To better appreciate current ground sentiments on the impact of Rising Public Transport Fares (especially on middle-income Singaporeans), the MP of Hougang will be hosting an informal dialogue with concerned Singaporeans.
Below are the details of the dialogue:
Date: 17th December 2011 (Saturday)
Time: 1 to 3.30pm
Venue: To Be Confirmed
If you are keen to part of the informal dialogue, please email Ms. Jace Tang at (jacetang@hotmail.com) to indicate your attendance. Thank you.
Best Regards
Shin Leong
Monday, November 28, 2011
Comprehensive Review Of the Estate Agent’s Bill & Proposals To Improve Our Real Estate Industry
On 14th November 2011, Hougang MP Yaw Shin Leong hosted an informal dialogue with a group of real estate agents (across agencies) to better understand the current issues and challenges face by real estate agents, after The Estate Agents Bill was passed on 15th September 2010 and the Council for Estate Agencies (CEA), a statutory board that oversees the measures and put forward in the bill. Below contains:
a) Executive Summary of the Informal Dialogue (14th Nov 2011)
b) Comprehensive Review Of the Estate Agent’s Bill (CROEAB)
c) Proposals To Improve Our Real Estate Industry (PTIOREI)
As the the review and proposals are still work in progress, the enthusiastic group is seeking out fellow like-minded estate agents (& legal professionals) to play a part in the review + proposal to further professionalize the industry. The gathered views will be complied in a finalized paper to be submitted to relevant channels. Please email yawshinleong@gmail.com if you are keen to be part of this journey.
A second informal dialogue will be hosted shortly and details are as follows:
Date: 12th December 2011 (Monday)
Time: 4 to 6pm
Venue: To be confirmed
If you are keen to be part of the 2nd informal dialogue, please email Ms Koh Wee Leng at kohweeleng@gmail.com to indicate your attendance. Thank you.
Executive Summary of Informal Dialogue (14th Nov 2011)
1) Applaud on the formation of a council to regulate the real estate industry, to eradicate rogue agents. However, CEA was formed hastily;
2) The People-in-charge at the CEA do not seem to possess the industry domain knowledge and do not understand the practical process of the works of the real estate agents, thus the rules set, are impractical and cause hindrances to the real estate agents in carrying out their professional duties instead;
3) The agents are not ‘protected’ by the Council when they encounter rogue property sellers, buyers, landlords and tenants. CEA seems to be out there to punish the real estate agents, than to objectively improve the professionalism of the real estate industry.
4) Apart from creating agreement forms that encourage agents to impose service fee on their clients, CEA must educate the public on the need to engage their respective agents, and the need to commission their respective agents.
Comprehensive Review Of the Estate Agent’s Bill(CROEAB)
The current rule - 'No Dual Representation'
It is imperative for the Council to educate the public, for the potential buyers and tenants of properties, to appoint their respective agents prior to any viewing appointment. This means, only buyers' and tenants' representing agents will contact the listing agents for viewing appointments and thus, the respective agents will transact the deal, on behalf of their clients. This will resolve the 'No Dual Representation', as well as, ' No Co-broking' issues.
One of the objectives of the Council as stated in their official web page is to engage in public education efforts to help consumers in property transactions. In respect to the objective and the above situation, the Council must educate the public that clients must commission their respective agents. This, also ensure the feudal duties of the respective agents are intact, and there will be no situation where, due to single paymaster, collaboration between two agents in favor of the paymasters or buyers. This is akin to the clients commission their respective conveyance lawyers, there isn't a situation where the seller's conveyance lawyer, splitting the legal fee he receives from his client, with the buyers' conveyance lawyer.
The current rule - For Sale By Owners
The Council should not permit sellers, buyers, landlord and tenants to transact any property deals themselves, as they are not trained; they do not attend classes; they do not sit the examinations such as Common Examination for Housing Agents(CEHA), Common Examination for Salespersons(CES) etc, and they are not registered with the Council. Therefore, the seller, buyers, landlord and tenants are not licenced to transact any deal with regards to property transactions. If a seller who is not licenced, sells his property to a buyer, essentially, the buyer is not protected, he is not being served by a licence agent.
The current rule - GST
The Council provides an option to payment of Good and Services Tax(GST). Payment of GST to GST registered agencies is mandatory, not an option as stated in:
Form 1-Estate Agency Agreement for the Sale of Residential Property;
Form 2-Estate Agency Agreement for the Purchase of Purchase Property;
Form 3-Estate Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Landlord;
Form 4-Estate Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Tenant;
Form 5-Exclusive Agency Agreement for the Sale of Residential Property;
Form 6-Exclusive Agency Agreement for the Purchase of Residential Property;
Form 7-Exclusive Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Landlord;
Form 8- Exclusive Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Tenant
The current rule - No obligation to compensate agents on aborted deals
As stated in Form 1-Estate Agency Agreement for the Sale of Residential Property and Form 3-Estate Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Landlord. Sellers and landlords are not obligated to pay commission to the real estate agents if the sale and the leasing of the property fall through. The real estate agents must be compensated half of the deposit that is forfeited by the sellers and the landlords when deals are aborted, as the real estate agents have successfully secured the deals, and cost spent in marketing the property.
The current rule - Annual license fee
The Council imposes an annual licence fee of $246.10 including GST should be amended to a one-off license fee, as agents are paying fees for courses, examination as well as the yearly Continuing Professional Development (CPD). The fees of these courses, examination and CPD amount to more than $500. Currently, if a new agent obtains the relevant certification, say in October 2011, upon registration with CEA, he has to fulfill the full amount of $246.10 for the entire year of 2011. Come January 2012, which is just 3 months after his registration on October 2011, the same agent has to fulfill another payment of $246.10 for the entire 2012. The new agent should only make a full payment of $246.10 as a one-off licence fee regardless the date of registration.
The current rule - Fines & jail terms
The Council imposes punishments in the form of heavy fines and imprisonment which are outrageous. One of the many examples is the fine of $10,000 and jail term of 1 year for not wearing the agent name tag. To cite an example of a simple, economical and effective approach would be suspending the agent’s licence for about 1 month for this incident.
The current rule - Renewal of Tenancy Agreement
3rd party agents are not allowed to take over renewal of lease irrespective of the 3rd party agents relation to the landlords or appointed agents. Landlords must honour the efforts of the existing agents, unless the latter is proven to have failed his/her duties.
Proposals To Improve Our Real Estate Industry(PTIOREI)
1) Implementing a minimal service fee on customers prior to engaging the real estate agents. This will protect the real estate agents from being abused and taken advantage of their time and efforts. Such implementation of minimal service fee will eliminate pseudo property buyers and sellers. For lower income households, a similar set-up such as the Legal Aid Bureau which they can seek help from.
2) The Council should provide a crystal clear distinction between disbursements and professional fees. Items such as valuation reports, title searches, submission/registration fee to HDB etc should be clearly stated as disbursements and not part of agents’ professional fees.
3) The Estate Agents Act (Gazetted) Part II, Section 25 denotes that ‘The Council may invest its money in accordance with the standard investment power of statutory bodies as defined in section 33A of the Interpretation Act(Cap. 1)’. As depicted in The Council website:
‘CEA's principal functions are to license the estate agents (referring to the estate agencies) and register salespersons (referring to the property agents), promote the integrity and competence of estate agents and salespersons and engage in public education efforts to help consumers in property transactions.’ The Council should stay very focus in promoting integrity and competence of estate agents and salespersons, but not engage in any form of investments. Perhaps the annual licence renewal and the imposition of outrages fines, are the source of funds for the future investment plan of the Council.
4) Estate Agents (Appeals) Rule 2010 depicts that an appeal to the Appeals Board shall be made by lodging a notice of appeal. A non-refundable fee $1,000 when lodging an appeal. This is another hefty cost imposed upon the agents.
5) The Council’s principal functions are to licence the estate agents and register salespersons(formally known as property agents), promote integrity and competence of estate agents and salespersons.
To promote competency, we suggest the Council to provide a truly professional training center or, outsource to truly professional certified training centers, which focus on:
1) Residential Property training course;
2) Commercial Property training course;
3) Industrial Property training course;
not when property buyers manoeveur their investments to Commercial and Industrial Properties, we witness companies marketing their Commercial and Industrial Properties training programs.
