By Jalelah Abu Baker and Lianne Chia, Channel NewsAsia, 2 Jul 2020
Candidates from four political parties that are contesting the most seats in the General Election debated a wide range of issues on Wednesday (Jul 1), including unemployment, helping businesses and social mobility.
Moderated by CNA Digital Chief Editor Jaime Ho, candidates from three opposition parties - the Workers’ Party (WP), Progress Singapore Party (PSP) and Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) - as well as the incumbent People’s Action Party (PAP), took part in the debate that was broadcast "live" on Wednesday.
The show was split into two segments. In the first segment, the candidates were given the chance to respond to three questions on several topics.
In the second segment, the candidates were given time to ask one another questions in a structured sequence.
Minister for Foreign Affairs Vivian Balakrishnan represented the PAP, while the WP was represented by economist Jamus Lim. The SDP's representative was its chief, Mr Chee Soon Juan, and the PSP was represented by Mr Francis Yuen, a former Republic of Singapore Air Force colonel.
Invitations to participate were sent immediately on Tuesday after the nomination process ended and the number of seats being contested by each party was confirmed.
SEGMENT 1: DEALING WITH RISING UNEMPLOYMENT
In the first segment of the hour-long programme titled "Singapore Votes 2020 – The Political Debate", the three opposition candidates were each given one-and-a-half minutes to respond to questions from Mr Ho, while the PAP was given four-and-a-half minutes.
The candidates were asked how their parties would deal with rising unemployment, create jobs for Singaporeans young and old and improve the lives of Singaporeans despite the bleak economic outlook here and around the world.
Responding first, Mr Yuen, who is contesting in Chua Chu Kang GRC, noted that “a lot” of foreign professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) - about 400,000 - work here, while more than 100,000 of local PMETs are jobless.
”We believe that we need foreign PMETs to complement but we do believe that there is opportunity for us to slow it down,” he said.
In a clarification issued on Thursday morning, the Ministry of Manpower said Mr Yuen's figure of 100,000 local unemployed PMETs is incorrect. There were 39,000 local unemployed PMETs as of June 2019, according to the labour force report released on Jan 30, 2020, the ministry said.
Mr Yuen also said that another aspect of dealing with the issues raised is making sure that small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) “continue to become a strong engine of growth, the backbone of our economy”.
Dr Lim, who is the WP’s candidate in Sengkang GRC, said: “The Workers' Party believes that it's not just sufficient to have jobs, of course we want jobs, but we want good jobs, jobs that will enable workers to work with dignity, and for that, we have proposed a number of proposals along those lines that we believe improve the quality of work.”
Besides a national minimum wage, the party proposed a “redundancy insurance” that costs S$4 per month, which will then provide employees a payout of 40 per cent of their last-drawn salary for six months after being made redundant.
Dr Chee, in his response, touched on points raised by both Mr Yuen and Dr Lim. Dr Chee is contesting in Bukit Batok SMC.
“We've got to stop this foolishness of continuing to bring in foreign workers, especially PMETs when we have more than 100,000 unemployed people in Singapore,” he said.
He also brought up the SDP’s proposal on retrenchment benefits, and allowing people who have been retrenched to come together to build a viable business plan.
The retrenchment benefits scheme is one of the proposals the SDP made in its "Four Yes, One No" central campaign theme, which also includes suspending the GST until at least 2021, and providing retirees above the age of 65 with a monthly income of S$500.
“You are going to encourage an entrepreneurial class and get Singapore to be a truly innovative society,” he said.
Dr Balakrishnan, who is standing in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC, noted that the COVID-19 crisis is the “greatest crisis of our lifetime”, describing it as not just a global health pandemic, but a deeper depression than even that in the 1930s.
This is why, he said, that the central focus of the PAP’s campaign is jobs. He outlined the support measures the Government had put in place in order to save jobs for Singaporeans in the immediate term, and to provide them with immediate relief, such as the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) and Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme (SIRS).
He added that most of the almost S$100 billion of support announced in the four Budgets this year were focused on keeping companies afloat, in order to keep job opportunities available for Singaporeans.
“It would have been far worse if we didn’t have these emergency measures in place,” he said.
However, he reiterated the need to “look beyond” these emergency measures, pointing out that the “only way” is increasing productivity, upgrading skills and seizing jobs of the future.
“It’s all about creating job opportunities. It means jobs, it means training, it means attachments,” he said, citing examples such as the National Jobs Council led by Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam.
HELPING LOCAL BUSINESSES SURVIVE RECESSION
The candidates were also asked what their parties would do to help businesses survive the recession, ensure that businesses are ready to rebound when the economy picks up, and to "ultimately transform and strengthen the economy".
Dr Lim said that many of the proposals in the party’s manifesto focused on helping to uplift businesses.
“We believe strongly that the vibrancy of businesses actually rests in the SME sector,” he said.
He added that the WP’s manifesto includes keeping commercial and industrial rents low for SMEs to help contain their costs.
Echoing a similar sentiment on costs, the SDP wants to lower rentals, Dr Chee said. "What we need to do is make sure that these rents are controlled,” he said.
He added that foreign worker levies are a “problem”.
”These are fees that businesses, small businesses, medium-sized businesses find very hard to stomach,” he said.
Mr Yuen had similar views about SMEs. “The SMEs are now in the ICU (intensive care unit), so (as) to speak,” he said. While the Government is helping them, he asked how long such help can last.
“We need to be able to create quickly help for them to reinvent their businesses, or if they know the business is not going to survive, they have to do something else. There is no point (in) prolonging the pain,” he said.
In his response, Dr Balakrishnan pointed out “one fundamental hard truth”, that Singapore has nothing which is of “inalienable value” to the rest of the world.
SMEs, he agreed, are crucial. To that end, he stressed that people should consider what the Government has done in the last few months, citing again the JSS - which provided an "avenue to keep SMEs afloat" - but also measures like corporate property tax rebates.
Dr Balakrishnan picked up on Mr Yuen’s analogy of the SMEs in the ICU, and agreed that “you can’t just keep on (being) in (the) ICU”. That is why companies need to transform and look at future opportunities, he said.
“We have supported these digital transformations,” he said, adding that it is “not over yet”.
Dr Balakrishnan cited growth opportunities in various sectors such as healthcare, professional services and infocomm technology.
“These are opportunities of the future and we again need to help our companies transform and get into these high growth fields,” he said.
He also highlighted skills upgrading as a key point. “That is why we have the transformation and growth packages so that not only can our SMEs target these new growth areas but our workers are equipped with the skills for it,” he said.
“Our position as a hub, as a city state where trade is three times our GDP ... We absolutely need to remain open and relevant.”
IMPROVING SOCIAL MOBILITY
In the last question of the first segment, Mr Ho asked: “How would your party improve social mobility; help Singaporeans who feel they've been left behind and ultimately emerge from this crisis stronger and more cohesive as a society?”
In his response, Dr Chee took issue with “elite schools” such as National Junior College and Singapore Chinese Girls’ School being housed in Bukit Timah, with schools like Whitley and Swiss Cottage secondary schools being moved out of the area.
“Education is the great leveller. When you have a system like this, when you put all your neighborhood schools outside of the choices district … you are going to get this widening of not just in society, but ultimately in our income divide and that's not something which we really should be going towards,” he said.
“The other problem is this - we have elderly people not being able to even make ends meet having to sell cardboard,” he said, comparing this with ministers' salaries.
“That is simply not right,” he said.
Mr Yuen said that although Singapore is a first-world country, a “majority of people” are “third-world citizens from a viewpoint of poverty”. He cited data that showed Singapore has more than 100,000 households living in poverty, which works out to about 300,000 people.
“Something is wrong, basically. How can a country, which is so prosperous, end up with this level of poverty?” he asked.
He added that Singapore had an issue of "great income inequality" and that it does not have a "strong social safety net".
His party believes that more money should be spent to "invest" in a strong social safety net, he said.
“We could have taken things like the insurance scheme for health care paid by the Government. That helps to relieve and give them more opportunity to actually, you know, have resources for other things,” he said.
Dr Lim said that a “very big part of social mobility” is ensuring that the Government takes care of people who have already contributed to the economy and society for years.
“It is really a crime that we see the elderly, continue to feel that they have to work in order to have (to) make ends meet,” He reiterated that “elements like a minimum wage” would move the country towards increasing social mobility.
Another way to increase social mobility is to ensure that schools that are not “elite schools” get a “disproportionately higher amount of educational spending”.
He also took issue with decreasing class sizes in schools, as this “ironically ends up penalising students who are in large classes” because they are forced to attend private tuition.
Responding to the points made by the other representatives, Dr Balakrishnan said the Government has focused on uplifting less well-off families.
“We don’t believe in class warfare, we don't believe sucking it to the rich, we believe in lifting - especially the less well-off, the most vulnerable, in order to achieve equality of opportunity that you’re aiming for,” he said.
On the topic of education and schools, he said that it is not a question of “brand name or otherwise”, but rather, making every school a good school.
“Not as a slogan, but looking at the real investments which we put in schools,” he said.
“I dare say every neighbourhood school we have is a school we can be very proud of,” he added. “Anywhere. I’ll take on any country’s schools, as far as we are concerned.”
On vulnerable families, Dr Balakrishnan highlighted the various assistance packages available. He also noted that in times like these, additional assistance - such as GST rebates - are "flowing" to less well-off families.
“I do not like to see seniors having to work unless they want to,” he said. “And every constituency has the capability to make sure we don’t see this.”
However, he stressed that the best form of welfare is a job. “There is nothing more demoralising than long-term unemployment,” he said. “No amount of generous unemployment benefits can compensate for that.”
Pointing to the minimum wage, he said that “we are on the same page”, bringing up the Progressive Wage Model as an example.
“We can argue, I think we agree on the aims, it’s a question of how we achieve it,” he said.
As for seniors, Dr Balakrishnan noted that Singapore has “the best healthcare system in the world” and that it is not a question of “how much we spend but how well we spend”, citing various schemes like the Pioneer Generation Package and the Community Health Assistance Scheme.
“Again, the point here is inclusivity,” he said. “We will not leave anyone behind, we will look after our seniors, we will give them the due dignity that they have.
“But remember that we have not lost our roots and our focus.
“Uplifting people who are vulnerable, jobs and the dignity that comes with jobs, and increasingly in a way that does not erode the competitiveness of our economy as a whole, so that we can continue to create jobs, and good jobs.”
SEGMENT 2: QUESTION AND ANSWER
DR BALAKRISHNAN AND DR LIM
In the second segment of the debate, Dr Balakrishnan was allowed to ask each opposition candidate a question. After their answers, the opposition candidates then put forward their questions to Dr Balakrishnan.
In a lively segment, the candidates shared and rebutted points related to issues such as jobs for locals, population, how some of the parties’ proposals would be funded and the efficacy of the Budgets that the Government provided to deal with the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Dr Balakrishnan said that people have called the WP “PAP lite or PAP-like”, saying that the opposition party uses PAP’s stand as a reference and takes a “half step to the left”.
In all the “little steps left”, he asked how the WP will deal with the trade-off in costs.
Dr Lim said that his party did not object to policy "for the sake of objection". The party has done the math, and acknowledged that the party’s plans do entail a set of trade-offs.
“I think where we fundamentally differ is where we think those trade-offs actually should occur,” he said. PAP tends to side capital, he said, while noting that for every dollar of national income, Singaporean workers receive 42 cents, less than the 55 cents in Japan.
