IMMIGRATION (AMENDMENT NO. 2) BILL
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as many Members have mentioned the work permit policy and the labour shortage, I think I should respond. Firstly, just a point of clarification. There are two types of illegal workers in Singapore. I have mentioned this before but some Members may not have heard me saying it or may not have understood what I said. The first type is the immigration offenders. These are the workers who enter Singapore illegally or overstay their immigration passes. Most of these are male construction workers, mostly labourers, from Thailand and India. Mr Philip Tan mentioned just now that one reason why these employers hire illegal workers is because of the labour shortage and the fact that we do not issue work permits to them. But this is not true, and he himself admitted this, that work permits have been issued liberally to the construction sector. In fact, over the last few months we have issued more in-principle approvals than we have ever done in such a short period of time. And I am sure the shortage situation in the construction industry will soon disappear. The basic motive for the employers in the sector and the agents is just to escape levy. So I think in that situation the application of caning is necessary. The other foreign workers are those who are here on valid social visit passes (or SVPs). These are mostly Malaysians who are allowed to stay here and every two weeks they have to go back and renew their Immigration stamps. Today we are discussing the Bill to amend the Immigration Act which governs the immigration offenders. It concerns their employers and harbourers. As several Members have conceded, even those who opposed this Bill in the past, it has been necessary to introduce caning for such offences because the jail term has proven ineffective, and the recent months have shown that caning, although unpleasant, has produced results. My Ministry administers the Regulation of Employment Act which applies to illegal workers who have valid immigration papers. The penalty under this Act is a maximum fine of $5,000 or imprisonment up to one year or both. This applies to both the illegal worker and his employer. This law has not been affected by the recent amendments although we may have to review it in due course. But I do not think we are thinking of caning in that situation. Coming next to the work permit policy and the labour shortage, the Government has to regulate carefully the entry of foreign workers into Singapore to minimize their long-term social and economic costs. I think most Members will accept this point. The question is how to tackle the labour shortage situation and still achieve our long-term objective. There are already more than 150,000 foreign workers in Singapore and the number is increasing. We must allocate the limited number of foreign workers to the more productive sectors, those which are export-oriented and high value-added. It is not possible for us to cater to all the demands for foreign workers. As Mr Heng Chiang Meng has mentioned, it is part of the normal process of economic growth and restructuring that, as you go for higher level activities, you must discard the lower value activities. It is just like the situation of a young boy growing up. As you grow older you must give up your small shirt. You cannot go on wearing the small shirt and refuse to give it up. You have to give the small shirt to your younger brother and then go on to something else. So this is part of the process of economic growth and restructuring. We must not forget in our debate what is our basic objective. Our basic objective is to achieve a stronger economy and to provide better paying jobs for Singaporeans. This must be the basic objective. We cannot grow by simply importing more and more unskilled foreign workers. True, the labour market is tight and we have full employment. But a tight labour market is in fact good for Singaporean workers, provided we remain internationally competitive and continue to upgrade our economic activities. This appears to be the situation today. Workers have enjoyed good pay increases and bonuses and at the same time companies are also making good profits. Of course, if they can have more workers, they can make more profits. But there must be a limit to the number of foreign workers that we can allow in. The situation has also resulted in better use of our domestic manpower resources. For example, many housewives are now working part time or doing home-based jobs. You would have discovered as you go on round your house-to-house visits that more and more housewives are doing some work at home, eg, simple assembly jobs, and so on, or they are now working part time in factories. In the past when I went round they used to complain that they could not get jobs. So because of this labour shortage and because we have been careful to regulate the issue of work permits, they have now been able to find jobs. Similarly, many older Singaporeans and retirees are working or interested to return to work. These people number in the hundreds of thousands. Not all of them want to work, but quite a number of them would like to work if the conditions are right. So this is a source of labour that we have not tapped. Some of you may remember the article in the Straits Times recently reporting about the older workers in McDonald's. Personally, I found that to