Truly professional and certifications from:
1) National University of Singapore
- Bachelor of Science (Real Estate);
- Bachelor of Science (Estate Management);
- Bachelor of Real Estate(Property Management);
- Bachelor of Real Estate(Valuation);
2) Ngee Ann Polytechnic and Singapore Polytechnic
- Diploma in Building Management;
- Diploma in Building and Real Estate Management;
- Diploma in Real Estate Management;
- Diploma in Real Estate Business;
- Diploma in Property Development & Facilities Management;
- Diploma in Building & Property Management
In Summary
The Council cited it had worked with the industry key stakeholders prior to formulating the rules and the penalties. There is an urgent need for the Council to re-look into the rules and penalties seriously and conscientiously, amend and or abolish the unacceptable ones.
a) Executive Summary of the Informal Dialogue (14th Nov 2011)
b) Comprehensive Review Of the Estate Agent’s Bill (CROEAB)
c) Proposals To Improve Our Real Estate Industry (PTIOREI)
As the the review and proposals are still work in progress, the enthusiastic group is seeking out fellow like-minded estate agents (& legal professionals) to play a part in the review + proposal to further professionalize the industry. The gathered views will be complied in a finalized paper to be submitted to relevant channels. Please email yawshinleong@gmail.com if you are keen to be part of this journey.
A second informal dialogue will be hosted shortly and details are as follows:
Date: 12th December 2011 (Monday)
Time: 4 to 6pm
Venue: To be confirmed
If you are keen to be part of the 2nd informal dialogue, please email Ms Koh Wee Leng at kohweeleng@gmail.com to indicate your attendance. Thank you.
Executive Summary of Informal Dialogue (14th Nov 2011)
1) Applaud on the formation of a council to regulate the real estate industry, to eradicate rogue agents. However, CEA was formed hastily;
2) The People-in-charge at the CEA do not seem to possess the industry domain knowledge and do not understand the practical process of the works of the real estate agents, thus the rules set, are impractical and cause hindrances to the real estate agents in carrying out their professional duties instead;
3) The agents are not ‘protected’ by the Council when they encounter rogue property sellers, buyers, landlords and tenants. CEA seems to be out there to punish the real estate agents, than to objectively improve the professionalism of the real estate industry.
4) Apart from creating agreement forms that encourage agents to impose service fee on their clients, CEA must educate the public on the need to engage their respective agents, and the need to commission their respective agents.
Comprehensive Review Of the Estate Agent’s Bill(CROEAB)
The current rule - 'No Dual Representation'
It is imperative for the Council to educate the public, for the potential buyers and tenants of properties, to appoint their respective agents prior to any viewing appointment. This means, only buyers' and tenants' representing agents will contact the listing agents for viewing appointments and thus, the respective agents will transact the deal, on behalf of their clients. This will resolve the 'No Dual Representation', as well as, ' No Co-broking' issues.
One of the objectives of the Council as stated in their official web page is to engage in public education efforts to help consumers in property transactions. In respect to the objective and the above situation, the Council must educate the public that clients must commission their respective agents. This, also ensure the feudal duties of the respective agents are intact, and there will be no situation where, due to single paymaster, collaboration between two agents in favor of the paymasters or buyers. This is akin to the clients commission their respective conveyance lawyers, there isn't a situation where the seller's conveyance lawyer, splitting the legal fee he receives from his client, with the buyers' conveyance lawyer.
The current rule - For Sale By Owners
The Council should not permit sellers, buyers, landlord and tenants to transact any property deals themselves, as they are not trained; they do not attend classes; they do not sit the examinations such as Common Examination for Housing Agents(CEHA), Common Examination for Salespersons(CES) etc, and they are not registered with the Council. Therefore, the seller, buyers, landlord and tenants are not licenced to transact any deal with regards to property transactions. If a seller who is not licenced, sells his property to a buyer, essentially, the buyer is not protected, he is not being served by a licence agent.
The current rule - GST
The Council provides an option to payment of Good and Services Tax(GST). Payment of GST to GST registered agencies is mandatory, not an option as stated in:
Form 1-Estate Agency Agreement for the Sale of Residential Property;
Form 2-Estate Agency Agreement for the Purchase of Purchase Property;
Form 3-Estate Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Landlord;
Form 4-Estate Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Tenant;
Form 5-Exclusive Agency Agreement for the Sale of Residential Property;
Form 6-Exclusive Agency Agreement for the Purchase of Residential Property;
Form 7-Exclusive Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Landlord;
Form 8- Exclusive Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Tenant
The current rule - No obligation to compensate agents on aborted deals
As stated in Form 1-Estate Agency Agreement for the Sale of Residential Property and Form 3-Estate Agency Agreement for the Lease of Residential Property by a Landlord. Sellers and landlords are not obligated to pay commission to the real estate agents if the sale and the leasing of the property fall through. The real estate agents must be compensated half of the deposit that is forfeited by the sellers and the landlords when deals are aborted, as the real estate agents have successfully secured the deals, and cost spent in marketing the property.
The current rule - Annual license fee
The Council imposes an annual licence fee of $246.10 including GST should be amended to a one-off license fee, as agents are paying fees for courses, examination as well as the yearly Continuing Professional Development (CPD). The fees of these courses, examination and CPD amount to more than $500. Currently, if a new agent obtains the relevant certification, say in October 2011, upon registration with CEA, he has to fulfill the full amount of $246.10 for the entire year of 2011. Come January 2012, which is just 3 months after his registration on October 2011, the same agent has to fulfill another payment of $246.10 for the entire 2012. The new agent should only make a full payment of $246.10 as a one-off licence fee regardless the date of registration.
The current rule - Fines & jail terms
The Council imposes punishments in the form of heavy fines and imprisonment which are outrageous. One of the many examples is the fine of $10,000 and jail term of 1 year for not wearing the agent name tag. To cite an example of a simple, economical and effective approach would be suspending the agent’s licence for about 1 month for this incident.
The current rule - Renewal of Tenancy Agreement
3rd party agents are not allowed to take over renewal of lease irrespective of the 3rd party agents relation to the landlords or appointed agents. Landlords must honour the efforts of the existing agents, unless the latter is proven to have failed his/her duties.
Proposals To Improve Our Real Estate Industry(PTIOREI)
1) Implementing a minimal service fee on customers prior to engaging the real estate agents. This will protect the real estate agents from being abused and taken advantage of their time and efforts. Such implementation of minimal service fee will eliminate pseudo property buyers and sellers. For lower income households, a similar set-up such as the Legal Aid Bureau which they can seek help from.
2) The Council should provide a crystal clear distinction between disbursements and professional fees. Items such as valuation reports, title searches, submission/registration fee to HDB etc should be clearly stated as disbursements and not part of agents’ professional fees.
3) The Estate Agents Act (Gazetted) Part II, Section 25 denotes that ‘The Council may invest its money in accordance with the standard investment power of statutory bodies as defined in section 33A of the Interpretation Act(Cap. 1)’. As depicted in The Council website:
‘CEA's principal functions are to license the estate agents (referring to the estate agencies) and register salespersons (referring to the property agents), promote the integrity and competence of estate agents and salespersons and engage in public education efforts to help consumers in property transactions.’ The Council should stay very focus in promoting integrity and competence of estate agents and salespersons, but not engage in any form of investments. Perhaps the annual licence renewal and the imposition of outrages fines, are the source of funds for the future investment plan of the Council.
4) Estate Agents (Appeals) Rule 2010 depicts that an appeal to the Appeals Board shall be made by lodging a notice of appeal. A non-refundable fee $1,000 when lodging an appeal. This is another hefty cost imposed upon the agents.
5) The Council’s principal functions are to licence the estate agents and register salespersons(formally known as property agents), promote integrity and competence of estate agents and salespersons.
To promote competency, we suggest the Council to provide a truly professional training center or, outsource to truly professional certified training centers, which focus on:
1) Residential Property training course;
2) Commercial Property training course;
3) Industrial Property training course;
not when property buyers manoeveur their investments to Commercial and Industrial Properties, we witness companies marketing their Commercial and Industrial Properties training programs.
Truly professional and certifications from:
1) National University of Singapore
- Bachelor of Science (Real Estate);
- Bachelor of Science (Estate Management);
- Bachelor of Real Estate(Property Management);
- Bachelor of Real Estate(Valuation);
2) Ngee Ann Polytechnic and Singapore Polytechnic
- Diploma in Building Management;
- Diploma in Building and Real Estate Management;
- Diploma in Real Estate Management;
- Diploma in Real Estate Business;
- Diploma in Property Development & Facilities Management;
- Diploma in Building & Property Management
In Summary
The Council cited it had worked with the industry key stakeholders prior to formulating the rules and the penalties. There is an urgent need for the Council to re-look into the rules and penalties seriously and conscientiously, amend and or abolish the unacceptable ones.
Thursday, November 24, 2011
Informal Dialogue on the Impact of GST
The GST (Goods & Services Tax) is a broad-based value added tax levied on import of goods, as well as nearly all supplies of goods and services.
The only exemptions are for the sales and leases of residential properties and most financial services. Export of goods and international services are zero-rated.
Singapore's GST was introduced on April 1, 1994, at 3%. It was increased to 4% on 1 January 2003, and to 5% on 1 January 2004. It was increased to its current rate of 7% on 1 July 2007.
To better appreciate current ground sentiments on the impact of GST (especially on low-income Singaporeans), the MP of Hougang will be hosting an informal dialogue with concerned Singaporeans.