“We think that a re-balance of that kind of share of labour income is ultimately necessary,” he said.
In return, Dr Lim asked Dr Balakrishnan how much the PAP has evaluated the efficacy of its policies.
Dr Balakrishnan said that the Government is funding the policies “not by passing the burden to our children or grandchildren, but from our reserves”, he said.
He added that the country has reserves that can be deployed for "a rainy day" because past generations believed in spending less than they earned, on a recurring basis. “It’s (a) quite right question, efficacy, and we need to measure outcomes,” he said.
DR BALAKRISHNAN AND DR CHEE
The segment also saw an exchange between Dr Balakrishnan and Dr Chee that involved them interrupting each other several times.
Dr Balakrishnan asked Mr Chee how much it would cost to implement the various schemes the SDP is proposing, and how it would be allocated to the taxpayers. “Some of your proposals have got very big holes, in terms of fiscal deficits, so please enlighten us,” he said.
Dr Chee highlighted two of the proposals SDP had made - a retrenchment benefits scheme and providing monthly income for the elderly.
Candidates from four political parties that are contesting the most seats in the General Election debated a wide range of issues on Wednesday (Jul 1), including unemployment, helping businesses and social mobility.
Moderated by CNA Digital Chief Editor Jaime Ho, candidates from three opposition parties - the Workers’ Party (WP), Progress Singapore Party (PSP) and Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) - as well as the incumbent People’s Action Party (PAP), took part in the debate that was broadcast "live" on Wednesday.
The show was split into two segments. In the first segment, the candidates were given the chance to respond to three questions on several topics.
In the second segment, the candidates were given time to ask one another questions in a structured sequence.
Minister for Foreign Affairs Vivian Balakrishnan represented the PAP, while the WP was represented by economist Jamus Lim. The SDP's representative was its chief, Mr Chee Soon Juan, and the PSP was represented by Mr Francis Yuen, a former Republic of Singapore Air Force colonel.
Invitations to participate were sent immediately on Tuesday after the nomination process ended and the number of seats being contested by each party was confirmed.
SEGMENT 1: DEALING WITH RISING UNEMPLOYMENT
In the first segment of the hour-long programme titled "Singapore Votes 2020 – The Political Debate", the three opposition candidates were each given one-and-a-half minutes to respond to questions from Mr Ho, while the PAP was given four-and-a-half minutes.
The candidates were asked how their parties would deal with rising unemployment, create jobs for Singaporeans young and old and improve the lives of Singaporeans despite the bleak economic outlook here and around the world.
Responding first, Mr Yuen, who is contesting in Chua Chu Kang GRC, noted that “a lot” of foreign professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) - about 400,000 - work here, while more than 100,000 of local PMETs are jobless.
”We believe that we need foreign PMETs to complement but we do believe that there is opportunity for us to slow it down,” he said.
In a clarification issued on Thursday morning, the Ministry of Manpower said Mr Yuen's figure of 100,000 local unemployed PMETs is incorrect. There were 39,000 local unemployed PMETs as of June 2019, according to the labour force report released on Jan 30, 2020, the ministry said.
Mr Yuen also said that another aspect of dealing with the issues raised is making sure that small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) “continue to become a strong engine of growth, the backbone of our economy”.
Dr Lim, who is the WP’s candidate in Sengkang GRC, said: “The Workers' Party believes that it's not just sufficient to have jobs, of course we want jobs, but we want good jobs, jobs that will enable workers to work with dignity, and for that, we have proposed a number of proposals along those lines that we believe improve the quality of work.”
Besides a national minimum wage, the party proposed a “redundancy insurance” that costs S$4 per month, which will then provide employees a payout of 40 per cent of their last-drawn salary for six months after being made redundant.
Dr Chee, in his response, touched on points raised by both Mr Yuen and Dr Lim. Dr Chee is contesting in Bukit Batok SMC.
“We've got to stop this foolishness of continuing to bring in foreign workers, especially PMETs when we have more than 100,000 unemployed people in Singapore,” he said.
He also brought up the SDP’s proposal on retrenchment benefits, and allowing people who have been retrenched to come together to build a viable business plan.
The retrenchment benefits scheme is one of the proposals the SDP made in its "Four Yes, One No" central campaign theme, which also includes suspending the GST until at least 2021, and providing retirees above the age of 65 with a monthly income of S$500.
“You are going to encourage an entrepreneurial class and get Singapore to be a truly innovative society,” he said.
Dr Balakrishnan, who is standing in Holland-Bukit Timah GRC, noted that the COVID-19 crisis is the “greatest crisis of our lifetime”, describing it as not just a global health pandemic, but a deeper depression than even that in the 1930s.
This is why, he said, that the central focus of the PAP’s campaign is jobs. He outlined the support measures the Government had put in place in order to save jobs for Singaporeans in the immediate term, and to provide them with immediate relief, such as the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) and Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme (SIRS).
He added that most of the almost S$100 billion of support announced in the four Budgets this year were focused on keeping companies afloat, in order to keep job opportunities available for Singaporeans.
“It would have been far worse if we didn’t have these emergency measures in place,” he said.
However, he reiterated the need to “look beyond” these emergency measures, pointing out that the “only way” is increasing productivity, upgrading skills and seizing jobs of the future.
“It’s all about creating job opportunities. It means jobs, it means training, it means attachments,” he said, citing examples such as the National Jobs Council led by Senior Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam.
HELPING LOCAL BUSINESSES SURVIVE RECESSION
The candidates were also asked what their parties would do to help businesses survive the recession, ensure that businesses are ready to rebound when the economy picks up, and to "ultimately transform and strengthen the economy".
Dr Lim said that many of the proposals in the party’s manifesto focused on helping to uplift businesses.
“We believe strongly that the vibrancy of businesses actually rests in the SME sector,” he said.
He added that the WP’s manifesto includes keeping commercial and industrial rents low for SMEs to help contain their costs.
Echoing a similar sentiment on costs, the SDP wants to lower rentals, Dr Chee said. "What we need to do is make sure that these rents are controlled,” he said.
He added that foreign worker levies are a “problem”.
”These are fees that businesses, small businesses, medium-sized businesses find very hard to stomach,” he said.
Mr Yuen had similar views about SMEs. “The SMEs are now in the ICU (intensive care unit), so (as) to speak,” he said. While the Government is helping them, he asked how long such help can last.
“We need to be able to create quickly help for them to reinvent their businesses, or if they know the business is not going to survive, they have to do something else. There is no point (in) prolonging the pain,” he said.
In his response, Dr Balakrishnan pointed out “one fundamental hard truth”, that Singapore has nothing which is of “inalienable value” to the rest of the world.
SMEs, he agreed, are crucial. To that end, he stressed that people should consider what the Government has done in the last few months, citing again the JSS - which provided an "avenue to keep SMEs afloat" - but also measures like corporate property tax rebates.
Dr Balakrishnan picked up on Mr Yuen’s analogy of the SMEs in the ICU, and agreed that “you can’t just keep on (being) in (the) ICU”. That is why companies need to transform and look at future opportunities, he said.
“We have supported these digital transformations,” he said, adding that it is “not over yet”.
Dr Balakrishnan cited growth opportunities in various sectors such as healthcare, professional services and infocomm technology.
“These are opportunities of the future and we again need to help our companies transform and get into these high growth fields,” he said.
He also highlighted skills upgrading as a key point. “That is why we have the transformation and growth packages so that not only can our SMEs target these new growth areas but our workers are equipped with the skills for it,” he said.
“Our position as a hub, as a city state where trade is three times our GDP ... We absolutely need to remain open and relevant.”
IMPROVING SOCIAL MOBILITY
In the last question of the first segment, Mr Ho asked: “How would your party improve social mobility; help Singaporeans who feel they've been left behind and ultimately emerge from this crisis stronger and more cohesive as a society?”
In his response, Dr Chee took issue with “elite schools” such as National Junior College and Singapore Chinese Girls’ School being housed in Bukit Timah, with schools like Whitley and Swiss Cottage secondary schools being moved out of the area.
“Education is the great leveller. When you have a system like this, when you put all your neighborhood schools outside of the choices district … you are going to get this widening of not just in society, but ultimately in our income divide and that's not something which we really should be going towards,” he said.
“The other problem is this - we have elderly people not being able to even make ends meet having to sell cardboard,” he said, comparing this with ministers' salaries.
“That is simply not right,” he said.
Mr Yuen said that although Singapore is a first-world country, a “majority of people” are “third-world citizens from a viewpoint of poverty”. He cited data that showed Singapore has more than 100,000 households living in poverty, which works out to about 300,000 people.
“Something is wrong, basically. How can a country, which is so prosperous, end up with this level of poverty?” he asked.
He added that Singapore had an issue of "great income inequality" and that it does not have a "strong social safety net".
His party believes that more money should be spent to "invest" in a strong social safety net, he said.
“We could have taken things like the insurance scheme for health care paid by the Government. That helps to relieve and give them more opportunity to actually, you know, have resources for other things,” he said.
Dr Lim said that a “very big part of social mobility” is ensuring that the Government takes care of people who have already contributed to the economy and society for years.
“It is really a crime that we see the elderly, continue to feel that they have to work in order to have (to) make ends meet,” He reiterated that “elements like a minimum wage” would move the country towards increasing social mobility.
Another way to increase social mobility is to ensure that schools that are not “elite schools” get a “disproportionately higher amount of educational spending”.
He also took issue with decreasing class sizes in schools, as this “ironically ends up penalising students who are in large classes” because they are forced to attend private tuition.
Responding to the points made by the other representatives, Dr Balakrishnan said the Government has focused on uplifting less well-off families.
“We don’t believe in class warfare, we don't believe sucking it to the rich, we believe in lifting - especially the less well-off, the most vulnerable, in order to achieve equality of opportunity that you’re aiming for,” he said.
On the topic of education and schools, he said that it is not a question of “brand name or otherwise”, but rather, making every school a good school.
“Not as a slogan, but looking at the real investments which we put in schools,” he said.
“I dare say every neighbourhood school we have is a school we can be very proud of,” he added. “Anywhere. I’ll take on any country’s schools, as far as we are concerned.”
On vulnerable families, Dr Balakrishnan highlighted the various assistance packages available. He also noted that in times like these, additional assistance - such as GST rebates - are "flowing" to less well-off families.
“I do not like to see seniors having to work unless they want to,” he said. “And every constituency has the capability to make sure we don’t see this.”
However, he stressed that the best form of welfare is a job. “There is nothing more demoralising than long-term unemployment,” he said. “No amount of generous unemployment benefits can compensate for that.”
Pointing to the minimum wage, he said that “we are on the same page”, bringing up the Progressive Wage Model as an example.
“We can argue, I think we agree on the aims, it’s a question of how we achieve it,” he said.
As for seniors, Dr Balakrishnan noted that Singapore has “the best healthcare system in the world” and that it is not a question of “how much we spend but how well we spend”, citing various schemes like the Pioneer Generation Package and the Community Health Assistance Scheme.
“Again, the point here is inclusivity,” he said. “We will not leave anyone behind, we will look after our seniors, we will give them the due dignity that they have.
“But remember that we have not lost our roots and our focus.
“Uplifting people who are vulnerable, jobs and the dignity that comes with jobs, and increasingly in a way that does not erode the competitiveness of our economy as a whole, so that we can continue to create jobs, and good jobs.”
SEGMENT 2: QUESTION AND ANSWER
DR BALAKRISHNAN AND DR LIM
In the second segment of the debate, Dr Balakrishnan was allowed to ask each opposition candidate a question. After their answers, the opposition candidates then put forward their questions to Dr Balakrishnan.
