Hansard, Wednesday, 4 March 2015

Order. Pursuant to paragraph (7) of Standing Order 92, I have fixed the times for the conclusion of consideration of the heads of expenditure in the Estimates of Expenditure for FY2015/2016 in the Committee of Supply.

In fixing these times, I have taken into account the reduction of Question Time to 30 minutes on the days allotted for the COS debates, and that the sitting times of the Committee of Supply (COS) be extended for each of the allotted days which are subject to the approval of the House.

Additionally, I have notified Members that the sittings on the allotted days of 6 to 13 March will commence at 11.30 am.

The "guillotine" times I have fixed have been notified to hon Members.

Page: 9

[(proc text) Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [23 February 2015], (proc text)]

[(proc text) "That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016." – [Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance] (proc text)]

[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]

Mdm Speaker, another year, another Budget debate. This is where the Finance Minister holds centre court. I do not envy Deputy Prime Minister Tharman's job. He has to balance short-term needs with long-term priorities and the demands from the various Ministries that are responsible for the wide range of functions that straddle the entire spectrum of Government functions: from ensuring national security to fostering economic competitiveness, funding health and social programmes, developing infrastructure to providing the finest education that our children need to compete in this world.

Madam, coming up with the Budget is like juggling many balls in the air and ensuring none should drop. At the heart of it is the concept of allocative efficiency. How do we distribute limited amounts of money in a way that gives us the biggest bang for the buck?

As our Prime Minister said recently, a dollar spent on healthcare means a dollar less to spend on other areas, such as education, housing or security. That is not to say healthcare is less important than education. But the truth is, we have a finite number of dollars to spend on a variety of needs and desires. And then there is the law of diminishing returns. The more and more we spend on one area, the less bang for the buck we get. So, it is probably wise to spread the spending to many areas in a balanced and equitable way.

Madam, this is the rational view of things. But life is seldom rational. In fact, contrary to what is proclaimed in neo-classical economics about the rational economic man who makes rational choices to maximise his utility, most of the biggest decisions in life are not rational. Two of the biggest choices we make in our lifetimes are our choice of spouse and the career we choose. Neither of which are very rational decisions.

I will not venture into the realm of marriage and spousal selection, but we all know that the heart rules the head in this area.

Page: 10

And then, there is the issue of choosing a career. A doctor friend of mine told me that there is little correlation in choosing a specialty that earns the most money and one's academic performance in medical school. If everyone were economically rational, the smartest medical students would choose the best paying specialties, such as ophthalmology and surgery. Instead, there are many excellent students who become physicians and paediatricians, which typically pay less.

I am fully aware that there are quite a few ophthalmologists and surgeons in this House and my comment in no way reflects on their academic ability relative to their peers. But even then, the fact that a few of them have given up their lucrative clinical practices to be in politics full-time is also, in itself, not a rational economic decision.

Madam, we now move on to a third important area where people are often not rational about – politics and the selection of their political leaders.

The same doctor friend of mine told me he used to sit on the interview panels that selected candidates for our local medical school, Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine. These candidates have to submit a personal statement to convince the panels why they would make good doctors if they were given a choice. Many of these personal statements contain words such as "compassion" and "empathy".

This doctor friend told me that he would ask the candidates who used these words, "What is the difference between compassion and empathy, and which trait is more important to have as a doctor"? Most of these 19-year-olds could not really describe the difference.

He tells me that the politically correct answer is both empathy and compassion are equally important. But in reality, on the ground, it is different. Empathy is more important than compassion in the short run.

A patient is naturally drawn to a doctor with empathy even if, internally, the doctor has little compassion. And sadly, a doctor who is full of compassion for his patients will come across as a cold fish if he cannot demonstrate empathy.

Empathy includes feeling the disappointment, frustration and anguish of fellow Singaporeans that may have felt defeated in one way or another.

Madam, defeat is a very painful process, as I should be able to empathise from my repeated and prolonged experiences. But at least in this country, anybody that may have felt

Page: 11

defeated will always find new hope and be able to forge a path towards new successes.

Compassion, on the other hand, is the feeling of distress and pity for the suffering or misfortune of another and often includes the desire to alleviate it.

How a voter relates to a politician is not much different from how a patient relates to a doctor. They are quickly drawn to the one with empathy. Empathy is taken as a reliable proxy for compassion. But, in reality, it takes a person far longer to realise that his doctor or political leader has compassion and sincerely wants to help him.

But the ability to empathise often does not truly reflect deep compassion. You can empathise, but do you really do what it takes to help the poor and the needy?

And you know what? Voters may still vote for certain politicians and political parties because they think these people and parties can empathise and, hence, have compassion as well.

Madam, in recent years, our Government has done many things that benefit the poor and the vulnerable. We have come up with the PGP, MediShield Life, more childcare centres, more buses, more education grants, more HDB flats and so on, and the list goes on. We have passed laws that protect the vulnerable, such as on human trafficking and the mentally disabled and even the everyday consumer.

And this new Budget underscores this commitment with the CPF refinement measures and the Silver Support scheme. Both these initiatives will provide greater support for older workers and senior citizens. They clearly exemplify the compassion and empathy in us.

So, I asked my doctor friend again, "Will the politics of empathy always triumph over policies and programmes of compassion?"

Here is his answer: "In the short run, yes. But in the long run, no. Compassion without empathy is like a cold fish. Empathy without compassion is like a con-man. Whether you are a doctor or a politician, there is a third element that is as equally important as empathy and compassion. That is – competence. If all your patients do not recover and get worse or die prematurely, then, in the long run, everyone will know you are a bad doctor, even when you have the best bedside manners. Ultimately, you have to solve your patient's problems. You need to be technically competent in addition to having empathy and compassion."

While we may not be very rational beings, in the long run, we all have to face reality, whether in relationships, in the career we choose or the politicians we vote for. And a

Page: 12

competency check is also a good reality check.

Madam, Singaporeans have had 56 years of experience with PAP's competency, starting in 1959 when Singapore achieved self-government. Admittedly, competency is always a work in progress and we can always improve, even if we make missteps along the way, such as the delay in improving our infrastructure and capacity of our public services, as our Prime Minister had mentioned recently. But by any international standards and in the large scheme of things, our PAP Government has always been competent.

