The newly minted Leader of the House Indranee Rajah took to Facebook on Sunday (23 August) to explain why Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat delivered the country’s 5th COVID-19 Budget measures last week via broadcast instead of in Parliament.

As a response to this, Ms Indranee pointed out two main reasons to why this decision was made. The first reason was that it offers businesses and workers some clarity on the Government’s plan, while the second was to give MPs and the public sufficient amount of time to think of the measures before the opening of Parliament.

“First, it was to give businesses and workers clarity on the Government’s plans to support them before the opening of Parliament. Some of the measures are expiring soon. The Jobs Support Scheme’s coverage will end in August and many jobs are at stake if there is no clarity on Government’s plan,” Ms Indranee, who is Singapore’s Second Minister for Finance and National Development, said.

She added, “Second, similar to other Budget statements, we should give MPs and the public enough time to consider the measures ahead of the opening of Parliament”.

On 17 August (Monday), Mr Heng, who is also Finance Minsiter, presented his ministerial statement through broadcast in which he announced S$8 billion worth of support measures that highlighted Government’s plan to continue to help workers and businesses.

Some of the measures include extending the Job Support Scheme for up to seven months until March 2021, and a S$1 billion programme to subsidise the salaries of new local hires for a year, which is subject to a cap.

In the post, Ms Indranee, who is also a Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, clarified that announcing the measures via broadcast does not mean that it is not subject to Parliamentary scrutiny.

She explained, “When there are significant Budget measures, the usual practice is to announce them ahead of time. This gives the MPs time to form their views on the plans. It also gives the public time to provide feedback to their MPs and the ministries. This is then debated in parliament.

“That’s why the annual Budget Statement is delivered first and the Budget debate comes about a week later.”

Ms Indranee went on to state that today’s (24 August) session is the official opening of Parliament and the agenda for the day is full, giving no time for any ministerial statement to take place.

“24 August is the official opening of Parliament. With the election of Speaker, swearing in of MPs and delivery of the President’s Address on the agenda, there is no opportunity for any ministerial statement at this sitting,” she said.

She also noted that the first business sitting of Parliament, which will happen on 31 August, will see the debate of the President’s Address on the agenda. As such, if the Ministerial Statement were to be delivered on 31 August, then it will not give MPs enough time to reflect on the measures before the debate, Ms Indranee asserted.

“Also, with the President’s Address being delivered on 24 August there will be a lot of substantive things for MPs and the public to consider between 24 and 31 August.”

As such, Ms Indranee reiterated that the “best option was to deliver the Ministerial Statement via broadcast before Parliament opened” as it “gives both MPs and the public enough time to absorb the contents before Parliament sits”.

“MPs can (and should) still raise questions and express their views on the Ministerial Statement in Parliament,” she said.

She continued, “In addition, the Government will in the coming months seek Parliament’s approval for its revised spending plans to give effect to the measures in the Ministerial Statement. This will be done through a Supplementary Supply Bill which must go through the usual 1st, 2nd and 3rd readings and be passed by Parliament and assented to by the President.”

Separately, Ms Indranee also noted that the Government “remains accountable and all is still fully in accordance with good governance”.

However, she said that the Government decided to deliver the Ministerial Statement earlier that later as “it affects people’s welfare and well-being, and we wanted to give enough time for proper scrutiny and deliberation”.

If that’s not all, Ms Indranee concluded her post by explaining that the recent 5th set of measures will be funded by reallocating monies out of the previously approved budgets.

“Because of Covid-19, some of the things we had wanted to do in the earlier budgets have had to be deferred or re-prioritised. We are therefore reallocating some of the money to more urgent needs,” she said.

Subscribe
Notify of
10 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
You May Also Like

Fire breaks out at NUS medicine building, 1,000 people evacuated

On Tuesday morning (26 March), close to 1,000 people were evacuated after…

PSA Marine worker found dead near Riau island

A Singaporean man who was reported to be missing after falling during…

政府对非主流媒体处处提防,是天生的恐惧?

两周前,《雅虎新闻》记者Nicholas Yong上载了一篇文章,揭露非主流媒体在采访工作上和政府打交道时,往往会面对各种困难,例如无法第一时间获得重要官方通知、未获通知和邀请出席政府部门的记者会或重要活动。 他诉苦道,主流媒体新闻出街几小时后后,他们才收到官方文告;重要的官方活动亦会以“仅限本地媒体”为由,限制非主流媒体出席。 Nicholas 写道,“还有一次,我们向政府要求预先提供国庆日当天的演说稿–这可是一整年里面最重要的政治演说,但我们却被各个资深官员以“我手头上没有”而拒绝提供。相反地,主流媒体一天前就拿到讲稿了。” 主流与非主流媒体的差别待遇已不是新鲜事,Nicholas也曾提及,前两年的国会新闻采访上,非主流媒体被迫挤在狭窄的国会新闻发布室上,室内禁止携带手机,而且无法第一时间获得演讲稿。反观新加坡报业控股与新传媒记者,却可以获得国会实况。 “今时今日,为什么仍给予主流媒体抢占先机,难道是为了主导论述吗?”他质问。 同样地,本社对于这种厚此薄彼的偏驳,也感同身受。有准证的非主流媒体不会收到政府文告,而且有时这些完整文告也不会上载到政府部门官网,但主流媒体却可以率先报导出街。 举个例子:学术界联署反对《防假消息法》,但是教育部的回应声明,并没有第一时间上载到官方网站上,反而独家给了《海峡时报》。即便到今天,这则教育部声明也没办法在该部官网找到。 然而,有别于《雅虎新闻》获得媒体认证,本社则是注册在新闻与艺术部下的其中一家受监督媒体机构。 本社也曾在去年申请媒体认证,然而却被告知本社不需要取得认证即可报导本地新闻,而要不要发出认证,也取决于政府的斟酌: 如同Nicholas所提,政府真的对主流与非主流媒体有差别待遇,不论对已注册在新闻及艺术部下的媒体如《雅虎新闻》或本社,都有限制?…

Two more confirmed imported cases of Wuhan coronavirus infection in Singapore, making seven cases in total

Two more imported cases of Wuhan coronavirus infection in Singapore has been…