PRESS RELEASE 30/08/2010
The Reform Party www.thereformparty.net
The Reform Party’s Response to the PM’s National Day Rally Speech
The Reform Party was disappointed with the PM’s speech. This was an opportunity for the PM to address some of the pressing issues facing this country and his failure to do so has demonstrated once again that our government is out of touch with the people. Here is the Party’s view on some of these issues and our proposed solutions. Economic performance
The PM praised Singapore’s economic performance this year. However this has been built on the back of a vigorous US recovery, which is now fading fast. Singapore’s performance is just a leveraged version of what most of the other Asian economies have experienced. Given that imports subtracted 2.4% from US GDP growth in the last quarter it is clear that we are fast approaching the limits of what can be achieved by reliance on US demand. There are few signs that Asia has replaced the US as a source of final demand. So we can expect a dramatic slowdown in growth for the second half of this year and perhaps even a technical recession where growth is negative over two quarters.
And let’s remember that while unemployment may have been contained Singapore workers have suffered real wage cuts that are a long way from being restored.
The wage guidelines for next year of a 3% pay rise would still be lower than expected inflation of 3-4%. In other words real wages will continue to fall.
The Reform Party is of the view that our level of net saving is unnecessarily high and we would do more to stimulate domestic consumption by reducing taxes or increasing transfer payments to the less well-off.
Foreign worker/Immigration policies
Buried in the PM’s speech was the eye-opening detail that 400,000 Singaporeans (or about 20% of the domestic labor force) are receiving workfare of an average $1,000 each (most of which goes into CPF). This is the segment of the population which has suffered most from the PAP’s open-door foreign worker policy, yet there were no policy measures announced to help them.
The PM relied on isolated anecdotes to downplay the level of anti- foreign worker sentiment that threatens to spill over into xenophobia. He provided no reassurances on immigration policy and no evidence of how the PAP policies have benefitted the ordinary Singaporean or older retrenched workers. The folksy stories of aunties do however concur with our experience that Singaporeans are not xenophobic by nature but have been pushed that way by PAP policy.
The Reform Party supports the policy of allowing easy access to foreign workers with special skills, but we should ultimately be looking to provide Singaporeans with the skill sets to take their place over the longer term. We do not agree that this country needs foreign workers to compete directly with Singaporeans on all levels of the workforce.
It is difficult to see how Microsoft’s need for skilled software engineers translates into the necessity of having foreign chambermaids or shop assistants. Nor indeed why any MNC (such as Microsoft) if it lacks skilled engineers should not reciprocate for the benefits of being based in Singapore, by running training courses to bring our local engineers up to the specification that they require. It is difficult to see why we should fight so hard to retain industries that employ 80-90% foreign workers as it just increases the competition for domestic inputs whose supply is inelastic, such as land.
The Reform Party is pleased that the PM has responded to our call for the need to raise productivity. Unfortunately PAP policies such as the current excessively liberal foreign worker policy are antithetical to productivity growth as they only serves to keep cost of labour low. The government has yet to show any real commitment or clear cut long term strategy to increasing productivity.
National Service
The only concrete initiative was to reward NS men with a grant of $9,000. Few details were provided other than to say that it could be used to pay for further education (which the Reform Party would make free for NS men) and for housing (where sky-high prices are the result of deliberate government policy in restricting the supply of land and growing the population at an unsustainable rate).
The Reform Party believes that $9,000 in a restricted account does not come close to reflecting the economic cost Singaporean NS men face with two years of lost earnings.
Furthermore, the PM said that future education fees will have to rise, presumably to cover this additional expense.
The Reform Party continues to propose, in this regard:
Lower taxes for NS men
Obligation on foreign students on Singapore scholarships wishing to work here to serve NS
Cutting the NS period down to a year at maximum within 5 years
A target for zero death in training
Education
On education, the Reform Party has repeatedly called for a reduction in the weighting given to PSLE in order to provide a more holistic education. We have also called for an abolishment of streaming at the early stages of education, between N levels and O levels as we want to offer opportunities for late bloomers who do poorly at PSLE to move up if they do well.
The party is disappointed with the PM’s 30% target for enrollment and his excuses for not expanding further. Again the PAP demonstrate their inability to formulate any long term innovative strategy for increased enrollment in institution where learning is targeted at the skills required in the workforce. The Reform Party has also called for the need to increase the percentage of university enrolment up to advanced nation standards.
