budget is a balanced budget, which provides support to workers, businesses and households to tackle the challenges due to the pandemic, and at the same time, it also prepares us for a more challenging future by transforming our businesses, developing new capabilities and investing in our people. However, several areas can be improved: The first is how the "Committee Against Profiteering" can prevent businesses from profiteering from the GST hike. Second, in light of future challenges, how do we remain relevant in the global economy and drive sector-specific industry transformation via the Industry Transformation Maps? Third, we must continue our journey towards inclusive growth by providing assistance for platform workers, providing job opportunities for senior citizens who still wish to work and special needs workers and, and also address workplace discrimination through TAFEP legislation.[+4 sentences] (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, this is a balanced Budget. it provides support to workers, businesses and households in tackling the immediate challenges brought about by the pandemic while positioning ourselves to be future ready, by continuing our journey towards transforming our businesses, developing new capabilities and investing in our people. I am heartened that we continue to invest in our people and strengthen our social compact. We have always committed ourselves towards inclusive growth and we will continue to do so. Notwithstanding the clarifications above, I rise in support of the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied)1425 words
[+23 sentences]In the concluding paragraphs of the Budget Statement, the Finance Minister highlighted how various sectors of Singapore society rose to the challenges posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. He applauded the Singapore spirit, as seen from frontline workers to those who set up community care facilities to the footballers and fans at the AFF Suzuki Cup semi-final. He was emphatic that Singapore would always prevail so long as we stood side by side in solidarity with one another. There is nothing to disagree with this. That said, two years on into the pandemic, it is appropriate to start evaluating how governments and people across the world responded to the pandemic, not just in terms of the health and economic impacts, but also what lessons or hints can be drawn about a nation’s culture and innovative potential. One analysis early on into the pandemic studied how 57 countries around the world responded to the pandemic. This study was published early last year in The Lancet by Prof Michele Gelfand, a cultural psychologist at the University of Maryland, USA and several colleagues. Prof Gelfand divided the countries based on whether they had “tight” or “loose” cultures. Thus, for instance, countries like China and Singapore were classified as having tight cultures, in that our societies tended to be highly respectful of rules and norms; contrast this with a country like the United States, where people tended to defy them. She observed, unsurprisingly, that loose countries had more difficulties enforcing social distancing measures due to the attitude of the people to rules; this in turn was associated with more COVID-19 deaths and serious illness in loose countries compared to tight countries. To be clear, these findings were more about the culture of the people rather than what the state did. For us here, classified as a tight culture, Singaporeans have fared well to comply with rules and guidance; this has contributed to keeping the overall health impacts of COVID in Singapore at a relatively manageable level. In talking about Prof Gelfand’s study some months later, CNN anchor Fareed Zakaria went further. He noted that as the COVID-19 pandemic raged on, the development of vaccines shed another dimension on tight and loose cultures. He observed that some of the loosest countries, which fared poorly in managing the pandemic through social distancing measures, were the most innovative and dynamic at developing, procuring and distributing the vaccine. These loose countries included the United States, Britain, Israel and Chile. Mr Zakaria posited that the very traits that made it hard to follow social distancing rules, were the ones that helped generate the solution to the problem. He concluded that these loose countries benefitted from the creativity, risk-taking and rule-breaking that was endemic in their people. Today, it is clear how these solutions have benefited humankind across the globe. While Singapore has done relatively well in the pandemic for health outcomes, it would be opportune to do a stock-take of how we did to invent or create solutions for COVID-19. On the one hand, there are some indications of significant breakthroughs. For instance, it was reported that a Singapore team from Duke-NUS had developed a COVID-19 neutralising antibody test kit, which was the first of its kind to get approval from the American Food and Drug Administration. Another example is the COVID-19 PCR test kit developed by DSO National Laboratories, that did not require reagents to process samples. On the other hand, despite some initial hype, the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) has yet to approve for public use any Singapore manufactured vaccine or Antigen Rapid Test kit for home use, arguably two of the most critical resources needed in the pandemic.[+2 sentences] Speaker, a lack of locally manufactured solutions is not just a matter of national pride. We have experienced first-hand how, in a global pandemic, needing to procure supplies from abroad subjects us to market forces and has resulted in supply shortages. On a related note, the Budget Statement highlighted that the mRNA vaccine manufacturer, BioNTech, will establish a manufacturing facility here.[+5 sentences] I also note the recent announcement that work has started on a new vaccine manufacturing facility at Depot Road by Hilleman Laboratories. This facility is part of efforts by the Economic Development Board to strengthen capabilities across the biopharmaceutical manufacturing value chain. These are reassuring developments. Nevertheless, we should strive to move up the value chain, to be the owners of such intellectual property. This raises the more general question: what is the state of Singapore’s capacity to innovate? According to the Global Innovation Index 2021 published by the World Intellectual Property Office, Singapore ranked overall eighth globally, and has been in the top 10 list for more than a decade.[+3 sentences] When one drills down further to why Singapore is ranked highly, we see that this is mainly due to its institutions and market and business sophistication. We did not fare so well in the area of Creative Outputs and Knowledge and Technology Outputs. For a high income country, we were ranked especially weak in the areas of Knowledge Creation and the Registration of Trademarks and Industrial Designs. For the 2021 ranking, it is notable that South Korea shot to fifth position and overtook Singapore.[+11 sentences] The report highlighted that countries like South Korea were particularly active in commercialising and patenting inventions in health-related technologies during the pandemic. South Korea was especially strong in registering patents, trademarks and industrial designs. Sir, we should do some introspection on why we seem to be somewhat lagging in the area of Creative Outputs and Knowledge and Technology Outputs. As a high-income country, we can contribute more to improve the quality of life for humankind. Do we need to do more to nurture creativity and risk-taking? Are there other inhibitors in Singapore’s ecosystem that need to be addressed? These need constant review. Sir, the other point I wish to make today concerns inclusivity of the Budget Statement. Budget 2022 is entitled “Charting Our New Way Forward Together”. If one looks at its coverage, it does indeed provide measures that support a broad church – from business to households and workers. It also imposes increased obligations on the more able to contribute more to the public purse, while accelerating salary increases for many low-wage workers. On GST, my Workers’ Party colleagues have explained why we do not think the GST hike is necessary.[+1 sentence] For my part, I will just make an observation on the household illustrations used in the Budget Statement on the expected impact of the GST increase. From paragraphs 286 to 287 of the Budget Statement, and also Annex F-3, there are four household scenarios highlighted. It will be noted that all the households comprise of a wedded couple living in an HDB flat, mostly with children; if the couple is of working age, the husband is always older and always earns more than the wife.[+5 sentences] There is a further assumption that all household members are Singapore Citizens. To be fair, the Ministry may have used them because the scenarios are typical. However, these illustrations may inadvertently alienate Singaporeans whose households do not fit into the traditional structure. They also reinforce the stereotype of the man being the major breadwinner. In addition, these households may experience less severe impacts from the GST increase than other types of households, due to more offsets. I wonder if the Ministry could, in future, be broader in its illustrations to capture some other types of households. Such other types of households, which are not uncommon, include divorced families, families with a foreign spouse and adult singles living with elderly parents.[+7 sentences] In addition, from a gender perspective, I feel that there is no need for the illustrations to stipulate the amounts earned by husbands and wives separately. Instead, the indication of the combined household income would suffice. By including some other types of households, we can have a fuller picture of the impact of tax changes on different segments of society. More importantly, I believe including them would have an important signalling effect that every household, whatever its composition, is part and parcel of the Singapore compact. Sir, to conclude, I have spoken today on how the COVID-19 pandemic has tested countries not just in terms of how to contain the virus, but also pointed to the environments which appear to promote the finding of inventive solutions. Singapore would do well if it finds a balance between tightness and looseness. I have also made an observation about the household illustrations used in the Budget, which in my view could be more inclusive.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang)2058 words
[+20 sentences]Mr Speaker. First, let me just say thank our Finance Minister Lawrence Wong, as well as the team from MOF for putting up this particular Budget that is forward-looking as we move towards the post-pandemic phase to build a greener, as well as more inclusive Singapore. During the last financial crisis in 2008, the Government dipped into our national reserves to support the economy and the amount utilised was probably returned when the economy rebounded strongly, post-crisis. This time, the Government has again deep into our national reserves for the pandemic, and the amount utilised is actually much larger compared to the last crisis. Using the same lyrics that was from last year's National Day song – that "we did it before and we'll do it again" – or just wondering whether will the Government be doing it again, and how and when the Government will be able to recoup and return the drawdowns that have been made during the pandemic so that we can return the reserves to our future generations. I will focus my speech now on three areas that affects the poor, the rich and all. First, inflation. Second, the tax system. Last, clean energy. On inflation, we are already feeling the pinch of inflation even before the Budget statement was made. The rise in petrol prices, the higher electrical tariffs, supply chain disruption, higher labour costs arising from the pandemic have triggered across-the-board rise in the cost of living. HDB resale price went up, private property prices went up. Public transport fares were increased last year. School bus transport fees were increased. Childcare services fees were also increased and taxi fares are all going up. Cooking oil and eggs prices are also moving up. Even throwing rubbish cost for now, as refuse removal fees was increased; and soon, even the plastic bags will cost some money, if you collect plastic bags from the supermarket. And having a sugary drink itself may cost more if the Government decides to implement a sugar tax. Inflation is making in-roads into the pockets of the man-on-the-street, especially the lower socio-economic groups. We have heard rumblings of higher cost of living as the people struggle to adjust with the cost to the loss of purchasing power. Salaries, if there had been any increases at all, are unable to fend off the rise in the cost of transport, cost of food, as well as other essential household items and healthcare services. And this Budget, we will see a higher GST next year, a higher carbon tax next year, which fuel inflation to an even higher level. The combined effects of the trio – GST increase, carbon tax increase and wages increase – cannot be underestimated.[+2 sentences] The cost of running businesses is rising rapidly, although there are various packages from the Government to cushion the impact on the operational overheads. Yes, under the 2012 Progressive Wage Model (PWM), the salaries of local lower-wage workers were increased. Employees' salaries went up by 3.3% in 2021 compared to 3.6% in 2019 and it is expected to rise by 3.5% in 2022, according to Mercer's 2021 Total Remuneration Survey (TRS). However, Singapore's headline inflation in 2021 was 3.9% to 4%.[+15 sentences] So, these numbers show how inflation is eating into the worker's income. GST was first introduced in 1994, with a 3% rate. Headline inflation then was 3.1% in 1994, and it dipped to 1.7% in 1995. MAS allowed the currency to appreciate steadily during this phase. This helped to contain overall domestic inflationary pressures. I take reference from the MAS "50 Years of Inflation Experience in Singapore" that was published by Macroeconomic Review October last year. In 2003, GST was raised to 4% and again to 5% in 2004, and it was up again from 5% to 7% in 2007. In the latter half of the 2000s, exchange rate policy was generally tightened as Singapore's headline inflation rose rapidly, from 0.5% to 6.6% in 2008. This increase was attributed to the backdrop of strong global commodity prices and also partly due to the China's rapid economic growth and other emerging economies. According to MAS, this was estimated to add around 0.4% to 0.5% to headline inflation each year in 2007 and 2008. During this period, the price of crude oil increased significantly due to heightened uncertainty, leading to a short bout of high inflation. In 2008, the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose above 5% for two months due to skyrocketing gas prices – sounds déjà vu again. By the third quarter of 2008, the effect of the US banking crisis impacted our economy. This resulted in Singapore being hit by recession. By allowing our Singapore currency to appreciate, it will help to cushion the inflation of imported goods and services but it will also harm our businesses by making our exports more expensive and reduce our competitiveness. While Singaporeans note that the Government has an offset package in place to cushion the effect of the GST rise, they argued that this offset package is only temporary.[+28 sentences] The inflationary effect on the cost of living is permanent. And they worry for their children and grandchildren having to live with this high costs. And, for businesses, their biggest overheads – wages, rental and property prices, only go one way – they will go up. Once business costs go up, this will also affect all consumers. Are we chasing our own tail? As we push for more wage increase for Singaporeans especially the lower-income group, business cost will also have to go up and inflation will increase and erode the purchasing power of these workers. Mr Speaker, I am glad to hear that the Government has pledged to do more, if inflation becomes more persistent and more serious than expected. I would like to raise the question: what is the projected acceptable medium and long-term inflation numbers? If inflation goes up, it hits people's savings especially the poor, the elderly and retirees. They would feel the drop in their buying power, and everything is more expensive for them. Those with savings would find themselves digging deeper, further into their savings than before. What may previously be an adequate amount of retirement funds could now become insufficient. How are we to manage wage increases to go up in tandem with this inflation? Otherwise, the Government's efforts in helping the workers and employers with the Wage Credit Scheme would be a futile effort. We need to examine this carefully and how are we to manage inflation when the GST rise kicks in. Next, on the tax system. The big question is that is it progressive enough or is this just the beginning? Mr Speaker, I agree that progressive tax changes include the latest income tax levied. But there is one area where I feel we should take a closer look; that is the property tax. I feel that there is more room for adjustment. From the current Budget, I do not see how the Government can recover the expenses that the Government requires in the coming years in order to reduce the deficit. Recently, we kept hearing news of record transacted prices of Good Class Bungalows. Should we have done more to make property tax more progressive, especially for the top-end properties like in this category? Our tax system is based on the annual value of the property which is as I understand is computed based on the imputed rental value of the property. Because of the land area of GCB compared with a high-rise and more densely populated condominium, the property tax levied on GCB is comparatively lower. The expanse of land for a condominium would include the many facilities and car parks, but the density is much higher, even for HDB blocks. They could be paying much more property tax per square foot than a GCB. So, my question is – Singapore has only 728 square kilometres of land, of which 14% is allocated for residential housing. What is the total amount of property tax on residential property that the Government collects every year from this? And what is the distribution of this property tax going by housing type, such as GCB, various landed properties, low and high-rise condominiums as well as HDB properties?[+5 sentences] Besides this, I would like to ask whether there is a differentiation between a freehold and lease hold property in the computation of property tax? If not, why? I would like to ask about property developers who sell their housing projects on a 99-year lease basis but using their freehold or 999-year lease land. Do these companies pay any tax on the value that they are holding since the ownership of the land will go back to them after the expiry of the 99-year lease? Otherwise, it would seem that these companies or developers are allowed to hold value without paying any taxes for 99 years. Since the Government need to increase revenue to support the long-term needs of an ageing population, why were sin taxes, such as gambling, alcohol and cigarette taxes, not increased in this Budget?[+5 sentences] Increasing sin taxes will encourage Singaporeans to adopt a healthier lifestyle and help our Government to support the revenue. My last topic will be on sustainability and clean energy. I agree with Dr Tan Wu Meng on what he said yesterday. Singapore is a small city state of just over 700 square kilometres. The limited size that we have also limits the amount of renewable energy that we can harvest. Even if we put a solar panel on the whole island, we will still not generate enough energy to meet our daily needs. So, my next question is: is it realistic for Singapore to aim for carbon zero?[+12 sentences] Between land for housing, transport, security, healthcare, education and a whole suite of economic infrastructure, we also push out land for infrastructure for Electric Vehicles (EVs) in public and private housing estates, office buildings, public roads and carparks. I know we have embarked on tapping solar energy and explored many other avenues to reduce our carbon footprint, but is it enough? I know that the Government has been working to import clean energy from ASEAN and various countries. All these are fine, as long as the relationship between countries are good and stable and the supply countries do not face any disruption or any sudden domestic needs increase. With climate change causing a heightened frequency and intensity of climate disasters in our supply countries, this is a real threat. The concerns over our energy security, as well as resilience, arises if we are significantly rely and depend on external supplies. The events in Europe are a good eye-opener of how energy prices shot up amidst the disruption and the supply of gas and because of conflicts between countries. However, only France seems to be in a better place than the rest of Europe because its electricity supply is supplied by its own nuclear power plants and this accounts for more than two-thirds of its total electricity generation in 2021. In the Far East, Hong Kong, which is slightly bigger than us, about 1,106 square kilometres, gets its electricity generated from coal, natural gas and also nuclear energy. Hong Kong gets its electricity from a nuclear power plant that is in Guangdong, the Daya Bay Nuclear Power Station. I have raised this question previously before, that was before the nuclear incident in Japan occurred, whether will Singapore consider nuclear energy. I also raised this question in a written Parliamentary Question (PQ) as well to MTI earlier this year and Minister Gan Kim Yong has replied as a written reply to say that Singapore supports the international effort to strengthen the global nuclear safety as well as the security architecture. But the question is: how far are we from there? I appreciate the response, that Singapore can give some priority to review the tapping of nuclear energy as part of our option to use clean energy, to meet our commitment to the global community on environmental sustainability, technological advances in micro nuclear reactors will enhance safety, reliability as well as cost effectiveness. We need to keep an open mind and tap this option in the future to enhance our energy security and resilience and reduce our dependence on other countries.[+1 sentence] With that, Mr Speaker, I do support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang)2374 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Speaker, Budget 2022 is a step in the right direction, in many ways. Even as the Workers' Party disagrees with the key proposal of the GST hike. In my speech, I would like to talk about a carbon tax, our transitions in the petrochemicals and industry and transport, before touching on the GST impact on healthcare costs. Mr Speaker, the Workers' Party has been supportive of a carbon tax when it was first mooted. We recognise that the Government has finally thought it appropriate to raise the common tax to a level in line with international standards to help Singapore achieve a net-zero and emissions ambition. We support the move to see the common tax raise progressively to a target between $50 and $80 dollars by 2030.[+1 sentence] This is still broadly similar to the range as proposed by my colleague, the hon member for Sengkang, Assoc Prof James Lim, in his previous speeches. It will impose a temporary cause to Singaporeans, but we are of the view that when we do become a green economy, the impact of the carbon taxes will be reduced. However, I like to seek a clarification from the Minister on whether there are any efforts to extend the carbon tax to companies that emit less than 25,000 tonnes of GHGs per annum to enhance our efforts toward a net-zero ambition.[+21 sentences] I also hope that the Government will present more details on how they intend to mitigate the impact of the increase of the carbon tax on our households beyond the U-Save vouchers. Mr Speaker, I wish to further address the important issue of Singapore's green transition. This is an important subject, given the carbon taxes increase over the next eight years and to aim to achieve net-zero emissions, by or around mid-century. Although some details, such as the exact day of the net-zero achievement and of the transition framework for emissions, intensive and trade expo sectors, as well as the exact quantum of the additional U-Save rebates to help mitigate the cost increases to businesses and households, have not been released, this is a step in the right direction for Singapore. The Workers' Party agrees with the need to transit our economy to a green one as soon as it is practical. However, the Workers' Party also recognises that while decarbonisation is necessary, it will also impose a cost. This is especially so if we are to provide climate leadership for our citizens and in this region. Singapore has taken some early measures on sustainable development, such as switching to natural gas for electricity generation instead of more pollutive fuel oil, imposed a vehicle quota system to cap vehicle growth and has introduced a suite of mitigation measures to decarbonize our industry, buildings and households sector. We now have a bolder carbon tax trajectory and improve our net-zero climate ambition. Therefore, we need to think carefully about how to bring about this change and not leave anyone behind. In my speech during the "Towards a Low-carbon Society" Motion last month, I have argued that we are in need of a just transition, one that is inclusive and equips those who work here and plan to work here with the necessary know-how, to access good job opportunities in the sustainability sector. Today, I wish to talk about the need for a just transition within the petrochemicals industry. There have been movements towards a greener transition within our petrochemical industry. In November last year, Shell has announced that it is halving its crude processing capacity at its Singapore hub and reduce fuel exports. The oil major, a major part of our oil and gas industry, is intending to transit from fossil fuels to cut emissions and meet lobal low-carbon energy needs. This is part of a wider global trend in a transition towards lower carbon fuels and it undoubtedly will affect Singapore. Earlier this year, students from the group Students for A Fossil-free Future (S4F), produced a 68-page report calling for universities to divest from fossil fuels. I empathised with the concerns of these students. They have proposed that Singapore Universities seek sustainable alternatives to linkages with the fossil fuel industry and implement climate crisis education over the short, medium and long-term. However, while it is true that we do need to transition, what does that mean for the petrochemical industry in Singapore in its current form? We know that our petrochemical industry has been a strategic pillar of our industrial sector. According to a 2019 answer by MTI to a Parliamentary Question (PQ), the energy and chemicals industry contributes nearly 3% of our GDP and employs about 28,000 people in 2017, with the majority in their 30s and 40s.[+2 sentences] The number went down to 27,000 in 2020, according to MTI's answer to my PQ in April 2021. Mr Speaker, any growing resistance in Singapore against the oil and gas industry may mean a talent pipeline disruption in this strategic pillar. In 2019, Singapore was the world's fourth biggest exporter of refined petroleum, and fuels and chemicals accounted for around 23% of our total merchandise trade, according to data from the World Bank and the Observatory of Economic Complexity.[+10 sentences] We are also a regional trading centre for coal, natural gas and oil products and support dozens of finance houses that specialise in the said commodities. More than a hundred global chemical companies have operations in the city. As noted above, Singapore's linkages into the current brown economy are deep. And while we build for the economy of the future, the reality is that if we take away the manpower and capital in the petrochemical industry abruptly, we will cut the oxygen prematurely at a time when our green ambitions have only just begun. And there is still a need for some petrochemicals in the modern green economy as some petrochemicals can be found in modern solar panels, modern wind turbines and batteries, to name but a few. Therefore, I ask that the Government provide more details on how it intends to manage the green transition in our petrochemicals industry and if Singapore will continue to attract and keep parts of the petrochemicals industry in Singapore that are relevant for the green economy. In the Committee of Supply debates, I will focus on the manpower transition in the industry with the hope that Singapore will be adequately prepared for the transition so that our Singaporean workers, young and old, will be able to be optimally employed in the sector as it undergoes the green transition and that we will not need to rely on or import significant foreign manpower. Mr Speaker, I next move to some updates from the Minister on our drive towards electrification of the vehicles on our roads. Last month. I filed a question to the Minister for Transport asking for the total number of electric vehicle chargers installed in 2021 and the expected number of EV chargers that will be installed progressively over 2022 and 2025. Minister S Iswaran said that there were around 2,200 electric vehicle charging points in Singapore, of which, 300 were installed by commercial operators in the past year. In 2022, there will be more than 600 charging points deployed at public car parks under the joint LTA-URA pilot tender, in addition to charging points in other locations like private residences, malls and petrol stations. The Minister also said that LTA will continue to monitor EV adoption trends and accelerate the deployment of our EV charging network where necessary to meet our 2030 target of 60,000 charging points island-wide.[+24 sentences] The year 2200 appears a long way off the target of 60,000 in eight years' time and I would like to ask the Minister again what are the Government's progressive targets over the next few years and how does the Government plan to step up on the installation of public EV chargers. Last year, in my Budget debate speech, I also mentioned that having a critical number of charging points required in all residential commercial car parks and public car parks as well as the design of the car parks and the siting of the EV charging points are important. Singapore is unlike other countries like the US or Australia, where most people have the luxury of charging their cars in their own garage overnight. The minimum charging time, even with an incomplete charge with a fast charger, may still lead to queues in HDB or condo car parks, if there are insufficient chargers or if the chargers are inappropriately sited. A year on, I would like to ask the Minister what the Government's experience with the installation of our initial chargers over the past year has been. Has the Government done any study to establish a suitable ratio of EV chargers versus the number of cars per car park? Will the public car parks be adopting all fast chargers or will there be a combination of fast and slow chargers? Does the Government have any specific planning requirements for the design of car parks in public, private residential or commercial buildings in respect of the installation and siting of EV chargers in car parks to minimise waiting time and avoid any traffic blockage caused by vehicles waiting for charging? For existing car parks, does the Government foresee that some or all car parks may require modifications? If modifications are required, would the assistance offered by way of the current EV common charger grant to MCSTs be sufficient? Not unlike ICE cars, most vehicles, except for commercial vehicles, will not require daily charging. However, drivers will still have to develop new habits of charging their cars with some forward planning. ICE cars may need just 10 minutes in petrol kiosks. But, for EVs, queuing time aside, typically, a fast charger may take between 30 and 40 minutes for up to an 80% charge, and a slow charger may take up to eight hours for a full charge. Technology is, of course, improving constantly, but depending on the number of cars waiting for charging at any one time, an HDB car park with, say, just three to four chargers, may still possibly create queuing time not currently seen with ICE cars in petrol stations, even with charging operators charging a penalty charge for drivers who leave their cars beyond the charging time required. Will MOT consider using public education messaging on wise and considerate use of public chargers so that we can start engendering good and considerate habits with our drivers while the EV numbers are still small and growing, just as we also want to encourage our ICE drivers not to use slots reserved for EV charging? It is good to get these issues right as early as possible so that we can minimise the waiting time and enhance charging access for EV owners. Importantly, this will, in turn, have an impact on our efforts to persuade more vehicle owners to convert earlier to the use of EVs. Mr Speaker, I next move on briefly to the proposed GST hike. As I have mentioned earlier, the Workers' Party recognises the costs that the decarbonisation move will impose on Singaporeans. Therefore, the GST hike comes at an inopportune time for Singaporeans, many of whom are dealing with record consumer price inflation. I echo my other Workers' Party colleagues who are asking for the GST hike to be implemented only as a last resort. Mr Speaker, I am aware that the Finance Minister has provided assistance packages to cushion the impact of the proposed GST increases. Apart from the adequacy of such packages, I note that the assistance package is only available for a few years. As for the enhancement to the permanent GST Voucher Scheme, those with an assessable income beyond $34,000 will not be receiving any assistance, a sharp cliff where, for some, these packages may no longer apply should they earn more.[+6 sentences] I note that GST has only gone up and has never gone down, even if assistance packages will adequately cushion the impact for low-income earners and even the lower-middle middle class in the short term. The eventuality is that the GST increase will be a burden on the middle class, increasing their costs of living. And as the sandwich class, this may be something they can less afford, as compared to higher income groups above them. In particular, we need to pay attention to Singaporeans in their 30s to 50s, but the vast majority are not just paying for necessities for themselves but also for their parents and their children. The compounded pain that households will have to deal with is not something we should ignore out of hand. This is particularly so as we expect an ageing population to come in the near future. According to a Straits Times report on 27 July 2021, citing figures from Census 2020, residents aged 65 years and above form 15.2% of the resident population in 2020, up from 9% in 2010. About one in four will be above 65 in 2030 and a corresponding increase in old-age dependency is to be expected.[+2 sentences] Singaporeans will be facing more questions on out-of-pocket healthcare prices. The Government has argued that the Government's healthcare expenditure will increase significantly, but the out-of-pocket costs of healthcare paid for by the people will also increase as a result of the GST hike. While subsidised patients in public hospitals and polyclinics do not pay any GST, the GST on the goods and services provided by GST-registered private clinics and non-structured hospitals that Singaporeans do go to are not absorbed by the Government.[+1 sentence] GST also applies to premiums of Shield and group medical insurance plans. Can the Government assure Singaporeans that the hike in GST will not mean that Singaporeans are going to pay more in their out-of-pocket healthcare costs?[+3 sentences] Mr Speaker, let me conclude. While Budget 2022 can be said to be matching our climate ambitions to the international standards, the devil is, of course, in the details as we will need to transition away from our current economic structure at some cost. I look forward to more details from the Government on how it intends to manage the transition, particularly within the petrochemical industry, and the move towards electric vehicles.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Don Wee.
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang)1518 words
[+10 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I declare that I am the Adviser to the Union of ITE Training Staff on a pro bono basis. I am heartened that the Finance Minister is committed to making more investments in our people and social infrastructure to strengthen our social compact. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): In our rapidly ageing country, each of our youths becomes even more precious. The Government and the community should invest in and develop our youths, especially those coming from disadvantaged families, and help them grow and learn in a healthy way. Youths nurtured with care will grow up to be successful and contribute to our country. The Government should allocate more resources to help disadvantaged families to help minimise the adverse impact of family problems on teenagers. When families are struggling, the Government needs to step in quickly to prevent their situation from deteriorating further. A stitch in time saves nine! Many youth problems, such as school absenteeism, delinquency and addictions, can be prevented if we intervene early to nip the problems in the bud. (In English): Will the Government elaborate on how we will strengthen our framework to identify families in crisis more quickly? I applaud the scaling up of the ComLink initiative nationwide to 21 towns.[+5 sentences] I hope there will be a teenage version of Comlink. How can we hire, retain and train more family support counsellors to help vulnerable families navigate the assistance schemes available to them? All youths benefit from caring role models, guidance and advice for their studies and future careers. For disadvantaged youths, these are even more vital in order for them to get out of the poverty cycle. How can we increase accessibility to mentorship opportunities and provide better internship and career placement support to them? In the latest survey conducted by Young NTUC, youths and young adults ranked mentorship opportunities the second most useful in terms of career-related resources but they also noted that they have little access to them. In 2020 and 2021, when physical events were curtailed, Young NTUC organised virtual career mentoring sessions. I understand that about 1,200 youths took part.[+28 sentences] There was a high demand. Hence, I urge the Government to provide more funding to organisations, such as Young NTUC, that run mentorship programmes to support the recruitment and training of mentors and ensure their quality. Better internship and career placement support is also important. I would like to request for more Government incentives to encourage companies to provide internship opportunities for our youths. Funding is needed for allowance subsidies and to support various components of an internship programme, such as the training of company supervisors. I also hope that the Government will consider giving incentives to spur sectoral tripartite cooperation to build a more systemic approach in curating internship and placement opportunities. Creating an internship of quality requires input and cooperation among the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), employers and Government agencies. Companies need more help to design good internship programmes that enable the students to gain work experience, make meaningful contributions and gain insights of the industry. These should help the students gain clarity on their career options and make informed postgraduate choices. We should encourage youths to go beyond their compulsory school internships today and embark on additional ones if possible. Internships should also benefit companies as opportunities to spot potential talents and employees. We need to change our employers’ attitude towards interns and internships as temporary exercises. Internships should be taken seriously as part of a firm’s long-term human resource management. If our youths have positive experiences, we may be able to address the problem of local manpower shortage for certain vocations and industries. A promising approach is to get the employers, unemployed youths and the IHLs to come together to develop a work-study experience. It can be an apprenticeship plus internship programme or a conversion programme where they learn before commencing work. This method had proven quite effective for Work-Study Diplomas, a mid-career switch conversion programme. However, the process to develop and approve new courses can take some time. To expedite, the Government, through MOM or NTUC, can take the lead and drive each sector's development in this area. Would the Government also consider providing funds to help unemployed graduates as union members? As members, they are entitled to the equivalent of student passes so that they can get further job placements or skills training. It is also important to support ITE students and youths-in-transition from school to the workplace and provide programmes to build up their experiences through internship opportunities. For certain sectors, due to limited internship opportunities, they get some exposure through school projects but this is not the same as work experience. Special needs youths need help to secure internship opportunities too. Both the youths and employers would need customised training and support to make sure that the work arrangements can be sustained. Would the Government please provide more funds and support to incentivise companies to be more inclusive? I would also like to ask for more funding to support IHLs to develop Continuing Education and Training modules with input from sector leaders and companies. Such an ecosystem will facilitate the development of updated training programmes, which are relevant and in demand by industries. An excellent example of a multi-parties' involvement for training is Google's Skills Ignition SG programme, a partnership between Google, EDB, IMDA and SkillsFuture.[+8 sentences] The programme involves online vocational and on-the-job learning with local and global host companies. Indeed, a tripartite approach is the most promising one to ensure timely and relevant curriculum development and good matches to place the trained participants. In recent years, there has been a sharp increase in the number of platform workers. We need to rethink our approach to supporting their welfare. A key factor contributing to the gig economy's expansion was the improvement of digital technology. This facilitated the matching of workers to tasks. However, the relationship between these technology companies and assigned workers is unequal and heavily weighed in favour of the firms, which have access to the data, customers and a wide pool of non-union, unorganised workers. The tech companies have no obligation to the independent workers, which mostly include private hire drivers and food delivery couriers. As independent service providers, they are not employees and thus are not entitled to employee rights such as sick leave, mandatory leave, CPF contributions, medical expenses, so on and so forth.[+2 sentences] Therefore, although they have flexibility and autonomy, the fact is that they have limited bargaining power and will find it hard to earn a sustaining wage if they do not work full-time. While many platform workers are young and work part-time, now, the number of full-timers are also significant. As a gauge, consider in 2018, 8% to 10% of Singapore's resident workforce was self-employed or they did full-time independent work. It is time for us to review their work conditions and consider if we should amend legislation to require platform companies to treat the full-time platform worker as employees as well as to allow them to form unions to protect their rights, including fair and timely payment.[+11 sentences] Presently, they are prone to exploitation and have very little say on how much they get paid – they are price takers – and in order to make a decent living, which include the incentive pay, which comes with completing certain assigned jobs, they have to work long hours to reach their target wages. Due to low barriers of entry, the jobs are attractive to those who have difficulty finding other jobs due to low levels of education, lack of skillsets or credentials, or other reasons, such as a prior criminal record. While they provide a much needed and in-demand service, they are in dead-end jobs with no prospect of progression. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Malay, please. (In Malay): To residents of Chua Chu Kang, and platform workers, my fellow Members of Parliament and I will help you get fair wages and rights. (In English): The least we can do for them is to ensure that they have representation via unions and are treated fairly, in another words, with the full rights and entitlements of employees. Finally, I would like to speak on the topic of carbon taxes. With the changes in carbon taxes, companies will face increasing pressure to transform. However, the cost of transformation will ultimately be passed on to the consumers and lead to higher costs of living. With inflation and logistics challenges due to the pandemic, ordinary families will face financial pressures. SMEs will also face challenges dealing with the higher carbon taxes. Singapore is the first or the only Southeast Asian country to introduce a carbon tax.[+3 sentences] While I support our efforts to go green, both figuratively and literally, I am very worried about the impact on our middle- and lower-income families and the competitiveness of our local SMEs. I hope the Government will assist them more over the transition period. With this, I would like to conclude with my support for the Budget.
Mr Speaker6 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied)2755 words
[+13 sentences]Sir, there are two parts to my speech. First, I will cover the topic of a caring and inclusive society, which I will deliver in English. For the second part, I will speak on a couple of issues related to the Malay/Muslim community in Malay. Sir, the constant feature of almost every Budget tabled in this Chamber has been efforts to build a caring and inclusive society. This year was no different. With this in mind, I would like to use my speech to invite the Government and every Member of this House to reflect on the issues that are faced by certain segments of our fellow Singaporeans who may still feel marginalised. For those who belong to these segments, the phrase "caring and inclusive society" may provoke anger and disappointment rather than any joy or pride. Sir, let us start by identifying who these people are and what the reasons are for their discontent. They are the ones who face challenges in their respective lives due to certain existing Government policies. I want to highlight the difficulties they face and make some suggestions that could alleviate the hardship these citizens face. The issues I am about to cover are not new. Rather, they have been discussed before and been raised repeatedly by many Members from both sides of this House, including myself. Sir, the first marginalised group I wish to highlight are our fellow countrymen who are low-income earners and are low-income motorcyclists who depend on motorcycles to support themselves and their families. In November 2021, I put forth an Adjournment Motion on the ever-increasing issues of motorcycle COEs.[+1 sentence] I proposed some suggestions which I felt could reduce the burden on motorcyclists and motorcycle owners. In responding to the Motion, MOT agreed on how the high COE prices burden motorcycle owners, especially those belonging to the low-income segments.[+10 sentences] The Ministry said it would monitor the situation and will assess what were the best measures that could be taken to address the matter. I would like to take this opportunity to ask MOT whether it has any updates to share with the House relating to this matter, about four months after the Adjournment Motion. Sir, the COE prices for motorcycles had already crossed the $10,000 mark. I would like to know whether the Government considers this situation to be an appropriate one and what are the steps that have been or are being considered so that those who depend on the use of motorcycles to make a living do not face even deeper troubles as a result of this situation. The second group of citizens are those whose spouse is not a Singaporean Citizen. The difficulty they face is in obtaining a Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) or Singaporean permanent residence or Singapore Permanent Resident status. I believe I do not need to elaborate at length as this matter has been raised repeatedly in this Chamber. However, I want to emphasise the negative implications stemming from the situation whereby applications for the Long-Term Visit Pass and permanent residence are rejected many times. I personally know some of my residents who face such situations, the implication of which is separation. This is very sad, because it is far from demonstrating our caring and inclusive society that every Budget claims to want to achieve. On this issue, the Workers' Party has specifically called for foreign spouses to be given priority for citizenship naturalisation if they apply after five years on their LTVP+, on the condition that they have been married to their current Singaporean spouse for three years or more and they have at least one child together.[+11 sentences] Another stressful situation faced by individuals married to foreign spouses is the cost of schooling for the children of their spouses. That is, their stepchildren. They have to pay high school fees because their stepchildren are student pass holders. For low-income earners, this is a very heavy burden. Many such individuals are destitute and find themselves out of options and solutions for their financial problems arising from the high school fees. Many of these individuals have already sought to obtain Permanent Resident status in the hope that their children would not be subject to high fees. However, many of those who have applied have been unsuccessful. As a concern for Singaporeans experiencing such a situation, I would like to ask the Government to re-evaluate our immigration policy in order to provide relief in this situation. Alternatively, I recommend that MOE considers establishing a subsidy scheme for such students, especially for those from low-income families and where their stepfathers have legal guardianship status over them. The next group who feels marginalised are divorcees: single mothers or fathers and also unwed single parents. Many still suffer from failing to find a place to live. Although there are reform measures taken by the Government such as allowing single parents to buy subsidised flats without having to go through a development period and also allowing unwed single parents to purchase up to a 3-room flat in a non-mature estate from HDB or a resale flat, but I think more flexibility can be exercised to reduce the difficulties of this group.[+20 sentences] This is worrying as there are still many restrictions in our public housing policies for unwed single parents as they and their children do not meet the criteria of a family nucleus under the existing rules. I and many other Members of Parliament have expressed our concerns on the matter and have been calling to abolish this unfavourable ruling and at the same time, to extend public housing benefits to all single parents regardless of their marital status. I hope this issue can be given due attention and will result in more positive changes to HDB's existing housing policies. There are two other concerns I have voiced in recent years, which I feel can have a positive impact in our effort in continuing to reinforce caring and inclusive values if they are addressed. One is with respect to the Kindergarten Financial Assistance Scheme, KiFAS. I have asked on several occasions in this Chamber to have this scheme extended to students from low-income families who attend kindergartens run by non-profit organisations such as charities, voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) and religious entities such as mosques and churches. This is because parents who wish to send their children to a kindergarten of their choice for certain reasons should not be sidelined or deprived of the opportunity to obtain financial assistance schemes. I do not think this is in line with inclusive values. Full-time madrasah students may also feel excluded from society in some ways. While the move to provide all full-time students at madrasah with Edusave accounts is a welcome one, I note that the Edusave awards, which are presented to students who have performed well or shown good improvement in a mainstream school, remains unavailable to madrasah students. Sir, at this point, I would like to declare that my daughter is a student at one of the full-time madrasah. I would like to once again request MOE take additional inclusive measures by extending the Edusave award to full-time madrasah students. Sir, the recognition of MOE through the Edusave award should not be limited to school students under the administration of the Ministry. Such awards should be extended to every Singaporean student to further strengthen efforts to inculcate inclusive values in our society, especially students. Sir, the last category of individuals which I wish to highlight are those whose nationality is classified as unknown or stateless. I have raised this matter in this House, previously citing two individuals who have sought my assistance on their dilemma of being stateless. Both of them were born and bred in Singapore and have never left this country as a result of their nationality status. One of them has to bear a heavier financial burden due to ineligibility for medical fee subsidies and the other is unable to access ComCare assistance. Having stayed in this country for the whole of their life and after giving their youth and energy to the building of this nation, they were repeatedly told of their unsuccessful applications and appeals for citizenship. Other Members of this House have also separately filed questions relating to the plight of the stateless. According to the Minister for Home Affairs, as of end November 2020, there were 1,109 stateless individuals in Singapore, of which 76% have obtained Permanent Residence status.[+17 sentences] That still leaves another 266 individuals. I also note that the Minister for Manpower had said in January 2021 that there were no regulations preventing the employment of stateless persons. However, I note that there are several steps that prospective employers of stateless persons need to take before employing them. Sir, I understand that the immigration authorities take this issue seriously and have to assess each application for Permanent Residency and Citizenship in detail before issuing their decision on whether to approve an application. I hope that the authorities will consider formulating streamlined policies to resolve the status of the stateless in Singapore. Sir, in Malay. (In Malay): I would like to bring up a number of issues relating to the Malay-Muslim community, during this Budget debate as well as the Committee of Supply debate. In today's debate, I would like to touch on two matters, that should be given due emphasis and attention to ensure the well-being of the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore. First, on home ownership and second, on education. After almost 57 years of independence, Singapore has attained many commendable achievements. The excellence that we achieved is the result of having awareness, hard work accompanied by sweat and tears, in addition to the spirit, perseverance, commitment, determination and solidarity of our people with a touch of vision and aspiration. As the people of a multi-racial Singapore, we are cognizant that united we stand, divide we fall. As a result, we can see now that on the world stage, Singapore is increasingly known as an exceptional and reputable brand name. We are a nation that is far ahead in many areas like economic growth, public administration, quality education, health services, anti-corruption and so on. Sir, as Members are aware, Singapore’s excellent achievements today have made our citizens more educated, skilled and capable. However, there are still many who are unable to say that they are self-sufficient. This is because we are facing critical challenges and problems, brought about by the wave of progress in the name of development, success and prosperity In short, we all face the pressure of a very high cost of living. Just look at last January’s core inflation which has gone up by 2.4% on a year-on-year basis, reaching the highest level in nine years, driven by higher inflation in food, electricity and gas, as well as a smaller decline in the cost of retail and other goods.[+3 sentences] This was declared by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) in a joint statement on 23 February. In this august Chamber, I would like to say clearly and plainly that the increase in prices of goods has adversely affected our people's cost of living. In this challenging and increasingly stressful situation, the Malay community is the most affected. The Population Census showed that the number of Malay households living in 1-room and 2-room rental flats has more than doubled in 10 years, from around 9,100 in 2010 to 18,600 in 2020.[+11 sentences] This, Mr Speaker, this is not progress but regression. If every rental flat is occupied by a family of four, it means 74,400 Malays are now living in a cramped, stressful and hampered manner. This comprises almost 15% of the entire Malay community in Singapore. So, I would like to ask the Government; first, what is being done by the Government to improve the ability of Malays to purchase flats and therefore leave the rental flats? Second, how many Malays are living in HDB rental flats in 2021? Third, what are the Government’s short-term and medium-term plans to reduce the number of Malays living in 1-room and 2-room rental flats? Four, what is the Government's target to reduce the number of Malays living in rental flats by 2030? Sir, moving on, I would like to know clearly the Government's plans on the education of Malay children, especially with regard to the Malay language. I am very concerned, looking at the growing number of our children who are more comfortable speaking in English. This will cause their command of the Malay language as their Mother Tongue to be eroded. In future, perhaps within another decade, Singaporean Malays will generally feel awkward speaking in their own language. According to statistics from the 2020 Population Census, there were 38,668 Malay boys and girls aged 0 to 4 years old.[+2 sentences] Children at this age are at a critical stage in their growth development. With married couples focused on supporting families, most of these children are placed in childcare centres before being sent to kindergarten. The upbringing and teaching of Malay Language, whether at home or at childcare centres, are equally important. However, I discovered from a reply by the Minister for Social and Family Development in April 2021 that 350 childcare centres provided Malay Language lessons beginning this year, despite having more than 1,800 preschools here. This means that only 19% of preschools here teach Malay Language.[+2 sentences] This is far from sufficient. I acknowledge that it is important for our people to have a good command of English, and the bilingual policy adopted by the Government should ensure a balance for all mother tongues, including the Malay Language, and on this point, my concern is that if there is no concerted effort, the majority of our 38,668 Malay children will have difficulty mastering the Malay Language, much less being fluent in their Mother Tongue. Moreover, the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) results showed a very clear indication that the percentage of Malay children who scored grade A* to C for the Malay Language had declined.[+10 sentences] The lowest percentage was 97.5% in 2020, and this downward trend began since the beginning of the new millennium in 2001. The Malay community cannot allow this decline to continue on. This is an early indication that a critical step must be taken to prevent this problem from worsening. Some may think that this decline is very small or negligible. Therefore, on this issue, I would like to pose some questions to the Government on the education of Malay children. This will allow the community to know more clearly the Government's position and stand in ensuring that Malay children are not hindered from the opportunity to learn Malay Language from a young age. As the saying goes, bend the bamboo while it is still a bamboo shoot. Sir, I have these questions for the Government. First, what will the Government do to address the shortage of preschools offering the teaching of Mother Tongue? Will the Government provide a bigger allocation to attract more professionals to join the preschool teaching sector to teach the Malay language? Second, what are the Government's plans to increase the number of preschools that can offer the teaching of Malay Language to meet the needs of the majority of the 38,668 children aged 0 to 4 years old, where currently only 350 preschools out of around 1,800 preschools that are doing so.[+8 sentences] Third, what are the immediate steps that will be taken by the Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs as well as the Mendaki Foundation to improve Malay language proficiency among primary school students who will sit for the PSLE. Generally we know that Mendaki Tuition Classes do not offer tuition in the Malay language. Four, what is the near-term objective of the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) to address the lack of Malay Language teaching in preschools by 2030? Sir, what I presented are part of several key issues that the Government needs to address with detailed answers. The Malay community is always told about our achievement and progress, and when we look that the available statistics, we can see a significant weakness over the last 10 years. The issues highlighted must be addressed decisively and judiciously. At the same time, we also seek the Government’s understanding to look into the living situation of Malays, with many increasingly living in rental flats. This has to be addressed quickly to extract them of the cycle and grip of poverty, and all the social problems that come with it.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Murali Pillai.