This Budget is a bold one although it, too, is a work in progress in our never ending efforts to put our political philosophy into policies, programmes and actions. We will only get better and better. Mdm Speaker, I support the Budget.

Mdm Speaker, I wore the lens of a Professional, Manager, Executive (PME), otherwise commonly known as the middle-income or sandwiched class, and paid close attention to Deputy Prime Minister Tharman's speech last Monday. I tried my best to list down every single item that was targeted at PMEs and kind of gave up after the first hour.

Indeed, this year's Budget can be said to be one of the most inclusive Budgets I have seen, with many measures and assistance targeted at not just the lower income group and the Pioneer Generation and seniors but also the middle-income group, PMEs and further pushing boundaries to include freelance professionals and stay-at-home mums. The positive list of items is an extensive one and I do not intend to run through each to laud but I know the entire package will certainly give our Singaporean PMEs a leg-up and lighten some of the load which they currently have to bear.

I particularly like this year's Budget as it addresses the current realities whilst at the same time preparing every Singaporean for the future. In particular, I am glad to note the especial focus on developing our people, our Singaporeans, to prepare them to be future-ready. It also seeks to future-proof them so that they can weather any uncertainties and stay afloat during turbulent times. In preparing and developing our people, the string of SkillsFuture measures underscore the importance we place on our people, our most valued asset of Singapore. Whether one is in employment, in-between employment, out of employment, going into or starting employment or leaving employment or even not in a formal employment relationship, this Budget and its SkillsFuture initiatives will benefit you.

Page: 13

We know skills and productivity are so tightly linked and that skills and job competency, other than personal character and attitude, should be the paramount consideration for placement and progression in any job. It is about developing the right skill for the right job. Not just a skill but a deep skill. Not just one skill but also a second skill to weather storms better.

I have personally spoken to and engaged PMEs of various ages and gender and who belong to different life stages; they each have their fair share of challenges, from achieving work-life balance to ensuring they find the right job and draw a good wage. In particular, there are two groups of PMEs which we need to pay special attention to. They are the young PMEs and the mature PMEs.

Young PMEs want to land the first job, move up the career ladder and do well. Some have to pay off their education loans. Mature PMEs above 40 years of age fear if their jobs are stable and whether they can find a job if they lose it. They have mouths to feed, parents and in-laws to look after, mortgages and loans to service.

In short, these two groups worry about their employment and employability. It is, therefore, heartening to note this year's Budget seeks to address the challenges faced by these two groups through the SkillsFuture programmes, initiatives and funding to help Singaporean PMEs in their employment and employability.

However, all said and done, this Budget is a positive one for PMEs. But what is even more important is that the plethora of initiatives through SkillsFuture will only succeed, if and only if, everyone plays their part. And I do not just mean every Singaporean but also the industry and employers, the Government as well as the Labour Movement, unions and workers. Everyone needs to not just "Do More" and "Do Well" but to "Do Together." I, therefore, urge each of the three parties to do three things.

Firstly, employers should lead by example. I urge Employers to come forward and avail themselves of the numerous programmes and internships that will be offered. More than that, employers play a crucial role in supporting this spirit of lifelong learning and CET. Employers should proactively send their PMEs for training and upgrading, something we see only in certain enlightened companies but do not see happening across all sectors and all companies whether big or small. Training support and funding are at an all-time high and employers should not use lack of resources as an excuse. Employers should use this opportunity to develop the Singaporean Core. Employers can also top-up the SkillsFuture credits of their staff to motivate them to embrace learning.

Page: 14

Secondly, employers must raise productivity through skills upgrading. As we embark on driving productivity across all industries and companies, including SMEs, I remind our employers that skills upgrading is one of the most important pillars to a motivated, engaged and productive workforce and also the Progressive Wage Model. The SkillsFuture plans will help not just individuals to realise their potential and aspirations to stay employed and employable but also for companies to grow and stay relevant and productive in a competitive and global marketplace.

Thirdly, employers must support their employees. As Singaporeans embark on individual-initiated training and on tapping on their SkillsFuture credits come next year to undergo training and upgrading, I urge employers to give the much needed support, encouragement and even time-off from their work. This is especially so when some of these individual-initiated training and their practicums and exams may be conducted during working hours.

Next is the Government. SkillsFuture Credit and Enhanced Funding for Singaporeans above 40. In this area, with higher training funding for mature PMEs above 40 years and the SkillsFuture credits which will benefit all PMEs above 25 years of age, I urge the Government to ensure that the credits are easily accessible and used. The ActiveSG Credit is one good example although a caution is that not everyone will know how to download the app and utilise it.

Likewise, learning from the UK's experience of the Individual Learning account, the quality of the training providers, including their programmes and delivery, is crucial. I also ask that the credits be allowed to be used to cover unfunded portions of course fees. The array of approved courses should extend beyond the WSQ training programmes or those at our local Polytechnics, ITEs and Universities but extend to a wider range of both certifiable or non-certifiable online and offline programmes which can help Singaporeans realise their passion and aspirations, including those programmes where it is an industry requirement for our PMES to undertake to stay current, employed or practising in.

All these will also then help stay-at-home mums who can undertake Lifelong Learning and CET and even prepare them if they decide to re-enter the workforce or stay connected and current. Freelance professionals can also embark on training to hone their skills or stay current in their industry since this training support is not tagged to an employer. Older Singaporeans, too, should also benefit from this credit to pick up a new skill or even learn a new interest. Since it is Lifelong Learning and lifelong, perhaps it can be extended to even useful courses at community clubs.

Finally, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman has announced regular top-ups and I urge for more top-ups at regular intervals during a person's lifetime, considering many of these PME

Page: 15

programmes cost more and, in some instances, $500 may not suffice.

Second, with the focus on SkillsFuture, Aspire and CET2020 and the emphasis on skills as the criteria to enter into employment and move up within employment, I urge the Government to take the lead in making the "one race to the top" principle, that is, moving up regardless of academic qualifications but based on skills and competency, a reality in the Civil Service. For a start, with higher Government expenditure for a variety of infrastructure, can the Government, Statutory Boards and Government agencies provide even more jobs targeted specifically at mature Singaporean PMEs above 40 years?