Below are the details of the dialogue:
Date: 10th December 2011 (Saturday)
Time: 1 to 3.30pm
Venue: To Be Confirmed
If you are keen to part of the informal dialogue, please email Mr. Haffiz Hani at (haffizhani@gmail.com) to indicate your attendance. Thank you.
Best Regards
Shin Leong
The only exemptions are for the sales and leases of residential properties and most financial services. Export of goods and international services are zero-rated.
Singapore's GST was introduced on April 1, 1994, at 3%. It was increased to 4% on 1 January 2003, and to 5% on 1 January 2004. It was increased to its current rate of 7% on 1 July 2007.
To better appreciate current ground sentiments on the impact of GST (especially on low-income Singaporeans), the MP of Hougang will be hosting an informal dialogue with concerned Singaporeans.
Below are the details of the dialogue:
Date: 10th December 2011 (Saturday)
Time: 1 to 3.30pm
Venue: To Be Confirmed
If you are keen to part of the informal dialogue, please email Mr. Haffiz Hani at (haffizhani@gmail.com) to indicate your attendance. Thank you.
Best Regards
Shin Leong
Monday, November 21, 2011
Shin Leong's Speech On Work Injury Compensation (Amendment) Bill
Mr Speaker Sir, the Bill makes several improvements to the existing Act. The Act now covers exposure to chemical or biological agents and improves the insurance protection of the worker. This is commendable. To further safeguard the interests of our workers, I would like to suggest four changes to the Bill.
Let me begin with the proposed amendment of Section 11: removal of court action as a reasonable cause for delay in filing WICA claims. This amendment would effectively prevent injured workers from getting any compensation, if they go to court and lose or withdraw for various circumstances beyond their control. This amendment reverses the decision by the Court of Appeal in the case of Pang Chen Suan Vs Commissioner for Labour. The Court of Appeal made it clear that an injured worker can choose to withdraw his claim under WICA to pursue his claim under common law and still be allowed return to WICA later, if there is no prejudice to the employer and insurer. The worker’s choice to sue under common law is considered reasonable cause to make the WICA claim outside the 1 year period.
The Ministry of Manpower’s consultation paper states that they have, quote, “started to see an increase in WICA claims being re-filed more than 1 year after the accident, with some cases being re-filed even 6 years after the accident”, unquote. In fact, MOM’s intention is to discourage so-called forum shopping. Is this increase in re-filings so large that it overwhelms the WICA’s intention as a cap on liabilities? Why punish all workers just to prevent a small number of forum shoppers abusing the system? Why not preserve the current status quo of allowing MOM discretionary powers to decide the merits of each case? Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. In the interests of our workers, the current form of Section 11 need not be changed.
I will now touch on the proposed amendment of Section 3, which would exclude compensation for injuries sustained in work-related fights. The proposed wording gives exceptions on the exceptions for compensation. This is complicated and puts the onus on employees to prove that they are entitled to compensation. Does this not undermine the intent of WICA to be a no-fault claims? The amendment should really be in line with the other stipulations in Section 3 and be stated as an exception to compensation. it should simply state, quote, “if the employee is shown by the proper authorities to have started the assault or destruction of property that resulted in his/her injury then theemployer would not be liable”, unquote. This shifts the burden of proof from the employee to the proper authorities for exceptions for compensation like the other stipulations in Section 3. This will prevent anyone from making use of the law to deny compensation to all workers involved in a fight.
I would like to add that the fact this amendment has been proposed is very worrying. The amendment suggests that workplace fights are not uncommon occurrences today. Is workplace safety and security no longer a given in Singapore? Are our workers now more vulnerable to work-related fights? We hope that the MOM intends to address this problem beyond capping employer liabilities. I notice that the banners of the WSH Nation campaign are lining our streets. And I observe that thousands of our workers have gone online to create their 3D WSH Citizen (I am citizen No. 3005). Each citizen has an audio that says quote, “I pledge to end all risks at work”, unquote. The risks should also include work-related fights. Excluding compensation for injuries due to fights will only make workers more anxious of this particular risk. It is not an effective deterrent if it is meant to be one. I ask that the MOM take a more positive approach to tackling this problem.
Moving on to the next change, I support the expansion in coverage for occupational diseases that the amendment of Section 4 brings.However, the limitation period for exposure to chemical and biological agents needs to be made equivalent to other occupational diseases. The start of the limitation period should be, quote, “no longer employed in the occupation”, unquote, rather than, quote, “ceases to be exposed”, unquote. The limitation period for exposure to chemical and biological agents should be 3 years, given that some Second Schedule diseases have 3 years limitation periods.
Separately, the MOM is conducting a review on the limitation periods of occupational diseases to better align them with the actual disease development timeframe. What is the progress of the review? This should be a matter of urgency since more workers will be compromised by the current common standard of 1-year limitation period with the delay of the review.
My final point is on the Increase of WICA compensation limit in the Third Schedule. The MOM had agreed to this in the consultation paper. Could the Minister indicate when the new limits will be gazetted and when will they take effect?
In addition, in 2008, the Ministry Of Health has further increased the burden on injured workers when they removed hospital subsidies for industrial accidents. The removal is supposedly in line with the principle that it is the employer’s responsibility to ensure the safety and health of their employees at the work place, yet any WICA compensation limit puts a price cap on this principle and transfers the employer’s responsibility to the workers’ burden instead.
For foreigners on S-Pass and Work Permit, the employer is fully liable for all medical treatment costs, even above the WICA limit. This is not so for injured Singaporean workers. After claiming from WICA, they are still liable for their own medical expenses above the WICA limit. Injured Singaporean workers with medical expenses above the limit have two choices. One, give up the WICA claim and take the risk of suing the employer under common law. Or two, apply through the hospital’s medical social workers for further assistance on a case-by-case basis. Why make this policy that results in Singaporean workers being worse off than foreign workers? With the interests of Singaporeans in mind, I propose the removal of the medical claims cap in Section 5 of the Third Schedule.
Mr Speaker, to re-iterate, I would like to say that the bill adds much needed protection for workers who’ve been exposed to chemical and biological agents. However, it still requires tweaks to further the interests of workers. Thank you.
—
Delivered in Parliament on 21 Nov 2011
Let me begin with the proposed amendment of Section 11: removal of court action as a reasonable cause for delay in filing WICA claims. This amendment would effectively prevent injured workers from getting any compensation, if they go to court and lose or withdraw for various circumstances beyond their control. This amendment reverses the decision by the Court of Appeal in the case of Pang Chen Suan Vs Commissioner for Labour. The Court of Appeal made it clear that an injured worker can choose to withdraw his claim under WICA to pursue his claim under common law and still be allowed return to WICA later, if there is no prejudice to the employer and insurer. The worker’s choice to sue under common law is considered reasonable cause to make the WICA claim outside the 1 year period.
The Ministry of Manpower’s consultation paper states that they have, quote, “started to see an increase in WICA claims being re-filed more than 1 year after the accident, with some cases being re-filed even 6 years after the accident”, unquote. In fact, MOM’s intention is to discourage so-called forum shopping. Is this increase in re-filings so large that it overwhelms the WICA’s intention as a cap on liabilities? Why punish all workers just to prevent a small number of forum shoppers abusing the system? Why not preserve the current status quo of allowing MOM discretionary powers to decide the merits of each case? Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater. In the interests of our workers, the current form of Section 11 need not be changed.
I will now touch on the proposed amendment of Section 3, which would exclude compensation for injuries sustained in work-related fights. The proposed wording gives exceptions on the exceptions for compensation. This is complicated and puts the onus on employees to prove that they are entitled to compensation. Does this not undermine the intent of WICA to be a no-fault claims? The amendment should really be in line with the other stipulations in Section 3 and be stated as an exception to compensation. it should simply state, quote, “if the employee is shown by the proper authorities to have started the assault or destruction of property that resulted in his/her injury then theemployer would not be liable”, unquote. This shifts the burden of proof from the employee to the proper authorities for exceptions for compensation like the other stipulations in Section 3. This will prevent anyone from making use of the law to deny compensation to all workers involved in a fight.
I would like to add that the fact this amendment has been proposed is very worrying. The amendment suggests that workplace fights are not uncommon occurrences today. Is workplace safety and security no longer a given in Singapore? Are our workers now more vulnerable to work-related fights? We hope that the MOM intends to address this problem beyond capping employer liabilities. I notice that the banners of the WSH Nation campaign are lining our streets. And I observe that thousands of our workers have gone online to create their 3D WSH Citizen (I am citizen No. 3005). Each citizen has an audio that says quote, “I pledge to end all risks at work”, unquote. The risks should also include work-related fights. Excluding compensation for injuries due to fights will only make workers more anxious of this particular risk. It is not an effective deterrent if it is meant to be one. I ask that the MOM take a more positive approach to tackling this problem.
