[h=2]Issue is why PAP insist on changed position when there was
none[/h]
June 4th, 2014 |
Author: Contributions
Jurong GRC MP and Minister of State for National
Development Desmond Lee. He is the son of former cabinet minister Lee Yock Suan
I refer to the 31 May 2014 Straits Times letter “Issue is whether WP changed
position on foreign workers” by Minister of State Mr Desmond Lee.
Mr Lee argued that in the case of WP, the need for time to master
policymaking doesn’t apply to the fundamental principles of honesty and
integrity. Mr Lee is mistaken; WP doesn’t need time to master honesty and
integrity as it already is head and shoulders above PAP in these areas.
Mr Lee questioned whether WP had changed its position on foreign workers and
whether it has acknowledged that change. He questioned the honesty, transparency
and accountability of Mr Low and his colleagues and referred to PM Lee
supposedly pointing out the falseness of Mr Low’s claim that WP had not
flip-flopped that was supposedly recorded in parliament reports. Mr Lee is wrong
again as parliament reports do not record any flip flop by WP. It is wishful
thinking on the part of Mr Lee and PM Lee that WP had flipped flopped because it
had not. WP was the first to honestly tell the parliament about the problem of
excessive immigration at a time when most PAP members didn’t. This speaks
volumes about the honesty of WP vis-a-vis PAP. Subsequently when PAP went into a
knee jerk scramble to stranglehold the inflow, WP again honestly told parliament
about the problem of such knee jerk reaction.
Mr Lee must understand that examples abound where warning about too much
first then warning against any sudden change are not at odds with each other.
For example:
• Warning about the obesity of a man who weighs 300 kg is not at odds with
warning him not to shed too much weight too quickly as that might kill him
• Warning about the overheating of the engine is not at odds with warning
against dousing it with ice cold water to quickly cool it as the sudden and
extreme temperature change might stress the engine instead
• Warning about the excessive altitude of an airplane is not at odds with
warning against too sudden a descent as that might stress the airframe or cause
discomfort to the passengers
• Warning about the high speed of a car is not at odds with warning against
suddenly braking the car as the vehicle behind might not brake in time and end
up crashing into the car
Hence, WP’s warning about too much at first and too fast later are not at
odds with each other, are not flip flops of each other. Mr Lee’s caution about
Singapore’s future being dependent on constructive politics, honesty and
integrity of politicians should therefore be applied on himself and his party
first because insisting there was flip flop when there was none is neither
constructive, honest nor exemplificative of integrity.
PAP and WP argue over immigration issue
I refer too to the 31 May 2014 Straits Times article “PAP and WP argue over
immigration issue”.
Mr Cedric Foo demanded that Mr Chen Show Mao state whether he would welcome
immigrants and whether he would rally Singaporeans to support bringing in
immigrants given there will be 900,000 Singaporeans above 65 years old and that
families are getting smaller.
Mr Foo need not have been so worried. The government has been assuring us
time and again that our CPF system is the best in the world and sufficient to
meet our retirement needs:
• In other words, the CPF system is designed to cater fully for the
retirement needs of those who are below middle-income, while at the same time,
cater significantly for the retirement needs of the middle income
group.
Speech by Mr Tan Chuan-Jin Minister of State (Manpower and National
Development) At The Retirement Conference “Improving Retirement Security in
Singapore” At Hilton Hotel, Singapore On 12 April 2012 At 9:15 am
• Ultimately, the CPF allows us to have peace of mind because you do have a
constant stream of income at the point of retirement and it ensures that will
continue, rather than you having to depend on someone else or the
state
Straits Times, CPF provides peace of mind: Chuan-Jin, 30 May 2014
• SINGAPORE’S Central Provident Fund (CPF) scheme has been named one of the
top 10 pension systems in the world, among the likes of countries such as
Denmark and Sweden.
Straits Times, CPF scheme among top 10 pension systems in
the world, 7 Oct 2013
• Mr Tharman said: “The results of the study are an important validation of
the CPF.”
Straits Times, CPF provides comfortable post-retirement income:
Study, 20 Sep 2012
More importantly, Mr Tan Chuan Jin explained how our CPF system solves the
problem of an ageing population and shrinking workforce:
• Many countries do the same through a pension system. They collect taxes or
get citizens to contribute to a social security fund. This pooled monies is then
paid out to citizens who reach a certain age. However, many of these systems are
facing challenges, because those who are young are now paying for the old. As
most countries age, there are fewer and fewer young people paying for more and
more aged people. The status quo cannot hold. Either taxes will have to rise, or
old people will get a lower and lower pay-out. The pension payout age is also
being increased. In Singapore, we have the CPF. Rather than pool all our monies
together, every individual saves for his own retirement via his personal
individual CPF account. We contribute monthly into the account … We then make
sure this CPF account grows at a reasonable interest rate without risk.