be a very encouraging report because it shows that when employers try hard enough and are prepared to accommodate the older workers, they in fact find that these are better workers. And even the employees and the managers call these older ladies "Aunties" (maybe there are some "Uncles" as well), and they are there to show the way to the younger workers. They are not affected by school examinations. They are more serious about their work and they are able to do the job as well, if not better than the younger workers. Such developments might not have taken place if we are too liberal with our work permits because to the employers it is a question of dollars and cents. Why hire an older worker who may perhaps be a bit slower, need a bit more training, maybe you have to pay him or her a bit more, as compared to a worker from Malaysia who is young and willing to work for lower wages? That is a basic dollar and cents issue. Unfortunately, from our records of employers who register with the Employment Service Division for jobs, many are still insisting on workers below 45 years old or even below 35 years old. So the whole basic attitude of our employers towards employment of the more senior workers has still not changed. True, in a tight labour market, employers have to compete harder for workers. Therefore, Members, I myself included, can expect more pressure from supporters who are running small businesses. They are faced with a situation where they have to compete harder for workers. However, we should also balance the interest of these groups with those of the vast majority of our constituents who are workers. No doubt, these people are very vociferous, they help us, they provide some financial support, they want us to loosen up on the work permit controls. To the extent that we can allow them, we have done so. For example, if they are willing to recruit 5 '0' levels or skilled workers, or if they recruit workers who are already in the unapproved sectors, we have allowed them. And we have also allowed employers who employ less than 10 workers to hire foreign workers, as I mentioned in my reply to the oral question earlier on. But the fact is many of these employers are catering to the domestic sector. Whilst we may sympathize with them, we must ask several questions. Have they tried hard enough to hire local workers, including older Singaporeans? Is their pay adequate for the type of job? Take hairdressers, for example. Are there too many of them? Should they not get together and open for shorter hours during peak periods? Should they not have an appointment system perhaps? All these changes must take place. Some changes have already taken place, as you can see from the better layout in the coffee shops, in the fast food joints, in the supermarkets and so on. But it is part of the upgrading process that must go on - the better use of our workers. One good example that was brought out by Mr Lim Boon Heng is this question of the construction industry. It is true. CIDB has done a study and found that, in fact, construction costs are lower in some countries with higher wage costs than ours . Whereas here, because we have this large pool of foreign workers wanting to come in and willing to work for low wages, therefore the incentive to apply better methods is not there. We must continue to maintain this pressure. As Singapore becomes more developed and salaries rise, the cost of personal services must increase. The way to provide such services must also change. This is what has happened in the developed countries. We cannot expect to enjoy high income on the one hand and low cost services which can only be provided by cheap foreign labour on the other hand. Before I conclude, I would just like to comment briefly on some of the remarks made by Mr Philip Tan, who is forever championing all and sundry who are clamouring for more foreign workers. Firstly, it is not true that we only issue permits to multi-nationals and foreigners. Most of the contractors in the construction industry, most of the shipyards, many of the manufacturing companies, most of the domestic employers, these are all locals. Many of the local industries have not found it necessary to employ foreign workers, like banks, stockbrokers and so on, even hotels, because they have been able to attract local workers. Even amongst multi-nationals, you have some companies which can operate with less than 10% foreign workers. There are others that cannot seem to have enough. Even if we give them 40%, 50%, they will still want more. So it is a question of management. It is a question of productivity and whether they are prepared to pay a bit more to retain the workers. This point about the construction workers and issue of permits, I have already touched on. I do not want to go into a long debate today on this work permit policy. It is a question that comes very often in our labour shortage situation. Of course, my Ministry is closely monitoring the situation and we are conscious of this problem. We are trying to balance the two objectives: how to achieve higher economic growth on the one hand, and control the pool of foreign workers on the other hand. So if Members have good ideas, we will be happy to listen to them. But we must always be conscious of the need to balance the interest of the vast majority of Singaporeans who are workers against the clamours of a few employers who want to make more profits.