Third, for the Government to successfully roll out the various programmes, they do not just have to come up with attractive, innovative and exciting initiatives but, more importantly, to partner employers, industry, unions and the Labour Movement, including e2i, to ensure good implementation, follow-through and ground acceptance. Our NTUC e2i and U-PME centre have been helping PMEs in Singapore and have started work with our tripartite partners, such as WDA. I urge the Government to work with us to better connect PMEs to jobs in the Jobs Bank, drive the progressive wage model for PMEs as part of the SkillsFuture initiatives and look at how to leverage and partner various stakeholders in this SkillsFuture journey.

Finally, for individuals and workers. We first need to take individual responsibility and initiative. The programmes, higher funding, awards and credits will only be useful if every Singaporean worker and individual steps forward to take personal responsibility and initiative. Regardless of age, gender and at whatever step of the career ladder you are in, take the individual initiative to tap on the array of programmes and funding, including the SkillsFuture credits, and embark on deepening your current skills and develop a second skill.

We need to cultivate a spirit of Lifelong Learning and Continuous Education and Training. Singaporeans need to embrace a culture and spirit of lifelong learning and CET. We need to learn, unlearn and relearn as current jobs become obsolete and new jobs are created. The old mantra is learn, work and retire. The new mantra will be learn, work, learn, work, learn, work, retire and continue learning. Start young if you can and start now if you are not so young.

We need to also keep an open mind. Deputy Prime Minister has shared some of the growth areas in our economy and the future jobs we expect to see. Follow your passion and dreams but at the same time keep an open mind to the sea of opportunities which are going to avail Singapore and Singaporeans. We cannot rely on skills and competencies alone; we each need to have the right mindset, right belief and the right attitude. Mdm Speaker, in

Page: 16

Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] This year's Budget is an inclusive one. Besides the senior citizens and low-income Singaporeans, it has benefits for the sandwiched class and PMEs as well.

I particularly welcome the series of SkillsFuture schemes. For SkillsFuture to be successful, the tripartite partners need to work together to create our future. I urge the Government to lead by example and help create more job opportunities for PMEs above 40 years old. The Government should also help to promote skills upgrading and the learning of a second skill.

Employers should seize the opportunity to encourage their employees to upgrade their skills and enhance their productivity. I also urge employers to top up their employees' SkillsFuture Credit.

Most importantly, it is the mindset of our people that is most critical. A breakthrough achieved through SkillsFuture is the idea of promoting individual-initiated training and encouraging people to take personal responsibility. We should create a culture of lifelong learning and cultivate a positive mindset. Singaporeans need to have the spirit where they constantly strive to improve and are always prepared for the unknown.

(In English): In summary, I applaud the Government for the string of measures to benefit the many middle-income and PMEs in Singapore. The SkillsFuture initiatives are a step in the right direction. However, it requires the proactive and positive action of not just the tripartite partners, the Government, employers and the Labour Movement alone but by each and every Singaporean – young and old, male or female, whether one is in employment, in-between employment, out of employment, going into or starting employment or leaving employment or even not in a formal employment relationship.

We are only as strong as the weakest link, each and every one of us has to do our part to stay relevant and future-ready to ensure we have a future for ourselves and our country. I call on and rally our employers and industries, our Government and agencies, our unions and Labour Movement and, most importantly, our people to come together, work together, embrace the opportunities and move ahead and up together. I support this Budget.

Mdm Speaker, thank you for allowing me to join the Budget debate. I would like to break my speech into two parts: first, on the plight of SMEs

Page: 17

and, second, on inclusiveness for Singaporeans.

On the plight of SMEs, as Members know, SMEs contribute significantly to the economy, accounting for 70% of jobs and deserve better attention.

The general feel is that things have become worse for SMEs in the last few years and business owners wonder if the Government is listening enough to their problems. Are we doing enough to help them? Or are we prepared to allow a substantial proportion of them to exit, shut down or die a natural death?

As many have mentioned before, only a small proportion of SMEs have benefited from the productivity push and I believe this is because of how we have defined and devised the incentives.

We should broaden the definition of productivity so that it does not only pay attention to improving companies' bottom lines. If we want our businesses to flourish, then they also need to grow their revenues. Our economic restructuring process should, therefore, focus not only on reducing cost but also on creating demand. This would help to bring about higher productivity, growth and incomes. The focus on innovation and internationalisation in this year's Budget is, therefore, timely.

We can also broaden the definition of innovation from its current form to include business model innovation. According to the latest SME Development Survey released in October, SMEs have embraced the need to restructure but 51% say that their main business strategy is to rethink their business model. Many of our SMEs need to restructure their business models to survive and they need help in this area. Besides giving incentives, exposure of our SMEs to new business concepts here and overseas, equipping them with the right mentors and facilitating collaboration would greatly help.

Regarding the foreign worker levy, the key idea for productivity improvement should be to incentivise, and not penalise, companies in making full use of their foreign manpower. Instead of having a blanket levy for all companies, why not we give a foreign levy rebate to companies that have a less than average number of foreign workers compared to their sub-sector average, while we continue to charge those that exceed the average number the normal or higher rates? This will give companies a tremendous incentive to push down their foreign worker dependencies and actually accelerate the restructuring process.

Higher business costs. Another concern for companies here is high business costs, which have become the bane of their existence. In my interaction with SMEs, I have come across many in the last year or so that have shifted part or all of their operations to lower cost

Page: 18

countries. Just recently, I met the owner of a well-known large food product manufacturer at a grassroots event and he told me that he has already moved his entire manufacturing operations to Malaysia and Vietnam because he could not cope with the costs of operating here.

I have highlighted several times in the last couple of years in Parliament that we need to keep an eye on our business costs and that if it is not managed carefully, we would see an exodus of companies from Singapore. I believe that this exodus has started and is going to accelerate further unless we do something about rising cost.

Venturing overseas is positive and healthy for the economy and our companies, but relocating may not be. We must stop this exodus we are seeing today. Because once companies relocate, they are unlikely to come back.