Mr Tan Chuan Jin, The Truth About Our CPF and the Minimum Sum, 25 May
2014
In other words, what Mr Tan was saying is that since each and every one of us
will be paying for our own retirement needs through our individual CPF accounts,
we avoid the issue of a shrinking pool of young people supporting a larger pool
of aged people faced by other countries. Mr Foo was thus unduly worried about
the 900,000 Singaporeans above 65 years and a shrinking workforce, because no
matter how many Singaporeans are above 65 years old or how small our workforce
is, CPF is the answer. Conversely, if we have to worry about population ageing
and a shrinking work force despite our CPF, does it not suggest that CPF was
never the silver bullet it is touted to be?
Mr Arthur Fong then took issue with Mr Chen’s supposed prevarication on Mr
Foo’s question. Actually, if Mr Fong were to view past videos of Mr Chen’s
replies in parliament, they have always been slow and deliberative. There is no
evidence that Mr Chen’s latest reply was significantly slower than his previous
ones. There is no evidence that Mr Chen prevaricated this time.
Thank you
Ng Kok Lim
[1] Straits Times, Issue is whether WP changed position on foreign workers,
31 May 2014, Minister of State Mr Desmond Lee
IN THE article (“Exchange raises questions on role of opposition”; Thursday),
assistant political editor Robin Chan said some people may see the Workers’
Party (WP) as a “small party that is still growing, still finding its way, and
which needs to be given time”, that “the WP cannot yet match the PAP in terms of
depth and breadth in policymaking, and perhaps also in vision”, and that
“eventually, the WP, to be a truly credible opposition in Parliament, must be
held to the high standards of politics that Mr Lee (Hsien Loong) spelt
out”.
The WP may indeed need time to master the depth and breadth of
policymaking, but surely that argument cannot apply to the fundamental
principles of honesty and integrity.
In Prime Minister Lee’s exchange with Mr
Low Thia Khiang in Parliament on Wednesday, the issue was less about the merits
of the WP’s foreign worker proposals, and more about whether the WP had changed
its position on foreign workers, and if so, whether it had acknowledged and
explained this change.
In other words, whether Mr Low and his colleagues had
been honest, transparent and accountable to Singaporeans.
Mr Low maintained
that the WP had not flip-flopped. But as PM Lee pointed out, this is false, and
the truth is recorded in the Parliamentary Reports.
Singapore’s future and
well-being depend on political parties practising constructive politics and our
politicians upholding honesty and integrity. If a party does not value honesty,
transparency and accountability from the very start, it is unlikely to become
honest, transparent and accountable one day.
[2] Straits Times, PAP and WP argue over immigration issue, 31 May 2014
THE People’s Action Party (PAP) and the Workers’ Party (WP) tussled over
immigration again, two days after a fiery debate between their party
leaders.
Backbenchers sparred over the subject of foreign workers yesterday,
albeit on a far less feisty note than the exchanges between Prime Minister Lee
Hsien Loong and WP leader Low Thia Khiang on Wednesday.
PAP’s Mr Cedric Foo
(Pioneer) pressed WP’s Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied GRC) on whether he felt
immigrants were necessary to deal with Singapore’s ageing population. This came
after Mr Chen’s speech, which focused on successful ageing in
Singapore.
Replying with pauses in between, Mr Chen said the focus should
still be on “the growing of a resident workforce”.
He added: “When targets we
set for the growth in our resident working population… are not met, then I think
at that time foreign workers may be… increased so that we’re on a path to growth
as we have planned.”
But Mr Foo took issue with this, stressing that he was
asking specifically about the flow of immigrants into the country.
“There
will be 900,000 Singaporeans above the age of 65 and families are getting
smaller… we do need immigrants and I’d like Mr Chen’s comment on whether he
welcomes immigrants and whether he would rally the support of Singaporeans to
bring about these immigrants,” he said.
Mr Chen said the WP has “nothing
against immigrants coming to Singapore”, but also is in favour of “orderly
growth within limits”.
Mr Foo pursued his point but this time, Mr Low jumped
in and said the WP is “not an anti-immigration party”.
He added: “We welcome
Jurong GRC MP and Minister of State for National
Development Desmond Lee. He is the son of former cabinet minister Lee Yock
Suan.
foreign talent but talent, real talent, not immigrants who are taking away the
jobs of Singaporeans or taking away opportunities that Singaporeans could have
been better served.”
Mr Low also stressed the need to keep a strong Singapore
core. He argued that with immigrants coming in, it would be too simplistic to
assume “they will integrate with Singapore and Singaporeans”.