In a lively segment, the candidates shared and rebutted points related to issues such as jobs for locals, population, how some of the parties’ proposals would be funded and the efficacy of the Budgets that the Government provided to deal with the fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Dr Balakrishnan said that people have called the WP “PAP lite or PAP-like”, saying that the opposition party uses PAP’s stand as a reference and takes a “half step to the left”.
In all the “little steps left”, he asked how the WP will deal with the trade-off in costs.
Dr Lim said that his party did not object to policy "for the sake of objection". The party has done the math, and acknowledged that the party’s plans do entail a set of trade-offs.
“I think where we fundamentally differ is where we think those trade-offs actually should occur,” he said. PAP tends to side capital, he said, while noting that for every dollar of national income, Singaporean workers receive 42 cents, less than the 55 cents in Japan.
“We think that a re-balance of that kind of share of labour income is ultimately necessary,” he said.
In return, Dr Lim asked Dr Balakrishnan how much the PAP has evaluated the efficacy of its policies.
Dr Balakrishnan said that the Government is funding the policies “not by passing the burden to our children or grandchildren, but from our reserves”, he said.
He added that the country has reserves that can be deployed for "a rainy day" because past generations believed in spending less than they earned, on a recurring basis. “It’s (a) quite right question, efficacy, and we need to measure outcomes,” he said.
DR BALAKRISHNAN AND DR CHEE
The segment also saw an exchange between Dr Balakrishnan and Dr Chee that involved them interrupting each other several times.
Dr Balakrishnan asked Mr Chee how much it would cost to implement the various schemes the SDP is proposing, and how it would be allocated to the taxpayers. “Some of your proposals have got very big holes, in terms of fiscal deficits, so please enlighten us,” he said.
Dr Chee highlighted two of the proposals SDP had made - a retrenchment benefits scheme and providing monthly income for the elderly.
"We’ve put these two together, we’re talking about an annual budget of about S$5 billion dollars,” he said.
"Now compare that to what you’ve signed off this year, nearly S$100 billion dollars,” he added. “Even if the Government did not take in any more revenue, it will take us 20 years for us to spend all that the Budget that you have allocated for just the next year or so.”
In his question to Dr Balakrishnan, Dr Chee said that labour productivity and GDP were going on the “same downward trend”, while unemployment in Singapore was going up. All this, he said, has been happening before the COVID-19 outbreak took place.
The number of S-Pass and Employment Pass holders continues to rise, he added.
“And over and above all this, Mr Heng Swee Keat then comes up to say, in an interview, toys with the idea of bringing our population up to 10 million,” he said.
“Singaporeans are deadly worried about this proposal. Will you categorically tell Singaporeans right now that your party has no intention of raising our population to 10 million by continuing to bring in foreigners – especially foreign PMETs – into Singapore to compete with our PMETs for jobs?”
In response, Dr Balakrishnan said that the Prime Minister’s Office had issued a statement “advising people like you not to indulge in falsehoods”.
At that, Dr Chee interjected, saying that it was Mr Heng that came up with the idea and he would cite the interview he was referring to. Dr Balakrishnan rebutted him, saying that it was a “cheap shot”.
Earlier in the day, the National Population and Talent Division (NPTD), Strategy Group in the Prime Minister’s Office had released a media statement saying that it is not true that the Government is planning to increase the population in Singapore to 10 million. It added that there have been statements circulating on various online platforms about the matter.
“Let me state for the record,” said Dr Balakrishnan. “We will never have 10 million. We won’t even have 6.9 million.”
“The Government doesn’t have a target for the population”, he added. “What we want is a Singapore core that is demographically stable, able to reproduce ourselves, able to create opportunities and jobs for ourselves, and able to stay as a cohesive whole.
“It is not a target, and it is certainly not 10 million, and you are raising a false straw man. That is a false statement. And we have said so and we will say so again.”
DR BALAKRISHNAN AND MR YUEN
In his question to Mr Yuen, Dr Balakrishnan asked if he was aware that almost 60 per cent of Singapore's workforce are in PMET jobs, and that it represented one of the largest percentages in the world.
He also asked Mr Yuen if he was aware that for every one foreign employment pass holder, there are almost seven locals holding a PMET job.
“What else do you want us to do, to fulfil what you started off with as far as PMETs are concerned?” he asked.
Mr Yuen said that “logic would tell us that” local PMETs could fill up some of the jobs.
“The Government ought to be helping them to do the transition of getting the ‘excess’ PMETs to (be) repatriated, and our own PMETs getting back to the job,” he said.
He said that the number of employment passes granted should be limited.
“Granted, we need foreigners to work here, but our position is that we have excessive number of people coming here at the expense of our own local talent,” he said.
Mr Yuen then asked Dr Balakrishnan for the time frame to create 100,000 jobs, and what kind of jobs they will be.
“We want jobs for our citizens, our Singaporeans to be lifelong career,” he said.
To this, Dr Balakrishnan said that the 100,000 job opportunities under the National Jobs Council include jobs, attachments and traineeships, and that they will be created within the next year.
“You talk about lifelong jobs, I'm glad you brought that up. It is about skills,” he said, adding that upskilling is not just for young people, but “people our age, 40 to 60”.
SEGMENT 3: WRAP-UP
In concluding the debate, the candidates were each given a minute-and-a-half to wrap up, with Dr Chee going first.
Summarising the proposals of his party’s “Four Yes, One No” campaign, Dr Chee called for the suspension of GST at least until 2021, implementing a retrenchment benefit scheme, giving retirees above 65 an income of S$500 a month and making sure that SMEs are “front and centre” of driving the economy.
“These are huge issues,” he said. “And how are we going to pay for all these things apart from some of the taxes we want to levy, for example, introduce a wealth tax. And by the way, I just want to alert Dr Balakrishnan that this wealth tax, some of his party members ... MPs, have even agreed with us that some of these things should be implemented.”
WP's Dr Lim said he enjoyed the debate, and pointed out that “this is exactly why debates about ideas for how Singapore should progress should occur” and noted that the PAP “does not have a monopoly on the best ideas on how we should bring society forward”.
"The PAP has argued that this election is really about giving them a mandate to bring the country out of this crisis," he said.
"What we are trying to deny the PAP isn't a mandate. What we're trying to deny them is a blank check. And that is what this election truly is about, so that we can actually have this kind of debate - not in a constrained form over a table - but actually in a forum which was designed for this, which is Parliament," he added.
Mr Yuen agreed with Dr Lim, and said: “We believe that there should be free contest of ideas, alternative solutions and constructive voices in Parliament."
He added that the Government has been “obsessed” with growing the economy while neglecting people.
“Economic growth must be not at all costs. There must be the other side, the compassionate side,” he said.
In wrapping up, Dr Balakrishnan responded in turn to each of the three. He questioned Dr Chee’s proposals on GST, and having a wealth tax or estate duties.
“In all these things, have a care that you are not actually engaging in class warfare and not trying to divide our society,” he said. “I believe Singaporeans remain a united, cohesive people and we want to uplift everyone.
“Don’t indulge in this. Don’t take it out against people who, through no fault of their own, have been somewhat more successful.”
He also agreed with Dr Lim and Mr Yuen that “the PAP does not claim a monopoly on wisdom”, stressing that the PAP is “not afraid of an open contest of ideas”.
“Whatever the outcome of this election, there will be more opposition members in the new Parliament than in the current Parliament,” he said. “These members, whether they win the seats or come in as NCMPs, have full voting rights, including amending the constitution and votes of confidence with or against the Government.
“So we are completely open to this contest, because at the end of the day, we are all Singaporeans.”
He objected to Mr Yuen’s characterisation that there are “many third world people” in Singapore, citing how over the last five years, the median income has gone up by 3.8 per cent, while the real income for the lower 20th percentile has gone up by 4.4 per cent.
“We are completely in agreement with you that we need to raise wages,” he said. “Please be fair in your characterisation."
“The only reason we have foreigners here is to give an extra wind in our sails when the opportunity is there,” he added.
“Now we are in a storm and we need to shed ballast ... 60,000 foreigners have lost their jobs. And the schemes we have rolled out now ... (are) clearly slanted at Singaporeans.”
In concluding, he reiterated what the Government has done to help Singaporeans in the COVID-19 pandemic. But there were already challenges before COVID-19, he said.
“These are the brutal facts of life, so I don’t promise any quick and easy answers,” he said. “The PAP offers honesty, complete transparency, we will take all ideas, we will work with you.”
"Now compare that to what you’ve signed off this year, nearly S$100 billion dollars,” he added. “Even if the Government did not take in any more revenue, it will take us 20 years for us to spend all that the Budget that you have allocated for just the next year or so.”
In his question to Dr Balakrishnan, Dr Chee said that labour productivity and GDP were going on the “same downward trend”, while unemployment in Singapore was going up. All this, he said, has been happening before the COVID-19 outbreak took place.
The number of S-Pass and Employment Pass holders continues to rise, he added.
“And over and above all this, Mr Heng Swee Keat then comes up to say, in an interview, toys with the idea of bringing our population up to 10 million,” he said.
“Singaporeans are deadly worried about this proposal. Will you categorically tell Singaporeans right now that your party has no intention of raising our population to 10 million by continuing to bring in foreigners – especially foreign PMETs – into Singapore to compete with our PMETs for jobs?”
In response, Dr Balakrishnan said that the Prime Minister’s Office had issued a statement “advising people like you not to indulge in falsehoods”.
At that, Dr Chee interjected, saying that it was Mr Heng that came up with the idea and he would cite the interview he was referring to. Dr Balakrishnan rebutted him, saying that it was a “cheap shot”.
Earlier in the day, the National Population and Talent Division (NPTD), Strategy Group in the Prime Minister’s Office had released a media statement saying that it is not true that the Government is planning to increase the population in Singapore to 10 million. It added that there have been statements circulating on various online platforms about the matter.
“Let me state for the record,” said Dr Balakrishnan. “We will never have 10 million. We won’t even have 6.9 million.”
“The Government doesn’t have a target for the population”, he added. “What we want is a Singapore core that is demographically stable, able to reproduce ourselves, able to create opportunities and jobs for ourselves, and able to stay as a cohesive whole.
“It is not a target, and it is certainly not 10 million, and you are raising a false straw man. That is a false statement. And we have said so and we will say so again.”
DR BALAKRISHNAN AND MR YUEN
In his question to Mr Yuen, Dr Balakrishnan asked if he was aware that almost 60 per cent of Singapore's workforce are in PMET jobs, and that it represented one of the largest percentages in the world.
He also asked Mr Yuen if he was aware that for every one foreign employment pass holder, there are almost seven locals holding a PMET job.
“What else do you want us to do, to fulfil what you started off with as far as PMETs are concerned?” he asked.
Mr Yuen said that “logic would tell us that” local PMETs could fill up some of the jobs.
“The Government ought to be helping them to do the transition of getting the ‘excess’ PMETs to (be) repatriated, and our own PMETs getting back to the job,” he said.
He said that the number of employment passes granted should be limited.
“Granted, we need foreigners to work here, but our position is that we have excessive number of people coming here at the expense of our own local talent,” he said.
Mr Yuen then asked Dr Balakrishnan for the time frame to create 100,000 jobs, and what kind of jobs they will be.
“We want jobs for our citizens, our Singaporeans to be lifelong career,” he said.