Managing business costs. SMEs think about productivity or venturing overseas when they are able to. Currently, they are pre-occupied with their day-to-day concerns of managing costs and staying alive.

In Budget 2015 and the previous two Budgets, at best, businesses have been given a chance to breathe a small sigh of relief of not incurring additional cost pressures. We need longer term cost reduction measures if we are serious about nurturing a conducive SME business environment.

I urge the Government not to take the cost issue lightly and find a permanent solution rather than allocating large amounts from every year's Budget to help companies offset the high cost of doing business – Wage Credit is an example.

This approach cannot be a permanent solution. For the longer term, we need to identify and resolve some deeper structural factors in the economy, which have led to high business costs in Singapore. This needs a focused, experienced and diverse team to study the factors for a concerted period of time. I would like to urge the Government to focus on this and set up a Cost Competitiveness Committee like what we did 30 years ago to address the same type of problems that we saw in 1985. We have nothing to lose by forming such a Committee: at worst, we will confirm our cost structures are not wrong but, at best, we would be able to solve some of these problems.

Next, Madam, I want to shift the focus on inclusiveness for Singaporeans. As we debate Budget 2015, I would like to take a step back and look at how the Government has progressed since GE2011, how the four Budgets since have addressed the issues Singaporeans faced as a result of past policies. I would like to refer to the speech I made in

Page: 19

this House on the Population White Paper in 2013 and also my response to the President's Address in 2014, where I raised various issues facing my fellow Singaporeans.

I explained that the biggest issue which resulted in the state of affairs in Singapore was the pursuit of a "growth at all cost" economic policy that focused on growing the GDP pie bigger without keeping a close eye on how such an economic policy would impact the lives of Singaporeans. I expressed that while the past policies were focused on economic growth and the pursuit of higher standards of living, the Government did not adequately focus on improving the quality of lives of Singaporeans as GDP grew.

While data pointed to higher wages for most Singaporeans, the cost of living increased at a faster pace, resulting in lesser savings, including retirement savings, as people forked out more to pay for everything, including higher prices for their HDB flats.

The "growth at all cost" and liberal immigration policies caused great difficulties for many Singaporeans. We saw infrastructure being stressed and Singaporeans facing tremendous difficulties with availability and pricing of housing, including HDB flats, a clogged up public transport system, overflowing hospitals and roads.

For some, the rapid development of Singapore caused serious displacements and dislocation as they could not benefit from the new jobs created simply because they could not keep up with the skills needed, no matter how much the Government tried to retrain them. A number became structurally unemployed, causing them great stress; many took part-time jobs that low-skill foreign workers typically did and, in return, for very low wages, not enough for them to cope with the daily needs of their families here in Singapore.

Looking at all these issues, some of our young raised questions about their future in their own home – Singapore. Can they afford a house or have jobs as they get older? It was vital that we could show the young a sense of "Hope and Opportunity" in Singapore for the future. They must be confident of Singapore, in Singapore.

So, what has the Government done since GE2011? Have they addressed these issues? This is my perspective. Has life become better for Singaporeans? I think, yes.

First, the change of economic growth policy. Some commentators have labelled this Budget as the most egalitarian Budget in the last couple of decades. Although the headline figures would certainly support this view, I believe that this Budget is simply another step in the process of building a more inclusive society, which began after GE2011.

Page: 20

In 2008, during the Budget debate, I called upon the Government to abandon the "growth at all cost" economic policy and I am glad that in February 2012, the first Budget after GE 2011, the Minister for Finance heeded this call and started talking about an "Inclusive Growth" strategy – which is economic growth that will benefit more Singaporeans – and it has adopted this approach since then in all the four Budgets. It has been four years since this change of mindset has taken place, resulting in many positive impact on many Singaporeans.

The tremendous increase in infrastructure and development spending from about $10 billion in 2009 to $19.5 billion in 2015 and the projected goal of spending close to 19.5% of the GDP on development expenditure will, hopefully, solve all the infrastructure problems facing our hospitals and transport system. I am confident that in four to five years, infrastructure issues, including housing, will not be a major bugbear for Singaporeans. Because the Government is forward-looking, there has also been greater focus on creating opportunities for future generations, so that our young see a sense of "Hope and Opportunity" in their own country.

And what are the changes that have happened? Because of the rapid rise of cost in the last 20 years, lagging wage increases, we saw a cross-section of Singaporeans become structurally unemployed or under-employed. They just could not be reskilled to match the jobs that were created. This resulted in short-term, transitional issues that needed to be addressed by policy changes which resemble those of a welfare state – where the Government has moved in to plug the gaps created in the area of depressed wages, healthcare affordability and to generally help low- and middle-income Singaporeans cope with the cost of living.

How has the Government achieved this? By redistributing Government earnings to help those facing difficulties in coping with the higher cost of living. For all Singaporeans, the Government has focused on helping families cope with the cost of education through subsidies for childcare, kindergarten, as well as top-ups to children's individual accounts to help them pay for some of the enrichment programmes which will otherwise be less affordable to them.

The other short-term and medium-term policies that have been put in place include CHAS for medical care, Workfare Income Supplement (WIS), which is now a permanent feature, regular CPF top-ups and utility rebates are also forms of transitional Government help to help the short-term issues.

Budget 2015 also addresses the plight of middle-income Singaporeans, who have been called the "sandwiched class". In addition to childcare and kindergarten subsidies, this Budget has also introduced a one-time tax rebate, which I hope can become a permanent

Page: 21

feature in future Budgets, and also the reduction in the levy for foreign domestic helpers to help middle-income Singaporeans.

What about the longer term solutions put in place by the Government? For the long term, the key focus of the Government is to create well-paying jobs by building a good environment to attract quality investments.

SkillsFuture is an initiative introduced this year that gives every Singaporean a chance to upskill, while the focus on ASPIRE will help us create an environment where everyone is valued for his or her skill and given a well-deserved compensation that affords them a comfortable life here in Singapore. This, together with the policy introduced in Budget 2014, called the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF), will ensure that Singaporeans will not be unfairly treated by employers who may try to hire younger and lower paid foreign workers.

