The Singapore Democractic Party (SDP) has issued a statement in response to the three correction order under Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation (POFMA) Act by Ministry of Manpower (MOM) on Sunday, citing various public reports from mainstream media as the basis for their statements which the ministry found fault with.
Yesterday, MOM issued three correction order to SDP for three online posting, alleging that the statements made were false.
The three posts are:

  1. A sponsored Facebook post on 2 Dec 2019,
  2. a post on the SDP Facebook page on 30 Nov 2019,
  3. and an article on the SDP website on 8 Jun 2019.

According to MOM, the Singapore economy is continuing to create jobs despite the economic headwinds. It emphasised that local PMET employment has increased consistently and there is no rising trend of retrenchment, whether amongst PMETs or otherwise.
It went on to state that the alleged false and misleading statements by the SDP have a singular objective, which is to stoke fear and anxiety among local PMETs.
It is important to set the facts straight so that Singaporeans are not misled, said MOM.

Straits Times and other major news outlets, the source of SDP’s information

MOM took issue with a statement in an article, “SDP Population Policy: Hire S’poreans First, Retrench S’poreans last”, published on SDP’s website on 8 June 2019. The statement wrote, “The SDP’s proposal comes amidst a rising proportion of Singaporean PMETs getting retrenched”. MOM claims that this statement is wrong as there is no rising trend of local PMET retrenchments.
It noted that the number of local PMETs retrenched in 2018 was, in fact, the lowest since 2014. Local PMETs retrenched as a proportion of all local PMET employees, has also declined since 2015, said MOM.
In response, SDP noted that this particular statement was based a Straits Times (ST) report “PMETs make up rising share of retrenched locals” (15 March 2019).
The report wrote:

“Professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) made up about three in four or 76 per centof the locals – Singaporeans and permanent residents – who were retrenched last year, the highest figure in at least a decade. It rose from 72 per cent in 2017 and is significantly higher than the share of PMETs in the resident workforce, which is about 57 per cent.”

The report also includes a figure labelled: “PMETs make up growing share of locals laid off” with MOM stated as its source.

SDP noted that as ST is a government-controlled newspaper,  it had no reason to believe that it would publish fake news about the government and aruged that MOM should take the matter up with the ST.
“If the ST states that its information, or the interpretation of it, is incorrect, we would be happy to amend our statement correspondingly.” wrote SDP.
It also pointed to another report by Yahoo! News dated 3 October 2019 where DBS senior economist Irvin Seah was quoted, saying: “PMETs continue to form a much larger share of retrenched workers compared to their proportion in the workforce.”
Commenting on the infograph posted on 30 November 2019, SDP said it had made the statement: “Local PMET unemployment has increased”.
Referring to a report by the Business Insider (13 June 2019), “More workers were retrenched in Q1 – here’s why most of them were PMETs”, SDP quoted the report stating: “Retrenchment in Q1 2019 is up from the previous quarter, and most of those who were retrenched were professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs), a report by the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has revealed.”
The party noted that other newspapers such as ST and TODAY also published similar reports.
In the second quarter of 2019, the above-cited Yahoo! report headlined “PMET unemployment in Singapore continues to climb” stated that the “number of PMETs who lost their jobs increased from 1,440 to 1,680, making them the bulk of those retrenched.”
SDP pointed that the report also cited Mr Irvin Seah’s comment that the rate of PMETs re-entering the workforce after six months of retrenchment was “persistently much lower” and said that its statement was based on publicly available information cited in the reports mentioned.
As for its infograph posted on 2 December 2019 where it made the statement: “Local PMET employment has decreased”. SDP explains that this is similar to the infograph posted on 30 November. |
In addition, the low re-entry numbers suggest that the absolute numbers of unemployed and under-employed PMETs would have increased, said SDP.
It concluded by stating 2019 is not yet over but MOM claims that local PMET employment has risen for the year.
“This raises questions about your conclusion.” said SDP.

Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Police report filed against grassroots leader who threatened Amos Yee online

A concerned Singaporean citizen, Mr Lee, has filed a police report against Jason Tan…

殖民时代老掉牙规矩?不准女佣入内 情义之家批板球俱乐部歧视

本地演员陈斌熙一家,偕同女佣到新加坡板球俱乐部,唯独女佣被拒于门外,职员声称“不允许女佣入内”,令陈斌熙感到愤慨,将此事发布在脸书,引来热议。 事件发生在上周五,陈斌熙和家人还有女佣,到历史悠久的新加坡板球俱乐部,观赏侄儿的橄榄球赛。比赛结束后,他们一家到俱乐部的维多利亚餐厅用餐。 然而,一名中年职员却告诉他:女佣不得入内,令陈斌熙对俱乐部还保留这种老掉牙的歧视,感到惊讶。他进一步询问下,职员告诉他女佣不得进入整个俱乐部的范围,还建议女佣可以到停车场等候。 陈斌熙的嫂嫂还反问“你怎么知道她不是我表妹?”职员还坚称,他们肯定知道。 陈斌熙的父亲是俱乐部会员。他把女佣作为宾客带进餐厅,也被拒绝。职员称俱乐部禁止女佣和司机踏入。 陈斌熙表示,当下他确实很生气,想到其他餐馆用餐,但考量天色已晚,年迈父亲和孩子用餐后就要回家休息,一家人还是只能那里匆匆用餐。 至于气愤的陈斌熙则散步让自己冷静下来,回来时看到女佣正抱着婴儿在俱乐部外,显得无可奈何。他们打包了女佣的晚餐。 之后数日陈斌熙仍对此事耿耿于怀,于是选择将此事公诸于众。他认为俱乐部并没明文规定禁止女佣,他在该俱乐部网站也差无此规则,如有,也应公开予众。 再者,如规则合理如要求会员穿着体面都无妨,然而限制女佣和家人用餐则显得很不公平。 客工组织:赤裸裸歧视 俱乐部的女佣禁令,也遭来本地客工组织非议。情义之家(HOME)执行董事Sheena Kanwar对此感到无法理解禁令背后的依据是什么。…

Tokyo Olympics 'difficult' if pandemic not contained: Abe

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe said on Wednesday it would be “difficult”…