Thursday 19 April 2012



Justice Party Singapore



High Wage Policy Revisited

Prof Lim was chairman of the NWC when the government implemented the high wage policy with the intended purpose of pushing companies in Singapore to increase their productivity through use of higher technologies, better skilled workers, etc.  Mr Lim Chee Onn who was the minister without portfolio and NTUC Secretary General also pushed very hard for this idea.


Why then did the idea not taken hold and high wage policy become the norm?  If it had, the government’s vision of a “Swiss standard of living”, a “vibrant society”, an “inclusive society” would have been attained long ago and we needn’t be talking about it still and ranting about the high income gap.


How bad was the high wage policy?  Let’s look at the table below:

             Taiwan               HK               S'pore
             growth rate        growth rate  growth rate     Remarks
1979        8.0                      11,6             9.4               NWC recommended high wage policy
1980        7.3                      10.3            10                
1981        6.5                      9.4              10.7              High wage policy
1982        4.0                      3.0              7.2               
1983        8.3                      5.9              8.6               
1984        9.3                      9.9              8.8 
1985        4.1                      0.7              0.6                Downturn
1986        11.0                    11.0            1.3                Wage restraint and flexi-wage policies
1987        10.7                    13.4            10.8
1988        5.6                      8.4              11.1
1989        10.3                     2.2             10.2


It should be reasonable to conclude from the table that when growth was strong, high wage policy was not a problem.  In 1985, Singapore went into a recession.  This was attributed to the high wage policy.  Rigidity in the wage structure made recovery from the recession difficult, so the high wage policy was subsequently replaced by wage restraint and flexi-wage policies.


Had the government been too hasty in abandoning the high wage policy?  Could the outcome be different?  While the high wage policy was intended to be the push factor, what was lacking then were pull factors that would aid companies go to the next level and supporting factors that would help smooth the path of the high wage policy.  The idea of high wage was good, but it cannot work alone.  As the wage structure in Singapore is no longer as rigid as before and with the high income gap and the attendant social costs, it is time to revisit the high wage policy.


We all know rental costs in Singapore are very high and form a major cost component of companies in Singapore.  And the Government is probably the biggest landlord.  To help companies, especially SMEs cope with a high wage policy, the Government and perhaps the GLCs could take the lead to reduce the rental rate in stages, in tandem with each push in wages.  Companies that are taking steps to skill up their workers and to redesign their processes to cope with the higher wage costs could be given greater rental reductions than those that do not.  The reduction in rentals will mitigate cost-push inflation.  Similarly, HDB could reduce their stall rental rate in tandem with wage increases so that the hawkers are not pressured as much to increase their prices.

Small companies may also need help in their effort to redesign their processes and to train their workers.  As we are likely to have a substantial pool of underemployed, unemployed and retired skilled workers due to displacement by cheap foreign labour and old age, so perhaps a scheme to gather these people and match them with companies that needed their skills for productivity enhancing projects could be looked into.  The fees earned by these people could be made tax free and the companies entitled to double deduction of these costs for tax purposes.  This would create a win-win situation for the struggling small companies and the displaced or retired Singaporeans with the requisite skills.

A system of recognizing different skill levels is another area to explore.  For example, when you engaged a contractor to do your home renovation, you do not know the skill level of his workers.  Wouldn’t it be useful if you know whether the worker who is doing up your kitchen cabinet is a master carpenter and not merely someone who can saw wood and hammer a nail?  Wouldn’t it be useful if you know that the contractor is a top-class project manager and that under his supervision, your renovation will be completed on time?  Would you pay a little more for such peace of mind?  If such a system is in placed, workers can be motivated to upgrade themselves.  Employers will be happy to get their workers upgraded as well.  Customers and clients will also be much happier and more willing to pay for their services as they know they are getting their money’s worth.

The high income gap is a problem that needs to be addressed and it is hope that this article will spur further discussion and throw up more ideas and solutions.

JPS Central working Committee



Wednesday 4 April 2012

Singapore Citizens will be given priority during the Primary 1 registration.


Justice Party Singapore

               
   
 Singapore Citizens will be given priority during the Primary 1 registration.                      

I am happy for Singaporeans with the recent announcement by the Government that Singapore Citizens will be given priority during the Primary 1 registration. This policy is long overdue. As part of our mission, the Singapore Democratic Alliance has always advocated that Singaporean’s interest should be placed first above all others. We have urged the Government to take care of Singaporeans between the ages of 25 to 50, especially couples building up a family. Hopefully, this recent policy announcement will go towards making the lives of this group of Singaporeans easier.

I would also like to comment on reactions by Permanent Residents (PR) to the announcement, which is one of general disappointment. My response to them would be this; show your commitment to Singapore and take up citizenship. Be like one of SDA candidates, Harminder Pal Singh, who was born in India but decided to commit serving his national service and even as President in Nanyang Technological University Student Union.

I abhor Singapore PRs, who refuse to take up citizenship although they have stayed here for many years. To me, they merely want to enjoy the best of both worlds, perks from their country and Singapore. There is no sacrifice and commitment on their part. They can claim that they have made economic contributions but how can they compare to Singaporeans who have made both economic contributions and a firm commitment to defend Singapore.

Therefore, going forward, the Government should pay attention to PRs, especially those who refuse to take up citizenship after many years.

Thank you.


With best regard


Lim Bak Chuan Desmond
Secretary-General of Justice Party Singapore