Later, PAP’s Mr
Arthur Fong (West Coast GRC) hit out at Mr Chen, saying he had “prevaricated on
Mr Foo’s question on immigrants”. Mr Chen pointed out that he was himself an
immigrant, and said helping older workers stay productive would help to grow
Singapore’s workforce and prevent an over-reliance on immigrants and foreign
workers.
none[/h]
Jurong GRC MP and Minister of State for National
Development Desmond Lee. He is the son of former cabinet minister Lee Yock Suan
I refer to the 31 May 2014 Straits Times letter “Issue is whether WP changed
position on foreign workers” by Minister of State Mr Desmond Lee.
Mr Lee argued that in the case of WP, the need for time to master
policymaking doesn’t apply to the fundamental principles of honesty and
integrity. Mr Lee is mistaken; WP doesn’t need time to master honesty and
integrity as it already is head and shoulders above PAP in these areas.
Mr Lee questioned whether WP had changed its position on foreign workers and
whether it has acknowledged that change. He questioned the honesty, transparency
and accountability of Mr Low and his colleagues and referred to PM Lee
supposedly pointing out the falseness of Mr Low’s claim that WP had not
flip-flopped that was supposedly recorded in parliament reports. Mr Lee is wrong
again as parliament reports do not record any flip flop by WP. It is wishful
thinking on the part of Mr Lee and PM Lee that WP had flipped flopped because it
had not. WP was the first to honestly tell the parliament about the problem of
excessive immigration at a time when most PAP members didn’t. This speaks
volumes about the honesty of WP vis-a-vis PAP. Subsequently when PAP went into a
knee jerk scramble to stranglehold the inflow, WP again honestly told parliament
about the problem of such knee jerk reaction.
Mr Lee must understand that examples abound where warning about too much
first then warning against any sudden change are not at odds with each other.
For example:
• Warning about the obesity of a man who weighs 300 kg is not at odds with
warning him not to shed too much weight too quickly as that might kill him
• Warning about the overheating of the engine is not at odds with warning
against dousing it with ice cold water to quickly cool it as the sudden and
extreme temperature change might stress the engine instead
• Warning about the excessive altitude of an airplane is not at odds with
warning against too sudden a descent as that might stress the airframe or cause
discomfort to the passengers
• Warning about the high speed of a car is not at odds with warning against
suddenly braking the car as the vehicle behind might not brake in time and end
up crashing into the car
Hence, WP’s warning about too much at first and too fast later are not at
odds with each other, are not flip flops of each other. Mr Lee’s caution about
Singapore’s future being dependent on constructive politics, honesty and
integrity of politicians should therefore be applied on himself and his party
first because insisting there was flip flop when there was none is neither
constructive, honest nor exemplificative of integrity.
PAP and WP argue over immigration issue
I refer too to the 31 May 2014 Straits Times article “PAP and WP argue over
immigration issue”.
Mr Cedric Foo demanded that Mr Chen Show Mao state whether he would welcome
immigrants and whether he would rally Singaporeans to support bringing in
immigrants given there will be 900,000 Singaporeans above 65 years old and that
families are getting smaller.
Mr Foo need not have been so worried. The government has been assuring us
time and again that our CPF system is the best in the world and sufficient to
meet our retirement needs:
• In other words, the CPF system is designed to cater fully for the
retirement needs of those who are below middle-income, while at the same time,
cater significantly for the retirement needs of the middle income
group.
Speech by Mr Tan Chuan-Jin Minister of State (Manpower and National
Development) At The Retirement Conference “Improving Retirement Security in
Singapore” At Hilton Hotel, Singapore On 12 April 2012 At 9:15 am
• Ultimately, the CPF allows us to have peace of mind because you do have a
constant stream of income at the point of retirement and it ensures that will
continue, rather than you having to depend on someone else or the
state
Straits Times, CPF provides peace of mind: Chuan-Jin, 30 May 2014
• SINGAPORE’S Central Provident Fund (CPF) scheme has been named one of the
top 10 pension systems in the world, among the likes of countries such as
Denmark and Sweden.
Straits Times, CPF scheme among top 10 pension systems in
the world, 7 Oct 2013
• Mr Tharman said: “The results of the study are an important validation of
the CPF.”
Straits Times, CPF provides comfortable post-retirement income:
Study, 20 Sep 2012
More importantly, Mr Tan Chuan Jin explained how our CPF system solves the
problem of an ageing population and shrinking workforce:
• Many countries do the same through a pension system. They collect taxes or
get citizens to contribute to a social security fund. This pooled monies is then
paid out to citizens who reach a certain age. However, many of these systems are
facing challenges, because those who are young are now paying for the old. As
most countries age, there are fewer and fewer young people paying for more and
more aged people. The status quo cannot hold. Either taxes will have to rise, or
old people will get a lower and lower pay-out. The pension payout age is also
being increased. In Singapore, we have the CPF. Rather than pool all our monies
together, every individual saves for his own retirement via his personal
individual CPF account. We contribute monthly into the account … We then make
sure this CPF account grows at a reasonable interest rate without risk.