To this, Dr Balakrishnan said that the 100,000 job opportunities under the National Jobs Council include jobs, attachments and traineeships, and that they will be created within the next year.
“You talk about lifelong jobs, I'm glad you brought that up. It is about skills,” he said, adding that upskilling is not just for young people, but “people our age, 40 to 60”.
SEGMENT 3: WRAP-UP
In concluding the debate, the candidates were each given a minute-and-a-half to wrap up, with Dr Chee going first.
Summarising the proposals of his party’s “Four Yes, One No” campaign, Dr Chee called for the suspension of GST at least until 2021, implementing a retrenchment benefit scheme, giving retirees above 65 an income of S$500 a month and making sure that SMEs are “front and centre” of driving the economy.
“These are huge issues,” he said. “And how are we going to pay for all these things apart from some of the taxes we want to levy, for example, introduce a wealth tax. And by the way, I just want to alert Dr Balakrishnan that this wealth tax, some of his party members ... MPs, have even agreed with us that some of these things should be implemented.”
WP's Dr Lim said he enjoyed the debate, and pointed out that “this is exactly why debates about ideas for how Singapore should progress should occur” and noted that the PAP “does not have a monopoly on the best ideas on how we should bring society forward”.
"The PAP has argued that this election is really about giving them a mandate to bring the country out of this crisis," he said.
"What we are trying to deny the PAP isn't a mandate. What we're trying to deny them is a blank check. And that is what this election truly is about, so that we can actually have this kind of debate - not in a constrained form over a table - but actually in a forum which was designed for this, which is Parliament," he added.
Mr Yuen agreed with Dr Lim, and said: “We believe that there should be free contest of ideas, alternative solutions and constructive voices in Parliament."
He added that the Government has been “obsessed” with growing the economy while neglecting people.
“Economic growth must be not at all costs. There must be the other side, the compassionate side,” he said.
In wrapping up, Dr Balakrishnan responded in turn to each of the three. He questioned Dr Chee’s proposals on GST, and having a wealth tax or estate duties.
“In all these things, have a care that you are not actually engaging in class warfare and not trying to divide our society,” he said. “I believe Singaporeans remain a united, cohesive people and we want to uplift everyone.
“Don’t indulge in this. Don’t take it out against people who, through no fault of their own, have been somewhat more successful.”
He also agreed with Dr Lim and Mr Yuen that “the PAP does not claim a monopoly on wisdom”, stressing that the PAP is “not afraid of an open contest of ideas”.
“Whatever the outcome of this election, there will be more opposition members in the new Parliament than in the current Parliament,” he said. “These members, whether they win the seats or come in as NCMPs, have full voting rights, including amending the constitution and votes of confidence with or against the Government.
“So we are completely open to this contest, because at the end of the day, we are all Singaporeans.”
He objected to Mr Yuen’s characterisation that there are “many third world people” in Singapore, citing how over the last five years, the median income has gone up by 3.8 per cent, while the real income for the lower 20th percentile has gone up by 4.4 per cent.
“We are completely in agreement with you that we need to raise wages,” he said. “Please be fair in your characterisation."
“The only reason we have foreigners here is to give an extra wind in our sails when the opportunity is there,” he added.
“Now we are in a storm and we need to shed ballast ... 60,000 foreigners have lost their jobs. And the schemes we have rolled out now ... (are) clearly slanted at Singaporeans.”
In concluding, he reiterated what the Government has done to help Singaporeans in the COVID-19 pandemic. But there were already challenges before COVID-19, he said.
“These are the brutal facts of life, so I don’t promise any quick and easy answers,” he said. “The PAP offers honesty, complete transparency, we will take all ideas, we will work with you.”
Vivian Balakrishnan refutes Chee Soon Juan on SDP's 10 million population claim
Figure is a falsehood, says minister, who adds that Govt has no target for Singapore population
By Rei Kurohi, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
Singapore's population will not go up to 6.9 million, let alone 10 million, said Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan yesterday.
Responding to Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan during a live debate broadcast on TV and online, Dr Balakrishnan said the 10 million figure is a "strawman" and a "falsehood".
During the debate, Dr Chee had taken aim at Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat for "toying with the idea" of having a population of 10 million people in Singapore.
He cited a dialogue held at the Nanyang Technological University in March last year, during which Mr Heng had said that Singapore's population density is not excessive.
Mr Heng had noted that other cities are a lot more crowded in terms of living space, and cited former Housing Board chief executive Liu Thai Ker.
Mr Liu had raised the notion that Singapore should plan for 10 million people for it to remain sustainable in the long term.
But Mr Heng did not say Singapore should plan for 10 million people - nor did he mention the figure.
Mr Liu, who is in his 80s, had raised the figure in 2013. In response to a controversial Population White Paper released that year, which projected that Singapore's population would reach 6.5 million to 6.9 million by 2030, Mr Liu had said Singapore would do well to look beyond 2030.
He estimated that the population could reach 10 million by 2100 and said infrastructure had to be planned with this in mind as population growth cannot simply be curbed after 2030.
Singapore's current population is 5.7 million.
The SDP has made the 10 million figure a key part of its election campaign message.
The "One No" in its Four Yes, One No (4Y1N) campaign slogan refers to saying "no" to what it says is the ruling People's Action Party's (PAP) plan to increase Singapore's population to 10 million by bringing in foreign talent.
Yesterday, Dr Chee said Singaporeans are "deadly worried" about this proposal.
"Will you categorically tell Singaporeans right now that your party has no intention of raising our population to 10 million by continuing to bring in foreigners, especially foreign PMETs, into Singapore to compete with our PMETs for jobs?" he said, referring to professionals, managers, executives and technicians.
Dr Balakrishnan replied: "Dr Chee, just today, the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) issued a statement advising people like you not to indulge in falsehoods."
Figure is a falsehood, says minister, who adds that Govt has no target for Singapore population
By Rei Kurohi, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
Responding to Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan during a live debate broadcast on TV and online, Dr Balakrishnan said the 10 million figure is a "strawman" and a "falsehood".
During the debate, Dr Chee had taken aim at Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat for "toying with the idea" of having a population of 10 million people in Singapore.
He cited a dialogue held at the Nanyang Technological University in March last year, during which Mr Heng had said that Singapore's population density is not excessive.
Mr Heng had noted that other cities are a lot more crowded in terms of living space, and cited former Housing Board chief executive Liu Thai Ker.
Mr Liu had raised the notion that Singapore should plan for 10 million people for it to remain sustainable in the long term.
But Mr Heng did not say Singapore should plan for 10 million people - nor did he mention the figure.
Mr Liu, who is in his 80s, had raised the figure in 2013. In response to a controversial Population White Paper released that year, which projected that Singapore's population would reach 6.5 million to 6.9 million by 2030, Mr Liu had said Singapore would do well to look beyond 2030.
He estimated that the population could reach 10 million by 2100 and said infrastructure had to be planned with this in mind as population growth cannot simply be curbed after 2030.
Singapore's current population is 5.7 million.
The SDP has made the 10 million figure a key part of its election campaign message.
The "One No" in its Four Yes, One No (4Y1N) campaign slogan refers to saying "no" to what it says is the ruling People's Action Party's (PAP) plan to increase Singapore's population to 10 million by bringing in foreign talent.
Yesterday, Dr Chee said Singaporeans are "deadly worried" about this proposal.
"Will you categorically tell Singaporeans right now that your party has no intention of raising our population to 10 million by continuing to bring in foreigners, especially foreign PMETs, into Singapore to compete with our PMETs for jobs?" he said, referring to professionals, managers, executives and technicians.
Dr Balakrishnan replied: "Dr Chee, just today, the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) issued a statement advising people like you not to indulge in falsehoods."
The minister added: "Let me state for the record: We will never have 10 million. We won't even have 6.9 million. The Government doesn't have a target for the population.
"What we want is a Singapore core that is demographically stable, able to reproduce ourselves, able to create opportunities and jobs for ourselves and able to stay as a cohesive whole. It is not a target, and it's certainly not 10 million."
The PMO statement noted that in March 2018, the Government, in an update to Parliament, had said that given recent trends, Singapore's total population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030.
"This outlook remains valid today," it added.
At the close of the debate, Dr Chee called on Singaporeans to vote for the SDP and again cited the 10 million figure, prompting Dr Balakrishnan to interject that it was "nonsense".
Dr Balakrishnan said in his closing statement: "I'm afraid I have to deal with Dr Chee's falsehood again. No 10 million. Fact."
PAP calls out SDP's Chee Soon Juan for misleading Singaporeans over 10 million population figure
It says falsehood over a key plank of party's campaign calls its integrity into question
By Grace Ho, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 3 Jul 2020
The People's Action Party (PAP) yesterday called out opposition politician Chee Soon Juan for attempting to mislead Singaporeans by claiming that the Government planned to increase the country's population to 10 million, and further twisting facts when his falsehood was caught out.
Pointing out that this was a key election plank of Dr Chee's Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), the PAP said in a statement last night that the falsehood "calls into question the integrity of the whole party".
Dr Chee had claimed in a live debate on Wednesday that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had "toyed with the idea" of raising the Republic's population to 10 million.
In a Facebook post yesterday, DPM Heng's response was emphatic. He said that he had not said the country should plan to raise its population to 10 million, or mentioned the number.
The SDP, which is asking voters to reject a population of 10 million, responded by claiming victory on that count.
The PAP noted that Dr Chee had repeated his false statement three times in the live TV debate. Each time, he was corrected by Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, who was representing the PAP.
Dr Balakrishnan had also referred Dr Chee to the National Population and Talent Division's statement that the Government had no plans to raise the population to 10 million.
Despite this, Dr Chee doubled down on this falsehood, publishing a Facebook post linking to a Straits Times report of a dialogue that DPM Heng had with Nanyang Technological University students in March last year.
Yesterday, ST clarified that "Mr Heng did not say Singapore should plan for 10 million people - nor did he mention the figure" at the event.
DPM Heng himself refuted Dr Chee's false statement, and said in a Facebook post yesterday: "Let me be clear: The Government has never proposed or targeted for Singapore to increase the population to 10 million. And if we look at today's situation, our population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030."
Joining in later yesterday, Dr Balakrishnan also called on Dr Chee to clarify his stance, now that the 10 million figure touted in the party's manifesto had turned out to be a falsehood.
The SDP, however, said in a press release later yesterday: "Now that Dr Chee has successfully extracted an assurance from the PAP that it has no intention of increasing the population to 6.9 or 10 million, we invite the PAP to tell Singaporeans what its target population is."
In a nod to its campaign slogan 4Y 1N - which hinges on getting people to say "no" to a 10 million population - the SDP added: "The idea of a 10 million population is not an SDP invention or imagination."
This prompted the PAP to say that having been proven wrong, the honourable thing to do would have been to "admit that SDP's election campaign was based on a falsehood, withdraw it, and apologise to Singaporeans for misleading them".
"Instead, Dr Chee further twists the facts. He now claims the SDP has 'achieved victory' by extracting a promise from the PAP that it had no intention to increase the population to 10 million.
"Dr Chee first conjures a bogey out of thin air to befuddle, frighten and divide Singaporeans," said the PAP. It added that when it was pointed out no bogey existed and no one had "toyed" with the idea, "he waves his arms triumphantly in the air, proclaiming, 'see, I slayed the bogey'".
Pointing out that Dr Chee has "staged this drama many times before", the PAP statement said that the "new Dr Chee - of which there have been many - is still the old Dr Chee".