Moving on to the next change, I support the expansion in coverage for occupational diseases that the amendment of Section 4 brings.However, the limitation period for exposure to chemical and biological agents needs to be made equivalent to other occupational diseases. The start of the limitation period should be, quote, “no longer employed in the occupation”, unquote, rather than, quote, “ceases to be exposed”, unquote. The limitation period for exposure to chemical and biological agents should be 3 years, given that some Second Schedule diseases have 3 years limitation periods.
Separately, the MOM is conducting a review on the limitation periods of occupational diseases to better align them with the actual disease development timeframe. What is the progress of the review? This should be a matter of urgency since more workers will be compromised by the current common standard of 1-year limitation period with the delay of the review.
My final point is on the Increase of WICA compensation limit in the Third Schedule. The MOM had agreed to this in the consultation paper. Could the Minister indicate when the new limits will be gazetted and when will they take effect?
In addition, in 2008, the Ministry Of Health has further increased the burden on injured workers when they removed hospital subsidies for industrial accidents. The removal is supposedly in line with the principle that it is the employer’s responsibility to ensure the safety and health of their employees at the work place, yet any WICA compensation limit puts a price cap on this principle and transfers the employer’s responsibility to the workers’ burden instead.
For foreigners on S-Pass and Work Permit, the employer is fully liable for all medical treatment costs, even above the WICA limit. This is not so for injured Singaporean workers. After claiming from WICA, they are still liable for their own medical expenses above the WICA limit. Injured Singaporean workers with medical expenses above the limit have two choices. One, give up the WICA claim and take the risk of suing the employer under common law. Or two, apply through the hospital’s medical social workers for further assistance on a case-by-case basis. Why make this policy that results in Singaporean workers being worse off than foreign workers? With the interests of Singaporeans in mind, I propose the removal of the medical claims cap in Section 5 of the Third Schedule.
Mr Speaker, to re-iterate, I would like to say that the bill adds much needed protection for workers who’ve been exposed to chemical and biological agents. However, it still requires tweaks to further the interests of workers. Thank you.
—
Delivered in Parliament on 21 Nov 2011
Shin Leong’s Speech on CPF (Amendment) Bill
Mr Speaker Sir, while I acknowledge the intent behind the Bill, there are two areas in which I wish to seek further clarity.
First, the Special Needs Savings Scheme introduced by this Billallows parents to nominate their children with special needs to draw a monthly cash payout, receive medisave transfers or a combination of the both after the parent has passed on. The statutory provisions as they are drafted give wide discretion to the CPF Board and MCYS to decide the amount and method of making the payouts to the nominee. Three parties – the parent, the Board and MCYS – could potentially be involved in the decision on how much to pay the SNSS nominee and how these payments should be made. It should be kept simple: the parent’s wishes expressed in the nomination should come first because parents will know the needs (which include financial needs) of their children best. If the parent’s nomination is unclear, only then should the MCYS be allowed to exercise its discretion. This will reduce the risk of slip-ups in coordination between the Board and MCYS. What areas of concern does the Board have that makes it necessary for the wide discretionary powers?
I also note that under the proposed S 25 (1C), the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports will decide whether the child qualifies as a nominee under this scheme. If the Minister does not issue the certificate of eligibility, the applicant can apply back to him for reconsideration under S 25 (1E). There is a concern that this avenue of re-consideration may not be effective since according to the Bill, the re-consideration is being done by the same person who made the decision in the first place i.e. the Minister. I note that the Minister can delegate one or both of these powers to others as allowed by section 25(1H). How does the government intend to ensure that the re-consideration is done with fresh eyes and is not just a formality?
Second, CPF Life payouts and Minimum Sum withdrawals are an important source of regular income to retired Singaporeans. However, the proposed changes to sections 27Q and 77(1)(o) allow the Board to pay the CPF Life payouts and the Minimum Sum withdrawals by a member who reaches 55 into that member’s account. Our retirees need their CPF Life payouts and Minimum Sum withdrawals in cash for their living expenses. Could the minister clarify why does the Board need the power to pay these payouts and withdrawals to the member’s CPF account instead of in cash? It is rather strange when a member can finally withdraw and enjoy his hard-earned savings from CPF at 55, only to have the Board put it back into his CPF account. Under what circumstances will theBoard exercise these powers?
Thank you.
—-
Delivered in Parliament on 21 Nov 2011
First, the Special Needs Savings Scheme introduced by this Billallows parents to nominate their children with special needs to draw a monthly cash payout, receive medisave transfers or a combination of the both after the parent has passed on. The statutory provisions as they are drafted give wide discretion to the CPF Board and MCYS to decide the amount and method of making the payouts to the nominee. Three parties – the parent, the Board and MCYS – could potentially be involved in the decision on how much to pay the SNSS nominee and how these payments should be made. It should be kept simple: the parent’s wishes expressed in the nomination should come first because parents will know the needs (which include financial needs) of their children best. If the parent’s nomination is unclear, only then should the MCYS be allowed to exercise its discretion. This will reduce the risk of slip-ups in coordination between the Board and MCYS. What areas of concern does the Board have that makes it necessary for the wide discretionary powers?
I also note that under the proposed S 25 (1C), the Minister for Community Development, Youth and Sports will decide whether the child qualifies as a nominee under this scheme. If the Minister does not issue the certificate of eligibility, the applicant can apply back to him for reconsideration under S 25 (1E). There is a concern that this avenue of re-consideration may not be effective since according to the Bill, the re-consideration is being done by the same person who made the decision in the first place i.e. the Minister. I note that the Minister can delegate one or both of these powers to others as allowed by section 25(1H). How does the government intend to ensure that the re-consideration is done with fresh eyes and is not just a formality?
Second, CPF Life payouts and Minimum Sum withdrawals are an important source of regular income to retired Singaporeans. However, the proposed changes to sections 27Q and 77(1)(o) allow the Board to pay the CPF Life payouts and the Minimum Sum withdrawals by a member who reaches 55 into that member’s account. Our retirees need their CPF Life payouts and Minimum Sum withdrawals in cash for their living expenses. Could the minister clarify why does the Board need the power to pay these payouts and withdrawals to the member’s CPF account instead of in cash? It is rather strange when a member can finally withdraw and enjoy his hard-earned savings from CPF at 55, only to have the Board put it back into his CPF account. Under what circumstances will theBoard exercise these powers?
Thank you.
—-
Delivered in Parliament on 21 Nov 2011
Relevance Of e2i Reskilling Programmes
Below is the question I filed and the written answer for Relevance of e2i Reskilling Programmes (21st Nov 2011)
Mr Yaw Shin Leong: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower since the inception of the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) in 2006 (a) what is the take-up rate for its reskilling programmes; (b) what is the placement rate of candidates in new jobs; (c) how are the sectors which are in dire need of local workers identified; (d) what are the root issues as to why these sectors are unable to attract local workers; and (e) whether these issues are being adequately addressed.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam:
A productivity-driven and innovative economy needs a strong and supportive Continuing Education and Training (CET) foundation to ensure that the workforce has the relevant skills to meet current and future needs. Over the years, WDA has developed a robust and comprehensive CET system based on the key tenets that training must meet the needs of employers and also lead to better jobs and improved employability for our workers. E2i is one of the multiple stakeholders in this national CET system.
To-date, about 700,000 workers have been trained in Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) courses[1]. This includes workers who were sent for training by their employers as well as individuals who participated in training on their own initiative. In a 2010 survey, 88% of respondents indicated that they were able to apply the skills learnt from WSQ training in their jobs. Similarly, more than 90% of 1,900 companies surveyed indicated that WSQ training had helped improve the work performance of employees.
WDA has also put in place Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) to enable professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) to switch to a range of new occupations such as registered nurses, occupational therapists, preschool teachers and software developers. As at Dec 2010, about 3,600 PMETs had undergone or were undergoing training.
As training should lead to improved employment outcomes, our CET Centres also provide job placement services. WDA’s Career Centres at the Community Development Councils (CDCs) and e2i also play an integral role in placing workers in jobs. Where workers possess the requisite skills, the Career Centres can help to place them into job vacancies on hand. However, where skills gaps are identified, the Career Centres would encourage workers to go for relevant training before placing them in jobs. 6 in 10 job seekers were placed into jobs by WDA’s Career Centres and e2i in 2010. This translates to some 17,000 successful job placements.
Certain industries face continuing difficulties in attracting local manpower. This is particularly where the job entails shift work, outdoor work conditions or serving customers. A tight labour market also means that local workers have ample choices of jobs. However, there is also some mismatch of skills, with employers needing skills which those looking for jobs do not have. We have thus been working closely with industry to redesign jobs and train workers to meet the needs of these jobs.
Ultimately, the solution lies in upgrading jobs and productivity, and allowing employees to take pride in their work, no matter what the job. Higher productivity will enable employers to offer better pay and career prospects to local workers.