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok)2334 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, the world has changed since the hon Minister for Finance delivered his Budget Statement on 18 February 2022. We heard an account of this from the hon Minister for Foreign Affairs in this House yesterday. Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February 2022 in what has been described as the biggest invasion of a European country since World War II.[+4 sentences] In a flash, blood has been spilled. Families have been displaced. Worryingly, I see no end in sight in the immediate future. Financial and economic sanctions on an unprecedented scale have been imposed on Russia by the US and EU countries. Singapore decided to follow suit and impose its own sanctions on Russia based on our principled approach to diplomacy.[+3 sentences] The hon Minister was quick to point out that our decision will come at a cost. We need to be prepared for this. The consequence for the rest of the world is substantial and serious. Both Russia and Ukraine are substantial commodity producers. We have seen spikes in the prices of oil, gas and agricultural commodities.[+22 sentences] Singapore is not immune. We are already hit with the inflationary pressures arising from the pandemic and supply chain issues. These pressures are likely to worsen. I trust that both sides of the House are solidly behind the hon Minister for Foreign Affairs’ condemnation of Russia’s unprovoked invasion of Ukraine and call for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine to be respected. As he eloquently highlighted, our own short history as a tiny island city-state informs us that we too will always be vulnerable to machinations of big powers and must continually be prepared to guard against any existential threat to Singapore and fellow Singaporeans. We have little influence in what happens globally. We are price takers. We have no choice but to take the world as it is. That is why our defence policy is based on the twin pillars of diplomacy which advocates a rule-based approach to settling international disputes in accordance with the UN Charter and international law; and deterrence, which involves a strong defence capability and ensuring that any enemy will know that there will be a big price to pay if they take us on. It is these developments that have guided me to draw hon Members’ attention to one aspect of the Budget Statement which is not specifically spelt out but is the raison d’etre for a number of initiatives stated in the Budget, that is strengthening our nation’s resilience and robustness. I am not using these terms interchangeably. I am guided by how Princeton professor Markus Brunnermeier has defined these terms in his book published last year titled “The Resilient Society”. He described “resilience” as the ability to rebound from a shock, whereas “robustness” is the ability to resist. Closer to home, at NUS, environmental scholars at the Lee Kuan Yew School have defined “resilience” as R1 and R2. The first being an ability to mitigate and resist; the second, to adapt and flourish in new circumstances. Whatever their names, the two are ways to respond to external shocks. More importantly, the Lee Kuan Yew School researchers point out that resilience is not a cost-free virtue. In fact, the price of resilience is inefficiency – a point I shall elaborate on below. Investing in both these capabilities are important to ensure Singapore’s survival in this unpredictable and volatile world. What is clear is that we cannot afford to adopt a “feast and famine” approach to building these capabilities. Thinking long term to secure Singapore’s future has always been the hallmark of the PAP Government. Let me provide a few examples. Hon Members will recall Prime Minister Lee’s bold plan to build polders and barrages for a period of between 50 and 100 years to save Singapore from rising sea levels costing at least $100 billion.[+19 sentences] The hon Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat spoke last year about efforts to strengthen Singapore’s capabilities in biomedical sciences and health infrastructures to be ready for Disease X. The hon Member Ms Sylvia Lim recounted some of these efforts in her speech just now and aptly described them as a "reassuring development". Also last year, the hon Education Minister Chan Chun Sing announced plans for MOE to roll out mental health education lessons to our children at Primary, Secondary and pre-university levels by next year to help them build up their resilience. These are not short-term plans, with an eye on the next electoral cycle. They are for the protection and flourishing of our children, grandchildren, and generations beyond – but already hardwired into our spending today. I applaud these moves and other Government initiatives aimed at making Singapore and Singaporeans more resilient and robust. No doubt though, there is a cost – and one we bear today – in developing these capacities. Let us take grocery supply as an example. It costs less for a supermarket to stock groceries employing a just-in-time inventory, something that hon Member Mr Seah Kian Peng knows very well. Purchase decisions can be made based on current conditions. It makes the business operations leaner but susceptible to disruptions when the suppliers cannot supply. The other option is to employ a just-in-case model which will allow the businesses to be more agile and respond to sudden demand increases quickly. It does, however, mean that business costs will be higher. This may not be the most efficient way to use resources. But it may be the better way when dealing with strategic goods. This is where we, on both sides of the House, must come together and affirm that these costs must be incurred progressively over the long term because what is ultimately at stake is Singapore’s survival and viability. My question to the hon Minister for Finance is two-fold; first, could he please let us know what are the strategic areas that the Government intends to build resilience and robustness capabilities for the immediate as well as the long term; and two, have we committed sufficient funds and resources for the building of these capabilities? My hope is that the Government will continue to eschew the natural tendency, when our country’s fiscal position is relatively weak and there is a pressure to increase social expenditure, to cut back on investments to progressively build such capabilities. We cannot be capricious. We must hold fast to our resolve to develop these strategic capabilities. I now turn to the hon Minister’s decision to increase the tax responsibility on wealthier Singaporeans through personal income tax, property tax, luxury car tax and GST increases.[+1 sentence] With respect to GST, I am glad to note the progressive way in which the GST will be implemented. The progressive nature of our policy ensures that low- and middle-income Singaporeans will, on a net basis receive significantly more benefits from tax transfers than what they would have paid.[+9 sentences] This is provided for under the Assurance Package and the permanent GST Voucher Scheme. This also means that, on a net basis, it will be the wealthier Singaporeans, who will be bearing the brunt of the impact of the GST increase. I have carefully considered the reasons provided by the Minister for the tax increases. I support the Minister’s decision requiring those with more to contribute more tax to fund our social programmes and, in particular, help those whom the hon Member Mr Faisal Manap referred to in his speech just now as "marginalised people" and keep our social compact strong. In fact, such contributions by the wealthier amongst us will so serve as “investment” not just for the future of the less fortunate but also for their own continued economic well-being and growth. After all, the strength of our social compact provides the foundations of our economic growth. In this way, their businesses and wealth will continue to grow, in a society that is stable and fair, where each man feels he has a place. Not only that, we should also acknowledge that our tax bases are still relatively low, even with the proposed increases. One point which I wish to emphasise though is the continued need to keep our public expenditure lean. As the hon Minister mentioned, Government spending today, excluding COVID-19 related expenditure, stands at 18% of our GDP which is the lowest among developed economies but yet it has produced social and economic outcomes that have been better than most.[+6 sentences] This fiscal discipline must continue. If we do not and we just continue to fund social expenditure for the less fortunate through knee-jerk increases in tax for the wealthy, then I am afraid the social compact will, ironically, weaken. There will be a danger that our society will fracture as a result of an “us against them” mentality taking root. It is a point that hon Members who spoke before me also raised. Already I see warning signs that this may happen. I note calls amongst persons who own private landed properties but have no steady income streams asking for Government support. Indeed, in the Assurance Package, it is provided that a person who owns a single private landed property but does not have income can get up to $1,600 over five years.[+17 sentences] This, with other measures such as CDC Vouchers and MediSave top-ups for seniors, will allow them to get more than five times the GST that they would have paid in a year. The reality, however, is that with the landed property prices as they are, these persons can well afford to fund their own expenses through readily available reverse mortgages from banks which will allow them to live comfortably in their homes until the end of their lives. Thereafter, their homes may be sold and the proceeds applied against loans extended by the bank. It is not easy to make these arguments to people who feel very strongly about their properties, but we must, on behalf of a society where more than 90% live in flats, push back against such claims. A similar example involves elderly retired couples in an HDB flat which is eligible for the Lease Buyback Scheme. They would again be entitled to Government support because they are living in an HDB flat without income. In reality though, they would be able to fund their expenses through the Lease Buyback Scheme which would again enable them to sell the tail end of their lease to HDB and live comfortably in their homes until the end of their life with the proceeds obtained. Some time back, I met an elderly couple who sought ComCare assistance because they are retired and their children are not willing to give them any allowance. I suggested the Lease Buyback Scheme to them as a way to resolve their financial woes. After some thought, they came back to me and the answer was that they are not keen. The reason is because they want to pass on their homes as inheritance to their children even though their children are not paying for their upkeep. As parents, they are amazing but as claimants on taxpayers’ monies used in substitution for their upkeep, they become what economists refer to as “free riders”. Private inheritance comes at a cost of public funds. This also means that there is less money for helping a person who may have a more pressing need for assistance. Again, this may be a hard argument to make to the elderly couple, but if we do not, we will be a nation of ComCarers, with a large budget. And there is no large budget without large taxes. At some point in time, as our social spending increases, we will have to make hard decisions on whom we should support through social assistance so that we can keep public spending lean and only to be given to the truly need it, while we focus on making our safety “trampoline” – a phrase made popular by Senior Minister Tharman – springier. The final area I wish to touch on in my speech concerns the development of entrepreneurial talent undertaking sustainability initiatives that can generate carbon credits for use by businesses to offset carbon tax. I support the move to increase the carbon tax as part of Singapore’s commitment to reduce emissions and tackle climate change. I note with interest that the hon Minister intends to allow businesses to use high quality, international carbon credits to offset up to 5% of their taxable incomes in lieu of paying carbon tax. What I wish to explore is whether assistance may be provided to entrepreneurial businesses in Singapore which have promising sustainability projects but lack the scale necessary to attract carbon credit financing. One suggestion I have is for Government or Statutory Boards to partner these businesses in the provision of services such as waste to energy plants to power lamp posts in business parks.[+8 sentences] With established track records, these Singapore businesses would be able to establish good branding and reputation as leaders in this field, venture into the region or beyond, and undertake larger scale projects to reduce carbon emissions that can be financed through carbon credits. Through this we would have developed a value proposition for Singaporean businesses and allow them an opportunity to participate in the international carbon credit value-chain. Sir, that I am able to speak of carbon credits, long-term spending on climate resilience and the structure of taxation, in the middle of a global pandemic and a military invasion that has impacted the entire world, speaks to how important peace and stability are to a small state. We cannot take this for granted. It is not the natural position of price takers. But while we cannot determine our own price, we can continue to write our own destiny as long as we are a sovereign state, with the will and wherewithal to defend it. To continue to write each page, requires resources and careful husbandry of what we have. This is what our Budget does, and this is why I support it.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied)2262 words
[+9 sentences]Mr Speaker, the COVID-19 pandemic serves as a reminder to all of us of the importance of national resilience. We are now moving towards life with COVID-19 as an endemic disease, a path which is bound to be fraught with unexpected challenges. The Russian invasion of Ukraine has been a stark demonstration of the fragility of territorial sovereignty in the face of aggression by a larger neighbour. Building national resilience is a key effort we need to undertake to prepare for current and future challenges. It has to be a joint effort, borne out of the partnership between the people, society, companies and the Government. It is vital that Government policies must be supportive of this endeavour to build and strengthen resilience. As I respond to the Finance Minister's Budget Statement, I will talk about seven pillars of resilience I believe that we need to continuously build up our nation. These are resilient families, resilient environment, resilient infrastructure, resilient companies, resilient workforce, resilient society and resilient government. Families are the building block of society. We must do all we can to increase the resilience of family units whatever form they might come in. I am concerned about the plan to raise the Basic Retirement Sum (BRS) by 3.5% per year for the next five cohorts turning 55 from 2023 to 2027. MOF said that eight in 10 CPF members turning 55 in 2027 will be able to set aside the heightened BRS.[+1 sentence] This means that 20% of them will not be able to withdraw more than a token sum from their CPF. Currently, some 435,000 Singaporeans aged between 55 and 70 are unable to meet the prevailing BRS.[+10 sentences] Many of them struggle with their living expenses and are not able to use their CPF of housing payments. I hope that MOF will give careful consideration to the needs of CPF members with lower balances before raising the BRS. For our children, building resilience starts at home. All parents, myself included, view our kids as precious gems, but we must be careful not to mollycoddle them. Let us encourage our children to take part in competitions, whether in sports, games or the arts. Every competition will have only one winner and many losers. Let them learn to win with grace and remain resilient in defeat by picking themselves up to fight another day. Let our children take public transport to school instead of ferrying them everywhere by car. This brings an additional benefit of reducing traffic jams around schools. I commend schools that disallow parents from turning up at schools with water bottles or homework that their children left at home. Occasions like these are opportunities for our children to take responsibility for their actions and their belongings.[+1 sentence] Next, on building a resilient environment. I am glad to hear the Finance Minister announced that Singapore aims to achieve net zero emissions by or around mid-century.[+34 sentences] In order to realise this goal, Singapore must be prepared to make big investments in emerging green technologies and take decisive steps towards wielding the mantle of climate leadership, regionally and globally. I would like to renew my call made in January for Singapore to launch a national hydrogen strategy, and roadmap to spur the creation of a hydrogen economy in Singapore. This will set Singapore on a path towards being a global player in the hydrogen industry and benefit Singaporean workers. NEA is now mulling the introduction of a mandatory plastic bag charge at supermarkets. I support the reduction of one-time-use plastics. However, policies designed to achieve this must take into account the local context. Most shoppers do not throw away their plastic bags but use them to bag their thrash before throwing it down the rubbish chute. If they do not have enough plastic bags from supermarkets, they might end up buying plastic bags or, worse, throwing their rubbish directly down the chutes. Therefore, any policy interventions should strive to encourage intrinsic attitudes towards conservation, not lead to people trying to work around punitive measures. Instead of a per-bag charge, has NEA considered requiring large supermarkets to offer a discount as an incentive for not using plastic bags? Singapore's rapid urban development and ascent on the global economic stage was made possible in large part due to good infrastructure. Our public transport network has seen improvements in recent years although the convenience and frequency of bus services in some areas like Bedok Reservoir has been a bugbear for many commuters. This has shown up in commuters' surveys which rate bus services the lowest among transport modes. I will speak more about this during MOT Committee of Supply. Moving on to digital infrastructure, the prevalence of online scams points to the need for more resilient cyber infrastructure, not only at the backend but also at the frontend, with efforts to detect attempts at social engineering and prevent people from falling prey to scammers. While our public education is important, the financial institutions must redouble their efforts to use technological solutions to detect suspicious patterns of use and stop using SMS as a channel for sending passwords. The world has entered a stage where cyber warfare is a real threat, as demonstrated by Russia's alleged cyberattacks Ukrainian's infrastructure, long before the air, land and sea invasion began. Adversaries can potentially maliciously shut down or control critical infrastructure with the click of a mouse. Are our Government agencies putting enough resources into countering this threat and are critical infrastructure providers, like water treatment plants, power grid operators, telcos and public transport operators, ready to counter these threats? Our companies have seen challenging times in this pandemic. Many are still struggling to stay afloat. The pandemic has shown our over-reliance on our foreign workforce. We need to transform our economy to boost the attractiveness of local talent to companies. MOM should watch out for companies that circumvent market testing requirements, for example, doing a token posting on MyCareersFuture when they already have a foreigner in mind to hire. Where there are instances of companies claiming that they are unable to find Singaporeans to take up positions, we need to make a deeper qualitative assessment on why this is so. For example, are there gaps in our education system that are preventing our schools from producing market-ready graduates? On a separate note, I believe that one of the brightest sparks from the pandemic is the mainstreaming of work-from-home arrangements. A large proportion of both employees and employers want to continue remote work, at least part of the time, even after the pandemic ends. We should build on these gains and encourage more companies, especially the traditional SMEs, to provide work-from-home options for their employees. Good economic prospects and technological advances disproportionately benefit the high-skilled. To make our growth more inclusive, we should engage more Singaporeans economically, including people with disabilities and the elderly. Companies should extend work-from-home opportunities to engage and empower Singaporeans with mobility issues. Not only do they form a large untapped labour market with valuable experience to contribute, enabling them to work from home will help them to connect better with society, improve their overall well-being and strengthen Singapore's social security. I hope MOM can consider ways to incentivise companies to extend work-from-home opportunities to this group of Singaporeans. In his Budget Statement, the Finance Minister introduced a $500-a-month minimum income requirement to qualify for the Workfare Income Supplement from 2013. This could potentially impact up to 46,600 employed residents, inclusive of part-timers, who earn less than $500 a month.[+6 sentences] It will disadvantage workers who have extremely low incomes and are forced to work reduced hours through no fault of their own or have unpaid caregiving responsibilities. The Minister said that this is to encourage part-timers and casual workers to take up regular full-time work. However, I fear that it will result in the exact opposite. Workers may decide to drop out of the workforce because their income cannot even cover their travel expenses. I appeal to the Minister to rescind the minimum income requirement, so that all lower-wage workers will benefit from Workfare. This was a call made yesterday by the Leader of the Opposition as well. We must ensure that every working Singaporean receives a decent minimum wage. I welcome the requirements for all local workers to be paid at least $1,400 a month, if their companies employ foreign workers. All the workers are in a Progressive Wage Model (PWM) sector or occupation. I am cheered that the Government is going to co-fund the pay increases for low-wage workers over the next five years.[+23 sentences] Building on this approach, would the Minister consider also co-funding for five years the pay increases of all Singaporean workers who are taking home less than $1,300, including those who are not in sectors or occupations covered by the PWM? This will help companies adjust to paying their workers a minimum wage and bring Singapore closer towards implementing a national minimum wage, something that the Workers' Party has been consistently advocating for. In addition to strengthening our workers' rights, we also need to build more resilience in our local workers. Some employers have lamented to me about local employees quitting when they are made to work long hours, in contrast to foreigners whom they claimed have no qualms about working overtime. We should not be dismissive about those who may have genuine domestic responsibilities like taking care of children or elderly parents. However, for those that do not, including many young professionals, I feel it does not hurt to "pia" a bit more during your first job, so you can establish your career and compete more effectively with the global workforce. Of course, do this without sacrificing your mental and physical health. A vibrant local sports scene contributes towards building a resilient society. The Suzuki Cup football tournament was a great demonstration of how sports can promote national unity. I experienced it myself when I took my son to see one of the matches. However, cheering the Lions once every two years is not enough. Our sporting talents are playing in the international tournaments throughout the year. They should be better featured. For example, Loh Kean Yew's historic victory at the 2021 Badminton World Championships could only be watched live on Cable Television. Non-subscribers had to wait almost a week to watch it on free-to-air TV. Featuring more of our local sporting talents on free-to-air TV or local online channels, like meWATCH, will not only imbue a greater national spirit, but will also inspire generation of young sports enthusiasts, who may go on to become future champions. Finally, I believe we need a resilient government. A sizable presence of opposition Members in Parliament will keep the government on its toes and responsive to the needs of the people and increase the resilience of our government. On the other side of the coin, as an efficient and effective civil service, I commend our public servants for demonstrating great resilience in helping our nation through the pandemic. I was once a civil servant and, to this day, I hold close to my heart a piece of advice that my Permanent Secretary gave to me when I first joined the service. He told me he expected me to be a subject matter expert on the issues covered by my desk. He said it was my responsibility to provide objective recommendations in my policy submissions I put up to the senior management and Ministers. This was sound advice. Civil servants should not second-guess what their political masters want or implement instructions blindly, just because the Ministers said so.[+4 sentences] They must also not be afraid to respectfully point out policy errors made by political officeholders, as it is in Singapore's interests that the best possible policies are advanced. The civil service must also remain politically neutral. The final point I wish to raise is to register my concerns over the planned hike in the GST rates in 2023 and 2024. I understand the budgetary pressures that come with an ageing society, and I support moves to socialise more provision of more public welfare services, especially for the elderly. However, it remains my belief that a consumption tax hike should be the last resort to increasing revenue. This is because the GST is an inherently regressive tax, to which the poor pay a higher percentage of their income compared to the rich.[+1 sentence] In Singapore, only a portion of the GST paid is returned in the form of GST Vouchers. The GST Offset Package is meant to help lower-income households adjust but this will last only five to 10 years.[+2 sentences] However, the GST hike will be forever. MOF should consider other more progressive sources of revenue besides the GST hike. Yesterday, Member of Parliament for Sengkang Assoc Prof Jamus Lim did a deep dive into the Workers' Party's alternative levers for raising revenue. This includes higher taxes in carbon emissions, multinational corporations and wealth, using a portion of land sales and increasing investment returns contribution, which can more than make up for shortfalls in revenue brought about by higher social spending without having to increase GST.[+4 sentences] Mr Speaker, the pandemic has precipitated societal and political upheavals in many countries. Singapore has, thankfully, been largely spared the kind of widespread rifts in society caused by measures to deal with the pandemic. Nevertheless, we must anticipate that future challenges will only get harder. Let us take the necessary steps now to build a more resilient Singapore, so that our next generation will be better prepared to weather any storm that comes.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang)1513 words
[+23 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, last year’s Budget had set us on the course to brave the storm of this pandemic by helping businesses, workers and families. We had also planted the seeds of growth on the SG Green Plan through sustainability efforts and green financing. Our consistent and careful handling of the COVID-19 crisis has led to greater confidence not only in Singapore but the region as well. However, we are not out of the woods yet. New challenges have emerged in the course of the past year. COVID-19 and its variants have tested our system and the resilience of our people. But we have prevailed, thanks to the cooperation and understanding of everyone. This is also assisted by the various schemes like the JSS, COVID-19 Relief Grant and the Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI), just to name a few. We are also facing a period of global economic uncertainty and higher energy prices, given the recent developments in the Ukraine region. With these challenges we now face, I agree with Minister Lawrence Wong that we have to further strengthen our social compact as one people, more so now than ever before. In this regard, in my Committee of Supply cuts, I will focus on three main areas. First, strengthen our institutions and relations. This includes strengthening our total defence and relevance of National Service (NS) to our people and new citizens, maintaining and improving our relationship with other countries in the region and all over the world. Second, prepare our people to be secure and confident to face a post-COVID-19 world, that means maximising the potential of everyone, especially the most vulnerable, like ex-offenders. Instead of offenders, they can become overcomers through our help in their rehabilitation and reintegration into the workforce and society. We must also look at the retirement security of not only our seniors but entire communities, by considering reforms to make it easier and affordable for Singaporeans to plan for their retirement and their future. Third, invest in our next generations through technology, education and skills required for the future. This involves not just targeting young people or students but also working with their parents, educators and industry players. How we support the young determines how they will grow to support our country in the future. However, all of these goals and aspirations will only remain as a wish list if we do not have the fiscal discipline and proper planning to finance our plans in the future. This Budget 2022 gives us the springboard to do so. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): This Budget is bigger than last year. Total Expenditure exceeded $100 billion, which is $4 billion higher than the Revised FY2021 estimate.[+1 sentence] Although revenue is projected to be higher than last year, this is not sufficient to cover our recurring expenses. The projected overall fiscal position for the year is a deficit of about $3 billion.[+2 sentences] Therefore, there is a need to increase revenue not just for current and future expenditure but to save for our future generations. Many people are talking about GST. Minister Lawrence Wong has explained its reasons and the fact that the GST increase will be done in stages and will only take place from next year onwards.[+1 sentence] However, anecdotally some Chua Chu Kang residents have informed me that they are already seeing some shops and stalls increasing retail prices. While it is unclear if this is due to an expectation of GST increase or other factors like the rise in the costs of energy and supplies, I welcome the establishment of a Taskforce by the Government to tackle profiteering and those who take advantage of the upcoming GST hike as an excuse to raise prices.[+24 sentences] The Taskforce is not something new as it was also set up during the GST hike in 2007. Our GST system is progressive and the features of the permanent GST Vouchers and other transfers have the effect of helping those who need it the most. At the same time, it also results in savings in administrative costs and implementation. The increase in GST alone will not be able to cover our expenditure, especially healthcare expenditure which will continue to increase. At the same time, while the Government had been able to tap on the country's reserves to respond to the COVID-19 crisis, this is untenable for the long term. We need to take steps to reduce the budget deficit in the future. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, as stated, this year’s Budget will have an even bigger deficit. What this means is that we need to do three things: first, work hard; second, spend smart; and third, save more. First, given the continued impact and uncertainty of the pandemic and global situation we have to continue to work hard in our economic recovery and strengthen our social compact. I am glad that we have come up with many efforts for close coordination between Ministries and agencies in specific areas which would also give us the ability to work harder together. For example, the Singapore Green Plan 2030 involves various Government agencies working in concert, along with a whole-of-society effort, to meet a global challenge. Just like the saying, "if you want to run fast, run alone. If you want to run further, run together". In recent years, MOF had also developed a number of joint Budgets to ensure better alignment and greater efficiency and value. We have seen these efforts in the Smart Nation initiative for example. What other whole-of-government efforts can be better coordinated across Ministries and agencies so that we can also attain greater efficiency and savings in implementation? For instance, I would suggest that the recommendations of the taskforce on family violence be considered for potential implementation not just by MSF alone but on a whole-of-Government effort. With regard to the pandemic, does MOF track the coordination of efforts and resources by MTF and the various agencies and Ministries related to the COVID-19 pandemic? This would be useful for future studies on the impact of the pandemic and how much it cost our country to provide the necessary support and response. I would suggest a multi-Ministerial consolidated Budget or allocation to address any future crisis. This will also provide a more accurate picture of non-crisis related expense by a particular Ministry or agency. The second step, spend smart. In my work with the Parliament Estimates Committee, we looked at the Government's budget to see how improvements may be effected to increase efficiency. In the course of the past year, we have also introduced various legislation which has helped in this. One example is the Significant Infrastructure Government Loan Act (SINGA) which allows Government borrowings for major national infrastructure projects that will last for at least 50 years. If I may clarify, can Minister illustrate how significant the financial impact of SINGA has been on this year’s and future Budgets in an easy to read and digestible manner?[+3 sentences] With such explanations or regular reports, Singaporeans can understand that the borrowing will not only help “free up” our spending capacity but at the same time not be a burden to future generations. Next, streamlining our tax system. One example is the Land Betterment Charge Act (LBC) which streamlines the previous framework for tax collection. Under the previous framework, landowners and developers have to pay to either the URA or SLA, a Development Charge or a Temporary Development Levy or a Differential Premium. However, now under the new Act, the LBC will replace all these previous charges and collected by just one agency, SLA.[+16 sentences] This is a good example of making things more efficient. I have a clarification: would MOF be looking into streamlining the imposition and collection of other charges to ensure greater efficiency? Is there a specific department that looks into this? Our tax system is admittedly already simpler and less complicated to navigate than other jurisdictions', but we can still see how to make it more efficient. Perhaps just like how we set targets on right-sizing Government spending with 5-year Block Budget Framework, MOF can similarly set targets to trim down the number and types of taxes too. Third, save more. Besides cutting on costs and spending smart, we must save more into our reserves. Our country does not have any other viable natural resources. NIRC, is already the single largest source of revenue. We cannot be over reliant on this alone. We cannot tax this golden goose. Now is the time for us to start planning to put more into our reserves for the future generations. Would MOF set some targets within the next five years, to reinvest more of our investment returns to build up our reserves and explore more revenue streams to complement our investment income? Hopefully with such targets we will be able to save more for our children and their children. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, we must continue to work hard, spend smart and save more for Singaporeans of today and Singaporeans of tomorrow. I stand in support of the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Mariam Jaafar.
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang)2906 words
[+16 sentences]Mr Speaker, budgets are seen by most lay people mostly from the lens of “what’s in it for me” – what am I going to have to pay more for? What goodies am I going to get? How will my business benefit? Economists and market watchers look to be convinced of whether the Budget will make Singapore more competitive and foster GDP growth. But just as organisations are finding that employees are increasingly looking beyond dollars and cents for companies with a clear and inspiring purpose, I believe that Singaporeans are also looking for more in a Budget: do the values reflected by the policies and initiatives proposed align with our own core values? Because when the values espoused are aligned with your own core values, it is a very special and awesome feeling – just ask any Liverpool fan who has bought into the ethos of "You Never Walk Alone". It is about not just getting results but doing it in a way that makes you deeply proud to be a Singaporean. On this measure, the evolution of the social compact towards a fairer, greener and more inclusive Singapore, as described by the Finance Minister, delivers. These are values and a vision for the future that are shared by the broad middle ground of Singaporeans. Personal responsibility and collective support. The yin and yang of the Singapore way, mutually reinforcing. While reinforcing personal responsibility through tying incentives and support to work, the Budget continues the tilt towards collective support. This has been happening for the past more than 10 years. The Government has recognised the need for greater social support, in response to growing inequality, technological change and changing societal expectations, and adjusted the system, very deliberately, over time, including the introduction of the new anchors of our social security system like Workfare, Silver Support and now PWM, and the tightening of foreign manpower policy. Collective support means we all pay, which also ensures that we all understand that nothing we get comes for free. But the wealthy pay more. The more money you have, the better the life you lead, the more you can afford to pay for other people's children's education and other people’s healthcare.[+1 sentence] That is just and fair. I welcome the progressive moves in the Budget: the uplift in salaries for lower-income workers, the higher income taxes for the rich, the wealth taxes, and the combination of GST with GST Vouchers and other rebates.[+7 sentences] By raising revenue in a broad-based way, but spending it in a targeted and fair way, we set ourselves up for a more sustainable fiscal position, while giving time and support for the transition. However, one area I urge the Minister to review, in light of recent developments, is the Household Support Package. Many Members of Parliament on both sides of the House have spoken about their concerns over the cost of living. I must echo this concern, for low- and middle-income households. I sat and talked to one of my residents. He and his wife have five children, they live in a five-room flat. Very typical upper middle-income family. Over the past few months, his electricity bill has gone up from $120 a month to $200 or by $80 a month.[+6 sentences] Multiply that by 12, $960 a year. His water bill has gone up from $30 to $60, multiply by 12, $360. His petrol bill, which he uses to work and ferry his kids to and from school has gone from $500 to $800 or $300 increase a month, $3,600 a year. His food expenditure – they do not cook a lot, so they mostly eat out – has gone up by about 15% to 20%, he says. Fortunately, his spend on healthcare and education have not gone up by much. But as you can see, these add up pretty quickly. Some of these, we expect to come down in due time, as MTI has previously shared, but the developments in Ukraine and the continued disruption of supply chains, give rise to concerns that this situation might go on past the end of the year.[+1 sentence] Mr Speaker, if anything is regressive, inflation is regressive. So, I would like to ask the Finance Minister, what assumptions of inflationary trends were made in developing the $560 million Household Support Package and whether more support can be given, including to the middle-income, for whom ComCare is not an option.[+14 sentences] But long term, the way to make sure that the increased cost of living does not bite too hard, is to ensure that incomes grow faster than expenses at every level of the workforce. With the expanded PWM, I think we are quite covered with the lower-income workers. For the middle-income, it is vital that we continue to enhance the competitiveness of our economy so that we can continue to create and retain good jobs. It is vital that we continue to invest in capability building and take a balanced, tempered approach in implementing the tax and manpower policy changes. In the Committee of Supply, I will speak more on measures to enhance the competitiveness of the economy, build capabilities in our people and businesses, accelerate the green transition and manage the healthcare costs and workforce for an ageing population. I would like to focus the rest of my speech today on three strategies for our nation’s development, strategies that are driven by alignment of values. The first is an economic strategy. Go after the Beyond Great companies. There is a set of leading global companies that are moving past all definitions of “great”, companies that used to focus on scale and strong shareholder returns. One example is Microsoft. These Beyond Great companies have realised that sustainable competitive advantage in an era of technological, geopolitical and social change, can only be attained by being responsive to the needs of all stakeholders, shareholders, but also customers, employees, local communities, governments and the natural environment. The have agile business models that offer customised solutions to borderless communities of digitally connected customers and are experts at forming flexible ecosystems of partners. Conscious of their responsibility to the countries they operate in, they nurture local expertise, enable SMEs to participate in global and regional value chains and help the countries they are in to develop customised solutions to their toughest problems. They are willing to provide jobs and opportunities for a combination of skills, from the highly skilled global professionals who compete with the best in the world, to the middle and lower-skilled workers who may compete more often with lower-cost resources in the region, because they understand that for Singapore to be true to our values, we must have jobs for every Singaporean. The Government, led by EDB, can proactively attract and nurture Beyond Great companies to anchor in Singapore.[+6 sentences] To attract these companies, we must continue to offer financial stability, predictability, transparency and low taxes. But these are table stakes. Beyond Great companies will also demand world class digital infrastructure and customs procedures that minimise transaction costs, cross border data sharing frameworks and safeguards, regional trade agreements that harmonise regulations. All of these are necessary for them to transact international business through digital platforms and fast-evolving ecosystems. Beyond Great companies also require flexible labour policies and the ability to tap on global employees and freelancers sitting outside the host country and within a country, a workforce that is not only highly skilled with specialised technical capabilities but also people with digital mindsets, who are agile and always hungry to learn, who have motivation and grit. In my maiden speech at the start of this Parliament, I spoke about the need for the Government and companies to invest in our people. We have made significant moves since then, but it is still not enough. We must continue to accelerate the reskilling and upskilling of our workforce for a more digital, more green future and, over the long term, we must reexamine the entire education system from early childhood all the way to work, to enable learning at the right time, at the right place, on a personalised learning journey.[+2 sentences] We must also collaborate in public-private ecosystems with these Beyond Great companies to align plans, policies and incentives to achieve mutually shared goals beyond profit and growth. The second strategy deals with social policy – implement a permanent growth dividend. As I have alluded to earlier in my speech, we have built, over time, a comprehensive social security system fit for our demographic profile with Workfare, Silver Support and Progressive Wage Model – really quite game changing.[+6 sentences] I must confess though that when schemes like the Solidarity Payment and Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers were announced, I was quite bemused. Did rich Singaporeans really need the $100 to feel solidarity with other Singaporeans? But after getting feedback on the vouchers from the ground, I must say my position has shifted. My residents in 5-room, executive apartment (EA), executive maisonette (EM) and Jumbo flats – we happen to have a lot in my division – told me that it felt good to finally get something when, usually, there is nothing for them, even though quite a few of them donated theirs. In the discussion on GST in this and previous Budgets, we have talked about the advantages of GST as a broad-based tax on revenue. Perhaps, there is something to be said about boosting solidarity through a broad-based distribution, which also provides an additional way to enhance financial security and mitigate inequality for those whose fortunes do not reflect the nation's success. The support package has elements of this but, if we want to be more inclusive, could we explore a more structural change to provide a permanent growth dividend tied to GDP or Budget surpluses, with different payouts, of course, based on wealth or income, partly in cash, partly in CPF, that give every Singaporean an additional stake in the nation's economic progress, reinforcing that we win and lose as a team.[+55 sentences] We have done this before with one-off payments like the SG Bonus in 2018, the Growth Dividend in 2011, the New Singapore Shares in 2001 and, of course, the discounted Singtel shares in the 1990s. It may feel moot to even be discussing this in the context of consecutive years of Budget deficits, but I hope the Minister might consider this as we move forward. The third strategy deals with shaping our values themselves – build a positive national culture. Our founding Prime Minister, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, famously said in 1977, "You know the Singaporean. He is a hardworking, industrious, rugged individual. Or we would not have made the grade. But let us also recognise that he is a champion grumbler." Forty-five years later, we may laugh and wryly say some things never change. But who do we really want to be? Have we thought about how much better and stronger we would be if we were a more positive people? Not just law-abiding but positive. There are three components of a positive national culture that I think are particularly important. First is empathy. In dealing with people, we must make the effort to get to know them as whole human beings. It increases the likelihood that they will go the extra mile when we need them to. The relationship and the trust between the people and the Government and the Public Service are a massive ingredient to sustainable success for our nation. Second is mutual respect. If we respect others, we must accept that people have different strengths and weaknesses and support them to use their strengths to flourish and not be stuck with narrow ideas of what good looks like and of what should be valued. We must accept different backgrounds, cultures and viewpoints while not letting society become more and more fragmented. We must speak to one another, on the streets and in this House, with respect and with integrity. Third, aspiration or ambition – always believing that we can do better, be better. We fight complacency and cynicism by surrounding ourselves with people who push us to aim higher and do better. We believe that no matter how small we are, our actions matter. For example, with respect to climate change, we could take the view that Singapore going to net-zero may not move the needle if bigger countries in the region and the world do not do their part or we could take the view that I mooted in last year's Budget debate that by investing in research and development (R&D) and developing solutions for the greatest existential crisis of our times, we can lead and change the world. We must cultivate that eternal optimism, that sense of idealism and adventure. Mr Speaker, at this point, I cannot help but remember another famous speech by our founding Prime Minister, "There is a glorious rainbow that beckons those with the spirit of adventure. And there are rich findings at the end of that rainbow. To the young and the not so old, I say, look at that horizon, follow that rainbow, go ride it. Not all will be rich. Quite a few will find a vein of gold. Dig it out. But all those who pursue that rainbow will have a joyous and exhilarating ride and some profit." Mr Speaker, building this positive national culture requires a lot of work that has to start early in life – in our schools, communities, workplaces, in our interactions with Government agencies, in social media, in the metaverse. We have to enable and stimulate the building of networks, support groups, mentorship programmes, volunteer groups. In my youth, we had a lot of public education campaigns on radio and television. Who can forget Singa the Courtesy Lion, Teamy the Bee and all those jingles? Now, the same types of campaigns may not be quite so effective with Singaporeans today but we have even more new mediums, tools and talents today to put out relatable and inspiring content to propagate positivity among Singaporeans. Mr Speaker, during the pandemic, there was a catchphrase that became quite popular. Test negative, be positive. Let us infect one another with positivity, regardless of backgrounds, cultures or political leanings. Mr Speaker, before I end, let me say a few words in Malay. (In Malay): Not long ago, I received a message over Facebook from a Chinese resident. Taking pains to say that it was nothing racist but an encouragement to me, our Malay MP in our Sembawang GRC, she shared what she overheard from a group of Chinese women: "Aiyo, you see, generally Malays are less hardworking … But you see that our Sembawang GRC Malay MP looks so cheerful, so hardworking and active?" Is this racist? Some will say yes, some will say no. But it is at least prejudice. The truth is prejudices are real. As minorities, the truth is we have always had to work harder than others just to be seen as working as hard as others. Is that fair? No. But is there a genuine desire to put in the hard work to change things? I believe this to be the case with this Government. It is fashionable these days to cry out injustices, to see calls to cancel someone or something. Sadly, that can sometimes do a great injustice to the hard work being done to change things. The Budget represents a vision of a fairer, greener and more inclusive Singapore. A fairer and more inclusive Singapore where the fruits of progress are shared more equally by all augurs well for our community. I hope our community will take full advantage of the commitment to invest in our people, invest in our children. I hope more will be done to build a positive national culture and that through the formation of networks, mentorship and communities, the Malay community can be lifted by a positive spirit. I know many are unhappy about introducing GST in next year, but I also know that with the $6.6b Assurance package, the vast majority of our community will not be affected by the GST increase at all until 5 or even 10 years or more from now. Indeed, some will get a GST bonus in the interim.[+1 sentence] During this time, we must continue to work on increasing incomes across all levels of our community through our individual efforts to upskill, and through further Government effort. Separate from GST, there are valid concerns about cost of living. I hope the Government will move swiftly to support Singaporeans even more if the high costs persist.[+7 sentences] I also hope that the 4G leaders will continue to build genuine relationships with our community, understand our values, our constraints, but also our talents, our efforts and our hustle. And then please be our ally and help us develop and use our strengths to benefit ourselves and society. Because we don’t just want to get better than we were, we want to be at par with everyone else. (In English) Mr Speaker, Budget 2022 makes a significant move down the path of a fairer, greener, more inclusive Singapore, from which may emerge a vision of a Singapore that is beyond great. It moves further to build capabilities to keep our economy and our people competitive, scaling up early intensive interventions to boost social mobility. It is a Budget we can be proud of. I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Chee Hong Tat.
The Senior Minister of State for Transport (Mr Chee Hong Tat)3635 words
[+30 sentences]Mr Speaker, the Labour Movement welcomes the pro-worker, inclusive and forward-looking Budget by Minister Lawrence Wong. I join Members of this House to thank our workers for their hard work and sacrifices during the pandemic. This includes our frontline workers and also those who are providing critical support behind the scenes. In my capacity as advisor to the Healthcare Services Employees' Union (HSEU) and as Senior Minister of State for Transport, I have witnessed how our healthcare and transport workers have stood strong and resilient in the face of challenging circumstances, to care for patients and commuters, and to keep Singapore connected with the world. Our Labour Members of Parliament will speak about how NTUC and our tripartite partners have worked together to protect, enable and care for our workers. Brother Abdul Samad will share his views on the protection of workers during the pandemic and beyond. Brother Heng Chee How will touch on enhancing employment for older workers, a topic close to his heart. Brother Patrick Tay will focus on strengthening workplace fairness and support for professionals, managers and executives. Brother Desmond Choo will talk about providing support and opportunities for younger workers. Brother Melvin Yong will speak on improving mental health support for our workers and enhancing consumer protection. Brother Fahmi Aliman will touch on NTUC's efforts to uplift lower-wage workers, reflecting our shared values with the People's Action Party to build a fair and just society. Sister Yeo Wan Ling will highlight how NTUC has provided support for women, family, self-employed persons and workers in small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Brother Seah Kian Peng will share on cost pressures faced by SMEs and how NTUC and our social enterprises have helped Singaporeans to manage costs of living and provided assistance to our members. Together, the Labour Members of Parliament will present how NTUC has championed the interests of our workers and helped them to achieve better wages, better welfare and better work prospects – because every worker matters, and every worker can make a difference. Sir, today, I will focus on how a strong tripartite partnership between the Labour Movement, Government and employers will enable our workers to benefit from better growth, better protection and better skills. Let me start with growth and why this is important to give our workers a brighter future. In his speech at the 1976 NTUC's Second Triennial Delegates Conference, Dr Goh Keng Swee warned about the dangers of having small or no economic growth. Without sufficient growth, we have a zero-sum game. This will intensify social conflict because one group can only benefit at the expense of another. Instead of win-win, we have win-lose. And when cohesion is affected, win-lose will soon become "lose-lose". This is why the Labour Movement fully supports the Government’s efforts to grow Singapore’s economy and to ensure that when companies do well, our workers receive a fair share of the gains. The PAP Government has consistently placed emphasis on achieving this win-win outcome through tripartism, to keep improving the lives of our workers. As Mr Lee Kuan Yew said: "It is in the interest of the workers and their unions that we must strive for growth and development. In other words, growth is meaningless unless it is shared by the workers." When Singapore’s economy transforms and the profile of our workforce changes, this important purpose shall remain at the heart of NTUC’s mission. Even as we evolve "what" we do and "how" we achieve our outcomes. In Mandarin, we say 不忘初心，与时并进. Never forgetting our core purpose and DNA, while moving in tandem with changing times. We could see how this principle was translated into action when NTUC implemented new ideas over the years. For example, when we developed the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) to uplift the salaries and skills of our low-wage workers without exposing them to dis-employment risks.[+2 sentences] Or when NTUC set up e2i to work with Government agencies and employers to improve productivity and help workers find jobs, which is especially important during a crisis. A more recent innovation is the formation of Company Training Committees (CTCs) between our unions and employers to strengthen our engagements with companies and workers through NTUC’s Training and Placement Ecosystem. Since Brother Koh Poh Koon started the CTCs in April 2019, we have set up 826 CTCs so far, with both large organisations and SMEs.[+7 sentences] Our ecosystem brings together a comprehensive package of training and placement services provided by e2i, NTUC LearningHub, Ong Teng Cheong Labour Leadership Institute and NTUC’s Industry Training and Transformation team. Compared to an entity which does only training or only job matching, we provide companies and workers with a wider range of integrated services. Our union leaders will mobilise workers to actively upskill themselves and support the company’s transformation plans. Depending on their requirements, NTUC can help CTC companies to redesign jobs and implement productivity improvements, improve workplace safety and health, to promote physical and mental well-being of our workers, provide training to existing workers and new entrants and match jobseekers to companies that are growing and expanding their workforce. We also have strong support from Government agencies and employers, which makes a powerful combination for driving enterprise and workforce transformation through CTC as a collaboration platform. I am happy that Ms Janet Ang, Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Sharael Taha have expressed support for setting up CTCs. They are experienced business leaders who understand tripartism well. The Labour Movement would also like to thank the Government for agreeing to our proposal to provide NTUC with $100 million to scale up our CTCs. And this includes a $70 million grant to help CTC companies implement their transformation plans. This will give NTUC additional resources to work with our CTC companies and co-fund their proposals to raise productivity, re-design jobs, upskill workers and improve work prospects by helping every worker to become a better worker through training, making every job a better job through job redesign and then matching the better workers to the better jobs through effective job placement.[+11 sentences] Certact Engineering is a local SME that provides precision and plastic engineering services. The Managing Director, Ms Ellis Eng, is a strong believer in training and self-improvement. She started her career as a nurse before she joined Certact. Through on-the-job training, she picked up new skills and learnt more about its business functions. Certact Engineering formed a CTC with the Advanced Manufacturing Employees’ Union (AMEU). Management and union agreed to redesign the role of "Machinists" to "Robotics Operators". Some of the workers were initially reluctant because they were unsure how they could adapt to the new requirements because they had been working as "Machinists" for many years. But with support from the union and from management, the workers embarked on the transformation journey and, over time, they became more confident and more familiar with the digital tools. After its transformation, Certact Engineering has more than doubled its revenue and is expanding its operations to take on more contracts. The growth benefited the workers, too, as they received significant wage increases. It is a win-win outcome that we want to scale up and achieve together with other CTC companies. NTUC will go beyond our original target of forming 1,000 CTCs by this year to achieve a more ambitious goal of having at least 2,500 CTCs by 2025. We will make good use of the $30 million funding from the Government to expand our team of Industry Training Officers (ITOs) and enlarge our network of CTCs to benefit more workers and more companies.[+16 sentences] I will now talk about protection for our workers and I will focus on two areas: first, how NTUC can uplift vulnerable workers, including ex-offenders as well as persons with special needs and disabilities, through skills upgrading and job placement. Second, why the Labour Movement firmly supports the Government’s policy for Singapore to remain open to international trade, investments and foreign workers. Because we know that our workers can have better wages and better work prospects when our economy is open and connected with the world and when we allow employers to have a complementary mix of local and foreign workers to grow their business in Singapore. Let me start with the support for vulnerable workers. I visited Agape Connecting People, a social enterprise that helps individuals turn their lives around through skills upgrading and job placement. The beneficiaries include people who are physically or visually challenged, single mothers and ex-offenders, with the last group forming the majority of their clients. One of its co-founders, Mr Anil David, is an ex-offender himself. He founded Agape Connecting People to help other vulnerable workers by equipping them with job-ready skills. He and his team have helped more than 800 vulnerable workers to find jobs and, just as important, to discover their sense of purpose, dignity and self-worth. One beneficiary is Ms Nur Madiah Lim, who was born without hands and legs. When Nur approached Agape Connecting People for help, the company trained and appointed her as one of its contact centre agents. She has been in this job now for the past three years and continually hones her skills to manage calls, emails and live chats. Nur went on to handle a National CARE Hotline (NCH) and earned her diploma, which was one of the goals she set to achieve. Her other goal was to own an HDB flat, which she has also achieved. Well done, Nur! Your resilience, determination and positive attitude are a source of inspiration. NTUC and e2i have been partnering social enterprises and agencies like Agape Connecting People, Yellow Ribbon, Singapore Prison Service and SG Enable to help our fellow Singaporean workers like Nur and many others. I am also glad the Jobs Growth Incentive, which has been extended to September 2022, will continue to include higher support for employers who hire persons with disabilities and ex-offenders.[+20 sentences] Together with our partners, NTUC will expand our services to help even more vulnerable workers through training and job placement. The number of vulnerable workers may be a small proportion of our overall workforce, but this is a meaningful area for the Tripartite Partners to focus on. Last evening, Mr Shawn Huang spoke passionately about how he and his colleagues have worked with Ms Denise Phua to help a group of vulnerable workers find meaningful employment. And what he shared really touched my heart – to build a more caring and inclusive society, we must do our best to leave no one behind. Sir, another way to benefit our local workers is to keep Singapore open and connected with the world, so that our companies can grow their business operations and create good jobs for Singaporeans. I agree with Mr Edward Chia that Singaporean workers are capable, but there are not enough of us. Minister Ong Ye Kung made the same point during an earlier debate in this House. We believe a balanced and complementary approach is better for our local workers, instead of rejecting free trade agreements (FTAs) and turning away foreigners and foreign investments. We understand the concerns of local workers regarding competition from foreigners. NTUC will do our best to protect the rice bowls of our workers and champion fair employment practices for locals. However, we know this alone is not sufficient. Having an empty rice bowl does not help our workers. They cannot eat the bowl. To enable our workers to have better jobs and better lives, we must also protect our rice fields and ensure that the fields are productive and can yield bountiful harvests year after year. Then our workers and their families, their rice bowls will be filled with rice. This is why NTUC works closely with employers and the Government to grow Singapore's economy, attract more investments and create more good jobs for our people. As Minister Lawrence Wong said in the Budget Statement: "by combining local and foreign professionals, we form the teams in Singapore to create value together. This gives us that extra advantage to excel amidst intense global competition and to create many good jobs and career choices for Singaporeans." Sir, to be clear, there are some employers who do not practise fair hiring and do not invest enough in developing their Singaporean Core. They are the minority among employers, but their behaviours have created a negative impact on the lived experiences of our workers and their families. NTUC supports the Government’s moves to differentiate the inflow of foreigners to offer better protection for Singaporean workers and to take firm enforcement action against errant employers to send a clear message.[+4 sentences] However, we must not react to the small number of black sheep employers by implementing overly tight foreign manpower measures that will hurt our businesses, or worse, by stirring anti-foreigner sentiments amongst our population. Such moves are detrimental to Singapore and Singaporeans as they damage our international standing, erode cohesion in our society and lead to job losses for our workers. Instead, a key part of our response must focus on working with employers and HR managers through tripartism to improve workplace practices for local workers, strengthen the emphasis on developing local talent and invest in building a strong Singaporean Core. Last year, I suggested at an event with business and HR leaders that the Government should sharpen the differentiation in how we treat employers with good HR practices and strong relationships with the unions, versus those with poor HR records and do not put in effort to develop their local workforce. A differentiated approach is also fairer to good employers who have invested resources in building a strong Singaporean Core and developed positive relations with the Labour Movement. These companies add value to their workers and to the community and we should recognise their contributions in tangible ways, for example, by giving them a competitive advantage over their peers, including in areas, such as Government projects, grants and work pass applications.[+3 sentences] One example is dnata Singapore, which has been badly affected by the pandemic as their main business is ground handling, cargo and catering services to the aviation industry. After they formed a CTC with NTUC and completed their Operation and Technology Roadmap in 2020, the company started offering food services to local business and retail customers. They also invested in upskilling their workforce to support their transformation and to prepare for the recovery in the aviation sector. A 115 employees have taken on expanded job roles in Air Service Management, Passenger Services, Load Control and Cargo Services.[+14 sentences] I met three of their staff during my visit – Ms Garmit Kuar, Mr Abdul Faizal and Ms Ferry Carisma. Garmit and Faizal are locals, while Ferry came from the Philippines. They shared with me their challenges during the pandemic and their upskilling journeys to become trainers in dnata. They enjoy their new roles as it gives them great satisfaction to help their colleagues acquire new skills and knowledge. I was also happy to learn from Garmit and Faizal that they appreciate having Ferry and other foreign colleagues as co-workers because they contribute to making the team more productive. And when the company does better, everyone gets to enjoy larger bonuses and higher salary increments. Dnata's example show that if we can work with companies through our tripartite partnership and CTC platform to create good jobs for locals and develop a strong Singaporean Core, it will help to provide sufficient protection and assurance to our people which will in turn allow Singapore to remain open and connected with the world. This brings me to the third and final area, skills upgrading for our workers. The Labour Movement believes that a good job is the best welfare for workers. And the best protection for their employability is to invest in their continuous training and skills upgrading. Lifelong learning for lifelong employability. I fully support MOE's plans to give lifelong learning a further boost and Minister Chan Chun Sing's call for all Singaporeans to "learn for life, and to learn throughout life". Skills upgrading and continuous learning are key priorities for the Labour Movement too. One practical challenge we want to tackle is the jobs-skills mismatch, where employers who are short-handed could not find enough workers with the right skills to fill their job vacancies. Some workers also feel frustrated when the new skills they acquire after going through training are not a good fit with what employers are looking for. We propose to address the skills mismatch by forming Tripartite Academies, where we bring together unions, employers and Government agencies to jointly identify industry-specific skills requirements, so that workers can receive job-relevant training that prepare them for jobs that employers offer.[+2 sentences] The tripartite coordination can help achieve better alignment, improve job placement rates and reduce wasted time and effort for both employers and job-seekers. We have some experience with such tripartite collaborations. The Singapore Bus Academy (SGBA) was formed in 2016 as a partnership between Land Transport Authority, National Transport Workers' Union and the public bus operators to train bus captains and technicians.[+8 sentences] They have been doing good work to identify new skills required in the industry and preparing existing workers and new entrants with the relevant training. Another example is the Singapore Institute of Power and Gas (SIPG) that was set up in 2014 to be a Centralised Training Institute. I was then Chief Executive of the Energy Market Authority (EMA). This has grown into a tripartite collaboration between the Union of Power and Gas Employees (UPAGE), industry and Government agencies like EMA. Under the leadership of Brother Samad, UPAGE worked with SIPG to train our workers in emerging areas, for example, Electric Vehicle charging facilities and wider adoption of renewable energy in Singapore. More recently, NTUC set up the Tourism Careers Hub with Singapore Tourism Board. We also brought in Workforce Singapore, e2i and the industry associations to help employers and workers from the tourism sector. The tourism industry has gone through a difficult period during the pandemic, but it is slowly recovering and I am confident it will bounce back. Tourism Careers Hub will provide customised training courses focusing on skillsets that employers require, including traditional areas such as safety, security and customer service as well as emerging areas such as digital skills and knowledge in eco-tourism.[+2 sentences] Dedicated career coaches will advise new entrants and existing workers on the training they need to take on higher level jobs in the industry. Tourism Careers Hub will also facilitate placement of workers within the industry to help employers who are facing manpower shortages. Besides tourism, the Labour Movement is discussing with employers and Government agencies to explore setting up Tripartite Academies in sectors such as advanced manufacturing, retail, logistics, security, healthcare and maritime.[+11 sentences] We plan to start with these and grow the list of sectors over time. The Tripartite Academies will serve as collaboration platforms at the sectoral level to complement our network of CTCs which are collaboration platforms at the enterprise level. Both platforms are important because they support the larger national objective of transforming Singapore's economy by building stronger enterprise and workforce capabilities which will in turn provide better jobs and better wages for our workers. Mr Speaker, please allow me to continue in Mandarin before I conclude in English. (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, we must continue to drive the transformation of businesses to achieve sufficient economic growth, to give our workers better wages, welfare and work prospects. We must protect their jobs and interests, treat them fairly, and ensure that their skills are constantly upgraded through lifelong learning. Take the Chang Cheng Group for example. They started from a coffee shop in Toa Payoh. Mr Kok Kuan Hwa, founder of the Chang Cheng Group, became an apprentice chef at the age of 15. Over the years, he and his team have worked hard, listened to customers' feedback, and improved constantly. They have improved efficiency, developed new products and brands, and become the food and beverage group it is today. The Chang Cheng Group and the Food, Drinks and Allied Workers Union worked together to set up a Company Training Committee (CTC) to develop plans for employee training, business transformation and job redesign, to train and upgrade the skills of all their employees (close to 1,000) and give them better job prospects.[+12 sentences] The Chang Cheng Group is also working with e2i to improve work efficiency, training employees to perform multiple roles, and help 56 low-wage workers and 15 older workers to upgrade their skills and earn higher wages. Through our tripartite partnership, NTUC will give full support to companies like the Chang Cheng Group and other local enterprises, enhance their competitiveness through transformation, and create more good jobs, better wages and a secure future for our workers. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have spoken about the importance of Growth, Protection and Skills Upgrading or "GPS". As a navigation tool, GPS can show us how to get to our destination, but GPS cannot get us there unless we embark on the journey. This is the journey of transforming and growing our economy to build stronger enterprise and workforce capabilities through tripartism and helping our workers to upgrade their skills to remain employable and to take on the new jobs that are being created. There will be obstacles and unexpected developments during this journey. Sometimes, the GPS may wrongly indicate a turning or we could discover new paths along the way. So, we will need to adjust and calibrate our measures as we progress but never lose sight of the direction we are taking and the destination we want to arrive at. And always remain cohesive so that we can stay together while we move ahead as one united people. SG Together, Solidarity Forever! Sir, I support the Budget. Thank you.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Abdul Samad.
Mr Abdul Samad (Nominated Member)2350 words
[+5 sentences]Mr Speaker, I will like to begin my speech in Malay. (In Malay): Budget 2022 provides various forms of support to help Singaporeans cope with the increasing cost of living. As always, the low-income group should receive such support to help them with their living expenses. I would like to take this opportunity to appeal to the Government to review the eligibility requirements in terms of individual or family income, by taking into account the middle-income group so that they are also given a fair share of support. It is also important that employers hire Singaporean workers and make them the first choice. As someone who represent workers, I am very heartened with the announcement on the lowering of the Dependency Ratio Ceiling.[+1 sentence] This approach reflects our openness to foreign workers because we are all aware that there is a shortage of manpower that is needed to continue developing Singapore's economy. Furthermore, the announcement of the $100 million grant to NTUC shows the Government's trust and confidence in NTUC's efforts to enhance the capabilities of workers alongside their employers through the Company Training Committees or CTC.[+24 sentences] The main objective of forming these committees is to allow trade unions and the management to work together to improve the quality and capability of their workers through comprehensive and new skills. As a result of this effort, I hope that the workers can have better income, career and welfare. We often hear news reports where Government says that a lot of job opportunities will be made available through new companies that will commence operations in Singapore for the near and long term. This announcement is very much welcomed and therefore, I encourage all workers to constantly improve your skills and capabilities so that we can take on the jobs that will be offered. Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to express my deepest appreciation to every nurse, doctor, paramedic and all those involved in managing this crisis. In addition, I would also like to convey my appreciation to the Fatwa Council and our religious leaders in providing guidance to fulfil our religious obligations at the mosques in terms of Friday prayers as well as daily prayers. This includes the mosque committee members and volunteers who have been working hard to facilitate and ensure safe distancing measures, among others, so that the congregants can come to the mosques in a safe and orderly manner. (In English): Sir, I will now begin my speech in English. I am heartened that this Budget reflects the Government's continuous support for workers and businesses that are still impacted as we move to an endemic situation. The Budget also acknowledges and empathise my fellow workers' plight given the rising cost of living and their stagnating income. I would like to begin by highlighting some of the efforts undertaken by fellow Union leaders and NTUC to protect workers and their livelihoods since COVID-19 struck us. We partnered with Government agencies to help redeploy workers from hard-hit sectors to sectors that had an urgent need for manpower. For workers who unfortunately lost their jobs, we negotiated for reasonable retrenchment benefits and at the same time, provided immediate employment assistance through our Job Security Council. For the companies that were still doing well, we pursued the skills upgrading and career development of workers through the company training committees. These all are only possible due to our unique model of tripartism. Yes, tripartism. As our economy shows signs of recovery, and our resident unemployment rate has rebounding to pre-COVID-19 levels. This is an opportune time to grow jobs and improve the wages, welfare and work prospects of our workers. This brings me to the first topic of my speech, very close to my heart and indeed all in this Chamber, I believe – Strengthening our Singaporean Core. This pandemic has accelerated technology adoption across all industries. We have seen many positive examples of unionised companies automating lower-level manual jobs and upskilling workers to work with technological solutions to increase their job value and productivity. As the COVID-19 situation improves and borders are slowly opening, companies should avoid taking the easy way out by bringing back foreign labour as a quick fix solution. Companies should invest in technology and automation for work processes to be easier, safer and smarter. I understand that there are some jobs that need to be supplemented by foreign labour but we should build on the momentum to train and transform our workforce to strengthen our Singaporean Core. The recent announcement on the reduction of Foreign Dependency Ratio from one is to seven to one is to five, is a positive move to reduce reliance on foreign workers, but raising the minimum qualifying salary by $500 for Employment Pass and S Pass applicants created some misconception and unhappiness because, some see this as a move to increase wages of foreign workers but our Singaporeans do not get similar adjustments over the same period of time. While the rationale is to ensure employability of our local workforce, MOM needs to clearly show how the increase in the qualifying salary of S Pass and Employment Pass has benefited the local workforce and resulted in the overall increase in wages for Singaporeans.[+6 sentences] Even with the reduction of the Dependency Ratio, I would also like to see that MOM continues to be stringent in assessing the needs of companies for foreign labour and ensure that such talents that come, complement our Singaporean workforce and augment their skills and capabilities. Strengthening our Singaporean Core applies to workers of all levels, including our Professionals, Managers, Executives (PMEs). The demands for good and high-skilled jobs that would attract PMEs are also growing, and this provides opportunities for localisation of jobs and career development. The NTUC-SNEF PME task force reported that younger PMEs, aged below 40, opined that their employers are not investing enough to equip them with relevant skills to prepare them for the future. Companies should not take advantage of the recovering economy to bring in foreign talents but instead put in place career development for their Singaporean workers to take on these jobs and grow their careers. While we could continue to embark on the transformation journey, together with enhancing foreign manpower and companies' policies, we acknowledge that it is important for us to keep up with the demands of the evolving job market, hence it is imperative that companies continue to invest in training, to build deep capabilities in our local workforce for us to strengthen our Singaporean Core. NTUC is very heartened by the Government's strong support in setting aside $100 million to scale up the company training committees (CTCs) to support companies' transformation plans.[+6 sentences] NTUC is very committed and ready to partner with companies to form CTCs to identify relevant training to upskill and transform workers in tandem with industry transformation. Such efforts must lead to better wages, better work prospects and better welfare for our workers. These three outcomes will be the catalyst to encourage workers to attend training. I would like to ensure our companies that NTUC is more than able to support such efforts through our NTUC Training and Placement ecosystem, comprising Employment and Employability Institute (e2i), NTUC Learning Hub, NTUC Industry Training and Transformation (IT&T) and Ong Teng Cheong Labour Leadership Institute (OTCi). Sir, NTUC is well positioned to support companies in their business strategy planning, job matching, job redesign and more importantly, workforce training. For instance, amid the COVID-19 outbreak, NTUC Learning Hub swiftly augmented its training capabilities to respond to training needs and the national agenda to upskill. This allowed companies from hard-hit sectors such as aviation, hospitality and among others, to reskill and upskill their employees. I am pleased to share that NTUC Learning Hub has achieved a record of over 500,000 training places and upskill more than 300,000 workers since the start of the pandemic.[+19 sentences] NTUC Learning Hub also launched their Learning eXperience Platform (LXP) late last year to encourage online learning at one's own pace, anytime and anywhere. This is to also encourage our workforce to embrace lifelong learning and upskilling – complementing CTCs' efforts in partnering companies to transform their business and workforce towards Industry 4.0 and Worker 4.0. As a strategic partner for industrial transformation, companies can tap on NTUC's Training and Placement network for a smoother business transformation journey, mobilise workers for upskilling and into new jobs to meet the aspirations of their workers, for better staff retention. Mr Speaker, union leaders are glad that the Government continues to support the aviation industry as it slowly recovers from the severe impact caused by this pandemic. For Singapore to remain its Airhub status, there needs to be a continuous and healthy pipeline of talents to perform these good skilled jobs. With this support, companies need to ramp up their technological solutions and also train their workforce. Companies should also find ways to retain experienced workers through better salaries and benefits while at the same time, improve internship opportunities for Polytechnic and ITE students. Besides aviation, tourism is another severely impacted sector and have been facing severe manpower shortage. Workloads have increased and sadly, salaries have not increased much since pre-COVID-19. Now and post pandemic, companies are and will continue to change to be leaner and more efficient in their operations, where skilled manpower is sought after. There are efforts to upskill the workforce so that it enables companies to cope with international demand when it returns. These are good jobs where a worker who has picked up the relevant industry knowledge and has the passion to contribute can rise very quickly to take up management level positions. We hope companies could increase the local Polytechnic and ITE graduate entry level salaries to attract Singaporeans and retain them in the long run. Otherwise, the salaries offered by the gig economy will draw them away from these industries. However, while Singapore gradually expands vaccinated travel lanes, there remains economic challenges and COVID-19 fear. These put additional pressure on effective recovery of international tourism. I hope and I call on the Government to review and extend similar support to the hotel sector too. Next point that I would like to raise is on the rising cost of living, with my focus towards extending more support to the middle-income earners. We are all aware that inflation has been on the rise. Singapore's overall inflation in December 2021 has jumped to 4% on a year-on-year basis and has remained at 4% in January 2022.[+4 sentences] For the whole of 2021, overall inflation rose to 2.3%, and in fact, this is the highest since year 2013. Based on the feedback and sentiments from my peers and fellow workers, inflation is quickly emerging as a key challenge this year, as households face rising prices on multiple fronts, ranging from food, education to housing. This is especially for our middle-income earners. We are really heartened by Government's initiatives such as the GST support package to help lower- and middle-income households as well as retirees to cope with the GST hike. Aside from GST Voucher and doubling the U-Save rebates applicable to all HDB households for the remaining quarter in 2022, we also appreciate the increase of annual assessable income to $34,000 as a qualifying criterion for the GST Cash Payment.[+1 sentence] On this note, we hope that it could be further increased so that it can be extended to middle-income Singaporeans to help them cope with the rising cost of living. Let us also not forget the group of lower middle-income workers, who are earning slightly more than lower-income individuals, but their families are also struggling with increasing daily expenses, yet they are losing access to Government support schemes as they have just fallen short slightly of the income criteria of these support schemes. I hope the Government can review the income criteria of various support schemes such as Kindergarten, Student Care and Childcare Subsidies, CPF Housing Grants, to prevent the "cliff effect" and better support the lower middle-income family.[+3 sentences] To my fellow workers, rest assured that the unions and NTUC hear your concerns and anxieties on the cost of living. We are also paying close attention and finding avenues to better support you. Our NTUC's social enterprises are committed to continue helping members and workers to moderate the cost of living and stretching their hard-earned dollars. Today, there are 10 NTUC social enterprises under the NTUC Enterprise group, ranging from FairPrice, FoodFare, Kopitiam, First Campus, Learning Hub and more.[+4 sentences] Each of them is created to primarily address specific concerns that weigh on the minds of fellow Singaporeans, from rising food costs, catering to the broader needs of Singaporean working parents and their families to staying relevant throughout their working lives. They will continue to roll out initiatives to help Singaporeans cope with the rising cost of living. I would close my speech by making two key points. One, as our economy recovers, we should build on the momentum to train and transform the Singaporean workforce. NTUC is here to support companies to form CTCs and through the Training and Placement ecosystem, we will provide support for business strategy planning, job redesign and workforce training.[+1 sentence] Together with the strong support of the Government, we will continue to walk this journey with you, raise local workforce capabilities through upskilling and reskilling. Most importantly, building the pipeline of local talents for the future.[+1 sentence] Second is for our middle-income earners. I really hope Government hears our call for greater support for middle-income earners to cope with the increasing cost of living as well as constantly reviewing the criteria of various support schemes to ensure this group of workers does not fall through the cracks.[+4 sentences] Unions and NTUC will continue to protect our workers, and the social enterprises will continue to cushion the impact of the cost of living through our various initiatives. Together, unions, NTUC and our social enterprises are committed to serve our members and workers better. We are and will always be by your side, because every worker matters! Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Patrick Tay.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer)1823 words
[+9 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of Budget 2022. This is indeed a Budget that is well-considered and targeted in giving our nation, economy and society a strong boost for the future while supporting our fellow Singaporeans to ride through this pandemic and easing their concerns over the cost of living today. It is one that invests more in our people and social infrastructure so that together, we can bring Singapore out of the COVID-19 shadows and re-inject the nation with resilience and strong growth. It is important that we continue to build a vibrant economy with thriving companies, supported by a future-ready workforce that can access good jobs and wages, and ensure that no one is left behind. Being part of NTUC and as Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) Chair for Education, I believe in investing in our workforce and our companies. As shared by fellow Labour Members of Parliament, Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat as well Labour Nominated Member of Parliament, Brother Abdul Samad earlier, as well as many other hon Members of this House, we are glad to see further investments in our people – not just the young but also supporting Continuing Education and Training, and Lifelong Learning for all, especially our mid-career workers amidst an ageing workforce. By training our workers and equipping them with good and in-demand skills, and giving them good jobs and opportunities, we want them to have better income stability to manage their daily cost of living and tools for success to achieve their aspirations. In my last Budget debate speech, I made a special highlight on a segment of our workforce which the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted immensely. They are the Professionals, Managers and Executives (PMEs) in Singapore, especially those in the ages of 40s to 60s. Last year, the NTUC-SNEF PME taskforce, which I co-chaired, consulted more than 10,000 PMEs and stakeholders to understand their concerns, needs, aspirations and fears at the workplace.[+1 sentence] In response to our local PMEs’ call for assistance, NTUC and SNEF want to strengthen their employment and employability and ensure that they can compete fairly and effectively to meet employers’ manpower and skill demands in a dynamic labour landscape. NTUC and SNEF have together deliberated the various challenges and concerns faced to arrive at nine recommendations under four key thrusts, which was presented to Minister Tan See Leng and MOM on 21 October 2021.[+1 sentence] I am heartened that the Government has taken the NTUC-SNEF PME Taskforce recommendations into serious consideration, as reflected in the Budget Statement made by Minister Lawrence Wong. In this regard, I would like to elaborate on four of the most urgent tasks on hand to enhance workplace fairness, employment and employability for our PMEs, which are: first, strengthening the Singaporean Core through enhancing the Employment Pass framework; second, imposing a penalty framework for egregious cases of workplace fairness; third, protecting the confidentiality of whistle-blowers of discriminatory practices; and lastly, four, helping mature PMEs to transit into new roles through short term salary support.[+8 sentences] First, strengthening the Singaporean Core through enhancing the Employment Pass framework. While many of us, including the local PMEs whom the NTUC-SNEF PME Taskforce surveyed, recognised the contribution and complementarity of foreign PMEs to Singapore’s economy and the need for us to stay open and competitive, there remained ground concerns and perceptions that an overreliance on foreign PMEs has led to an unnecessary increase in competition in the local job market and employment. To safeguard our Singaporean Core and curb discriminatory hiring, we must ensure that Singaporean PMEs have access to a level playing field for jobs while at the same time, balance companies’ manpower needs in the immediate and longer term. Today, the eligibility criteria for Employment Pass (EP) applications generally focus on the individual applicant’s educational qualifications and salary. With the qualifying salaries of both the EP and S Pass holders raised in the past, and with further increases announced in Budget 2022, this will go some way to level the playing field for local PMEs as it ties in with the rise in their median wages. However, I opine that such a system, by itself, is inadequate to level the playing field for our local PMEs. It is therefore pertinent that the EP framework be further enhanced to meet the objective of ensuring that foreign professionals complement our local PME workforce and that employers practice fair hiring as well as improve the diversity of their workforce. I am elated that Minister Lawrence Wong announced earlier that the Government will refine the EP application framework so that there is complementarity, transparency and diversity of the foreign workforce. I look forward to MOM sharing more details of the refined EP framework at the Committee of Supply. I hope that MOM will take in our NTUC-SNEF PME Taskforce’s recommendation for the enhancement of the EP application review process and include a point system which factors in: (a) sectoral input; (b) whether the employer has been hiring and developing local workers; and (c) the diversity of nationalities within the companies.[+3 sentences] We believe that such a system will provide the flexibility to let employers who have justified genuinely and adequately, secure foreign talents to complement their local PME workforce and restrict access to foreign talents for the errant companies. And for our local PMEs, we believe both a refinement of the EP system, coupled with the workplace fairness legislation, will go a long way to give better protection and stronger assurance to our local PME populace, especially those 40 to 60 years of age. Second, imposing a penalty framework for egregious cases of workplace fairness. While there have been many measures and policies, even with the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) set up over the years, more needs to be done to penalise the small proportion of egregious companies that are out to exploit the system, so that local PMEs can continue to receive fair opportunities and treatment while maintaining Singapore’s economic competitiveness.[+12 sentences] I am glad MOM has formed the Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness and I hope to see a set of recommendations which will include establishing a robust framework to help achieve workplace fairness for our local PMEs. This should include measures to strengthen enforcement against errant companies and management personnel who adopt unfair practices and require their remedial action. The measures should also be supported by grievance handling processes that will be entrenched to facilitate the therapeutic resolution of grievances at company level for our local PMEs. Third, protecting the confidentiality of whistle-blowers of discriminatory practices. This brings me to my third point on mandating whistle-blowing policies and procedures to ensure that employees can speak up safely, especially with the forthcoming workplace fairness legislation. In my engagements, I have heard from various HR professionals and PMEs who have witnessed or experienced discriminatory practices at work. However, in most cases, they do not report such practices for fear of potential reprisals or consequences in their workplace or in their industry. It is beneficial for those who experienced workplace discrimination or harassment to come forward so that problems can be resolved and positive norms can be established. We will therefore need to incorporate legal protections to promote transparency and fairness by safeguarding employees’ confidentiality and preventing retaliation by the employer. In this aspect, I hope that policies can be put in place to mandate that employers set up formal grievance handling processes that are communicated clearly to employees. Equally important in the process, is to ensure confidentiality of the whistle-blowers and prohibit retaliation against employees, ex-employees and potential employees, who report discrimination or harassment. Fourth, helping mature PMEs transit into new roles through short-term salary support. The findings of the NTUC-SNEF PME Taskforce Report shows that mature PMEs are in a particularly precarious and vulnerable situation when they are retrenched or unemployed.[+2 sentences] In an online survey with 1,000 PMEs last year in April, we found that as compared to younger PMEs who are 20 to 40 years old, a higher percentage of the mature PMEs who are 40 to 60 years old, attributed their age to be a disadvantage to them at workplaces. In another online survey conducted last year in July with another 1,000 mature PMEs, majority of these mature PMEs expressed challenges in their search for employment and attributed their age to be the key reason. Half of them expressed that they faced some form of discrimination during their job search or at their current workplaces. Some also held the perception that companies are not open to hiring workers who are aged 40 and above. Thus, I am heartened that in this Budget, the Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI), which supports employers to expand local hiring from September 2020 to March 2022, will be extended to September 2022.[+13 sentences] This will better encourage and support companies in hiring our mature PMEs and ensure that mature PMEs get the opportunities they need and deserve. In the long-term, and with an ageing population, I hope that the JGI can be translated or even entrenched to a permanent short-term salary support initiative to assist our mature PMEs. This is done by helping companies, who hire unemployed mature PMEs, in mitigating their costs and risks associated with hiring this group of PMEs, who may possess the relevant skills and experience needed by the companies. This will also allow companies to assess the mature PMEs’ suitability for the job roles and continue to keep them in the company's workforce. In conclusion, as our demographic profile shifts over the next decades, coupled with profound transitions of the global economy because of COVID-19, we will need to transform urgently to stay competitive, while ensuring we continue to meet the job aspirations of Singaporeans. We recognise the growing need to ensure PMEs are adequately protected, have access to good jobs and are equipped with relevant skills. As we prepare for the new normal, it is important that we continue to entrench progressive and fair practices at workplaces and extend schemes to support our local PMEs, especially the more vulnerable ones. It is crucial to create a level playing field for Singaporean PMEs, strengthen the Singaporean Core, eradicate all forms of discrimination through tougher measures and targeted legislation, and support PMEs and workers in general, to transit effectively and less painfully between jobs. One of the best ways to protect PMEs and help them progress is through having better wages and better jobs. NTUC will help support PMEs with the four Ups – Up their Skills, Up their Employability, Up their Protection and Up their Employment Opportunities. At NTUC, we will champion these for all workers because every worker matters. As we pivot and transform to the next normal of work, employers and workers alike will have to find new ways and new avenues to navigate the kinks and curves that the uneven and uncertain future presents. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman.
Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman (Marine Parade)2086 words
[+22 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, this has traditionally been a time when we as a nation delineate our goals and aspirations for the year ahead. It is thus imperative that we renew our commitment and resolve to uplift society as Singapore continues to recover from the corollaries of the pandemic. I am encouraged by the central theme of this year's Budget. As we continue to find ways to deal with the ever-evolving nature of the pandemic, we must also set our eyes on how we can prepare Singaporeans for a post-pandemic future. Only by doing so can we “Chart Our New Way Forward Together.” My esteemed colleagues and I in the Labour Movement strongly support and welcome the slew of measures introduced to alleviate the hardship that Singaporeans have experienced as a result of the pandemic as well as improve all facets of society as we transit to a post-pandemic future. I am heartened to note that the Government will be allocating more resources to help vulnerable groups in society. As we chart our way forward, we should remain sensitive to the challenges and concerns of our vulnerable workers, especially our lower-wage workers and migrant workers. The best way to help workers cope with cost of living is through better wages and better jobs. Mr Speaker, allow me to elaborate. Many of our lower-wage workers are frontliners in our nation’s fight against the pandemic. Spanning from security to cleaning sectors, our workers have toiled to keep Singapore safe. As the number of COVID-19 cases soared, our workers continued to work tirelessly to keep Singapore going. In doing so, they stepped up despite the risks to their health and took on additional precautions to limit the transmission of COVID-19 in our community. In my Budget speech last year, I spoke about the ongoing efforts to support lower-wage workers. In particular, I reiterated that the formation of the Tripartite Workgroup on Lower-Wage Workers is a testament to our commitment to ensure that the interests of our lower-wage workers are protected. Over the past year, the collective support from various stakeholder groups to uplift the incomes of our lower-wage workers have been encouraging. NTUC, alongside our tripartite partners and various other stakeholder groups, will remain committed to help workers improve their income security and quality of life, and give them confidence in navigating their careers, equipping them to participate in new growth opportunities. But how can we work towards this goal? What are some areas we can continue to look into? Firstly, the introduction of the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS) is pivotal as it will provide transitional wage support for employers to adjust to upcoming mandatory wage increases for lower-wage workers covered by the Progressive Wage and Local Qualifying Salary requirements. It will also allow employers to voluntarily raise wages for lower-wage workers. Under this scheme, the Government will co-fund wage increases of eligible resident employees from 2022 to 2026. The introduction of the PWCS is a step in the right direction and will go a long way in uplifting and supporting lower-wage workers.[+1 sentence] Having said that, at NTUC, we are cognisant that efforts to help lower-wage workers is a long-term strategy. As more sectors and occupations are incorporated into the PWM, there will be a greater need to re-think the duration of transitory support new sectors will receive under the PWCS beyond 2026. Therefore, I would like to know how new sectors incorporated into the PWM between 2025 and 2026 will be supported.[+3 sentences] In particular, I would like to know if the Government will make special provisions for these industries. On the subject of PWM expansion and as mentioned in my Budget speech last year, NTUC has identified two sectors for the implementation of PWM, namely, strata and facilities management and pest management. NTUC has conducted several engagements with stakeholders in the respective sectors and the response has been very encouraging thus far. In this regard, I would like to take this opportunity to call on the Government to seriously consider our proposal to implement PWM in the two sectors.[+15 sentences] Secondly, on a related note, it is imperative that we look at parallel efforts to complement PWM. In sectors where services are outsourced, we ought to incentivise service buyers from the private sector to adopt outcome-based contracting to ensure that PWM wage increases are sustainable in the long run. Consumers and service buyers should also become more socially responsible and reject service providers that provide services at a low cost but at the expense of the welfare of such essential service workers. Instead, service buyers should adopt an outcome-based contracting model where contracts are awarded to companies with progressive employment practices that give due recognition to workers, rather than basing these decisions on price alone. In 2018, NTUC launched the Smart Sourcing Initiative that gives funding to service buyers in security, cleaning and landscape sectors that implement outcome-based contracts and train procurement staff to be familiar with the best sourcing principles. The introduction of this initiative is encouraging but it also reminds us that there are sufficient opportunities and latitude to incentivise service buyers from the private sector to adopt outcome-based contracting. In order to do this, I call on the Government to provide funding for trade associations to engage consultants to develop an outcome-based contract guide. Depending on the industry, the consultants would develop bespoke guides for employers in varying industries. By incentivising private sector employers to implement outcome-based contracts, due recognition can be accorded to our workers, ensuring that they can progress and perform higher-value roles and our PWM wage increases will be more sustainable in the long run. Another vulnerable group adversely impacted by the pandemic would be our migrant workers. I will not be the first to thank our migrant workers for their hard work and contribution to the development of our nation, all while working in challenging conditions, distant from their homes and loved ones. NTUC has perennially been advocating for enhanced medical coverage for the welfare and safety of our migrant workers. We are pleased that the Government has heeded our calls for greater protection. At NTUC, we strongly believe that our migrant workers deserve to be insured against risks within and beyond the workplace. In December last year, NTUC Migrant Workers' Centre (MWC) introduced its Associate Membership to offer holistic protection and benefits that are specially tailored to serve migrant workers' lifestyle needs. In exchange for a membership fee of about $24 per annum, our migrant workers would be insured up to $10,000 in term life insurance against critical illnesses, non-work-related death as well as total and permanent disability.[+1 sentence] Collectively, I am confident that the Government's provision of enhanced protection and NTUC MWC's Associate Membership programme would ensure that our migrant workers are well protected against uncertainties. To ensure that our migrant workers are insured within and beyond the workplace, I call on the Government to mandate or incentivise companies to sponsor the membership fee for their workers. Early last year, it was reported that more than 97% of employers with foreign workers living in dormitories were paying salaries electronically, up from 76% before the requirement was introduced in April 2020.[+20 sentences] MOM also claimed that the electronic payment of salaries has proven to be beneficial, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, because it ensures that foreign workers continue to receive salaries even when there are movement restrictions in place. Once again, I urge the Government to consider mandating electronic payment of salary for migrant workers to protect them from exploitation. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): At this year’s Budget Speech, the Government announced the Household Support Package to provide support for daily essentials. The Assurance Package for GST to cushion the impact of the planned GST increase, and enhancements to the permanent GST Voucher scheme to provide continuing help to defray the GST expenses of lower-income to middle-income Singaporean households, beyond the transitional support covered by the Assurance Package. Support is also provided to lower-income households to cope with the rising cost of living. For example, the 2021 Public Transport Voucher (PTV) Exercise will be extended to support lower-income families to cope with any fare adjustments. These schemes announced by the Government would undoubtedly assist in defraying the costs of living for Singaporean households, including the Malay-Muslim community in Singapore. By strengthening our social compact, the assistance rendered is beyond defraying cost but also provide opportunities for all to enhance our social support pillars. We will be able to focus on our children’s education through the expansion of Uplift and Kidstart to support more young children from lower income families. The budget will immensely benefit our Malay-Muslim households in Singapore in coping with the cost of living as Singapore transitions to a post-pandemic future. The majority of Singaporean households will receive at least five years’ worth of additional GST expenses. It is important for the family to take this opportunity to, firstly, continue to find a stable job that provide protection for us now and in the future; second, encourage the spouse to get back to workforce and support the family income; and third, upgrade and upskill to prepare for job in the growth sectors. We can all take a leaf from 47-year-old Brother Ahmad Sadiq's lifelong learning journey. To ensure a brighter future, Brother Ahmad Sadiq pursued part-time courses to climb the academic ladder, beginning with a NITEC in Mechanical Technology, then a diploma in Mechanical Engineering, and finally, a Bachelor's in Mechanical Technology with Honours (Distinction). All this education was fully self-funded, alongside a study grant from the Union of Power and Gas Employees (UPAGE), as well as SkillsFuture Credits. As a Mechanical Engineer and now as a union leader, he continues to champion lifelong learning and leading by example. In fact, he is currently pursuing an energy manager course supported by his company, and plans to pursue shorter courses that are aligned to his personal interests. Moving forward, NTUC will also join hands with the Malay/Muslim community to address the community’s various needs and concerns. At NTUC, we firmly believe that the best approach is to empower our workers to access better jobs and earn better wages with better skills. On 24 February, through a Memorandum of Understanding, NTUC formalised our collaboration with Yayasan MENDAKI with both organisations tapping on our respective networks and resources to advance Employment and Employability for Malay workers in Singapore.[+5 sentences] This MOU is part of M3 Focus Area 4’s key strategy to uplift the Malay community in Singapore. This partnership is a prime example of how NTUC enlarges our efforts in empowering our workers, forging collaborations with community-based and self-help organisation partners to enhance our reach to workers and communities that would benefit from our national-level resources in training and job placement. We will do this by leveraging our training ecosystem with NTUC LearningHub and NTUC’s e2i. And through this ecosystem, the Malay/Muslim community’s efforts to train and upskill, can be augmented and scaled up, so that they remain employable and competitive in the job market. Malay Muslim union leaders are also deployed in the M3@Towns to rally the Malay Muslim workforce and provide the last mile support for job placements. In line with a Malay proverb that tells one to make an effort to achieve one’s desired outcome - NTUC will also partner companies to set up Company Training Committees, or CTCs. As highlighted by Brother Chee Hong Tat and other parliamentary colleagues earlier, this CTC model brings together the unions and employers to develop concrete firm-level transformation plans, including the relevant training needed by their workers. Through the CTC companies, we can multiply our impact to help more workers train and upskill.[+5 sentences] With continued support from the community, NTUC's efforts will go a long way in our cause to uplift the Malay/Muslim community in Singapore. (In English): Sir, in conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic has tested our resilience as a nation. Singaporeans have remained steadfast despite the challenges they faced during the pandemic. Whilst we have come a long way, there will inevitably be many more challenges along the way. However, as a country, we have weathered similar storms and emerged stronger together. As we chart a new forward together, the Government and NTUC are committed to helping workers in every step of the way and will continue our fight for a fairer and more progressive society for all.[+2 sentences] Rest assured, NTUC will continue to champion all workers because every worker matters. Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol)2289 words
[+12 sentences]Mr Speaker, as we continue to navigate the realities of a world still rolling with the punches of COVID-19, it is key that we look out for new opportunities that help us forge a better Singapore that produces more equitable outcomes and is more inclusive of Singaporeans who come from all walks of life. First, on the Progressive Wage Model. Every country is faced with an apparent trilemma when it comes to labour policies. What seems to be fair often does not cultivate a competitive workforce and what appears to do both ends up with high costs of living or taxes. Singapore's answer to this comes from the PWM the Singapore Labour Movement pioneered. Done prudently with meticulous negotiations amongst the tripartite partners, it rewards improved productivity and quality with a wage increase ladder suitable for individual industry sectors. Two upcoming PWMs will be in the retail and food services sector. The workers in these sectors touch our lives and hearts everyday and yet, we have taken our workers in these sectors for granted. Many Singaporeans start our day with a kopi that is served by their usual good neighbourhood kopi soh. When we celebrate with our families birthdays, anniversaries, New Year and Christmas, our workers in the restaurants are right there with us, even if their own families are spending time away from them. Our retail frontliners have also been there for us when we buy our first set of furniture, when we pick the freshest produce from our grocers, when we scoot down to our convenience stores at 2.00 am to pick up emergency supplies. Our workers in these sectors have been keeping Singapore and our lives running with their hard work, sacrifices and good cheer. Despite this, even till today, some 60% of food services and 45% of retail full-time resident workers are earning at or less than the 20th wage percentile of the local workforce. In many international standards among OECD countries, percentile 20 defines the threshold for low pay.[+3 sentences] We need to do something about this. F&B and retail are price sensitive, where a rise of prices in a kopi or a plate of economy rice at the food court will draw much attention. Indeed, our retailers have told me how price spotting even amongst essential items have become ever more keen with the advent of online shopping, cutting their margins razor thin. Therein, the concept of PWM is critical as it marries wage increases with productivity increases through upskilling, investments in technology and career pathways.[+17 sentences] The pandemic has shown that this sector’s veterans and newcomers alike do thrive with the help of technology. Radha Exports Private Limited is the company behind the ValuDollar chain of stores. During COVID-19, the team was caught in an onslaught of challenges to their supply chain and manpower. It was the necessity for change that pushed the company to digitalise and upskill their workers in this process. This increased productivity generated new and better paying jobs by helping the company justify a better pay for their employees. I visited with the company and was delighted to have met with Uncle Rafi, as he is affectionately known. He has been working with the company since 2004, and has moved from being a deliveryman to now their warehouse supervisor. Today, Uncle Rafi is 65 years young, and he proudly tells me of his lifelong learning journey in Radha, from taking inventory using paper and pen, to creating rooms filled with filing shelves, to now being able to use their warehouse software to call up the smallest bar of chocolate from the aircon comfort of his newly computerised monitoring room. The moral of the story is clear: upskilling works and tech is here to help. The PWM ensures competitive pay comes from justifiable reasons. The results speak for themselves. As the PWM continues to reach out to more lower-wage workers, as a Labour Movement, as a Tripartite Partnership, as a country, we need to stand together. This is the heart of the matter: the PWM stands for Singapore’s commitment to uplift workers. This is about companies investing in our hardest working workers, unions protecting them with promise and hope, consumers making sure that those who labour can find ways to make ends meet with dignity, and Government ensuring that companies, workers and consumers are supported while we all are playing our own part in uplifting the lives of our fellow Singaporeans. I would like to turn my attention to another slice of workers in Singapore, our freelancers and the self-employed. As many countries battled the economic downturn in the face of the COVID-19, the gig economy has provided crucial lifelines for many, allowing workers from affected industries to seek freelance jobs in food delivery and ride-hailing services. The growing importance of this economy has seen a greater emphasis to protect the interests and welfare of these workers, workers who are not considered employees and thus are not afforded the protections and benefits salaried employees enjoy. Indeed, in the recent study by the Institute of Public Policy just released yesterday, researchers warn of food delivery and private hire vehicle workers facing risks of becoming trapped in poverty and precarity.[+6 sentences] The study cited that the "lack of savings and voluntary CPF contributions, being stuck in platform work poses additional challenges to future aspirations, such as home ownership". As a progressive Labour Movement, we are sensitive to changes in the evolving Singaporean workforce and have witnessed, like many in the House, including Mr Saktiandi Supaat, the growing popularity of gig work. As such, the Labour Movement has been at the forefront of Singapore’s push to accord greater protection and welfare benefits for workers in the gig economy. We thank Mr Supaat for his feedback and suggestions for protecting freelancers in the education sector and hope that Mr Supaat can continue his good work with us in our associations and our unions. Over the years, we have set up and advocated for safety nets for our gig workers such as offering protection and representation in the event of illness or injuries and care support for income loss or training assistance. However, there are miles to go before we sleep. As we seek to maintain the flexibility and ease of entry into the gig economy that current circumstances allow for, it is imperative that the companies and platforms share our workers' sentiments and work towards providing better protection for our freelancers. I am heartened to see some platforms putting in place their own measures to protect their riders, with delivery platforms such as Grab and Deliveroo offering their riders basic accident insurance coverage. The Labour Movement, through NTUC Learning Hub, has also started to introduce career conversion classes to protect the long-term livelihoods of our drivers who intend to move out of the industry.[+3 sentences] Even as these efforts are encouraging, such measures do not sufficiently protect workers, particularly those who rely on the gig economy as their primary source of income. Without basic labour protections, one can ill-afford to fall sick or face sudden emergencies without facing a loss of income. If this is their hard-earned rice bowl, should we not then provide them with the required protection they deserve? Instead of basic insurance, should we not look towards a standardised level of insurance applied to all workers in the same plight?[+22 sentences] If our workers are contributing to the enterprise value of their partner platforms, should we not then also insist on platforms also contributing to the retirement safety nets of their partners? As the Adviser to the NTUC’s National Taxi Association, National Private Hire Vehicles Association and the National Delivery Champions Association, I have heard loud and clear from the ground the need for better protection and representation of our gig platform workers. One of our brothers, Raymond, met with an accident last year. While covered by his platform partner’s insurance package, he felt that the claim process was onerous to a point where he decided not to pursue the insurance, as he would be able to earn back in one day what he would have received in the claims. Brother Joseph also spoke to us about gaps in their platform partner’s support when their app went down and drivers were not able to earn their full day’s livelihoods. Our associations assisted to compile the list of bugs as the app went back up so that our drivers would have a coordinated voice on what impacts their livelihoods most. These are just some of the many small inconveniences and I would say large tribulations our gig economy workers face as the gig economy and its ecosystem of platforms evolve and grow. As we look to provide greater protection and welfare benefits for workers in the gig economy, the Tripartite Partnership must strive to support a healthy diversity of career options and sustainable, dignified livelihoods brought about by the gig economy. In this respect, I look forward to the recommendations of the Advisory Committee for Platform Workers. It is a good significant beginning for a more coordinated approach to supporting our growing gig worker population. On the topic of evolving workforce, one of the greatest lessons learnt has been on the importance of accommodating diverse profiles as a design feature of our labour force, rather than a design fault. In particular, the interests of two groups of employees – women returning to work, as well as single mothers – must be paid attention to. The Labour Movement has long recognised the distinct challenges women face at work that primarily stems from women having to saddle a greater proportion of domestic responsibilities and have accordingly championed and provisioned to advance this cause. For example, our NTUC Learning Hub has started to co-create with our Women and Family Unit, confidence training courses as well as skills-based programmes to give women returnees the much needed boost when it comes to re-entering the workplace. We has also introduced a Women Mentoring Women programme that consists of Women Union Leaders joining forces with female grassroots leaders in mentoring women who need support with careers and livelihoods. The primary thrust of these supports have been to alleviate the pressures that our women face both at home and the workplace, so that they can engage more productively and meaningfully in both spheres of their lives. To this end, the Labour Movement has sought to continuously enhance Flexible Work Arrangement standards to stay responsive to changing family and workplace needs. As we celebrate these strides forward, we should also be mindful of ongoing gaps. It is my firm belief that changes in organisational culture is just as important as formal frameworks and enhancements to FWA policies must be accompanied by parallel changes in attitudes and values. As companies consider FWA a long-term feature, ground issues such as fair performance evaluation of employees on FWAs, and the availability of FWA options to employees in all job roles become all the more real on the ground. On this, I call for more support from our Government to help employers upskill their HR and line managers to manage a workforce with employees on FWAs. Mothercare, is a name many mothers are familiar with, and it is not surprising that they have championed my heart for women. When I visited Mothercare recently, I was delighted to note that mothers with young children were 40% of their new hires in 2021.[+7 sentences] While I was at their store, I delighted in meeting with Mdm Fadilah who has four children and has worked her way in from Sales Assistant to Store Manager in just eight short years. She was not alone and I met another three teammates of hers, who were moms with three to four children each. The secret to Mothercare’s success? They are committed to job redesign and providing flexible working arrangements especially for their moms at work. I believe that we ladies can have our cake and eat it too with the support of our workplaces. And I look forward to the measures our Government will introduce to encourage and support our employers to take on the challenge of job redesign. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin please. (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Progressive Wage Model will commence in the 3rd quarter of 2022 for the retail industry and 1st quarter of 2023 for the F&B industry.[+3 sentences] This will affect 28,000 full-time low-wage Singaporeans. These people are those who interact with us in our everyday life – our colleagues, neighbours, relatives and friends. They are the coffee aunty whom we meet every morning, and the smiling lad at the convenience store, the restaurant waiter whom we celebrate birthdays together, and the aunty cashier who gives us discount at the supermarket counter. Some 60% of food services and 45% of retail sector workers are classified as low-income workers.[+1 sentence] We must improve this situation. In this Budget, the Government announced a five-year Progressive Wage Credit Scheme to help stablise the wage of the F&B and retail sectors. However, improving the situation of low-wage Singaporeans requires the cooperation of other stakeholders.[+5 sentences] Workers must constantly upgrade their skills and companies must invest in technology. Helping low-wage Singaporeans is the mission of NTUC, the investment of the companies and the duty of all Singaporeans. (In English): Helping businesses pivot to capture new capabilities in digitalisation and upskilling and allowing for employees to share in the fruits of advancement; creating deeper safety nets for the freelance ecosystem, ensuring parity for single mothers and sparking deep attitudinal changes at workplaces for women. These are the opportunities we must latch onto as they present themselves in a Singapore economy that awaits thoughtful reconstruction as #EveryWorkerMatters. Mr Speaker, I support the Budget 2022.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines)1535 words
[+10 sentences]Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to join the debate. The Budget theme “Charting Our New Way Forward Together” is especially apt for a group of Singaporeans with the most vested interests – our younger Singaporeans. They are also part of “Generation COVID”. It is a loose moniker covering people from late childhood to early adulthood who are coming of age during this pandemic. This generation faces unique challenges. COVID-19 has changed the workforce, workplace and aspirations. New opportunities abound but also new threats lurk. Technology has accelerated the creation of higher-end jobs but also commoditised lower-end ones. Skills erosion is happening faster than ever. Young workers preparing for a changing economic order before COVID-19, now find themselves facing a vastly altered one. Recently, Young NTUC commissioned a study involving 1,500 young Singaporeans from age 16 to 35. Perhaps, unsurprisingly, two out of three youths are anxious about the employment landscape, finding it challenging to navigate. Only one in two youths is certain of their career path and believe that they are provided with adequate career opportunities.[+18 sentences] Yet, they also have opportunities beyond the reach of earlier generations. Some worries I have heard from younger Singaporeans include how fundamental economic shifts will impact their job prospects and, of course, inflationary pressures. They want to pursue the future with energy and passion but are faced with a nebulous environment. Generation COVID are the future leaders of Singapore. We need to address their anxieties and worries and, importantly, work with them to fulfil their potential to the fullest. I do appreciate that I am perhaps unable to adequately understand the predicament faced by Generation COVID. So, for a start, I would like to explore some of their concerns from three aspects: jobs, education and changing aspirations. First, jobs and education opportunities. Some members of this Generation find their skills eroded substantially even before they graduate. Others are graduating into depressed sectors, such as tourism-related industries. Yet others, majoring in oil and gas, are entering the decarbonisation era. Reskilling and rapid adaptation are the new game. First, we can consider expanding the reach of SkillsFuture. The use of SkillsFuture credits has shown a strong uptake in the past year. Courses related to skills in the IT, healthcare and professional services sectors are seeing the highest demand, alongside good employment outcomes. Generation COVID would similarly benefit from SkillsFuture. This is especially for those who have graduated but find themselves unable to tap on growth opportunities due to a mismatch in skills. Young NTUC’s survey also showed that a majority of young people find such skills workshops useful. The much shorter economic cycles require us to consider lowering the minimum age for SkillsFuture.[+27 sentences] In addition, we can also increase subsidies for targeted SkillsFuture courses, especially those that support young Singaporeans to explore industries in growth economies. Because of the shifting skills landscape, many younger Singaporeans will possibly need a more significant skills upgrade via a second subsidised diploma or degree. There is merit to such bigger moves because some skills acquisition just cannot be done through micro-courses. Currently, every Singaporean enjoys one bite of the cherry – one subsidised diploma and/or degree per person. With a shrinking cohort of Singaporeans every year, there is already capacity within the IHLs for people seeking a career boost. Currently, hard technical skills are already baseline expectations. These can be taught within educational institutions or academies. However, there is a greater industry emphasis on soft skills, such as career management and interpersonal skills. Some of these soft skills are not transferable through courses and are perhaps better picked up through the sharing of experiences. Thus, there is great demand for structured mentorship in today’s workplace to assist our younger people in navigating the professional workspace. Mentorship will be especially valuable for Generation COVID younger people from the lower- and middle-income families. Some of them might not have easy access to mentors, unlike their better-off counterparts. We have some nascent endeavours, such as Young NTUC’s LIT Mentorship. There is also WeConnect 2.0, an initiative by the Mentoring Alliance For Action (Singapore). But for the Singaporean workforce to differentiate itself from competitors, we must see mentorship as a national capability. It is also part of the ethos espoused by this Budget – Singaporeans looking out for one another. We must still preserve the ground-up mutual help movement. At the same time, creating national centres of excellence for mentorship can accelerate and boost the impact of mentorship. Tripartite partners, such as NTUC and SNEF, can develop such centres because of their deep industry connections. Ironically, the new opportunities from the post-pandemic world, or the endemic-pandemic world, would also have made career navigation a lot more difficult. The current model of navigation starts from the school in the form of career guidance offices to national placement centres, such as e2i or Career Connect. The transition is not seamless and might not also meet the needs of younger workers. Young workers have often asked about the possibility of a one-stop centre that houses career counselling, mentorship, internships and employment opportunities. I can imagine that even the approach to career navigation might be quite different if it primarily serves younger workers. Can the Government consider working with tripartite partners to develop such a capability? Next, on how we can better tailor our policies to Generation COVID, shaping Singapore into a country that they are proud to call home. Mr Speaker, Generation COVID are perhaps the most outspoken, educated and progressive citizenry in the world. In Singapore, the SG Youth Action Plan has shown us our youth’s vision for Singapore in 2025 – social inclusivity, sustainability, mental well-being, and the need to strengthen our social compact.[+7 sentences] Indeed, Generation COVID youths are different from the youths we were. They hold different aspirations for Singapore and have a stronger sense of social justice and activism. Many of them are interested in political and social causes, actively seeking avenues to be heard, to contribute meaningfully to such discourse. During the pandemic and even now, many youths have founded and expanded mutual aid networks to help the less fortunate around us. They also hope that their professional work aids in the advancement of social causes. Increasingly, we see our younger people seeking the expression and advancement of such issues not only through their personal lives, but also their professional work. This intersection of work and social activism is both exciting and less understood. We have an urgent need for deeper conversations to chart the way forward. This brings us to the theme of Budget 2022 – Charting the Way Forward Together.[+18 sentences] We must first seek to understand Generation COVID’s views on a deeper level, by creating safer spaces for them to candidly share their thoughts, views and aspirations for Singapore. What is their desired workplace and work culture? What is the new compact with our younger workers? NTUC is working towards a deeper understanding of the aspirations and needs of our younger workers. We welcome partners to join us on this journey. This is that critical first step in building a new and sustainable compact with our young workers. To many of our Generation COVID, greater strides must be taken to tackle mental health issues. As part of a generation who ascribe greater significance to having a purposeful balance between work and mental wellness over traditional aggregators of success, this issue is one Generation COVID feels strongly for. The pandemic has normalised hybrid workplaces and work-from-home culture. While the changing face of the workplace has afforded more flexibility, it has also blurred the boundaries between work and personal lives. New entrants to the workforce have a much harder time adapting to the hybrid work model without the benefit of an established support network. Thus, they are more exposed to stresses that were never present before the proliferation of hybrid workplaces. I believe we can spark more conversations on mental health on the national level, thereby normalising mental health issues across the nation and within workspaces. Key stakeholders, such as employers, must remain sensitive and understanding towards persons struggling with mental health issues. The Labour Movement will work closely with our tripartite partners to champion mental health within the workplace. We can consider establishing a code of practices for working from home and increasing peer-to-peer support as an avenue to advance mental wellness. Peer support is a crucial part of primary care at the workplace. It is not meant to replace professionals but, instead, is a vital link to get people to seek help. NTUC has launched a WSQ on peer-to-peer support and endeavours to work with all stakeholders to advance mental well-being.[+2 sentences] Mr Speaker, Sir, despite the uncertainties, the future is shining bright for our younger people with Budget 2022’s commitment to investing in new capabilities and opportunities for our economy and our people. We must ensure that Generation COVID is well-prepared to face the uncertainties of the global economy and even the next pandemic. In NTUC, we will champion the aspirations and needs of our younger Singaporeans.[+2 sentences] We will chart this journey together with Generation COVID, working with them to emerge even stronger from the pandemic. Notwithstanding my suggestions, I support the Motion.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Seah Kian Peng.
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade)1474 words
[+15 sentences]Sir, first, let me declare my interests as the Group CEO of NTUC Enterprise and the Fairprice Group. Sir, this Budget looks into the future, even if it runs, for the third year, into the red. The bills come, not just from the price of security and safety today, but for the education and investments of tomorrow. The rising inflationary pressures come from different sources and are complex in nature. The impact, however, is simple and direct – a dollar today can buy more than a dollar tomorrow. I want to speak on two groups that are particularly hard-hit – small businesses and the cost of living for the ordinary men and women. First, cost pressures faced by SMEs. Many SME suppliers are all struggling now to manage the cost increases that are coming from all fronts. Some described it like a "tsunami". Whether it is raw materials, freight, manpower, packaging or cost of energy, everything is more expensive now. Added to that, the headwinds from tough weather, floods and logistical disruptions due to COVID-19 restrictions. For SMEs, in particular, where profits can be razor-thin, it is about cost pressures and stresses of managing rising costs in many areas, and these, sometimes, can appear to be faceless corporate troubles. But when businesses fail, jobs are lost, too. And behind each SME is a group of men and women with dreams and families. One SME owner shared with me that the cost of his raw materials for soya sauce includes soya beans. Prices have gone up by 20%, sugar and salt are up 30%, and the freight cost of shipping raw sugar from Thailand to Singapore has increased from what used to be less than $200 per 20-foot full container load, is now $1,000.[+8 sentences] That is almost a five-fold increase. The current conflict that is taking place in Russia and Ukraine will add further cost pressures to businesses. Amongst other things, Ukraine is a major supplier of sunflower seed, sunflower oil, whilst Russia is a major supplier of wheat, which will impact raw materials supply and cost of wheat-based products. Ukraine is also a major producer of corn. Corn supply shortage may also impact price of livestock feeds where corn is a major ingredient. Indeed, many egg suppliers have told me that their cost has gone up very significantly where energy cost and corn, which is the feed for the chicken, are major cost items for them. In its annual survey last year, the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry sought feedback from more than 1,000 businesses, 92% of whom are SMEs. Many say their costs have gone up quite significantly and, as a result, they have suffered losses. For sure, some 57% of Singapore businesses surveyed saw their costs rise this year. That is nearly double the 28.8% who did so last year.[+20 sentences] SMEs form an important part of the Singapore economy, including as a source of jobs and meaningful livelihood. And, often, the voices of small business owners go unheard. So, what can we do to ensure that SMEs have a place at the table? For example, trade associations play an important role in gathering feedback, as well as explaining new policies and schemes to its members. Such associations may run on a tight budget, which constrain their effectiveness. Can the Minister consider providing some one-off grants to such associations? On the impact of cost increases, I think some price increase in products and services may be expected. Of course, there are those few errant businesses which may take advantage of the situation to profiteer. Like everyone else in this House, I have no sympathy for them and they should be taken to task. I am sure the Committee against Profiteering headed by Minister of State Low Yen Ling, when the committee is formulating the guidelines against profiteering, will, with the help of the community, step up their vigilance in light of the current situation and ensure that those who use, whether it is “inflation” or “GST” or whatever, to cover a multitude of price increases, will be taken to task. But at the same time, we should not begrudge businesses and SMEs for legitimate and reasonable price increases for the reasons that I shared earlier. Finally, I would like to bring up an "ask" from SMEs – the issue of manpower. Given the important role that migrant workers play in Singapore’s economy, I would like the Government to give some flexibility to businesses and, in particular, SMEs in hiring such workers. Let me now switch to the other group and speak about the cost of living faced by individuals and families. Cost of living is a perennial issue. I am not sure about the rest of you but my grandparents, parents, peers and now my own children, they are also talking about it. I think no one will ever say things were cheap during their time. Our forefathers carried those worries too, but through determination, hard work and with support from various people and the Government sectors, they not only survived but prospered and built the foundation of a thriving Singapore. NTUC was certainly one of those partners. In fact, NTUC FairPrice, "Welcome" then, was born at a time of rising prices in the oil shocks of the 1970s. Just two Mondays ago, we announced the "Stretch Your Dollar" programme to give a 5% discount on 100 essential items every Friday.[+7 sentences] This will start in March. We ran similar "Stretch Your Dollar" programmes in 2007 to 2008 during the Global Financial Crisis and again from 2010 to 2011 during the economic downturn. Overall, NTUC’s focus is on ensuring workers in Singapore remain competitive and employable for life, as well as enhancing their welfare. To do this, NTUC strives to help workers of all collars and ages get better jobs and earn better wages. At the same time, NTUC supports workers and their families by moderating the cost of living through various programmes, including sustainable wage increases in the form of PWM, subsidised training, financial assistance schemes and affordable daily essentials and services through the NTUC group of social enterprises. Within the NTUC group, we have various charities and foundations. They include U Care Fund, FairPrice Foundation, Orange Aid, Eldercare Trust and Bright Horizons Fund to ensure those who have less, they are not disadvantaged. In fact, when I group all these together, over $441 million have been given out.[+4 sentences] Over the years, the NTUC Enterprise group have evolved to be significant industry players today, whilst continuing to take care of the needs of not just workers, but also their multi-generational families, across their different life stages. We strive to play our part to moderate cost of essential goods and services, serving as price benchmarks and addressing underserved needs. Of course, we are not the only ones doing this, and there are many, many helping hands all over Singapore to help those in need. I would like to ask if the Government can consider the following. First, can we on a whole-of-Government and whole-of-society basis, coordinate, encourage efforts which keep basic items affordable, to help cope with the cost of living?[+1 sentence] This can either be in the form of giving guidance on specific items or tax incentives for doing so. Second, keep looking out for those whose incomes have been lost or reduced during the pandemic and to provide support for those who might fall through the cracks, such as those with limited family support. And related to the second, perhaps it is not just a matter of having more schemes, but helping more people become aware of and applying for such schemes.[+11 sentences] Yes, we need to extend more help to those less tech-savvy workers to apply for Government schemes. They are often the ones who need it most. Even as we help address their welfare needs, we can also help them see where they need help in terms of upgrading their skills and securing jobs. As Singapore develops, aspirations today are understandably different from the past. We are better educated, technologies have empowered convenience and lifestyles have evolved. But one thing remains: we continue to want the best for our children and for the next generation. In the past, a dollar’s value is measured in its ability to buy a home, to go to school and put a meal on the table. Today, a dollar can already do this for most of us, and we want it to buy more. Mr Speaker, Sir, the challenges have become more complex today – ageing population, maturing economy, sandwich generation, cost of living, climate change, global competition for talents. What we need to buy with our dollar is security for all Singaporeans, to be able to continue our common dream of peace and prosperity amidst rising and uncertain seas. Sir, 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 4.15 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 3.50 pm until 4.15 pm. Sitting resumed at 4.15 pm.
Mr Speaker5 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas)1616 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Budget, which seeks to address our immediate challenges and chart our way forward together. Sir, let me first declare my interest as President of the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE). This Budget comes on the back of significant global inflationary pressures, at a time when rising cost of living is a major concern for many Singaporeans. The proposed increase in GST will no doubt add to consumers' concerns. While we understand the need to raise revenue, I am heartened that the Government has decided to delay the GST increase to 2023 and to stagger the increase over two years. Doing so will provide time for the various measures introduced to tackle rising inflation to come into effect. At CASE, we believe more can be done to help consumers make informed purchasing decisions. That is why we launched the Price Kaki mobile application in 2019 to allow consumers to compare prices of household essentials, groceries and hawker food, make informed purchase decisions and stretch their dollar. Since its launch, the app has been downloaded more than 80,000 times. CASE will expand Price Kaki this year, with more retailers, more products and more services, so as to benefit more consumers. We will increase the coverage of cooked food stalls from the current 114 hawker centres to cover an additional 200 foodcourts and coffee shops. CASE will also increase the coverage of groceries and household essentials on the app from 4,000 to 10,000 items.[+7 sentences] To tackle rising prices, consumers can also consider purchasing house brands for their daily essentials. According to Price Kaki's data, house brand products can cost 10% to 25% cheaper than brand goods. House brands can be just as good and have similar nutrition value as regular brands. I would encourage consumers to look beyond the advertising and give house brands a try. The same taste for a much lower cost may come as a pleasant surprise. Sir, house brands help set an important price floor for many of our household essential items and I hope all major supermarket chains can absorb the GST increase for selected house brand essential items. But comparing prices alone is insufficient if a retailer chooses to maintain the price but reduce the quantity of the product. To tackle this shrinkflation, I would like to call on the Government to introduce mandatory unit pricing for supermarkets and grocery retailers in Singapore.[+38 sentences] Mandatory unit pricing is already practised in countries such as Australia, Argentina and Chile. This might have been a logistical and administrative challenge in the past when price tags were printed on paper placed manually on the shelves. With the wide use of digital price tags today, supermarkets should have no difficulty displaying unit pricing. As part of our commitment to price transparency, CASE will display unit price alongside the retail price for items listed on Price Kaki. Sir, COVID-19 has impacted many of our heartland shops and hawkers. While the CDC vouchers have been a major help, more can be done to help our neighbourhood merchants transform their businesses. Heartland shops are facing immense pressure as higher prices of goods and utilities are weighing down heavily on their profitability. They are also facing stiff competition from online retailers. As consumers' purchasing behaviour shifts to e-commerce accelerated by the pandemic, I thought it would be helpful to onboard our heartland merchants and hawkers onto a major e-marketplace. This will help them tap on the huge e-commerce potential. I am therefore glad that Lazada Singapore has partnered Radin Mas to launch the Radin Mas Marketplace @ Lazada. This will be Singapore's first e-marketplace for heartland shops. Lazada will onboard all interested merchants and hawkers in Radin Mas, which number close to 600 and allow them to list their first 100 items on the e-marketplace at no cost. Lazada will also teach our merchants how to better engage with younger customers such as through livestreaming. Merchants and consumers can also benefit from the occasional promotional campaigns organised by Lazada. Sir, our heartland shops are an important part of our social fabric. As we transform our economy and chart our way in the post-pandemic future, we must ensure that our heartland shops will continue to remain part of our Singapore Story. Mr Speaker, to manage the cost of living, wages must increase in tandem with rising inflation. However, we need to watch out for these three "invisibles" that could stand in the way of raising salaries – the invisible competition for jobs, invisible skills mismatch and invisible threat of burnout. The COVID-19 pandemic has completely transformed the way we work and has accelerated the "work from anywhere" trend. Competition for jobs can now come from digital nomads working from any corner of the globe as long as the candidate has the right skills, a computer and a good Internet connection. There is even a new word recently invented called "workcation" where people travel and work remotely at the same time. Countries are now seeking to attract these digital nomads as they reopen their economies and try to revive their tourism and hospitality sectors at the same time. The Financial Times recently reported that Thailand is offering 10-year visas to attract skilled professionals working remotely. According to Investopedia, Thailand is not alone, with Germany, Mexico and Norway – just to name a few examples – trying very hard to attract these digital nomads. Sir, the Minister for Manpower answered a Parliamentary Question yesterday on foreign remote workforce employed by Singapore-based companies. He highlighted how it is important for Singapore to continually transform ourselves and help our local workforce perform higher value jobs. I cannot agree with him more. But the reality is that digital nomads are competing for higher value jobs – jobs such as creative professionals, coding specialists and data science analysts. Simply put, companies today need not hire people based physically in Singapore to fill jobs here and our PMETs are particularly at risk of being displaced by an invisible competition, sitting by the poolside of a resort in Phuket. While the increase in minimum qualifying salaries for Employment Pass and S Pass holders may be a short-term measure, I urge the Government to study this trend and review if our existing labour policies would continue to remain relevant in the years ahead. Do we need to adjust our policies and economic strategies to account for this invisible global competition for local jobs? According to data from MOM, Singapore had a record high of 98,700 job openings in September 2021, with the number of job vacancies more than double the number of unemployed people. On the ground, however, the Labour Movement has received feedback from PMETs, particularly those in their mid-career, that they find it difficult to land these jobs. Jobs looking for people. People looking for jobs. What could be the reason for the disconnect? One answer is likely a mismatch in skills. Our NTUC's career coaches have found that many mid-career PMETs often neglect to go for skills upgrading because they were too caught up with day-to-day work schedules and very wide-ranging family responsibilities. That is why I am glad that the Government is committing $100 million to scale NTUC's company training committees (CTCs).[+3 sentences] The CTCs help address the two most common questions that workers have when it comes to training – train what and train for what – by aligning the training needs with the company's future business and operations roadmap. Therefore, I encourage all companies in Singapore to work with NTUC and partner with us to create and implement training programmes that are suitable to upskill and reskill your workers effectively. Lastly, I would like to touch on workplace burnout, a real but often invisible threat to the well-being of our workers. Over the years, I have been speaking both inside and outside of this House on the importance of maintaining good workplace mental health. I am glad that the Government has worked closely with the Labour Movement on various initiatives, notably the Tripartite Advisory on Mental Well-being at Workplaces back in November 2020, which provides guidance on after-hours work communications.[+2 sentences] For the first time, the Workplace Safety and Health Council will introduce a new workplace mental health category at this year's Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Awards. However, there remains much more to be done. According to a recent NTUC survey of 1,000 young working adults, over 40% reported poor work-life balance and work stress due to longer working hours and heavier workload since the start of the pandemic. Forty-two percent of the respondents felt that there was insufficient mental well-being support at their workplaces.[+10 sentences] Clearly, our tired working professionals deserve a right to disconnect so that they can have protected time to rest and recharge after work. I urge the Ministries and our Government agencies to lead by promulgating clear directives on after-hours work communications for their staff. Good workplace mental health is good for productivity and business. I hope that the Government can provide grants to encourage more employers to implement Employee Assistance Programmes at various workplaces to support its workers with mental health needs. Mr Speaker, the coming years are fraught with challenges. Rising energy prices, inflation and a rapidly ageing population are just some of the difficult hurdles that Singapore and Singaporeans will need to overcome. At NTUC, we believe that every worker matters and the best way to protect them through these challenges is through better jobs and better wages. We will continue to walk alongside our brothers and sisters and help them take advantage of all the help that are available. We will chart our way forward together. Sir, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Heng Chee How.
The Senior Minister of State for Defence (Mr Heng Chee How)1793 words
[+9 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to join this Debate. I support the Budget. Earlier, the hon Member Mr Melvin Yong spoke of the threat of shrinkflation, which is that the price is the same, but the items get smaller. That is the pressure that inflation can put on consumers. But, Sir, not everything, however, is going in that direction. There are certain things which are going in the opposite direction and one of them is the longevity of Singaporeans. Singaporeans are living longer and there are implications, and it is to this direction that I will now turn. Sir, I wish to speak on measures to further strengthen the retirement adequacy of present and future generations of older workers. First, I thank the Government for beginning to implement the recommendations of the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers. In January this year, the first step to improve the CPF contribution rates for older workers aged 55 to 70 was carried out. This is part of the journey to harmonise CPF contribution rates for workers up to age 60 by the year 2030, as part of overall measures to help strengthen the retirement adequacy of Singaporean workers. I, therefore, welcome our Finance Minister’s announcement in this year’s Budget that the next tranche of CPF contribution rate improvements would be carried out in 2023.[+14 sentences] It is important for these steps to be undertaken while conditions permit, because 10 years might sound very long, but it passes much faster than one thinks. Sir, while improving CPF contribution rates for workers aged 55 to 70 will, indeed, help increase their retirement savings to some degree, it is not a silver bullet to achieve retirement adequacy in and of itself. For workers to be able to maximise their CPF retirement savings gained from work, they need to be in work for as many years as they are willing and able to, and for them to be able to qualify for both employer and employee CPF contributions as pay levels change with time. Hence, there should be periodic reviews of the qualifying criteria for employer CPF contributions to ensure that, as pay levels improve over time, the proportion of pay that qualifies for CPF keeps pace and does not become materially eroded, of course, taking into account prevailing economic conditions. This will enable us to strike and sustain a fair, judicious and necessary equilibrium between employers’ legitimate cost concerns and workers’ legitimate need for retirement adequacy. Sir, each year of additional work would mean that an older worker earns at least 12 months of additional pay and, for many workers, they have that 13th month as well, so, at least, 12 months. Clearly, this would greatly help with an older worker’s financial position and retirement savings, much more than any other measure. This was why the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers had recommended increases in the statutory retirement and reemployment ages to be accomplished within this decade, moving from 62 to 65 and from 67 to 70 by the end of the decade. The Government had previously announced that the first step in this journey is to add one year to both the statutory retirement and reemployment ages in July this year, that is, in July 2022. I fully support this step as our economy is projected to grow this year at a still healthy clip. Just like the improvements in CPF contribution rates, we must take incremental steps while we can, so that we will reach the goal within the timeframe that the Tripartite partners had agreed upon. The enactment of the Retirement Age Act and its subsequent expansion to encompass Reemployment represent overt Government and legislative intent and support for older Singaporean workers. I, therefore, look forward to the outcomes of the Tripartite Workgroup on Workplace Fairness and, in particular, its recommendations to safeguard and strengthen the interests of older workers for fair consideration and treatment at work, including for training. The Government has also put money where its mouth is to spur the continued hiring of older workers through a range of policy incentives: training subsidies, hiring incentives, CPF offset measures and so on, all stacked in favour of the hiring of older workers. The combined result of tripartite and Government resolve and action has been a steady rise in mature workers' employment rates. It improved from 27.6% in 2019 to 28.5% in 2020 to 31.7% in 2021.[+17 sentences] This is all the more remarkable, because these improvements happened even in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic that we are experiencing here in Singapore. When we compare this achievement with the large-scale shedding of older workforces in many other countries over the past two years, then we know that we must not take this support and investment in our older workers for granted. This did not come naturally and it is not by chance. That said, I want to point to two areas that I urge close attention and coordinated action on in the coming years, to make sure that these hard-won gains are sustained and not eroded. Sir, in 2019, the proportion of Singaporeans aged 60 outnumbered Singaporeans aged five for the first time. We have also heard that the proportion of Singaporeans aged 65 and above has grown from 9% of the population in 2009 to 16% in 2019 and will reach 25% in 2030. These figures all, basically, show that Singapore is ageing very rapidly. The implication of that on healthcare costs is clear and has been extensively discussed, including in the Budget speech. So, I will not dwell on that one. But there is another significant implication, which is the implication on mature workers’ employment rate, that we must not miss. As I had said in previous Budget debate speeches, there is a significant trend of departure from work among female workers from around middle age. By some estimates, there could be some 30,000 such work-able persons in our population. This is likely to be due to care responsibilities, that is, the fact that they had left work is likely to be due to care responsibilities at work, and such care responsibilities, given that if they are leaving at middle age, are likely to be related to caring for senior members in the family. This trend, we must expect, will intensify as our population bulge of baby boomers age into their 70s and beyond, and that would trigger a corresponding increase in pressure on middle-aged family members, especially women, to have to leave work in order to care for their senior family members. If this happens, the impact on household income and the retirement adequacy of caregivers on the one hand, and the implication on the availability and mix of our workforce to companies on the other, will be big. Traditional measures to help retain more middle-aged workers with care responsibilities either at work or to allow a return to work include the promotion of flexible work arrangements. This is correct and must, of course, continue. But I believe that this is not sufficient and we have to do more. I believe that it is timely for a very thorough study to be carried out on how to enable appropriate affordable senior day care services, whether they be homecare or day-focused institutions, to be made available, at scale, that would also be sustainable for the service providers to provide.[+2 sentences] Conceptually, this would be similar to the thinking behind providing affordable childcare services so that the parents, especially the mothers, can have a practical option of choosing to work, rather than, out of no choice, to have to stay at home to look after the babies. So, if you flip it to the other end of the population, conceptually, it is the same. Of course, the details are different and the conditionality for providing such affordable and accessible senior day care at scale is not identical but will have to be studied. But we must study this expansion of such day care services in earnest and, through policy direction, implement a scaling up of such services with appropriate conditions so that we can forestall a surge in local workforce departures in the medium term, or a huge further increase in demand for foreign domestic help to look after the seniors.[+7 sentences] But that, in itself, brings about its own complexities. Doing so will also allow us to create viable jobs in this sector, turning the unavoidable population ageing into an opportunity. I turn now to my final point, which is that we need to focus attention on jobs and occupations that employ significant numbers of older workers that we know will be impacted significantly by fast changes in technology. In this regard, we must pay special attention to the subset of such jobs and occupations that our switch to a low-carbon economy will likely put additional pressure on. The vulnerability of older workers in such settings is quite self-evident and I think, earlier on, my colleague Mr Melvin Yong and, before that, Mr Patrick Tay had also given examples of how the middle-aged PMEs are also facing these difficulties and pressure, including the three invisibles that Mr Melvin Yong spoke about. For older workers, if they are displaced, then their risk of structural unemployment will be higher than the rest. Even if they are rehired, their earnings will likely be lower and, therefore, negatively impacting their retirement adequacy. To forestall this, I call for a specific tripartite focus to identify such priority sectors and occupations for re-skilling so that older workers holding these current jobs roles can be reskilled and be part of their firm's future even as their companies transform.[+1 sentence] Such efforts can certainly tap into NTUC’s growing network of Company Training Committees (CTCs) in order to systematically, deliberately and proactively do so. In this regard, I join my colleagues in thanking the Government of the investment of $100 million to work together and support NTUC's efforts in this area.[+7 sentences] And where there is ultimately an excess of manpower, parallel efforts to help the older workers reskill and convert to other job possibilities elsewhere will be equally crucial. Sir, the theme of this Budget is “Charting Our New Way Forward Together”. This means that we must look at what is coming ahead and rally the whole of Singapore society to face it together and thrive, leaving no one behind. As for NTUC, we will continue to champion better wages, jobs and work prospects for all workers. Every worker matters and we believe that this is the best way to care for their present and to uplift their future. Our older workers are a valuable and growing part of our local workforce. Let us work together with them to shape that better future.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Wan Rizal.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar)1958 words
[+23 sentences]Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Budget. The past two years had been like a roller-coaster ride in the dark. We do not know where the twists and turns are but we have, together, shoulder-to-shoulder, ridden over one peak after another, and it seems like we are now in the midst of another one. This has never been a fun ride, especially for our frontliners. To Team MOH and the healthcare workers who are once again called up to the fore, thank you, and I salute you for valiantly keeping our country going, not forgetting my fellow educators, who face students every day to provide normalcy amid a dynamic landscape. Alongside our Public Service officers, our healthcare workers and educators have taken up multiple, varied and new roles, which underlie their unwavering commitment. I am grateful as they give us the much-needed confidence to see the light at the end of this dark roller-coaster ride. I urge that we continue to provide our Public Service officers, especially our healthcare workers and educators, with the best support and work-life balance possible. Firstly, I ask that their workload and work scope be reviewed. How many hats can one person wear to remain effective? Perhaps, it is also time that we set clear guidelines on work hours, introduce timeouts and enforce the time for disconnect. Replying to non-urgent emails can wait but our families cannot. We must also continue to create and upgrade channels for communication between staff and this does not include the bi-annual staff appraisal. I am also aware of the abuse they face and the pressures of work from the stakeholders, and we should do more to create practical ways to allow them to come forth and be provided with the necessary support and protection. Mr Speaker, while the fight against COVID-19 is far from over, we are in a better position to chart a new way forward together. I support the Finance Minister's call to renew and strengthen our social compact. It resonates strongly with me and I will touch on two areas: education and mental health. Mr Speaker, I am a firm believer in lifelong learning. To sustain something lifelong requires us to acknowledge that one may be susceptible to physical and mental burnouts. In my previous speeches, I mentioned that one way to mitigate this is to provide opportunities or rather, phases for individuals to: discover, re-discover and re-invent themselves. I will cover two of them today, although all three are aptly represented in this year's Budget announcement. The first phase, "discover", begins from early childhood. Within this phase, we must provide our children with the opportunities to discover their strengths and interests. Opportunities for deliberate play and exploration will allow children to pick up social interaction and problem-solving skills beyond what books can offer. Therefore, I welcome the announcement that we will be investing more in our children to scale up the KidSTART programme nationwide and expand into a nationwide UPLIFT Community Network to support more children in disadvantaged families.[+2 sentences] However, I hope that we can also curate programmes for those in the middle class in the future, especially those who may be struggling or facing sudden change in their situation. As shown through the pandemic, being on a balance means that one can be tipped over fairly easily. Nevertheless, the move for an enhanced KidSTART and upscaled UPLIFT programme underlines our strong commitment to tackle inequality at the earliest juncture possible and ensures that every child is given the opportunity to discover the joy of exploration and play and importantly, stand a fighting chance when they enter Primary school.[+3 sentences] Mr Speaker, when I recall my Primary and Secondary school experience, it was all about the PSLE, the "N" and "O" levels. I understand the need to hold these major exams, but I think we can do with fewer exams in between. If we are serious about redefining success, then it can start by redefining what exams mean. I urge this call in unison for a "whole-of-society approach" to change the mindsets on education, from daily school issues to major examinations and how we perceive success and learning as a whole. It is about time to change this "Assessment of Learning" culture to a "Journey of Learning".[+15 sentences] We must create a culture of appreciating the joy of learning and the challenges such a journey presents, be it easy or difficult, whether we get success or failure and accepting that there are multiple paths to achieve success. In removing the minor exams, we can nurture an optimal lifelong learning concept and this, in turn and hopefully, result in a better mental health environment. Sir, the second phase, "re-discover", is at the Polytechnic or University stage. We have done well to create multiple pathways. There are now numerous courses that a student can enrol in that matches their interests. However, one lesson we learnt from the pandemic was the inability of some of our fresh graduates to be agile in a volatile job environment. This is not their fault. Who could have predicted that certain sectors can be so affected by the pandemic? In my previous speeches, I emphasised the need to give our graduates broad skills that can be generalised across other disciplines. This will put them in a better footing and give them the confidence to apply their skills across other sectors. I would now go a step further and ask if we could allow greater flexibility to allow students to choose modules outside their main course and pursue side interests. I could be a sports scientist with a good foundation in entrepreneurship. Or an engineer with graphic design skills. Inevitably, time is a factor. Polytechnic students, for example, have three years to complete the course. Perhaps, it is time to review if a slightly longer duration would allow students to develop better, to get that much needed time and space to equip themselves and pursue these interests.[+8 sentences] Mr Speaker, many PAP Members, past and present, have touched on the importance of mental health and support. In my previous adjournment motions, I highlighted several suggestions to destigmatise mental health. These include a push for mental health and social media literacy in schools and workplaces, improving accessibility at community touchpoints, providing regular mental health screening and introducing time-outs for individuals to recharge, re-organise and come back stronger to school or work. I also called for the Government to expand our mental healthcare infrastructure, expand community support network and to make mental healthcare and support affordable. Beyond Parliament, with support from other PAP Members, as well as the Young PAP, we drove the #452TooMany campaign and conducted dialogues to bring community partners like Total Wellness Initiative, ItAllStartsHere.sg, IMH, the Muslim Healthcare Professionals Association and many more, as well as volunteers and residents together. Within my constituency, we have also organised workshops for grassroots leaders so that they can better support our residents. That is why I am very happy to hear our Finance Minister laying out broad plans to enhance and integrate mental health and social services in the community. The setting up of the Inter-agency Task Force shows that the Government is committed to taking action towards mental health stigmatisation and supporting the needs of Singaporeans. In November last year, MOH published its National Population Health Survey and found that younger adults aged between 18 and 29 had the highest proportion of poor mental health, for about 21.5%. Therefore, I call on the task force to expand outreach and support for this particular group and hope that with the rising numbers as a whole, we can also increase the number of psychiatrics services that we made available.[+27 sentences] Mr Speaker, while the Government can enact policies and guidelines, it does not have the monopoly of solutions to make Singapore a caring and inclusive nation. We need all hands on deck. Here, I would like to call upon three groups to play their part. The first: employers. I spoke previously about the need to be more compassionate to our workers and provide them with periods to recharge, therefore I urge employers once again to review their mental wellness programmes, encourage regular health screening, both physical and mental and consider using time-outs. Like some say, a happy employee is a productive employee, but most importantly, an even happier employer. Secondly, is family and friends. While I am grateful that our mental healthcare infrastructure is robust and sound, it is sad that many of us are still not stepping forward to receive help. Stigmatisation remains a pertinent issue. Mental health issues are varied in nature. Some are obvious, others are silent and almost unnoticeable. It would be unwise for one to generalise. Therefore, a strong support system of family and friends play a key role in helping a loved one. Thus, the need for mental health literacy for everyone remains important to eradicate stigmatisation and create a more caring support system. Thirdly, is our community. With Singapore having one of the highest internet penetration rates globally, almost every adult and youth are connected to the internet and social media. Cyberbullying, the woke culture and online shaming are becoming more rampant and have a detrimental effect on the mental health of those affected. Therefore, it starts with us, not the Government alone or social media platforms, it begins with us – the community – to set a good online and offline code of conduct to create a more caring and inclusive home for all of us. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): I was happy to see this caring and inclusive Budget delivered by the Minister of Finance. I support his call to renew and strengthen our social compact. In my English speech earlier, I spoke about three issues. First, comprehensive support for workers; second, education; and third, mental health. Allow me to summarise. First, I urge that we provide a more comprehensive support for workers, especially healthcare sector workers and teachers. I call on the Government and employers to review their workload and job scope to ensure a quality Work-Life balance. This includes setting clear guidelines on working hours and introduce time-outs for workers to come back stronger to their workplace. As for education, I welcome the announcement to scale up the KidSTART and UPLIFT programmes.[+4 sentences] It underlines a strong commitment to tackle inequality as early as possible and ensures that every child is given the opportunity to fulfil their potential. In my previous speeches in Parliament, I highlighted several suggestions to eradicate stigmatisation and increase support for mental health. Beyond Parliament, other PAP MPs and I have organised campaigns on social media and discussions to raise awareness about mental health. Therefore, I am heartened to hear the Minister laying out broad plans to enhance support for mental health. The establishment of an Inter-Agency Task Force shows that the Government is concerned and took action against mental health stigmatisation and supporting the needs of Singaporeans.[+6 sentences] I urge employers and everyone from all walks of life to join us in this endeavour. United we stand, divided we fall. Many hands make light work. (In English): Mr Speaker, in conclusion, I can only say that change in the only constant and if we, as Singaporeans, are committed to creating a caring and inclusive Singapore for our generation and the generations ahead, we need to continue to take decisive actions and remain agile in a dynamic, volatile landscape. With the Government reiterating its commitment and the community stepping forward to co-curate these solutions, I am confident that we can be the shining light for other countries to emulate as we "chart a new way forward for Singapore together". Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Hazel Poa.
