TRIPARTITE PARTNERSHIP IN SINGAPORE

Mr Hawazi Daipi (Sembawang): (In Malay): I support the motion tabled by NMP Mr Cyrille Tan. Please let me first of all comment on the views of the Opposition Member, Mr Chiam See Tong, by referring to a small incident at the meeting of the International Labour Organisation for the Asian region.

In this meeting, Singapore labour movement's representative at the tripartite meeting spoke on how NTUC and the Singapore trade unions have developed human resources through training and retraining programmes for our workers. The report includes the Skills Redevelopment Programme initiated by the NTUC in collaboration with the employers and funded by the Government. The report also touched on other areas of cooperation in the tripartite partnership, ie, the workers, employers and the Government. The report also drew attention of the ILO when Singapore was named specially in this session report. Normally, the session report of ILO will be more general without mentioning any country which had addressed the meeting. Why was this so? This was because ILO, as a world organisation, involving three parties, has an objective to develop cooperation among the three parties so that it will be beneficial to the workers and the community.

On the other hand, in most other countries, tripartism is only a wish or a dream because the parties are still in conflict. Therefore, the ILO often hopes that all the three parties, especially in the developing countries, are able to work together. In such a situation, I found that the speech made by Mr Chiam is wayward and my colleagues in the NTUC who had delivered their speeches earlier had already shown how the NTUC wants to add value for the employers and also for the people so that this benefit from the value-added aspect may be enjoyed by the workers and the people. But to carry out this responsibility, NTUC has to appeal to the employers and the Government to make more contribution towards such an effort.

What is the interest of the Singapore workers which has been neglected now as compared to the period when there was no cooperation among the tripartite partners? Will Singapore be more capable to face the possible economic crisis in Southeast Asia? It is predicted that there will be many incidents of riots in many countries in the Asian region. Are we able to face these problems if there is no cooperation among the NTUC and the Government led by the PAP and the employers? On the other hand, contrary to what Mr Chiam said that the NTUC is dominated by the PAP, the workers, through NTUC, have a voice in the Cabinet because its leader is a member of the Cabinet. Our workers also have a voice in Parliament because its leader is a Members of Parliament. The benefits are many and obvious in Singapore.

I would like to go back to the ILO meeting. In my opinion, Singapore's successful experience in achieving this cooperation of tripartism as shown at the ILO meeting, lies in many benefits enjoyed by the workers, the employers and the Government. We in Singapore are aware that the training programme, which we hope will become a national programme, is not the only evidence of the beneficial cooperation enjoyed by the workers, the employers and the Government. My colleagues who have spoken earlier have already shown how the partnership has helped to maintain peaceful labour relations, greater growth and a comprehensive progress which the people have enjoyed. For many countries in this world, the tripartite relationship is only a wish, if not a dream. The challenge now is how the three partners are able to strengthen this partnership to meet the greater challenge of the future, especially in the short term, to meet the economic, and in the long term, to meet the challenge of world globalisation.

For the short term, the economic crisis which has come about here because of the economic crisis and slow growth, I hope the employers and the Government will give due consideration to the interest of the workers. I admit that in this economic situation there are many firms which will reduce the number of their workers. They will downsize their manpower and restructure their operations. As a result, many workers will lose their jobs. For this group, I hope the employers and the Government will work together with the unions to reduce the plight of the workers who will be suffering from the loss of jobs, by offering them alternative jobs and to find a way to avoid retrenchment. The unions have been working together with some firms to assist workers, who have lost their jobs recently, to take up alternative jobs. In future, when more workers lose their jobs, it is better for us to resolve this matter collectively with the unions, employers and the Government.

The most effective way to face this global economic crisis and the keen competition in most countries, including Singapore, is to expand training and retraining opportunities, especially for those who are low-skilled workers. Otherwise, most of the 700,000 workers who possess only Secondary 2 education will be redundant or they will be displaced by their company or the economy in future. For that reason, NTUC has launched the Skills Redevelopment Programme and this ought to be granted more funds by the Government, and should be supported by the employers. In view of the concern of possibly more retrenchments, we require the tripartite partners to work together to resolve the issue. I support the plea made by Mr Lim Boon Heng that the employers should only retrench as a last resort and not resort to it simply as a way to reduce their operations by terminating the services of their workers whom they do not want.

