Connect with us

Current Affairs

A Messy End to a Poorly Implemented Vision

Published

12 years ago

on

By Chua Suntong –

On 30 September 2012, Minister of Manpower former Brigadier-General (BG) Tan Chuan Jin updated the state of foreign non-resident employment situation in Singapore.

The big increase in the non-resident employment originated from the Prime Minister’s National Day Rally Speech on 24 August 1997. The future Emeritus Senior Minister (ESM) Goh Chok Tong announced a change in population policy from immigration-supplemented to immigration-centric.

The ESM described foreign PMETs as foreign talents (FTs) during the 1997 National Day Rally Speech. His biggest dream in 1998 was to attract huge numbers of young PMETs He hoped these PMETs would contribute economically & demographically by settling down & produce babies.

In September 1998, the existing workpass system was implemented. Part of this system was an Employment Pass for foreign PMETs with higher P Pass & a lower Q Pass categories based on salary thresholds. In 2004, a S Pass which was lower than Q Pass was added.  

BG Tan stated a relatively huge increase of 14 200 S-Passes the 1st half of 2012 with an insignificant decrease in PQ Passes. He claimed to be looking into the issue of employers bringing in huge numbers of S –Pass foreign junior PMEs.

The minimum monthly salary threshold of $2000 for the 2012 S Pass Holder was similar to the 1998 Q Pass Holder. The main difference was official attitude. While BG Tan was concerned about large foreign junior PMET inflows, the ESM consistently from 1997 to 2011 liked these inflows very much.   

During the 1st decade of the 21st century, large numbers of PQS holders would be granted residency & citizenship status.

In 2001, the Q Pass minimum monthly salary threshold was increased from S2000 to $2500. Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP) Mr Simon SC Tay felt this was too low as it was about the starting pay for fresh graduates in Singapore.

Deputy Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s  reply was:

 “I think what we are looking for is a cut off which is not too low, but really we are not looking for is a cut off which is not too low, but really we are not looking to price the foreign graduates out of the market. We want certain graduates of a certain quality, and the $2500 is really an indication of the kind of graduate which we are bringing in and also the kind of job which the foreigner is doing.”

(Parliamentary Reports Volume 73. 6 March 2001 to 15 October 2001. Emphasis added.)

This statement clearly showed the Government wanted employing organizations to hire the maximum possible number of young junior foreign PMETs.

As years passed, the FT policy was criticized as causing marginalization of homegrown citizen PMETs. The ESM was unhappy that more homegrown citizens were seriously considering long-term emigration. On another National Day Rally speech on 18 August 2002, he negatively described these potential emigrants as “quitters”

According to the National Population & Talent Division Population in Brief 2012, the number of overseas Singapore Citizens increased from 157 100 in 2002 to 200 000 in 2012.  The Government was apparently unable to present information showing the expected socio-economic value created by the FT policy that was supposed to benefit existing locals.  

BG Tan maintained that the Government was on the right track to reduce foreign labour dependency. The critics disagreed but to BG Tan, no mention of the FT term was already a radical step.

On 25 September 2012, former Minister Mentor (MM) Mr Lee Kuan Yew spoke at the 7th Russia-Singapore Business Forum.. He unusually described Singapore as having 1.5 million “foreign workers”.

Former MM Lee was referring to the total number of working non-citizens, including non-citizen residents. Since 1997, the Government always avoided describing immigrant PMETs as foreigners, regardless of their immigration status. Therefore, this indicated an apparent acceptance that the ESM FT policy failed.

The failure was not inevitable but caused by poor implementation. One weakness was the belief that social integration between newer immigrants & existing locals could be accelerated.

One example was the 2005 Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) with India. This partly resulted in the multiplication of the already-large pool of Indian-born PMETs. They, similar to other immigrant groups, showed an obvious inclination to congregate among themselves.

On 25 September 2012, the Indian High Commissioner to Singapore T.C.A. Raghavan was speaking at the Singapore Press Club. He stated Indian expatriates needed time to fit into Singapore.  This was an unintended & indirect rebuttal to the Government idea of fast-tracked integration.  

BG Tan’s update might be seen as an unofficial announcement that the Government was prepared to set aside the immigration-centric ESM FT policy. Unfortunately, there seemed to be no future direction.

The Government still refused to take measures to significantly slow down foreign PMET immigration. This was a messy end to a poorly implemented vision.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Current Affairs

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

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

Published

11 hours ago

on

4 October 2024

By

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

CPIB investigators uncovered the flight manifest and seized the document.

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

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

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

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

 

Continue Reading

Current Affairs

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

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

Published

2 weeks ago

on

23 September 2024

By

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading

Trending