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member)1056 words
[+14 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, there are many measures announced in this year's Budget Statement that we welcome. We welcome the further tightening of foreign manpower, the increased focus on re-distribution through the introduction of higher income tax rates at the top tiers and higher taxes on properties and luxury cars. We think that more can be done but are happy with the direction we are taking. However, we object to the raising of GST. Firstly, this is a bad time to be raising GST, and we do not need the revenue now. Singaporeans are concerned about the rising cost of living. Additional worries are on the horizon over the inflation outlook. The Federal Reserve Chairman and the European Central Bank's President articulated their expectations of high inflation this year. Oil prices rose by 50% in 2021 and the war in Ukraine is likely to worsen the picture. According to Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), food prices rose by 28% in 2021 and in December 2021, fertiliser prices rose to more than double the price from a year ago. This is expected to put further inflationary pressure on food prices. Closer at home, MAS has revised their inflation expectations upwards. Bus, train and taxi fares have been raised. Electricity tariffs has been rising steadily every quarter since the first quarter of 2021. The GST hikes will further exacerbate inflationary pressure.[+3 sentences] While for the time being, the rebates given out is more than the expected additional GST to be collected, it is only a matter of time before most Singaporeans have to pay more in GST; for that is the whole purpose of raising GST – to raise additional revenue. The fact that the Government is giving out rebates in excess of the expected additional GST to be collected over the next few years underlines the fact that we currently do not need the additional revenue now. If raising GST is to fund the additional healthcare and other social spending in future, how much would we have to raise GST by? The Finance Minister has shared that healthcare spending could increase from $11 billion in 2019 to $27 billion in 2030 based on current trend. So, does this mean that we would have to raise GST by 11% just to fund the additional healthcare spending? Are we looking at 18% to 20% GST by 2030?[+32 sentences] This is an alarming prospect which brings us to our second point: we need to look at other ways of raising revenue. GST was introduced to enable Singapore to cut corporate income tax and personal income tax rates to make Singapore a more attractive investment destination. GST started at 3% in 1994 and gradually increased to the current 7%. Over the same period, corporate income tax rate was gradually cut from 27% to 17% and personal income tax rate was gradually cut from 30% to 20%, before being raised to 22% in 2016. This tax development benefited the rich more than the poor and middle class. With the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) initiative, not only will we lose tax revenue, using low corporate tax as a tool to attract investment will also become less effective. It is, therefore, time to review our previous approach of raising GST to cut corporate and personal income taxes. Income taxes are progressive while GST is regressive. The pandemic has also worsened inequality by hitting the poor more than the rich. In light of new tax developments and the current environment, we should reverse our earlier moves. Instead of raising GST for additional revenue, we should look at raising corporate and personal income taxes. We are happy to note that the personal income tax rate for the highest tax brackets will be raised, but we believe there is room for more. While our corporate tax rate is 17%, there are tax incentives that lower the effective tax rate of many companies. Even if we were to raise our corporate tax rate to 20%, it would still be low compared to the region. The pandemic has affected different sectors differently. Some sectors suffered, others weathered it better, while some sectors actually benefited from the pandemic. Corporate tax is applied only on profitable companies and hence is a more discerning way of raising revenue. Loss making companies will not be affected by an increase in corporate tax rate but some will be hit with increased cost due to a GST hike. Moreover, many companies have benefited from the generous COVID-19 packages offered by the Government, including companies that remained profitable throughout the pandemic. It is only fair that they now pay a higher corporate tax. This is simple give-and-take. Next, I will talk about land sale proceeds. Currently, land sale proceeds are not treated as revenue, but are put into reserves. The Government considers this just a change in the form of the asset – from land to money – not an income. If the land is sold on a freehold basis – once sold forever gone – then I would agree that this approach makes sense. However, it would be a different matter if land is sold on a leasehold basis. The issue of using land sale proceeds as revenue is not new. My colleague Mr Leong also mentioned this yesterday, but we are aware of the Government’s long-standing position on this matter. Today, PSP would like to suggest an alternative way of treating land sale proceeds. Currently, the Government typically sells industrial land on 20- or 30-year leases, and residential land on 99-year leases. After the requisite number of years, the land returns to Government and it can be sold again. The land sale proceeds are, therefore, more akin to rental income over the length of the lease. In Budget 2018, Workers' Party suggested that up to 20% of land sale proceeds be used as revenue. Then Finance Minister Heng said, with reference to land sold on 99-year lease, that, I quote, "If you are rigorous about it, you really ought to be spending no more than 1% of that land sale proceeds". This statement, while true, paints an incomplete picture and is, therefore, misleading. It does not address what happens over time.[+1 sentence] With your permission, Mr Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout illustrating the revenue stream over time?
Mr Speaker9 words
[+1 sentence]Yes, please.
Ms Hazel Poa717 words
[+1 sentence]Thank you. PSP proposes that land sale proceeds be taken as revenue over the period of the lease.[+17 sentences] In other words, if a piece of land is sold on a 99-year lease, then the sale proceeds should be taken as revenue spread over 99 years. Take for example industrial land sold on a 20-year lease. Suppose the sale proceeds were treated as revenue over 20 years, then each year, the revenue would be 5% of the sale proceeds for the next 20 years. In year 1, the revenue would be 5% of the sale proceeds in year 1. In year 2, the revenue would be 5% of the sale proceeds in year 1 plus 5% of the sale proceeds in year 2. In year 3, the revenue would be 5% of the sale proceeds in year 1 plus 5% of the sale proceeds in year 2 plus 5% of the sale proceeds in year 3. For the sake of simplicity in illustration, if we were to assume that land sale proceeds remain constant over the next 20 years, by year 20, the revenue amount would be equivalent to 100% of the land sale proceeds for that year. This is illustrated in the form of a table in the handout. The same principle applies to land sold on 30- or 99-year leases. The revenue stream is cumulative and builds up to a significant amount. PSP, therefore, contends that treating land sale proceeds as revenue over the term of the lease does not compromise on financial prudence and is also a significant revenue stream. Thirdly, we need to look into cutting expenditure. We should not have this thinking that when cost increase, we just increase revenue to pay for it. If expenditure increases in one area, let us first look for ways to cut costs in other areas. This is how most individuals and businesses deal with cost increases Finance Minister Lawrence Wong shared that since FY2017 the budgets of all Ministries have been cut by 2% and, from FY2023, a further 1% cut will be implemented. However, a look at the actual Government expenditures from FY2017 to FY2019 showed them to be higher than the figures in FY2016. Can the Finance Minister explain how this is a budget cut? From FY2022 to FY2028, the Government is subsidising the F1 race to the tune of over $80 million per year and that works out to be over $560 million.[+2 sentences] If the race brings economic benefits, should the private sector not be paying for it? Why do we need to raise revenue to subsidise F1? Another dubious expenditure is the $900 million payment to SPH Media Trust over five years.[+5 sentences] If SPH had not been restructured, the losses from its news operations could have been covered by the profits from its property operations. With the restructuring, taxpayers end up with a $900 million bill! These are instances where we feel that our tax revenue is not being used judiciously. We disagree with such voluntary wealth transfers from the Government to commercial entities. They result in the costs being paid by taxpayers and the commercial benefits kept by the commercial entities. Each year, HDB pays about $3 billion to $4 billion to SLA for purchase of land.[+7 sentences] This internal transfer amongst different parts of the Government is treated as an expenditure on one end, but not as revenue on the other end. This means that we need to raise tax revenue to fund this transfer of land from SLA to HDB. While the land was most probably acquired under the Land Acquisition Act back in the 1960s to 1980s at low prices in the name of national development, the transaction between HDB and SLA is made based on current land prices. In other words, even though Government had acquired the land at low prices using tax revenue in the past, taxpayers have to now pay for that land again at current prices. This state of affair does not seem reasonable to us and further strengthens the point that land sale proceeds ought to be treated as revenue over the lease period. In conclusion, PSP objects to the GST hike. We do not currently need the revenue and when we do, we have other revenue sources and we should cut expenditure first.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar)1719 words
[+42 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of Budget 2022. The delay and staggering of the GST hike and the slew of subsidies to soften the blow on most of the population are a relief. I thank Finance Minister for the decision to continue with the CDC Vouchers scheme so that every Singaporean household, regardless of abode or income, can tap on them. I thank also the CDCs’ partners such as the Merchant Associations, the Heartland Enterprise Centres, the People’s Association, GovTech, Enterprise Singapore, IMDA and several other partners for developing and supporting a scheme that: (a) allows not only residents but also heartland merchants to benefit from the money injected into the heartland economy to spur enterprise; (b) allows participating merchants to be reimbursed in the next day instead of having to wait; (c) allows for the printing of CDC Vouchers for the elderly who are non-tech-savvy so that they can personally use them. So, thank you very much. Now, I wish to touch on three topics today. I call it PCR, namely P for Principles of stewardship; C for Cost of doing business; and R for Resourcing of charities. On "P", Principles. Budget 2022 is a clear articulation of the principles of how Singapore stewards its resources. Former US President Dwight Eisenhower once said, "A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both." What are the principles that undergirds the Budget of 2022 and by this Government. There are many. I will name three. One, the principle of Prudence. Two, the principle of Preparedness. And three, the principle of Inclusiveness. The principle of Prudence. It explains the conservative and cautious stand by which Government builds up and draws down its reserves. We spend within and sometimes below our means. We do not easily borrow nor freely tap on past reserves. We save for the future; for rainy days such as that during the Lehman Brothers collapse and the COVID-19 pandemic. And when we draw down on resources, we will return it back promptly when we are able to for the use of future generations and for future rainy days – the principle of Prudence. Next, the principle of Preparedness. This Government invests highly in the education and training of our people through initiatives – proactive initiatives – such as SkillsFuture and capability building schemes for businesses across the private, people and public sectors. We are ready and able to defend ourselves so as to prevent ourselves from landing in a position such as the ongoing Ukraine-Russia war. It is the principle of Preparedness. The principle of Inclusiveness. This Government no intent to leave anyone behind and intentionally develop measures and programmes to uplift the low-wage workers, households and the vulnerable amongst us. So, these three principles of Prudence, Preparedness and Inclusiveness. The extent that we as a people agree on these principles is the extent of how united we are to forge ahead. So, PCR. The next is "C", the Cost of doing business. Like all things, Budget 2022 is never perfect, though the undergirding principles of this Government are clear. Let me share touch on one of several areas that is, to me, worth reviewing and that is on SMEs' concerns on cost of doing business. Matters of cost of living and cost of doing business are not new topics, raised in and outside Parliament. But it is still noteworthy to hear out the local enterprises who are struggling, despite doing their best, especially in such a time as this. One case in point is rise in energy cost. Mdm Tan, a resident of mine, and I am sure her plight is heard elsewhere too. She is a supplier of container packaging to industries ranging from food to paints to solvents. She told me her struggles arising from not only supply chain disruptions during the pandemic but also high global energy costs. A loyal Singapore PowerGrid customer for a long time, her business was subject to fluctuations in electricity rates since last September, from 14 cents to 75 cents per kilowatt. It has gone down recently. Hope came in the form of MTI’s very popular Temporary Electricity Contracting Support Scheme, or TRECS, which offered monthly fixed price plans.[+4 sentences] Alas, utility supplier after supplier turned down Mdm Tan's application citing full subscription and to try in July 2022. Mdm Tan fears that cost of doing business for SMEs like hers might further escalate with news like the carbon tax increases and the war in Ukraine and Russia. She certainly has no intent to close her business, this being a family business and doing quite okay for a long time. I have discussed the matter with Minister Tan See Leng in his MTI role and I know that he too – and he is a very earnest Minister – is mulling over the issue. Would MOF be willing, would the Government be willing to consider providing an energy rebate equivalent to, for example, the U-Save Vouchers given to residents, if expanding the TRECS programme is not viable?[+7 sentences] Still on "C", cost of doing business, the rise in qualifying salaries of the foreign workforce. Another major input heard from SMEs concerns the well-intended increased qualifying salaries of S Pass and E Pass holders. The policy intent is this: to bring in the right calibre of imported talents and to make it more attractive for companies to employ Singaporeans. The anecdotes I heard from the ground caused me to wonder if Government has been too blunt in this approach and if the policy intent, in this instance, has been achieved. Some employers claim that the increase in qualifying S Pass and E Pass salaries have pushed up not only the salaries of the foreign talents, but also local staff as well and, hence, cost of business. It is not that bad but there is also this nagging issue that even if firms choose to hire local staff, some candidates are simply difficult to come by. I am referring to candidates for jobs such as preschool Chinese Language teachers, educators, speech and occupational therapists, even cybersecurity and IT professionals who are also in high demand by multinational firms setting up business in Singapore. In this regard, would Government direct a think tank to study the impact of this particular policy and decide: one, if this S Pass and E Pass policy is still effective to deter foreign hires and promote local hires; and two, if ways can be found to increase the pool of local talents in higher demand?[+3 sentences] So, PCR, and lastly, "R", on Resourcing of charities. I wish to end off with suggestions on how Government can play a more effective role in resourcing charities to build a more caring and inclusive society – one of the strategic thrusts of Budget 2022. The Singapore Government has long adopted a "Many Helping Hands" approach to deliver a range of social services and assistance programmes, primarily, to work with partners who know the ground better. This has been the adoption of this strategy for a long time. There are more than 2,300 registered charities in Singapore.[+3 sentences] About 200 of these are large charities with more than $10 million in receipts. Larger charities often fill important gaps where Government and the rest of society have not stepped in sufficiently. There are gaps which are also well-known and highlighted time and again in this House. In the world of disability, for example, these include issues such as the "cliff effect" for many special-needs graduates who literally stop learning after the age of 18; the need for a continuum of residential housing options for especially disabled adults; the pleas for support by elderly parents too afraid to die for fear of what might happened to the ones they leave behind. Some of these programmes such as residential homes and day care centres for the disabled are known to be high-ticket items that cause high operating deficits on charities, in the millions, and often insufficiently covered by Government grants, and these are spaces that only the lion-hearted or the clueless will enter.[+6 sentences] Government should play an active role in resourcing charities that provide essential services that Government would otherwise have to undertake. Resourcing, of course, can be facilitated in three ways. One, by providing grants, hopefully sufficient grants, to the partnering charity. Two, by strengthening the nexus between top needs and potential top donors. Can local multinationals such as DBS, Singtel, and so on, be persuaded by Government to take ownership or adopt some identified, and maybe unfilled, top needs agreed upon by Government and its charity partners? Three, Government can help by simplifying or facilitating fundraising requirements to help charities help themselves. One case in point is Government’s partnership in this Budget to extend the Tote Board’s Enhanced Fundraising programme, or EFR, to incentivise fundraising.[+1 sentence] Because of the way the programme is currently designed, charities large and small, their behaviour is shaped by how the programme is designed, they are largely driven now to organise, for example, to meet the rule, maximum five campaigns a year, up to $100 per campaign. They have to organise five campaigns in a year if they wish to obtain maximum matching. I feel there ought to be flexibility in the current EFR scheme, so that charities can focus to organise just one large successful fundraising campaign, be done with fundraising for the year, and focus their resources and their energy on the core business of serving their beneficiaries.[+7 sentences] Another way that Government can facilitate is also to help social enterprises, especially those which are owned by charities themselves. The proceeds do not go to any private pockets, it is back to the charities. If social enterprises owned by charities can be allowed to qualify for fundraising, and then being the arms of job creation and service creation, that will really help as well. So, I really hope Government will help to look at the ways by which charities can be resourced, so that these charities can partner Government even more effectively. In conclusion, Sir, I have brought up the issues of PCR – Principles, Cost of doing business in Singapore and Resourcing of charities by Government. I seek the Minister’s favourable consideration for my suggestions. Thank you for a well-crafted Budget 2022, which I support.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Nadia Samdin.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio)2198 words
[+10 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, the Budget gives Singaporeans an insight into the ways which the Government stewards and allocates resources to help Singapore and Singaporeans grow. It acts as a steer and a benchmark for Singaporeans to understand where we are going and how we intend to get there. History has shown us that societies tend to stratify as they develop. With development comes a difference in wants, needs and aspirations. If left unaddressed, some of these differences may ultimately cause irreconcilable tensions. We see this happening all over the world and how we negotiate these differences in Singapore is imperative to our collective progress. While we cannot completely fight it, we can try to stave off the undesirable outcomes that it can bring, by ensuring that people, regardless of background, have a seat at the table to share in inclusive economic growth. Access to opportunities is key. While there is much in Budget 2022 to talk about, I will focus on two areas for my English speech: support for mental health and social integration, and a stake for our youth. From our frontliners to students, healthcare workers to teachers, seniors to caregivers, battling COVID-19 has taken its toll on Singaporeans. A survey reported by TODAY in October 2021 indicated that 68% of respondents in Singapore said they found 2021 to be the most stressful year they have experienced.[+1 sentence] More than half said they felt like they have lost control over their future. In 2020, Singapore reported 452 suicides, a 13% increase compared to 400 cases the year before.[+21 sentences] For seniors, we saw the highest number of suicides since 1991. Unlike physical health, the effects of poor mental health often go undiagnosed until too late, it starts to interfere in significant ways with one’s life. Even if diagnosed, there is still a lack of social understanding on how a person who on the outside might seem okay, is not able to function because of what is going on in their minds. It is easier to see the difficulty someone faces in climbing a set of stairs, for example, if their leg is broken, but it is not as easy to understand that the same or even seemingly simpler tasks like getting out of bed, also can present a challenge for someone with mental health challenges, much less keeping up with the pace of life. Is it no wonder, that many hide their conditions away? On their own, already they may feel like they are a burden, without society’s reminders that they are not where they want to be in life. Mental health challenges do not fit in a neat little box. The implications of being diagnosed or having a loved one who is diagnosed with a serious mental health condition spans financial, familial and social considerations. As such, I am glad that the Government in 2021 announced the formation of the inter-agency task force and I certainly look forward to hearing more about the next actionable steps and plans. Besides the Government, it is really civic society and ground-up groups who have made great strides in promoting mental health awareness to reach different pockets of society. Awareness and education is but the first step towards destigmatisation. From Campus Psy to Silver Ribbon Singapore, Over the Rainbow to Hayaa’ Network and Samaritans of Singapore, youth, volunteers, suicide survivors and even religious teachers are telling stories of the complex realities which those who face mental health challenges are going through. And I am deeply appreciative of their work. But this is not enough. Mr Speaker, Sir, we must take the next steps in becoming a more mental health ready society. In particular, increasing access and affordability for people seeking mental health treatment and working towards better protections and integration of life for people with mental health conditions. Currently, patients seeking mental health treatments can lean, to a certain extent, on MediSave and Government grants. We know that other than stigma and shame, cost can often be a prohibitive reason why people do not seek help. Furthermore, mental health challenges can be recurring and, unfortunately, the road to recovery is not always linear. Options in the private sector for insurance coverage are few. A CNA article in September 2021 notes that there is rising interest in mental health insurance, but options remain inadequate. AIA, which launched the first insurance policy in Singapore to cover mental illness in January 2019, said the take-up rate for its Beyond Critical Care plan rose by more than 470% compared with the same period in 2020.[+9 sentences] Other than reviewing the withdrawal limits, will the Government consider working with the private sector to incentivise more options for the provision of mental health insurance coverage? We must go beyond mental health awareness and towards integration and acceptance of people with mental health conditions, including skilling, literacy and a more inclusive workforce. As an example, how do we ensure that people suffering from mental health conditions are given a fair shot and not turned away simply because of their conditions at a job interview? How do we also ensure that the caregivers may apply for discretional time-off to take care of emergencies that may arise. Having to rely on informal processes and the grace of colleagues to secure the foregoing can be extremely stressful. Many people living with a mental health illness do want to work and can contribute to the workforce if they are adequately supported. For those who are not able to work, would we be willing to explore how social assistance can be more nuanced to tide over different demographics of people during difficult times? These are complex issues with many considerations but it is an important step for us to take sooner, rather than later. Mr Speaker, Sir, over the last two years, our youth have faced unprecedented challenges from their experience of going to school, graduating and entering the workforce during a pandemic. A TODAY Youth Survey found 55 % of 18- to 35-year-olds felt a dent in their financial prospects as a result of COVID-19.[+11 sentences] In my chats with youth on Zoom, via Instagram DM and in-person, many share their worries for the future. A commentary piece written by final year University student, Natalie Tan, was published in January 2022. She notes how the pandemic has short-changed young people in financial, professional and social ways. In Natalie’s words, “For graduating cohorts last year, the absence of in-person graduation ceremonies was like a nail in the coffin. It felt like we ran the race, won the prize but we are not there to collect the medal and hug family and batchmates. "It’s also tough to transit from attending classes on Zoom to searching for jobs in this floundering economy. With limited doors open, we went about in circles trying to figure out the next stage of our lives. Those of us who managed to find jobs had to contend with a lonely onboarding experience. Others weren’t so lucky.” Incentivising employment is something the Government has done. From employers to employees, many appreciate these efforts. In 2020, for example, the Government set aside $100 million to fund a traineeship scheme as a stop-gap measure to help new graduates increase employability amid a weak job market due to the pandemic. In Budget 2022, a total of $500 million for a Jobs and Business Support Package will be set aside to support workers and businesses in segments of the economy that are facing slower recoveries.[+18 sentences] How will our youth be supported through this package? The lack of internships and in-person opportunities have made it difficult for some to even figure out what they want to do. And there is little we can do to replace those years. I also know of youths who have turned to the gig economy as a means of generating an income. Some now consider this to be their full-time job, while others use their freelancing skills as a side hustle for the time being. As more turn to these roles as viable options, how can we work with companies to ensure better protections for these workers in the long run? Artists, musicians, dancers, actors, physical trainers and many others have been unable to generate an income at different points of the pandemic. Some of them have been able to return to work in a limited capacity, others not so much. While frequent testing is important, ART kits also come at a cost from already reduced incomes. One hard hit group includes live musicians such as bands and DJs who previously held residencies at nightlife institutions. Since March 2020, many have not been able to continue their residencies and some hotspots have shuttered. Like many others who have seen the large bulk of their incomes slashed, many have tried to pivot, some have taken their skills online and others have transitioned into other careers, but they remain hopeful that they will able to earn a living once again by doing what they know and love best. I have two questions. Workplaces such as gyms have been able to operate with restrictions for some time now, in an attempt to mitigate the risk of transmission. Are there ways in which we can limit the risks of transmission of performing on stage at an eatery that serves food and drinks, so that live music can return? Will the Government consider introducing balanced measures that enable this? With watchful eye on Omicron, as measures relax in stages, can the Government give some clarity, what are some sort of circumstances and conditions we will need to see before members of this community will be able to return to work? Mr Speaker, Sir, in Malay please. (In Malay): MAS and MTI recently reported a 2.4% increase in Singapore's core inflation compared to a year ago.[+12 sentences] This increase was driven by increases in the prices of food, electricity and gas. As a small country, Singapore cannot escape geopolitical shocks and incidents that occur globally. Although our economy is still recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic, this year's Budget has demonstrated the Government's concern to continue supporting and enhancing the capabilities of Singaporeans. Nonetheless, COVID-19 and the rising cost of living have presented even more challenges for our community, particularly in terms of access & opportunities to prepare for an uncertain future. Last year, the Population Census report stated that the number of Malay families living in 1-room and 2-room rental flats had more than doubled over the past decade. And this is due to several factors such as the increase in the number of rental homes that are provided especially for families that need it. Each family has different needs and problems. They usually need help from various quarters, and we have to look for a holistic strategy and way. We should engage this group more closely. Therefore, I am glad that efforts such as the Commlink and the DIAN@M3 project are available, in which the Government, agencies and volunteers can coordinate efforts to reach out to residents living in rental houses and help them achieve their dreams and a brighter future for the next generation. Social service agencies such as the South Central FSC have provided innovative and holistic approaches such as the Keystart Home Ownership where they offer assistance which includes housing mortgages and the cost of shifting to a new home. This pandemic has also reminded us that with time and changes in technology, it is possible that the jobs we have now will no longer be relevant in the future. A study by NTU last year showed that only 58% of women with STEM qualifications had embarked in careers in STEM-related fields, compared to 70% of men with the same qualifications.[+7 sentences] We should definitely encourage more people within our community, especially women, to venture into STEM and the growth industries. I hope the Government can open up more channels and opportunities so that our community can participate in these fields. If we want to chart a new direction for Singapore, let us uphold our pledge to progress together, and emerge even stronger so that each generation can benefit from our nation’s progress. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, it is a precarious balancing act, managing the needs, wants, ideals and aspirations of citizens. Singapore is no stranger to cater to these differences, while at the same time rallying our people towards common goals and purpose. Decades ago, the idea of a multiracial, multi-religious society, was thought to be impossible given the times and our geographical context. In many ways, even today it remains an anomaly. From increased healthcare spending to care for our seniors, to heeding the call to tackle climate change despite the increased complexities that threaten to pull us in different directions, I support the steps taken in Budget 2022 and believe we can and will find common ground to work together, despite our differences, towards progress for all.[+1 sentence] In the words of our talented artists, Linying and Evan Low in last year’s NDP song, and do not worry, I will not scare you by singing, "Come whatever on the road ahead; We did it before, and we'll do it again."
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Tan See Leng.
The Minister for Manpower and Second Minister for Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng)3275 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I speak in support of the Budget. The Minister for Finance has put out a comprehensive suite of measures in his Budget Statement. Today, I would like to speak mainly on three issues. The first is on Workfare Income Supplement, the second, to assure our business community, especially the small and medium enterprises (SMEs), of the direction and the pace of our foreign workforce policy. Finally, I would also like to address the points brought up by the Workers' Party Members on the distribution of tax burden. First, on Workfare. Earlier in this debate, the Leader of the Opposition Mr Pritam Singh, Mr Gerald Giam and Ms Jessica Tan, raised concerns about the $500 minimum income criterion for Workfare. I would like to correct the misconception that this is a cutback for lower-wage workers. First, we estimate that around 20,000 Workfare recipients will be affected by the criterion, all of whom are casual or part-time workers.[+10 sentences] The Leader of the Opposition has estimated that the number of affected recipients is 46,600 by referencing the number of employed residents aged 15 and above earning below $500 in 2021. This is inaccurate. Not all of these 46,600 qualify for Workfare due to criteria such as age, spousal assessable income and the annual value of their place of residence. So, in other words, nothing to do with the salary that they earn. Some would be students earning extra pocket money while they study or some of them are actually from higher income households. They are not the intended targets of Workfare. Furthermore, 46,600 is based on 2021 data and does not take into account the expected wage growth from the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) expansion. And also, the new Local Qualifying Salary (LQS) requirements that would uplift many employees beyond the $500 threshold. Should any of these 20,000 workers subsequently work more and earn more than $500 per month, they will automatically re-qualify for Workfare. Second, the $500 per month is a reasonable and achievable wage for most regular workers under our Progressive Wage Model approach. With the new LQS requirement, firms that hire foreign workers must pay all of their locals working part-time at least $9 per hour.[+2 sentences] At this wage, a part-time worker only needs to work about two working days a week to meet the $500 minimum income criterion. Third, we also recognise that there may be some workers who want to work more, but are unable to earn $500 per month, due to their personal circumstances. This includes persons with disabilities and ComCare recipients. We will provide them concessionary Workfare payouts so that they will not be excluded from Workfare.[+5 sentences] Hence, if Ms Jessica Tan's resident requires additional financial assistance, she can apply for ComCare and if she qualifies she will receive concessionary Workfare as well. In short, for workers who are earning less than $500, the best way to help them is to help them find a job of the appropriate quality and quantity of working hours to earn at least $500. Then, Workfare can come in to provide an additional boost to help such workers. We have a whole suite of employment facilitation programmes and initiatives, ready to assist. Moving onto my second point that I would like to raise and that is on the foreign workforce policies. The Minister for Finance has laid out a multi-year road map to increase the qualifying salary for Employment Passes; increase the qualifying salary and levies for S Passes; reduce the Dependency Ratio Ceiling; dismantle the Man-Year Entitlement (MYE) system and adjust levies for the Construction and Process sectors.[+27 sentences] I will speak more when MOM’s budget is debated in a few days' time. Today, let me touch on and elaborate on our thinking behind these moves, and how we will walk with businesses through these changes. Businesses, especially our SMEs, have expressed concern about rising costs. I want to assure SMEs that we understand these concerns and we have taken great care when designing the timing of our moves. We are well aware that if businesses do not succeed, there will not be good jobs for Singaporeans. Besides SMEs, foreign companies are also quietly observing our moves. Even foreign publications have been speculating that Singapore is now less welcoming to talent. Members of the House, we must not allow such perceptions or such misperceptions to take root, because this will be very damaging for us. Hence, I want to be very clear that the changes we announce are to ensure that Singapore remains open to foreigners who can complement our workforce, so that our businesses can assemble the best team of locals and foreigners to compete on the global stage. Indeed, this strategy was affirmed by the House last year. We recognise that having foreigners working alongside us and living amongst us can cause discomfort, even some tension, amongst Singaporeans. My assurance is that we will be vigilant in managing the social frictions that may arise from time to time. We will also guard against anti-foreigner and xenophobic sentiments. Singapore has always been a multicultural society and we intend to keep it so. Our foreign workforce policies will have to balance the needs of businesses and workers, and this has been MOM's core guiding principle. The announced changes to the qualifying salaries for Employment Pass (EP) and S Pass are part of this series of adjustments to maintain a balance. The wages of our local workers have risen over the years. This reflects the growth of our economy and the deepening of skills in our local workforce. This also means that the quality of the EP and S Pass holders that we bring into Singapore must go up. That is why our EP and S Pass qualifying salaries are adjusted regularly to keep pace with local wages. If we do not do so, firms may choose to hire foreigners simply because they are cheaper than locals. There will not be a level playing field. Our efforts to upskill our workforce and sharpen our business competitiveness will, therefore, be diluted. We know that businesses would want more lead time to adjust before these changes take effect and this is exactly we have done. We announced the moves early but incorporated a long runway between the announcement and implementation dates of all of these moves. We are being transparent so that businesses have ample time to adjust and certainty to plan ahead. Let me use the S Pass changes to explain in greater detail. We have given businesses six months' notice for the first move to take effect. This first move will increase the qualifying salary to $3,000 for new S Pass applications. In other words, come September this year, 2022, all existing S Pass holders are still not affected – the existing ones that are here, they are still not affected.[+1 sentence] Only the new applications are affected. We will only apply the new qualifying salary 18 months later, from September 2023.[+5 sentences] The renewals will also not all happen at the same time in September 2023. It will take another two to three years, so, up to 2026, before the last S Pass employee on the old qualifying salaries comes up for renewal. So, in reality, businesses will have a minimum of 18 months' notice. But it could take up to four and a half years before all existing S Pass holders have to be renewed under the new rules. The same goes for the levies. The Tier 1 levy will be gradually raised to $650 by September 2025, in not just one step but three steps.[+28 sentences] And that is around three and a half years before the changes take effect fully. I know these adjustments, they take effort, and change is never easy. But at the same time, it is only through continuous innovation and improvement that our businesses can and will grow from strength to strength. Rest assured that we will walk this journey with our businesses. I am particularly mindful of the many SMEs in our economy. SMEs account for more than 70% of employment. This is a very significant proportion of employment, and they are a very important contributor to our economy. I personally know and I have also met with many SME business owners and have heard their concerns. Some are worried that they may be hit more than the multinational companies (MNCs) because they have more financial constraints. They find it more difficult to compete for workers and they are concerned that higher costs for foreign and local manpower will just mean higher business costs. How can our SMEs make the necessary adjustments and emerge stronger? We have been regularly and progressively making updates to our framework. Each time when we made these adjustments, SMEs have taken advantage of the support schemes that we have available to transform, to pivot and to adapt. The result is that our firms have a more sustainable and robust business model – they continue to thrive and they continue to be able to tap the labour market for their manpower needs. With this round of changes, we will continue to support businesses. I would like to offer and submit some suggestions and share some examples of Government support that businesses may wish to tap on. Businesses can review, of course, their wages. They can look into redesigning jobs to make jobs more productive and attractive for employees. Businesses can tap on schemes, such as the Support for Job Redesign under the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG-JR) for job redesign consultancy support to complement and drive business and workforce transformation. In addition, businesses can expand local hiring and upskill their local workforce. The extended SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package and the Jobs Growth Incentive will continue to provide a significant boost to the hiring of locals. Together with the tripartite partners, we will make sure that SMEs which are prepared to transform their businesses and increase local hiring will receive the support they need. Some business owners told me that it is hard to find manpower even with the support, given that our unemployment is so low and that our labour market is tight. They say they need manpower across all levels, from the Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians (PMET) level to the Rank-and-File (RnF) levels. Yes, our unemployment rate is low. This is something that we are happy and very glad for. But there are still untapped sources. One such group is women outside the workforce. For a whole myriad of reasons, there are about 20% or 260,000 women aged 25 to 64 who are not in the labour force.[+17 sentences] There are vacancies across all occupational levels with varied qualifications and needs which could potentially be filled by this group. In order to tap on this segment of our population, businesses will need to consider how the jobs they offer can be more flexible and attractive to locals. As flexible work arrangements can come in various forms and some may be more relevant for certain jobs than others, businesses can adopt the most suitable flexible work arrangements that suit their organisations' as well as their employees' needs, including for those in frontline or shift work. Some businesses are already doing so and we should press ahead as best and as fast as we can. Some SMEs also tell me that they wish to hire at the Work Permit level to manage their manpower needs but are unable to do so because of the rules, such as source country restrictions. These rules are there for a reason. But we can find a way to offer some flexibility. It is something that MOM has been working on. I will address this at the upcoming MOM's Committee of Supply (COS) in a few days' time. And I think it will be good news. Lastly, as we continue to refine our policy levers, we will ensure that there will not be a disproportionate impact on SMEs. For instance, there have been suggestions for the Government to look beyond qualifying salary in our Employment Pass (EP) framework, which may be a blunt tool. We have considered and taken the feedback very seriously. I will elaborate further in MOM's COS debate about how our refinements of the EP framework have taken into account the size of the firm. We know that businesses are trying hard. They are exploring various options to transform to adjust to the changes. We know that border controls have made things more challenging. As of end January 2022, there are around 46,000 approved Work Permit holders who have yet to enter Singapore due to border controls.[+13 sentences] But with our border reopening in a calibrated manner, some of this pressure will be relieved. This should help in the interim. But SMEs and businesses alike need to start to plan ahead on what works best for their business model and their workforce. Training and restructuring take time. So, I hope that our businesses will take a longer view on this. To support businesses in their planning, we have laid out our foreign workforce policy moves for the next few years so that businesses have greater certainty, predictability and time to adjust. Finally, Mdm Deputy Speaker, Sir, allow me to also address some of the points made by the hon Members from the Workers' Party. They oppose the Budget because of the GST increase. But they agree with the moves we are making to shore up the social compact. They accept greater Government spending. In fact, they would like us to spend even more. I believe their position is – agree with all the good and nice things that we propose and then say, "not enough, ask for more". But what they oppose is how we intend to do the difficult thing and, that is, to raise the revenues to pay for all the good things that they like so much that they want even more. The Workers' Party suggests that we can do away with the GST increase if we raise more taxes through other means. That is a revenue shortfall of $3.5 billion.[+10 sentences] They say, "put a heavier load on some Singaporeans" so that we do not have to have a GST increase. It sounds very simple and attractive but ask yourselves – is it really doable? Mdm Deputy Speaker, there is a fundamental philosophical difference in our approach. Make no mistake. This Government's approach is that the rich should carry a heavier load. We are raising income taxes on the top earners, property taxes on higher value properties and the additional registration fee (ARF) for luxury cars. That was the mantra in my colleague, the Minister for Finance's Budget speech this year. The well-off will pay more and receive less, and the less well-off will receive more and pay less. Let me repeat that. The well-off will pay more and receive less and the less well-off will receive more and pay less. But there is a significant difference between what constitutes a fair load and what constitutes a punitive load. It is not possible to get the entire GST amount – the $3.5 billion – by loading it entirely on all those just at the very top.[+3 sentences] Amongst the revenue options proposed by the Workers' Party, they have suggested increasing personal income tax and property tax even more. If we were to do that, we will have to raise the tax rates on income and property even more substantially and we have to make more people, including middle-income earners pay more. Why? Because it is not possible to have extremely punitive taxes on just the top 1% or the 5%.[+15 sentences] So, the consequence is that we will have to raise income taxes for not just those at the very top but it will percolate down to our middle, our upper-middle income, including those who have benefited from our educational system, our years of social mobility, those who have toiled, who have laboured, who have worked very hard all through the years to move up from more modest circumstances. We will have to apply higher property taxes to a larger base of properties, not just your landed properties, your Good Class Bungalows, your semi-Ds, your terrace houses, your luxury condos – which will already, by the way, see a significant increase – but it will also go to all condos, perhaps Executive Condominiums (ECs) and, perhaps, even eventually even larger HDB flats. Residents from across the country, the whole island, my residents in Marine Parade, residents in the nearby East Coast, Joo Chiat, Bukit Timah, Thomson, Upper Thomson, Bishan – you name it – Upper Bukit Timah, including even in Sengkang, in Aljunied, too. They will all be hit. These are the people who may have to make up the difference. So, this year, this debate, the impression I took away of what the Workers' Party want is two things. One, they said loud and clear; the other may not be so loud or, perhaps, it is hidden somewhat and, perhaps, they could clarify. Loud and clear: "I like all the nice and good things you are proposing but more will be better." But what they are not saying, and I am baffled and, as a consequence is, "I like it that you are raising taxes on the wealthy and more of such taxes would be better". However, have they considered the burden would inevitably have to be borne and applied to a wider group and variety of Singaporeans and taxpayers? So, the first "more", they shout from the rooftops; the second "more", relatively muted, hoping that, perhaps, people would not notice that inevitably, that could be a consequence of what they are proposing. Deputy Speaker, we fundamentally disagree with what the Workers' Party's proposal will imply for our society. It will ultimately result in a system where our approach to revenue is just to squeeze anyone who does well from the middle-income upwards, potentially; where we tell Singaporeans, "Look, there is someone better off who can afford to take on all of the burden, you don't have to put in your share, or you don't have to put in your fair share." That is not good nor is it sustainable for our social compact. All of us have a stake in our society and we benefit from public services and from progressive policies. In fact, those with less would get back much more than what they pay in additional GST and we give generous help to those who need the help while everyone pays something. It is both an individual and our collective responsibility. And if we do what has been proposed and suggested, the middle-income, the upper-middle-income, those who have worked hard, who have done, perhaps, better than their parents' expectations and aspirations, they will feel betrayed. If we take the Workers' Party's approach, we will, as a consequence, have to increasingly shift and raise the tax burden onto the middle-class. That, I believe, is the surest way to unravel and destroy our social compact and trust in our society and Singapore will not hold together.[+4 sentences] To conclude, Mdm Deputy Speaker, it is not an easy task ahead for all of us. There are difficult things that we must do together. But as long as all of us – workers, unions, businesses, fellow citizens and Government – are prepared to play a part and work closely together with the long-term interest of Singapore and Singaporeans at heart, I believe we will continue to live long and prosper. With that, I support the Budget.
Mdm Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied)536 words
[+26 sentences]Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. Let me just deal with some of the points raised by the Minister for Manpower. I take his point with regard to the number of workers who could be affected by the changes to the Workfare Income Supplement that a more accurate number would be 20,000, as he suggested. Let me just come back to what the Minister for Finance said in his speech. He said, "I will introduce a minimum income criteria for Workfare at $500 a month to encourage part-timers and casual workers to take up regular full-time work". So, that seems to be the policy intent to move them into regular full-time work. Can I clarify from the Minister, even for these individuals who may continue to earn less than $500, going forward, can the Minister confirm that they still will not qualify for the Workfare Income Supplement? And Minister spoke about concessionary Workfare. What does that entail? Is that a lesser amount of Workfare for these individuals who cannot do full-time work, which is the policy intent as it would appear from the Minister for Finance's speech, that he wants to transit these people into full-time work. Does the Minister not agree that there are individuals who just cannot do full-time work for a variety of reasons? Minister then moved on to some other subjects and in the course of moving on to those subjects, he was drinking some water and he wet his shirt. I do not know whether that was in anticipation of some of the points he was going to make. There were some words that were used: like the Workers' Party wants to put a heavier load on Singaporeans, a fairer, a more punitive load. I think the point of our suggestions really is a more equitable load. How do you balance things in a manner which is more equitable for society, going forward, for a more fairer, more sustainable and more inclusive society? That is the thrust of what the Workers' Party had put forward. And to just make the point Minister spoke about a number of taxes, for example, property taxes, alluding to residents in various parts of Singapore who would suffer with raised property taxes. But does the Minister not agree that there were a number of proposals put forward by the Workers' Party? And on a Monday, yesterday, a Business Times article made the point in a different way – that the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) is unlikely to hurt competitiveness and may net Singapore gains in tax revenue. So, I think in the spirit of seeking a more equitable tax distribution, amongst various segments of society, I think the Workers' Party is fully entitled to raise alternate forms of revenue, which we have. So, I disagree with the Minister's characterisation. I also cannot understand why he is baffled because it would be in the course of this debate that the Workers' Party would propose alternate revenue sources. And you have cherry-picked some and criticised them. I think you are entitled to. But if you look at the proposals holistically, you would understand that the Workers' Party has put up alternatives for a rise in GST.
Mdm Deputy Speaker1 words
[+1 sentence]Minister.
Dr Tan See Leng307 words
[+3 sentences]I thank Mr Pritam Singh for the concern on spilling water on my shirt. It was actually because of the fact that it is a new flask, I did not figure out exactly how to press the right buttons yet. He has put up a series of questions, some of them, we will cover, for example, Workfare, in the upcoming debate under the MOM COS so I do not want to give too much of a preamble. In terms of the individual who works and gets less than $500, the current construct is that yes, in the absence of any other things, he or she would not qualify. But there is an entire plethora of help schemes available.[+2 sentences] There are also help groups available to try to understand where the bottlenecks are in terms of them being able to get a higher income or even get to that $500 mark. Suffice to say, the whole policy construct is to encourage, to nudge our local able-bodied Singaporeans towards gainful employment and also a higher sense of achievement. As far as the point about the taxes, the whole crux of this was for your team to consider that what you are proposing, consequentially, could result in very, very high disproportionate burden on the top 1% to 5%, that it is not sustainable and it is punitive.[+3 sentences] And, eventually, for us to sustain it, consequentially, this would end up percolating or pervading down to the upper middle-income and eventually affecting the middle-income as well. I am pretty sure the Minister for Finance in his round-up speech will cover more aspects of it. For the moment, I want to assure that our policies take a very measured and a very calibrated approach, designed for most people to be able to adjust and also be able to absorb some of these measures.
Mdm Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Pritam Singh159 words
[+6 sentences]Mdm Deputy Speaker, just to follow up on the point on the WIS. Indeed, Minister has accurately stated the policy purpose. I am sorry he did not accurately say it; you added something more to it. You said the policy construct is to nudge able-bodied Singaporeans towards gainful employment. I understand that. What I am suggesting is that part-timers may well be able-bodied, casual workers may also be able-bodied, but for various reasons, they cannot take up full-time work. And it is in that spirit that I would forward and advance that they should not be denied the WIS. I hope the Minister can reconsider this because if the number is already smaller, less than half the number that I quoted, I think it is figure 28 of the Labour Force statistics, then all the more, the impact, the fiscal impact is even less.[+1 sentence] And if we can help this small number of workers and why should we not?
Dr Tan See Leng31 words
[+1 sentence]Mdm Deputy Speaker, I will give a bit of the preamble and then, perhaps, can I request, I think Senior Minister of State Mr Zaqy Mohamad has a response as well.
Mdm Deputy Speaker1 words
[+1 sentence]Yes.
Dr Tan See Leng152 words
[+5 sentences]I think that Mr Singh missed my point. That may be a whole myriad of reasons why able-bodied Singaporeans cannot or are not prepared to commit to just two days of work a week. But we have already started the Progressive Wage Model. We have also gotten some of the other measures to help to uplift the lower-wage workers. And many of these schemes will take effect over the coming months. The $500 is fixed at this particular point in time.[+5 sentences] When that rising tide comes up, we will certainly see where this group of Singaporeans, who are still not affected, would fall into. I think that we can then review the policy. Just like what we have done constantly. If you look at the last few years, we have been constantly reviewing, improving and uplifting the framework. I will invite Senior Minister of State Mr Zaqy to further add to it.
The Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Zaqy Mohamad)161 words
[+5 sentences]I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his clarification. On the minimum income criterion, I just want to say quickly that: one, it is not meant to discount any of our lower-wage workers from receiving Workfare. When Minister Tan spoke about concessionary Workfare, what it means is that: if you are receiving ComCare, or if you qualify for ComCare, then automatically you will get Workfare as well. Even if you are a part-time worker, earning less than $500. So, that is one assurance that today. As Minister Tan shared, the number is about 20,000.[+4 sentences] This is because with the Local Qualifying Salary (LQS) coming into play, the number that Mr Pritam Singh cited will certainly reduce, because the hourly rates will go up. And therefore, we will see less. Like the example that Deputy Speaker raised, for someone like that, if they are truly low income, if they are on ComCare, they will automatically get Workfare. I hope this clarifies.
Mdm Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Pritam Singh18 words
[+2 sentences]That clarifies. Can I just confirm if they are not on ComCare, they would not get the WIS?
Mr Zaqy Mohamad83 words
[+5 sentences]Indeed, yes. So, as I shared, if you are on ComCare, means you are low income and most likely, if you are earning less than $500, part-timer, you will get it. And that extends to all our persons with disabilities too, to ensure that no one gets left behind. This separates our truly low-income part-time workers who may be constrained for whatever reason, whether caregiving or other constraints, that they are still provided assistance, not just from ComCare. Holistically, they also get Workfare.
Mdm Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang)377 words
[+4 sentences]Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. I just wanted to clarify a few points. And I understand that by peppering Minister Tan with more questions, we might end up making him yet more thirsty, but it is important, I think, to get some of the points that we made right. I will start off by pointing out that I wonder whether he could clarify where he thinks there is such a large philosophical difference between our particular approach of raising revenue relative to that of the Government. I say this because, if you look at the four levers that we have described, only one of these – what we had called "the wealth tax" lever – actually approaches the high-income, high net worth individuals. And even within that particular scenario, we had made very modest recovery assumptions, amounting to something in the order of $1.2 billion on wealth taxes alone. Of course, the hole is $3.5 billion and so, it is important to understand that the rest of that hole would have been met by much more broad base forms of taxation.[+6 sentences] Similarly, for the corporate taxation lever, when we made that proposal about raising the rate of corporate taxation to what would be compliant with the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) agreement, we also made very clear that the target of that would be the multinational firms and not the small and medium enterprises. Keeping with that particular scenario, we would have kept the corporate taxation rate on them at the effective rate of 3% or so. The reason why I think it is important to clarify that we are not philosophically seeking a very narrow tax base. We are, in fact, seeking alternative revenue levers that subscribe to the general principles of public finance, which are, as much as possible, to spread the revenue schemes in as broad a manner as possible. But at the same time, recognising the importance, as suggested by Minister Wong in his speech, of a certain degree of fairness and equity, and that is precisely why we have some components, in fact, one third of one of our four levers, where we do include wealth taxation. I hope that clarifies and perhaps Minister Tan can clarify a little more.
Mdm Deputy Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Minister Tan.
Dr Tan See Leng180 words
[+6 sentences]Again, I thank Prof Lim as well as the Leader of the Opposition for their concerns. I am fine to take any number of questions and happy to engage because it is also good to clarify the points. As I have shared earlier on, in my speech, what the impression that we have taken in terms of where you have decided to load this is on the wealth tax portion, which seems to put a huge burden on a certain very small group of Singaporeans, and I question its sustainability. And hence, if you noticed that in my speech, I said consequentially, this will eventually end up having to be more spread out, in terms of having to be borne by more people. In terms of the philosophical differences, therefore my point to perhaps Assoc Prof Lim and the Workers' Party is that: do they now, having heard our explanation, decide that they support the GST hike and support the Budget. The other point is that Minister Wong will address a number of your points in his round-up speech tomorrow.
Mdm Deputy Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied)221 words
[+6 sentences]Madam, I think I understand the policy intent of encouraging able-bodied people to work more, but has the Government done studies on what they think would be the best way, or what would be the best way to achieve this policy intent? How did it arrive at the conclusion that imposing a $500 minimum income would encourage, rather than discourage, them from working? Because to me, it seems to fly against the logic of the WIS which is the whole purpose of the WIS is to supplement the income of low-wage workers, so that they would be encouraged to work more. So, why would you have a cut-off such that the lowest income workers are not encouraged in that way to work more. And if the Government is still intent on keeping this $500 dollar minimum, can I get an assurance from the Minister that the Government will adopt a more flexible approach to take into account the various constraints faced by workers that prevent them from earning more than $500 dollars. For example, some may have caregiving responsibilities who just cannot spare the time to work, to earn more than $500 dollars a month, or to work more than two days a week. So, can this group of people be extended some flexibility so that they can also get Workfare?
Mdm Deputy Speaker5 words
[+1 sentence]Senior Minister of State Zaqy.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad74 words
[+1 sentence]I thank the Member for his question. So, I responded earlier and as I responded to Leader of Opposition, every low-wage worker who is working part-time, who is also receiving ComCare, will get Workfare. Whether there is a bar or not, as long as you are low-income, part-time, working and getting a sum less than $500, you will get Workfare.[+1 sentence] So, to some extent, I hope that clarifies and responds to the Member's question.