MediSheld Life, to be implemented later this year, is a relief for all Singaporeans that they will always have good and affordable healthcare. This, coupled with the huge increase in the number of hospital beds and new hospitals coming on board, should assure all Singaporeans that their healthcare will be taken care of as they grow older.

The Progressive Wage Model (PWM) policy to mandate a minimum wage for some categories of workers is a good start for a long-term minimum wage system that will assure Singaporeans that they will always earn enough to support their families as cost continues to rise here in Singapore. We should expand this to cover all low-wage Singaporeans.

Many prominent members of society have called on the Government to implement a national minimum wage. The business community has, in general, been reluctant in allowing wages to increase across the board, citing increases in business costs. This is a fair argument. Increasing wages would certainly lower margins of businesses. Despite these arguments, the Government has courageously begun the implementation of sector-specific minimum wages, through the Progressive Wage Model.

The Progressive Wage Model, however, does not provide a comprehensive longer term solution that we need. Some companies have gotten around this model by reclassifying their jobs in the two sectors affected, while employers in sectors not covered by the Progressive Wage Model have little incentive to redesign their jobs.

A Singaporean earning very low wages – who has a family to support – cannot cope with unrealistically low salaries, no matter which sector they work in. Having considered that, I think that we should formalise a national wage system so that Singaporeans are more self-

Page: 22

sufficient and do not have to rely on regular Government interventions for them to cope.

Retirement and older Singaporeans. Without doubt, taking care of older Singaporeans has been one area where we can say the Government has done an excellent job in. Starting with the Pioneers aged 65 and above last year, who were given the Pioneer Generation Package (PGP) for healthcare needs, they now worry less about falling ill and being able to afford medical treatment. This is also a relief for family members who have to worry less about supporting their pioneer parents and grandparents, who mostly earned much lower wages and have much less savings compared to those who are working today.

The many changes to the CPF scheme, the regular CPF top-ups for older Singaporeans and the Government paying 6% interest for the first $30,000 of savings in the Retirement Savings account, announced this year, are all useful to help us build sufficient retirement savings.

The Silver Support Scheme, soon to be implemented, will help all lower income Singaporeans today have an assurance that they will get some help from the Government when they retire so that they do not feel disadvantaged by the huge income gap that we see today here in Singapore.

The long-term sense of well-being is a very important thing for us to build a sense of national identity. As long as we keep adopting this "Inclusive Growth" strategy that we started in 2012, I am sure we will do the right things to improve the lives of Singaporeans. We need to keep focusing on building infrastructure ahead of time, keep housing and public transport affordable in the long term, valuing all skills – not just academic excellence – and be willing to pay better for these skills so that not only those with good academic grades get paid better.

Over the past 10 years, some people have thought that the PAP Government has lost the plot in governing Singapore. As we can see from what the Government has done since GE2011, this Government did momentarily get distracted by the "growth at all cost" policy, but it did not lose the plot. Today, the Government has addressed many of the concerns that Singaporeans had.

At least for me, I am seeing that the Government is now addressing many of those concerns and, in a few years' time, we will see the full impact and feel the difference of living more comfortably here in Singapore.

While I am happy that we are heading in the right direction and have made good progress, there are some areas that we can still work on. No one is perfect. One area, I think,

Page: 23

that we should continue to focus on is affordable housing. This will also help us build, among Singaporeans, a strong sense of stakeholdership in the country.

Would this Government consider removing the salary ceiling and providing first-time Singaporean home buyers a substantial housing grant, say, $50,000? This grant should be over and above the existing grants, but would come with one clause. First-time home buyers who utilise this grant will only be able to sell their properties back to the HDB. The HDB would buy back these homes at inflation adjusted prices, less the straight line depreciation for the years of occupancy. Every Singaporean should be allowed to buy at least one HDB flat, no matter what size of the flat, at a very affordable price.

National identity. Last year, I wrote about the erosion of our national identity and the urgent need for the Government to refocus on rebuilding it. I feel that as long as the Government focuses on "Inclusiveness" and on "Singaporeans First", we will have a chance of building a stronger national identity for our future Singaporeans.

National identity results in a greater sense of ownership and responsibility towards nation-building and we need to energise our young to feel the sense of ownership and responsibility. I am very sure that if we continue to focus on the inclusive growth approach and put in place measures that make each Singaporean feel that this is their home and not a hotel and that citizenship is a matter of pride to want to continue to build a better future for subsequent generations of Singaporeans, we would have succeeded in building a stronger national identity. I urge the Government to spend more in future Budgets focusing on this exercise of building the Singapore national identity.

In conclusion, at the end of the day, if every Singaporean can feel that their life today has become better than it was yesterday, then this Government would have done its job well. I am confident that we are heading in the right direction.

Let me conclude by speaking about a letter I received from a young Singaporean. After delivering my speech at the White Paper debate in 2013, I received an email from a young Singaporean lady who was leaving Singapore for university in Australia. She highlighted her various concerns and worries and her sense of disassociation with Singapore.

She had four main areas of concern. As a far-sighted lady, she worried about her employment prospects as she grew older. She was worried that she would be replaced by younger, faster, cheaper foreigners. She was also concerned that with the ever rising number of foreigners coming to work in Singapore, our infrastructure would be unduly stressed. She worried about the eroded sense of belonging that she and her friends felt and their view that

Page: 24

the Government was more interested in luring foreigners than bringing Singaporeans home.

She said that friends and relatives asked if she planned to stay in Australia after her graduation. In 2013, she was unsure of her answer. I hope that today, in 2015, having seen all the policy changes implemented by this Government, she is encouraged and can say with conviction that she is going to return to her home, to Singapore.

I call on this young lady and all young Singaporeans studying overseas, "Come back to your home, be part of our nation building for the next 50 years and more. This is your home! This is our home!" Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I support the Budget.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker, for this opportunity to speak on the Budget delivered by Deputy Prime Minister Tharman on 23 February 2015.

Like many who have spoken before me, I applaud this year's Budget. Together with Budget 2013 and Budget 2014, this year's Budget completes the holistic coverage of assistance, incentives and provisions for Singaporeans of all ages – from the young and young adults who are studying or starting their careers, through to the middle-aged employees who are thinking of changing their careers or starting their own businesses, as well as Singaporeans who are in their golden years.