Mr Tan Chuan Jin, The Truth About Our CPF and the Minimum Sum, 25 May
2014
In other words, what Mr Tan was saying is that since each and every one of us
will be paying for our own retirement needs through our individual CPF accounts,
we avoid the issue of a shrinking pool of young people supporting a larger pool
of aged people faced by other countries. Mr Foo was thus unduly worried about
the 900,000 Singaporeans above 65 years and a shrinking workforce, because no
matter how many Singaporeans are above 65 years old or how small our workforce
is, CPF is the answer. Conversely, if we have to worry about population ageing
and a shrinking work force despite our CPF, does it not suggest that CPF was
never the silver bullet it is touted to be?
Mr Arthur Fong then took issue with Mr Chen’s supposed prevarication on Mr
Foo’s question. Actually, if Mr Fong were to view past videos of Mr Chen’s
replies in parliament, they have always been slow and deliberative. There is no
evidence that Mr Chen’s latest reply was significantly slower than his previous
ones. There is no evidence that Mr Chen prevaricated this time.
Thank you
Ng Kok Lim
[1] Straits Times, Issue is whether WP changed position on foreign workers,
31 May 2014, Minister of State Mr Desmond Lee
IN THE article (“Exchange raises questions on role of opposition”; Thursday),
assistant political editor Robin Chan said some people may see the Workers’
Party (WP) as a “small party that is still growing, still finding its way, and
which needs to be given time”, that “the WP cannot yet match the PAP in terms of
depth and breadth in policymaking, and perhaps also in vision”, and that
“eventually, the WP, to be a truly credible opposition in Parliament, must be
held to the high standards of politics that Mr Lee (Hsien Loong) spelt
out”.
The WP may indeed need time to master the depth and breadth of
policymaking, but surely that argument cannot apply to the fundamental
principles of honesty and integrity.
In Prime Minister Lee’s exchange with Mr
Low Thia Khiang in Parliament on Wednesday, the issue was less about the merits
of the WP’s foreign worker proposals, and more about whether the WP had changed
its position on foreign workers, and if so, whether it had acknowledged and
explained this change.
In other words, whether Mr Low and his colleagues had
been honest, transparent and accountable to Singaporeans.
Mr Low maintained
that the WP had not flip-flopped. But as PM Lee pointed out, this is false, and
the truth is recorded in the Parliamentary Reports.
Singapore’s future and
well-being depend on political parties practising constructive politics and our
politicians upholding honesty and integrity. If a party does not value honesty,
transparency and accountability from the very start, it is unlikely to become
honest, transparent and accountable one day.
THE People’s Action Party (PAP) and the Workers’ Party (WP) tussled over
immigration again, two days after a fiery debate between their party
leaders.
Backbenchers sparred over the subject of foreign workers yesterday,
albeit on a far less feisty note than the exchanges between Prime Minister Lee
Hsien Loong and WP leader Low Thia Khiang on Wednesday.
PAP’s Mr Cedric Foo
(Pioneer) pressed WP’s Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied GRC) on whether he felt
immigrants were necessary to deal with Singapore’s ageing population. This came
after Mr Chen’s speech, which focused on successful ageing in
Singapore.
Replying with pauses in between, Mr Chen said the focus should
still be on “the growing of a resident workforce”.
He added: “When targets we
set for the growth in our resident working population… are not met, then I think
at that time foreign workers may be… increased so that we’re on a path to growth
as we have planned.”
But Mr Foo took issue with this, stressing that he was
asking specifically about the flow of immigrants into the country.
“There
will be 900,000 Singaporeans above the age of 65 and families are getting
smaller… we do need immigrants and I’d like Mr Chen’s comment on whether he
welcomes immigrants and whether he would rally the support of Singaporeans to
bring about these immigrants,” he said.
Mr Chen said the WP has “nothing
against immigrants coming to Singapore”, but also is in favour of “orderly
growth within limits”.
Mr Foo pursued his point but this time, Mr Low jumped
in and said the WP is “not an anti-immigration party”.
He added: “We welcome
Jurong GRC MP and Minister of State for National
Development Desmond Lee. He is the son of former cabinet minister Lee Yock
Suan.
foreign talent but talent, real talent, not immigrants who are taking away the
jobs of Singaporeans or taking away opportunities that Singaporeans could have
been better served.”
Mr Low also stressed the need to keep a strong Singapore
core. He argued that with immigrants coming in, it would be too simplistic to
assume “they will integrate with Singapore and Singaporeans”.
Later, PAP’s Mr
Arthur Fong (West Coast GRC) hit out at Mr Chen, saying he had “prevaricated on
Mr Foo’s question on immigrants”. Mr Chen pointed out that he was himself an
immigrant, and said helping older workers stay productive would help to grow
Singapore’s workforce and prevent an over-reliance on immigrants and foreign
workers.