The Government is investing heavily to support companies and workers in this effort. This includes both generic and focused schemes. Amongst the focused approaches is the Inclusive Growth Programme (IGP) administered by e2i and funded by the National Productivity Fund. The $40 million scheme provides grants to help employers raise productivity by investing in training their workers and by leveraging on technology to reduce reliance on manpower.
[1] From 2009-2010, about 58,000 individuals participated in upgrading and re-skilling programmes administered by e2i. This includes WSQ programmes.
Mr Yaw Shin Leong: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower since the inception of the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) in 2006 (a) what is the take-up rate for its reskilling programmes; (b) what is the placement rate of candidates in new jobs; (c) how are the sectors which are in dire need of local workers identified; (d) what are the root issues as to why these sectors are unable to attract local workers; and (e) whether these issues are being adequately addressed.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam:
A productivity-driven and innovative economy needs a strong and supportive Continuing Education and Training (CET) foundation to ensure that the workforce has the relevant skills to meet current and future needs. Over the years, WDA has developed a robust and comprehensive CET system based on the key tenets that training must meet the needs of employers and also lead to better jobs and improved employability for our workers. E2i is one of the multiple stakeholders in this national CET system.
To-date, about 700,000 workers have been trained in Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ) courses[1]. This includes workers who were sent for training by their employers as well as individuals who participated in training on their own initiative. In a 2010 survey, 88% of respondents indicated that they were able to apply the skills learnt from WSQ training in their jobs. Similarly, more than 90% of 1,900 companies surveyed indicated that WSQ training had helped improve the work performance of employees.
WDA has also put in place Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) to enable professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) to switch to a range of new occupations such as registered nurses, occupational therapists, preschool teachers and software developers. As at Dec 2010, about 3,600 PMETs had undergone or were undergoing training.
As training should lead to improved employment outcomes, our CET Centres also provide job placement services. WDA’s Career Centres at the Community Development Councils (CDCs) and e2i also play an integral role in placing workers in jobs. Where workers possess the requisite skills, the Career Centres can help to place them into job vacancies on hand. However, where skills gaps are identified, the Career Centres would encourage workers to go for relevant training before placing them in jobs. 6 in 10 job seekers were placed into jobs by WDA’s Career Centres and e2i in 2010. This translates to some 17,000 successful job placements.
Certain industries face continuing difficulties in attracting local manpower. This is particularly where the job entails shift work, outdoor work conditions or serving customers. A tight labour market also means that local workers have ample choices of jobs. However, there is also some mismatch of skills, with employers needing skills which those looking for jobs do not have. We have thus been working closely with industry to redesign jobs and train workers to meet the needs of these jobs.
Ultimately, the solution lies in upgrading jobs and productivity, and allowing employees to take pride in their work, no matter what the job. Higher productivity will enable employers to offer better pay and career prospects to local workers.
The Government is investing heavily to support companies and workers in this effort. This includes both generic and focused schemes. Amongst the focused approaches is the Inclusive Growth Programme (IGP) administered by e2i and funded by the National Productivity Fund. The $40 million scheme provides grants to help employers raise productivity by investing in training their workers and by leveraging on technology to reduce reliance on manpower.
[1] From 2009-2010, about 58,000 individuals participated in upgrading and re-skilling programmes administered by e2i. This includes WSQ programmes.
Number Of Employment Passes & Certificates Issued
Below is the question I filed for written answer on the number of employment passes and certificates issued. (21st Nov 2011)
Mr Yaw Shin Leong: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower for each of the past five years from 2006 to 2010 inclusive, how many of the following passes/certificates have been issued: (i) P1 Employment Pass; (ii) P2 Employment Pass; (iii) Q1 Employment Pass; (iv) Personalised Employment Pass; (v) S-Pass; and (vi) Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam:
The table below provides the year-end stock of Employment Pass (P1, P2, Q1 and Personalised Employment Pass) and S Pass holders from 2006 to 2010. These figures include Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate[1] (EPEC) holders who have converted their EPEC to an Employment Pass (EP) or S Pass.
EP and S Pass
06: 110,000
07: 143,000
08: 188,000
09: 197,000
10: 240,000
EP
06: 81,000
07: 99,000
08: 114,000
09: 115,000
10: 142,000
S Pass
06: 29,000
07: 44,000
08: 74,000
09: 82,000
10: 98,000
[1] The EPEC is a certificate which indicates that the holder is likely to qualify for an Employment Pass. It is not a work pass. The EPEC holder would still need to apply for a work pass from MOM to be able to stay in Singapore to work.
Mr Yaw Shin Leong: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Manpower for each of the past five years from 2006 to 2010 inclusive, how many of the following passes/certificates have been issued: (i) P1 Employment Pass; (ii) P2 Employment Pass; (iii) Q1 Employment Pass; (iv) Personalised Employment Pass; (v) S-Pass; and (vi) Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam:
The table below provides the year-end stock of Employment Pass (P1, P2, Q1 and Personalised Employment Pass) and S Pass holders from 2006 to 2010. These figures include Employment Pass Eligibility Certificate[1] (EPEC) holders who have converted their EPEC to an Employment Pass (EP) or S Pass.
EP and S Pass
06: 110,000
07: 143,000
08: 188,000
09: 197,000
10: 240,000
EP
06: 81,000
07: 99,000
08: 114,000
09: 115,000
10: 142,000
S Pass
06: 29,000
07: 44,000
08: 74,000
09: 82,000
10: 98,000
[1] The EPEC is a certificate which indicates that the holder is likely to qualify for an Employment Pass. It is not a work pass. The EPEC holder would still need to apply for a work pass from MOM to be able to stay in Singapore to work.
Compensation For Retrenched Daily-Rated Civil Servants
Below is the question I filed and the written answer on the compensation for retrenched daily-rated civil servants in Singapore. (Monday, 21 Nov 2011)
Mr Yaw Shin Leong: To ask the Prime Minister in respect of Division 4 and daily-rated civil servants in the Civil Service, what is (i) the number of such workers who were retrenched from 2006 to 2010; (ii) the percentage of these workers who received compensation for retrenchment; (iii) the average number of months of salary paid as compensation; and (iv) the number of such workers who were upskilled to Division 3, from 2006 to 2010.
Mr Teo Chee Hean (Minister-in-charge of Civil Service):
The Civil Service’s Special Resignation Scheme (SRS) allows civil servants whose jobs are no longer needed and who cannot be deployed to other jobs within the Civil Service to leave with compensation.
From 2006 to 2010, 20 Division IV officers left the Civil Service through the SRS. All received compensation generally calculated at one month’s last drawn salary for each year of service and capped at 25 years.
72 Division IV officers were promoted to Division III jobs in the same period.
Mr Yaw Shin Leong: To ask the Prime Minister in respect of Division 4 and daily-rated civil servants in the Civil Service, what is (i) the number of such workers who were retrenched from 2006 to 2010; (ii) the percentage of these workers who received compensation for retrenchment; (iii) the average number of months of salary paid as compensation; and (iv) the number of such workers who were upskilled to Division 3, from 2006 to 2010.
Mr Teo Chee Hean (Minister-in-charge of Civil Service):
The Civil Service’s Special Resignation Scheme (SRS) allows civil servants whose jobs are no longer needed and who cannot be deployed to other jobs within the Civil Service to leave with compensation.
From 2006 to 2010, 20 Division IV officers left the Civil Service through the SRS. All received compensation generally calculated at one month’s last drawn salary for each year of service and capped at 25 years.
72 Division IV officers were promoted to Division III jobs in the same period.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
The Kindred Spirit Of Hougang Indians
Last night was WP Hougang Deepam Nite 2011. It was Hougang Constituency Committee’s first Deepavali celebrations post-GE2011. Hougang Deepam Nite was a night of non-stop entertainment, splendid food and community bonding. MP Yaw Shin Leong, MP Low Thia Khiang, MP Sylvia Lim, MP Chen Show-Mao, MP Muhamed Faisal & NCMP Yee Jenn Jong, WP members & volunteers joined 500-plus Hougang’s Indian community in the celebrations. (MP Pritam Singh was out of town and NCMP Gerald Giam had a prior commitment)
The WP MPs preset kick-start the event with the lighting up of the two Kuthuvelaku(s) (Traditional Light Lamps). Accordingly to the resident who loaned HGCC the Kuthuvelaku(s), he purchased them from Colombo, Sri Lanka in 1990. This was one year earlier than WP’s GE1991 victory in Hougang SMC!
The sub-committee that organized the ‘Hougang Deepam Nite’ was comprised of predominately Hougang residents and was helmed by Mr Manja Khaiyum. Shin Leong shared with the guests, that, he was very heartened by the unceasing passion and deep-rooted commitment displayed by sub-committee members.
Shin Leong shared that their passion is highly infectious and that energizes him. The kindred spirit displayed by Hougang’s Indian community (together with other communities) certainly makes the Hougang Spirit complete.