Mdm Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song30 words
[+2 sentences]I am sorry, Senior Minister of State, I do not quite understand how those who earn less than $500 will get Workfare still. Can you explain a bit more please?
Mdm Speaker5 words
[+1 sentence]Senior Minister of State Zaqy.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad93 words
As what I have shared that as part of the concession given, for as long as you are low-income, you get ComCare, you will get Workfare. So, that differentiates our low-income workers from the casual workers who may not necessarily come from low-income households.[+3 sentences] There is a difference. And also, from some of those who are doing vacation jobs and so forth, this puts a differentiation and puts our focus on our social compact that you are low-income, and you need the money, you would not be left behind. I hope that answers.
[+6 sentences]Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. Just a quick one, it is not a clarification. Just to confirm with the Minister, the understanding that he had of the WP's alternate proposals are incorrect. And we will clarify in the course of Minister's wrap-up speech, depending of what Minister for Finance says. It is just important for me to put that on the record, because otherwise the media may interpret your interpretations of what we are proposing to be correct. And I just want to put it on record that it is not correct.
Mdm Deputy Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Dr Shahira Abdullah.
Dr Shahira Abdullah (Nominated Member)1836 words
[+1 sentence]Mdm Deputy Speaker, this year's Budget has brought to focus on the worries Singaporeans have regarding the rising cost of living and their ability to cope with it. Official statistics taken from MAS and MTI indicate that Singapore's core inflation in January rose to 2.4% on a year-on-year basis, the highest level in more than nine years.[+19 sentences] This increasing inflation rate is contributed in no small part by the cost of food, electricity and gas in our country brought about by supply chain disruptions caused by the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic. Now, with the Russian invasion of Ukraine causing the prices of oil and natural gas to skyrocket, as well as imminent threat of further global supply chains disruptions occurring down the road, Singaporeans are no doubt worried that the cost of living will continue to increase to a level greater than they can grapple with. This worry has also trickled down to the youths: "Will I be able to earn enough in future to keep up with these increases?", "Am I reskilling or upskilling enough so I can earn better wages?", "Can I support my family?" These are just some questions that the youths ask. And lastly, "how do we ensure those more vulnerable are not left behind?" This Budget's theme, "Charting Our New Way Forward Together", demonstrates that everyone has a part to play for us to progress as a country. This Budget is noteworthy, because it tries to uphold the values of care and inclusivity. This Budget introduces measures to ensure that those with more contribute more, to help build a more balanced society. For example, I am highly encouraged by the recent moves to increase the personal income tax, property tax and luxury car tax levied on the more well-off in Singapore. It sends a strong signal that Singapore wants to re-distribute its wealth and reduce wealth inequality. More importantly, it sends a signal that Singapore priorities efforts to ensure that our social mobility framework remains agile. It is a good start and one that I am sure was only made after careful research and calibration. While the wealthy should not be made to shoulder the entire of the society's tax burden, at the same time, it is only equitable for those with more to also contribute greater to the society they have benefited from. I do hope these measures are but the beginnings of a more progressive tax system in Singapore. As the Minister stated in his Budget speech, "Everyone chips in and contributes to a vibrant economy and strengthened social compact, but those with greater means contribute a larger share." The COVID-19 pandemic has already affected low-income families in rental housing disproportionately compared to the rest of the population. The Singapore Longitudinal Early Development Study, published in November 2021, found that lower-income families were hit the hardest by the pandemic due to the economic impact, job losses, struggles with adapting to work-from-home and home-based learning as well as social distancing measures, affecting them physically and mentally. The combination of rising costs driven by this period of heightened inflation and the newly announced GST increase will hit the low-income families hard. I am therefore heartened to see that this Budget has boosted social support for Singaporeans, especially those from the low-income. The Budget promises a top-up of the ComCare Fund by $5 million over five years, with another $12 million awarded over four years to self-help groups to better support low-income families. I am also heartened that the GST Voucher (GSTV) will remain to help defray some of the cost of living and that the assessable income threshold for GSTV will be increased to enable more Singaporeans to qualify for the rebates.[+10 sentences] However, I would like to enquire if the Government will be prepared to reconsider how it awards the GSTV. Currently, GSTV is only awarded after review of both assessable income and the annual value of recipients' property. It is also only awarded to Singapore citizens aged 21 years and above. This ignores the fact that residents of houses with identical annual values may have vastly different financial needs and require greater rebates based on the number of household members and children under 21, who maybe residents. In the same vein, would the Government also be relooking at the eligibility criteria of each social welfare scheme, especially in the backdrop of rising costs? If it is assessed that it is not the time for such a review, then would there be clearer guidance of when the Government will decide to review the eligibility criteria and amount of benefits under each social welfare scheme? Mdm Deputy Speaker, in Malay, there is a proverb, "Hati gajah sama dilapah, hati kuman sama dicecah". When there is more, everyone will get more, when there is less, everyone will get less. Scaffolding vulnerable groups are something youths also feel strongly about. The National Youth Council's regular sentiment polling showed that in the area of supporting vulnerable populations, the top issues youths feel need to be addressed include the empowerment and social safety nets for lower-income communities; the rights, treatment and policies for migrant workers; and capability development and empowerment of persons-with-disabilities. In this regard, I wish to highlight that the migrant worker population is set to be more vulnerable than ever to the effects of the rising costs and GST increases.[+9 sentences] The GST increase will affect them from the onset and at the same time, they will not be able to qualify for the GST Vouchers. They are also less able to adapt to these increases due to their low wages and debt. They do need help. The migrant workers have been integral in our nation-building. Our streets, houses and skyscrapers are built by them. Does the Government have any plans on reviewing the social support schemes to ensure that their well-being is also looked after? For the persons-with-disabilities, I am pleased that we are launching the Enabling Masterplan 2030 and am looking forward to hearing more details about it. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I will now speak of the environment. In this Budget, Singapore has taken a bold move forward and it is something I support. In terms of carbon taxes, aiming to increase it to $80 per tonne in 2030. This may inevitably lead to the rise of electricity bills and coupled with the effect of inflation, many families and businesses are concerned about how they can cope. It is comforting that additional U-save rebates will be provided to cushion this transition. However, as seen by how electricity prices may be affected by many factors, recently by geopolitical changes, could I ask if the Government is considering more support for households and businesses if the electricity bills increase more than expected?[+15 sentences] Likewise, green technologies are more expensive in the short-term. As Minister Fu answered in my Parliamentary Question in the last sitting, and I quote, "Green products and services may cost a bit more. But in a competitive market, businesses will compete to provide consumers with the most value-for-money products and services. As sustainable products and services become more mainstream, economies of scale could bring down costs." This means, however, that, in the meantime, costs will trickle down to consumers. Will there be monitoring on how the costs are trickling down to consumers, similar to the safeguards and monitoring that will take place by the Committee against Profiteering for the GST hikes? Mdm Deputy Speaker, another issue of importance that I would also like to bring up is mental health. The rising cost of living may lead to greater mental anxiety and strain among Singaporeans about the future. This is exacerbated with the impact of the pandemic on mental health. A new study by BMJ suggests that catching the COVID-19 virus increases the risk of developing mental health problems such as anxiety, depression, stress and adjustment and substance use disorders. As you know, as significant proportion of our population is infected with the virus. It is significant that a Minister mentioned mental health and the inter-agency task force for mental health in the Budget. It signals the seriousness of the Government to tackle the issue and its recognition that all segments of the society have mental health needs. Our SG Mental Health Matters, which is a community of mental health policy advocates, comprising individuals who also have lived experiences of mental health challenges, recently advocated for a whole-of-Government approach to mental well-being. I agree with this approach as it would consolidate all efforts between Ministries, public agencies, social service agencies and ground-up initiatives to plan for the short, medium and long term more effectively. Can we therefore go one step further from a transient inter-agency task force, to the formation of a permanent mental well-being office under PMO, such as one inspired by SNDGO?[+20 sentences] Mdm Deputy Speaker, it seems that there are many concerns facing Singaporeans. The youths may be especially worried about their future. Even before the pandemic, Singapore youths were already concerned about job prospects, the climate crisis, inequality and mental health. The World Economic Forum Global Risks Report 2021 also showed a worsening of mental health since the start of the pandemic, leaving youths vulnerable to depression, anxiety and disillusionment. In China, we have the "lying flat" movement. Though I do not think Singaporean youths are at this stage yet, how do we prevent this from happening and wearing out the potential of our youths? Especially when bad news seems to come from all sides? I hope that the youths can find comfort that this Budget demonstrates how the Government places importance on improving social mobility and reducing inequality in the rapidly changing global economy. Mdm Deputy Speaker, even with all the disruptions facing Singapore and the world, in my engagements with youths, I discovered something else: hope. Hope and optimism that together as one Singapore, when we make the effort to look out for one another, regardless of our differences, we can make sure that no one gets left behind. There is a common Malay Saying, "Berat sama dipikul, ringan sama dijinjing". It means when we face challenges, we surmount them together, because together we are stronger. Together, even the greatest of challenges make light work. This is exemplified by a "pantun" written by then 12-year-old Iman Solihin Bin Mohamad Fariq which won an SG50 poetry competition. (In Malay): The first quatrain (pantun) refers to the student himself, who, when asked where he was from, he replied proudly that he was from Singapore. In the second quatrain, he describes Singapore as a peaceful and prosperous country, where all the communities get along with one another. The final quatrain is a declaration of his love for his motherland and his readiness to sacrifice everything for Singapore. (In English): Therefore in these times of uncertainty, I would like to say to the youths, have courage. As it takes courage of heart, will, mind and spirit to face the headwinds of tomorrow. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Xie Yao Quan.
Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong)2651 words
[+28 sentences]Madam, last year, I spoke about our social compact. So, I am glad to hear the Finance Minister say that this year's Budget is "a first step in renewing and strengthening our social compact". "Renewing and strengthening our social compact", precise choice of operative words and a profoundly important aspiration. And today, I wish to offer three key reflections. First, a renewed and strengthened social compact must be about the state playing an even more activist role in healthcare, to ensure quality and affordability for all. And we have to find a way to fund this. Over the years, we have invested billions in our public healthcare system. Because we have decided early on, that quality and affordable healthcare would be a key pillar in our social compact in Singapore. And because we cannot rely only on the free market to achieve this, the Government has been playing an activist role. To have kept that commitment and stayed the course, investing billion after billion, year after year, this is something that should not be taken for granted. Yet, as we look ahead, we need to do even more. This is because our future healthcare challenges will be different and amidst these challenges, Singapore must continue to be a nation where all Singaporeans can aspire to take good care of their parents while providing the best for their children and where every Singaporean can have basic peace of mind for him or herself. More advanced diagnostics and therapeutics are becoming what we call standard care. Take total knee replacements (TKRs), for example. These can drastically improve quality of life, as patients who have actually gone through TKRs would know. And TKRs are indeed becoming more and more common. But the real cost of a TKR is thousands of dollars. The question is, how can we help all Singaporeans who need a TKR and opt for one in future to afford it? Take cancer, as another example. In my House Visits, I have met many residents, either in remission, or even on active treatment and management. They show that it is now possible to live well with cancer, because of incredible advances in cancer care. But again, there is a real and high cost. How can we help all Singaporeans and their caregivers and their loved ones, afford such life-giving care, if cancer finds them one day? There are many other examples. Inevitably, with many more seniors with advances in standard care. In the years ahead, we must spend much more on healthcare. Billions more. And so based on that scale of what is needed, some levers of revenue generation, on their own, are simply not going to be enough. In this Budget, the Government is sharply increasing tax on the highest-end properties, but this will only raise a few hundred million more each year, not the billions that we need.[+2 sentences] Realistically, two key levers that can meet our needs come to mind: one, GST; and two, the contribution of returns from investing our reserves, or what we call NIRC. A higher NIRC means we take more of the investment returns to spend today and plough less of these returns back into future investments for future returns to benefit future generations. Today, the NIRC rate is 50% and if we increase NIRC to say 60%, we can raise enough to fully fund future healthcare.[+16 sentences] This was a specific suggestion by Mr Louis Chua yesterday, who by the way, I think made a very good and insightful speech. So, increase NIRC to 60%, rather than raise GST. That is the suggestion. And I have heard a compelling argument for this. It goes like this: "The younger generation wants to earn its own keep and is capable of earning its own keep. And so the money available today, let the older generation spend it and make full use of it, today. No need to save it for us. No need for the older generation to leave anything behind." Many kids today would tell their parents the same. But parents will want to leave something behind for their children. It is who parents are. It is a basic instinct, a basic desire. Parents want to gift a legacy for their children. And, in my view, it should be the same for a country's finances. Each generation must want to leave something behind for generations that follow. Our forefathers have left much behind for us. It is the most precious thing and Singaporeans should carry this on. So, I think the current 50-50 formula for our NIRC is just right and we should resist the urge to spend more of NIR today, leaving less for tomorrow. On the other hand, for GST, because and only because of the specific way in which GST has been designed here in Singapore, I believe that increasing GST is the fairest way for us to raise the revenues that we need. It is the fairest way because a large proportion of GST – more than half of GST – is paid not by the average Singaporean but by foreigners working and living here, by tourists visiting Singapore and by a minority of Singaporeans who spend more.[+25 sentences] So, all of them contribute to most of the GST. We then take some of this to return back to most other Singaporeans a portion, if not all, of the GST that they pay and, whatever GST revenue is left for the Government in this way, the net GST revenue, we spend on healthcare for all Singaporeans. In other words, if we look beyond the theoretical nature of consumption tax as being regressive and an undue burden to the middle- and low-income, if we look at the specific design of GST here, where non-Singaporeans and a small portion of Singaporeans, some high-spending Singaporeans, pay most of the tax that we then use to benefit all Singaporeans and, when we return the GST paid by the middle- and lower-income to make the tax effectively progressive, if we look beyond the theory and recognise the uniquely Singapore design of GST here, in practice, we can conclude that it actually works for all Singaporeans. Therefore, we should really be looking at our GST system as a lever of first resort in our fiscal toolkit, rather than a lever of last resort, as it is being framed, I think, from time to time in this House. To be clear, I am not saying that we cannot and should not do more on other levers like personal and corporate income taxes. Mr Louis Chua has also raised salient points about these and I agree with him. We can do more and I do hope that the Government will do more in good time. But my basic point is to let us look at all our revenue levers as a whole mix and recognise that we are already moving on property and personal income taxes as part of this mix but, at the same time, higher GST must also be an essential part of the same mix. In fact, because of the way in which we have designed it, GST should be a lever of first rather than last resort in the mix. Getting this consensus right is important for our renewed and strengthened social compact. Madam, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): In this year's Budget, what attracted the most attention is the GST hike. If we were to analyse the pros and cons of this move, we must first understand the fundamentals of our unique GST system. Under this system, many of those who pay GST are foreigners and tourists. GST collected from them are also a big chunk of the total tax revenue. Hence, our GST system is a two-pronged one. First, it gets substantial tax revenue from non-Singaporeans; second, they are spent on Singaporeans, especially in healthcare. Therefore, our GST system is on the side of Singaporeans. It is our friend, not foe. Coupled with the Government's support measures, the impact on lower- and middle-income Singaporeans will be minimised. (In English): Madam, my second reflection is that in this social compact, those with more will be contributing even more to support those with less even more strongly. The higher taxes on property, luxury vehicles and top individual earners send a strong signal that, in our social compact going forward, those with more will contribute even more. At the same time, those with less will get even stronger support than before. In terms of cushioning the impact of GST, this Budget provides both transitional and permanent support which, when added up, amounts to a very significant level of support, perhaps, the most in our fiscal history. I did the sums. Based on MOF's example, for a typical lower-income family – a couple with two young children in a 3-room flat, the husband the sole breadwinner – they will receive $5,010 under the Assurance Package from 2022 to 2026.[+3 sentences] But this is only the transitional support. If we include enhancements to the GST Voucher scheme, which is permanent and permanently helps Singaporeans with higher GST, then, for the same period from 2022 to 2026 alone, the couple will receive an additional $1,800 in GST Voucher cash. Actually, the absolute cash amount is more than $1,800 but the incremental alone is $1,800, thanks to enhancements to the scheme. And on top of that, around $590 in Service and Conservancy Charges (S&CC) rebates, which have also been made a permanent feature of GST Vouchers. So, transitional support and permanent enhancements combined, this typical family will receive additional support totaling almost $7,400 over the next five years.[+2 sentences] Very significant. Another example – an elderly couple, retired, in a 3-room flat. The total additional support they will receive for the next five years comes up to $9,200 – very, very significant and I think a very strong signal of how we are strengthening our support for those with less.[+3 sentences] Another major move is enhanced Workfare. Workfare is effectively a negative income tax for those at the bottom. It makes our personal income tax regime highly progressive and what this Budget does is to enhance Workfare to make the overall regime even more progressive. Specifically, a 50-year-old getting $2,500 per year in Workfare support today will get $3,600 per year in future; a 30-year-old young worker who has not been eligible for Workfare today will get $2,100 per year in future; and all persons with disabilities under the age of 44 who have been getting $1,700 per year today at the lowest tier of Workfare support will, in future, get the highest tier of support at $4,200 per year.[+11 sentences] These are major advancements for those with less. In fact, coupled with the Progressive Wage Model, which, essentially, is about getting the whole of society to chip in to supplement and uplift wages at the bottom, when this Progressive Wage Model works alongside Workfare by the Government, the combined boost in gross wages for our lowest-wage workers will be almost $1,000 every month by 2025. This is, in my view, an overdue but nonetheless decisive move that will profoundly transform jobs and lives at the bottom and form a key part of our renewed social compact. On this note, I also urge the Government to consider raising the chargeable income ceiling for the zero-rated personal income tax bracket from $20,000 today to $30,000 in a future Budget to ensure that our tax regime continues to keep pace with wage developments and stay progressive. Madam, my last reflection is that a renewed and strengthened social compact is not and cannot be about asking only those with more to contribute. It cannot be about "what can you give to me" because all of us, we, are in this together. So, while those with more will contribute even more in future, we must be careful not to take it to the extreme. We will have a very different ethos if we devolve into a state of "what can or should you do for me". Hence, everyone pays GST and we put in place large transfers to achieve net effects but the same GST rate applies to everyone in the first instance rather than a tiered system or a system of exemptions by segments, by categories, at the outset. I think it sends an essential signal that, in the first instance, we are all in this together. A related issue here is rising prices. Cost of living is a very real concern and, yes, a small minority of businesses may be using GST as a pretext to raise prices, perhaps, even ahead of the hike itself.[+5 sentences] But the reality is there are many other forces, apart from GST, pushing prices up. In fact, there are many businesses as well who are trying their best to absorb what they can even as they have no choice but to pass on some of the costs to consumers by charging higher prices. We are all in this together. So, I hope that, on cost of living concerns, all of us – consumers, businesses, workers, the Government – can recognise the part that everyone else is playing to help address the problem. And I urge the Government to continue monitoring the situation closely and provide decisive support, as necessary, even beyond this Budget. But let us start with all of us seeing the cost of living issue objectively and quite apart from GST factors because, ultimately, we have to refrain from making GST a strawman or a convenient scapegoat stopping us from doing what we ought to do as a people. We can address both GST and rising prices with separate appropriate measures and this is what this Budget has done exactly.[+13 sentences] Madam, to conclude, I have laid out how in renewing and strengthening our social compact, healthcare will remain central, and why raising GST in our uniquely Singapore design is the fairest way ahead and how, while those with more will contribute even more, ultimately, we all need to be in this together. Actually, on further reflection, another key phrase by the Finance Minister struck me and, that is, that this Budget is the "first step". So, it means there are more steps to come. What steps then? We may ask. Well, it may be future policy moves in the same direction. But I believe that a key step or, indeed, steps going forward, must be the discourse that we have on these very important issues. The discourse, the process, beyond policy pronouncements, are key steps ahead in renewing and strengthening our social compact. As fellow Members have said, it will show who we are and what we value. To this end, I hope our discourse ahead can be based on facts where we explain and correct misconceptions where we must, instead of propagating and reinforcing these. I hope our discourse ahead will recognise and be rooted in our own local context where examples of other countries are thoughtfully analysed and interpreted. Above all, I hope our discourse ahead will seek to elevate us collectively to an ever more mature, more inclusive democracy. Raising taxes is one of the hardest things to do for any Government. If the alternatives are really so straightforward, this Government must be mad to want to press on with GST. I think Singaporeans understand, deep down, that all options have been fully considered and raising GST is necessary – alongside other levers, of course, but raising GST is necessary. So, let us focus our discourse ahead, our next steps, on how we can make this work, on what else we can do, on how we can all play a part, using this Budget as a “first step”.[+2 sentences] And that, I think, will make for a truly renewed and strengthened social compact that all Singaporeans can be proud of. Madam, I support the Budget.
Mdm Deputy Speaker11 words
[+3 sentences]Parliamentary Secretary Mr Eric Chua. Sorry, hold on. Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied)218 words
[+4 sentences]Thank you, Mdm Deputy Speaker. Just a very quick clarification. I thank Mr Xie Yao Quan for his speech. I just wanted to ask a clarification on one point. Mr Xie said that we seek to leave behind something for the next generation and he spoke about the NIR ceiling, and he made a few very interesting points. I just wanted to ask him if he would acknowledge that if we have a 50% cap on the NIR contribution, that is, a cap of 50% that can be taken into the Budget every year, would the hon Member acknowledge that if we increase that cap from 50% to 60%, for example, there is still 40% that goes into the reserves and that gets compounded so that, therefore, you are not actually decreasing the reserves. You are just increasing the reserves at a slower rate and you still will leave behind something more to the next generation, because that amount gets compounded and compounded as the years go by.[+3 sentences] So, in other words, I am just asking is there anything magical, is there some special methodology that leads us to say that 50% is the Goldilocks zone, that it is exactly right, but 60% is irresponsible or 65% is irresponsible and so on. That is my clarification. Thank you.
Mdm Deputy Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Xie.
Mr Xie Yao Quan99 words
[+3 sentences]Madam, I thank the Member for his clarification. I will keep this short in the interest of time. I listened to Prof Hoon Hian Teck yesterday and he spoke about every society having to find its own judgement about where is the sweet spot. And, so, to Mr Perera's question, I think it is really a question of judgement. And if we look at the entire revenue mix, our NIRC rate now as it currently stands of 50/50 is, in my view, the right balance and we should look at other revenue levers in the first instance.[+1 sentence] Thank you.
Mdm Deputy Speaker5 words
[+1 sentence]Parliamentary Secretary Mr Eric Chua.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth and Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua)1027 words
[+7 sentences]Mdm Deputy Speaker, Budget 2022 hits the refresh button on the social contract that Singaporeans have with our country, our home. Through the Budget, we seek to achieve a more equitable distribution of finite resources we have so that those who need more help, get the assistance they need; and those who can afford to spare some help, do so. Enough has been said about how, in Singapore, our people are our only resource. While I applaud the focus on strengthening our social compact, we can do much more for our young people. Every youth has potential. And this applies equally to youths who are on the fringes of social norms and the law, many of whom would come from the more vulnerable segments of our society. I would like to speak on two broad trends of (a) youth sexual offending, and (b) youth attitudes towards drugs. The overall number of youth offenders has fallen by 43% in the past decade. In numerical terms, that translates to 4,174 in 2010, to 2,367 in 2020. The overarching statistics look dandy but there has been a worrying upward trend in the number of youth offenders who committed outrage of modesty and rape offences between 2016 and 2020. More specifically, from 109 cases in 2016 to 162 in 2020.[+36 sentences] What drives our young people to commit these offences? A 2015 study of 168 male youth sex offenders provided glimpses to better understand the motivations behind youth sexual offending in Singapore. The study notes that the most common motivation behind youth sexual offending in Singapore appeared to be attempts at “seeking pleasure”. While there are no surprises here, given adolescence is often associated with exploration, sensation-seeking and impulse activity, we need to better understand the potential triggers behind such offences. All in all, the devil is in the details. There are plenty we do not yet comprehend. What are other contributing factors that feed the youth’s impulse to commit a sexual offence? For instance, how does the consumption of pornographic material impact our youths' behaviours? Singapore is a hyperconnected digital city. Being digital natives who navigate the virtual world with perhaps much more ease than those amongst us who are digital migrants, the risks and dangers that our youths face are real. A recent study by Google found that at eight years of age, the Singaporean child is among the youngest in the world to receive his or her own first Internet device. Couple that with a study by social service agency, Touch Cyber Wellness, which found in a recent survey of over 800 youths aged 13 to 15 that as many as 50% of those surveyed have watched or read sexually explicit materials, and some were as young as seven when they were first exposed to such materials. On a related note, how many amongst us Asian parents have the courage to start the conversation with our children about the birds and the bees? Members will agree that, for many parents, the butterflies that such conversations bring to our stomachs, probably means that many will choose to shun it completely. Our youths' interactions with sexually explicit materials and how families choose to deal with this awkward issue are but only a couple of slices in what is a complex, multi-dimensional but, unfortunately, little understood issue. And we will need to invest much more to better understand this nascent trend, so that we can better design appropriate upstream interventions. Our youths’ liberal attitude towards drugs is also a cause for concern. Between 2016 and 2020, a noticeable uptrend in the total number of youth drug abusers was observed. This number rose from 277 in 2016 to 376 in 2019. The dip observed for 2020 to 305 could have been a function of border closures and movement restrictions brought about by the pandemic and that could have impacted supply and demand. Anecdotally, my conversations with both youths and youth workers have been alarming, as many shared how "soft" or recreation drugs were being pushed in venues familiar to our youths. A 2015/2016 survey by the National Council Against Drug Abuse (NCADA) also found that, over the years, youths were increasingly permissive when it came to drugs. Such a trend, though concerning, should perhaps not come as a surprise. Globally, attitudes towards drug use have been shifting. Our digitally savvy youths consume a vast amount of what they know about the world through social networking sites. A 2017 Youth and Public Perception survey by NCADA found that, amongst youths aged 13 to 21, 16% “were open to trying drugs for a new experience, if they are overseas or if it does not affect their daily routine”. Clearly, youth attitudes towards drugs appear to be slowly but steadily liberalising. But make no mistake. There is nothing soft about soft drugs like methamphetamine, otherwise known as ice, glass, crystal or cannabis, otherwise known as marijuana, pot, grass, weed. These substances are not less addictive, nor are they less harmful, as many young abusers misunderstand. The Central Narcotics Bureau’s preventive drug education programmes have reached out to youths both within and outside of schools. Despite our best efforts, how else can we drive home the message amongst youths of the harms that drug abuse brings? This is, hence, a second area of concern for which, I propose, we will need to resource more heavily in the coming year, so that we do not lose our younger generations to the scourge of drugs. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I do not purport to have any quick answers to the two broad youth trends I have highlighted above, but our response will have to be one that is not merely led by the Government alone. To ensure that our young ones do not fall prey to the perils of drugs and sexual offending, our response must be one that involves a much deeper understanding and appreciation of our youths’ psyche, a coordinated and deliberate movement across society to combat these ills afflicting our future generations and an openness in evolving our approaches to engage and empower our young people. Notwithstanding the points I had raised above, I support the Budget.
Mdm Deputy Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Raj Joshua Thomas.
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas (Nominated Member)2969 words
[+8 sentences]Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank the hon Finance Minister for a very well-thought through Budget 2022, which balances dealing with immediate needs and preparing for future challenges and opportunities. Several parts of the Budget deal with developing our manpower resources to ensure we remain competitive, as well as how we can uplift our lower-wage workers. My speech will centre on two key themes: first, ensuring that our workforce remains motivated and enterprising, and making sure we level up the working conditions of and opportunities for our lower-wage workers. There has been an inexorable global drive by employees to seek work-life harmony. This has dominated the headlines recently. Employees, especially new job entrants and younger workers, are drawn to workplaces that offer flexible work arrangements, like work-from-home and compressed work weeks, and that can guarantee freedom from work considerations outside of contracted working hours. It has even been suggested in this House that we consider implementing a four-day work week and the right to disconnect. This move to find workplaces that are more accommodative of workers’ personal pursuits and aspirations has been called the “Great Resignation” or the “Great Re-alignment”. A 2021 talent trends report by Michael Page indicated that 56% of Singapore workers see themselves searching for new jobs post-pandemic.[+5 sentences] Although the statistics bear out that this may not have happened yet, it appears that the trends underlying the Great Re-alignment are likely to become the new norm. To give effect to such aspirations, the Government has, amongst other things, introduced the Tripartite Advisory for Work-Life Harmony and instituted an Alliance for Action for Work-Life Harmony. Madam, I fully support these initiatives that help employers adopt good and progressive employment practices. It is, however, easier for larger corporations and those with deeper pockets to put in place work-life harmony initiatives. SMEs may need to be more creative since – and this is something that Minister Tan See Leng mentioned earlier – they have less resources and could do with experts assisting them to design and implement such measures. In this regard, I would like to suggest that Enterprise Singapore’s Enterprise Development Grant include work life harmony as a specific fundable area, so that SMEs can avail of the grant to help them formulate work-life harmony programmes for their employees. Notwithstanding my support of these initiatives, I have some reservations on how we are approaching work-life harmony and this has to do with, first, how we can continue to encourage high performance and, second, how it applies to lower-wage workers. I read a recent survey by recruitment agency Randstad Singapore that showed that an equal number of respondents ranked “work-life balance” and “attractive salary and benefits” as the most important employee value proposition they looked for in an employer.[+16 sentences] In other words, employees’ expectations are to find a workplace that offers both work-life balance and an attractive salary and benefits. This is, of course, aspirational and, on the face of it, it is a good aspiration. However, there will always be workers who wish to do more, to go the extra mile, who take additional pride in their work and desire to do a good job. Sometimes, this may take them beyond their working hours. I refer to these people, Madam, as “dedicated workers”. There are also workers who upend and buck the trend of work-life harmony, who are willing to forgo their benefits and their rights. They are ambitious, driven and committed to achieve and surpass their organisation’s goals. They want to do more because they want more. They are hungry and their professional goals have become their personal goals. I refer to these people, borrowing a phrase from professional sports, as “elite performers”. Both these types of workers go beyond their contractual obligations and they do so not because they are asked to or because they are pressured to. They do it out of a sense of responsibility and commitment to their job roles. They still feel that they have work-life harmony, just perhaps a different form, because work-life harmony means different things to different people. As we move towards balanced workplaces, we need to make sure that, inadvertently, these dedicated workers and elite performers are not discouraged from wanting to be the best and, if they wish to forgo their rights and benefits, we should not judge them, dissuade them or, even worse, ridicule them. Importantly, we must not allow a culture to develop that is against hard work and hard workers. A case in point is the varied reception that Twitter's new CEO Parag Agrawal received when he announced that he would be taking "a few weeks of paternal leave" after the birth of his second child. Twitter offers its employees up to 20 weeks of paternal leave.[+32 sentences] Many applauded him, seeing his move as helping to normalise the taking of paternal leave. But there were some who questioned why he had taken only a few weeks and not the full 20 weeks he was entitled to; and others yet who criticised him when he said he would still be taking meetings while he was on leave and keeping up with the company's business. It is almost as if the responsibility and dedication to his work was being vilified. Now to be clear, I am not saying that everyone should strive to be an elite performer. A recent article on Rice Media titled "Everyone's Progressing, but I Lack Ambition. Is That So Wrong?", carried a quote as follows: "Just because I'm not ambitious doesn't mean I'm lazy or lagging behind. I don't need a big house, for example. I don't need to travel the world too. If I'm earning enough and happy, it's my choice". Madam, I agree with this and indeed, it is everyone's right to make choices about how they want to live their lives and how they want to structure their relationship with their jobs. And this is equally so for elite performers and dedicated workers. But the difference may be felt ultimately in promotions and increments, and employees who decide to enjoy the fullness of their benefits should temper their expectations. This is not because they are being punished – it is because it is fair, just and equitable to reward dedicated workers and to reward elite performers. The hard truth is that those who do more, especially if it exceeds expectations or contractual obligations, will get more. And yes, this will inevitably spark others who also want to get ahead to go the extra mile. What is important is for employers to put in place mechanisms to prevent their elite employers and dedicated workers from burning out or suffering from mental health issues arising from work. But employers and peers should never hold them back. As regards to elite performers, we must make special effort to identify, nurture and promote them. They pull their organisations forward; in the private sector, they drive profit and growth, attract and keep clients, and they help to create more jobs. They include business leaders, entrepreneurs, admin service officers in the Government, senior counsels. They include Razer CEO Tan Min-Liang, Singapore's youngest self-made billionaire, who recounted at a Singapore Management University commencement ceremony that he was spurred on by his parents who told him that he needed to just go get what he wanted out of life through hard work, attention to detail and responsibility. They include Carousell CEO Quek Siu Rui who has said that he had not taken a holiday in years due to his obsession with his work and with doing things well and good. For a country that has nothing but people as our resources, we need these captains of performance to continue to be motivated, to continue to push the boundaries and ultimately to expect, see and feel the rewards of their hard work. And while we raise awareness about the importance of balance and mental health, an extremely critical endeavour, we should not forget to concomitantly celebrate our elite performers, to fortify them and to recognise them. This is because their successes are the successes of their organisations and ultimately, of Singapore. While striving for work-life harmony, we should not lose our culture of meritocracy and our system of meritorious rewards. In this regard, I am happy to hear Minister Wong’s announcement of the new Singapore Global Executive Programme and I trust that our elite performers will be identified to be involved in it. Separately, I call on the Action for Alliance for Work-Life Harmony and TAFEP to consider how to make sure that even as we adopt work-life harmony principles as norms at our workplaces, we do not at the same time unwittingly discourage elite performers and dedicated workers from putting in hard work and effort, and rising above the rest nor should we allow a culture of complacency and adversity to work to foster, because Singapore cannot afford it. I will now move on, Madam, to my next points on lower-wage workers, before which I declare my interest as President of the Security Association Singapore. The narrative on work-life harmony is weighted towards flexible work arrangements. This is more suited to office workers and those whose work can be done remotely. We need to consider the work-life harmony of employees who are in jobs that require them to be at their workplace, many of whom are essential workers like nurses, or in lower paying jobs like bus captains, cleaners and security officers. In particular, Madam, I would like to raise the issue of the unearthly working hours of security officers, who generally work 12 hours a day, six days a week.[+15 sentences] I raised this last year, but I feel compelled to raise it again this year. Security agencies, who are the employers of security officer, can only do so much to change the norm of 12-hour work shifts, because as an outsourced service, supply follows demand. Hence, if a buyer stipulates 12-hour work shifts, that is all that an agency can bid for. Most security contracts in both the private and public sector are based on 12-hour shifts. We need to seriously think about whether this pattern of work is reasonable. Put ourselves in an officer's shoes. Her shift starts at 8.00 am. If we cater one and a half hours for her to wash up, have her breakfast and commute to work, it means she has to wake up at 6.30 am. She ends her shift at 8.00 pm. By the time she gets home, it is 9.00 pm. If she has young children, she has barely an hour or less of time with them before they go to sleep. After she has her dinner, spent time with her family and done some chores, she goes to bed at 12.00 am. If she needs more time for these things, she sleeps later. This routine then continues, Madam, for the next six days before she has one day off and this day off may well be a weekday. So, Madam, amidst all this hullaballoo about work-life harmony, where is the work-life harmony for this security officer? Where is the work-life harmony for the 50,000 security officers who live this life right now?[+2 sentences] In fact, more than 50,000 if we consider ad hoc workers and many of them, Madam, older workers. So, the private sector will take some convincing to move away from 12-hour shifts because it involves costs. In this regard, I would like to ask the Government, as one of the largest buyers of security services, to take the lead by changing the working hours for security officer in all Government tenders to eight to 10-hour shifts. This will have a knock-on effect on the shift durations for security officers in the private sector.[+1 sentence] Achieving work-life harmony for our lower-wage workers means challenging and changing their working conditions. The chief issue in working conditions for security officers is that of unreasonable working hours.[+9 sentences] I plead, Madam, that as we take steps towards achieving better work-life harmony generally, that our security officers, low-wage workers and older workers are not left behind. Another group that may be left out in this drive to improve working conditions and work-life harmony are workers in outsourced services. These are sectors where workers do not work at their employer's premises, but at third party sites that their employers are contracted to supply manpower. As such, these employers do not have much control over their employees' physical working conditions. Working conditions and how these outsourced workers are treated are dictated by the service contracts between their employers and the service buyers, not the employment contracts. Outsourced workers are not even parties to these contracts and have no say in how they will be treated at their workplaces. Pursuant to the service agreements, they often face the threat of summary immediate removal from their workplaces or discrimination. And they have no recourse nor protections under the law. This issue must be addressed urgently as it affects a large proportion of our outsourced lower-wage workers. To address this, I call on the MOM to ensure that the upcoming legislation enshrining the TAFEP guidelines includes obligations on buyers of outsourced services, in that, service agreements must not contain clauses that result in unfair or discriminatory working conditions for outsourced workers.[+1 sentence] This is similar to the Workplace Safety and Health Act, which imposes obligations on building owners and managing agents. If we fail to do this, Madam, we are leaving the employment conditions of almost 100,000 outsourced workers to be subject to the whims and fancies of service buyers and managing agents without recourse.[+8 sentences] Madam, the current Progressive Wage Models (PWMs) have been very successful in raising wages and I thank the Tripartite Committee on Low-Wage Workers for their recommendations, as well as MOM and the tripartite partners for their hard work and commitment. However, prices in the PWM outsourced sectors continue to lag wages, as Minister Wong noted in his Budget speech and the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS) has been introduced to support businesses in the short term. But the PWCS may operate ultimately as a crutch, in which service providers use it as leverage to bid lower in upcoming tenders. The net effect is that these companies will find themselves in a similar position when the PWCS tapers off: that is, providing services at a rate that is unsustainable vis-à-vis the PWM wage increases. Furthermore, in order for companies in these sectors to meaningfully transform, including implementing work-life harmony schemes and adopting technology, they will need to earn enough to afford these measures. If prices continue to lag wages, SMEs will invariably forego transformation initiatives for day-to-day operational needs. In this connection, I would like to ask how the Competition Act applies to the PWM outsourced sectors, given that in the outsourced services sectors, fixing wages is essentially fixing the cost of supply. On a related note, will the Government consider working with the tripartite partners to set out reasonable prices that service buyers can expect to pay for each of the PWM outsourced sectors, derived from objective costs, for example, insurance and costs of replacements, so that prices can keep in tandem with wage increases. As regards the extension of the PWM to in-house cleaners, security officers, landscape workers, administrators and drivers, I would like to urge the tripartite partners to adopt a unitary PWM for the same professions, regardless of whether these workers are employed in-house or if they are outsourced workers.[+16 sentences] This is because the PWM prescribes not only wage increases but also a skills and progression path. In-house and outsourced workers in these sectors do identical work and differentiated wage ladders based on who their employers are, in my view, does not make sense. On a related note, the current PWM sectors tend to have a fairly large number of ad hoc or part-time workers who choose to be ad hoc workers. In fact, many of them work every day, often with the same employer but do not take up full employment. This would appear to be antithetical to the PWM, which provides a career progression path with concomitant skills upgrading. In this regard, efforts should be made to encourage workers in these sectors to be employed full-time, instead of doing jobs on an ad hoc basis. Finally, I would like to propose that SSG consider putting in place a system to recognise apprenticeships alongside Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) framework, because not all skills can be imparted through a classroom setting. Some skills and professions, like that of gaffers, artists, technical crew, woodworkers and hawkers are best acquired through a period of apprenticeship. Sir, before I end, I would just like to respond to a point that Member Mr Fahmi Aliman brought up, where he suggested that TACs be funded to employ consultants to develop outcome-based contracting guidelines. I am happy to support what he has said and also to inform him that for the Security Association Singapore, we have received funding from Enterprise Singapore to go beyond just creating guidelines but to create an outcome-based tender generator and repository that will help buyers create outcome-based tenders. This will first be implemented for the security industry but we will very soon then make it available for other industries as well. To conclude, Sir, I support this Budget and all it will do to help our businesses and workers. But despite our best efforts, some may still fall through the cracks. I have sought to identify some of these areas and have made suggestions as to what we could do. Together with the cooperation of the tripartite partners, I have no doubt that we will not only chart a new way forward together but that we will also leave no one behind. Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Ng Ling Ling.
Ms Ng Ling Ling (Ang Mo Kio)1374 words
[+2 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, this is our third year into the COVID-19 pandemic. As Singaporeans adjust to the new norms and with borders opening up progressively, our economy has also gradually improved, and the outlook is optimistic. Although I am heartened to hear that the MTI's projection of a 3% to 5% growth in Singapore's economy in 2022, I continue to be mindful of the uncertainties in the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic and the potential downside risks it has on our economy and our people, especially with also now the war in Ukraine.[+24 sentences] Last year, I rose to speak about safeguarding and improving the welfare of three vulnerable segments of our population – persons with disabilities, women who are caregivers, and seniors living alone or with their spouse only. Given the 2022 Budget's focus on charting a new way forward together, I intend to highlight three areas where I feel there are long-term implications to pay more attention to as our nation moves forward to living with COVID-19. These three areas are: (a) social mobility amidst COVID-19, economic restructuring and digitalisation; (b) managing long-term healthcare needs; and (c) fulfilling the housing aspiration of our younger generation. First, I would like to raise the issue of social mobility amidst economic restructuring and digitalisation. COVID-19 has exacerbated the need for economic transformation and digitalisation. We know that this is important as we strive to thrive in a volatile, unpredictable and fast changing world. Yet this may also bear a considerable impact on vulnerable groups including the lower-wage workers, middle-aged workers, persons with disabilities and their families. While Singapore's overall unemployment rate saw a decline from 3% in 2020 to 2.6% in 2021, we know the recovery in the labour market remains uneven, especially for those that are more impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Families with members in these sectors would likely have experienced a greater loss of income or job insecurity and their children may face a host of obstacles in their social mobility. A study in the UK assessing the social mobility implications of COVID-19 has shown that a fall in earnings can reduce the options available to displaced workers as they have less resources to finance reskilling and to lean on while they search for re-employment. For their children and young who are still in education, a fall in parental income or job loss has been shown to reduce attainment in school and through this, have long-run impacts on future earnings. I am thus really glad to hear in the Minister for Finance's Budget speech that we will continue to invest and upskill our workers and encourage companies to do so through skills development initiatives, increase in support for continued training and SkillsFuture Career Transition Programmes. These will certainly go towards helping our people remain employed and to transit into new growing industries and the digital economy. Programmes such as the Fresh Start Housing Scheme, KidSTART, UPLIFT Community Pilot and scaling up of ComLink are also helpful in ensuring that our children in disadvantaged and low-income families have opportunities to improve their lives. However, I note that many of these schemes will take years before they can reap their full benefits. I would thus like to ask how will the Government monitor and ensure that the families these schemes are targeted to help are making the transitions in these few years of rapid and intense changes? I also observe that families, for example, with parents who are trying to upskill, find new employment and manage their transition into new jobs while raising young children all at the same time would be struggling in juggling multiple demands. I would like to ask how would the Government help to streamline all these programmes and help the family in a more wraparound holistic manner for them to navigate between social and manpower schemes that are targeted to help them? The second topic that is close to my heart is the issue of managing the long-term healthcare needs of our ageing population. The COVID-19 pandemic showed us the importance of building a resilient healthcare system. Singaporeans, healthcare and frontline workers have rallied together and through the cooperation and efforts of everyone, we have avoided overwhelming our hospitals. I take this opportunity to salute all our hardworking healthcare workers and frontline workers. We need to continue to strengthen our healthcare systems and build capabilities to ensure that our frontline workers would remain adaptable in responding to future crises. Besides being able to be prepared for future pandemics, a resilient healthcare system should also meet new challenges and changing healthcare needs. The 2020 population census report showed that residents aged 65 and above has increased from 9% to 15.2% over the last 10 years .[+1 sentence] At the same time, the National Population Health Survey 2020 highlighted that diabetes prevalence increased with age where more than 20% of adults aged 60 and above are diabetic. Despite Singapore's effort to tackle diabetes, the crude prevalence of diabetes showed an increasing trend from 8.6 % in 2010 to 9.5% in 2019 to 2020.[+1 sentence] Although the crude prevalence was partly attributable to population ageing, it is nonetheless important to know that more than one in every five older adults aged 60 to 75 are diabetic. Furthermore, the numbers of patients with hypertension does not fare well either, with an increase of the overall crude prevalence of 24.2% in 2017 to 35.5% in 2019 to 2020.[+5 sentences] Similarly, the age-standardised prevalence also showed an increasing trend from 21.9% in 2017 to 31.7% in 2019 to 2020. This data shows that we must do much more to manage chronic diseases in an ageing population. In my Committee of Supply cuts for health, I will also elaborate on my suggestions on activating more primary care general practitioner's (GP) clinics as well as the use of technologies to help our population manage chronic diseases. I look forward to hearing from the Ministry of Health their overall plan for managing population health. Lastly, I would like to speak about helping to fulfil the aspirations of our younger adults and the challenges that they are facing in building a home and a family. COVID-19 has accentuated the challenges of home ownership amidst the supply crunch in the construction sector and the rising cost of utilities due to the increase in energy prices. Many young couples in my constituency have written to me or approached me at Meet-the-People Sessions about their difficulties in successfully balloting for a Build-to-Order (BTO) flat although they want to settle down and have a family. In Singapore, a study conducted by the Asian Development Bank has shown that the idea of "no flat, no child" is prevalent among our young generation.[+1 sentence] Thus, it is definitely important for us to engage Singaporeans more, especially during these few years where housing remains an issue for many of the young couples who want to settle down. This, in the face of our continued declining rate, is an important issue that I feel should be addressed. There are two suggestions that I would like to suggest for better meeting the housing aspirations of young Singaporeans.[+5 sentences] Firstly, I would like to suggest for MND to consider extending greater interim subsidies or housing loans to young couples who are trying to get a resale flat if they have immediate housing needs and cannot wait for the longer waiting time for BTO flats. Secondly, I would also suggest for MND to consider reviewing some of the criteria of the current schemes to give more flexibility for young couples to be able to find their flat if they do not meet all the criteria immediately. Mr Speaker, as the economy gradually recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic and we move towards the goal of an endemic Singapore where Singaporeans coexist with the virus, it is timely that this year's Budget focuses on how we can chart our new way forward as a nation. As we strengthen our resilience from the shadows of COVID-19, my hope is that the Singapore Dream – where opportunities and care continue to be available to all and aspirations of all Singaporeans can become real – will remain alive in the many years to come. On that note, I support Budget 2022.
Mr Speaker5 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon)2499 words
[+34 sentences]Sir, every year during Budget season, we ask ourselves how we can best support the most vulnerable members of our society. Let me start this time with one story of what vulnerability looks like. Allie – not her real name – is a girl who used to live in my constituency. When I first met her in 2016, she was just eight years old. She was like a big sister to my daughter Ella, and they used to play together. Her family had little and lived in a rental flat, but she gave what she could. She gifted Ella her toy car. She patted Ella on her back whenever she coughed. One could not wish for a sweeter, kinder child. But all this changed when in about a year later, Allie was sent to live in a place of safety – to protect her and to help her. But it also made her a completely different person. Torn from her friends, her family and her home, she shrunk into her shell. When I visited her, she barely spoke a word. She just sat in the room and stared into space. This was not the lively child I once knew, and it was heartbreaking to see how much she was affected and how she had her childhood ripped from her. It is hard to blame the social workers at the place of safety. I saw firsthand how much they cared. They tried their best with the limited resources they had. When I was there, I saw a little boy climbing the fence and the barb wires, trying to escape. The social worker was trying so hard and so gently to calm him down. Children like Allie need all the help they can get. I spent a lot of time thinking about what we can do to help children like her. I raised questions in Parliament about places of safety and about intergenerational incarceration. I thought, surely, we can launch new programmes, more programmes, to help. But as we deep dived into the issues, I realised we have plenty of programmes. The issue might be that social workers had too much on their plate and many were burned out. Over the past year, I talked with many social workers. I met with social workers every month. I spoke to senior social workers and junior social workers. I spoke to those in the frontlines and those who have left the profession. I spoke to those from family service centres (FSCs) and from other voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). I also carried out a public survey and reached out to over 120 social workers. I listened to their concerns, their worries and most of all, their deep passion in wanting to help others. But Sir, they too need help, especially during this pandemic. A study found that nearly 60% of frontline social workers were affected by anxiety at the height of the pandemic, with 45% facing depression.[+8 sentences] The study also found that social workers in FSCs faced higher depression rates. These findings mirror what I was hearing from social workers in my dialogues. One after another, social workers described their heavy caseloads and exhaustion. I heard the same requests over and over again: requests for more time, more resources and more help. Today, I want to focus on social workers at our FSCs. FSCs are often the first port of call for those in need. Many see them as a clearing house for all social services. They advise and support families with financial, housing, employment, social and emotional resources. Families rely on their support when applying for financial assistance, seeking housing assistance, requesting food donations, seeking new employment, solving marital problems and much, much more. It is no surprise that active cases handled by FSCs skyrocketed during the pandemic, increasing from 17,000 per quarter to 20,000 cases – and cases are also getting more complex.[+4 sentences] Sir, we need to do more for our social workers who are just as much at the frontline of this pandemic and are in a tight situation like our healthcare workers. Today, I have three recommendations to give our social workers the time, resources and support they need. My first recommendation is to set a cap on the number of cases that each social worker can take on at any given time. Currently, too many social workers are forced to juggle an excessive caseload. According to MSF data from the past five years, the average social worker at a FSC handles 22 cases a year.[+2 sentences] If 22 cases was the maximum, that might be fine. But 22 cases is the average. This likely means many social workers are out there working far heavier caseloads. I met many of them during my dialogues who told me that they often have 30 to 50 cases at any given time.[+16 sentences] This is a shocking number. Maybe they are outliers but their views are important too. Social workers have told me that excessive caseloads directly hurt their ability to do a good job. A FSC social worker shared with me that they feel that they are shortchanging their clients who so desperately need help and they feel bad. Another social worker shared this quote with me to explain how they feel, "If you ever wanna know what a social worker's mind feels like, imagine a browser with 2,857 tabs open. All the time." With a huge caseload, they obviously have to give less attention to each case. Often, they end up doing what they call "firefighting", which means tackling only the most urgent problems. This firefighting makes it hard for them to give 100% to each case. It also denies them time to attend courses, mentor junior staff and create community programmes, equally important tasks that build organisational capacity, transfer knowledge and support communities. Ms Elizabeth Quek, a community social worker, shared about "the helplessness social workers feel when we don't have the time or resources for someone who needs more support." This is not a sustainable solution and many social workers are reaching or have reached their breaking point. We need to have a cap on the number of cases that social workers can take on. This is nothing new. In many industries, caps are set to ensure service quality remains high. Schools, for example, limit the number of students in each class so teachers can dedicate more attention to each student. In a survey I carried out, 87% of social workers felt that there should be a cap on the number of active cases a social worker handles.[+20 sentences] Ms Quek, whose quote I shared earlier, said that reducing caseloads will improve social workers' capacity to help their clients. I know this cannot happen overnight and it is not easy to implement. It will require changes in FSC human resources (HR) practices but this cap is absolutely necessary. The actual number of the cap should also be decided in consultation with social workers from across the profession and take into consideration the wide spectrum of cases – Group 2, Group 3 and Group 4 cases – a social worker handles. Sir, my second recommendation is to increase the time, resources and headcount for research work at FSCs. Social workers told me they spend a significant part of their work entering data from their cases into the Social Service Net, or SSNet. This might sound like a miserable task but many social workers I spoke to talked about SSNet as a treasure trove of data. They think the rich information stored on SSNet could provide useful insights on the communities they serve. Some social workers have spent their personal time, after work hours, to trawl through and crunch the data in search of insights. One enthused to me about how it would be possible to run a sentiment analysis by applying natural language processing techniques to the data, to surface trends across cases in the same community. Sir, our social work degrees are rigorous. Their graduates emerge with research and technical skills. It would be a waste for them to let these skills atrophy. As I have mentioned, the only barrier is that FSCs often do not allocate time or staff to do research. The same social workers who beamed about unlocking the insights held in the SSNet data were also the ones frustrated by how they never had the time or support to do so. About half of the social workers that I surveyed shared that their FSCs do not have dedicated manpower for research work. About 85% wanted Government funding for headcounts dedicated to research. I know MSF is trying to help and recognises the importance of research work. It does provide FSCs with data from SSNet whenever a social worker request for it. But we can cut the administrative workload of social workers making these constant requests by having in-house researchers. I hope MSF will respond positively to this appeal by social workers. I know it can provide funding for this through the new Community Capacity Trust which will open for applications from 1 April 2022, and I hope MSF will ensure that all FSCs use this funding and hire in-house researchers.[+24 sentences] With funding support and dedicated headcounts, our FSCs can arm themselves with data about the vulnerable families and communities they serve and they can go upstream to solve these issues within the community. That brings me to my third and final recommendation today – to increase the time, resources and headcount for community work. I spoke earlier about how social workers do not have the time to do things like create community programmes. Indeed, when I met them, some social workers described community work as their CCA, as something secondary to case work, something they dabble in during their spare time. But it is something they feel is crucial. Sir, community work, in fact, has two important contributions. First, community work is prevention. It enables FSCs to reach at-risk families not yet clients of theirs. This improves outcomes as the families can receive support before their problems worsen significantly. Easier to put out small fires than raging infernos, after all. Second, community work builds social bonds. No man or woman is an island, and everyone needs a robust social network to succeed. Often, families working with FSCs lack friends and neighbours they can count on. Through community work, FSCs can link their clients with others in the same community and enable them to provide mutual support. This reduces the family’s reliance on institutions such as FSCs, helps them succeed in a sustainable way and also offers a way for families themselves to support others around them. Community work will also help to slow the inflow of new cases which will give social workers the space and time they need. It might help to break the vicious cycle some social workers are in. There are other NGOs that do community work and, indeed, many do excellent work. But why not empower FSCs to do the same? FSCs are located in the heart of the community and they have their finger on the pulse of their community. FSCs are already working with many of the people in the community, already meeting with them regularly and have the data on the trends and needs on the ground that many other NGOs do not have. There might be worries about duplication of work but there is so much to be done. We should be concerned but I think we hardly need to fear the duplication of work currently. About half of the FSC social workers I surveyed said their FSCs do not have dedicated manpower and resources for community work. About 84% wanted Government funding for headcounts dedicated to community work. I know MSF will agree that community work is important and, in fact, they already provide funding to FSCs for two headcounts for group and community work.[+11 sentences] But there is a lot more we need to do. First, social workers need to know there is existing funding for this. During my consultations with social workers, many were surprised to hear that funding for this headcount existed. Second, we need to increase the funding available. Many social workers shared that funding for two headcounts is hardly sufficient. Third, MSF needs to work closely with FSCs and ensure they use this funding available to them and hire the headcounts required to focus on community work. Sir, in conclusion, let me end my speech by returning to Allie’s story. She has been released from the Place of Safety and I brought her out for a meal and a day at the arcade with my daughter recently. I hope that one day Allie will be able to lead a stable and fulfilling life within the community in spite of everything she has gone through. I hope no other child has to go through what Allie went through. To do this, we need to help our social workers. In summary, I am asking that the Government introduce a cap on the number of cases each social worker can take on, provide funding for dedicated headcounts and resources for research work and provide more funding for dedicated headcounts and resources for community work. For all these recommendations, we need to make sure that it is not just rolled out as guidelines but that FSCs should follow and implement them, and MSF should help FSCs in the implementation.[+10 sentences] Sir, I recently met with MSF to discuss and share the concerns that social workers have shared with me. I appreciate the important work that MSF is doing and I could feel the passion in the room when they spoke about how they were helping FSCs and social workers. I thank them for their hard work and dedication. Let me end my speech with a quote, "Being a social worker is easy. It’s like riding a bike. Except the bike is on fire. You’re on fire. Everything is on fire". That is the reality. That really is what some social workers are feeling. In fact, I met up with social workers right after the Budget Statement. I shared this speech with them and one social worker shared with me in the most simple terms, "just tell everyone we are just very tired and frustrated".[+2 sentences] Sir, our social workers are our social safety net but they truly want to be more than that, to not just address the symptoms of the problem but address the root of the problem, to go down into the community to co-create solutions and address the real needs of the community. Social workers want to be the social safety trampoline that Senior Minister Tharman spoke about. If we value our social workers, I hope MSF seriously considers the recommendations I have made on behalf of the social workers.[+1 sentence] We can and we must do more to help our social workers and empower them to help make Singapore a better place and more inclusive place for all.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Tin Pei Ling.
Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson)2005 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, Singaporeans and families have been facing higher costs of living prices, from food to daily necessities to utilities and all these costs have increased quite significantly for them. I think, so far, from yesterday to today, we have heard many hon parliamentarians in this Chamber talk about this. This impact is especially salient for middle- and lower-income households, both financially and psychologically. According to the Department of Statistics, Singapore’s overall CPI, inflation, rose 4.0% from January 2021 to January 2022, although MAS’ core inflation measure was 2.4%.[+3 sentences] Household income growth barely matched the CPI growth in the same period for these households, as median monthly household income from work grew by 3.6% in nominal terms from 2020 to 2021. So, at first glance, middle- and low-income households may feel pressured that their incomes are only barely matching the rise in prices. But after taking into account Government transfers, middle- and low-income households would have seen higher real income growth. With Government transfers and taxes considered, the Gini coefficient in 2021 evidently fell from 0.444 to 0.386, the second lowest level since 2000.[+15 sentences] Hence, I am glad that the Government has multiples schemes, such as the CDC vouchers, education accounts top-ups and enhanced U-Save rebates, in place to support these households. However, we must not undermine the psychological factor of the public, even if income is still outpacing inflation in reality. It is not always immediately obvious how Government transfers have buffered the impact. It takes multiple steps to calculate the net impact. Moreover, there remains much uncertainty in how costs can fluctuate in the future and, therefore, how families can or cannot cope. The psychology of uncertainty, if left unaddressed, can severely affect one’s well-being but, more importantly, threaten our nation’s ability to stay together, overcome crisis together and progress together. Rising global demands for the same products that we demand with the arrival of COVID-19 vaccines, oil and gas supply crunch made worse by geopolitical turmoil, and global supply chain woes are driving costs up. Clearly, these are macro factors beyond our control. But these are hurting Singaporeans. For example, the sudden spike in energy price forced a few of the open energy market operators out of operations. Customers are transferred back to grid operator SP Group. Or, they could choose other private operators that survived. Regardless, energy prices have increased significantly across the board. During a house visit in January this year, I met a MacPherson resident who runs a small shop and she shared her frustration and anxiety with me. She had subscribed to Best Electric, one of the open energy market operators that went bust last year. Her monthly electricity bill doubled from $1,800 in the first month after SP took over her account, and this monthly bill further increased to over $8,000.[+17 sentences] It was more than a four-fold increase. For small operators with a modest margin, such a shocking increase drives them into the red. Needless to say, these small operators, many of whom are Singaporeans with families, will see their household disposable income being affected as well. Could the Government have stepped in more strongly in such extraordinary instances to help mitigate the increase? Perhaps, to put a cap to the amount of increment for these affected small businesses and household in such instances where the impact or the increase was not of their own doing. In another example, an elderly couple in MacPherson in their 70s live on their CPF payouts and allowance of a couple of hundreds of dollars per month from their three children. They are typical middle-income Singaporeans who have retired and are living in a flat of their own. One may argue that this is not too bad and they certainly receive subsidies and benefits from various Government schemes as well. But both elderly have chronic medical conditions that incur recurring medical costs. MediSave savings are also fast depleting for them. They tried and are still trying to be self-reliant but rising food, groceries, utilities and public transport costs in recent times are really testing for them. While Singaporeans understand that some factors are beyond Singapore’s immediate control, and that self-efforts are important, the pressure from fast rising costs stress them. Successive news or observations of price increases in a short time frame are unsettling. I sincerely appreciate Government’s efforts in introducing various support packages to help households and retirees cope with living costs, as well as uplifting workers to uplift wages. The latest measures announced in Budget 2022, along with those introduced in the past, will help to push down the “bottomline” costs and push up “topline” income for households. Government transfers through various help schemes help to offer buffer, but households are uncertain how much the costs will rise further, how long might they be eligible for Government subsidies or assistance and whether the assistance is even enough for them to cope. For retirees who no longer have active income, this worry intensifies. What happens after the Assurance Package expires in five years?[+6 sentences] What happens if the oil price spikes again or if the oil price and, therefore, the electricity bill stays high? Singaporeans must not feel that they are left to deal with the pressures alone as this can erode our sense of togetherness and undermine the social compact in Singapore. Hence, our Government must continue to assure Singaporeans of its support through words and deeds. Next, I would like to speak on the national reserves. Again, I am thankful that our past and present leaders have been judicious in managing our reserves, painstakingly saving up for "storms" like this COVID-19 pandemic. Money drawn from our past reserves has been put to good use as we battle the crisis and provide tangible support for Singaporeans. The Government’s total draw from past reserves is now revised to $42.9 billion for the period of FY2020 to FY2022, less than the initial draw of $52.0 billion from past reserves announced at the Fortitude Budget in May 2020. Drawing less than expected is encouraging as it signals stable economic growth and prudent spending.[+5 sentences] My question now is – from this point, what is the Government’s plan for our national reserves? Our Pioneers took more than 50 years to save up this pot of gold because they want to protect their children and future generations. Similarly, we have a duty to use this pot of gold wisely and make sure that we put back what we took once we can, so that our children and their children can continue to have this asset to fall back on when they face the crisis of their generation. Lest I get misunderstood, let me state that I believe it was necessary for us to draw on our reserves to help Singapore and Singaporeans get through this COVID-19 storm. I also believe that at this juncture when Singaporeans are struggling with escalating cost of living, now is not the right time to put money back into the reserves. Still, we must keep in mind that we cannot deplete our reserve, that must guard it judiciously, and instil a discipline to put back what we took at the earlies opportunity when we can afford to do so – if not all at once, then in phases. Therefore, could the Government share what circumstances or indicators need to be met for money to be returned to the reserves, and is there a timeline that the Government is looking at?[+12 sentences] My next point is on building up for the future. Many of the problems we face today are not novel. We probably already have the solutions to these old problems and we need to accelerate the implementation. For instance, our energy needs are over-reliant on oil and gas that we import. We benefit from processing these imported natural resources but our electricity prices are almost totally dependent on the prices set by oil export countries. One solution is to diversify to use clean energy so as to dilute the impact of oil prices on our own energy cost, and I believe this topic has been very passionately debated by fellow colleagues yesterday and today. And I am also aware that the Energy Market Authority is also actively exploring these solutions. Another possible solution is to actively deploy smart technology that allow us to move from reactive to predictive maintenance, so that we can save energy and reduce waste. This also includes other types of green technology as well. The upfront CAPEX could be costlier, but the longer-term savings could be worth it. Therefore, the problem is not without a solution, but could we hasten it? We need to build future-ready infrastructure that can last. And we need to build up enterprises and talents that are skilled and versatile. Hence, I am supportive of the plan to strengthen our digital capabilities and invest in next-bound infrastructure.[+17 sentences] When others are looking at 5G, we must look at 6G. When others are looking at Web 3.0, we must start imagining Web 4.0. The current S-curve is already saturated, we need to get onto the next. And to do so, of course, we need good people. Therefore, I am definitely also very supportive of the plans to invest in our people throughout the stages of their lives, from when they are young and in school to when they have entered the workforce and can benefit from mentorship to when they reach mid-career and to when they have become mature workers. It used to be that one’s career is a straight-line progression, hardly changing jobs or industry. But it will increasingly be commonplace for one to change path multiple times in his/her working lifespan. Hence, by investing in our people, we not only help Singaporeans to achieve their many aspirations but also recognise them as our nation’s key asset. I will also speak more on this during the Committee of Supply debate. By building up for the future, we can better take advantage of the opportunities and rise comfortably above the challenges that we now face. To move away from quibbling over small margins but changing games altogether. Singapore’s social compact have evolved over time. From focusing on survival as a nation in the 1960s to the 1980s, to the "Many Helping Hands" approach that encouraged a greater sense of collective responsibility, and that was from the 1990s to the mid 2000s, to now recognising that Government and the community need to play a bigger role to complement individual and family efforts. Singapore has done well so far. As we look ahead, the world is getting chaotic again, Singapore’s society is also getting more complex with more sophisticated needs and issues. There are still many challenges and uncertainties ahead. Therefore, to continue keeping our people and Singapore together, we must have sufficient guardrails, sufficient support and very importantly, mutual trust that we will be there for each other in good times and bad. As the Government draws from our treasury and reserves to provide financial stimulus and put in place the various schemes and legislation to distribute help fairly and boost failing sectors and groups that need help, businesses have to do its best to survive, to transform, to keep jobs for workers, to make space, to create capacity, to help groom our workers. And workers too, will need to be willing to accept concessions during tough patches and also be willing to learn and keep learning to always be better than who we were yesterday. At the society level, the more abled must also be willing to take less and give more. And the less abled need to also be willing to keep trying their best to adjust, to change track, to upskill and to progress. If we can all be more accommodating, a bit more give and take, try a bit harder for each other, I am sure there is no storm that we cannot overcome or weather through.[+2 sentences] Singapore will definitely emerge much stronger with every generation. Therefore, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Ang Wei Neng.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast)1678 words
[+10 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, in the Budget Statement, Minister for Finance said that we need to transform our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) which include the six Autonomous Universities. I agree. This is because IHLs need to keep pace with industry changes. I would like to share two personal anecdotes that would support the need for the transformation of IHLs. The first was at my workplace. A candidate applying for an IT support position in his 50s did not have any diploma in IT or a degree in IT. So, the HR department did not think he was fit to join as an executive using the conventional wisdom. But this candidate had a lot of work experience in running an IT infrastructure and support business. He self-learned over the years and was competent in IT support. Eventually, the IT head decided to hire him, and he performed very well thereafter. Clearly, his skill sets, real-world experience and knowledge about current IT practices trumped whatever IT diploma or IT degree he may have gotten 30 years ago, which would be obsolete by now.[+11 sentences] This episode reflects the need for continuous training and lifelong learning and IHLs need to play this role. The second case is closer to home. When my son was about to complete his full-time National Service last year, he was searching for a temporary job before commencing university this August. While serving his National Service, he started diving into the rabbit hole of blockchain, cryptocurrencies, decentralised finance and stablecoins. With his deep knowledge about cryptocurrency, he managed to land a temporary job with a cryptocurrency firm as an analyst despite having no official training. All things related to cryptocurrency is developing very fast and is hard to imagine how the subject can be taught in the university with sufficient currency. After working for a few months, he wants to defer his university education to pursue his interest and continue working in the same field. He does not want to miss the swift developments in the cryptocurrency industry. As his father, I was quite concerned. I am old school and very much believe in the notion of having a university degree to fall back on. But taking a step back, I am amazed that these days, young people without a university degree can do very well in certain industries especially in technology and make a very decent living. From my understanding, a significant number of young people working in the cryptocurrency industry are earning more than a hundred thousand dollars a year despite being in their 20s or early 30s.[+24 sentences] These days, even without a university degree, skill sets, personal experiences and knowledge can take a person very far. Young people may have their own ideas about their professional development. Taking this into account, our universities need to evolve to remain relevant. Unlike my time in the university, the main pillar of the curriculum was to impart knowledge and learn how to search for information in the library. But today, knowledge is abundant with the help of the Internet. The demise of print encyclopaedia reflects this reality. What is important about university education is to learn how to search information, verify the information and organise the information to present in a coherent, concise and simple manner. University education is also about sharpening the presentation skills, collaboration skills, social skills and other soft skills through project works, through tutorial seminars and internship, both locally and overseas. So, do we still need a four-year full degree course? Should we shorten the degree course? Should we have extended and more purposeful internships as part of transformation of IHLs that Minister for Education is thinking about? How do we involve industry leaders in shaping the curriculum of the IHL education so that the professors and students are more in touch with the industry’s needs and development? Can we have the flexibility of converting the second half of the full-time degree course into a part-time degree should the students want to extend his internship or even start work earlier? Above are food for thoughts as we transform our IHLs. It is always evolving, and we cannot be static. Mr Speaker, Sir, when we look at the job prospect of university graduates over the past three years, graduates of information and digital technologies are well sought after and command the highest starting pay, comparable or even higher than the starting pay of lawyers and doctors. People with tech skills are high in demand. Will this trend last? Or will it burst just like the dot.com bubble did 20 years ago? Given the trend of how digital technology has disrupted many industries, there is a high chance that this technology craze will continue for quite a while. In fact, every company has to be tech company to survive. Even the media companies that are reporting our speeches in Parliament have to be tech driven as declared by the chairman of the newly formed SPH Media Limited. I know of a family where the daughter, a fresh graduate of computer science, is earning close to the pay of her mother who has been a teacher with MOE for more than 30 years. Is this an anomaly? Is the job of a teacher of less important?[+1 sentence] No. This is just market forces at play. There is an acute shortage of IT staff in Singapore and worldwide. If our IHLs are still sticking to four years to churn out IT graduates, we might not be able to close the gap in the short to medium term without importing more foreign IT talents.[+6 sentences] At the same time, we have many recent Polytechnic and University graduates that cannot find jobs. There are also many mid-career PMETs who have lost their jobs and aspire to earn the starting pay of the recent IT graduates. So, what can we do? I had the privilege of visiting Tata Consulting Services (TCS) SG United Program with Minister Iswaran about two years ago. I also recently had lunch with the Asia Pacific Head of TCS. I understand that the trainees go through foundational and specialised training courses in areas like cloud adoption, artificial intelligence, machine learning, coding and getting on-the-job training by working on projects with TCS clients. Most, if not all of their hundreds of their trainees, found good jobs after the course. We need to work with more industry partners to expand the programme to produce not hundreds but thousands of such IT personnel.[+21 sentences] If we believe in the notion that every company has to be a tech company to survive, then almost all key personnel in the company, ranging from HR, customer service, marketing, procurement, all have to be IT savvy and be able to adopt technology that can make their work more efficient and effective. That being the case, the IHLs have the urgent need to incorporate tech components in almost every course in the university. More importantly, the IHLs have the mission to provide continuous training to existing professionals to equip them with technology and skills so that they can keep up with the industry trends. If we take a step back, we may need to examine if we need to put a time stamp on the degree conferred by universities. What do we mean by time stamp? One radical idea is to put it as a requirement that the graduates have to attend upgrading courses every five years or so. If you do not upgrade, your degree will fade over time and you no longer can claim the degree as your credential after a while. Does it sound scary? Mr Speaker, Sir, if we are serious about continuous training and lifelong learning, we have to be radical about transformation. It may not and should not happen overnight. But, we have to start to transform our IHLs. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin please. (In Mandarin): The Budget debate over the past two days has seen two consensus and one difference. The first consensus is that the Members of Parliament all agree that the country's spending needs to be increased, especially the budget for MOH. This is because our population is ageing, healthcare costs will go up year by year. The second consensus is that so far, no Member of Parliament has suggested cutting our defence spending to pay for the increase in healthcare costs. Because of the war in Ukraine, many people realised the importance of national defence. If we cannot ensure our territorial integrity, there is no need to debate this Budget here. Therefore, I am heartened that Members of Parliament who have questioned why defence spending is so high in the past, or have asked the Government to freeze or even cut defence spending, are no longer making the same request. However, the biggest difference now is that several Members of Parliament have called for using more Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC). Currently, half of NIRC is spent on Government spending and the other half is used for topping up our reserves to increase investment capitals, thus increasing the returns on our net investment. Due to COVID-19, we have spent nearly $43 billion of our national reserves.[+4 sentences] Without this $43 billion, the NIRC will also be reduced. At the same time, the Finance Minister has also said that it is difficult to plug this big hole with current Government revenue, especially taxes. Without the trees planted by our forefathers, we would not have the reserves to help Singaporeans to cope with the impact of COVID-19 in the past two years. Singapore is a small country. We do not know how many other crises like COVID-19 or the Financial Crisis will happen in the future and whether or not we need to use reserves. Therefore, I suggest that for the sake of our children and future generations, we should use half of our NIRC to slowly top up the $43 billion reserves that have been used. We cannot afford to sit idle and use up all our savings.[+1 sentence] (In English): I support the Budget.
[+4 sentences]Mr Speaker, I am thankful that Minister Lawrence Wong mentioned mental health in his Budget speech this year. With COVID-19, the mental health of care workers, caregivers – and I shall refer to them as "carers" – has deteriorated significantly in the past two years. Many news articles have come out recently, documenting the stress that they have come under due to the disruptions brought about by the pandemic, whether they were social workers, teachers, healthcare workers, mental health workers or informal caregivers. As my colleague, hon Member Mr Louis Ng, mentioned in his speech last evening, 56% of social workers had mild to severe anxiety during the past two years. Such statistics point to an increased risk of burnout amidst a lengthy pandemic and, in the longer term, of an increasingly unattractive care sector. It is not surprising that 1,500 medical workers resigned in the first half of 2021, when many of them worked too long hours, with inadequate manpower and support.[+10 sentences] Burnout occurs when people feel overburdened and depleted of emotional and physical energy. Some effects of burnout include loss of motivation, negativity, a sense of failure, self-doubt and a cynical attitude towards others, as well as a loss of empathy. Empathy is the bedrock of caring professions and it runs short when people feel burnt out. What quality of care can we reasonably expect when those who toil in our care professions and social services are stretched too thin? In charting a new way forward together, we need to protect the well-being of those who take on the work of caring for others, because people can only provide quality care to others when they themselves are well physically, mentally and emotionally. Two things are vital to ensure quality care: adequate capacity and adequate recognition. We need to provide sufficient resources and support to carers so that no one burns out. We also need adequate recognition through reasonable compensation and opportunities for advancement to boost morale and motivation and ensure that the care industry remains sustainable in the long term. Most people who chose the care professions are motivated by a strong desire to care for others and very few are calculative about monetary contributions and compensation. However, we should still take good care of them and ensure that they have the means to sustain themselves. Hence, my first recommendation is to enhance financial support for informal caregivers. I urge the Government to increase the quantum of the Home Caregiving Grant (HCG) for informal caregivers and implement "Carefare".[+3 sentences] Many caregivers shared with me in focus groups last year that they struggled to pay for outpatient expenses that are inadequately covered under MediSave. Such costs add to a family's financial burden, especially for those who had little choice but to give up their jobs and income to care for ageing parents, special needs children or mentally-afflicted family members. The pandemic also made caregiving responsibilities and expenses heavier because care resources, like daycare centres and domestic workers, were short in supply, as shown in a survey done by the Singapore Alliance for Women in Ageing (SAWA) in 2020. Enhancing HCG will go a long way to lighten their load because finances have shown to be the most significant source of stress for informal caregivers. I suggest that we tier the HCG according to the care recipient's needs and associated expenses.[+1 sentence] Care recipients who require assistance with more activities of daily living (ADLs) can and should be supported with higher amounts of HCG. Carefare is what I proposed before as a scheme similar to Workfare, but for lower-income individuals who provide full-time care to their loved ones, not by choice, but by circumstance.[+16 sentences] Many caregivers who had to quit their jobs suffer a loss of self-identity, decreased self-worth and emotional stress. Often, the family members who are not personally involved in care work fail to understand how demanding it is. Carefare is one way we can provide crucial financial relief and offer recognition to informal caregivers for the labour of caregiving. I will now speak a few words in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): I recommend that the Government enhance financial support for informal caregivers. I urge the Government to increase the quantum of the Home Caregiving Grant for informal caregivers and implement "Carefare". Many caregivers shared that they faced various challenges, including not being able to pay for outpatient expenses that are inadequately covered under MediSave. Such costs add to a family's financial burden, especially those who had little choice but to give up their jobs and income to care for their ageing parents, special needs children or mentally-inflicted family members. According to a survey done by the Singapore Alliance for Women in Ageing in 2020, the pandemic made care resources like daycare centres and domestic workers short in supply, aggravating the financial burden and pressures faced by caregivers. Because finances are the most significant source of stress for caregivers, improving the Home Caregiving Grant will go a long way to lighten their load. Carefare is what I propose as a scheme similar to Workfare, but for lower-income individuals who provide full-time care to their loved ones, not by choice, but by circumstance. Many caregivers who had to quit their jobs suffer a loss of self-identity, decreased self-worth and emotional stress. Family members who are not involved in the actual care work also often fail to understand how demanding it is. Carefare is a way to provide crucial financial relief and offer recognition for the labour of caregiving. (In English): Second, we need to ensure adequate national resourcing for social work, social services, healthcare and mental health care to be adequately staffed and well-protected from work hazards. Beyond salaries, we can do more to enable them in their work and support them in their well-being. In the healthcare sector, on top of burnout, cases of nurses being physically or verbally abused and even sexually harassed by patients are increasing.[+1 sentence] More preventive steps need to be taken to ensure that healthcare workers remain safe and supported at work. I encourage MOH to look into proactive policies in hospitals and other healthcare settings to protect our healthcare workers from abuse. We could also consider amending our laws to toughen punishments for those who abuse healthcare workers, to send a very clear signal that such behaviour will not be tolerated.[+24 sentences] Beyond just improving salaries, we need to ensure safety, support and adequate staffing, to retain and develop individuals in the care sector for as long as possible to adequately meet the needs of our ageing population. Similarly, we need to protect our teachers from burnout. The role and workload of teachers have expanded drastically over the years. Yet, teachers face more challenges as well as increased expectations of them, with home-based learning and the rising concern over our youths' mental health. In October last year, there was a letter written from a Mr Ng Wei Yang to The Straits Times and his plea went, "My wife's a teacher. Can I have her back with my family please?" I have spoken about this before in Parliament and I caution again about putting dual responsibility on teachers to double up as counsellors amidst an already overwhelming workload. Although teacher-counsellors will have a reduced teaching load, I am concerned about whether they will have sufficient bandwidth and emotional capacity to do both effectively while maintaining their own mental health. Some teachers shared with me that providing students with some form of basic counselling is already part of their role and they do it quite organically. However, I am concerned that formalising this role could create even more expectations by parents and the public towards teachers. The mental health of our teachers is next on the line if we continue to load them with too many expectations. I hope MOE will augment its efforts in this area with effective stakeholder communication towards parents. On top of that, other than being trained in youth psychology, the Ministry could consider adding on training in family therapy for school counsellors. School counsellors need to be well-versed in the everyday struggles faced by youths, including those they may encounter within their families. Other skills, such as mediation, could be helpful to foster and bridge relationships between students and their parents, especially during the difficult adolescent years. Within the wider community, I urge MOE, MSF and MOH to jointly resource and enable the training of mental health responders and volunteers from the grassroots to be empathic listeners. Our People's Association (PA) grassroots network has been a formidable and dependable way to reach out to residents in times of need, from mask distribution to mobilisation for vaccination and, in pre-COVID-19 times, organising activities to bring people together. We can tap on this network further, provide targeted training to suitable members and build their capabilities in one-to-one care support to residents. Social Service Agencies (SSAs) can partner PA to train and equip volunteers as befrienders in the community for anyone who needs a non-judgemental listening ear and guidance on further resources for help. Someone facing mental health struggles may not need to see a counsellor if they feel listened to early on in their difficulties. Those who require more attention and expertise can be advised by the befrienders on where to get more support. This pool of volunteers serve to help distribute and mitigate the care load from the limited number of existing professional counsellors until we can train more to handle the needs in the system. I am piloting this in Nee Soon South with the support of Yishun Health and HPB this year, and I look forward to share our learnings to help build this care network model in Singapore. Lastly, we need to enable SSAs to improve their capacity-building capabilities. Increasing funding from private, corporate and philanthropic donors can reduce SSAs' reliance on Government funding and the Government's administrative workload. I am heartened by the Budget announcements that the Government will provide a $100 million top-up to continue the dollar-for-dollar matching to donations to charities until end 2024.[+1 sentence] We should use such support to encourage private philanthropists and corporate donors to finance capacity-building in Singapore's SSAs for roles and headcounts, such as volunteer management, marketing and communications and fundraising. Getting multiple sectors to sponsor and support diverse and value-adding job roles to careers in SSAs will make the sector more attractive and vibrant for Singaporeans. This helps to increase the non-profit sector's capacity and bring three wins: one, it reduces the stress that SSAs often experience due to public funding limitations and large reporting and bureaucratic requirements; two, it allows for more experimental approaches to support vulnerable communities; and three, it frees up Government monies to be directed to the professional training of additional social workers and healthcare workers. The Charities Capability Fund by MSF as well as the Community Capability Trust are steps in the right direction and I am glad for the $26 million top-up to these efforts.[+2 sentences] I look forward to the implementation details and hope it will be a simple process for SSAs in its execution. Mr Speaker, a mentally healthy nation is a strong nation. The mental health of those who take on the brunt of care work in our country is an immediate priority.[+1 sentence] We need to help redistribute their care load. In the year ahead, I urge more attention and creative resourcing to look after the mental health of our carers.[+3 sentences] In Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): A mentally healthy nation is a strong nation. If we could provide better care for our caregivers, they will be able to better look after more people. (In English): I look forward to coordinated plans by MOH, MOE and MSF to enhance their support and care of our care workers.[+2 sentences] If we take better care of our carers, they can care better for many more. Notwithstanding the above that begs further attention, I fully support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Rahayu Mahzam.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong)2013 words
[+17 sentences]Mr Speaker, the Budget announcements mean different things to different people. Many look out for what the Government is planning to do to address day-to-day cost of living issues. Some look out for whether the Government will do more to address their areas of concern and the matters they champion. For the Members of this House, the Budget debate and the Committee of Supply debate provide the opportunity for us to talk about issues that are close to our hearts and to highlight areas for the Government to look at more deeply. For me, it is also an opportunity to share about everyday heroes who advocate for important issues in the community, who quietly work hard to improve their lives and those of others and, in their own ways, contribute to nation-building. There are two people I would like to speak about today. I want to first introduce you to Dr Chen Shiling. Dr Chen is a medical doctor trained in internal medicine and who has special interests in dementia and intellectual disability (ID). When she was in Junior College, she had the opportunity to volunteer at MINDS, to provide support to individuals with ID. She shared candidly that, in the beginning, the experience was daunting and, after her first session, she was not certain if she would do it again. Despite her reservations, she continued to help out at MINDS over the years. After graduating from medical school and becoming a doctor, she volunteered in her free time to give medical care to patients with ID. This is challenging because, typically, patients with ID also have multiple medical issues. Aside from that, what Dr Chen came to realise was that it was also necessary to track the health and well-being of their parents and caregivers. Patients with ID depend on their caregivers for many things, including, but not limited to, compliance with medication, nutrition and therapies. Their health, largely, depends on the ability of their caregivers to manage their care. This means that the health and well-being of the caregivers also needed to be addressed, especially as they age. Dr Chen, therefore, developed a holistic healthcare approach for ageing caregivers and their adult children with ID, addressing also social issues and bringing together multidisciplinary stakeholders on the same platform.[+17 sentences] This is a fairly niche area relating to healthcare and, although seemingly illogical, it is a refreshing and efficient approach to the issue. Only someone in the sector and familiar with working with such families would appreciate the specific challenges they face and curate the appropriate solutions. I believe this area of work is very important. We have heard, in recent times, the call to provide more support for families with children with special needs. I will touch more on this in my speeches for the COS debate. I am happy that the Government has responded to this call. In particular, Minister Chan Chun Sing’s and Minister Masagos Zulkifli’s replies to recent Parliamentary Questions gave assurance that the Government will continue to strengthen efforts and will work with the community to provide this support and build an inclusive society. Dr Chen has been championing this cause of caring for patients with ID and their caregivers as a family unit for many years. She has been working with Government agencies to see how this effort can be made accessible to more in Singapore. As a parent of a child with ID, I am heartened and glad that there are people like Dr Chen, who looks out for the needs of those with special needs and their caregivers. They do not only volunteer their time but seek to find solutions to make things better for others, especially for those who are vulnerable. Dr Chen shows how it is so important to walk the talk. She does not just give comments and expect the Government to come up with the solutions, but she has come up with substantive and constructive plans, tirelessly working with partners and taking effort to implement the ideas. The other person I would like to talk about today is Mr Hafiz Kasman. Mr Hafiz is a graduate from Singapore Management University (SMU), who co-founded Kinobi Asia. Mr Hafiz was a consultant, and Kinobi initially started as a movement during COVID-19 to help prepare students for the working world. Mr Hafiz and his friends-turned-partners started conducting webinars on career role models and tips on how to get into different industries. They saw great success for a few months in a row. There would be an average of about 200 to 300 participants at each of these webinars, which they initially held for young people in Singapore but, subsequently, also organised for youths in the region.[+2 sentences] Mr Hafiz realised from there that there is a big under-served market of students preparing for jobs. I believe this is also an area that the Government is keenly aware of. In the past year, career uncertainty has remained a top concern among two in five job-seeking youths, based on NYC’s youth sentiment polls, February to December 2021.[+3 sentences] The pandemic has reshaped the economy, made some sectors less desirable but also created new opportunities. Those who were about to enter the workforce had to adjust, like everyone else, and prepare for this new world. For several years, even before the pandemic, the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) had developed their career guidance framework. When the pandemic hit, these services needed to be strengthened and updated to address current needs.[+9 sentences] There were efforts by NYC and Young NTUC to provide resources for the youths to learn about growth sectors and how to prepare themselves for the working world. For example, the YouthTech Programme launched by NYC for youths to gain work insights in the increasingly important area of technology and digitalisation, creates pathways for young people to learn new skills and gain tangible experiences. Another example is the career symposium entitled LIT DISCOvery organised by Young NTUC as part of the SkillsFuture month in July last year. There were online webinars, workshops as well as virtual mentoring and masterclasses to equip youths and young working adults with the necessary technology and soft skills to pivot into new and evolving job roles in the growth sectors. I think the provision of support for our youths remains acute and necessary. Aside from career guidance, mentoring should also be an area that the Government continues to develop. In fact, Mr Hafiz, whom I was speaking about, is, himself, a champion of mentoring. He is the co-Chairman of the Mentoring AfA and also oversees Mara Mentoring, one of the M3 programmes, which aims to accelerate the career and personal progression of high-potential Malay/Muslim undergraduates, by connecting them to a dedicated community of successful early career professionals. Mr Hafiz has also managed to turn his passion into a business opportunity. What started as a series of webinars during COVID-19 has, today, become a business set-up, with 51 university partners across Indonesia, Singapore and the Philippines using its services. Kinobi provides free career tools and services for all students, such as resume-builder and job preparation courses, augmented with a job portal.[+3 sentences] Kinobi sees itself as the technology partner for university career services, driving a systemic change. They create, replace and augment the institution’s career platforms, enabling career services staff to do more to serve their student population. Mr Hafiz said that Kinobi is thriving with the support of the Government and the Singapore ecosystem. The SG StartUp Grant was a great catalyst in helping his team to do this full-time. They also had guidance from Enterprise SG as well as the Singapore Business Federation in getting them plugged into the regional ecosystem.[+31 sentences] His alma mater, SMU, has supported them via their incubator, by connecting them to the alumni based in Indonesia and by partnering with Kinobi across initiatives like SMU Fintech Symposium. Dr Chen Shiling and Mr Hafiz Kasman, our people, are pieces of the puzzle in realising our vision of a fairer, more inclusive society. In renewing and strengthening our social compact, the Government needs to address areas of concern, especially of groups which are vulnerable and have been most affected by the pandemic. But part of the deal must be that of active participation of our people in augmenting Government efforts. My ask is, therefore, as follows. Firstly, I hope the Government continues to channel funds for better services and support for families with children with special needs. The needs are acute and varied and we need the Government to provide the framework for whole of society to come on board in this journey of making our society more inclusive. Secondly, it is important that the Government builds on efforts to support young individuals to explore career opportunities. There is value in enhancing the resolution of this support through developing the framework for mentoring. Many of us have had the good fortune of meeting someone in our lives who has guided us, shown us what is possible and brought us to a completely different trajectory in our lives. Not everyone, or every young person, is as fortunate. We should build an ecosystem of support, a culture of mentoring, so that every young person, regardless of his or her background, has the chance to be guided to find and seize all the opportunities that come their way. Thirdly, aside from the Government's efforts, Singaporeans also need to play their part. Many Members of this House have spoken about this, too. This should not just be a platitude. The Government needs to be responsible for providing the fiscal framework for the economy to thrive and provide the infrastructure for many dimensions of support for different demographics in the community. However, there are many opportunities for all of us to fill in the gaps and propel our community forward. Mr Speaker, in Malay. (In Malay): In renewing and strengthening our social compact between the Government and society, the Government has the responsibility to address the issues faced by those who are in need or have been most affected by the pandemic. Nonetheless, all of us also have a role to participate actively in all efforts to help uplift the community. My hope is that, firstly, the Government continues to channel funds to increase support for families with children who have special needs. Their needs are varied and we need the Government to provide a framework for the whole of society to work hand in hand to build a more inclusive Singapore. Second, the Government should continue to provide opportunities for our young people to explore career opportunities. It would be good to build on efforts to create a mentoring ecosystem, so that every young person gets the support they need to succeed. Third, every Singaporean must participate in efforts to build the nation. The Government needs to think of ways to ensure that our economy continues to progress and provide support for various groups in society. However, there is much we can do to uplift our community. All of us have to play a part. (In English): Mr Speaker, to me, the Budget goes beyond just fiscal considerations but reflects our priorities and shapes what we become as a nation. A Budget channels funds, creates opportunities and empowers individuals. However, it is not the be-all and end-all and should not be so. The Budget supports various areas of concern and initiatives that impact Singaporeans.[+1 sentence] But it is not omnipotent. We need more Dr Chens and Mr Hafizs, Singaporeans with the heart and grit to do their bit for the community and seize opportunities with the support from the Government. This year’s Budget debate is carried out against the backdrop of many unsettling international developments.[+1 sentence] I hope we can find solace in the strength and unity of our people, to share the load and take advantage of the opportunities before us. The Budget is a significant driving force towards the creation of better prospects and empowerment of individuals, as we chart our new way forward together.[+1 sentence] Mr Speaker, I support the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar)1213 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir, I am heartened by the Government’s continued commitment to do its utmost to provide the necessary assistance and support to help Singaporeans cope with the rise in the cost of living and the impending increase in GST, from food to utility bills, service and conservancy charges, and more. The monies set aside for the assistance packages are substantial.[+6 sentences] Though these can offset the GST increases for up to 10 years for the lowest income group, we should continue to look out for those among us who need more support. However, faced with higher costs in their daily expenses, from the prices of food and drinks to other grocery bills, Singaporeans are feeling the pinch constantly. Every day, when people have to pay the extra 20 cents or 30 cents more for their beverages and 50 cents more for their food, they feel squeezed. The elderly and retired feel such financial pressures especially keenly. So, that adds an additional layer of stress and anxiety to their lives. It is, therefore, important to remind worried Singaporeans that there is a package to help offset these increases, through this package, as well as other support schemes that are in place. The planned GST hike will also be delayed and staggered, which is welcome.[+14 sentences] However, it will be especially helpful to provide some reassurance that the Government is watching the inflation rate very closely and will consider additional support measures when necessary. As for our elderly residents living in private estates, I have also received some feedback that they do not receive as much assistance. Yes, they do receive assistance but, understandably, it will be less than HDB dwellers. I urge MOF to consider highlighting the various payouts to all residents in both public and private housing estates through a letter or email to them or a mode of communication that they are comfortable with. Though this might alleviate some stress, I would still appeal for more consideration of some cases, as they do have genuine circumstances that do warrant more support. Our sandwich class. Singaporeans in the middle-income group have always felt that they are “sandwiched” as their incomes are not rising as fast as the inflation rate. On the other hand, they are not receiving as much help as the lower-income groups and, yet, they are contributing taxes and also have to grapple with increased prices. They feel strongly that the incremental revenue needs to come from the affluent and not the middle-income sandwich class, considering that our taxes are still low, compared to countries we are competing against. Some have suggested taxing capital gains and dividends and increasing them progressively. However, I know that we are not taking that route today as it will not help to attract investors and companies coming to set up shop in Singapore. But I do sincerely hope that the Government watches this space carefully so that the sandwich class does not feel squeezed. On the Employment Pass issue, I have also received feedback from some residents that foreigners’ salaries seem to be going up faster than local salaries. This is actually a misunderstanding of our EP policy. There is misinformation going around regarding this and the misperception has to be corrected. They are referring to the minimum qualifying salary for new EP applicants which will be raised from $4,500 to $5,000 and, for the financial services sector, from $5,000 to $5,500.[+7 sentences] So, this change is, in fact, a higher barrier to foreigners and to get employers to hire locals for job functions at this salary level instead of foreigners. Some Singaporeans have misunderstood this to be pushing employers of new EP applicants to give them a salary increment, instead of the intent of this change, which is to put up a higher barrier. I hope that MOM can continue to watch out for such employment trends in the months to come and to be ready to take firm action if employers are found to be abusing the system at the expense of local staff. Turning to hawker trade heritage, a topic very close to many of us and our hearts, affordable food in our hawker centres has helped to keep the cost of living manageable. These delicious dishes are loved by all income groups. Unfortunately, many of our hawkers do not have successors for their trade. Their children are not interested, as many have jobs which do not require long hours on their feet over a hot stove. But I do know that many of our ageing hawkers do want to hand down their recipes and techniques so that their food can continue to be enjoyed by future generations. I hope to hear about the progress of the Hawkers Succession Scheme (HSS), which facilitates the pairing up of a retiring veteran hawker with an apprentice, so as to pass down his or her culinary skills, recipes and hawker stall to the aspiring successor.[+12 sentences] May I suggest that NEA facilitate the transition and pay the veteran hawker the appropriate compensation amount while the skills are taught to the apprentice? The compensation sum should reflect the value of the heritage recipe and technique. In turn, the apprentice could be bonded to the stall for a period of, say, three years, for example; if I may say so, similar to a Government scholarship with a bond. This will help to keep our hawker trade alive and ensure that our hawker culture stays on the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. We should also start reviewing how we can transform the hawker trade. How can we improve the work conditions so as to attract more younger hawkers? Is it possible to improve productivity in the hawker trade, ensure fair prices, rest and medical care? I have already seen some hawkers adopting machines to automate their cooking or other processes and we have seen how most of our hawkers have now adopted digital payments. We will, therefore, need to review all aspects and think out of the box to keep our hawker traditions alive. Singapore will, definitely, not be the same without our hawkers and we have to put in greater efforts to support the hardworking men and women who labour every day to fill our stomachs with delicious and affordable meals. Sir, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): Our hawker centres offer delicious and affordable dishes, which are loved by all the people from all income groups. Unfortunately, many hawkers have no successors and their children are not interested to take over their business. But our ageing hawkers do want their recipes and techniques to be passed on.[+1 sentence] May I suggest to the authorities to consider setting up a special scheme for veteran hawkers with appropriate compensation for them to impart their recipes and skills to apprentices? Compensation can reflect the value of the recipes and culinary techniques. After the apprentice has inherited the stall, he must work for a certain period of time, for example, three years, at the stall.[+2 sentences] This will help to keep our hawker traditions alive and ensure that our hawker culture will be preserved under the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. (In English): Sir, I conclude with my support for the Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Mark Chay.
Mr Mark Chay (Nominated Member)2001 words
[+19 sentences]Mr Speaker, like many Members of Parliament, I am deeply troubled by the conflict in Ukraine. I echo Minister Vivian Balakrishnan’s sentiments that Singapore cannot accept the unjustified attack by one country on another. This was a clear violation of the Olympic Truce. Mr Speaker, I was on calls last night with, first, the Ukrainian Esports Federation and, second, the IOC Athletes Commission. Hearing the Ukrainian athletes and what Ukraine is going through is truly heartbreaking. The sporting world is aligned with the Minister’s position that the sovereignty, political independence and territorial integrity of countries, big and small, must be respected. Sports will continue to stand for values. Sports will continue to stand for peace. My thoughts and prayers are with the citizens of Ukraine today. I now turn to speak on the Budget. I rise in support of this today and I consider that the Budget is a sensible one that balances the long- and short-term needs of the country. It also focuses on national development in a sustainable manner that addresses the challenges posed by climate change. As some of you know, yesterday was Founders’ Day and as our motto goes, “The best is yet to be”. So, today, in keeping with this motto, I shall raise three issues which I believe can bring our society to new heights. One, how do we, as a society, manage the rising cost of living? Two, how do we ensure a safe and sensible reopening of Singapore? And, three, as we look forward into the future, how do we create a better and more conducive space for the development of the sports in Singapore? I speak, first, about managing the rising cost of living in Singapore. This is a concern which many hon Members and colleagues have raised, in particular, the effects of rising costs felt, primarily, by the sandwich class and youths in Singapore today. On the GST hike, what is welcomed is the implementation of GST in stages which enables Singaporeans to plan and make provisions for the increase. I am comforted that the Government has considered cushioning measures to lessen the impact of the GST increase and fully support the top-up of $640 million to the Assurance Package. I also note that low-wage workers and seniors are considered, with cash payouts to seniors, as well as the raising of the income threshold of the GST Voucher (GSTV) scheme.[+1 sentence] Although the cushioning measures are generous, the rising cost of living is a concern and I raise three issues in this regard. First, GST is expected to rise to 9% by 2024 and there is also going to be an increase in the carbon tax.[+16 sentences] Given additionally that the rising tensions in Europe are expected to bring an increase in energy prices, I am concerned daily living expenses will increase significantly. Second, on manpower, I am also concerned about the adjustments to the foreign worker policies, in particular, the rise in minimum qualifying salaries for S-Pass holders and the impact of these adjustments on the hospitality, F&B and construction industries. Would such measures increase the costs of labour which would, ultimately, be borne by the end consumer? The cost of living in Singapore will also impact Singapore’s competitiveness in being able to attract talent from overseas. We need to keep a close eye on this. Finally, investing in our people is the right step forward. I wholeheartedly support a review of the programming at IHLs to not only provide quality continuing education and training, but also to prepare Singaporeans with skills to take up job opportunities in the market. But we must not forget our seniors and persons with disabilities (PWDs) in this endeavour. How would we enable PWDs to access job opportunities? Is there more that we can do in this endeavour? I believe that addressing these concerns will not only lay the foundation for the successful implementation of these measures but also create a liveable and affordable Singapore. I now move on to talk about my second point – ensuring a safe and sensible reopening of Singapore. As Singapore takes a positive posture to reopening and leans on the possibilities of a COVID-19-endemic world, I would like to take a moment to thank our frontliners and immigration officers for their hard work and dedication over the past two years in ensuring the health and safety of Singaporeans and its visitors. Our airports, seaports and causeways are the first and last experience Singaporeans and tourists have of Singapore. I would like to suggest resources be allocated to our ports of entry to ensure safe, reliable and efficient transit of Singaporeans and visitors, thus, maintaining Singapore’s competitiveness as a hub for business and travel. With events returning to Singapore, such as the Singapore Rugby 7s in April, the Singapore Grand Prix in October and many other MICE events on the calendar, I hope the MTF will consider not only safe management measures (SMMs) that balance the safety of participants, officials and spectators, but also the viability, practicality and experience of these events. At the AFF Suzuki Cup in December 2021, a maximum of 10,000 fans were allowed into the 55,000-capacity National Stadium.[+14 sentences] The SMMs did not allow for food and drinks to be consumed at the venue. This was a start, nonetheless. Many of the international events require minimum spectator numbers and ticket sales to break even. Enabling food and drinks to be consumed at these venues is also part of the experience of watching a live event. It would be good if distinctive SMMs as well as the administration of these SMMs can be considered for such events organised at venues, such as the Singapore Sports Hub. The sports industry has been hit hard since the start of the pandemic. Productivity has been low because of the nature of the industry. Things are picking up; things are getting better. One group I would like to focus on are the operators that service children who are unvaccinated. Because of the SMMs, they are unable to operate productively. These operators perform an important function – introducing physical skills to toddlers and tweens. They feed our development and competitive programmes. If we do not help them, we will see the effects in our competitive sport pipeline in the future. The fitness industry has also been affected since the start of the pandemic. Gyms have seen a steady decline in their memberships. And although SMMs have eased, what would really move the needle for the big box gyms would be to increase the maximum capacity of these facilities to over 50 if the minimum size requirements are met.[+1 sentence] Boutique gyms also are suffering. Reducing the physical distancing requirement between individuals from two metres to 1.5 metres would make a huge difference in terms of sustaining their businesses.[+25 sentences] I am thankful for Minister Lawrence Wong’s continued support for the sports and arts sectors. The Sports and Arts Resilience Grants have helped the sector with some relief and I hope they will continue to be available for organisations that are still affected by the pandemic. On my third point, I would like the Ministry to encourage the growth of sports in Singapore. Before I move on to this point, I would like to declare that I am the Chairman of the SNOC Athletes’ Commission, a coach at the Singapore Disabilities Sports Council and a Director of the Global Esports Federation. The year 2021 has been a terrific year for Singapore sports. We were all inspired by the fantastic performances of our athletes in Tokyo and sang the Majullah Singapura twice at the Tokyo Aquatics Centre. As an Olympian, I am very thankful to the Members of this House who supported the Motion to recognise Team Singapore’s performances at these Olympics and Paralympics. As Yip Pin Xiu’s coach, I am thankful that Pin Xiu’s achievements were recognised and she was awarded the President’s Award for Inspiring Achievement by President Halimah just two weeks ago. Singapore had several athletes become world champions last year. Aloysius Yapp became Singapore's first number-one-ranked pool billiard player. In bowling, Shayna Ng won gold at the IBF Super World Championships. In e-sports, Singapore's DOTA-2 Women's Team comprising Sheng Ying "KazeL" Ho, Hui Chun "Merody" Tay, Amanda "bings" Lim, Joanne "Minkiey" Lim and Paula "xiaoma" Teo clinched the gold medal in a close final against Team Great Britain at the Global Esports Games. To cap off a fantastic year, shuttler Loh Kean Yew did us all proud by winning the 2021 Badminton World Federation World Championships title. These performances inspire us, ignite the competitive fire within us and redefine our definition of what is possible. Mr Speaker, Team Singapore takes the international stage multiple times this year at the Southeast Asian Games, ASEAN Para Games, Commonwealth Games, Asian Games and Asian Para Games. This, as well as the various world and regional championships and qualifiers our athletes compete in. I would like to ask for additional support for our Team Singapore athletes as they prepare to fly our flag high at these events. Behind every athlete is an entourage that comprises our sports scientists, coaches and sports administrators. I would like to request for more resources to bolster up their capabilities and enable our athletes to achieve greater performances. As many of our Team Singapore athletes are also National Servicemen, I would like to encourage greater collaboration between MINDEF and MCCY to enable our Team Singapore athletes to continue fulfilling their National Service obligations and requirements, whilst being able to train, compete and bring glory to Singapore. National Sports Associations (NSAs), like many of our charities, were not able to conduct events. This will, no doubt, affect the national team performances downstream. Essentially, many of our youth and development athletes have lost two years of physical literacy and competitive experience. I would like to suggest additional resources be put into NSAs for community participation and development programmes. Hosting and organising events are another vehicle for the sports industry to grow and develop. In December 2021, Singapore hosted the inaugural Global Esports Games (GEG21). This event had a staggering 500 million accumulated views and a peak live viewership of 4.4 million.[+3 sentences] With the support of SportSG, Singapore Tourism Board and the National Youth Council and many others, the event was able to showcase Singapore as an e-sports and gaming hub and proved that Singapore had the capability to host such properties and do it well. The GEG21 showcased how gaming and entertainment in the metaverse could look like as we look towards the future. When I speak of the metaverse, I mean the seamless merging of our physical and digital worlds. For example, the opening ceremony with Singaporean artist Shigga Shay performing live on stage in a motion capture suit being beamed into the metaverse as an avatar was a sight to behold. We should anticipate more Singaporeans spending time in the metaverse and draft parameters to govern it, its uses, potential hazards and protections for citizens, for example.[+10 sentences] During GEG21, we also saw local technology firm, Refract, showcase "active e-sport" which it co-created with traditional sports body, World Taekwondo Federation. If you are wondering what e-sport is, it is using the entire body as a controller competing in virtual reality. This breaks down physical limitations, such as age, gender and physical size. Why do I raise these points? Because I think they will go a long way towards enhancing and cultivating the uniqueness and strength of Singapore. I urge you to consider them with an open mind and imagination. I look forward to more conversations on these topics to best position Singapore to continue leading and innovating globally. Mr Speaker, that concludes the three issues that I wish to contribute to this session. I raise these issues because they will contribute towards enhancing and cultivating the fabric of Singapore's society. I believe the best is yet to be and I am excited about the possibilities in these aspects, strengthening our Singapore Core and identity.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied)3610 words
[+20 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to start by referencing a memoir written by Ms Liyana Dhamirah called "Homeless". Ms Liyana's memoir traces her journey as a young mother sleeping rough in "crazy rich" Singapore. She, eventually, got back on track with the tenacity to fight stigma, with support from social workers and a spot of luck with generous friends. There are many people in Singapore like Liyana who have pulled themselves up to thrive. But, Sir, my Budget speech this year is not about individual actions. It is about ensuring our policies are designed to substantially reduce poverty and decisively break the poverty cycle for all children born into poor families. Sir, Budget 2022 does provide some benefits to lower-income groups. However, I will argue that we need to substantially improve access to support in three ways. First, access to support for the well-being and dignity of the poor. Second, access to programmes that give a leg-up to children in poor homes. And third, access to employability support for those at risk of being stuck in low-income jobs or long-term unemployment. Such support should be provided in a holistic, results-oriented way. NGOs, volunteers and ground-up charitable initiatives all have a role to play. But they should not be doing the heavy lifting when it comes to funding action against the root causes of poverty. They should be providing the "heartware" to help those who need it, while we maintain a strong baseline of state support, on top of which, NGOs and the community can layer personalised effort, expertise and passion. As a country, we have stood up to national challenges like the threat to our water supply and the COVID-19 pandemic. A major effort to wage war on poverty is not just something we can afford – it is something we must do. Our pledge to build a society based on "justice and equality" calls on us to act. But beyond that, investing in additional anti-poverty and early intervention action for poor children may reduce the incidence of persons needing social welfare support in future. Such investments may unlock talent for our economy, which would raise GDP and the tax base. The World Economic Forum's inaugural Global Social Mobility Report 2020 estimates that if Singapore is able to increase its performance by 10 points on the index, the resulting growth would add S$3.2 billion to our economic output every year.[+5 sentences] In this sense, investing in anti-poverty action is like making adult vaccines free – it may more than pay for itself in the longer term. Last and most importantly of all, a war on poverty would strengthen the foundations of social solidarity in our nation and help realise the promise that we truly have everyone's back. One response to what I have said thus far would be – well, we are already waging a war on poverty, we are already doing it. We have programmes like ComCare, KidSTART, Workfare, Silver Support, the work of bodies like MENDAKI, CDAC, SINDA and so on and so forth. But let us take a look at some of the objective evidence. In Food Bank Singapore's 2020 Hunger Report, 10% of Singaporean households experienced food insecurity at least once in the last year.[+4 sentences] Two in five experienced it at least once a month. I do meet some Singaporeans who experience food insecurity when we engage constituents, as, I am sure, do other Members of this House. In a Parliamentary Question reply, I was told that even as Safe and Sound Sleeping Places run by community partners were scaled up in 2021, their utilisation rate was 93%. This is a rate our hotels would be envious of. From another Parliamentary Question reply, I learnt that we have about 4,000 children living in 1-room rental flats and about 18,000 in 2-room rental flats.[+1 sentence] I estimate that this means that the average living space per child in such flats is just 10 square metres, 60% less than the average living space per person in Singapore. Research by academics led by Prof Ng Kok Hoe and Prof Teo You Yenn concluded that a single elderly person realistically needs a minimum of around $1,400 per month for basic necessities and $6,400 per month for a family of four.[+14 sentences] Yet, 100,000 people in our local workforce earn a gross income of less than $1,300 per month. I do not have a figure for the families of four or more earning less than $6,400 per month but it must be significant. The last Household Expenditure survey shows that, on average, households in the bottom 20% spent more than they earned. On social mobility, the available data shows a worrying trend. A 2019 MOF study of intergenerational income mobility found a high degree of mobility for those aged 44 to 53 today. However, this generation came of age at a time of rapid expansion of the economy. Younger Singaporeans today face a completely different set of challenges, such as high housing prices and high income and wealth inequality. One study by Prof Irene Ng, based on a 2002 survey dataset, concluded that 58% of the income advantage of Singapore parents was being handed down to their children, a level similar to the USA at that time. In 2015, the Principal of Raffles Institution said that the school enrolment was exhibiting a class skew that it did not have in the past. Some baby boomers made a windfall from property and this shows in our parallel problem of wealth inequality. My colleague, Sengkang Member of Parliament Mr Louis Chua has spoken about wealth inequality and cited quite a few data points which I would not repeat here. But we also need to look beyond statistics to the lived experiences of Singaporeans to fully understand why this matters. A 2018 CNA survey found that it was class and not race or religion that was the most divisive factor in Singapore. It also found that those identified as upper class were more likely to feel a greater sense of belonging and national pride than those identified as lower class. In a 2018 poll by Blackbox Research, seven in 10 Singaporeans felt that income inequality in Singapore had worsened over the past five years, with youths and young working adults more likely to feel anxious about the unequal distribution of income.[+8 sentences] Sir, let me now move to specific policy calls. Before I begin, to set some context, the assistance that is provided to the poor is not always channelled through a one-stop shop. Assistance schemes and ad hoc help are available from different agencies and the process of navigating this ecosystem can be stressful and daunting. In fact, the Government's "kueh lapis" approach of multiple lines of assistance may, in fact, levy an unnecessary bandwidth tax on the poor when they seek help. "Bandwidth tax" refers to the additional cognitive burden they face. To get support from multiple schemes, they personally have to fill up paperwork, produce documents, attend meetings and meet deadlines. And because they struggle, their cognitive functioning is impacted and they may make what many others see as "poor" decisions. As a result, they become entangled even more deeply in the poverty cycle. One study found that the bandwidth tax due to poverty can be the equivalent of 13 to 14 IQ points.[+22 sentences] Poor families would benefit from having one window for state support and also to have that support scaled up and follow more of a results-driven, account management approach. Sir, let me now expand on my recommendations for poverty alleviation and employability support. Firstly, we should increase the accessibility of state schemes. I will suggest four ways to do this. The first involves us currently having too many financial assistance schemes that confuse and overwhelm their applicants. These include CDC vouchers of various kinds, ComCare and the Pioneer Disability Fund, for example. We should aim instead to minimise the number of scheme distributors and not have applicants being referred from one organisation to the next. What I propose is that all state schemes be funnelled through a central account manager, with one such manager paired to each poor family. Social workers at Family Service Centres (FSCs) seem to me to be best placed to play this role. These account managers should be empowered to channel and administer all state schemes. They should also have visibility on schemes that are automatically administered, like Silver Support and Workfare, so that they can also address issues or errors there and so that they can take a more holistic view of the family's situation. To mirror the one account manager for social welfare support, each poor family and low-income worker should have one account manager in charge of employability at WSG. That manager should be empowered and mandated to coach the worker to access the large array of work and training schemes. Their mandate should not merely be process-driven, meaning they should not be limited to training them on CV-writing techniques or asking them to sign up to passive job alerts. But they should also proactively work with their beneficiaries to assess different opportunities and find the right one, like a consultant and coach would do. I have spoken in this House previously on how some state employability counsellors in some other countries take a results-driven approach. An employability account manager for the disadvantaged would also be in a position to nudge their beneficiaries to upskill or reskill to move out of "at-risk" jobs before they are made obsolete. This recommendation is linked to my earlier call to expand the supply of such training and conversion places. The second issue involves the current process of applying for financial assistance being too complex and exhausting. For example, the interviewing of family members by agencies, in some cases, is unnecessary. Some applicants are deterred from pursuing their Financial Assistance applications because of the humiliation that they would feel if agencies call their relatives. I repeat my call for Financial Assistance to be provided based on declarations as to whether family support is being obtained, without the need for interviewing family members, and with strong disincentives associated with making false statements. Next, when seeking Financial Assistance, ComCare Short- to Medium-Term Assistance currently gives assistance for an average of only six months. To avoid the uncertainty and stress that comes with having to renew the support every few months, a longer-term grant can be given, albeit tied to conditions which I will touch on in a minute. This addresses the disruption of some beneficiaries having their Financial Assistance suddenly cut off when they find a job or increase their pay beyond a certain threshold.[+19 sentences] There should be a certain runway where the Financial Assistance continues after such events to enable the beneficiary to settle debts, to adapt to the new income structure and so on. Next, on the Financial Assistance application process. Applicants are sometimes asked to produce various documents that they may no longer have. Some are asked to hold physical meetings at the SSO office, which can be very hard for them if they are taking care of young children or working. Can social workers visit beneficiaries more frequently at their homes, which would help them to better assess their living conditions? And this is a topic that I have raised before. Can we convince more beneficiaries also to grant the agency direct access to past records residing with banks or Government agencies so that the absence of documents does not become the impediment it often is? Thirdly, let me address how we can increase the quantum of Financial Assistance available based on the beneficiary committing to positive actions that would help them and their family. More financial assistance can be provided beyond the current scheme caps, but tied to various conditions about which the welfare account manager is best placed to decide. These may include, firstly, commitment to ensure attendance of children at early intervention programmes, such as KidSTART, or attendance at school for families where absenteeism is an issue. This follows the Bolsa Família principle of conditional cash transfers to poor families, which has had some success globally. And I note that in a Parliamentary Question reply that just came in, 2% of Secondary school students are tied up with absenteeism. Secondly, commitment to taking action on the employability front with training, job seeking and so on and, here, the FSC and WSG account managers can coordinate. Thirdly, commitment to healthy behaviour, such as going for health screening and adult vaccination. Fourthly, commitment to attend personal life skills courses, for example, related to financial literacy. In fact, some of the increased Financial Assistance can come in the form of digital currency that can only be spent on healthier food. At the Committee of Supply (COS), I shall elaborate on this and on child early intervention programmes to break the poverty cycle. Sir, my final topic on the administration of poverty relief would be the quantum of relief. More can be given, with part of it being conditional, as I have argued. Long-term ComCare gives individuals about $600 monthly, short- to medium-term ComCare gives a mean of $600 per household per month in FY2020, which works out to just under $270 per person per month. There are other schemes like the Workfare Income Supplement and Silver Support, but these also number in the hundreds of dollars per month.[+6 sentences] And not every person who is vulnerable accesses multiple schemes. I am sure other Members of this House have had the same experience as I often have, where persons approach me to plead for Financial Assistance and the case is referred to the SSO. A letter from the SSO sometimes follows, which states that, in their conversation, the residents agreed that they were receiving certain state benefits already and, hence, they have agreed to withdraw their application for Financial Assistance. However, the fact that they initially came to the Member of Parliament underlines that there is a difference of perspective on how much is enough. In citing this, I want to be absolutely clear that our social workers and SSOs, generally, do their very best and do good work, but they operate within the policy parameters prescribed for them. Sir, I cited research earlier showing that income levels of $1,400 and $6,400 per month have been suggested to provide a very basic standard of living for a single elder person aged 65 and above and a family of four respectively. For those aged between 55 and 64, that figure increases to $1,700 per month.[+5 sentences] Sir, I would suggest that there is scope to revisit and significantly increase the quantum, duration and conditions of welfare assistance we provide to better protect the vulnerable, particularly the children and unemployable elderly. We should address the issue of poverty in a results-oriented fashion and in way that takes into consideration new research when it becomes available. To be sure, I am not suggesting that welfare assistance should be unlimited and unconditional in all cases, or that the levels should be so high as to make it unattractive to work. But as we apply progressive wage laddering, the quantum that makes work unattractive will rise and this should be reflected in our welfare schemes. Sir, another suggestion I have is to enable poorer individuals to contribute back to society in a manner that might most befit their abilities by empowering them to become micro-entrepreneurs. A state-backed facility should be set up to provide micro-loans to poorer individuals to set up microbusinesses, such as home-based catering businesses, for example.[+19 sentences] The financial services industry is, currently, not set up to do this. Many poor Singaporeans I know are willing to work hard and may have a passion or talent for something that could become a source of stable income, pride and self-esteem. Micro-entrepreneurship, particularly among women, whom research has shown are more likely to share financial gains with their children, unfortunately, is a pathway to poverty alleviation that attracts a great deal of multilateral funding in other countries. I would like to briefly repeat a call made by my colleague, Member of Parliament Mr Faisal Manap, to reintroduce the hardship scheme for hawker centre stalls. This could provide opportunities for the low-income and ex-offenders to pursue their aspiration to set up a hawker stall with subsidised rents. Next, Sir, I would like to touch on the social work profession. Social workers are at the core phase of dealing with poverty. Many I have spoken to feel that many of our social workers feel overworked. And this was my sense, too, when I was an FSC volunteer in the 1990s. This is a subject that has been discussed in this House a number of times. We need to invest in more manpower and we need to ensure that compensation is well matched to the rigours of the job, which can be intellectually, socially and emotionally draining. We can do more to set benchmarks for caseloads and increase headcount when these benchmarks are breached. Social workers will find it hard to help others if they are looking for help themselves. Social workers with sufficient capacity are the best people to provide advice and support on more complex issues and not just disburse money. They could be like venture capitalists, investing in people and also providing them with critical advice and coaching to help realise a return on that investment. In short, social workers can help people thrive. The last subject I would like to address in my speech is to call for the release of better data to tackle the issues of poverty and social mobility. Better data helps public debate and helps us figure out what works and what does not. And in tackling a problem that is as complex and resistant to simple solutions as poverty is, such data is critical for performance management for the goals we have set. We need to invest in a rigorous measurement of intergenerational social mobility at least once every decade, a call I have made before. And a nationally recognised poverty line should be established, which could aid social workers in making decisions, a call made in this House by my colleague, then Non-Constituency Nominated Member Mr Yee Jenn Jong, in 2013. We should also keep data on child poverty, which is key to intergenerational poverty and which many other countries do publish. I propose that we track the intergenerational rate of reliance on ComCare Financial Assistance and rental housing.[+9 sentences] One head of an FSC who had been in the field for over 20 years told me that he was receiving cases of young families that were the children of cases he had handled as a young social worker. This is a poverty cycle we must break. Thirdly, I would like to call for in-depth studies to be done, directed, especially, at younger poor Singaporeans, to do deep root cause analysis of the reasons for poverty. Lastly, we should aim to release more data by socioeconomic status, including on health outcomes, educational attainment, new business formation and so on. Any relevant public survey of studies that relate to this should, by default, be published. Sir, in waging war on poverty, there are many other policy tools we need in our arsenal that I will not have time to expand on and hope the conversation will continue. For example, my colleagues, Members of Parliament Gerald Giam and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, have tirelessly spoken about minimum wages in this House. Member of Parliament Louis Chua moved an Adjournment Motion about expanding the supply of rental housing, while Member of Parliament Faisal Manap did the same on motorcycle COEs. Workers' Party chair Ms Sylvia Lim has spoken passionately on social mobility. In this Budget debate, the Leader of the Opposition, Member of Parliament Ms He Ting Ru and other Workers' Party Members of Parliament have argued for other policies that will help the poor and the vulnerable, including why the Government's 28% GST hike is unhelpful and unnecessary, which is why the Workers' Party cannot support the Budget.[+5 sentences] A 28% hike refers to the increase in GST rate from 7% to 9% – that is, a 28% increase. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to wrap up by asking a simple question. Is spending more and investing more effort in fighting poverty and breaking the poverty cycle really worth it? I understand that changing our mindset and paying to tackle poverty costs money. But we have done this before. In Year One of COVID-19, almost 200,000 self-employed people were given $1,000 a month.[+7 sentences] There will be returns from investing in a war on poverty and breaking the poverty cycle. If the help is provided in a results-oriented, holistic way, with sufficient dollars, there is every reason to believe that that spending will diminish over time and yield broader social and economic and even sociopolitical benefits, as more people improve themselves in terms of health, life skills, employability and – that most precious commodity of all – self-belief and confidence in themselves. We must not judge our success solely on how much GDP growth we have achieved each year, but also by how much poverty we have eliminated. In recent years, it is unclear if we are making success on this front, with no real downtrend in demand for ComCare, rental flats and other assistance schemes. We must break this cycle and make a substantial dent on poverty. Then, and only then, can we truly claim to be living in a First World Country. Only then can we say that we live in a society that has everyone’s back.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Vikram Nair.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang)1761 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Speaker, I support this Budget. I will deal with three matters in my speech: first, the war in Ukraine and its implications for Singapore; second, our response to COVID-19; third, I have some suggestions in relation to public housing. First, on the war in Ukraine. This war broke out after the Budget Statement, but before this debate. The Russian invasion of Ukraine is the largest conflict on the European continent since World War II.[+8 sentences] There remain risks that this conflict may escalate further. The eruption of conflict has already created turbulence in financial and commodity markets. It is anticipated that, in the long term, various commodities may rise in prices, adding to inflation. I support the principled position that Singapore has taken in relation to this dispute. While we are not against any country, we stand firmly against this invasion as a violation of Ukraine’s territorial sovereignty. As at the time of this speech, it remains the case that despite the violation of international law, Ukraine is largely fighting alone against Russia. However, the international community has been swift in taking action, including tough economic sanctions, against Russia. This raises a number of related issues for us to consider. The first is that defence spending is vital and we must ensure we have the capability and resources to survive in the event war is visited on us.[+6 sentences] While I expect we will have more details on the defence spending in MINDEF’s Committee of Supply – I have filed several cuts on that – I think we need to remain committed to defence spending and national defence even during times of peace. There will be many demands on our spending in the coming years and it is always tempting to say we should cut defence spending in times of peace. This would clearly be a mistake. The second is we must continue to maintain and build good and deep relations as well as mutually beneficial economic ties with as many countries as possible. We hope never to go to war, but the stronger and deeper our ties with the world around us, the better our chances of avoiding war and also of getting support from the international community in the event we are drawn into a war. It is always a big ask for others to join our conflict, but they may help in other ways, which will be vital. Third – and this is more short term – I would also like to ask the Minister for Finance whether he sees any significant economic turmoil from the war in Ukraine on us and whether any additional measures may need to be taken in the Budget to provide for this.[+21 sentences] The second topic – and now coming to home more directly – is our response to COVID-19. Singapore has done an excellent job of handling this crisis. We have taken a generally cautious, science- and evidence-led approach that has enabled us to achieve a high vaccination rate amongst the population and kept fatalities at a relatively low rate. The main price we have paid is living with social restrictions, which have taken a toll both on the economy and on the mental health of some of our people. Over the last few months, with Omicron spreading, COVID-19 has been affecting even many in our highly-vaccinated population. I, myself, came down with COVID-19 in December when I was with my family in the UK. The UK's approach to COVID-19 was quite different from Singapore's and, while there were some restrictions in place, including requirements to wear masks indoors, many activities had resumed when we were there. These included football matches, dining at restaurants and eateries and watching plays and performances. Of course, this is probably part of the reason I came down with COVID-19, as did my daughter. However, for both of us, the experience was not particularly bad. Although we had mild symptoms for a few days, we did not test positive until our pre-departure test, where my daughter and I tested positive. Thereafter, we isolated ourselves, in line with the UK's guidelines at the time. However, within about two days, we were testing negative again and our symptoms were relatively mild. In my case, just a slight sore throat and runny nose. As we spoke to more people, we realised that almost everyone knew someone or had family or friends who had come down with COVID-19 and some had come down with it themselves. For most, it was not debilitating and life could go on. Of course, this is not to trivialise the COVID-19 experience. My wife and I had three shots of the vaccine and this, probably, helped us in resisting and overcoming the virus. My daughter had the benefit of youth. However, from what we understand, the immunocompromised and those with pre-existing ailments remain vulnerable to serious complications. Additionally, there are studies in the UK pointing to a group of people who suffer symptoms called "long COVID", which means they have different after-effects following a COVID-19 infection, some of which can be serious and debilitating. My suggestion is that it may be better for us to proceed with plans to ease our restrictions and move closer to life as normal but, at the same time, remind and educate the more vulnerable to take extra precautions.[+14 sentences] We need to reiterate the message that, for those with COVID-19 who are either asymptomatic or who have mild symptoms, there is no need to visit the doctor or the hospital. If necessary, sceptical employers who are asking for medical certificates can ask employees to send photographs of their current ART test results for human resource (HR) record purposes. I understand that even with the relatively large number of COVID-19 cases that are emerging every day, our hospitals remain able to cope with those who need urgent assistance. Our population is amongst the best vaccinated in the world. I think we are ready to open up. The third topic I wish to discuss, quite different from the earlier two, relates to housing. In my Meet-the-People session (MPS) cases, appeals in relation to housing are one of the common ones that come up. Housing affordability and availability are a concern for many residents. One of the curious issues that has arisen during the pandemic is that the housing market has heated up, both in the public and private sector. I think this is a combination of both increased demand and tightening supply. On the demand side, as more people are at home, the more people seek more personal space for themselves and family members. Thus, in large extended families, various members may wish to move out into houses of their own. New couples getting married want their own place as it may be difficult to move in with either of the parents. Appeals for new flats emerge regularly in my MPS. On the supply side, Build-to-Order (BTO) development has slowed down somewhat because of delays in construction.[+1 sentence] Additionally, the resale market has been limited by the imposition of minimum occupation periods, or MOPs, for both resale and new flats. I had filed Parliamentary Questions on this previously and MND had indicated in its response that it did not believe removing MOP would increase housing supply and may encourage speculation because people who sell their flats may then look to buy new ones. I do not agree with this view entirely and I would suggest, perhaps, initially, HDB may wish to consider removing the MOP for resale flats while retaining it for new flats.[+2 sentences] This was actually the state of affairs for many years before MOP was extended to resale flats as well. Even without MOP, there are other disincentives to flipping flats, including the seller's stamp duty, which is higher if a flat is sold within a shorter holding period. In my view, one of the biggest drivers for new BTOs is that there is a huge price discrepancy between resale flats and new flats.[+10 sentences] A new flat is both brand new and has a fresh lease, and it comes at a lower price. So, as a result of this, there is almost no logical reason for anyone to buy a resale flat unless they feel they have no choice. At the same time, people who buy resale flats also get a feeling they are getting a raw deal and are envious of those who get new flats at a lower price. This exaggerates the "lottery effect" of new flats and those who are eligible for it vis-a-vis those who are not or who are lower on the priority list start feeling more resentful. My humble suggestion would be to take away the MOP for resale flats. This would, at least, create a greater supply of resale flats, which should ease their prices. I also do not expect this to be a one-off effect because, if a resale flat is bought, it could still be put on the market again if needed, whereas now, if a resale flat is bought, it would be out of the market for at least five years, hence, constraining supply. So, in that sense, every transaction constrains the resale market further. It would also give resale flat buyers the benefit of flexibility – at least, one tangible benefit for the huge premium they would otherwise be paying. Currently, the two most common HDB appeals I get are either for new flats or to reduce the MOP because families need to change their living arrangements as a result of changing circumstances. I think one of the reasons for the high demand for BTOs, in particular, is the disparity in prices between resale flats and BTO flats. And I would suggest that, ideally, the price of a BTO flat with the resale levy should be somewhat comparable to a resale flat so that they become easy options for buyers to choose from.[+3 sentences] I believe that if more buyers are prepared to go to the resale market to buy their flats and the resale market is accessible, this would reduce the heavy demand we have for BTO flats at the moment. So, if this disparity falls enough, such that Government grants would make buying resale flats as attractive as new flats even for those who are house hunting, I think this would also further reduce the current pent-up demand for BTOs and the lottery effect people are feeling from this. Mr Speaker, I have covered three different topics that are important, I believe, in different ways but I, generally, support this Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Ms Hany Soh.
