Connect with us

Current Affairs

NSP's Secretary General Lim Tean calls on the govt to implement a minimum wage for a level playing field for Singaporeans

Published

7 years ago

on

On 1 May 2017, the annual Labour Day event organised by Transitioning.org was braced with seven speakers. The theme for this year’s event was ‘Jobs for Singaporeans first’, with all the speeches revolving around the labour market and prioritising Singaporeans for jobs.

Putting Singaporeans first

In his speech, National Solidarity Party’s Secretary General, Mr Lim Tean, broached on the subject of the regular Singaporean’s competition with foreign labour, and the issue of Singapore’s non-existent policy of a minimum wage.
Quoting from Mr Tan Kin Lian, Mr Lim said, “We must not be the silent crowd. We are all here today because we recognise there is a problem in the economy”.
Echoing the complaints of Singaporeans, Mr Lim said that it is up to the citizens of Singapore to advocate for change and to call on the government to give Singaporeans the priority in jobs. In 2015, Mr Lim said, 98% of total employment went to foreign workers and only 700 jobs were jobs for the Singaporean worker. “When that Singaporean worker loses the job, what our ministers don’t see is the despair on the face of the Singaporean worker,” Mr Lim added.
In 2016, according to a release by MOM, it was reported that 99.7% of jobs created in 2015 went to foreigners. According to MOM, out of the 31,800 jobs created, only 100 or 0.3% were taken up by Singaporeans and PR with the rest by foreign workers and domestic workers. MOM attributed the poor growth in jobs to sluggish global economic conditions and slower growth of the Singapore economy and tightened supply of foreign manpower.

“Work Fair, ComCare, Job Fairs. [The govt] has all the fairs in the world, except to give Singaporean workers fair wage and a fair job. The Singaporean low income worker is forever tight to the apron strings of the government. He has no dignity, and cannot make it on his own.”

Comparing Singapore to Australia, Mr Lim described how Singapore is the only advanced country in the world where there are no government protection at all for Singaporean workers. “Less than two weeks ago, the Australian Prime Minister Malcom Turnbull said [that] when Australia tightens its 457 visa policies, it is Australians job first, foremost for Australians”.

Mr Lim also took reference from the recent report of three National Service defaulters being sentenced to jail. The Singapore government, Mr Lim said, wanted Singaporean men to be proud and loyal to its country. “Can that Singaporean worker not demand a certain loyalty from his government?” Mr Lim asked.

Three men had their jail sentences increased in a hearing from the High Court for defaulting their NS duties. Ang Lee Thye, who was given a 24 months jail term, had his jail term raised to 33 months for defaulting on enlistment for 23.5 years.

Brothers Sakthikanesh Chidambaram, 26, and Vandana Kumar Chidambaram, 24, had defaulted for more than five years and more than three years respectively.
The former sentence was three weeks’ imprisonment for Sakthikanesh and a fine of S$6,000 for Vandana last year, but due to an appeal by the prosecution last year, the High Court increased their sentences to 10 weeks jail term for Sakthikanesh and seven weeks jail term for Vandana. The S$6,000 fine will be refunded.
Quoting from Amy Khor, a Member of Parliament (MP) representing the single-member constituency of Hong Kah North, Mr Lim expressed his disagreement with her arguments for not putting Singaporeans first as it will not be beneficial to the economy in the long run.
In 2015, Ms Khor had said that it is “populist” to suggest that jobs be reserved for Singaporeans first.
Ms Khor was responding to a suggestion by the Singapore People’s Party (SPP) candidate whom she is contesting against, Ravi Philemon, who had called for better protection of jobs for Singaporeans, and for citizens to be given priority for all jobs.
Mr Ravi had said at the launch of his manifesto for the SMC that the government’s Fair Consideration framework was “not enough” to secure jobs for Singaporeans.

“I cannot think of a single advanced country in the world that has the policies or the non-policies which Singapore has,” Mr Lim said in response to the government’s inaction on not protecting Singaporeans first.