For this year's Budget, I am particularly heartened by the greater focus on income redistribution, assistance and recognition for alternative pathways in education and careers, as well as lifelong opportunities and provisions for learning, training and upgrading of skills. These signal the Government's commitment to greater equitability to ensure equal opportunities remain for all Singaporeans.

While I appreciate the extent of coverage and assistance of this year's Budget, I wish to surface three proposals for consideration by the Government when implementing the programmes and schemes presented in the Budget.

First, SkillsFuture. The full suite of SkillsFuture scheme is a welcome move for Singaporeans as it lays a clear pathway of learning, training and employment opportunities throughout one's career.

The SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme is useful for our Polytechnic and ITE graduates to gain relevant work experience and training that will lead to industry qualifications. However, may I propose that university graduates or even undergraduates,

Page: 25

also be included in this programme? Particularly, I would like to propose that Singaporean University students from general degree or less-specialised programmes, such as Science or Arts in our local Government-funded universities, as well as locally-based private universities, be included in this programme.

I have met University graduates from general degree programmes or less-specialised programmes who face difficulty in being employed as they may not always be seen to have the relevant or required industry skills or qualifications. If the SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme can be extended to such Singaporean University students, even while they are still undergraduates, it will certainly prepare them better in terms of employability.

The SkillsFuture Leadership Development Initiative is another scheme that I applaud. This initiative will help to identify and groom Singaporeans with the capabilities and potential to develop the right skills and experience and hone their leadership proficiencies. However, may I ask, is this initiative meant only for our local SMEs? Will MNCs also be able and encouraged to implement this initiative?

The reason I ask is because although largely anecdotal, I am sure we have heard from Singaporeans working in some MNCs that they have observed instances where those who are promoted or given leadership opportunities tend to be of the same race or ethnic backgrounds as the reporting or senior officers who usually tend to be foreigners and who are in positions of influence or power in these MNCs. Despite provisions by the Government to ensure equal opportunities and fairness in hiring and promotion, such as through TAFEP, MOM's Fair Consideration Framework and non-discriminatory hiring policies, these instances are still observed and felt by some Singaporeans. I urge the Government to create as wide a coverage as possible by including both the SMEs and MNCs. I look forward to the details of the SkillsFuture Leadership Development Initiative.

Second, stay-at-home-mothers (SAHMs), SkillsFuture and CPF. SAHMs is another group of Singaporeans I would like to make a pitch for under the SkillsFuture scheme. Based on 2014 data, the proportion of female Singaporeans and PRs who are employed seems to be on the uptrend from 2011 through to 2013, from the age group 25 years old and above. For the age group of 25 to 39 years old, more than 80% of our women are employed. This is encouraging. However, the numbers fall to below 80% for the age group 40 years old and above.

As our women become more highly-educated, have higher earning power, and marry and have children later, taking time off from work to be a stay-at-home-mother is increasingly an option. However, we recognise that the employment sector is a very dynamic

Page: 26

one and work skills evolve rapidly.

Hence, the SkillsFuture Credit will be useful for stay-at-home mothers to finance their work skills-related courses while they are still stay-at-home mothers and before they return to the workforce. May I confirm that this will certainly be so for our stay-at-home-mothers? In addition, may I propose that the SkillsFuture Credit be made transferable between spouses and among family members? Hence, stay-at-home-mothers who need to undergo more intensive training can do so by utilising their husbands' SkillsFuture Credit, while stay-at-home-mothers who do not need the SkillsFuture Credit at that point in time, can transfer their credit to their husbands or other family members who can then utilise them.

Here, I would also like to propose that the SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme be extended to stay-at-home-mothers who are returning to the workforce and who would like to equip themselves with current skills, experience and industry qualifications and that this programme can be extended to our stay-at-home-mothers on a part-time basis so that they can gradually return to the workforce.

For many stay-at-home-mothers, their CPF accounts do not receive any contributions during the time they are not working. Husbands who are gainfully employed and older children who are working can be encouraged to make voluntary top-ups or transfers to the CPF accounts of their wives or mothers. These top-ups should be made flexible and can be made from the husband's or children's CPF Ordinary Accounts and into the wife's or mother's CPF Ordinary or Medisave Accounts. The flexibility to transfer or top-up to one's Medisave Account will certainly help when MediShield Life premium payments kick in.

Third, on older Singaporeans and CPF contributions. I support the increased CPF contribution rates for older workers announced in this Budget. The 1% increase for each employer and employee contribution will be useful in helping Singaporeans to continue to save for retirement.

While I recognise that increasing CPF contribution rates for older workers may also create the adverse effect of making it less attractive for employers to continue to employ older Singaporeans, the reality is that our society is ageing. We will be working over more years as we are expected to live longer.

It is expedient to ask the Government to extend the 37% total CPF contribution to those aged 50 to 55, from up to age 50 only currently. It is also expedient to ask the Government to extend more Special Employment Credit to employ older workers. However, the onus is not just on the Government to give or provide more. Employers also need to re-look their

Page: 27

hiring policies, specifically in retaining older workers beyond 50 years old.

It used to be that when someone tells you they are 50 years old, you may think the person is considered "old". But now, a 50-year-old is considered still young, with about 30 more years to live on average and can be economically active for at least another 15 years!

I hope that, in time, employers would be able to make that adjustment to retain older workers and eventually fully embrace the extended full 37% CPF contribution to beyond 50 years old for their workers. At this juncture, Mdm Speaker, please allow me to speak in Malay.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I truly applaud the 2015 Budget because it presents the medium-term and long-term planning for Singaporeans of all backgrounds and capabilities.

The ultimate focus of this Budget is to provide support for skills and human capital upgrading, as well as lifelong learning. In my view, this is the main path for us as a nation with limited natural resources so that we can maintain our global competitiveness.

I am excited with the SkillsFuture scheme because I believe that many among our Malay/Muslim community can benefit from the schemes and incentives provided. I hope that we will not miss the opportunity to hone our skills and continue our education while enriching our work experience in an ever-changing world.

The SkillsFuture scheme also emphasises that a University degree is not the only path to success, to upgrade our skills and to find a better life for ourselves and for our families.