The PM failed to touch on any measures that would ensure all of Singapore’s children receive an equal right to an education, including the physically challenged, those with learning difficulties, or other issues such as familial economic hardship.
Conclusion
It is interesting to see yet again how much Reform Party thinking is now reflected in Government policy but this begs the question of why we need a PAP government in the first place. In response, I reproduce below the Reform Party’s 19 policy pledges so the electorate can judge who has the welfare of ordinary Singaporeans at the heart of their policies. It is all very well to talk of the Singapore spirit but this is a government which continues to insist on running Singapore as a business and has downgraded Singapore from Sovereign Nation status to International city status.
Our Pledges
Providing Cheaper and Better Lower-Income Housing by releasing more land for house-building and allowing the private sector a greater role
Universal health insurance to be funded through current CPF contributions replacing current Medisave and Medishield schemes
Basic Old Age Pension payable to all provided they have worked and paid into CPF for a sufficient number of years
Reform of CPF to make contributions above those necessary to fund health and unemployment insurance and basic pension voluntary
Universal child benefit scheme (as part of Guaranteed Minimum Income) to replace current tax breaks that heavily favour women on higher incomes
Guaranteed Minimum Income for those in work to replace current Workfare system and to be integrated with child benefit and tax system
A Minimum Wage to encourage businesses to raise productivity
Reforms to Foreign Worker Policy to ensure that business gets the skilled labour it needs but that our own citizens come first
Reductions in or exemptions from GST for certain categories of goods like food that form a higher proportion of total expenditure for those on median incomes and below
Universal free and compulsory education from pre-school through to secondary level
Expanded university enrolment and increased investment in improving quality of education for everyone
Increased assistance for older workers and women re-entering the labour market to retrain and acquire new educational qualifications
Reduction in NS to 18 months initially with aim to reduce it to one year as soon as feasible
Requirement for new citizens and PRs to do NS or to pay lump sum tax instead
Privatization of Temasek and GIC and distribution of equity to Singaporean citizens of more than five years standing
Continuing Business and Foreign Investment Friendly Environment coupled with low tax rates
Greater help and support for local SMEs to grow world-class companies
Abolish restrictions on freedom of expression to encourage creativity and innovation necessary for a 21st century knowledge-based economy
Reduce waste and inefficiency in government starting with slashing ministerial salaries and replacing it with performance-linked earnings tied to indicators directly related to your welfare
Released by Kenneth Jeyaretnam on behalf of the Reform Party, August 30th 2010
I-A-I-A…, 4 September 2010
in light of present economic situation is that increasingly volatile, does NS help or hinter men from reaching financial stability? that is what i am asking…
the fortunes of the alternative parties depend on the ruling party. & its fair to say PAP has been delivering the promise of better lives (for most) for decades in the past. naturely, people did not support the alternative parties back then. anyway, why dwell in the past when PAP was such a different entity?
in the past:
- PAP did improve the lives of its people,
- HDB homes were affordable, now they’re “affordable”,
- people did not have to compete tooth & nail with foreigners for jobs, a place in school, personal space, etc…
- town councils did not hoard $$$.
the only thing that has remained nearly the same for most people is salaries…
i have already pointed out possibilities why they are not joining hands. i am not affilliated with any party to speak on their behalf, i am merely expressing the possibilities i deduce.
@mice is nice
pardon my ignorance, but how does NS actually hinders men from reaching financial stability? I am currently still in the duty of serving my NS liability, but I dun see where it hinders my career or financial status. i am living with my family, with 2 young boys, 3 and 1 and my parents. I started work after i completed my NS and work through the ranks in the company. I haven’t had an issue about going for NS and affecting my career. I would appreciate if you would share with me any examples of NS being a hinderance in someone’s career and family planning.
i see your point in why the opposition parties are not joining hands, and this is exactly what is frustrating for me as a Singaporean that the ruling party is not being given a run for their money. I have seen instances where very strong candidates have given a good challenge to the MPs in the district but to eventually fall due to the dilution of support to a 3rd candidate running in the same district. if they had joined hands, results would be different. But like you said, it’s easier said than done. with each party interested in only running their own campaigns, the likelihood of the ruling party getting an upset is UPSETTING…
The opposition must consult Sun Tzu, an accurate knowledge is vital, or else it will be a PR excercise.