"This latest falsehood, however, is not just a matter of Dr Chee's personal dishonesty. The '1 No' is a key plank in the SDP's election campaign. Its falsehood renders the campaign pointless, and calls into question the integrity of the whole party."
"What we want is a Singapore core that is demographically stable, able to reproduce ourselves, able to create opportunities and jobs for ourselves and able to stay as a cohesive whole. It is not a target, and it's certainly not 10 million."
The PMO statement noted that in March 2018, the Government, in an update to Parliament, had said that given recent trends, Singapore's total population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030.
"This outlook remains valid today," it added.
At the close of the debate, Dr Chee called on Singaporeans to vote for the SDP and again cited the 10 million figure, prompting Dr Balakrishnan to interject that it was "nonsense".
Dr Balakrishnan said in his closing statement: "I'm afraid I have to deal with Dr Chee's falsehood again. No 10 million. Fact."
PAP calls out SDP's Chee Soon Juan for misleading Singaporeans over 10 million population figure
It says falsehood over a key plank of party's campaign calls its integrity into question
By Grace Ho, Senior Political Correspondent, The Straits Times, 3 Jul 2020
The People's Action Party (PAP) yesterday called out opposition politician Chee Soon Juan for attempting to mislead Singaporeans by claiming that the Government planned to increase the country's population to 10 million, and further twisting facts when his falsehood was caught out.
Pointing out that this was a key election plank of Dr Chee's Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), the PAP said in a statement last night that the falsehood "calls into question the integrity of the whole party".
Dr Chee had claimed in a live debate on Wednesday that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had "toyed with the idea" of raising the Republic's population to 10 million.
In a Facebook post yesterday, DPM Heng's response was emphatic. He said that he had not said the country should plan to raise its population to 10 million, or mentioned the number.
The SDP, which is asking voters to reject a population of 10 million, responded by claiming victory on that count.
The PAP noted that Dr Chee had repeated his false statement three times in the live TV debate. Each time, he was corrected by Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, who was representing the PAP.
Dr Balakrishnan had also referred Dr Chee to the National Population and Talent Division's statement that the Government had no plans to raise the population to 10 million.
Despite this, Dr Chee doubled down on this falsehood, publishing a Facebook post linking to a Straits Times report of a dialogue that DPM Heng had with Nanyang Technological University students in March last year.
Yesterday, ST clarified that "Mr Heng did not say Singapore should plan for 10 million people - nor did he mention the figure" at the event.
DPM Heng himself refuted Dr Chee's false statement, and said in a Facebook post yesterday: "Let me be clear: The Government has never proposed or targeted for Singapore to increase the population to 10 million. And if we look at today's situation, our population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030."
Joining in later yesterday, Dr Balakrishnan also called on Dr Chee to clarify his stance, now that the 10 million figure touted in the party's manifesto had turned out to be a falsehood.
The SDP, however, said in a press release later yesterday: "Now that Dr Chee has successfully extracted an assurance from the PAP that it has no intention of increasing the population to 6.9 or 10 million, we invite the PAP to tell Singaporeans what its target population is."
In a nod to its campaign slogan 4Y 1N - which hinges on getting people to say "no" to a 10 million population - the SDP added: "The idea of a 10 million population is not an SDP invention or imagination."
This prompted the PAP to say that having been proven wrong, the honourable thing to do would have been to "admit that SDP's election campaign was based on a falsehood, withdraw it, and apologise to Singaporeans for misleading them".
"Instead, Dr Chee further twists the facts. He now claims the SDP has 'achieved victory' by extracting a promise from the PAP that it had no intention to increase the population to 10 million.
"Dr Chee first conjures a bogey out of thin air to befuddle, frighten and divide Singaporeans," said the PAP. It added that when it was pointed out no bogey existed and no one had "toyed" with the idea, "he waves his arms triumphantly in the air, proclaiming, 'see, I slayed the bogey'".
Pointing out that Dr Chee has "staged this drama many times before", the PAP statement said that the "new Dr Chee - of which there have been many - is still the old Dr Chee".
"This latest falsehood, however, is not just a matter of Dr Chee's personal dishonesty. The '1 No' is a key plank in the SDP's election campaign. Its falsehood renders the campaign pointless, and calls into question the integrity of the whole party."
PAP says Chee Soon Juan should admit SDP campaign is based on falsehood
Ruling party says SDP chief should apologise to Singaporeans for misleading them
The Straits Times, 3 Jul 2020
The People's Action Party (PAP) last night said the election campaign of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) is pointless now that a key plank of its campaign has been proven false.
The "No to 10 million population", which is part of the SDP's Four Yes, One No campaign slogan for the general election, is based on a false claim that the Government plans to raise the country's population to 10 million, the PAP noted.
The ruling party said the honourable thing for SDP chief Chee Soon Juan to do would have been to admit that his party's campaign was based on a falsehood, withdraw it, and apologise to Singaporeans for misleading them.
"But that would have been out of character," the PAP said.
"Instead, Dr Chee further twists the facts. He now claims the SDP has 'achieved victory' by extracting a promise from the PAP that it had no intention to increase the population to 10 million," it added.
The PAP statement came hours after the SDP said that Dr Chee had "successfully extracted an assurance from the PAP that it has no intention of increasing the population to 6.9 or 10 million".
The SDP had claimed the PAP wished to jack up the population to 10 million by bringing in more foreigners, a charge Dr Chee repeated three times during a televised debate on Channel 5 on Wednesday.
Dr Chee claimed that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had in an interview "toy(ed) with the idea of bringing our population up to 10 million", the PAP noted.
Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, representing the PAP, refuted him each time, referring Dr Chee to a statement the National Population and Talent Division (NPTD) issued earlier in the day.
The NPTD also stated categorically that the Government "has not proposed, planned nor targeted for Singapore to increase its population to 10 million".
Dr Balakrishnan also stated for the record that Singapore "will never have 10 million".
Dr Balakrishnan asked Dr Chee not to repeat the false statement.
The PAP said: "But Dr Chee doubled down on this falsehood. After the debate, he published it again, this time in a Facebook post linking to a Straits Times report of a dialogue that DPM Heng had with NTU students in March last year." Mr Heng himself refuted Dr Chee's false statement, and released the video clip of what he had said at Nanyang Technological University.
Mr Heng referred to former chief planner Liu Thai Ker, who had publicly said Singapore should go for a higher population number. Mr Heng also said the population number is not just about the physical space but also the social space, and sense of togetherness.
The PAP said: "Dr Chee first conjures a bogey out of thin air to befuddle, frighten and divide Singaporeans. When it is pointed out to him the bogey doesn't exist, he claims someone else had 'toyed' with the idea first.
"And when it is shown conclusively that someone else had done no such thing, he waves his arms triumphantly in the air, proclaiming, 'see, I slayed the bogey'."
Said the PAP: "Dr Chee has staged this drama many times before, going back to 1996 when he refused to apologise for his use of wrong data on healthcare subsides at a parliamentary Select Committee.
"'Reputation is temporary; character is permanent,' Dr Chee said in 2015. One cannot agree more.
"A leopard does not change its spots. The new Dr Chee - of which there have been many - is still the old Dr Chee," it added.
Ruling party says SDP chief should apologise to Singaporeans for misleading them
The Straits Times, 3 Jul 2020
The People's Action Party (PAP) last night said the election campaign of the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) is pointless now that a key plank of its campaign has been proven false.
The "No to 10 million population", which is part of the SDP's Four Yes, One No campaign slogan for the general election, is based on a false claim that the Government plans to raise the country's population to 10 million, the PAP noted.
The ruling party said the honourable thing for SDP chief Chee Soon Juan to do would have been to admit that his party's campaign was based on a falsehood, withdraw it, and apologise to Singaporeans for misleading them.
"But that would have been out of character," the PAP said.
"Instead, Dr Chee further twists the facts. He now claims the SDP has 'achieved victory' by extracting a promise from the PAP that it had no intention to increase the population to 10 million," it added.
The PAP statement came hours after the SDP said that Dr Chee had "successfully extracted an assurance from the PAP that it has no intention of increasing the population to 6.9 or 10 million".
The SDP had claimed the PAP wished to jack up the population to 10 million by bringing in more foreigners, a charge Dr Chee repeated three times during a televised debate on Channel 5 on Wednesday.
Dr Chee claimed that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had in an interview "toy(ed) with the idea of bringing our population up to 10 million", the PAP noted.
Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan, representing the PAP, refuted him each time, referring Dr Chee to a statement the National Population and Talent Division (NPTD) issued earlier in the day.
The NPTD also stated categorically that the Government "has not proposed, planned nor targeted for Singapore to increase its population to 10 million".
Dr Balakrishnan also stated for the record that Singapore "will never have 10 million".
Dr Balakrishnan asked Dr Chee not to repeat the false statement.
The PAP said: "But Dr Chee doubled down on this falsehood. After the debate, he published it again, this time in a Facebook post linking to a Straits Times report of a dialogue that DPM Heng had with NTU students in March last year." Mr Heng himself refuted Dr Chee's false statement, and released the video clip of what he had said at Nanyang Technological University.
Mr Heng referred to former chief planner Liu Thai Ker, who had publicly said Singapore should go for a higher population number. Mr Heng also said the population number is not just about the physical space but also the social space, and sense of togetherness.
The PAP said: "Dr Chee first conjures a bogey out of thin air to befuddle, frighten and divide Singaporeans. When it is pointed out to him the bogey doesn't exist, he claims someone else had 'toyed' with the idea first.
"And when it is shown conclusively that someone else had done no such thing, he waves his arms triumphantly in the air, proclaiming, 'see, I slayed the bogey'."
Said the PAP: "Dr Chee has staged this drama many times before, going back to 1996 when he refused to apologise for his use of wrong data on healthcare subsides at a parliamentary Select Committee.
"'Reputation is temporary; character is permanent,' Dr Chee said in 2015. One cannot agree more.
"A leopard does not change its spots. The new Dr Chee - of which there have been many - is still the old Dr Chee," it added.
Singapore GE2020: That 10 million figure - When facts get in the way
By Zakir Hussain, News Editor, The Straits Times, 3 Jul 2020
Falsehoods repeated often enough can be perceived as the truth, and there is a risk this is happening in the general election.
The latest example is the slew of statements on social media platforms and online forums, echoed by several political parties, saying that the Government plans to increase the population to 10 million by bringing in more foreigners.
Some online commentators point to a Straits Times report of a dialogue Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had with around 700 students at Nanyang Technological University last year.
Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan cited the report at a televised debate on Wednesday night, claiming that Mr Heng had, in an interview, toyed with the idea of raising the population to 10 million - a charge that was refuted several times by Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan of the People's Action Party (PAP).
Dr Balakrishnan had categorically stated: "We will never have 10 million. We won't even have 6.9 million. The Government doesn't have a target for the population."
Shortly after the debate ended, Dr Chee put up a Facebook post with a link to the ST article.
He highlighted two paragraphs: "Singapore's population density is not excessive, he (DPM Heng) said, noting that other cities are a lot more crowded in terms of liveable space. He cited former chief planner Liu Thai Ker, who said in 2014 that Singapore should plan for 10 million people for it to remain sustainable in the long term."
No ordinary reader of the article - let alone these sentences - would think that Mr Heng wants Singapore to plan for 10 million people.
For good measure, ST's report on the TV debate stated that Mr Heng did not say Singapore should plan for 10 million people - nor did he mention the figure.
Had he done so, it would have been the headline, and very likely on the front page.