On minimum wage

Reiterating what Mr Tan Kin Lian said in his earlier speech, Mr Lim added that without a minimum wage, there cannot be a level playing field for Singapore’s low income workers.
New Zealand introduced the first minimum wage laws in the late 1800s, Mr Lim said, insisting that the arguments against minimum wage, whether in the 1900s or during the present day, is completely ‘hogwash’.
Before breaking down the income of Singapore’s senior state ministers, Mr Lim cited Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s implementation of a basic minimum wage of 25 cents in 1938 during the recession.
Mr Lim said in his speech that Mr Roosevelt’s response to his opponents is still apt today – Mr Roosevelt had said, “Don’t let those calamity howling executives with an income of $1,000 a day tell you that paying a wage of $11 a week will destroy American industry.”
After pointing out that a senior minister of state in Singapore earns $770,000 a year, while a mayor earns $660,000 a year, and a member of parliament earns $192,500 a year, meaning that they would be earning at least three thousand to four thousand a day, Mr Lim said,
“You don’t allow those ministers who earn at least three to four thousand dollars a day tell you that they cannot afford to pay Singaporeans at least one thousand two hundred to one thousand five hundred a month.”
Mr Lim added that 15% of our population has a household income of less than one thousand dollars, which is below the poverty line.
“At the end of the day, this is not Xenophobia, this is not populism, it comes back to a world which all of us can understand – it is called ‘community’. We are the Singapore community,” Mr Lim said before ending his speech.
[iframe id=”https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Ftheonlinecitizen%2Fvideos%2F10155331810416383%2F&show_text=0&width=560″]  

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Current Affairs

Hotel Properties Limited suspends trading ahead of Ong Beng Seng’s court hearing

Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has halted trading ahead of his court appearance today (4 October). The announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at about 7.45am, citing a pending release of an announcement. Mr Ong faces one charge of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts and another charge of obstruction of justice. He is due in court at 2.30pm.

Published

1 day ago

on

4 October 2024

By

SINGAPORE: Hotel Properties Limited (HPL), the property and hotel developer co-founded by Mr Ong Beng Seng, has requested a trading halt ahead of the Singapore tycoon’s scheduled court appearance today (4 October) afternoon.

This announcement was made by HPL’s company secretary at approximately 7.45am, stating that the halt was due to a pending release of an announcement.

Mr Ong, who serves as HPL’s managing director and controlling shareholder, faces one charge under Section 165, accused of abetting a public servant in obtaining gifts, as well as one charge of obstruction of justice.

He is set to appear in court at 2.30pm on 4 October.

Ong’s charges stem from his involvement in a high-profile corruption case linked to former Singaporean transport minister S Iswaran.

The 80-year-old businessman was named in Iswaran’s initial graft charges earlier this year.

These charges alleged that Iswaran had corruptly received valuable gifts from Ong, including tickets to the 2022 Singapore Formula 1 Grand Prix, flights, and a hotel stay in Doha.

These gifts were allegedly provided to advance Ong’s business interests, particularly in securing contracts with the Singapore Tourism Board for the Singapore GP and the ABBA Voyage virtual concert.

Although Iswaran no longer faces the original corruption charges, the prosecution amended them to lesser charges under Section 165.

Iswaran pleaded guilty on 24 September, 2024, to four counts under this section, which covered over S$400,000 worth of gifts, including flight tickets, sports event access, and luxury items like whisky and wines.

Additionally, he faced one count of obstructing justice for repaying Ong for a Doha-Singapore flight shortly before the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) became involved.

On 3 October, Iswaran was sentenced to one year in jail by presiding judge Justice Vincent Hoong.

The prosecution had sought a sentence of six to seven months for all charges, while the defence had asked for a significantly reduced sentence of no more than eight weeks.

Ong, a Malaysian national based in Singapore, was arrested by CPIB in July 2023 and released on bail shortly thereafter. Although no charges were initially filed against him, Ong’s involvement in the case intensified following Iswaran’s guilty plea.

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) had earlier indicated that it would soon make a decision regarding Ong’s legal standing, which has now led to the current charges.

According to the statement of facts read during Iswaran’s conviction, Ong’s case came to light as part of a broader investigation into his associates, which revealed Iswaran’s use of Ong’s private jet for a flight from Singapore to Doha in December 2022.

CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.

Upon learning that the flight records had been obtained, Ong contacted Iswaran, advising him to arrange for Singapore GP to bill him for the flight.