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee)1301 words
[+8 sentences]Mr Speaker, it is uplifting to learn that several of the schemes and support packages introduced in this year's Budget will go a long way towards softening the impact of rising costs for Singaporeans, particularly the lower-income group. However, while the Government provides direct monetary aid to our citizens, I believe that we can go even further by ensuring that all Singaporeans have the knowledge and the tools to become financially self-sustainable. As the saying goes, "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime." One suggestion is that various Ministries should consider working with the People's Association to organise financial literacy workshops in the community. These workshops would cover essential topics, such as budgeting for necessities, planning for big ticket item purchases and the basics of investing, which can also include sharing of useful tips on scam prevention. We can also pair these workshops along with estate planning and law awareness talks, which are also an extension of managing household finances. The law awareness talks should involve multiple agencies, including the Office of Public Guardian (OPG), the CPF Board and MinLaw to work hand in hand together with the Law Society of Singapore. In conjunction with the talks covering estate planning, MinLaw can consider a further waiver of the $50 wills registration fees currently chargeable by the Singapore Academy of Law while encouraging inter-agencies to work closely together to promote the use of Smart Nation's MyLegacy portal for comprehensive estate planning services on matters, such as CPF nominations, advance medical directives, lasting power of attorney and wills. In terms of investing in our children, another area which I hope we can consider is to defray the costs of preschool and after-school care services, such as exempting the GST for these monthly expenses.[+2 sentences] This would be a welcome relief for parents, especially single parents and families with special needs children, as this pandemic has caused many of our little ones to miss school for extended periods of time without compensation. On the same note, I also hope that more support can be provided to families with autistic children. During the course of my thematic e-townhalls which focus on embracing parenthood, as well as my regular house visits, several of my residents with autistic children have shared with me that, notwithstanding the fact that they belonged to the middle-income group, they find themselves financially stretched due to the costs incurred for signing up their children into the early intervention programmes and speech therapy sessions, coupled with the expenses incurred by them every month for enrolling their children in a kindergarten or childcare centre.[+1 sentence] All of these expenses are subject to GST. Lastly, we can further reduce our collective upkeep and progress towards our Singapore Green Plan 2030 goal by encouraging Singaporeans to practise not just the 3Rs but the full 5Rs: (a) reduce consumption of resources unless necessary; (b) reduce consumption of resources, such as water, electricity and food; (c) repair reparable items, such as electrical and electronic appliances; (d) reuse used items for different purposes, such as using reusable bags, bottles or food containers; and (e) segregate recyclable items and place them into recycling bins.[+17 sentences] These 5Rs will not just enable us, as a community, to work towards our Singapore Green Plan 2030 but will also help fellow Singaporeans to reduce their day-to-day expenses. To that end, the Government can contribute towards improving the "software" and the "hardware". In terms of the "software", a few of my suggestions include setting up workshops in the community, sharing useful tips to practise the 5Rs and empowering residents with the knowledge to conserve water and energy as well as to reduce food waste. One example would be the Singapore Institute of Building Limited (SIBL)'s ongoing SG Eco Fund project in Woodgrove aimed at raising awareness on environmental issues and encouraging more residents to adopt an eco-friendly lifestyle through community and education programmes, sustainable markets and an app with interactive games. Another suggestion would be in relation to developing new TV programmes to educate our younger generations about the 5Rs in an engaging manner. Captain Green, an iconic green frog mascot was first introduced in the 1990s to encourage Singaporeans to adopt a clean and green lifestyle. In recent years, Captain Green has ventured into storybooks and quick teach cards used in preschools to inculcate our children with the habit of taking responsibility for their actions and to reflect on their choices towards a clean and green environment. I believe these teachings can be further enhanced through a collaboration with Mediacorp to introduce a cartoon series involving mascots like Captain Green, Water Wally as well as the recently launched Bloobin, using rhythmic content akin to the popular "Baby Shark" song to attract our children and to encourage them to be our young budding green champions. To tackle the "hardware" part of the equation, quite a number of my Woodgrove residents have expressed during our regular Green Living sustainability dialogues that the present design of the blue recycle bins poses many challenges for the community to recycle effectively. While we note that NEA has been stepping up efforts to educate the public on how to recycle correctly, all we need is one irresponsible user to deposit food waste into the blue recycling bin to cause the rest of the recyclable items in the bin to become fully contaminated and attract rodents unnecessarily. We should, therefore, not merely provide one bulk container for people to dispose all types of recyclables and waste. There needs to be more innovative solutions to encourage or incentivise single-type recyclables, such as having one specifically or specially for batteries, plastic bottles, paper or cans and so on. In relation to the energy- and water-saving component, HDB can assist by considering green features in future housing projects and upgrading existing ones through Home Improvement Programme (HIP), such as adopting sustainable materials and designs. Many of our existing HDB flats incorporate full glass windows that emit a considerable amount of heat during the late afternoon. As an example, HDB can consider installing low heat transfer windows, such as double-glazed windows, as a solution. Finding a suitable greener alternative that helps cool down our HDB flats will translate to less reliance on fans and air-conditioning, indirectly contributing towards reducing residents' utility bill costs each month. Mr Speaker, allow me to conclude in Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): In this Budget, the Government has listened to the voices of the people and delayed the increase in GST.[+1 sentence] It has also introduced several assistance packages, providing reassurance to Singaporeans whose livelihoods have been affected by the pandemic, and easing their financial burden. Continuing support, such as S&CC rebates, GST vouchers, will continue to help Singaporeans cope with rising cost of living due to inflation.[+1 sentence] While these assistance packages are substantial, responses vary from household to household. Take, for example, the $100 CDC vouchers previously given out by the Government to each household.[+3 sentences] Some residents from low-income families expressed their gratitude to the Government, while others told me that they hoped the Government could have given more. In the long run, we should not rely too much on Government assistance to sustain our livelihood. Instead, we should carefully plan for our future and build our own financial foundations. Starting a family, making a career, birth, ageing, sickness and death will definitely impose a heavy burden on us in different stages of our lives. Hence, I hope that the Government will provide professional guidance to Singaporeans in financial planning before they enter these stages.[+2 sentences] Like our reserves, if we plan ahead and manage our finances and expenses well, we will be prepared for rainy days. I support this year's Budget.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Darryl David.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio)1881 words
[+14 sentences]Mr Speaker, Sir, there was anticipation and even some trepidation in the lead-up to Budget 2022. Not only was this Budget set against the backdrop of a COVID-19 year three, it was also set against rising global energy prices, increasing core inflation, the rising cost of living and Europe on the brink of open conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which, by now, has become a grim and sober reality. And added to all these, of course, was the impending increase in GST. The issue of the GST increase has been debated quite extensively in this House and I understand that Members have opposing views on whether the GST should or should not be increased. I believe it is fair to say that almost all Members, if not all Members of the House, would agree that more can and should be done for the less privileged in society and those with more should contribute more. The fundamental question is, of course, how that more should be funded. Should we continue to draw more from the reserves? Should we significantly raise income tax and corporate tax? Should we base property taxes on property values? Should we tax the wealthy based on the value of their wealth portfolio? Should we use more of the NIRC and, if so, how much more – 60%, 70% and so on? These might very well be decisions that could be taken by either this Government or governments of the future. But I would like to urge those governments to exercise caution because such decisions have to be part of a holistic, balanced and diversified taxation policy that strikes a careful balance by considering the impact on all the various groups and stakeholders in our society. Let us not use a sledgehammer and swing away wildly when perhaps a discerning use of a chisel might be more appropriate. As such, I do understand the rationale behind the GST increase and commend the Government for being sensitive in implementing the GST increase in two stages, in 2023 and 2024, so that the immediate impact of the increase is not felt and this will give everyone, both consumers and companies, time to prepare for the hike. To further soften the blow of the increase and to help Singaporean households cope with the increase in the cost of living, I am also heartened to see that the Government has rolled out many other schemes, such as the enhanced Assurance Package with additional CDC vouchers and cash payout to eligible Singaporeans; enhanced permanent GST Voucher scheme; U-Save rebates; MediSave top-ups; and the addition of S&CC into the GSTV scheme.[+2 sentences] With these schemes, the net transference from the Government to lower-income families and those who need it will increase from the current sum and the impact of GST increase on lower-income families will not be felt for many years. I believe that this transference and these schemes are really quite seamless and the effort for many of those who need it is quite minimal to access these schemes and that would significantly thus reduce the impact of any bandwidth tax that was mentioned earlier by our colleague, Mr Leon Perera, in his speech. As I have mentioned before, it is important to have a holistic taxation strategy and it is commendable that the Government is looking beyond GST as a revenue source and is also exploring other alternative sources of taxation revenue via other forms of progressive taxes, such as the increase in personal income tax for those with an annual income of more than $500,000 and an increase in property tax for non-owner-occupied property and owner-occupied property with an annual value of more than $30,000.[+3 sentences] The revisions in the rate of these progressive taxes will help to ensure that the overall tax regime in Singapore remains resilient, with those with more means contributing more than those with less. Notice I have said "those with more", not "those with a lot". So, as long as I have more than you, I should be happy and willing to contribute to you. That is what I think we all should be aiming for.[+1 sentence] I would like to shift the focus now to the next topic of my speech, Mr Speaker, please, on healthcare and, specifically, men's mental health and well-being. I am personally glad to hear that there will be an increase in healthcare spending, and a specific area of healthcare that I am especially happy that the Government is focusing on is mental wellness.[+11 sentences] This has been raised before by other Members in this House. Mr Speaker, COVID-19 has left an indelible mark on humanity and on our collective psyche. It has changed the way we utilise spaces, interact with one another and how we build social relationships. The stress of having to live with the pandemic, the need to face medical unknowns related to the disease, the increase in contestation for living and working spaces, job and income insecurity, and having to constantly navigate the ever-changing COVID-19 management measures, have left many of us physically exhausted, emotionally spent and mentally drained. When we think about mental wellness, we have to understand that different groups of people have different mental wellness needs as they can be affected by the same stressors differently. We recognise this, of course, if we look at mental wellness for the youths, mental wellness that affects seniors, postpartum depression when it comes to women who have just given birth and so on. So, rather than to treat mental wellness as a collective term, it will thus be beneficial for us to recognise that, just like these other different segments of society, men are also affected very differently by stresses. In many societies today, some patriarchal beliefs continue to be commonly held by the majority of the population and there are corresponding societal expectations of how men should behave in social settings. Men are still expected to be the head of the family, the dominant breadwinner, to have the "eye of the tiger" by demonstrating strength and confidence and to stare adversity in the face and to "man-up", take the fall when things go wrong. These expectations have, inadvertently, caused men to experience stressors that are different from those from other segments of our society. Ms Porsche Poh is one of the leading mental advocates for mental health, having founded Silver Ribbon way back in 2006. One of the nominees for Singaporean of the Year in 2021, Ms Poh has done a lot to help those with mental illness in my Ang Mo Kio-Hougang constituency and she shares these strong views that more needs to be done for men's mental health. I had a chat with Ms Poh lately and, according to her, men often tend to equate psychosomatic symptoms, such as racing heart, digestive issues or headaches, as health issues and seek help from physicians without realising that these are common symptoms of depression. More worryingly, when depressed, men are more likely to engage in negative coping techniques, such as alcoholism, which may, ironically, lead to other forms of health problems in the long run. "During our sessions," says Ms Poh, "some male clients asked if it is okay for them to cry.[+4 sentences] We have to promote mental health among men more so that they feel comfortable to speak up about their struggles." And I thank Ms Poh for her valuable inputs in my speech. Mr Speaker, I wholeheartedly agree with Ms Poh and have some suggestions that I hope the Government could consider to better promote mental health among men. I believe that we should go upstream to educate men about the importance of mental wellness and let them know that there are sources available to them when they need help. Could our Secondary schools or tertiary institutions not develop dedicated resources and platforms to teach male students how to dispel traditionally toxic masculine stereotypes and encourage them to step forward and feel comfortable to speak up about their struggles and seek help?[+10 sentences] Could MINDEF consider running programmes educating our NSFs and soldiers about the importance of mental wellness and promote the idea that it is okay to seek help? It is okay to be not okay. To help them move away from the stereotype that you should shed blood and not tears because "real men don't cry?" I believe that having such mental wellness programmes and demolishing archaic male stereotypes are not incompatible with training our soldiers to be tough and resilient. Making our young men better soldiers by making them more aware of their mental wellness also prepares them to be better men for the rest of their lives. I would also hope that the Government can devote some resources to having more community-based platforms that specifically cater to men who are presently struggling with mental wellness. For example, one could start with mental well-being activities in community clubs and centres that cater to men and perhaps this could evolve into dedicated structured support group sessions that men could attend. The ultimate aim of this would be to destigmatise help-seeking behaviour from men as signs of weakness by creating a more gender-neutral society and providing platforms where men, and women, feel comfortable to discuss mental wellness issues. Mr Speaker, Sir, there are those who have described this as a "Robin Hood" Budget; that is, "take from the rich to give to the poor". But to use that term is to draw lines of divisions between just "what or who" is rich and "what or who" is poor and dishes out unhelpful labels that can only be divisive in our society. The heart of good governance is about creating a strong social compact, and the social compact is constantly evolving as our society progresses. And a key feature of our social compact is reflected in this Budget, which signals that those of us who are blessed to have more should contribute more, and those of us who need more help should get the help that they need.[+7 sentences] Rather than reducing it to a blunt tool about simply taking from one group and giving to another, I see this Budget more as reinforcing a uniquely Singaporean version of "noblesse oblige" where those who are in positions of relative privilege and wealth – and I use the word, "relative" again, Mr Speaker – have the social duty and obligation to take care of those who have less. So, it is not just about implementing a particular fiscal policy; it is about strengthening a societal philosophy. It would be wonderful if this philosophy could permeate into every single Singaporean social consciousness, whereby, regardless of our income levels, we are willing to contribute not just our money, but also our time to those who need our help and assistance. Because that is what a family does, Mr Speaker: those who are stronger, take care of those who are not as strong; those who can, help those who are trying; those who have more, help those who have less. Everyone does their part. And it is only by staying strong as one united Singaporean family that we are going to get through the economic and societal challenges of the years ahead. And with that, I end my speech in firm support of 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 1.40 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 1.15 pm until 1.40 pm. Sitting resumed at 1.40 pm.
The Minister for Finance (Mr Lawrence Wong)8703 words
[+14 sentences]Mr Speaker, I thank all Members who have spoken and supported the Budget. Many suggestions have been raised and I cannot cover all of them in this round-up speech, but I assure everyone that we have listened to every view and will study your suggestions carefully. Members have also raised many specific questions related to the programmes of the Ministries and these will be addressed at the Committee of Supply (COS). Sir, this Budget sets out the roadmap for Singapore to adapt and thrive in a post-pandemic world. We are charting our way forward together – towards a fairer, greener and more inclusive society. From what I have heard during the debate, there is strong support for these key thrusts of the Budget and I thank everyone for the support. The key issues raised during the debate can be summarised in three broad questions. Are we doing enough to sustain our recovery and position Singapore well for the future? Why do we need more revenues and, in particular, why raise GST and are there alternatives to this? And is the Budget fair to all Singaporeans? I will address these three issues in turn. Let me start with our overall economic situation. Ensuring a strong and vibrant economy is of critical importance because it raises our standard of living, provides good jobs and opportunities for Singaporeans and generates revenues, so that we have the resources to do more, especially for the more vulnerable groups. In my Budget speech, I shared our outlook for the year and some of the risks on the horizon, including the tensions in Eastern Europe. Since then, we all know that the situation has escalated sharply, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.[+5 sentences] The Minister for Trade and Industry has provided an update of the economic outlook. Singapore’s direct trade linkages with Russia and Ukraine are relatively small. But the conflict will impact the global economy and global energy markets, which will, in turn, affect us. So, we are taking actions to enhance the resilience of our energy supplies. We are coordinating actions across the whole-of-society as some Members have suggested. For example, extending the Temporary Electricity Contracting Support Scheme (TRECS) to help affected consumers, especially the SMEs.[+6 sentences] We are getting businesses to offer more value-for-money house brands to consumers so that consumers can stretch their dollars. We are extending Price Kaki to help consumers make better, more informed purchasing decisions. And we are standing up the Committee Against Profiteering to take action against unfair price hikes. Where inflation risks are concerned, MAS had taken the pre-emptive step to tighten monetary policy in January. The appreciating exchange rate will moderate the impact of higher global inflation. MAS will continue to assess the appropriate steps to ensure medium-term stability. In this Budget, we introduced the Jobs and Business Support Package to help businesses and workers, as well as the Household Support Package to help households with their daily needs.[+1 sentence] Let me be clear: this Budget is expansionary, and our fiscal stance is appropriate. We are staggering the tax moves, with the first step of the GST increase taking effect only next year and with generous offsets for all Singaporean households.[+8 sentences] We are monitoring the external situation and the risks for our economy closely. Risks in terms of both growth and inflation. If the situation worsens, we will not hesitate to take further actions to protect jobs and to help households and businesses deal with increased costs. Notwithstanding these near-term uncertainties in the external environment, our overall prospects are good. We are operating from a position of strength and that is why we can make bold moves now, which will position us well to seize the opportunities ahead. One decisive step is to accelerate the decarbonisation of our economy and achieve net-zero by or around the mid-century. All of us will have to adjust to the new levels of carbon tax to facilitate this green transition. But moving decisively will bring many benefits and open up new opportunities. For example, after the Budget, Members may have read that EDP Renewables, a global leader in the renewable energy space, announced plans to invest up to $10 billion through a local firm Sunseap to establish a clean energy hub in Singapore for the Asia Pacific region.[+20 sentences] As we attract more of such green investments, we will also step up training efforts to equip Singaporeans with the right skills to take on these new green jobs. As several Members, including Ms Poh Li San, Prof Koh Lian Pin and Ms Hany Soh highlighted, this will take a whole-of-society effort to achieve our climate ambition. We will, certainly, move forward in that direction. At the same time, we will continue our R&D efforts in emerging technologies, such as carbon capture and hydrogen, as suggested by Dr Tan Wu Meng. All of these moves will enhance and strengthen Singapore's position as a choice destination for new investments in the green economy and, ultimately, create many more good jobs for Singaporeans. Several Members, I think Mr Seah Kian Peng and Ms Denise Phua, worry that we are making too many changes at the same time – foreign worker adjustments, progressive wages, CPF, carbon tax and so on – and that all these will add to cost pressures for businesses at a time when demand is still weak for certain segments of the economy. I understand these concerns. That is why we are continuing to provide significant support to the harder-hit sectors, including through the Small Business Recovery Grant. We are also phasing in the new requirements. For example, the carbon tax increase will be staggered over three phases from 2024 to 2030. The changes to the S Pass minimum qualifying salary will be implemented over three steps from this year to 2025. What we are doing is to be upfront, clear and transparent to businesses. We are announcing these moves well ahead of time so that businesses can plan ahead and make the necessary adjustments. Even as we make these policy moves over the coming years, we continue to pay very close attention to our SMEs, something which many Members spoke about. We will continue to help our SMEs upgrade and maintain a vibrant SME sector in Singapore. This includes our heartland enterprises, as mentioned by Mr Melvin Yong. In fact, our support and grant schemes for companies are designed to benefit SMEs the most. Prior to COVID-19, smaller firms were receiving about 12 times more grants from the Government on a grant per dollar of revenue basis, compared to larger firms. Twelve times more grants from the Government on a grant per dollar of revenue basis. And throughout the past two years, SMEs continued to receive significant help through schemes like the Jobs Support Scheme, rental relief and financing schemes. In this Budget, 80% of the payouts from the new and enhanced schemes will flow to SMEs.[+4 sentences] Of course, not every SME will get the same support. That is because our strategy favours SMEs which are actively training their workers and increasing their productivity. If the SME is prepared to make the effort, it will enjoy very generous co-funding. Under the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG), firms that undertake productivity solutions this year will receive significant funding support. For a $10,000 productivity project, the Government will pay up to $7,000.[+2 sentences] With the SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit (SFEC), eligible firms can get additional funding for up to 90% of out-of-pocket expenses for their supported programmes. You can stack both schemes together. If you do so, SMEs only need to pay as little as $300 for a $10,000 productivity project.[+11 sentences] Mr Derrick Goh, Mr Edward Chia and several Members who have spoken passionately about SMEs will be heartened to know that we will intensify our outreach efforts to the SMEs to let them know about the support schemes and how to take advantage of them. We will proactively reach out to our SMEs through our Trade Associations and Chambers (TACs) and Enterprise Singapore. At the same time, we are making it easier for SMEs to access information on schemes and available support through the GoBusiness portal and SME Centres. I recognise that the operating environment in Singapore can be challenging for businesses. We are no longer competing based on being a low-cost business location. Where we can, the Government will manage the pace of cost increases and make it easier to do business. For example, through GoBusiness Licensing, we have streamlined the number of regulatory touchpoints for food business owners from 14 to one. This reduces the number of licence applications that firms have to fill up and saves up to 14 days of turnaround time. Ms Janet Ang and Mr Edward Chia shared concerns from the business community on the availability of manpower. That is a key concern for many businesses and I fully understand. The current shortage of Work Permit holders is partly due to our border restrictions. As we progressively open our borders, we are giving priority to bringing back workers that businesses urgently need, especially workers for the construction, marine and process sectors. We should be able to clear the shortages within the next few months.[+21 sentences] At the same time, firms should continue to take full advantage of the various schemes that support job redesign and improve productivity to become more manpower-efficient. In the near term, the Government will also help to offset some of the cost increases. For example, we have the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme to help co-fund wage increases for low-wage workers. But we cannot offset wage and cost increases perpetually as that will not be viable nor desirable. Keeping the cost of employing foreigners low would also mean depressing the wages of local workers over time. Our focus, therefore, is not to hold down labour costs indefinitely but to support efforts by our firms to be more productive and innovative so that they can be competitive and successful even as labour costs gradually increase. That is why we are redoubling our efforts to invest in new capabilities. Mr Seah Kian Peng asked about support for our TACs. We are already doing this through the Local Enterprise and Association Development (LEAD) Programme, which provides funding support for TACs to drive capability development and internationalisation projects. At the same time, as Mr Shawn Huang noted, we are continuing to invest heavily in R&D and technology to strengthen the overall competitiveness of our economy. Ms Sylvia Lim asked why we appear to be lagging behind in some of these knowledge and technology outcomes. In fact, we have been doing better over the years. These investments have a long gestation period. They take time to bear fruit but we are seeing positive results. I am confident we will continue to see more positive results in the years ahead. As I shared in my Budget speech, one area of focus is to strengthen the linkage between research institutes and industry so that companies can readily access frontier technology and high-quality research. We are also paying closer attention to the more promising SMEs to help them scale up faster and expand overseas. Take the example of Cheng Yew Heng, a food manufacturer and food ingredients supplier. It started out as a small family business in 1947, producing candies and preserved fruits. It is now run by the third generation and has embarked on a journey of production innovation, automation and has expanded into overseas markets. Today, it is a leading sugar manufacturer and ingredients supplier and operates its own e-commerce platform. It even launched a food accelerator recently to help startups commercialise food technology, scale up and access new markets. We now have about 800 local enterprises with annual revenues above $100 million.[+1 sentence] They include many household names like BreadTalk, Koufu and SK Jewellery. Through the new Singapore Global Enterprises initiative, we will provide customised support to help promising businesses scale up and better access the three areas of capital, talent and networks that Ms Janet Ang had mentioned so eloquently in her speech.[+15 sentences] With all of these efforts, we look forward to celebrating many more homegrown success stories in the years to come. Another critical aspect of competitiveness is to stay open and connected to the world, something which many Members like Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat, Mr Cheng Hsing Yao and Mr Patrick Tay have emphasised. This is not just an option. This is essential, even existential, for us. We must never let anti-foreigner sentiments take root here or give the impression that we are becoming more inward-looking. I caution some in the House who have been shrill on this subject. Take a look at some of the articles that have appeared in the international media recently, wondering if Singapore is closing itself and Singaporeans are becoming less welcoming of foreigners. If global investors conclude that this is so, Singapore will become less attractive to them and it will be ordinary Singaporeans who suffer the most. My colleague, Dr Tan See Leng, the Minister for Manpower, had also sounded a similar warning yesterday. In this Budget, we are adjusting some aspects of our foreign worker policies. This is not a sudden change in policy. We made our intentions very clear in the Economic Strategies Committee report in 2010. Since then, we have been making careful, calibrated adjustments to our foreign worker policies. We recognise that tightening too quickly will hurt our SMEs, but moving too slowly will lessen the incentive for firms to upgrade. So, it is really about maintaining that careful balance. The latest moves we have made in this Budget will help to ensure that the workers coming in are of the right calibre and in areas where we need them and further strengthen the complementarity of our local and foreign workforce. But I want to be very clear about one thing: we are not closing ourselves to the inflow of foreign workers and professionals.[+25 sentences] They are, and will remain, integral to our economy and our competitiveness. They are a valuable complement to our Singaporean Core at all levels of the workforce. We continue to welcome all who contribute to us having the strongest teams here, to give Singaporeans, ourselves, the best chance of success amidst intense global competition. And we welcome those with the capabilities and the commitment, who share our values and our way of life, to stay on and help us build the next phase of our Singapore story. I also recognise that certain segments of the economy may need more help. And Members have provided many useful suggestions in this debate. For example, Mr Don Wee and Ms Yeo Wan Ling spoke about self-employed persons (SEPs) who are vulnerable and in need of support. The Government has rolled out several schemes to support self-employed persons through this difficult period. We have also set up the Advisory Committee on Platform Workers, which comprises multiple stakeholders, including our tripartite representatives. The Committee is deliberating on ways to further strengthen protections for these gig workers and will give an update when they are ready. More generally, we will continue to review our social safety nets to ensure that they meet the needs of our workers in a rapidly changing economy and labour market. As I mentioned in the Budget, this is a multi-year agenda. This Budget is just one step among many that we have taken before and will take in the future to renew and strengthen our social compact for a post-pandemic world. In this regard, I am heartened by the various suggestions of Members in this House. Many have offered good ideas. They include Mr Cheng Hsing Yao, Mr Henry Kwek, Mr Patrick Tay, Ms Denise Phua, Mr Louis Ng and, just now, Mr Leon Pereira, around social workers and our social safety support schemes, all suggesting for us to do more and to do better for Singaporeans. This is, indeed, what drives every Budget. We will continue to study these suggestions carefully and review all of our schemes. But to do more, we will also need to ensure that we have sufficient revenue. That is what I will move on to very shortly. Sir, on raising revenue, I believe there is broad agreement in this House that additional revenues are needed for the Government to do more. Some have suggested that before we raise revenues, we should put in more effort to slow down expenditure growth. I agree with that. Government spending is about 18% of GDP today. We already run an extremely tight and lean ship, compared to other developed economies, and yet, we have been able to achieve consistently good outcomes. Ms Hazel Poa asked about the effect of the planned 1% budget cuts – let me clarify that the savings from these budget cuts are reallocated towards new priorities, because the Government is always seeking to embark on new initiatives for the benefit of Singaporeans.[+15 sentences] So, by making these cuts and reallocating to new initiatives, we are able to moderate the increase in our spending. I am glad that several Members, like Mr Yip Hon Weng, recognise that Government spending and revenue are two sides of the same coin. But in every Parliamentary session, I must say that I hear many requests for the Government to do more and much fewer requests for the Government to do less. Because we are raising revenues now, I think Mr Leong Mun Wai and Ms Hazel Poa say we should cut back spending further, but they have conveniently neglected to mention that they and the PSP have made requests on multiple other occasions for the Government to spend more, for example, funding of insurance premiums for MediShield Life and CareShield Life; hiring more teachers, reducing class sizes, all of which cost a lot of money. So, you cannot have it both ways. If we want the Government to do more, then let us be upfront and explain to Singaporeans why additional revenues and tax increases are needed. In many countries, the tendency is for politicians to focus only on the spending side, because it is inconvenient to talk about taxes. As a result, these governments spend beyond their means. They run up unfunded obligations and debt, and they kick the fiscal can down the road. We are not immune to such pressures. Some of the increase in Government spending is necessary and unavoidable. For example, healthcare spending will be the main driver of the increase in social spending. And the key reason why healthcare spending will rise is our rapidly ageing population, as everyone in this House understands. We are living longer. Take the number of people who are aged 90 and above. In 2010, we had about 10,000, aged 90 and above. Now, they have more than doubled to 22,000.[+1 sentence] Or take the number of centenarians, aged 100 and above. In 2010, we had 700; now, around 1,500.[+12 sentences] By 2030, the numbers will increase much more. Our seniors will require more medical services – they are more likely to be hospitalised and their length of stay in hospital tends to be longer, compared to younger folks. They also need elective procedures like cataract operations that help them lead more fulfilling lives. But these, too, require more healthcare spending. So, just the demographic effect of having more seniors alone will already push up healthcare spending significantly. Further increases will happen as better and more costly treatments become available and with the medical inflation that is inevitable, even with the best organised healthcare system. Another reason for more spending is that our social needs are getting more complex, something which several Members have recognised and highlighted, including Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How, Mr Desmond Choo, Dr Wan Rizal and Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin. These issues are not so easy to resolve through standardised schemes alone. Often, we will need to customise approaches to suit the circumstances and needs of individuals and families facing complex and multiple challenges. We also need strong coordination, which our agencies are continuing to do, not just across public sector agencies, but with social service agencies on the ground, to take a family-centred approach. And to do this well, we need trained counsellors and social workers to befriend, mentor and journey along, handhold the individuals and families and journey along with them, like what we are doing with ComLink and KidSTART. This is important work, it likely to produce better outcomes, but it is also highly resource-intensive and will, invariably, cost more. Over the last decade, Government expenditures rose from 15% to 18% of GDP.[+22 sentences] This was mainly due to higher spending on healthcare, public transport and significant enhancements to Workfare and the introduction of Silver Support, to name a few. All meritorious programmes, but all requiring significant funding. Now, if we are able to keep Government expenditures at 20% of GDP in 2030 – so, from 15% to 18% over the last decade, but in 2030, if we can keep it to 20% of GDP – that would already mean a slowing of the rate of increase, compared to a decade ago. I think that would be a good achievement. The Government will do its part by using its fiscal resources prudently and judiciously and ensuring value-for-money in public spending. We will continue to streamline coordination across the whole-of-Government to reap synergies, as Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim suggested. But there is only so much the Government can do on its own. We also require cooperation from all parties, as Miss Cheryl Chan rightly said – to moderate our own expectations for the Government to keep doing more and to consider how community groups and individuals can also come together to contribute solutions. And I am glad that there are, indeed, many ground-up initiatives taking off, like the #EastCoastBeachPlan started by Ms Samantha Thian. She started cleaning the beach herself when she noticed large amounts of trash piling up there. Then, she started a Telegram group for like-minded individuals to join and undertake clean-ups together. Now the group has grown to 3,300 members and they have conducted more than 400 beach clean-ups. There are many more ground-up projects all over Singapore. They self-organise to tackle issues and solve problems, sometimes even before the Government gets a chance to respond. We will continue to support and encourage such initiatives and find new ways to partner them and work in collaboration together. This will reinforce the spirit of mutual support in our community and will go a long way in strengthening our social compact. Both the WP and PSP have suggested spending more from reserves to meet our rising expenditure. It is tempting to turn to our reserves each time we need more funds. But is this the right thing to do? The Leader of the Opposition, Mr Pritam Singh, has highlighted that the reserves' rules were amended in the past, so, we can easily amend them again now, for example, to adjust the percentage we use from the NIRC. Sir, we have enshrined the fiscal rules in our Constitution to instil discipline in the Government – to spend within our means and maintain a fair and equitable balance between taking care of our needs today and saving for the future needs of today's generation as well as for generations to come. As we have explained before, we last amended the Net Investment Returns (NIR) framework in 2015. That was to include Temasek into the framework and this was done after a robust and thorough debate in this House. We should not, at the first sign of need, push for changes in the rules, just to take the easy way out and to avoid having to raise taxes to meet our growing recurring expenditure needs.[+18 sentences] That would not be the responsible thing to do. Some argue that they have insufficient information about the reserves or about our fiscal projections to make an informed decision about our fiscal options. In fact, there is already a lot of information published, on the reserves, for example. What we do not disclose is the size of funds managed by GIC, so as not to reveal the full size of our financial reserves. It is not in our national interest to do so. Our reserves are our strategic defence against threats. If we disclose this information, we will be making it easier for potential adversaries to use it against us. Why would we want to do that? Where fiscal projections are concerned, the Government will continue to put out as much information as possible. We have released data on our key expenditure drivers, I have mentioned several times our demographic projections and explained why our healthcare and social spending will increase in the coming years as a percentage of GDP and included the expenditure growth figures. On taxes, we expect them to keep pace broadly with GDP, so, there is clearly a structural funding gap as our spending needs rise. We have shared extensively about our needs and plans and will continue to put out more information, where necessary. But I cannot help but feel that the persistent requests for more information are red herrings – they are distractions from the key problem at hand. At some point, we need to make decisions, including difficult and critical ones, like what we have done in this Budget, to better prepare Singapore for the future. So, the question is whether all Members are prepared to come back to the real issue – on the need to strengthen our revenues through our various tax measures, to meet the structural growth in our expenditure in the coming years. Unfortunately, both the WP and PSP paint a false, distorted and misleading picture about our reserves, that these are being accumulated at the expense of the current generation. That is not so. They have assumed that the present rules result in an accumulation of more reserves than is necessary, but that is not the case. Our reserves are growing, but the size of our economy, the challenges we face and the complexity of needs are growing even faster. I have already explained that the NIRC has provided about 3.5% of GDP to the annual Budget, on average, in the last five years.[+23 sentences] And that going forward, we expect this NIRC stream to continue to keep pace with economic growth. Even to achieve that is, by no means, a sure thing. We would have done very well if we can do so, given that our investment returns are subject to significant headwinds in the global investment environment, for example, due to ageing populations in the developed countries, lacklustre productivity growth, rising government debt levels and geopolitical tensions. Both the WP and PSP have also suggested different ways to spend from our land sale proceeds. These are variations of what they have put out before and they still do not recognise that land is a scarce asset that is protected as Past Reserves. We have said it before and we will say it again, when we sell land, we are not creating new wealth. We are merely converting the land from a physical to a financial asset. Therefore, we invest the land sale proceeds back with the rest of the reserves and we spend 50% of the expected long-term real return through the NIR framework. In this way, our land sale proceeds provide a stable and sustainable stream of income for our Budget over time. So, to be clear, that means we are already spending from our land sale proceeds. We are doing so. But our approach avoids the pitfalls that we will face if we were to spend on land sale proceeds more directly. What are some of these pitfalls? First, land prices will move in cycles and can be volatile. We know that, for a fact, there are property market cycles. It will not be a static "$100", as Ms Hazel Poa has assumed in her proposal. And we do not want Government revenues to fluctuate with the market because it makes Government spending itself procyclical and creates too much uncertainty for the Government to plan long term. Second, once a government gets used to relying on land sales to fund spending, it will have a vested interest to keep land prices high to maximise revenues. This will, ultimately, hurt the economy and will hurt Singaporeans. Why would we want to do that? So, the more prudent approach is to treat our land as a finite asset, as what we have done today. We sell the land that we need for urban development and invest the proceeds, as we are doing, to generate a steady income over time. This is a sound approach and it has served us well. Members need to understand that the risks for our reserves are tilted on the downside. We have already drawn about $37 billion in Past Reserves over the past two years and are continuing to draw on them this year to keep up our public health defences.[+1 sentence] Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Ms Tin Pei Ling asked about returning the sums drawn from our reserves. While we are in a better position now, but we are not out of the woods yet. And, I would say, we will not be able to put back what we have drawn down from the Past Reserves anytime soon. Ms Foo Mee Har also asked whether we would be able to get back to a balanced Budget position. We are, certainly, committed to doing so, as we exit the crisis.[+10 sentences] This is the basis of our planning. But if there continues to be an extraordinary need, we will have to go through the due process of seeking the President's agreement to a Budget that results in a draw on Past Reserves. This is an appropriate move for managing shocks, as Prof Hoon Hian Teck has noted, and that is how our framework is designed. Ms He Ting Ru suggested that by saving for the future, we are discounting the needs of the current generation. This is not so. Our fiscal policy, including our Reserves Protection Framework, keeps faith with all generations – current and future. We have drawn on Past Reserves to protect the lives and livelihoods of the current generation, throughout crises. We are also tapping on the NIRC to fund many programmes for the current generation, from the young to the old and, especially for the Merdeka and Pioneer Generations. At the same time, we need to consider the needs of the future generation. Do we really want to leave our next generation with fewer resources in a more uncertain and volatile world? To illustrate, if we were to have just 20% less NIRC than today's levels – which could easily have happened if our predecessors had focused on their own spending and did not think it necessary to have a carefully designed Reserves Protection Framework – our GST would now need to increase to 11% instead of 9%, to make up for the funding gap. So, drawing more NIRC now means that our children and the next generation will end up paying more taxes.[+32 sentences] Furthermore, no one can tell what the world will be like in 30 years' time. But it is very likely to be a more dangerous world. Our children and the generations after them will have more, not fewer, emergencies to contend with. The recent conflict in Ukraine reminds us that we are living in an increasingly divided and troubled world. We will encounter more episodes, where size matters, where might is assumed to be right even though that is not a stand we can accept, and where international rules are blatantly ignored by major powers. Let us be very clear. This is a world that will be less hospitable for small countries, let alone a small city-state like Singapore. We will always be at the mercy of these external forces and we must ensure we have sufficient resources to defend and protect ourselves. And in the years to come, we will need to deal with many other major and pressing challenges, including global warming and rising sea levels, as well as future public health emergencies, which public health experts are predicting will happen with increasing frequency. We are all thankful that our forefathers did not take the easy way out. Instead, they were disciplined, they considered our needs and chose to keep faith with future generations, meaning us today. So, we benefit from the reserves that they have built up painstakingly. They cared for their future generations, which is us. So, what about us now? What should our attitude be? I say we continue to husband our reserves, keep faith with the generations after us and ensure that they, too, will always have access to this "rainy days" fund to meet any emergencies and, importantly, a steady stream of income for their future needs. My biggest concern with these requests to use more of the reserves is that it reflects a certain cavalier mindset, one of spending whatever we can today and not caring sufficiently about tomorrow. And we see this happening throughout history and around the world. As countries become more affluent, they feel they have arrived and they get tempted by easy money. It begins with something small – allow standards to slide a little; just tweak the parameters a little. What harm does it do? But, over time, these small things add up. Then, it becomes politically very challenging to roll back any benefit and to raise taxes, or even to talk about it, and the country ends up quickly in a downward fiscal spiral. Sir, despite our small size, we can face the challenges ahead of us with confidence, in large part, because of our fiscal strength. Very few countries are in the same position as us. In fact, intergenerational equity is better preserved in our system than in other places. But we must never take what we have for granted, for it can unravel very quickly. So, I strongly appeal to all Members in this House, let us all do our part to uphold the ethos of fiscal responsibility, discipline and stewardship that is so vital to our success. Next, let me turn to other revenue options. Several Members touched on this. They asked if we could do more on other revenue options, especially income and wealth taxes. And, in particular, the Workers' Party offered a range of revenue options as alternatives to the GST increase. The short answer is we cannot just ignore consumption taxes and put the entire burden on income and wealth taxes. We need a good mix of all three types of taxes: income-based, asset-based and consumption-based.[+21 sentences] This is how we ensure that our revenue base remains diversified and resilient, while achieving its objectives of being fair and progressive. In fact, all jurisdictions rely on these three forms of taxation and the OECD jurisdictions have much higher VAT rates or, our GST, than Singapore. Much higher, all in double digits. But let me go through the revenue options one by one. Let me touch first on corporate income taxes, or CIT. As I Have said in the Budget speech, it is hard to be definitive at this juncture about the overall tax revenue impact from both Pillars 1 and 2 of BEPS 2.0. International discussions are still ongoing on the reallocation formula for Pillar 1. But before we have reached an agreement, Mr Louis Chua has already concluded that the impact of Pillar 1 will be limited, because it only covers 100 multinational enterprise groups, or MNE groups. I think that is premature. I must clarify that although the number of in-scope MNEs affected is small, these are the largest and most profitable MNEs. Any reallocation of profits away from Singapore will have a significant impact. Mr Louis Chua then projected that the CIT revenue could be as high as $71.5 billion. Mr Louis Chua should have paused at this huge number for a reality check. He says it is "purely hypothetical". But he should have said it is wishful thinking. Seventy-one-and-a-half billion dollars, that is the total amount of revenue we collect from all taxes. Does Mr Chua really believe that CIT revenue from the profitable non-SMEs, the larger companies, will jump by seven times, from $10 billion to $70 billion? Really? Will the implementation of the Minimum Effective Tax Rate, or METR, bring us more tax revenue? Yes, the short answer is yes. Mathematically, it has to be so, if nothing else changes. In other words, if we have the same volume of investments and business activities in Singapore, even as taxes go up with the METR, yes, we will collect.[+1 sentence] But that is a very big "if". It is hard to estimate with any confidence whether or how much more net tax revenue we can collect from both Pillars 1 and 2.[+2 sentences] The eventual impact cannot be ascertained by a simple static analysis, as it also depends on how governments and companies will respond, post-BEPS 2.0. BEPS 2.0 represents a fundamental change in the competitive environment for Singapore. Hitherto, smaller economies like us could rely on tax incentives, not just non-tax factors, to make up for our inherent disadvantages, like limited land and labour force.[+12 sentences] But this is no longer as effective, post-BEPS 2.0. Companies will review their existing and new investments. Governments will also seek to compete via non-tax investment promotion in order to recover from the pandemic and to make up for what they can no longer do through tax incentives. Our engagement with investors is already revealing this. So, likewise, Singapore will need to find other ways to stay competitive, from investing even more in our workers to building new infrastructure and incentivising R&D. All these will mean more Government spending. So, even if we can generate additional revenue from Pillars 1 and 2, these will have to be reinvested towards ensuring Singapore remains competitive and attracts our fair share of investments to create good jobs for our people. I would, therefore, caution against jumping to conclusions or believing wild guesses on how much more revenue we can get from changes in global tax rules and use that as a reason to avoid raising the GST. Next, personal income tax or PIT. Currently, the top 10% of taxpayers who pay PIT already account for about 80% of our total PIT revenue. With the top marginal personal income tax rate at 24%, we will be higher than the 17% top tax rate of Hong Kong and closer to the Asian average top marginal personal income tax rate of 28%. There is a limit to how much we can increase PIT rates for the top income brackets, without touching the PIT rates for the income brackets below it. If we were to keep the GST at 7% and raise the same amount of revenue through PIT, the top marginal rate would have to go up from 22% to 42%.[+16 sentences] And that would apply to everyone with chargeable income of at least $320,000 or more. And that is assuming the tax base remains unchanged. But we all know this sharp increase is untenable and will badly damage our competitiveness. Investments and jobs for everyone, including lower- and middle-income earners, will be impacted, not just taxes. So, to raise the same amount as a GST increase through higher PIT, in reality, we would have to raise the PIT rates for a broader group of income earners, including the middle- and upper-middle income earners. And that was what Dr Tan See Leng was trying to explain yesterday. In fact, Prof Hoon Hian Teck had correctly observed that as our economy matures and population ages, a bigger share of the population will become economically inactive. This will, in turn, shrink the tax base for income-based taxation. So, we cannot rely only on income-based taxes alone, if we want to maintain a resilient and future-proof revenue base. So, I have covered corporate and personal income taxes. Next, wealth taxes. Mr Louis Chua also said we should do more on this front, especially on property taxes. On the other hand, several Members, like Mr Chong Kee Hiong, raised concerns that increased property taxes will impact many retirees and senior owners of private residential properties. So, again, we have to find the balance. In fact, the changes we have made to property taxes this time around, are not insignificant at all. But we have structured it in a highly progressive manner. Together, our property tax moves raise $380 million more per year from a base of only 7% of all owner-occupied residential properties and all non-owner-occupied residential properties.[+13 sentences] For the owner-occupied residential properties, the increased tax rates affect only those with Annual Value (AV) above $30,000. That means that all owner-occupied HDB flats are not affected. Two-thirds of private residential properties, like condominiums in the suburban areas and lower-value landed properties, are also not affected. The remaining one-third of private residential properties which are affected are higher-end condominiums, as well as most landed properties. And then, all non-owner-occupied residential properties will also face higher property taxes. The tax rates for these are higher because these properties include second homes and those held for investment. And the increases are also more significant for the higher-end non-owner-occupied residential properties. If we want to raise enough tax revenue from property tax to eliminate the need for a GST rate increase, what would we have to do? Well, we would have to tax all non-owner-occupied residential properties at a significantly higher rate. Let us, say, we taxed all non-owner-occupied residential properties at a flat 36%. This would still not be enough, because the number of non-owner-occupied residential properties is considerably less than that of owner-occupied residential properties. So, we would need to raise property tax rates significantly for owner-occupied residential properties, including for HDB flats. In fact, I am somewhat surprised that Mr Louis Chua characterised our moves on property tax rates as tokenism. Three hundred and eighty million dollars more per year; and he says it is tokenism. Currently, our total property tax revenue from all residential properties is about $1 billion. To raise another $1 billion from just property tax alone, property tax rates may very well need to be doubled across the board.[+10 sentences] I suppose that is what the Workers' Party is proposing. There were other suggestions for wealth-related taxes. For example, Mr Saktiandi Supaat suggested estate duty. We did away with this in 2008 because it did not achieve the social equity outcomes we had hoped for. In the end, middle- and upper-middle-income individuals were disproportionately affected by estate duties, compared to the wealthy, who were able to find ways to avoid through tax planning. Besides us, the jurisdictions that have repealed their estate duties, like Hong Kong, Malaysia and New Zealand, have not reinstated it either. There were also suggestions to tax capital gains or dividend income. But remember, jurisdictions in the region do not tax capital gains or dividends. And if we were to do so, that can very easily hurt our competitiveness. It will impact jobs and Singaporeans. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim and Mr Louis Chua suggested we introduce a net wealth tax; and they estimated that it could yield about $1.2 billion annually.[+29 sentences] As much as we would like to tax the net wealth of individuals in theory, I have explained, it is very challenging to do this in practice. What happened with estate duties could very well happen here. Many forms of wealth are mobile. And as long as there are differences in wealth taxes across jurisdictions, wealth can and will move. That is why many jurisdictions have already abolished their net wealth taxes. In fact, only three OECD jurisdictions now have a net wealth tax. We will continue to study the experiences of other jurisdictions and explore other options to tax wealth effectively. We also welcome feedback on how to make a suggested net wealth tax work in practice in our context, when almost all our competitors in this region and worldwide do not levy such a tax. Then, what about the so-called “externalities taxes”, such as sin taxes and carbon tax, as suggested by Assoc Prof Jamus Lim? I am surprised that he raised this, in the first place, as a means of generating revenue. Tobacco taxes, for example, are a regressive tax – the lower-income groups pay a bigger share of it. The Workers' Party had expressed such strong concerns about the regressivity of the GST, but does not appear to be the least concerned about regressivity here. Why the double standards? In any case, we do not levy sin taxes for purposes of generating revenue, but for deterring consumption, and we will review and adjust these taxes from time to time. For carbon tax, as I have already highlighted, we will channel the revenue to help with the green transition. So, this will not help to meet our structural funding gap. I have explained how we cannot rely on reserves or these different revenue options to close the funding gap. But let me now address the key issues pertaining to GST. First, the timing of the GST increase. I had considered this matter very carefully, before deciding to start on 1 January 2023, to delay the start and to stagger the increase over two steps. Some ask: what happens if inflation turns out to be more persistent or higher? Would it not be better to wait until we are sure that inflation has come down before raising GST? As I have mentioned before, I fully understand the concerns about inflation and cost of living, but we cannot keep delaying the GST increase, given our pressing revenue needs. If inflation turns out to be persistent and higher than expected, we will deal with this separately through other tools, like I mentioned at the start of my speech. Besides managing inflation, we also share the concerns raised by Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Saktiandi Supaat, which is that we want to see local wages rising faster than prices. In fact, we have done well on this front in the last 10 years. Median Singaporean wages, in real terms, have risen by about 3% per year, faster than many other developed jurisdictions, such as the US, the UK, Japan and Hong Kong. We will continue to work hard to ensure such real wage increases are sustained in the coming years across all segments of our workforce. Meanwhile, we are helping Singaporeans with the Household Support Package this year and we are cushioning the impact of the GST through the enhanced Assurance Package and the permanent GST Voucher scheme. The Household Support Package will provide a household with two children up to $785 of assistance this year.[+7 sentences] The enhanced Assurance Package and GST Voucher will be rolled out together, starting from this year, even before the GST rate goes up. Combining the two, households will receive a very significant package of benefits. Let me illustrate this with an example. But before I proceed, I should say that I have noted Ms Sylvia Lim's suggestions on our household archetypes. We do, in fact, take into account different household formations in studying the effects of our policies and we adjust our policies where necessary. And I am conscious, personally, that there are other kinds of household formations besides the traditional, and we will bear Ms Sylvia Lim's points in mind in our future illustrations. But for now, take the example of a family with two young children, earning about $2,500 a month and living in a 3-room flat. Over the next five years, they will receive, on average, around $1,000 per year from the enhanced Assurance Package and around $1,400 per year from the enhanced GST Voucher – altogether, $2,400 per year of benefits over the next five years. This is more than their annual total GST expenses – not the increase – more than their total annual GST expenses of around $2,000 per year over this same period.[+30 sentences] In fact, over the next five years, most low-income families will receive more benefits than what they will pay in GST. Middle-income families have not been left out and will also enjoy significant benefits from the Assurance Package and the GST Voucher. We know that some are caring for both elderly and young dependents. That is why we have designed our measures to help them. Again, take the example of a household of five persons living in a 5-room flat, but, this time, with two young children and a retired grandparent, and they have a combined monthly income of $9,000. Over the next five years, they will receive, on average, around $1,300 per year from the enhanced Assurance Package and around $1,100 per year from the enhanced GST Voucher scheme. Again, altogether, $2,400 per year of benefits over the five-year period. Not a small sum at all, and this is for a three-generation household with a combined income of $9,000 a month. Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Chong Kee Hiong, Dr Shahira Abdullah and Mr Dennis Tan have commented on the criteria we use for our GST Voucher scheme. We have used Assessable Income combined with Annual Value as a measure of an individual’s means and access to family support. They are not perfect, but I think they are quite reasonable. We will continue to review and see if there are better criteria for our schemes. Meanwhile, where there are challenging or unique circumstances, we will carefully consider the appeals. Ms He Ting Ru asked if we can make the GST less regressive, such as through a multi-tiered GST system for different items, or if we can exempt certain essential items from GST. From the outset, the Government has always cushioned the impact of the GST on the less well-off Singaporean families. This is how we have been implementing the GST since 1994, with offset packages and, eventually, the permanent GST Voucher scheme. The question is: what is the fairest and most effective way to achieve this objective? Exempting or lowering the GST on a basket of essential goods sounds like a good idea. But there are two problems with this. The first is that a multi-rated GST system leads, in practice, to highly arbitrary distinctions between products and lots of creative effort by businesses to get their products classified into the lower tiers. It is administratively costly and onerous to implement. Ms He Ting Ru said that these costs can be easily overcomed. But that has not been the experience of other jurisdictions. If we were to go down this path, it will significantly and unnecessarily complicate the GST system. That is the first reason. But the second and bigger problem with this suggestion is that, in fact, it does not effectively target support to those with greater needs. So, aside from the administration of it, it is not effective. In fact, such an exemption for a basket of goods tends to benefit the well-to-do, because they spend more on everything, not just luxury items, but basic necessities as well. We did an exercise. We looked at four categories of items: uncooked food; basic food serving services that include hawker centres, food courts and coffee shops; telecommunication services; and utilities. If we were to exempt these four categories from GST, we expect to lose about $1.2 billion in tax revenue, of which only $185 million, or 15% of GST not collected, will benefit the bottom 20% of resident households.[+3 sentences] That is it. So, this is ineffective as a redistributive tool to make our system fairer. This is not just MOF's conclusion, mind you. This conclusion has also been reached by studies by numerous governments as well as organisations like the OECD. This is why, in fact, it is fairer and more effective for us to have a single GST rate across the board and to directly help lower-income and middle-income Singaporean families through the GST Voucher scheme, which is what we are doing.[+1 sentence] Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, let me explain this with some slides on the screen.