Instead, the headline for the article was: "S'poreans must remain open to foreigners, says Heng". It was on page 10 of ST's print edition.
The main point, captured in paragraphs preceding those cited above, reads: "The need for Singaporeans to have an open mindset and a multicultural outlook was one of his key messages at the two-hour forum, during which he was questioned on a raft of issues, including population growth, technological disruption and meritocracy.
"On the projected population of 6.9 million by 2030, set out in the Government's 2013 Population White Paper, Mr Heng said the number goes beyond how densely populated Singapore would be. The social space is as important."
Yet, as misperceptions about the matter continued to swirl on social media, Mr Heng had to come out to refute them strongly.
Yesterday morning, he made a Facebook post to state clearly that he did not say Singapore should plan to increase its population to 10 million, nor did he mention the figure.
He also released a brief video clip of this segment of the dialogue.
It is also worth noting the wider context in which the 10 million figure was first raised. The SDP noted that it is not an invention or something of the party's imagination.
But neither has the Government put out plans or targets for a Singapore with 10 million. Rather, the figure was floated by a retired public servant as something to consider for the long term, out of concern about Singapore's future and its ability to continue planning for the long term. It is a point worth thinking about as Singapore's politics becomes more contested.
Three months after the Population White Paper drew negative reactions from many quarters - in particular, over its projection that Singapore's total population could reach between 6.5 million and 6.9 million by 2030 - Mr Liu, former Housing Board chief executive, suggested that Singapore should actually plan for a more distant future if it is to remain a viable, liveable city.
At a public forum in April 2013 on the topic of planning for 2030, Mr Liu said: "The world doesn't end in 2030, and population growth doesn't end at 6.9 million."
ST reported him suggesting that Singapore could do well to look ahead, perhaps to 2100, when it might have a population of 10 million. Since Singapore's land area is essentially fixed, higher density is thus inevitable. But liveability can be preserved with adequate amenities and buffers of greenery.
Mr Liu repeated the figure in July 2014, saying Singapore should plan for a population of 10 million in the long term if it is to remain sustainable as a country. "The question is: How long do you want Singapore to exist as a sovereign state?" he said.
He also said that if projections were based on the upper limit of 6.9 million by 2030, Singapore could reach a population of 10 million by 2090. If it is based on the lower limit of 6.5 million, the population may reach 10 million by 2200.
We may never hit these numbers. And 2090 is 70 years away, while 2200 is 180 years away. In fact, recent trends ensure that Singapore's population will be significantly below 6.9 million in 2030.
But for some, these facts get in the way of a campaign slogan to sway voters.
WHAT WAS ACTUALLY SAID
MARCH 29, 2019
A Straits Times report, headlined "Heng Swee Keat on keeping Singapore open: We don't want a world where people build walls", on a dialogue that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had with Nanyang Technological University students, reads: "On the projected population of 6.9 million by 2030, set out in the Government's 2013 Population White Paper, Mr Heng said the number goes beyond how densely populated Singapore would be. The social space is as important. Singapore's population density is not excessive, he said, noting that other cities are a lot more crowded in terms of liveable space.
"He cited former chief planner Liu Thai Ker, who said in 2014 that Singapore should plan for 10 million people for it to remain sustainable in the long term."
Mr Heng neither said Singapore should plan for 10 million people - nor mentioned the figure.
JULY 1, 2020
The National Population and Talent Division, under the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), issues a clarification saying recent statements on various online platforms that the Government proposes or plans to increase the population in Singapore to 10 million are untrue.
It adds that an update on the population outlook, provided in Parliament in March 2018, said given recent trends, the total population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030, and this outlook remains valid today.
In a televised general election debate, Singapore Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan says Mr Heng "toys with the idea of bringing our population up to 10 million", and asks Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan if he would categorically tell Singaporeans that his party has no intention of raising the population to 10 million by continuing to bring in foreigners.
Dr Balakrishnan replies that the PMO has just issued a statement advising people like Dr Chee not to indulge in falsehoods, saying: "The Government doesn't have a target for the population." Shortly after the debate ends, Dr Chee puts up a Facebook post with a link to the March 29, 2019, ST article. He writes: "Dr Vivian Balakrishnan said at the debate that my claim that Mr Heng Swee Keat was toying with the idea of a 10m population was a falsehood. Here's what ST reported on 29 Mar 2019..."
JULY 2
Mr Heng makes a Facebook post noting that he did not say Singapore should plan to increase its population to 10 million, or mention the figure. "Let me be clear: The Government has never proposed or targeted for Singapore to increase its population to 10 million. And if we look at today's situation, our population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030," he writes.
Mr Heng also posts a video of his response on the subject at the forum, which shows him saying: "On the population issue, the 6.9 million number that was put out earlier on. In fact, I met Mr Liu Thai Ker, our former chief planner, he had publicly said - it has been reported in the papers - that we should go for an even higher number and this little red dot can accommodate many more people.
"Now whether this little red dot can accommodate many more people, actually, is not strictly just a physical constraint. We cannot be thinking of 50 million people on this little red dot because it will just be so dense and unpleasant.
"But if you look at our population density as a city, it is not excessive. There are many cities which, if you look at the liveable space, it is actually a lot, a lot more crowded. But the population number is not just about physical space, it is also about the social space, it is about the sense of togetherness."
By Zakir Hussain, News Editor, The Straits Times, 3 Jul 2020
Falsehoods repeated often enough can be perceived as the truth, and there is a risk this is happening in the general election.
The latest example is the slew of statements on social media platforms and online forums, echoed by several political parties, saying that the Government plans to increase the population to 10 million by bringing in more foreigners.
Some online commentators point to a Straits Times report of a dialogue Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had with around 700 students at Nanyang Technological University last year.
Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan cited the report at a televised debate on Wednesday night, claiming that Mr Heng had, in an interview, toyed with the idea of raising the population to 10 million - a charge that was refuted several times by Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan of the People's Action Party (PAP).
Dr Balakrishnan had categorically stated: "We will never have 10 million. We won't even have 6.9 million. The Government doesn't have a target for the population."
Shortly after the debate ended, Dr Chee put up a Facebook post with a link to the ST article.
He highlighted two paragraphs: "Singapore's population density is not excessive, he (DPM Heng) said, noting that other cities are a lot more crowded in terms of liveable space. He cited former chief planner Liu Thai Ker, who said in 2014 that Singapore should plan for 10 million people for it to remain sustainable in the long term."
No ordinary reader of the article - let alone these sentences - would think that Mr Heng wants Singapore to plan for 10 million people.
For good measure, ST's report on the TV debate stated that Mr Heng did not say Singapore should plan for 10 million people - nor did he mention the figure.
Had he done so, it would have been the headline, and very likely on the front page.
Instead, the headline for the article was: "S'poreans must remain open to foreigners, says Heng". It was on page 10 of ST's print edition.
The main point, captured in paragraphs preceding those cited above, reads: "The need for Singaporeans to have an open mindset and a multicultural outlook was one of his key messages at the two-hour forum, during which he was questioned on a raft of issues, including population growth, technological disruption and meritocracy.
"On the projected population of 6.9 million by 2030, set out in the Government's 2013 Population White Paper, Mr Heng said the number goes beyond how densely populated Singapore would be. The social space is as important."
Yet, as misperceptions about the matter continued to swirl on social media, Mr Heng had to come out to refute them strongly.
Yesterday morning, he made a Facebook post to state clearly that he did not say Singapore should plan to increase its population to 10 million, nor did he mention the figure.
He also released a brief video clip of this segment of the dialogue.
It is also worth noting the wider context in which the 10 million figure was first raised. The SDP noted that it is not an invention or something of the party's imagination.
But neither has the Government put out plans or targets for a Singapore with 10 million. Rather, the figure was floated by a retired public servant as something to consider for the long term, out of concern about Singapore's future and its ability to continue planning for the long term. It is a point worth thinking about as Singapore's politics becomes more contested.
Three months after the Population White Paper drew negative reactions from many quarters - in particular, over its projection that Singapore's total population could reach between 6.5 million and 6.9 million by 2030 - Mr Liu, former Housing Board chief executive, suggested that Singapore should actually plan for a more distant future if it is to remain a viable, liveable city.
At a public forum in April 2013 on the topic of planning for 2030, Mr Liu said: "The world doesn't end in 2030, and population growth doesn't end at 6.9 million."
ST reported him suggesting that Singapore could do well to look ahead, perhaps to 2100, when it might have a population of 10 million. Since Singapore's land area is essentially fixed, higher density is thus inevitable. But liveability can be preserved with adequate amenities and buffers of greenery.
Mr Liu repeated the figure in July 2014, saying Singapore should plan for a population of 10 million in the long term if it is to remain sustainable as a country. "The question is: How long do you want Singapore to exist as a sovereign state?" he said.
He also said that if projections were based on the upper limit of 6.9 million by 2030, Singapore could reach a population of 10 million by 2090. If it is based on the lower limit of 6.5 million, the population may reach 10 million by 2200.
We may never hit these numbers. And 2090 is 70 years away, while 2200 is 180 years away. In fact, recent trends ensure that Singapore's population will be significantly below 6.9 million in 2030.
But for some, these facts get in the way of a campaign slogan to sway voters.
WHAT WAS ACTUALLY SAID
MARCH 29, 2019
A Straits Times report, headlined "Heng Swee Keat on keeping Singapore open: We don't want a world where people build walls", on a dialogue that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had with Nanyang Technological University students, reads: "On the projected population of 6.9 million by 2030, set out in the Government's 2013 Population White Paper, Mr Heng said the number goes beyond how densely populated Singapore would be. The social space is as important. Singapore's population density is not excessive, he said, noting that other cities are a lot more crowded in terms of liveable space.
"He cited former chief planner Liu Thai Ker, who said in 2014 that Singapore should plan for 10 million people for it to remain sustainable in the long term."
Mr Heng neither said Singapore should plan for 10 million people - nor mentioned the figure.
JULY 1, 2020
The National Population and Talent Division, under the Prime Minister's Office (PMO), issues a clarification saying recent statements on various online platforms that the Government proposes or plans to increase the population in Singapore to 10 million are untrue.
It adds that an update on the population outlook, provided in Parliament in March 2018, said given recent trends, the total population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030, and this outlook remains valid today.
In a televised general election debate, Singapore Democratic Party chief Chee Soon Juan says Mr Heng "toys with the idea of bringing our population up to 10 million", and asks Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan if he would categorically tell Singaporeans that his party has no intention of raising the population to 10 million by continuing to bring in foreigners.
Dr Balakrishnan replies that the PMO has just issued a statement advising people like Dr Chee not to indulge in falsehoods, saying: "The Government doesn't have a target for the population." Shortly after the debate ends, Dr Chee puts up a Facebook post with a link to the March 29, 2019, ST article. He writes: "Dr Vivian Balakrishnan said at the debate that my claim that Mr Heng Swee Keat was toying with the idea of a 10m population was a falsehood. Here's what ST reported on 29 Mar 2019..."
JULY 2
Mr Heng makes a Facebook post noting that he did not say Singapore should plan to increase its population to 10 million, or mention the figure. "Let me be clear: The Government has never proposed or targeted for Singapore to increase its population to 10 million. And if we look at today's situation, our population is likely to be significantly below 6.9 million by 2030," he writes.
Mr Heng also posts a video of his response on the subject at the forum, which shows him saying: "On the population issue, the 6.9 million number that was put out earlier on. In fact, I met Mr Liu Thai Ker, our former chief planner, he had publicly said - it has been reported in the papers - that we should go for an even higher number and this little red dot can accommodate many more people.