Iswaran subsequently paid Singapore GP S$5,700 for the Doha-Singapore business class flight in May 2023, forming the basis of his obstruction of justice charge.

Mr Ong is recognised as the figure who brought Formula One to Singapore in 2008, marking the first night race in the sport’s history.

He holds the rights to the Singapore Grand Prix. Iswaran was the chairman of the F1 steering committee and acted as the chief negotiator with Singapore GP on business matters concerning the race.

 

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

Chee Soon Juan questions Shanmugam’s $88 million property sale amid silence from Mainstream Media

Dr Chee Soon Juan of the SDP raised concerns about the S$88 million sale of Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow at Astrid Hill, questioning transparency and the lack of mainstream media coverage. He called for clarity on the buyer, valuation, and potential conflicts of interest.

Published

2 weeks ago

on

23 September 2024

By

On Sunday (22 Sep), Dr Chee Soon Juan, Secretary General of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), issued a public statement on Facebook, expressing concerns regarding the sale of Minister for Home Affairs and Law, Mr K Shanmugam’s Good Class Bungalow (GCB) at Astrid Hill.

Dr Chee questioned the transparency of the S$88 million transaction and the absence of mainstream media coverage despite widespread discussion online.

According to multiple reports cited by Dr Chee, Mr Shanmugam’s property was transferred in August 2023 to UBS Trustees (Singapore) Pte Ltd, which holds the property in trust under the Jasmine Villa Settlement.

Dr Chee’s statement focused on two primary concerns: the lack of response from Mr Shanmugam regarding the transaction and the silence of major media outlets, including Singapore Press Holdings and Mediacorp.

He argued that, given the ongoing public discourse and the relevance of property prices in Singapore, the sale of a high-value asset by a public official warranted further scrutiny.

In his Facebook post, Dr Chee posed several questions directed at Mr Shanmugam and the government:

  1. Who purchased the property, and is the buyer a Singaporean citizen?
  2. Who owns Jasmine Villa Settlement?
  3. Were former Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and current Prime Minister Lawrence Wong informed of the transaction, and what were their responses?
  4. How was it ensured that the funds were not linked to money laundering?
  5. How was the property’s valuation determined, and by whom?

The Astrid Hill property, originally purchased by Mr Shanmugam in 2003 for S$7.95 million, saw a significant increase in value, aligning with the high-end status of District 10, where it is located. The 3,170.7 square-meter property was sold for S$88 million in August 2023.

Dr Chee highlighted that, despite Mr Shanmugam’s detailed responses regarding the Ridout Road property, no such transparency had been offered in relation to the Astrid Hill sale.

He argued that the lack of mainstream media coverage was particularly concerning, as public interest in the sale is high. Dr Chee emphasized that property prices and housing affordability are critical issues in Singapore, and transparency from public officials is essential to maintain trust.

Dr Chee emphasized that the Ministerial Code of Conduct unambiguously states: “A Minister must scrupulously avoid any actual or apparent conflict of interest between his office and his private financial interests.”

He concluded his statement by reiterating the need for Mr Shanmugam to address the questions raised, as the matter involves not only the Minister himself but also the integrity of the government and its responsibility to the public.

The supposed sale of Mr Shamugam’s Astrid Hill property took place just a month after Mr Shanmugam spoke in Parliament over his rental of a state-owned bungalow at Ridout Road via a ministerial statement addressing potential conflicts of interest.

At that time, Mr Shanmugam explained that his decision to sell his home was due to concerns about over-investment in a single asset, noting that his financial planning prompted him to sell the property and move into rental accommodation.

The Ridout Road saga last year centred on concerns about Mr Shanmugam’s rental of a sprawling black-and-white colonial bungalow, occupying a massive plot of land, managed by the Singapore Land Authority (SLA), which he oversees in his capacity as Minister for Law. Minister for Foreign Affairs, Dr Vivian Balakrishnan, also rented a similarly expansive property nearby.

Mr Shanmugam is said to have recused himself from the decision-making process, and a subsequent investigation by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) found no wrongdoing while Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean confirmed in Parliament that Mr Shanmugam had removed himself from any decisions involving the property.

As of now, Mr Shanmugam has not commented publicly on the sale of his Astrid Hill property.

Continue Reading

Trending