GE 2020: Welcome next challenger PSP

Singapore has finally announced the dissolving of parliament and all Singaporean will head to the polls on 10-Jul for GE 2020. For my constituency, the opposition candidate is PSP, the party headed by the ex-PAP member: Tan Cheng Bock. So lets have a look at PSP manifesto and see if it is a better alternative to PAP one?

PSP manifesto mainly focus on 3 pillars, 4 points each as below:

Economic Development

Jobs for Singaporeans:

• Job priority for Singaporeans
• Introduce quota for Employment Pass
• Lower quota for S Pass and Work Permit
• Review free trade agreements like CECA

Assistance to local SMEs:

• Priority in public sector procurement
• Invest in local SMEs and encourage cooperation amongst them
• Direct support to SMEs to restructure their business and in their effort to go overseas
• Reduce business costs

Reduce dependence on foreign labour:

• Problems of congestion, social strains and depressed wages
• Curb easy supply to push employers to invest in equipment or processes for higher productivity
• Move toward higher value-add and higher-wage model

Living Wage:

• Increase amount of Workfare and the cash portion to 80% (like wages)
• After the economy stabilises, to introduce living wage to all sectors

For a detailed explanation on the points, you can refer to the article on Mothership.

For me personally, on the topic of Job for Singaporean, I can only agree with half of the proposal. Lowering quota for S Pass and Work Permit is not the way to save jobs for Singaporean. While I do agree with the idea that companies employing foreign talent should be insisted on knowledge transfer to locals, but forcing companies to employ Singaporean (at a higher wage due to lowered quota and paying the same wage could not entice local to take the job) will only increase business cost, raise inflation (cost will be transferred to customer) and reduced real wage growth (due to increase inflation). The reason why companies employ S Pass and Work Permit foreigners was simply because they cannot find Singaporean who are willing to do the same job for the same salary given to the foreigners. On the topic of Living Wage, according to Wikipedia, it is defined as the minimum income necessary for a worker to meet their basic needs. It is something similar to a minimum wage, with the only difference in that the latter can fail to meet the requirements for a basic quality of life. For me, I do not support living wage as it artificially inflates a business cost. If you set the living wage on a low side, it is of no use. If you set the living wage on the high side, business is just going to transfer the cost back to the customer. In a way, it affect competitiveness and dive the cost of everything up. You can have a good read on this topic here. 

In summary, my total score given is 1.5/4.0

Jobs for Singaporean - 0.5

Assistance to local SME - 1.0

Reduce dependence on foreign labor - 0.0

Living Wage - 0.0

Social Development

Social safety net:

• Improved financial assistance for those unemployed due to Covid
• Increase ComCare payout

CPF:

• Withdrawal of up to $50,000 at age 55
• Sale of En-bloc rights
• Medishield Life premium to be paid by Government

Housing:

• En-bloc redevelopment for all old flats
• Peg new flat prices to income levels
• Bring down housing costs for young Singaporeans to free them for entrepreneurial pursuit

Taxes and Fees:

• Freeze tax and fee increases for the next five years
• Exempt basic necessities from GST

For a detailed explanation on the points, you can refer to the article on Mothership.

On the social front, for me personally, I agree that withdrawal rate at age 55 should have a relook. $5000 may not be sufficient for today's context, but not to the rate of $50,000. This is luxurious, considering the sole purpose of CPF is like our retirement fund, to last us for the next 20-30 years. When you take out $50,000, how much is left? Sale of En-bloc rights is like the current HDB lease buy back scheme, nothing new in this. For the proposal on Medishield Life, I do not support that Government should bear this cost totally. Where is the extra budget going to come from? Additional taxes? In any case, citizen should pay their own insurance. In any case, this is using their medisave account, which can more than cover the cost if he/she is working. If the citizen is unemployed, why should the government foot the bill to feed the citizen? On the topic of housing, it is extremely ridiculous. "En-bloc redevelopemnt for all old flats". Ehh, you know there are how many old flats in Singapore? Where is the budget going to come from? Cut from defence budget arh? Pegging new flat prices to income level is also nonsense. Singapore income level can only keep on rising, so the flat price will also keep on rising la? What's the point? Freeze tax and fee increase for the next 5 years also makes no sense to me. Singapore is preparing for the problem of aging population by building up more hospitals and polyclinics. We need the extra tax (and money) to build up these facilities. If you freeze it, where is the budget going to come from? As an individual, it looks good to us, but as a country, this is not a good policy. Is this proposal trying to gain populist vote or are they good for the country? Sometimes, a good proposal for the country may be a bitter pill for the citizen, but we need to pull through for a better tomorrow.

In summary, my total score given is 1.5/4.0

Social Safety Net - 1.0

CPF - 0.5

Housing - 0.0

Taxes and Fees - 0.0

Political Development

Stronger alternative voices in Parliament:

• Reduce the over-dominance of a single Party with over 90% representation in Parliament
• Stronger alternative voices in Parliament offering different viewpoints and suggestions

Independence of key institutions and key appointments:

• Expand Presidential oversight over more key public appointments
• No conflict of interest in key public appointments

Public Service:

• Personal sacrifice: Ministerial salaries should be cut and pegged to median income.
• Public spending should be frugal and huge projects subject to greater scrutiny
• Public service including public transport and utilities should not be profit making.

Freedom of speech and expression:

• Allow for speaking up without fear or favour
• Encourage diversity of views
• Relax the regulation of media & the arts
• Review POFMA

For a detailed explanation on the points, you can refer to the article on Mothership.

This section by far to me is the best proposal. Only conflict I have will be on the point that public transport and utilities should not be profit making. Business, by and large are profit making to continue challenging them to do better. If they are not profit making, what is the motivation of the employees to do better? If government is going to plug in the shortfall, how much is the government going to fill every year? Where is the budget going to come from? I feel that public service should aim to break even, but still profit making on the whole. On the topic of pegging ministerial salaries to median income is an interesting suggestion worth exploring. On the topic of speech and expression, Singapore is a unique country where speech and expression are called "Controlled freedom". So far, it has worked well for Singapore. You can speak up without fear or favour, provided what you said is true and not defamatory. Do we want to be like the USA where you can blatantly lie without consequences? It is simply dangerous for politics.

In summary, my total score given is 3.0/4.0

Stronger alternative voices in Parliament - 1.0

Independence of key institutions and key appointments - 1.0

Public Service - 0.5

Freedom of speech and expression - 0.5

Total Score: 6.0/12.0 (50% approval)

Strangely, there is nothing on healthcare, which I feel should be a major topic for any contesting party for the next 5 years. Aging population is a real time bomb. As of Jun 2019, median age of Singapore population is 41.1, with 29% of 4.03M residents age 55 and above. If you are not going to start preparing for it now, by the time crisis hits, it will be too late.