Mr Speaker, this motion tabled by the NMP, Mr Cyrille Tan, a labour leader, shows how the NTUC and the labour movement want to increase their contribution for the benefit of the workers and the community. Therefore, the essence of this motion tabled by him and my colleague is how to enhance the value of contribution to the members, the employers, and the community in general.

NTUC 21 is a long-term programme, consisting of five principles which were mapped out by the whole labour organisation. It is an effort to contribute to the quality of the members and the community in general. Our labour movement announced details of NTUC 21 recently and I would like to remind Members about the five principles. The first is to enhance employability for life for our workers; second, to strengthen competitiveness through shared responsibility. And I would like to emphasise here that the key word is shared responsibility. Third, to build a healthy body, a healthy mind, because a worker who aspires to perform well would not be able to do it without good health. Fourth, to care more and share more with the community. And fifth, to strengthen the labour movement.

Each of these principles is not only to bring benefit to the members of the unions, but it is also for the benefit of the employers and the community in general. What the labour movement wishes to achieve is a better quality of life where the needs of every Singaporean are given attention and support.

In short, the labour movement pays particular attention to the interest of Singaporeans generally and likes to share the benefits with others, and this can be achieved more effectively if NTUC and the members work together with the leadership of the PAP more earnestly. And on this basis, our unions should continue to receive support from the social partners of this tripartism.

NTUC and the Singapore labour movement are the first to respond to resolve the national issues involving the workers and the community. Through child care centres, NTUC has helped to cater to the need for child care while the mothers are at work. Through NTUC FairPrice, our labour movement helps us to control increase in prices of the daily necessities. Through NTUC Income, we attempt to provide insurance for our workers, especially the low-income group who is not reached out by the other insurance companies. Our labour movement also works fast to encourage more women to return to work. And now, realising that Singaporeans have a long life expectancy and that the families require help to take care of the aged and sick parents, our labour movement has formed a new cooperative, that is, NTUC Eldercare Cooperative, which will be of great service to the low-income group. At the beginning, NTUC Eldercare will set up a day-care centre for the elderly, especially those who are sick. We are aware that in future, the need for the care of the elders will be a greater responsibility and it will overtake the responsibility of taking care of children. Therefore, to maintain this centre, which will soon be set up, the cooperative will expand its services, for example, by managing homes for the aged.

Mr Speaker, in Singapore we have a concerned and caring labour movement. NTUC and the Singapore trade unions want to contribute to society. Year by year, its members' contribution to social work and to the labour movement continues to increase. This includes services such as home adoption scheme, home visit scheme, blood donation and also meals for the needy. There are also plans to promote volunteer service and fund-raising projects to assist the welfare organisations. In other words, the spirit of voluntarism is flourishing in NTUC and our labour movement. This is one way for our labor movement to increase its value to society.

At a time when we are facing greater difficulty due to retrenchment and economic crisis, our workers and the general public would need more support. Employers can work together with the labour movement to promote social services among workers and the general public, whether in the form of cooperation within the companies or in the form of tripartite cooperation at national level. In this way, we can extend the cooperation in other areas for the public benefit, and we will be able to build up the people's confidence towards Singapore's integrity. In difficult times, we need the people's trust and confidence for our leadership, so that we can preserve and enhance social cohesion.

If we look at what had happened in South Korea where the workers are often in conflict with their employers, they are now questioning the calibre of the newly elected President, who has been elected but yet to be installed, and whom they previously supported during the general election. In this situation, the nature of the labour relations in South Korea will continue and certainly it will affect not only the national interest but also the Korean community's interest.

