Clarification by Second Minister for Trade and Industry

The following statement was made in the reply given by the Second Minister for Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng) at the Sitting of 9 January 2023:

The Second Minister for Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng) The Second Minister for Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng): Just to set it into perspective, the 30% cap, that was not the context of how I addressed that there is no U-turn. Because Mr Leon Perera's point about the U-turn was whether this M-SEP scheme subsequent would, in terms of raising the sub-Dependency Ratio Ceiling (DRC) numbers, and also the work permit numbers above the prevailing quota, appears to be a U-turn.

For the record, for the 30% ratio, we will continue to monitor this very closely. But the M-SEP, because of the very highly selective nature of the scheme and because of the stringent criteria that we have applied for Condition 1 and Condition 2, we do not expect, in the penultimate, the numbers to affect the proportion significantly. [Please refer to "Work Passes Issued under Manpower for Strategic Economic Priorities Scheme", Official Report, 9 January 2023, Vol 95, Issue 79, Oral Answers to Questions section.]

Written statement by Dr Tan See Leng circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5):

I wish to make the following factual correction to my statement made at the Sitting of 9 January 2023. My statement should read as follows:

The Second Minister for Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng) : Just to set it into perspective, the

33% 33%: cap, that was not the context of how I addressed that there is no U-turn. Because Mr Leon Perera's point about the U-turn was whether this M-SEP scheme subsequent would, in terms of raising the sub-Dependency Ratio Ceiling (DRC) numbers, and also the work permit numbers above the prevailing quota, appears to be a U-turn.

For the record, for the 33% ratio, we will continue to monitor this very closely. But the M-SEP, because of the very highly selective nature of the scheme and because of the stringent criteria that we have applied for Condition 1 and Condition 2, we do not expect, in the penultimate, the numbers to affect the proportion significantly.