Hougang Deepam Nite was a culturally enriching night of Bollywood Dance, Indian 'Live' band, non-stop entertainment hosted by G.T. Mani (Vasantham Host) & performances by 'MGR', 'Sivaji' and several other artistes. Hougang residents were also treated to a sumptuous 9 dish buffet dinner, exciting lucky draw prizes and door gifts.
The event will not have been possible, if not because of generous sponsorships, which included a miniature kuthuvelaku, premium Sidhi café (50g Arabica instant coffee) and great lucky draw prizes that included a 32’inch flat screen TV, DVD players, Spa vouchers, fruit blenders and cash vouchers etc.
The night also saw WP MPs dancing alongside the beats of Bollywood music. It was particularly interesting when MP Low Thia Khiang gamely danced on stage!
The volunteers behind Deepam Nite were so jubilant with the event’s success that the team is already talking about the preparations for Hougang Deepam Nite 2012!
Friday, November 18, 2011
On Unlicensed Foreign Monks' Operations
Two monks & a nun met up with me last night to express concerns regarding lax policing by the MOM (Ministry Of Manpower) despite being presented with evidences of unlicensed foreign monks' operations in Singapore. As Singaporeans (especially grieving families) which engage monks to do prayer chants will be affected, I will work closely with their Buddhist order & MOM to look into the matter.
Wednesday, November 16, 2011
On The Would-be Land Acquisition of NYPLHK Building
Hougang MP Yaw Shin Leong, who is a member, said it would be a pity to lose the iconic building. But he added: “Community bonding, however is more important than the physical infrastructure, so I hope members can rally around the new site, wherever it may be.” (ST, Prime News, Page A12)Above are my comments to the Straits Times on the would-be land acquisition of 40 years old Nanyang Pho Leng Huay Kuan (NYPLHK) Building. NYPLHK is a Teochew clan association for descendants of immigrants from Pho Leng county in China’s Guangdong Province.
Between the years 2008 – 2010, I served as an Auditor to NYPLHK’s 50th Working Committee. My late father served as a director of the Huay Kuan’s working committee member. In fact my first-uncle (大伯) is a current director and has been its Assistant-English Secretary (副英文书记) for many years.
As a child I have very fond memories of the time I spent at the Huay Kuan (Clan Association) premise, including those moments when I participated in festive dinners, lantern parades, dong zhi festivals, bursary awards and public speaking competitions etc.
In fact I had my first public speaking experience in NYPLHK at the age of 7 years old. I remembered I froze up like a stone, trying to recall what I was supposed to say! The situation however improved and I even managed to clinch a couple of public speaking first prize awards in subsequent years of participation ;)
First Photo: 1st row, 2nd from right! (Yaw Shin Leong), 1st from left (Yaw Ching Sing, late father of Shin Leong), 4th from left (Yaw Ching Sia, 1st-uncle of Shin Leong)
Second Photo Source: Google Street Map of 115 Keng Lee Road
Monday, November 14, 2011
Discussions With Estate Agents (I)
Earlier this afternoon, Shin Leong hosted an informal dialogue with a group of Estate Agents from various realty agencies to discuss the effects of the Estate Agent’s Bill passed in Parliament on 15th September 2010.The estate agents shared with Shin Leong the challenges they face in the course of carrying out their professional duties. It was a lively and candid session where good ideas on how to improve the real estate industry were generated and proposals flew freely.
Moving forward the dialogue, Shin Leong and the estate agents represented will be putting together the following papers in their private capacities:
1) Proposals To Improve Our Real Estate Industry (PTIOREI)
2) Comprehensive Review Of the Estate Agent’s Bill (CROEAB)
These two initiatives are independent of their respective real estate agencies and CEA (Council for Estate Agencies). They are ground breaking in the sense that both initiatives are amongst the rare organic industrial movements in Singapore, which will be put together by a group of professionals from a particular industry, for that industry and of that industry.
The enthusiastic group is seeking out fellow like-minded estate agents to be part of these two meaningful initiatives. The group welcomes more estate agents to join them in this meaningful journey to professionalize the industry. Please email yawshinleong@gmail.com if you are keen to be part of this journey.
Details of the second informal dialogue are as follows:
Date: 12th December 2011 (Monday)
Time: 4 to 6pm
Venue: To be confirmed
If you are keen to be part of the 2nd informal dialogue, please email Ms Koh Wee Leng at kohweeleng@gmail.com to indicate your attendance. Thank you.
Best Regards
Shin Leong
Thursday, November 10, 2011
The First Step of A Political Breakthrough
Shin Leong accepted a phone interview from the 'The Global Studies Journal'. This non-governmental organization is based in Hong Kong. It focuses on International politics research and global studies. Below is the full verbatim of Shin Leong's phone interview. This interview has been published in Issue 4, 2011, The Global Studies Journal. For a raw translation of the verbatim, please use Google Translate (Traditional Chinese to English).
專訪工人黨勝選人饒欣龍：突破政治現狀的第一步
訪問：馮智政（Roundtable研究員）
答：饒欣龍（新加坡工人黨黨員、後港單選區議員）
工人黨在2011年新加坡議會選舉取得6個議席，被視為新加坡突破人民行動黨威權管治的契機。工人黨秘書長劉程強自1991年以來穩佔後港單選區的國會議員席位，今年毅然率領名單轉戰阿裕尼集選區，成功創造歷史，首次由反對黨勝選集選區。而工人黨派出捍衛後港單選區席位的饒欣龍，也成功以64.81%得票率擊敗對手當選。無論2011年選舉中反對派工人黨的成績是否啓示新加坡政治生態將切實得到改變，工人黨是次選戰當中所採取的策略，以及往後如何把握此次成功進而展開步伐，都值得分析、前瞻。為此，我們專訪了饒欣龍，由他親身回顧工人黨選戰、解說該黨下一步策略以及分析新加坡政治新形勢。
新興網絡造就政客、選民雙向接觸
馮：在今次的選舉中，工人黨贏得了很好的成績。事實上，這個成績頗讓人感到驚訝，因為在過去新加坡的政治現實中，反對黨都很難贏得任何席位。作為工人黨勝選名單中的候選人之一，你可以說說在這次選舉當中所運用了的策略嗎？
饒：運用任何選舉策略也好，選舉競爭當中都沒有捷徑可言。我認為最重要的是當計劃了某個選舉策略以後，就矢志按着這個方向鋪路。勤勞是重要的，如果人民在對了解相關利益和認知某些議題感到困難時，我們就應該致力讓他們明白客觀的問題和我們的主張，從而讓他們能夠確定其所支持的參選人。我想，我們永遠在致力尋找正確的選戰策略，並循此作出努力。
馮：但當我們留意今次選舉，會發現很多反對黨派都以新加坡年輕一代和新興網絡媒體作為競選策略的主要對象和宣傳平台。工人黨在今次選舉是否利用了網絡媒體來達到競選成功？