As I have said, there is an anticipation that there will be a wave of riots and crisis in Asian countries resulting from the economic crisis which we are facing today. So is it time now for us to discuss whether NTUC is dominated by PAP or not? Or whether we want to look into the future to step up our effort or cooperation between the NTUC and the PAP, not only enhancing the relations but also to expand it, with the involvement of the employers, so that we will have tripartite partnerships which form a strong basis for Singapore. In Singapore, a relationship based on trust should be strengthened, more so during difficult times, like what we are experiencing today. The thrust among the tripartite partners could be stepped up by renewing, intensifying, and expanding the cooperation which we have achieved.

Mr Speaker, I support the motion.

Mr Tay Beng Chuan (Nominated Member): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore's achievements in economic and trade development are attributable to the joint efforts and cooperation among the Government, employers and trade unions. In the development of this tripartite partnership based on peaceful co-existence, we have experienced many challenges and difficulties. Sometimes, we may have some disputes and we may not fully understand or agree with certain Government policies. However, at the end of the day, we have always been able to sort out our differences through discussion, consultation and compromises. So, it is correct to say that the tripartite partnership's approach towards the common goal and problem resolution is a very important success factor to Singapore's economic development.

Based on the spirit of solidarity and unity, our unions, employers and Government have been able to cooperate and work together to maintain this long-lasting harmonious partnership. The resulting economic environment has enhanced the confidence of local and foreign investors. This is also the strongest weapon we have in dealing with the current regional economic crisis. Therefore, I agree with the views of Mr Cyrille Tan and support his motion.

Mr Speaker, in this tripartite partnership, the employers are involved in two bilateral relationships. The first is between the employers and the trade unions or the employees. The second is between the employers and the Government. In the relationship between the employers and the employees, the most serious problems faced by employers are: (1) high labour or personnel costs, (2) job-hopping, (3) the quality and training of staff.

These three problems are inter-related. If the quality of an employee is high, a higher pay is justifiable. If the turnover rate is high, the incentive for employers to train their workers will naturally be reduced.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the largest and most precious asset of Singapore is its human resource. Training is very important if we want to enhance the value of this asset. If the labour turnover rate is too high, businesses will not be able to obtain a reasonable return from their investment in training. This will undoubtedly lower their willingness to put in efforts to train their employees.

In order to encourage employers to strengthen the training of employees, the business sector has proposed in the past that the vesting of employer-contributed CPF be linked to an employee's length of service. In other words, if an employee leaves the job before fulfilling the pre-set minimum length of service, he will not be able to enjoy the whole of the CPF contributions made by the employer during his employment with that employer. The employee's entitlement should be pegged to the length of his service.

The importance of grasping the information technology cannot be underestimated. There is no doubt that computerisation will enhance the productivity of a business. However, many small and medium size enterprises still lack the required expertise to use computers and apply the information technology. Therefore, I would suggest that the Government provide a special fund to encourage employers to send their employees for related training. The use of the fund could be for direct sponsorship, double tax allowances for employers, or tax deductibility for employees.

In the relationship between the employers and the Government, the employers face several problems, such as many regulations and charges, resulting in ever increasing business costs.

Relatively speaking, our Government has a larger hand in Singapore's economy. As a result, many Government measures directly affect the operating cost of businesses, including personnel cost, cost of utilities, rentals of factories and shops, all kinds of taxes and levies, etc. Naturally, employers keep a close eye on Government policies. They very much hope that the Government will also look at the problems they have to face seriously and provide assistance as and when necessary.

In terms of personnel costs, I think it is fair to say that the Government is the largest employer in Singapore. As such, the pay adjustment in the public sector sets the lead for the private sector. Each year, when the civil servants' pay is adjusted upwards and the bonus is generous, the private sector immediately faces the pressure to follow suit.

Not long ago, the Secretary-General of NTUC, Mr Lim Boon Heng, told the workers that they should not expect too much pay rise and bonus this year unless productivity is substantially raised. Such openness and straight talk are much appreciated by the business community.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the financial results of our businesses may have yet to reflect the impact of the current financial storm sweeping through this region. So far, the level of retrenchment may not have markedly increased. But we must not underestimate the impact this financial turmoil will have on our economy. Therefore, I would like to appeal to the Government to appreciate the difficulties faced by the business community and take the lead in adopting austerity measures in terms of salary.