One role model is Mr Mustafa Lambak, who, I believe, many of us have already known through advertisements about Skills Upgrading and Lifelong Learning. Just like Mr Mustafa, we can also become good role models for our children so that we can inculcate in them the spirit of hard work, never giving up and to continue to pursue our dreams to improve our abilities and skills, regardless of age or background, as the saying goes, "Like father, like son".

At the same time, I would also suggest that the Government provide full waiver of fees for all Singaporean students who are studying full-time in mainstream schools or in private schools in Singapore and those who are sitting for the GCE "O", "N" and "A" level examinations, at least for the first time.

One particular example will be our students who are in the full-time madrasahs. This is one of the concerns of the Malay Members of Parliament from the People's Action Party as

Page: 28

well as our Malay/Muslim community.

This suggestion is similar to the provision of the Edusave fund for all Singaporean students. I believe that no Singaporean student should be left behind in pursuing their dreams through educational opportunities.

(In English): To conclude, Mdm Speaker, I am very heartened by this year's Budget, which complements the incentives, assistance schemes and provisions of the preceding years' Budgets.

Nonetheless, I hope the Government would consider the few proposals that I have made today, as we implement the schemes and programmes announced. With that, Mdm Speaker, I support the Budget.

Mdm Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I would like to thank the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance, Mr Tharman, for crafting a Budget that is comprehensive and full of compassion. I am heartened to see that this year's Budget gives priority and emphasis on helping the less fortunate, as well as supporting and reducing the burden on the middle-income group.

The funds for education and learning are one way to provide assurance that the Government is very concerned and that it believes that lifelong learning is a rewarding investment because our people are the most important resource to Singapore.

I applaud this year's Budget because it focuses on the welfare of the elderly and demonstrates the Government's commitment to take care of them in their twilight years.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The interest rate for the first $30,000 in CPF will be increased to 6%. This news is very inspiring. I would like to ask the Government how the CPF Board is going to pay for this higher interest rate. Where will the money come from?

Now that we have such a high interest rate, surely my residents are very happy about it. If the economic situation allows, the housewives should take this opportunity to encourage their spouse or children to top up their Special and Retirement CPF accounts and

Page: 29

save for the future. I hope the Government can provide more rebates to Singaporeans to encourage them to top up the CPF accounts of their family members who have no jobs.

In the area of preschool education, the Government is going to introduce a new Partner Operator Scheme. We are all looking forward to it. I hope this scheme can ensure that the school fees are kept at affordable levels. The details are yet to be announced. I hope this scheme will benefit not just the operators; the most important thing is for the parents to benefit directly. In the past, whenever the Government increased the subsidies, the operators will increase the school fees in tandem and the parents did not receive any benefits. I hope this time round, the parents' burden can be lessened by reduced school fees.

In addition, the Government will also do away with the examination fees. For poor families, this will greatly relieve their burdens. Talking about examination fees, I remember when I was in Secondary school, I needed to pay examination fees for taking national examinations. My father had no money and had to borrow from our relatives. Our relatives not only did not lend to him, but said, "Daughters don't need to go to school, because daughters will be married out of the family in the future, like water thrown out". Many years have passed and I still remember that incident. I really appreciate our education system, because better education can narrow the gap between the rich and the poor.

In the area of housing for the sandwiched class, I hope the Government can raise the family income ceilings so that more middle-income families will have the opportunity to buy HDB flats or ECs. Because of family income ceilings, some young couples are forced to buy private properties. Besides their own children, some young couples also need to look after their aged parents or grandparents; the mortgage to buy a private property has created a heavier financial burden on them.

Next, I am going to talk about petrol tax. Many residents have asked me why the Government is raising the petrol tax at this time. They are afraid that once the petrol tax is increased, the petrol companies will take the opportunity to increase the petrol prices and this may further cause other prices to rise, too. And as expected, as soon as the petrol tax is raised, the petrol companies raised the price of various grades of petrol. Who says that Singapore companies have low efficiency? The petrol price hike is higher than the petrol tax increase. One company even increased the diesel price whose tax is not even raised! When interviewed, their spokesman said, "The petrol price depends on many factors, such as the storage cost, land cost and international fuel price." These are just excuses. Did their earlier price not include all these factors already? What is more, the international oil price has been declining all this while. The petrol companies must have made a lot of money.

Page: 30

We all know that what these petrol companies are doing is what we call "looting during a fire"; as my residents put it, "They just increase the price, willy nilly".

Next, I would like to talk about our SMEs.

(In English): Mdm Speaker, our businesses are disappointed with this Budget because they are facing a lot of challenges on the tightening of manpower. They thought that they can get some help from this Budget. The only consolation they have is the levy deferment.

Because our country is not big, we need to have foreign workforce supplementing where we are short of, if we are to help our economy keep pace with the changing global economy. They are necessary in sectors that often experience shortages of manpower, either because locals do not want to do the jobs or they lack the skills.

It is prudent that the Government, working closely with the trade associations of each sector, study how best to increase productivity and also their manpower needs. Many sectors will need more hand-holding if the Government can point them to the right direction and more productive work processes and practices which are proven in other countries, I am sure many of our companies would like to embrace the call for productivity.

A one-size-fits-all solution will not work across the board, as every sector has different challenges and the nature of the jobs is varied. For example, companies that produce goods or services for export, can we give them more foreign workers as they bring in foreign revenues? And for those companies in, for example, ship-repairing, ship-building, they are saying that without manpower how are they going to compete with companies overseas?

But let us not only think of foreign workforce in the field of manual work. There are some skilled personnel that we are in great need of, such as healthcare professionals and trained pre-school educators. There are insufficient teachers to meet the demand and grooming local educators takes time. In the meantime, a short-term solution to this crucial problem is hiring capable, qualified teachers from abroad.

In Taiwan, the pre-school teachers are bilingual and place great emphasis on environment cleanliness in their teachings, a valuable concept that should be imparted to children at a young age. We should, therefore, carefully take in more of such foreign workers who can add value to our society.

I am glad to note that the Government will be giving greater support and funding for SMEs to try out new ideas and venture abroad. But we should not put them on a boat with

Page: 31

some rations and then expect them to sail the high seas.