饒：你說得對，新媒體的出現讓個人擁有Facebook、Twitter、Friendster等網絡平台。通過這些新興網絡平台，個別政治活動家能夠直接接觸選民；而任何選民只要對從政者感到興趣，也可以直接在電腦透過互聯網搜索有關他的演講、大會發言和宣傳短片等等。選民未必可能親身到競選宣傳活動的現場，但總可以使用YouTube等來收看讓他們感興趣的從政者的發言。
民主尚未成功，突破現狀只走了第一步
馮：你認為反對派在今年大選中所取得的成功，是否為人民行動黨傳遞警訊，告訴他們是時候改變政策，或者是時候在新加坡建立真正的民主？
饒：我認為，怎樣界定「成功」相當重要。在一個民主制度的選舉中，唯一識別所謂「成功」的，就是通過獲得50.00…1%的支持率，從而進入議會。在這次2011年選舉中，我們看到工人黨贏得了6個國會議席，還有2個非選區國會議員，這意味着總數共8個。反對派原本還有1席是來自新加坡人民黨的，在2008年初由於詹時中患病而由其妻子補上，可惜她先前失去了議席。換言之，議會中的反對派民選議員佔6席。回想1960年代，13位人民行動黨立法委員表態脫離該黨，並另組社會主義陣綫（Barisan Socialists），形成足可媲美人民行動黨的反對派力量；但從1960年代以來，當天的成功未有把握住，甚至導致了往後的倒退。因此，今天從數量上來看，2011年選舉或許算得上是反對派的成功，但從質量上是還有待觀察和跟進。更重要的是，工人黨必須以此次選舉作為基礎，進而籌備從2011年到2016年的躍進；真正的成功並未在這此選舉中達到，而還在前路。
馮：你是指這次競選表現並不如普遍輿論所指的那般成功嗎？
饒：這次選舉的成就僅在於為前路提供了基礎和信念。今年只是一個開始，與其慶祝當下的選舉成功，倒不如期待看到將來的成功。成功在前路及將來。
馮：你有甚麼計劃來繼續達到心目中真正的成功？
饒：我認為這將取決於選區的水平，最重要的是當選的國會議員如何表現。工人黨將繼續在選區的基礎設施、一般城市保養、綠化等各個方面盡可能爭取提升，我們認為跟社區的聯繫是重要的。工人黨在這次選舉遭遇失敗的選區中，應該加強與人民、社區的關係。對於我們來說，2011年的選區得票率並沒有超過我們的「45%基準」重要的是我們要繼續加強獲得的支持率，才可以在社區從5%、6%、7%…，如是一直提升，最終超越那個「45%基準」，長遠構成對整個國家的影響力。
馮：在新加坡的例子中，人民行動黨長期是國內的第一大黨。從反對黨的角度和定位，你如何看日後新加坡的民主化？
饒：我寧願工人黨着力於在民主化進程當中作出貢獻，而不單是坐着觀望新加坡步向民主。因為如果你不切實地把手、心和精力投入到推動民主，根本沒有資格對未來的成果有所期待和展望。首先，我們必要有一個更公平的議會辯論。在過去數十年，我們見證了新加坡最高決策機構──新加坡議會的辯論；然而，如何優化這個辯論平台還是值得期待的，尤其未來或會有更多反對派議員躋身議會、提出議題。另外，2011年選舉作為國內政治的覺醒，我覺得新加坡人開始變得更容易接受議會內出現代表他們的反對黨。新加坡人民一直生活在執政人民行動黨的威權統治下，任何超出執政黨統治的事情或活動都被標籤為「不尋常」，但事實上整個新加坡政治現實本身才是那個「不尋常」。所謂「民主國家」的本質不應該存有「一黨主政」的成份，新加坡這個事例在於整個世界來說是非常罕見的。
馮：似乎，人民行動黨長年以來的統治和意識形態正是新加坡政治現狀必須突破的關口。有甚麼因素能夠催生這個突破？
饒：還是互聯網吧。互聯網已經存在了十多年，近五年來尤其普及。在新加坡這樣細小密集的城市國家，互聯網所能發揮的連結和凝聚作用更為有力。互聯網在「Y世代」和「Z世代」之間特別流行，而他們將是能左右下屆2016年選舉大局的主要選民群組。依我估計，隨着愈來愈多的年輕一代、互聯網用戶在2016年選舉中加入成為選民，會讓互聯網之於新加坡政治的影響真正見效、更為顯著。
年輕人代政治覺醒值得期待
馮：對於即將在8月份舉行的新加坡總統選舉，工人黨有何主張？
饒：工人黨不支持總統選舉。
馮：為何不支持？
饒：現階段的總統選舉僅是一個保障制度，防止執政黨在民選議會之中完全地失去主事權力，為執政黨的統治護航。現在的總統選舉並沒有實踐制度的基礎目的，即讓總統權力與議會權力之間互相制衡，相反只是一個保障執政黨管治連續性的機制。你必須理解，現時新加坡政府把總統職位的合資格參選條件定得苛刻，門檻極高，如是者只有少數幾個人能符合參選總統的資格。許多合資格的候選人都不約而同地來自建制，正如當下正式宣布角逐、而且合符資格的三位總統候選人 ，都曾經是人民行動黨黨員，跟執政黨有密切的關係。
馮：相信未來幾年的新加坡政治生態，也是讀者相當關注的議題之一，你對此有何評論？
饒：我看到越來越多的新加坡的年輕人挺身而出，為我們的國家出力。特別是我看到國內的年輕人成為了工人黨的義工或成員。我認為這對於國家建設具正面作用，因為當越來越多的年輕人開始看到有需要為國家投資他們自己的時間，即年輕一代逐漸對政治覺醒，就意味着反對派，也包括工人黨的明天是頗為樂觀、值得期待的
專訪工人黨勝選人饒欣龍：突破政治現狀的第一步
訪問：馮智政（Roundtable研究員）
答：饒欣龍（新加坡工人黨黨員、後港單選區議員）
工人黨在2011年新加坡議會選舉取得6個議席，被視為新加坡突破人民行動黨威權管治的契機。工人黨秘書長劉程強自1991年以來穩佔後港單選區的國會議員席位，今年毅然率領名單轉戰阿裕尼集選區，成功創造歷史，首次由反對黨勝選集選區。而工人黨派出捍衛後港單選區席位的饒欣龍，也成功以64.81%得票率擊敗對手當選。無論2011年選舉中反對派工人黨的成績是否啓示新加坡政治生態將切實得到改變，工人黨是次選戰當中所採取的策略，以及往後如何把握此次成功進而展開步伐，都值得分析、前瞻。為此，我們專訪了饒欣龍，由他親身回顧工人黨選戰、解說該黨下一步策略以及分析新加坡政治新形勢。
新興網絡造就政客、選民雙向接觸
馮：在今次的選舉中，工人黨贏得了很好的成績。事實上，這個成績頗讓人感到驚訝，因為在過去新加坡的政治現實中，反對黨都很難贏得任何席位。作為工人黨勝選名單中的候選人之一，你可以說說在這次選舉當中所運用了的策略嗎？
饒：運用任何選舉策略也好，選舉競爭當中都沒有捷徑可言。我認為最重要的是當計劃了某個選舉策略以後，就矢志按着這個方向鋪路。勤勞是重要的，如果人民在對了解相關利益和認知某些議題感到困難時，我們就應該致力讓他們明白客觀的問題和我們的主張，從而讓他們能夠確定其所支持的參選人。我想，我們永遠在致力尋找正確的選戰策略，並循此作出努力。
馮：但當我們留意今次選舉，會發現很多反對黨派都以新加坡年輕一代和新興網絡媒體作為競選策略的主要對象和宣傳平台。工人黨在今次選舉是否利用了網絡媒體來達到競選成功？
饒：你說得對，新媒體的出現讓個人擁有Facebook、Twitter、Friendster等網絡平台。通過這些新興網絡平台，個別政治活動家能夠直接接觸選民；而任何選民只要對從政者感到興趣，也可以直接在電腦透過互聯網搜索有關他的演講、大會發言和宣傳短片等等。選民未必可能親身到競選宣傳活動的現場，但總可以使用YouTube等來收看讓他們感興趣的從政者的發言。
民主尚未成功，突破現狀只走了第一步
馮：你認為反對派在今年大選中所取得的成功，是否為人民行動黨傳遞警訊，告訴他們是時候改變政策，或者是時候在新加坡建立真正的民主？
饒：我認為，怎樣界定「成功」相當重要。在一個民主制度的選舉中，唯一識別所謂「成功」的，就是通過獲得50.00…1%的支持率，從而進入議會。在這次2011年選舉中，我們看到工人黨贏得了6個國會議席，還有2個非選區國會議員，這意味着總數共8個。反對派原本還有1席是來自新加坡人民黨的，在2008年初由於詹時中患病而由其妻子補上，可惜她先前失去了議席。換言之，議會中的反對派民選議員佔6席。回想1960年代，13位人民行動黨立法委員表態脫離該黨，並另組社會主義陣綫（Barisan Socialists），形成足可媲美人民行動黨的反對派力量；但從1960年代以來，當天的成功未有把握住，甚至導致了往後的倒退。因此，今天從數量上來看，2011年選舉或許算得上是反對派的成功，但從質量上是還有待觀察和跟進。更重要的是，工人黨必須以此次選舉作為基礎，進而籌備從2011年到2016年的躍進；真正的成功並未在這此選舉中達到，而還在前路。
馮：你是指這次競選表現並不如普遍輿論所指的那般成功嗎？
饒：這次選舉的成就僅在於為前路提供了基礎和信念。今年只是一個開始，與其慶祝當下的選舉成功，倒不如期待看到將來的成功。成功在前路及將來。
馮：你有甚麼計劃來繼續達到心目中真正的成功？
饒：我認為這將取決於選區的水平，最重要的是當選的國會議員如何表現。工人黨將繼續在選區的基礎設施、一般城市保養、綠化等各個方面盡可能爭取提升，我們認為跟社區的聯繫是重要的。工人黨在這次選舉遭遇失敗的選區中，應該加強與人民、社區的關係。對於我們來說，2011年的選區得票率並沒有超過我們的「45%基準」重要的是我們要繼續加強獲得的支持率，才可以在社區從5%、6%、7%…，如是一直提升，最終超越那個「45%基準」，長遠構成對整個國家的影響力。
馮：在新加坡的例子中，人民行動黨長期是國內的第一大黨。從反對黨的角度和定位，你如何看日後新加坡的民主化？
饒：我寧願工人黨着力於在民主化進程當中作出貢獻，而不單是坐着觀望新加坡步向民主。因為如果你不切實地把手、心和精力投入到推動民主，根本沒有資格對未來的成果有所期待和展望。首先，我們必要有一個更公平的議會辯論。在過去數十年，我們見證了新加坡最高決策機構──新加坡議會的辯論；然而，如何優化這個辯論平台還是值得期待的，尤其未來或會有更多反對派議員躋身議會、提出議題。另外，2011年選舉作為國內政治的覺醒，我覺得新加坡人開始變得更容易接受議會內出現代表他們的反對黨。新加坡人民一直生活在執政人民行動黨的威權統治下，任何超出執政黨統治的事情或活動都被標籤為「不尋常」，但事實上整個新加坡政治現實本身才是那個「不尋常」。所謂「民主國家」的本質不應該存有「一黨主政」的成份，新加坡這個事例在於整個世界來說是非常罕見的。
馮：似乎，人民行動黨長年以來的統治和意識形態正是新加坡政治現狀必須突破的關口。有甚麼因素能夠催生這個突破？
饒：還是互聯網吧。互聯網已經存在了十多年，近五年來尤其普及。在新加坡這樣細小密集的城市國家，互聯網所能發揮的連結和凝聚作用更為有力。互聯網在「Y世代」和「Z世代」之間特別流行，而他們將是能左右下屆2016年選舉大局的主要選民群組。依我估計，隨着愈來愈多的年輕一代、互聯網用戶在2016年選舉中加入成為選民，會讓互聯網之於新加坡政治的影響真正見效、更為顯著。
年輕人代政治覺醒值得期待
馮：對於即將在8月份舉行的新加坡總統選舉，工人黨有何主張？
饒：工人黨不支持總統選舉。
馮：為何不支持？
饒：現階段的總統選舉僅是一個保障制度，防止執政黨在民選議會之中完全地失去主事權力，為執政黨的統治護航。現在的總統選舉並沒有實踐制度的基礎目的，即讓總統權力與議會權力之間互相制衡，相反只是一個保障執政黨管治連續性的機制。你必須理解，現時新加坡政府把總統職位的合資格參選條件定得苛刻，門檻極高，如是者只有少數幾個人能符合參選總統的資格。許多合資格的候選人都不約而同地來自建制，正如當下正式宣布角逐、而且合符資格的三位總統候選人 ，都曾經是人民行動黨黨員，跟執政黨有密切的關係。
馮：相信未來幾年的新加坡政治生態，也是讀者相當關注的議題之一，你對此有何評論？
饒：我看到越來越多的新加坡的年輕人挺身而出，為我們的國家出力。特別是我看到國內的年輕人成為了工人黨的義工或成員。我認為這對於國家建設具正面作用，因為當越來越多的年輕人開始看到有需要為國家投資他們自己的時間，即年輕一代逐漸對政治覺醒，就意味着反對派，也包括工人黨的明天是頗為樂觀、值得期待的
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
Statement for Cultural Diplomacy Outlook Report 2011
Below is Shin Leong's cultural diplomacy statement for Cultural Diplomacy Outlook Report 2011. Shin Leong is ICD's Advisory Board Member & President of ICD Singapore.
Preamble
Cultural Diplomacy has been in existence since time immemorial. Traders, pilgrims, explorers, musicians and artisans can be considered examples of informal ambassadors or cultural diplomats. The establishment of trade routes and trading centers enabled frequent exchanges of ideas, information and gifts between individuals. Perhaps in recent memory, the idea of ‘Cultural Diplomacy’ might be closely associated with the imageries of the Cold War. Yet ‘Cultural Diplomacy’ today differs vastly from the images of CIA and the US’s State department’s cultural relations unit funding American efforts at it.
Cultural Diplomacy: Singapore & ASEAN
As a small nation state, Singapore is fully aware of its size and recognizes that its security and stability depends largely on good relations with neighboring states, particularly members of ASEAN. Therefore it is important that Singapore to go beyond ‘relationship for relationship sake’ and cultivating ties beyond cultivating ties sake. One possible way forward is to appreciate and to internalize the cultural aspects of neighboring states.