In terms of business cost, I feel that we should seriously consider risk sharing between the Government and the businesses. I would suggest that business costs such as energy costs and the rental of factories, offices and shops be linked with the economic condition. This way, in times of slowing economic growth, the Government would be able to flexibly adjust such costs more quickly, helping businesses when they need such help most.

In addition, I would like to stress that in the midst of this regional financial crisis, the economic difficulties we will soon face will be daunting. I would like to appeal to the Government, in keeping with its character of tackling problems head-on without being rigidly confined by conventions, to propose a balanced budget for the coming year to help the business community to ride out the severe difficulties lying ahead.

Our Government has no foreign debt. The foreign debt of the private sector is not excessive either. During economic downturns when the private sector consumption drops, investment slows down, and the net export is likely to fall, the net expenditure in the public sector is the only factor left to provide the needed stimulus for the recovery of the economy. While the business community is busy weathering the regional economic storm, our economy will need the Government to adopt relatively expansionary fiscal policies such as tax cuts and increased development expenditure to mitigate the impact of the economic downturn.

Mr Speaker, Sir, our Government has always been extremely prudent. It has always insisted on fixing the small holes here and there during the sunny days. Often, even though things appeared all right, the Government still wanted to strengthen the roof, the wall, and the pillars. Some of us indeed felt that the Government might have been too risk averse.

However, it was with such unparalleled prudence and conservatism that, year after year, during the time when the economy was well and sound, Singapore was able to accumulate large surpluses to generate the huge reserve we now have. All Singaporeans should be grateful to the Government for its foresight and discipline. The Government was absolutely correct in repeatedly stressing that we need to save for the rainy days. Well, seeing the financial turmoil blowing through the region, it appears that such rainy days have finally dawned on us.

Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong said last Sunday that, if the region's economic crisis was confounded by political instability, we would also be adversely affected and could expect more hard times ahead.

Mr Speaker, Sir, given what has been happening in the stock and foreign exchange markets and the way events are unfolding in the neighbouring countries these few days, I think the hard time is already with us.

Countries which sought IMF assistance have no choice but to exercise austerity. The business community I represent however feels that our Government should not propose an austerity budget at this difficult time. On the contrary, the Government should fill the gap resulted from the private sector's cutback by increasing the development expenditure to stimulate the economy.

For FY1987, we had a deficit of $1.16 billion. The year 1987 was the year of recovery following the 1985-86 recession and the 2.6% (of GDP) fiscal deficit reflected the Government's measures to tackle the economic problem at that time.

Today, what we are facing is a regional economic crisis which has the potential to blow up to a global scale. It will be more complex and far more challenging than what we faced back in 1985. Therefore, it warrants a balanced budget.

Mr Speaker, Sir, undoubtedly, as a very small country, Singapore alone cannot resolve the regional financial crisis. The recovery of our economy relies on the improvement of the economic climate of the regional countries. However, the Government can take certain suitable measures to give a shot in the arm to our domestic economy. This will be consistent with our cooperative and harmonious tripartite partnership spirit, with which we can work together to ride out this extraordinarily difficult crisis.

Mr Chay Wai Chuen (Tanjong Pagar): Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for giving me this opportunity to join in the debate.

First, I would like to counter the comment by Mr Chiam, the Member for Potong Pasir, that somehow the unions, the NTUC in Singapore, are controlled by the PAP and that for some strange reasons because of this, the tripartism that we have been building and working along this while is somewhat hollow. Perhaps, he forgot that many unionists have been the leading founders of the PAP in the 50s and the working relationship with the unions has always been a symbiotic part of the PAP political set-up. He made the comment also that because the Minister without Portfolio is the Secretary-General of the NTUC, for that reason the workers' interests are somehow compromised. But I take the other view that because we have a Minister in the Cabinet who knows deeply the issues facing the workers in Singapore that the PAP Government shows concern and value the input by the Secretary-General.