The new citizens will probably vote for PAP gratefully and ensure they are very welcome.
It is definitely a good idea that company’s employing foreign workers put up a plan on how it is going to train local workers so that that do not need foregin workers within 18-24 months depending on the complexity of the job, to attain the same productivity rates.
I-A-I-A…, 4 September 2010
i think you are too narrowly focusing this discussion on yourself. if you keep on talking about your situation & thinking that your situation represents the majorities’ view. you are just like the insensitive pappies…
let’s here it from the masses online here…
http://sg.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100831193531AAxJG2T
how each alternative party decides it’s up to them, if you are that upset about how they run things. perhaps the logical step for you is to be involved by joining them?
you live in your own world where you expect things to pan out the way you wished, & get upset when things dun. but the world does not revolve around you alone. your lack of empathy renders most discussion pointless.
*sigh*
Alex Har, 5 September 2010
i highly doubt the foreigners are willing to train locals if they know they will be shipped out. if the foreigners are made to leave by a certain deadline leaving locals not properly trained, companies will just take the easy way & blame the locals for not being up to scratch. give them poor performance review & maybe fire them in the end…
if MM is that great he too would have spotted the real talents who are passionate about civil service. he too would have trained them so well they will be an extension of his greatness, but as many now know this is not the case lah…
@mice is nice
focusing the discussion on myself is to speak from self experience, unlike those who think they know what the rest are feeling or thinking and try to use the response from the rest as a base for their argument.
Knowing what the rest think and feel is one thing, but to discuss issues thinking you understand what the rest are thinking is another matter all together.
Have you read the response on the forum you highlighted to me? How many actually makes logically sense? Not wanting to do NS if given a choice.. the guy writing about the loss of CPF contribution during his NS… just to name a few. Seriously, who is willing to sacrifice that 2 years for the good of our country. If everyone choose not to serve NS when given a choice, we would probably be long gone from being a red dot on the planet.
I for one can only speak for what I have seen or felt, if you think you are qualified to speak for the masses, you can have your place..
I-A-I-A…, 6 September 2010
going by your experience you simply denounce the issues others are facing? just because your NS experience did not hinter your career in any way does not mean others are as fortunate.
if NS did not hinter careers the slightest bit, there would not be those negative comments in the link i posted above. have you wondered why? how people feel & think are in those posts, no doubt many are rants, but maybe you should ponder why there are rants in the 1st place…
i wasn’t about to discuss the issues those forumers posted in that forum, the link was a request from you to show how (directly or indirectly) NS commitment hinders careers, the ground sentiments if you will.
i can only wonder why you even use the word “sacrifice”?…
there are problems you dun see, maybe because you are not facing them? like i mentioned before, you lack empathy… like you have mentioned in your earlier post (quote):
“I am currently still in the duty of serving my NS liability, but I dun see where it hinders my career or financial status.”
@mice is nice
Agreed is that sacrifice is a big word to use here, but where would Singapore be if NS is not imposed onto the nation? We do not have enough volunteers to protect the country like the other big countries..
People only rant about what they missed during the time they serve NS. what about if nobody have to serve NS? what economy or country is there to even speak about..
I think its hard to reduce NS to 1-1.5 years. Maybe they can consider to include women for NS if shortage of manpower.
andrew leung I agree with your comment.
In this day and age of gender equality, when women can rise to the highest positions in government, business and academia, there is no reason why women should be exempt from national service. They don’t have to serve on the front but there are many things they can do to help in times of war.
Women in Israel (on which the Singapore system is partly based) have long served in their reserve forces.
I-A-I-A…, 6 September 2010
ehh?…
so do you agree that NS commitment does have negative consequences on career prospects for a fraction (putting things more accurately?) of men?
if there was no conscription? that’s a very big “if” IMPO… that would be highly unlikely, how about prodding the highly paid scholars to think of ways to minimise the negative effects of NS commitment?
NS commitments, economy, family commitments, etc, are all linked, directly or indirectly. its really the govt’s duty to formulate solution & policies that strikes a good balance. as of now, the various agencies are acting with little or no co-ordination.
there was a classic arcade game where you use a mallet to hit critters popping out of holes- this is so like problem with the govt…
posting a link about army song to share. hee…
http://www.mrbrownshow.com/2010/09/03/the-mrbrown-show-oh-army-music-video/
cheers all! ^.^