I believe there would be government-to-government projects we can offer great opportunities for SMEs to participate in and to gain international exposure. Opportunities for such projects should be open to SMEs and not just GLCs like Jurong Consultants and Surbana. I believe SMEs, if given the chance and guidance, will be able to perform just as well.

Give our local contractors opportunities to do local projects so that they can build up their capability. These days, many big Government projects are still awarded to foreign contractors. I am not asking for a protectionist policy, but we should promote buy-Singapore products and services first. If our local companies can do it, we do not need to give it to foreign contractors. The Government should lead by example.

If our companies cannot win local projects, how would they stand a chance to venture overseas? I urge the Government to give them the boost they need. Our local construction industry, if properly developed, has great potential to venture overseas because there are lots of infrastructure projects overseas.

Additionally, many SMEs require transport to run their businesses, but they cannot compete with the big businesses in bidding for COEs, for example. I hope the enhanced Early Turnover Scheme can help them to continue to be able to afford a vehicle. I am eagerly awaiting details for improvements to the scheme.

Regardless of the sector, continuous education and training are always necessary to promote growth, be it at the individual or company level. SkillsFuture Credit is a good concept and the financial commitment from the Government is a clear indication that being less well-off should not stop one from improving your skills to seek a better future and contribute to our economic success.

However, more must be done to instil a mindset change in Singaporeans, from employees to employers, to respect craftsmen and all workers, regardless of whether they are white collar or blue collar workers. We should not be biased towards academic grades. Currently, almost everybody wants to be managers, CEOs. How many of us are willing to dirty our hands? Indeed, we need more skilled craftsmen, artisans, welders, builders, technicians, electricians, plumbers and so on.

We should pursue lifelong learning because of our own interest, because of our job requirements, that is, we can do our work more effectively and efficiently, not just for that

Page: 32

piece of paper qualification.

Besides the MOE and WDA, ITE, Polytechnics and Universities should have more modular courses to meet the needs of the workforce. We need to offer a greater variety of courses so that we can reinforce the notion that education is for everybody at any level, not just those who are academically-inclined.

Learning how to fish to be self-sufficient is an important rule of life that should be ingrained in every Singaporean. We learn continuously to become the masters of our future.

As employees are making the effort to upgrade themselves, similarly, employers must open up. They, too, must set aside resources to groom employees and give them the opportunity to move up the ladder and, eventually, perhaps, to lead the company. Why must we always look outside when companies are looking for CEOs? Are foreigners necessarily better than Singaporeans? Perhaps, they can speak and present better!

Last but not least, Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance Mr Tharman has shared that development expenditures will grow to $30 billion by 2020. Investing in infrastructure is the right thing to do. Not every government can afford to do so without borrowing money, without printing money. Only a prudent and caring government like ours is capable of doing it.

We have read of countries which are struggling with their budgets and their deficits. Here, we are fortunate to have taken a balanced approach over the years in managing the economy. Because of this, today, we are able to give a good spread on the Budget menu to provide for the people. It is a Government that will not fall prey to populist rhetoric and yet it is not insensitive to sensible feedback from the people to build a fair and inclusive society. We must give credit to our Government.

Mdm Speaker, if every Singaporean is constantly learning new things to improve ourselves, if every company gives their employees the recognition and opportunity, I see a lot of hope in the future. I support this Budget, a future-ready Budget.

Mdm Speaker, a major theme of this year's Budget revolves around preparing Singapore and Singaporeans for the future. The two aspects of the Budget that are the focus of my speech are SkillsFuture and, more briefly, the inclusion of Temasek in the Net Investment Returns Framework. On both fronts, the Government has considerable

Page: 33

experience to call upon and Singapore is not starting from a zero base.

First, SkillsFuture. As a national philosophy, upgrading of skills and lifelong learning are not a new phenomenon. Almost 35 years ago, then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew announced at the 1979 National Day Rally that the Skills Development Fund would be set up, compelling employers to pay a percentage of wages into the Skills Development Fund, as recommended by the National Wages Council. A month later, Minister for Finance Hon Sui Sen informed Parliament that the introduction of a Skills Development Levy was a necessary intervention, as the Singapore economy had to be upgraded and restructured promptly for Singapore to move up the economic value chain.

The Skills Development Levy Act of 1979 legislated skills upgrading primarily at low-level workers but also included mid-level workers and managers, too, with some, especially those involved in technology work, sent overseas for training in the early 1980s. Since the Skills Development Levy was introduced in 1979, an entire eco-system of training and skills upgrading has been part of the governance firmament in Singapore.

Lifelong learning is also not a new phenomenon. The Lifelong Learning Endowment Fund was first announced by then-Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong in the year 2000 to promote and support lifelong learning in Singapore and to provide assistance and opportunities for Singaporeans to meet the needs of a knowledge-based economy and cope with the threat of structural unemployment.

Last year, during Budget 2014, it was announced that the Fund would be topped up by $500 million, bringing the Fund size up to a total of $4.6 billion. A decade later, by 2010, the National Productivity Fund was launched with a $1 billion injection. This year's Budget will see another injection of $1.5 billion into the Fund.

Over the years, the Workforce Skills Qualifications framework, a key component of the Continuing Education and Training (CET) system, allowed Singaporeans to improve their qualifications in various industries, from certificate up to diploma level, and even graduate diplomas for certain industries. In industries where there has been an acute shortage of skilled professionals, the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) has even introduced scholarships at the post-graduate level, thus providing opportunities for professionals who wish to upgrade themselves further. There are currently 34 WSQ frameworks covering the manufacturing and services sectors, such as precision engineering, aerospace, retail, hospitality, community and social services, financial services, infocomm and logistics, some of which have also been identified under SkillsFuture initiatives, in particular, Earn and Learn.

Page: 34

When the Skills Development Levy Act was amended in 2008 to cover all employees, including those earning more than $2,000 a month, in a functional way, the seeds were sown for SkillsFuture, with the Skills Development Levy acting as the primary tool to better support the CET system supporting all workers, regardless of age, skill or education level, to upgrade and seize new opportunities as they progress in their careers.