Mr Speaker7 words
[+1 sentence]Yes.
Mr Lawrence Wong4142 words
[+2 sentences]This chart shows the existing effective GST rate, across different income deciles, after subtracting the GST-V and the GST that is absorbed for publicly-subsidised healthcare and education. And you can see that the lower-income households pay a much lower effective GST rate than the higher-income households. In fact, on average, the households at the bottom 10% do not pay any GST at all, after offsets.[+10 sentences] This includes many retiree households without income. For the second decile, the effective rate is very low. Even for the middle-income households, the effective rate is well below the headline 7% rate, because of how their GST expenses are being offset on a continuing basis. Essentially, we already have a highly-tiered GST system in Singapore. But it is not tiered by the different types of goods or services, which Ms He Ting Ru had asked for. Instead, it is tiered by the impact of our GST, such that the well-to-do pay more GST and the lower-income are impacted the least. That is a fairer and far more effective way of taxing consumption. Many Members of the Opposition – in fact, both the Workers' Party and the Progress Singapore Party – object to the very idea of raising GST, claiming that the payouts are temporary and that the GST is regressive and disproportionately impacts the poor. But, again, such misguided claims ignore the way we have implemented GST in Singapore. What happens when the GST rate is raised to 9%? Together with the enhanced permanent GST Voucher scheme, you can see from this chart, the effective GST rate for the first three deciles remains unchanged.[+12 sentences] So, for them, the enhanced permanent GST Voucher neutralises the impact of the increase in GST. So, it is not true that the GST increase hurts the poor. Not in the way we have designed it. Even for the middle-income, you can see they continue to pay an effective rate which is well below the headline 9% rate. There is another effect of the GST which causes it to bear more heavily on the well-off. A consumption tax also allows us to tax those who may not be earning income in Singapore but are, in fact, well-off. They may be investors or persons of means. They may not be paying much in income tax today even though they have the means to contribute because their income is not easily ascertained. That could be, for example, if they are self-employed. But they will certainly be consuming more and the GST ensures that such people, those with greater means, will contribute their fair share of taxes. Mr Leong Mun Wai had made some calculations and he concluded that the middle-income will bear a disproportionate burden of the GST increase. But that is not so. After the GST rate increase, it is the top 20% of citizen households who will pay a greater share of GST and that is after GST Vouchers and the absorbed GST, netted off.[+1 sentence] You can see from the chart. Top 20%, the share goes up from 40% to 42%.[+66 sentences] For the middle 20% of households, they will pay a slightly smaller share of GST. Sir, I have covered the issues around GST and the various revenue options. I would like to assure Members that we have studied and carefully considered every tax option. I appreciate that the Workers' Party offered suggestions on alternatives to the GST. In fact, we have studied every tax option even before the Budget in order to design what we have put together as part of a package of tax changes in this Budget. We have looked at all the options again. As I have explained, there are limitations to all these different proposals and, in some cases, the sums just do not add up. Every tax move we make is carefully considered so that we have, in the end, a balanced, effective and fair set of tax measures in the Budget. More importantly, a progressive fiscal system does not and should not mean that each and every tax is progressive, let alone highly progressive. What ultimately matters is the overall system of taxes and transfers, to ensure that the overall system is progressive, and that is what we have done. If we were to take a revenue-by-revenue approach, we will end up with less revenues and you will also undermine the broader need for everyone to contribute, as part of a durable social compact. In this regard, I should say that there is a fundamental difference between the measures we have put forward in the Budget and the Workers' Party's alternative proposals or, for that matter, the position taken by the Progress Singapore Party. From what I have heard in this debate, the basic position of the Workers' Party and the Progress Singapore Party is that we can close the funding gap without having to raise the GST. How? By making various groups pay more. Make the wealthy pay more. Make large companies pay more. Let future generations pay more. Anything but GST increase – even though I have already explained the GST increase in Singapore does not hurt the poor. I can understand why they think these alternatives are politically more attractive options to offer, but I am afraid they are too simplistic and divisive and will end up creating more problems for our society. Let me explain. The bottom line is that we cannot sustain a tax system where the bulk or all of the burden is borne by a small group of people at the top end. It will not be possible to hold our society together if only a small group of people is required to pay more taxes all the time, while the rest simply get to piggy-back on their contributions to enjoy more benefits. That is why having a broad-based tax like the GST is so vital. It makes a direct link between our demands as voters and our responsibilities as citizens. Break that link and we encourage irresponsible lobbying and playing to the gallery. Someone else will pay for the good things in life. Why not demand more? That is how we have designed our system – on the principle of collective responsibility. Everyone contributes. Everyone contributes towards the cost of delivering services and everyone benefits from these services, but to different degrees. Those with greater means bear a higher burden and they draw less on Government support but they still enjoy some benefits from the Government. Those with fewer means carry a lighter share but they still contribute something and, in return, they receive more benefits from the Government – more than they put in and more than the better-off. In this way, we all do our part to help ourselves and one another and we strengthen the trust that binds us together as a society. This is a fair and inclusive system. We should also remember that the well-to-do contribute in many other ways and not just through income or wealth taxes. For example, many have set up businesses in Singapore, creating good jobs for Singaporeans and helping to develop new capabilities in our economy. While these individuals are here in Singapore, they consume more and pay more in GST. Some also set up philanthropic foundations, contributing to our charities and other worthy causes. Ms Foo Mee Har and Ms Denise Phua spoke about this, about enhancing our framework for philanthropy. And we will, certainly, do so. I want to make it very clear, too, that we have no issue with people doing well, earning more and achieving success in their careers. Our tax system must never discourage hard work, effort and enterprise. At the same time, we want to avoid in Singapore the emergence of stark income inequalities or social stratifications, which will undermine social cohesion and pull us apart. So, we will continually review and update our system of taxes and transfers to achieve this balance: to reward enterprise, innovation and work and to mitigate the pressures of social inequalities. We will continue to ensure a fairer and more resilient fiscal structure to underpin our social compact and to strengthen our social solidarity. Many Members in this House – Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Miss Rachel Ong, Mr Xie Yao Quan – have affirmed this and I thank everyone for your strong support. Finally, let me address the third major question: is the Budget fair to all Singaporeans? The Budget has something for everyone. It is designed to provide opportunities for all to succeed – the young and the old, the lower-income, the middle-income and even the higher-income. In fact, a significant part of our social spending goes towards ensuring broad access to affordable and quality housing, healthcare, education and lifelong learning. These are important social provisions and they support the aspirations of all Singaporeans. But we have also been careful to design our schemes so that those who come from less well-off backgrounds will get more support. I assure Members like Dr Shahira Binte Abdullah and Mr Abdul Samad that we will continue to review our eligibility criteria and schemes so that support is sufficient and targeted towards those in need. We are continuing with this emphasis in the Budget to provide, generally, for all but to tilt the support towards those who need them more. Over the last decade, our policy moves have helped to reduce income inequalities and steadily brought down the Gini coefficient. As Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman and Mr Raj Joshua Thomas said, we are determined to continue reducing wage disparities despite the global economic pressures that are pulling incomes apart and making it harder to hold our society together. That is why we are setting aside significant resources in this Budget for both Progressive Wage and Workfare. This reflects our shared commitment for a fairer and more equal Singapore. I assure everyone that we are moving as fast as we can to uplift the wages of these lower-wage workers. The new Local Qualifying Salary (LQS) will take effect soon, from 1 April this year. We will work with our tripartite partners to get the employers to come on board quickly, even before the mandatory progressive wage requirements kick in. Overall, our system of taxes and benefits continues to be fair and highly progressive. I will show a chart to reflect this. It depicts the overall net benefits, including grants and subsidies, that Singaporeans receive in a year from the Government, after subtracting the taxes they pay. You can see here our seniors are well taken care of. Retirees, on average, receive $6,900 in net benefits per person. Among Singaporean employed households, the benefits, net of taxes, are significant, at $5,900 per member for the bottom decile. When you add that up for a typical household, the benefits work out to be about 90% of their household income. Put another way, Government benefits will nearly double the amount of resources for these households.[+18 sentences] It is a significant and tangible form of support. Of course, as incomes go up, the net benefits are correspondingly reduced. The higher-income are net contributors – they contribute more than they receive. But they, too, benefit. They benefit from the political stability, social cohesion and overall environment that we provide in Singapore. Some Members have asked if we are doing enough for the sandwich middle-income group. If you look at the chart, for those in the 40th to 60th percentiles of household income, they continue to receive more benefits than the taxes they pay. For those in the 60th to 90th percentiles of household incomes, they pay some taxes, after netting off the subsidies and transfers they receive. I understand the pressures faced by this group. Some are caregivers who bear a heavy burden financially and emotionally, even physically. This is why we have been mindful to make sure we expand our suite of broad-based support in areas like education and healthcare. We have also increased healthcare and caregiving-related subsidies and support to relieve the load on these families, especially for those who care for young ones and elderly parents. Importantly, we have taken extra care to keep the tax burden for this group low. In fact, their tax burden is significantly lower than what it is for their equivalent in most other cities. For the relatively low amount of taxes paid, they enjoy many benefits in Singapore: affordable public housing and healthcare, beautiful parks, excellent infrastructure, quality preschools, schools and tertiary institutions with highly-subsidised fees. So, when you put it altogether, this is how we have designed our fiscal system: one, a fair revenue structure with everyone contributing, but those with greater means contribute more; two, a fair system of subsidies and transfers where all benefit but those who are less well-off benefit more; three, a system where we keep taxes on middle-income households low by targeting our social safety nets at the more vulnerable households who really need the support, while ensuring universal access to high-quality public housing, education and healthcare. When you put all three together, we have a highly progressive system of taxes and transfers where the better-off contribute more and receive less in tax-funded benefits while the less well-off still contribute, but a smaller amount, and receive much more in benefits. This is reflected in our benefit-to-tax ratios, something which many Members are familiar with but which is worth reiterating. The bottom 20% of Singaporean households receive about $4 in benefits for every tax dollar paid, the middle 20% of Singaporean households receive about $2 in benefits for every tax dollar paid and the top 20% of Singaporean households are net contributors receiving about $0.30 in benefits for every tax dollar paid.[+22 sentences] These ratios that we have achieved for the lower- and middle-income households are no mean feat at all. And we will have to continue working hard to maintain this in the coming years. Sir, I started work more than 25 years ago as an economist in MOF. So, in that sense, I have been through many Budgets, even though this is my first time delivering one. Over the years, I have had the chance to study the fiscal systems of many other jurisdictions. I can confidently say that Singapore is unique in having such a highly progressive system of taxes and transfers, while keeping the overall tax burden low for everyone and especially for the middle-income. We have a system that is fair, progressive and effective. It reflects our values: what we stand for and who we are as a people, and it provides a strong foundation for us to build our economy and our society. That does not mean that we have a perfect system. We are continually reviewing and improving it. We are continually adapting and adjusting our approach, as circumstances change and as our society evolves. Typically, after a Budget, we get two types of responses: "too much" and "too little". On the one hand, some say that the Government is doing too much – making costs higher for SMEs and for consumers. On the other hand, there are voices that say we are doing too little – not enough taxes for certain groups, more is better. After 25 years of public service, I know it is almost impossible for the Government to do anything that pleases everyone all of the time. But I want to assure everyone that every move we make is considered very carefully. We weigh the costs and benefits and the implications. We discuss extensively with all stakeholders, especially our tripartite partners. And that is what the team and I in MOF have worked very hard to do in this Budget – to ensure a balanced and fair package of measures, adjusting what is necessary to meet our evolving needs, while bearing in mind our economic and social imperatives and, above all, upholding the principles of fiscal prudence and sustainability. That is the approach we will continue to take in reviewing and updating our policies – never compromising on our principles and values, and always doing what is in the best interests of Singapore and Singaporeans. Sir, with your permission, let me say a few words in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): The Budget has something for everyone and will provide opportunities for all to succeed. I understand the concerns that Singaporeans have about rising prices and the cost of living. That is precisely why I had decided to defer the GST to 2023 and to stagger the increase over two steps. Meanwhile, we are extending significant help to Singaporeans through the Household Support Package – we will double the U-Save rebates this year for households, help them with their children’s education and also their daily essentials through the CDC vouchers.[+7 sentences] I know many are concerned about the impact of the Ukraine crisis. The Government is closely monitoring the situation. I assure you that we will do more to help Singaporeans and businesses cope with cost of living and business costs should the situation worsen. Some are worried that even with the delay and staggering of GST, there will still be an impact on prices. That is why we have the enhanced Assurance Package (AP) and the GST Vouchers (GSTV) to offset the GST expenses of households. Both will be implemented starting from later this year before the GST increase takes effect. Combining the two, households will receive significant benefits. For example, a family of four earning $2,500, living in a 3-room HDB flat, will receive around $2,400 a year over the next five years from both the AP and GSTV.[+5 sentences] This should more than cover their GST expenses during this period. We have also not forgotten the middle-income or "sandwich" group who are taking care of both old and young. They, too, will enjoy significant benefits from the AP and GSTV. The GST system that we have here in Singapore is unique. Low-income families pay less GST than high-income families. Besides the GST, we have also made other tax changes in this Budget, like the income and property taxes, so that those with higher incomes and who own properties with an annual value over $30,000 pay more taxes. These tax changes will generate additional revenue which we urgently need to fund our rising Government expenditures, especially in the area of healthcare, so that we can take better care of our seniors.[+4 sentences] But we are doing this in a way that is fair and progressive. That means everyone pays something in taxes. The less well-off contribute a smaller amount of taxes and receive much more in benefits. On the other hand, the well-to-do contribute more in taxes and receive less in benefits. Some Members of Parliament have suggested that we should draw more from our reserves to cover our funding gap.[+36 sentences] But that would mean leaving behind less and less for our children and grandchildren. If we keep doing this, one day, we will deplete our reserves. Like our forefathers, we must exercise stewardship and responsibility over our hard-earned money. We must not only be fiscally prudent, but also plan for the future. This is how we ensure that Singapore’s wealth can pass down the generations. I believe the changes to the tax structure we introduced this Budget will help to strengthen our social compact and social cohesion because we are all chipping in and doing our part to tackle our challenges and build a better Singapore together. Ultimately, that is how we can build a fairer and more inclusive society, where no one gets left behind and all can enjoy the fruits of Singapore’s success. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, in every Budget, we discuss and debate the design of policy parameters or schemes in monetary terms. But the Budget is much more than that. It reflects something deeper: our ethos and our values. It is an expression of our shared compact to tackle our challenges together, to never stop thinking of tomorrow and to never cease building a better Singapore. All this boils down to trust, something the Prime Minister spoke about recently in this House – trust between the Government and the people; the trust we have in one another and trust across the generations. Trust is fragile and precious. It takes effort and time to build up, but it can be destroyed very quickly. When there is trust, we can achieve great things together, we can make the impossible possible. But when we lose faith in one another, even simple things become impossible. So, whatever views we may have about the Budget, whatever differences we may have on policy issues, let us always work to strengthen trust in our institutions and in one another. That means debating the issues based on facts and not biased soundbites, or worse, half-truths and lies. It means being honest and upfront with Singaporeans about what we need to do together; not sugar-coating realities or pretending that there are quick and painless remedies available. In this Budget, I have set out plainly the challenges and also the opportunities ahead of us and explained why we need to move on difficult measures like the GST increase. It is not the popular thing for me to do: certainly, not for my first Budget as Finance Minister. But I have a responsibility to do what is right and what is in the best interests of all Singaporeans; not what is politically expedient now but will store up problems for the future. I am convinced that the measures in the Budget are necessary and will put us in a stronger position to strengthen the self-reinforcing system of trust we now have and to ensure that every citizen contributes their fair share to building our common enterprise, which is Singapore. A lot has been said about the redistributive aspects of the Budget. But, in fact, to deepen the trust in one another, we must also engage the human spirit and involve every Singaporean. We must strengthen the culture of responsibility for one another, so we all feel a renewed sense of duty towards one another and not just a right to the benefits of citizenship. Singapore must always remain an open and egalitarian society, one without rigid hierarchies and class distinctions, but with a big heart and a generosity of spirit. We do not begrudge those who do well. Instead, we celebrate them and we take pride in their achievements. At the same time, for those who have succeeded, there is no need to flaunt one’s wealth or be ostentatious about it. Instead, keep a modest and unassuming approach and do your part to give back to society, so that wealth can be recycled and invested back into society to expand opportunities for others. Sir, I have confidence that Singaporeans can instinctively sense if any Budget is not worthy of them and fails to renew their trust in the Government, in one another and in the future. They can decipher whether the Budget reflects our shared vision of a fair and just society, whether this Government is one they can trust to manage our resources in a way that is in line with our values and whether this Government is keeping faith with them and their children. In the weekend immediately after the Budget, I had several engagement sessions. As someone shared with me, his wife asked him: "Why are you so happy to pay more taxes?" This is by no means a well-to-do individual, just an ordinary person. But his wife asked him: "Why are you so happy to pay more taxes?" His reply: "It's the right thing to do." In a dialogue organised by the CDCs, including their community and corporate partners, a participant said she did not need the cash payout from the Assurance Package and would like to donate it to families with greater needs. I was cheered by this and I am glad to share that we will have an online portal set up in the coming months, where Singaporeans can indicate their preferred charities for the Government to directly channel the payout to, if they wish. In the end, the Budget is about all of us as Singaporeans, driven by our compassion and our conviction to build a better society for all; strengthening our trust in one another and keeping faith with future generations, as our forefathers kept faith with us. And Sir, as one united people, we can be confident in charting our new way forward together and in building a fairer, greener and more inclusive Singapore together.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied)1082 words
[+2 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would also like to thank the Finance Minister, particularly for the acknowledgement towards the Workers' Party for coming up with alternative revenue proposals for the Government's consideration. And we did so, of course, knowing that since the decision to raise GST was announced a few years ago, circumstances have changed.[+1 sentence] COVID-19 was unanticipated, of course. And core inflation right now is at its highest level in nine years.[+9 sentences] I think the prices of goods and services are not a point I need to repeat. Minister would know, thanks to CPI information from MAS and MTI, that price pressures will impact Singaporeans, particularly at the low- and middle-income levels. This is even as the question is important with respect to raising the GST at this time. The Minister made some brief points about it. He had thought about it carefully. But I think the question remains: is this a reasonable thing to do in these circumstances? That is the first question. And I think the point arises more acutely when you take into account what market watchers have said about the OECD Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) 2.0, which may well result in corporate tax revenue gains for Singapore. And I think this is a point that has been raised at the start of the week, coinciding with this Budget debate. To that end, my question is: can I ask what are the Government's current estimates, given that there is an implementation deadline of 2023 for BEPS? What is the range of estimates of the net impact of Pillar 1 and Pillar 2 on our corporate income tax revenues?[+5 sentences] Surely, MOF would have prepared itself for these various scenarios. And can I confirm that MOF does not have these various scenarios planned out? This really brings up the other point the Minister raised about red herrings, that, somehow, when the Opposition asks for revenue and expenditure projections, these are red herrings. But it cannot be so. Because, as I have mentioned in my Budget speech, it is something that many jurisdictions do. Hong Kong has a medium range forecast right up to fiscal year 2026/2027.[+38 sentences] They have got assumptions, of course. You are projecting into the future, so, it cannot be perfect and I think people will give the Government buffer and leeway for that. But that is incredibly important and that is precisely why the Workers' Party put forward different revenue streams. The Minister rounded off at the end about the importance of information, facts. I completely agree with him. But would not this approach not to make a call for information, characterising it as a red herring, but actually just producing that information lead to the outcome that the Minister himself speaks of and reduces the prospect of individuals mischaracterising positions which, one could argue, has also been done in the course of this debate? I think there were arguments made in the extreme which were not put forward by Workers' Party (WP) Members of Parliament. I do not think anybody suggested raising personal income tax for the upper tier up to 42% to make up for the GST hole. That was not done. But it was, nonetheless, characterised as an Opposition idea. So, I think it is a case of what is good for the goose must be good for the gander. And this is something I hope can actually be alleviated through more projections of what the Government needs, how much it is going to collect, because this will result in a more fruitful debate. In the course of my Budget speech, I did make a point about the revenue that the carbon tax will bring in. I hear the Minister's point. He said it in the beginning, when he opened the debate. He is saying it now. He does not expect carbon tax to bring in new sources of revenue. But still a debate has to be had. What are those numbers? Particularly, when you look at utility prices, utility bills for average Singaporeans, which the Minister says in his speech are going up. I believe he used a 25-year timeline. But if you follow it in a linear fashion, that is $12 by 2030 – an increase. So, those numbers should really be brought forward by the Government so that we can debate these and talk about how people, both at the lower- and middle-income levels, can be supported in a better way. I think the Minister raised a number of other points. We spoke about the various levers. The other WP Members, of course, will chip in and make those clarifications with the Minister. But Mr Louis Chua is not here today. He will be happy to come into this debate, I can assure you, but he is self-isolating, just to be on the safe side. I think he was COVID-19-positive yesterday but it was a false positive. So, I think better for him to stay away. But he will definitely come back to this in the course of what happens with BEPS and actually what are those projections that the Government is working with vis-a-vis its impact. A number of other points, like I said, I will let the other WP Members come in. But I think there is a useful question to ask about the reserves. We have had this exchange in this House a number of times on our position on the reserves. I do not think it is an accurate reflection to say that, first instance, you look at and turn to the reserves. That is not true. And we have really made the Government's own approach informed in this House as to how it also takes a certain approach to change how it deals with the reserves mechanism, at quite short intervals – 2008, 2015. We are entering a decade where circumstances are changing quite significantly. The Minister himself recognised in his Budget speech that, I believe, there is a review of even healthcare resourcing at paragraph 239: "We are thinking through this healthier SG strategy carefully. It will entail a review of our resourcing approach and healthcare financing schemes as well as the need for upstream investments and preventive healthcare." So, clearly, the other numbers that were in his speech about potentially where we could be with healthcare expenditure if we do not keep it in check, may not really be what will, eventually, be the outcome, because there is a review going on.
Mr Speaker34 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Pritam Singh, this part is really for clarification. So, I will allow preamble and, as Leader of Opposition, I am prepared to allow you some leeway. But let us keep to the point.
Mr Pritam Singh6 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, I take the point.
Mr Speaker33 words
[+1 sentence]And before I end, just a reminder to the rest of the Members, this is meant for clarification. So, if you have some preamble, I would allow it, but please limit that time.
Mr Pritam Singh173 words
[+3 sentences]Obliged. Speaker, I will not abuse this. Let me just then come to the point before I hand it over to the other colleagues of mine to make clarifications. It was previously said that we have drawn on our reserves equivalent to 20 years of past Budget surpluses. This was the Government position vis-a-vis COVID-19. "We have used a generation's worth of savings to combat a crisis of a generation." My colleague, Mr Louis Chua, asked Deputy Prime Minister Heng, in his capacity as Finance Minister previously, after accounting for the draw, where would our reserves be, compared to five years ago and 10 years ago?[+1 sentence] And he made the point that this really was not answered and he put the question to Finance Minister Lawrence Wong. After having a better fix on the number, $42.9 billion drawn on Past Reserves, where would our reserves be today, as compared to five years ago?[+1 sentence] Is it higher or is it lower? I think that is a question that can be answered in one word.
Mr Lawrence Wong1414 words
[+1 sentence]Sir, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for these comments and questions. There are few of them and I will take them in turn.[+1 sentence] First, on the increase of GST. It was a very difficult decision for all the reasons I have explained: recognising, on the one hand, the concerns that Singaporeans have about higher prices but, on the other hand, the urgent and very pressing revenue needs we have to address. That is why I highlighted that I decided, eventually, to delay the GST and to stagger the increase over two years.[+11 sentences] I suppose Mr Singh's point is that even that is not enough. And I can understand that some people might feel and be concerned that even that delay and that staggering are not sufficient to address concerns, especially in light of the recent developments in the external environment. And that is why I mentioned just now that the best way to deal with this is: firstly, if, indeed, inflation turns out to be more persistent and higher than expected – which may happen – we will deal with that decisively and separately, and we have the tools and resources to do so. How? Well, we have monetary policy to deal with inflation; secondly, we are able to take a series of actions to better secure our energy supplies; and, thirdly, we can help households and businesses directly. We have the resources to do so. And, if the need arises, we will not hesitate to take all of these actions. So, that is the first assurance we have for everyone. The second assurance is that, even setting aside additional measures and actions, we have already done a lot. And I have been trying to explain that. Look at the significant help that is on the table today: household support package this year, plus Assurance Package and the GST Vouchers, both of which have been enhanced, combined together, and both being rolled out this year before the GST goes up. A lot of help, which will, for most households, delay the impact of the GST increase by five years or more.[+32 sentences] So, the two, taken together, I think should assure everyone that we are not doing this in a cavalier manner at all. We considered it very, very carefully before we decided to proceed. And making sure that we are taking all the necessary actions and steps and have contingency measures in place to take care of the concerns of every Singaporean. That is number one. Second, on projections, numbers and data, I accept Mr Singh's point. I was not attempting to characterise it unfairly. I was sharing my feelings about these repeated requests for information as perhaps distracting us from the real issues. But I accept Mr Singh's clarification and I assure him that he has my commitment that we will continue to put out more information, as much as possible, in order to provide for more informed debates. And I hope he also takes what he said seriously, that the Opposition will also exercise leeway in recognising that these projections in the outer years are inherently fraught with a great deal of uncertainty, especially for a small, little, open economy like Singapore, where so many external events can never be predicted with any degree of certainty. So, very often, we do not even project GDP beyond the year. So, when you talk about outer year projections for the economy, for fiscal projections, there will be a very high cone of uncertainty around these numbers. And we, therefore, want to make sure that if we were to provide any figures, we do not inadvertently mislead people, cause people to have the wrong impression. And I seek the Leader of the Opposition's understanding, too, that, in putting out such figures in the future, we may very well get it wrong, because there is a lot of uncertainty when we project into the outer years. But he has my commitment that we will continue to see how we can improve the data and information that we put out. Third, on the reserves, I have explained our position and why changes in the rules, done hastily, we think, are not wise, are not prudent and will come at the detriment of the next generation. If we have to change any rules, we will have to seriously consider them very, very carefully. But if we make any tweaks in parameters – more land sales, more NIRC – what it basically means at the end of the day is that our future generations will be the ones to have to carry the burden. They will have to pay more in taxes in the future. That is what it comes down to. And they will have that much less to deal with any future emergencies, which we all know, will come at a more frequent rate in the coming years. So, all I say is, let us have a care about this. And I do not think it is prudent to make this change now, in place of raising the GST or other tax changes, which we can and should do. As for the quantum of reserves, I have actually mentioned that in my speech. I said that our reserves are growing. We would not be able to tell you what the actual figure is, for the reasons I have explained. It is not in our national interest. But as I have said in my speech, our reserves are growing. But our economy, our needs, the complexity of our needs and the magnitude of the challenges we face are growing even faster. What is more important when you drill it down is, are we accumulating more than necessary? And the answer is no. How do we know that this is the case? Because our NIRC, as I mentioned before, we project will continue to grow at a rate that keeps pace with economic growth. That is how we know that we are not over-accumulating. Whatever we are getting from NIRC today at 3.5% of GDP, on average, over the past few years, we do not expect that to continue rising as a share of GDP.[+12 sentences] It will keep pace with economic growth. And as I mentioned in my speech, even that, we cannot be sure that we can achieve that. But if we are able to do so, it will already be a significant achievement because of all the headwinds that we are facing in the global investment environment. I think I have answered all the questions from Mr Singh, Sir. Oh, sorry. One more question – BEPS. For BEPS, again, this is one of those things. We have been studying this very carefully. And, as I mentioned just now on Pillar 1, the rules are still being finetuned. It is not over yet. It is still being discussed. Yes, there is the pronouncement of 2023, but I do not know for a fact that this will happen in 2023 because many details are still being worked out. So, that is one of the reasons why I mentioned I hesitate to put out any figures at this stage. But taking the earlier point about putting out more information for a more informed debate, we will go back and think about whether we might provide a range of estimates about what the impact of BEPS 2.0 might be for both Pillars 1 and 2.[+2 sentences] I would say it would range from neutral to perhaps some increase, but we will have to look at the figures. We will provide some figures, hopefully, to help everyone get a better sense of what it might be. What is more important, especially the point I mentioned, which is that even if Pillars 1 and 2, combined, yield us additional revenue, we will very likely have to reinvest that revenue back into ensuring we remain competitive and attract our fair share of investments.[+2 sentences] Why? Because the reality is competition for investments is not going to go away just because of BEPS 2.0. In fact, it will get even more intense, and it will intensify in other non-tax areas, which we will, therefore, have to fund and have resources ready for. So, even if there is a plus from BEPS 2.0, I am, in fact, not confident that that additional revenue will help us with our social spending needs, and, especially not for our healthcare spending needs, which will continue to rise very sharply.
Mr Speaker2 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh151 words
[+6 sentences]I thank the Minister for the reply. I think it just reinforces the point that I have been trying to make about the alternative revenue streams that the Workers' Party came up with in the course of this debate, knowing that there are quite fundamental changes taking place worldwide where we need a better fix on what the revenue situation will be. I think the Minister missed out one question that I also put in my speech about the carbon tax and the estimates that the Government has with its increase at the tiers up to 2030. I think those numbers would be appreciated. Even though I take Minister's point, as I mentioned in my earlier clarification, that he does not foresee this to be a revenue generator, if I can put it that way. But I think this is something that we should have a debate about, in good time.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member)229 words
[+13 sentences]Thank you, Speaker. We will not be having such a difficult debate, if Singaporeans, especially the middle-class Singaporeans are not asked to pay more taxes. Sir, I have two questions first, for clarification. I have a total of six questions. I hope the Speaker will allow me to ask all the six questions, but let me ask two questions first. I have given a number of the tax burden of the GST on the middle class to be $1.2 billion. Take away all the compensating packages that you are going to give them, divide the taxpayers into three groups. Top 20%, the middle class who will not get permanent vouchers, and those taxpayers who will get permanent vouchers. How is the $3 billion or $3.5 billion additional GST going to spread over these three groups? That is question one. Question two: PSP has not been talking a lot about alternative sources of revenue because we think there is a lot of justification to make use of the unutilised revenues. But if you look at alternative avenues, actually, it is very easy from our point of view. The second question: if you have to choose between a 2% GST hike and a 3% to 4% personal income tax hike on the top 10%, they will yield about the same amount of revenue, would you still choose the GST 2% hike?
Mr Lawrence Wong383 words
[+3 sentences]Mr Speaker, let me answer the second question first because it is quite straightforward. The sums do not add up, Mr Leong. The sums do not add up. A 2-percentage point to 3-percentage point increase in the top personal income tax rate will never get anywhere close to the revenue we get from a 2% increase in GST.[+12 sentences] It will not. So, there is no choice here. In fact, we are already raising the personal income tax rates in this Budget. We will get some money from it, but it is not enough and that is why the GST increase is needed. But as I have repeatedly said, the objections to GST on the basis that it hurts the poor are completely unfounded. You may disagree with the GST, fine. But do not use that as a reason for disagreeing with GST. There is no basis for that in Singapore. So, stop pretending that this is the reason. On the first question, impact on the middle class. I know what you are trying to do with your computations, but I have shown in my chart and in my speech a different way of showing it, which is the share of GST paid by the different groups. And you can see from that, the chart is self-explanatory, the middle 20%, the share burden that they pay for GST, the increase in GST comes down. Effectively, what it means is that the increase in GST, the $3.5 billion of revenues that the 2% of GST generates, will be borne by the upper-middle and the top income earners.[+1 sentence] That is what it comes down to. It shows in the effective rate chart, where you saw, when we stacked up the effective GST rates and we showed the increase in GST to 9%, that extra burden is all borne by the upper-income deciles.[+4 sentences] Upper-middle and top-end. And that is exactly how we have designed the system. It is that group that will bear the burden of the GST increase, while the rest of the population pay the GST rate, but the impact of GST expenses is offset on a continuing basis. And that is why we can have the confidence of implementing a consumption tax in Singapore that is fair, effective and does not hurt the poor.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai101 words
[+6 sentences]Speaker, thank you. I think the Minister did not answer my question. After all, someone has to pay for the $3 billion or $3.5 billion GST. So, I am asking the Minister what is the tax burden on the different groups of Singaporeans? You cannot say there is no increase in tax burden. Secondly, on the income tax. Can I ask the Minister then, what is the total taxable income attributable to the top 10%?[+2 sentences] I can tell you that a 3% increase in the income tax on the top 10% will yield $3 billion. What is the total taxable income?
Mr Lawrence Wong303 words
[+18 sentences]Mr Speaker, I have to differ with Mr Leong Mun Wai. I do not intend to get into a debate on figures with him. If he thinks that me and all my MOF officers know less about revenues than him, he is entitled to take that view. I do not wish to entertain or continue the debate further when we are not even able to — if the Member is unable to accept facts which I have put out and says that that is wrong, I do not know how to debate any further. Because then what are we debating about? The Member is unable even to accept an authoritative fact from the Minister for Finance and say it is wrong, so, what is the point of continuing the debate on facts and data if the Member does not accept the figures which I have put out on personal income tax? I have already explained that it does not yield that figure. Just look at the revenue generated from the tax change we have just introduced in this Budget. It is nowhere in the region of billions. Nowhere! So, I can only say the facts that the Member has are wrong and it should not form the basis for public policy. On the first question, I have, in fact, answered it. I did not say that there is no increase in burden. Please do not distort what I said. Listen to what I said carefully. I said the burden is borne by the upper-middle and top-end. And it is reflected in the chart and we will be able to circulate the chart after this, put it out on the website and Mr Leong Mun Wai can have all the time in the world to analyse the figures and internalise them. Thank you, Sir.
Mr Speaker4 words
[+1 sentence]Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang)87 words
[+6 sentences]Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Minister for his stout and robust defence of the need to raise GST. I have three clarification questions with regard to three separate areas. The first has to do with corporate taxation. And the question is whether the Government plans to subscribe to the spirit of the BEPS agreement as a signatory and to roll out, broadly speaking, the framework as prescribed. I mentioned this, in part, because the Workers' Party's proposal for corporate taxation is quite different from the hypothetical.
Mr Speaker24 words
[+2 sentences]Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, if we can just keep it to largely clarifications. Sure, I will allow some preamble, but not another speech again.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim181 words
[+5 sentences]Fair enough. So, that was my first question. My second question has to do with wealth taxation and the question is whether the Minister believes that the modest increase in wealth taxation that is set forth in our proposal, which is broadly consistent with – in fact, it significantly is lower than some other neutral analysts have had, our estimate is $1.2 billion – whether he thinks that this modest increase in wealth taxation will be such that it will make Singapore so unattractive that high net worth individuals would relocate and be footloose in that sense. My third question has to do with land sales. I accept the position that this Government has that they treat land sales as part of reserves, but then I am wondering if the Minister is able to reconcile the treatment of land sales that are less than 10 years. So, land leases that are of one to nine years, with the broad argument that land sales must all immediately go into reserves, rather than take the first nine years as part of recurrent revenue.
Mr Lawrence Wong604 words
[+1 sentence]Sir, on the three questions, first, on BEPS 2.0. We are, certainly, committed to implementing the spirit of BEPS 2.0.[+10 sentences] We will do so while ensuring that this is, indeed, implemented around the world. Because our bigger concern is that it must be a level playing field. It cannot be that some countries do it and others do not; and then, there are revenue leakages that will undermine Singapore. So, we are watching. Yes, countries have signed up to it. But countries have to go through their own domestic processes to roll out BEPS 2.0. It is not a certainty that this will get through their respective parliaments. Signing the declaration is one thing; 2023, but will it get through all the countries' parliaments, legislation and implemented in law? Not so sure yet. So, we do want to make sure that there is a level playing field and we will do our part as a signatory, as a responsible member of the international community, to likewise implement, when there is that global consensus and global implementation. On wealth taxes, I recognise a proposal from Assoc Prof Jamus Lim and the Workers' Party for a net wealth tax that will yield revenue of $1.2 billion.[+18 sentences] I have explained that, yes, in theory, you could design a scheme like that. You could. But in practice, it will be much more complicated and it is not just about the fears of people leaving, but the fact that there are so many ways for high net worth individuals to circumvent whatever taxation rules you have in place and to plan away the burden of the wealth tax on themselves. The ones who do, are usually the ones with better means and higher wealth. And this is why, even in Switzerland, for example, if you look at the net wealth tax they have there, the burden of tax falls on a much broader base of the population. The so-called "net wealth tax" in Switzerland is not a wealth tax for the top-end only. Many middle-class, many middle-income people pay for that net wealth tax. This was our experience in estate duty, mind you. As I mentioned, the top-end, the very wealthy, knew how to plan it away. But the burden ended up falling on the middle-income and the upper middle-income. That is our bigger concern, on top of the concern that, yes, there will be some competitiveness reasons. That is also a relevant concern. And that is why we have to study this very carefully. We have to think through, look at the experiences of other jurisdictions. Not very many left to study because, as I have said, many of them have dropped the idea of doing a net wealth tax. We will have to consider what is suitable for Singapore. So, we will not rule it out. But at this stage, we do not have something that we are confident can be effectively implemented, suited to Singapore's circumstances. On land sales, the easy answer is, for these shorter duration leases, we have decided for flexibility and, because there are more transactions like that, there is no need to regard them as assets and, therefore, we take them in as current revenue. But for the ones with longer leases, we treat them as assets and then, therefore, we take them into our reserves framework and accord the treatment accordingly.[+3 sentences] It is a judgement call. We could have said everything, regardless of the duration of the lease. But we have worked out what we think is a reasonable balance and that has been decided and agreed with the President's Office.
Mr Speaker3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied)221 words
[+9 sentences]Sir, the Minister accused Workers' Party of double standards by calling for higher taxes on tobacco, because that is regressive. But would he not agree that more taxes on tobacco and gambling are acceptable, if they can help discourage that behaviour because the effects of that behaviour have far higher health and family costs on the lower-income and, therefore, are more regressive? Secondly, the Minister said that those with fewer means will bear a lighter share of the GST increase, but they get more benefits from the Government and more than what they put in. That was what he said just now in his speech. He said this makes a fair and inclusive system and he repeated that point in his Chinese speech as well. And he just said just now that the burden is all borne by the upper-middle and the top deciles of income earners. Sir, if those with fewer means really get back more than what they pay, by the Minister's logic, how will they feel that they are contributing? And to be clear, Workers' Party is not against the lower-income getting back more, if this is, indeed, the case. But can the Minister clarify whether or not the GST hike will make the lower- and middle-income pay more in net taxes over a 20- or 30-year period?
Mr Lawrence Wong410 words
[+5 sentences]Sir, I did not say that I was opposed to sin taxes or to tobacco taxes. I was simply highlighting that the Workers' Party made a big issue of regressivity in one case, but not in another case. So, I did not understand why there was inconsistency there. But we have never made a big issue of it and, in fact, we do not look at fiscal systems like that. As I have said, it is not appropriate to consider item by item. We look at the system as a whole. And where sin taxes are concerned, externality tax, we do it not for revenue-generating purposes.[+15 sentences] Yes, it generates some but not a lot. But really more for curbing consumption, which we think is necessary. And that is why we will continue to review these taxes from time to time, as we have been doing. On the second point, the burden of GST increase and how our system works, I think Mr Gerald Giam is saying, well, you want everyone to contribute, but, with GST, the low-income do not end up paying. Net-net, they do not have to pay. So, how do they contribute? But the point is this. With the GST, yes, they may get back something in terms of continuing offsets, but they do pay. There is a price. If there were no price to pay, we will not be having this debate. Everyone will happily say, "GST goes up and there is no opposition to it". But I think the Workers' Party and the PSP know that this is something not very popular on the ground and, therefore, they are objecting to it. But because people have to pay for it, then they feel that they are contributing to the system. Everyone contributes. With GST, we bring that about. It is a broad-based consumption tax which impacts everyone and everyone feels it, but it is also the way they can contribute and chip in to the system. But what we have done is do it in a fair way by offsetting the impact. And because the GST Vouchers are permanent, they are conjoined with our GST system.[+3 sentences] It is together, permanent. Therefore, we have confidence to say that, on a continuing basis, the charts that I have described, how we can offset the impact on the low-income groups. That is something we can do, not just today and not just five years, but on a continuing basis.
Mr Speaker44 words
[+4 sentences]Just a reminder to Members. You do know that we have a Committee of Supply coming up, where the specific and technical questions can be asked. So, if we could keep our focus on the overall fiscal policy of the Government. Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera190 words
[+11 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I thank the Finance Minister for his wrap-up speech. There are three clarifications. Before that, just a very short sort of response or preamble. I think the Minister talked about how much the personal income tax and property tax would have to rise to fill the hole if GST was not hiked. I want to clarify that when my colleague Assoc Prof Jamus Lim outlined different proposals for revenue generation, there was never the intent that the entire burden of plugging that hole falls onto personal income tax or property tax. So, with respect, Sir, I think the view that we are putting forth proposals that soak the rich is a mischaracterisation. In fact, it is a caricaturisation of what we have put forward. The bulk of revenue generation in those proposals actually fell on the changes to the land sales, the changes to NIRC and also the net effect on corporate tax's take from compliance with the BEPS regime. Not a discretionary increase in corporate tax, but how that would impact the overall corporate tax taken. I think our point there is that —
Mr Speaker13 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Leon Perera, if you can come to your clarifications and questions, please.
Mr Leon Perera309 words
[+8 sentences]Alright. Let me move to my first clarification, which is: I had an exchange with the hon Minister Lawrence Wong in this House in 2018. I asked the Minister at that time what would be a reasonable time interval when we review these rules governing the reserves. They were amended in 2008, they were amended again in 2015. So, what is reasonable time? Are we saying that it is set in stone and we will never amend it? And the hon Minister's reply to me at that time was, "you never say never" and these things do have to be reviewed at a certain point. So, my question is, what does the Minister think is a reasonable point in time when we review these rules, as we have suggested? The second clarification is on the concept of an optimal level of reserves. I would invite the Minister to agree with me that as the absolute level of reserves increases in dollar terms as a proportion of GDP, we must accept that it is legitimate to bring into place policies that slow the growth of that reserve without depleting it.[+5 sentences] On that note, would it be the case that the Minister rejects altogether any notion that there is an optimal level of reserves and we keep adding to the reserves, ad infinitum, without any regard to the absolute level and its relation to GDP? The last clarification is, the Minister alluded to the fact that when we make suggestions about the reserves, land sales, NIRC, there is a certain cavalier mindset involved in doing so. I would like to ask him, the PAP Government in this House did exactly that, in 2008 and they did it again in 2015. Was that cavalier? And if that was not cavalier, why is it cavalier when the Workers' Party now suggests doing that?
Mr Lawrence Wong837 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Speaker, on the three points. On the first, I recognise that the Workers' Party's suggestions for revenue alternatives could entail mix and matches as they have highlighted, a bit from here, a bit from there. But I still say, as I have highlighted, the sums will not add up. Why? Basically, you are asking to tax more from three possible groups as an alternative to GST: the wealthy and the better-off, large companies and future generations.[+6 sentences] So, that is what it comes down to. The future generations would mean land sales and NIRC, these sorts of changes. And I have explained why we do not think it is financially prudent to make those changes. Large companies, I have highlighted. This is contingent on the evolving rules around BEPS 2.0 and, even if we were to get some additional revenue, we are very likely to have to reinvest back to strengthen our competitiveness. This leaves me with the third group – the wealthy. And that means wealth taxes, which, I have explained, can be difficult to do, or property tax or personal income tax. And, if you were to home in on property tax, I have explained, if you want to get another billion dollars of revenue from property tax, you probably would have to double property tax rates across the board.[+53 sentences] That is just $1 billion. GST is $3.5 billion. So, where does the money come from? And that is why I highlighted the sums still do not add up. I appreciate and I take these in good faith that there are these different options that the Workers' Party has offered as alternatives. We have studied all of them before the Budget. During the Budget debate, when these options were raised, we went into them again with my team, but we still are not able to make the sums add up. The next two questions I will take them together – when is the next reasonable interval when we might review our reserves' rules and is there an optimal level of reserves? It is very hard to answer these questions, because I do not have a crystal ball. Really, who knows what will happen to the world in the next 30 years or more? Really. Can anybody predict? It is almost impossible. So, what would trigger us to change? I think it will have to be something really very disruptive. Not just once off, but on a permanent basis, and we will have to study the options very, very carefully at that point in time. Because there are deep, deep implications if we were to change anything on the reserves' rules. Deep implications for intergenerational equity, essentially, resulting in our next generation having to pay more taxes, as I have said, and having less to deal with any emergencies in the future. That is why I would say not something we will do today because we have other options. We have the GST, which we can implement in a fair way. We have other tax options. That is the reason why I ask, well, I wonder, maybe this is taking it a little bit too lightly. Because why turn to the Reserves when we have all these options and why make the GST into the last resort? But reserves – okay. Future generations – never mind, let us do it. But GST – cannot touch. Why? Why take that approach? Especially when the way we have implemented the GST is not the way the Workers' Party has characterised it. It is not, and you know it, too. I have shown the charts. I have explained it. We have explained it before multiple times and we have reiterated our explanation. So, if you understand this, then why are your proposals anything but GST increase? Even Reserves can be touched, but not GST increase. That part, honestly, I cannot understand. It makes me wonder why. The Workers' Party cites that the GST will hurt the poor. It does not. I have explained it. And on that basis, they cannot support the Budget. Really? Do you know what you are saying then? You do not want to support all the things we have in this Budget? To uplift the wages of lower-income workers, Workfare, progressive wages, to help vulnerable families with KidSTART. You are rejecting all of that? I find it hard to understand, frankly, on the misguided view that GST hurts the poor, which it does not. I can only, therefore, ask whether you are taking things too lightly. Or whether you are raising opposition because of other reasons, political reasons? Or other things? As opposed to seriously looking at the facts and doing what is right for Singapore. The Workers' Party is entitled to their views and to not supporting the Budget. But it will not stop me as the Minister for Finance from doing what is right and it will not stop this Government from continuing with all our efforts to build a better Singapore.
Mr Speaker11 words
[+2 sentences]Ms Hazel Poa. There is time for one clarification from you.
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member)97 words
[+5 sentences]Just now, the Minister for Finance responded to my question about the Budget cut. I did not just ask about the 1% cut, which is meant to start next year but also the 2% Budget cut that was supposed to have been implemented from FY2017. Can I take it that the same reason applies? That it was not really a cut but was reallocated to new initiatives and that therefore this is a reallocation, not strictly a Budget cut? Do the new initiatives, therefore, include subsidies to F1 as well as the transfer to SPH Media Trust?
Mr Lawrence Wong154 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, yes, Ms Poa is right. When we talk about these Budget cuts, they are in the context of a budgetary framework that allows us to reduce – so, the cuts are real, mind you. The cuts are real and actually applied to Ministry expenditures.[+5 sentences] But Singapore also has new priorities. And, therefore, this allows us to reallocate expenditure from existing to new, without having to just top up more monies. In this way, we can moderate the increases in expenditures. On how or what are the areas these reallocated monies go to and whether the SPH Media Trust and F1 are part of it, I think we can discuss all these in the respective Ministries' Committee of Supply debates when they come up. Thank you, Sir.
Hon Members2 words
[+1 sentence]say "Aye".
Mr Speaker9 words
[+1 sentence]To the contrary, say no. Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Pritam Singh20 words
[+4 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Workers' Party would like to record its dissent. Thank you. No off-set package lasts forever.
Mr Speaker13 words
[+1 sentence]The Members who would like to record dissent, please stand up for record.
Mr Leong Mun Wai3 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Speaker, Sir.
Mr Speaker10 words
[+1 sentence]Mr Leong, we are taking a record of the dissent.
Mr Leong Mun Wai5 words
[+1 sentence]Before we do that —
Mr Speaker77 words
[+4 sentences]Mr Leong, we are taking a record of the dissent. If you have other clarifications, you can raise them during the Committee of Supply. Thank you. [(proc text) Hon Members Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song, Mr Leong Mun Wai, Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim, Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap, Mr Leon Perera, Ms Hazel Poa, Mr Pritam Singh and Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong rose in their place for their dissent to be recorded. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker8 words
[+2 sentences]Members may sit down. Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Pritam Singh38 words
[+2 sentences]Thank you, Mr Speaker. Our Chair Ms Sylvia Lim, Members of Parliament He Ting Ru and Louis Chua are not here because they are self-isolating. I just want to state that they take the same position as well.
Mr Speaker12 words
[+1 sentence]Understand. But they need to be in person to record their dissent.