The above calls for better understanding, interaction and exchanges across the ASEAN cultures. This cannot be done just at government-to-government levels but such cultural exchanges must cut across multiple spectrums and levels, such as people-to-people, businesses-to-business and civil societies-to-civil societies etc. Naturally ‘Cultural Diplomacy’ fits in. As it stands, cultural diplomacy calls for better understanding of respective cultures amongst us. While modern communication tools offer easy and fast access to information, still nothing beats a traditional handshake and face-to-face interactions between peoples and cultures.
Cultural Diplomacy: Beyond ASEAN
Cultural diplomacy is not just between Singapore & ASEAN. Rather the full effects of cultural diplomacy actually transcend over continents. Cultural diplomacy calls for the appreciation of global diversities. After all, building upon the foundations of such diversities across nationalities, religions, traditions and history, we can only conclude that there is only one human race. In this spirit, there are actually much underlying similarities in the shared goals across all cultures, which are the pursuit of health, peace, prosperity and happiness. The fact the appreciation of diversities and similarities is so much at the center of cultural-diplomatic activity that makes this a primary challenge for anyone who aspires to be a cultural-diplomat!
Yaw Shin Leong
Preamble
Cultural Diplomacy has been in existence since time immemorial. Traders, pilgrims, explorers, musicians and artisans can be considered examples of informal ambassadors or cultural diplomats. The establishment of trade routes and trading centers enabled frequent exchanges of ideas, information and gifts between individuals. Perhaps in recent memory, the idea of ‘Cultural Diplomacy’ might be closely associated with the imageries of the Cold War. Yet ‘Cultural Diplomacy’ today differs vastly from the images of CIA and the US’s State department’s cultural relations unit funding American efforts at it.
Cultural Diplomacy: Singapore & ASEAN
As a small nation state, Singapore is fully aware of its size and recognizes that its security and stability depends largely on good relations with neighboring states, particularly members of ASEAN. Therefore it is important that Singapore to go beyond ‘relationship for relationship sake’ and cultivating ties beyond cultivating ties sake. One possible way forward is to appreciate and to internalize the cultural aspects of neighboring states.
The above calls for better understanding, interaction and exchanges across the ASEAN cultures. This cannot be done just at government-to-government levels but such cultural exchanges must cut across multiple spectrums and levels, such as people-to-people, businesses-to-business and civil societies-to-civil societies etc. Naturally ‘Cultural Diplomacy’ fits in. As it stands, cultural diplomacy calls for better understanding of respective cultures amongst us. While modern communication tools offer easy and fast access to information, still nothing beats a traditional handshake and face-to-face interactions between peoples and cultures.
Cultural Diplomacy: Beyond ASEAN
Cultural diplomacy is not just between Singapore & ASEAN. Rather the full effects of cultural diplomacy actually transcend over continents. Cultural diplomacy calls for the appreciation of global diversities. After all, building upon the foundations of such diversities across nationalities, religions, traditions and history, we can only conclude that there is only one human race. In this spirit, there are actually much underlying similarities in the shared goals across all cultures, which are the pursuit of health, peace, prosperity and happiness. The fact the appreciation of diversities and similarities is so much at the center of cultural-diplomatic activity that makes this a primary challenge for anyone who aspires to be a cultural-diplomat!
Yaw Shin Leong
8 Days Tour To Yunnan Province
Residents of Hougang SMC and Aljunied GRC, together with MP Low Thia Khiang and MP Yaw Shin Leong arrived safely from an overseas tour to Yunnan Province, China last evening. WP’s Aljunied Constituency Committee and Hougang Constituency Committee jointly organized this trip that brought residents from both constituencies to the ancient cities of Kunming, Dali and Lijiang.
It was a relaxing trip whereby residents of both constituencies in a very leisurely paced trip, covered part of an ancient caravan trade route (that was even earlier than the more famous Silk Road).
This lesser known ancient caravan trade route is known as ‘ 茶马古道’ (Tea-Horse Ancient Road), which was a skein of tracks, a network of paths and passages both difficult and diverse that passed through the immensely difficult terrain over some of the highest, coldest and most inhospitable regions in Asia. Of course the tour group had the luxury of travelling via coach along well-paved roads!
In a particularly memorable moment in Dali, Hougang residents had the opportunity to take a breath taking scenic group photo, that had the elements of苍山洱海 (Mountain ‘Cang’ & the ‘Er’ Sea) right behind them. Above them was 蓝天白云 （Blue Sky White Clouds) and a visible moon in broad day light.
In Lijiang, the tour group was fortunate to sight the shy peak of ‘玉龙雪山’ (Jade Dragon Snow Mountain) which would be typically be covered by the clouds during this season. Due to the higher altitude, the weather in Lijiang can be rather cold, even under a blazing noon sun.
Back in Kunming (via Dali), the group had the chance to sample the local delicacy ‘过桥米线’ (Cross Bridge Rice Noodles). By tradition, it was said that a wife crossed a bridge to her husband, carrying his meal in a basket. She tripped and accidentally poured hot broth into the bowl of raw meat. Since this dish originated from a trip on the bridge, hence the name of the dish.
Aljunied GRC & Hougang SMC residents & their MPs enjoyed their trip tremendously. It was so enjoyable that enquiries for AJCC/ HGCC 2012’s overseas trip have already emerged!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)