"Now whether this little red dot can accommodate many more people, actually, is not strictly just a physical constraint. We cannot be thinking of 50 million people on this little red dot because it will just be so dense and unpleasant.
"But if you look at our population density as a city, it is not excessive. There are many cities which, if you look at the liveable space, it is actually a lot, a lot more crowded. But the population number is not just about physical space, it is also about the social space, it is about the sense of togetherness."
No plans to increase Singapore population to 10 million, says Government
By David Lee, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
Singapore has no plans to increase its population to 10 million as claimed on some online platforms, said the National Population and Talent Division (NPTD) yesterday.
In a statement refuting these claims, it said it "would like to state categorically that these statements are untrue".
It added: "The Government has not proposed, planned nor targeted for Singapore to increase its population to 10 million. The Government regularly explains its approach to population planning, including through annual updates at the Committee of Supply debates."
In fact, the population is expected to remain significantly below 6.9 million by 2030, according to an update on Singapore's population outlook provided in Parliament in March 2018.
The NPTD, which is part of the Strategy Group in the Prime Minister's Office, said: "This outlook remains valid today."
Its clarifications come after statements have been circulating on various online platforms that the Government proposes or plans to increase the population in Singapore to 10 million.
The claim had been made by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) and Peoples Voice party, with both saying that they were opposed to the idea.
For instance, the SDP's campaign slogan for the July 10 General Election is "Four Yes, One No", with the "no" being a "No to a 10 million population".
The NPTD also referred to a Factually article published in March, in which the Government reiterated that Singapore's population size is affected by many factors, including birth rates, life expectancy and global developments.
The article also states that the Government does not seek to achieve any particular population size.
The NPTD added: "The Government aims to achieve a careful balance between these factors, to ensure a sustainable Singapore with a cohesive society and vibrant economy that improves Singaporeans' lives.
"We monitor our population trends closely, and regularly review our population policies along with infrastructure and social development needs."
It also warned that publication of such falsehoods damages the public interest by undermining legitimate and honest discussion, and that appropriate action may be taken against any further publication of such claims.
HOW THE 10 MILLION PROJECTION CAME ABOUT
The contentious 10 million projection for the Singapore population was first brought up by former HDB chief executive Liu Thai Ker in 2013, as he felt the Republic should plan for the figure in the long term if it was to remain sustainable as a country.
He told a seminar that the 10 million figure was projected on how much Singapore could grow for the next 80 to 150 years at a rate of less than 1 per cent each year.
Mr Liu felt that for Singapore to remain a sovereign state in the long run, it should not stop its population growth projection for 2030 at the figure of 6.9 million in the 2013 White Paper on Population, and that it was necessary to plan further ahead.
He suggested that even though there was a lot of land to be reclaimed and a lot of land set aside for industrial purposes that could be converted for other use, it was still prudent to plan for the longer term so that there was a better estimate of the amount of land required because shorter-term planning may lead to an increase in land density.
He was criticised by netizens, who feared Singapore's infrastructure could not support such a large population. But he has stood by his comments, telling The New Paper in 2017: "You cannot stop population growth, because as long as your economy is booming and you create new jobs, you need new population."
By David Lee, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
Singapore has no plans to increase its population to 10 million as claimed on some online platforms, said the National Population and Talent Division (NPTD) yesterday.
In a statement refuting these claims, it said it "would like to state categorically that these statements are untrue".
It added: "The Government has not proposed, planned nor targeted for Singapore to increase its population to 10 million. The Government regularly explains its approach to population planning, including through annual updates at the Committee of Supply debates."
In fact, the population is expected to remain significantly below 6.9 million by 2030, according to an update on Singapore's population outlook provided in Parliament in March 2018.
The NPTD, which is part of the Strategy Group in the Prime Minister's Office, said: "This outlook remains valid today."
Its clarifications come after statements have been circulating on various online platforms that the Government proposes or plans to increase the population in Singapore to 10 million.
The claim had been made by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) and Peoples Voice party, with both saying that they were opposed to the idea.
For instance, the SDP's campaign slogan for the July 10 General Election is "Four Yes, One No", with the "no" being a "No to a 10 million population".
The NPTD also referred to a Factually article published in March, in which the Government reiterated that Singapore's population size is affected by many factors, including birth rates, life expectancy and global developments.
The article also states that the Government does not seek to achieve any particular population size.
The NPTD added: "The Government aims to achieve a careful balance between these factors, to ensure a sustainable Singapore with a cohesive society and vibrant economy that improves Singaporeans' lives.
"We monitor our population trends closely, and regularly review our population policies along with infrastructure and social development needs."
It also warned that publication of such falsehoods damages the public interest by undermining legitimate and honest discussion, and that appropriate action may be taken against any further publication of such claims.
HOW THE 10 MILLION PROJECTION CAME ABOUT
The contentious 10 million projection for the Singapore population was first brought up by former HDB chief executive Liu Thai Ker in 2013, as he felt the Republic should plan for the figure in the long term if it was to remain sustainable as a country.
He told a seminar that the 10 million figure was projected on how much Singapore could grow for the next 80 to 150 years at a rate of less than 1 per cent each year.
Mr Liu felt that for Singapore to remain a sovereign state in the long run, it should not stop its population growth projection for 2030 at the figure of 6.9 million in the 2013 White Paper on Population, and that it was necessary to plan further ahead.
He suggested that even though there was a lot of land to be reclaimed and a lot of land set aside for industrial purposes that could be converted for other use, it was still prudent to plan for the longer term so that there was a better estimate of the amount of land required because shorter-term planning may lead to an increase in land density.
He was criticised by netizens, who feared Singapore's infrastructure could not support such a large population. But he has stood by his comments, telling The New Paper in 2017: "You cannot stop population growth, because as long as your economy is booming and you create new jobs, you need new population."
GE2020 political debate: Chee, Vivian spar over fiscal spending, SDP's proposed social policies
By Low Lin Fhoong, Assistant Sports Editor, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
Some of the proposals put forth by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) for the general election have "very big holes" in fiscal deficits, People's Action Party (PAP) candidate Vivian Balakrishnan said in a live TV debate yesterday.
Moderated by CNA Digital's chief editor Jamie Ho, the debate pitted Dr Balakrishnan against Singapore Democratic Party's (SDP) Chee Soon Juan, Workers' Party's (WP) Jamus Lim and Progress Singapore Party's (PSP) Francis Yuen.
Dr Balakrishnan and Dr Chee went head to head over a number of issues, with the second half of the hour-long session hotting up as they squared off on the cost of SDP's proposed social policies, among others.
Noting that both men "have had many disagreements in the past professionally", Dr Balakrishnan, 59, asked Dr Chee: "I think my voters want to know what the total size of the bill is, and who bears it."
The SDP's election campaign, Four Yes, One No, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, has called for the goods and services tax (GST) to be suspended until 2021, retrenchment benefits to be paid to workers laid off because of the pandemic, $500 monthly payments to be made to some retirees and for the PAP to put the people's interest as its top priority.
SDP has also called for a stop to the increase in Singapore's population and to the displacement of PMETs (professionals, managers, executives and technicians) with foreign ones.
In response to Dr Balakrishnan's question, Dr Chee, 57, who is SDP's secretary-general, said the annual cost would be about $5 billion. "Now, compare that to what you just signed off just this year, of nearly $100 billion. Even if the Government did not take in any more revenue, it would take us 20 years for us to spend all the budget that you have allocated for just the next year or so."
Pointing out that the SDP had been accused of being a "tax-and-spend party" which was compared to Greece "going down the road to ruin", Dr Chee said the PAP had raised prices and taxes after 2015.
He added: "That whole slew of taxes went into spending... the budget that you blew in the Youth Olympic Games way back in 2010 (Dr Balakrishnan was Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports at the time), and then the auditor-general came by and chided this Government for overspending and not practising financial prudence. This is where I think the tax-and-spend policy applies to the PAP, more than any."
Earlier in the debate, Dr Chee had also called the PAP's focus on jobs for Singaporeans "election jack jingle", pointing out that the Republic had the lowest economic growth in a decade of 0.7 per cent last year. Commercial rent should be controlled and the foreign workers' levy has hit small and medium-sized enterprises hard, he said.
In response, Dr Balakrishnan said Singapore's net productivity was negative "once out of 10 years".
He added: "This is the worst crisis of our lifetime, and it is not going to go away in one year. What have we done so far? We have had emergency infusions to save jobs. We have moved four Budgets to keep our businesses afloat, especially our SMEs, in order to keep jobs for our own Singaporeans. We have emergency measures to protect our public health in these measures. We are continuing to accelerate this necessary transformation that our economy has to undergo because of the digital revolution.
"I don't promise any quick and easy answers. The PAP offers honesty, complete transparency."
By Low Lin Fhoong, Assistant Sports Editor, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
Some of the proposals put forth by the Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) for the general election have "very big holes" in fiscal deficits, People's Action Party (PAP) candidate Vivian Balakrishnan said in a live TV debate yesterday.
Moderated by CNA Digital's chief editor Jamie Ho, the debate pitted Dr Balakrishnan against Singapore Democratic Party's (SDP) Chee Soon Juan, Workers' Party's (WP) Jamus Lim and Progress Singapore Party's (PSP) Francis Yuen.
Dr Balakrishnan and Dr Chee went head to head over a number of issues, with the second half of the hour-long session hotting up as they squared off on the cost of SDP's proposed social policies, among others.
Noting that both men "have had many disagreements in the past professionally", Dr Balakrishnan, 59, asked Dr Chee: "I think my voters want to know what the total size of the bill is, and who bears it."
The SDP's election campaign, Four Yes, One No, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, has called for the goods and services tax (GST) to be suspended until 2021, retrenchment benefits to be paid to workers laid off because of the pandemic, $500 monthly payments to be made to some retirees and for the PAP to put the people's interest as its top priority.
SDP has also called for a stop to the increase in Singapore's population and to the displacement of PMETs (professionals, managers, executives and technicians) with foreign ones.
In response to Dr Balakrishnan's question, Dr Chee, 57, who is SDP's secretary-general, said the annual cost would be about $5 billion. "Now, compare that to what you just signed off just this year, of nearly $100 billion. Even if the Government did not take in any more revenue, it would take us 20 years for us to spend all the budget that you have allocated for just the next year or so."
Pointing out that the SDP had been accused of being a "tax-and-spend party" which was compared to Greece "going down the road to ruin", Dr Chee said the PAP had raised prices and taxes after 2015.
He added: "That whole slew of taxes went into spending... the budget that you blew in the Youth Olympic Games way back in 2010 (Dr Balakrishnan was Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports at the time), and then the auditor-general came by and chided this Government for overspending and not practising financial prudence. This is where I think the tax-and-spend policy applies to the PAP, more than any."
Earlier in the debate, Dr Chee had also called the PAP's focus on jobs for Singaporeans "election jack jingle", pointing out that the Republic had the lowest economic growth in a decade of 0.7 per cent last year. Commercial rent should be controlled and the foreign workers' levy has hit small and medium-sized enterprises hard, he said.
In response, Dr Balakrishnan said Singapore's net productivity was negative "once out of 10 years".
He added: "This is the worst crisis of our lifetime, and it is not going to go away in one year. What have we done so far? We have had emergency infusions to save jobs. We have moved four Budgets to keep our businesses afloat, especially our SMEs, in order to keep jobs for our own Singaporeans. We have emergency measures to protect our public health in these measures. We are continuing to accelerate this necessary transformation that our economy has to undergo because of the digital revolution.
"I don't promise any quick and easy answers. The PAP offers honesty, complete transparency."
We could have written the same manifesto: PAP's Vivian Balakrishnan to WP's Jamus Lim on live GE2020 debate
Jamus tackles fiscal issues raised by WP's manifesto proposals
By Low Lin Fhoong, Assistant Sports Editor, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
The Workers' Party (WP) has been called "PAP-lite" because of how similar its positions are to the ruling party's, but the opposition party's more left-wing stance raises the question of how it would pay for its programmes, said Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan in a live television debate yesterday.
Key proposals in WP's manifesto for the 2020 General Election include scrapping the proposed goods and services tax hike, introducing a national minimum wage as well as a redundancy insurance scheme, and lowering the cost of intermediate and long-term care for those whose monthly household per capita income is below $3,200, among others.
Jamus tackles fiscal issues raised by WP's manifesto proposals
By Low Lin Fhoong, Assistant Sports Editor, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
The Workers' Party (WP) has been called "PAP-lite" because of how similar its positions are to the ruling party's, but the opposition party's more left-wing stance raises the question of how it would pay for its programmes, said Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian Balakrishnan in a live television debate yesterday.
Key proposals in WP's manifesto for the 2020 General Election include scrapping the proposed goods and services tax hike, introducing a national minimum wage as well as a redundancy insurance scheme, and lowering the cost of intermediate and long-term care for those whose monthly household per capita income is below $3,200, among others.
The People's Action Party "could have written this manifesto", noted Dr Balakrishnan, 59, in the second half of the hour-long debate, a question-and-answer format that allowed candidates to put questions to him and vice versa.
That WP's Associate Professor Jamus Lim was seated to his left during the debate was not lost on viewers as Dr Balakrishnan added: "And that's why people have called the Workers' Party PAP-lite or PAP-like, it's almost a position where whatever line or stand the PAP has taken, you basically use that as your reference point and take a half step to the left." But that half step left raises fiscal questions, he noted, on the trade-off with costs and who would pay for them.
In response, Prof Lim, an economics professor who is contesting Sengkang GRC in his first election, pointed out that the WP has often emphasised it does "not necessarily object to policy for the sake of objection".
"Ultimately, what we want is the right policy... Now, you have then gone on to say that what we have done is move to the left, and the kind of underlying query is that well perhaps by moving to the left we are being irresponsible fiscally," he added. "I'd like to emphasise within the manifesto, we have actually done the maths behind it and everything is within our budget, it actually is budget neutral. What is true though, is that it does entail a set of trade-offs."
Where the two parties fundamentally differ is "where we think those trade-offs actually should occur", added the 44-year-old.
"The PAP would tend to side on the side of the capital. We think, in fact, that for every dollar of national income, Singaporean workers already receive an insufficient amount - 42 cents compared with 55 cents in Japan, and much higher in other high-income countries. And we think that a rebalance of that kind of share of labour income is ultimately necessary," he said.
In turn, Prof Lim asked if the PAP had evaluated the efficacy of its policies, and referred to Singapore Democratic Party's Dr Chee Soon Juan's comment earlier in the debate that the PAP has tried to raise productivity unsuccessfully since 1972.
Pointing out that the Government has put aside 20 per cent of its GDP fiscal stimulus, Dr Balakrishnan, who is running in Holland-Bukit Timah, said they are funding this not by "passing the burden to our children or grandchildren", but by dipping into Singapore's reserves.
"Our Pioneer and Merdeka generations always believed in spending less than they earn on a recurrent basis. That's why we have the reserves. And that's why we can deploy that for a rainy day. This is a rainy day."
Singapore GE2020: Securing jobs key theme on day two of campaign
Parties hold e-rallies and debates as well as walkabouts to take their message to voters
By Royston Sim, Deputy Political Editor, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
With the spectre of an economic crisis looming, political parties made their case for how they would keep Singaporeans in jobs and tackle unemployment on day two of the hustings.
The ruling People's Action Party (PAP) has emphasised jobs as one of the key issues in the July 10 general election and it resounded through the day.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong pointed to how the Economic Development Board was able to attract $13 billion in new investments in the first quarter of this year, which will generate several thousand jobs over the next few years.
In a video message yesterday, he said this was possible because investors know Singapore's Government has strong popular support, and can get backing for "policies that will grow the economy, attract talent and investment, and eventually create jobs for Singaporeans".
"In a crisis, it is even more critical for us to reinforce these fundamentals, in order to attract more investments and jobs to Singapore," PM Lee added.
Jobs was also a central topic in an election debate between four parties that was broadcast live by Mediacorp last night.
Workers' Party (WP) candidate Jamus Lim highlighted the party's proposals for a national minimum take-home wage of $1,300 a month for full-time work, as well as a redundancy insurance scheme.
The scheme would see workers pay $4 a month, matched by employers, into a security fund, and retrenched workers would receive a payout equivalent to 40 per cent of their last drawn salary for up to six months, capped at $1,200 a month.
Progress Singapore Party (PSP) candidate Francis Yuen said Singaporeans have to "get priority in jobs", by freeing up jobs held by foreign professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs).
"We believe that we need foreign PMETs to complement, but we need to believe that there is opportunity for us to slow it down," Mr Yuen said.
The former air force colonel also highlighted the need for small and medium-sized enterprises to thrive and prosper, to keep jobs available to Singaporeans.
Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan called on the PAP to "stop this foolishness" of bringing in foreign workers, especially PMETs.
It is not sustainable, he said, to bring in foreign PMETs "for the purposes of lowering wages".
In response, Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan noted that 60,000 foreigners have lost their jobs in the first five months of this year. He also highlighted various support schemes and initiatives that have been rolled out to save the jobs of Singaporeans amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Dr Balakrishnan said: "The central focus of our (PAP's) campaign is jobs, jobs, jobs."
Dr Chee responded: "I think that's more an election jingle than a well-thought-out plan."
Citing the Jobs Support Scheme, Dr Balakrishnan said: "During the circuit breaker, in effect the Government was paying three quarters of the median wage of Singaporeans."
The minister also pointed to measures like the income relief scheme for the self-employed, and the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package that will create some 100,000 opportunities in the form of jobs, traineeships and paid skills training places.
Parties on the campaign trail yesterday relied on walkabouts in constituencies and other online events to reach out to voters.
Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, for instance, held an e-rally with members of his East Coast GRC team. Conducted like a panel discussion, the five candidates spoke on national as well as municipal issues, and addressed questions to them on Facebook.
The WP launched the first episode of its "Hammer Show". The pre-recorded show saw candidates like former Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) Gerald Giam making speeches to viewers.
There was also a talk show segment, where party chief Pritam Singh and chairman Sylvia Lim posed questions to three of the party's candidates.
In the process, the WP leaders reinforced points that they have previously made - that the vote is secret, that checks and balances are needed in Parliament, and that the NCMP scheme is meant to prevent opposition parties from sinking roots in constituencies and building up a power base.
Elsewhere, Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam took aim at the PSP, saying it seemed to be "half-hearted" about contesting in his Nee Soon group representation constituency.
He added that the PSP was offering to trade Nee Soon for some other constituency a week ago - a statement PSP candidate Bradley Bowyer called "far-fetched". The party had never negotiated ceding Nee Soon to the Reform Party, Mr Bowyer added.
The hustings continue today, with the first of two party political broadcasts to be aired across 19 TV and radio channels from 8pm this evening.
Parties hold e-rallies and debates as well as walkabouts to take their message to voters
By Royston Sim, Deputy Political Editor, The Straits Times, 2 Jul 2020
With the spectre of an economic crisis looming, political parties made their case for how they would keep Singaporeans in jobs and tackle unemployment on day two of the hustings.
The ruling People's Action Party (PAP) has emphasised jobs as one of the key issues in the July 10 general election and it resounded through the day.
Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong pointed to how the Economic Development Board was able to attract $13 billion in new investments in the first quarter of this year, which will generate several thousand jobs over the next few years.
In a video message yesterday, he said this was possible because investors know Singapore's Government has strong popular support, and can get backing for "policies that will grow the economy, attract talent and investment, and eventually create jobs for Singaporeans".
"In a crisis, it is even more critical for us to reinforce these fundamentals, in order to attract more investments and jobs to Singapore," PM Lee added.
Jobs was also a central topic in an election debate between four parties that was broadcast live by Mediacorp last night.
Workers' Party (WP) candidate Jamus Lim highlighted the party's proposals for a national minimum take-home wage of $1,300 a month for full-time work, as well as a redundancy insurance scheme.
The scheme would see workers pay $4 a month, matched by employers, into a security fund, and retrenched workers would receive a payout equivalent to 40 per cent of their last drawn salary for up to six months, capped at $1,200 a month.
Progress Singapore Party (PSP) candidate Francis Yuen said Singaporeans have to "get priority in jobs", by freeing up jobs held by foreign professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs).
"We believe that we need foreign PMETs to complement, but we need to believe that there is opportunity for us to slow it down," Mr Yuen said.
The former air force colonel also highlighted the need for small and medium-sized enterprises to thrive and prosper, to keep jobs available to Singaporeans.
Singapore Democratic Party (SDP) chief Chee Soon Juan called on the PAP to "stop this foolishness" of bringing in foreign workers, especially PMETs.
It is not sustainable, he said, to bring in foreign PMETs "for the purposes of lowering wages".
In response, Foreign Minister Vivian Balakrishnan noted that 60,000 foreigners have lost their jobs in the first five months of this year. He also highlighted various support schemes and initiatives that have been rolled out to save the jobs of Singaporeans amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
Dr Balakrishnan said: "The central focus of our (PAP's) campaign is jobs, jobs, jobs."
Dr Chee responded: "I think that's more an election jingle than a well-thought-out plan."
Citing the Jobs Support Scheme, Dr Balakrishnan said: "During the circuit breaker, in effect the Government was paying three quarters of the median wage of Singaporeans."
The minister also pointed to measures like the income relief scheme for the self-employed, and the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package that will create some 100,000 opportunities in the form of jobs, traineeships and paid skills training places.
Parties on the campaign trail yesterday relied on walkabouts in constituencies and other online events to reach out to voters.
Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, for instance, held an e-rally with members of his East Coast GRC team. Conducted like a panel discussion, the five candidates spoke on national as well as municipal issues, and addressed questions to them on Facebook.
The WP launched the first episode of its "Hammer Show". The pre-recorded show saw candidates like former Non-Constituency MP (NCMP) Gerald Giam making speeches to viewers.
There was also a talk show segment, where party chief Pritam Singh and chairman Sylvia Lim posed questions to three of the party's candidates.
In the process, the WP leaders reinforced points that they have previously made - that the vote is secret, that checks and balances are needed in Parliament, and that the NCMP scheme is meant to prevent opposition parties from sinking roots in constituencies and building up a power base.
Elsewhere, Home Affairs and Law Minister K. Shanmugam took aim at the PSP, saying it seemed to be "half-hearted" about contesting in his Nee Soon group representation constituency.
He added that the PSP was offering to trade Nee Soon for some other constituency a week ago - a statement PSP candidate Bradley Bowyer called "far-fetched". The party had never negotiated ceding Nee Soon to the Reform Party, Mr Bowyer added.
The hustings continue today, with the first of two party political broadcasts to be aired across 19 TV and radio channels from 8pm this evening.
No comments:
Post a Comment