Tripartism has served Singapore well and Singaporeans, in general, have benefited for the last 25 years. And in the face of these new global challenges we are seeing in the new global market and the new open integrated economy that we are facing, it is timely that we have this motion in the name of the Nominated Member of Parliament to urge this House to renew and express our new commitment to this new tripartism. This task has equal urgency, not just for the Government whose responsibility is to ensure good governance and improve the well-being of the people, but also to employers whose more mundane aim is of course to ensure good profitability and growth for their respective lines of businesses. And in this respect, I am really very impressed by the speech made by the Nominated Member of Parliament just before me who is also an employer with the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce for his very deep and very fruitful contribution.

The financial market turmoil in the region does not detract us from this over-riding task of renewing tripartism. After this financial and currency turmoil is over and a new alignment of the exchange rates takes place, the regional economies that adjust themselves appropriately to further deepen this integration with the open international economy, or as in the words of the previous NMP who spoke, those who bite the bullet to adjust will be the stronger than before.

The tripartite partnership forges this unique Singaporean understanding, an implicit social modus operandus, short of a social contract, whereby workers who are led by the NTUC, the Government and employers, including the more enlightened foreign employers, work towards the common objectives of stability and overall economic growth within a more moderate and reasonable wage system, in line with productivity growth in an environment of industrial peace and goodwill.

The tripartite model has served us well for the past quarter of a century. There are four main factors why the present situation is slightly different or quite different. First, the population is aging. Within the next 10 years, 20% of our population will be aged 60 and above. This is a sobering thought.

Secondly, the economy being more mature will no more be growing at the high rate that we have been accustomed to. With a more mature economy, emphasis on productivity improvement, rather than just growing by adding more foreign labour and capital, will become more crucial to sustaining real growth to ensure a rising standard of living for our workers.

Thirdly, is the increasing use of information technology to all areas of business - in design, manufacturing and services. Those countries with the most appropriately relevant type of education system will be able to produce the people to work the new manufacturing design systems. And a young flexible modern educated workforce will be necessary.

Fourthly, the irresistible and irreversible drive of globalisation will throw up new game rules for transnational corporations, to invest, to reward management and workers across the globe, and to manage MNC business in an integrated world economy. The foreign direct investments we are attracting today are no more the cheap labour investments 25 years ago. Today, our investments are in high skill-intensive and high value-added industries requiring high capital intensity.

With further skill training needed for new jobs and more intensive global competition, all parties must re-examine their part in this partnership to ensure their relevance. Labour with skill and knowledge base will be in demand. Because of this, the growth potential for wages in this high technology sector will be relatively higher, commensurate with their growth and their contribution. In the same way, there will be certain sectors of the labour market which will run the potential risk of structural under-employment or structural unemployment. This problem is not unique and is not new. The American and European workers faced this problem in their economies more than 10 years ago, when their very own MNCs and businesses relocated their factories from their home countries to the developing countries.

What we will see in the likely scenario will be unequal development in the labour market, and unequal development of wages in the industrial sector. The skill-intensive and knowledge-intensive sector will see a higher trend of growth. The less skill intensive or knowledge intensive or, worse, technologically obsolescent sector, will see slow, no growth or decline, At the lower end, we may even have the risk of structural under-employment, especially among our older and not-so-well trained workers.

The problem faced here is compounded by the rising aging working population. Also, the fact is that there are 700,000 in our workforce of 1.8 million, ie, 40% who have less than lower secondary level of education. This makes the retraining of this group of workers a daunting and challenging task.

This call for a new commitment to tripartism, therefore, is a call for a new awareness for all parties to recognise and prepare ourselves to manage this ambiguity in the not too distant future. The policies we develop and pursue must answer to the competitive needs of the global economy in high value added, high productivity and high capital or skill intensive industries. They must also answer to the need to upgrade the skill of our workers by constant retraining.

The challenge for this tripartite partnership is not just to manage the threat of structural under-employment, but also to manage the need for high skill and knowledge intensive labour in high technology. It is a paradox with a dual. The neglect or the failure to do so in one will have repercussion on the overall economy, leading to friction in the social integration of our people. And as the Secretary-General of the NTUC said a moment ago, solely relying on foreign labour is only a partial solution.

Undoubtedly, retraining and training are crucial elements in the solution. I urge the tripartite partnership, with the Government as the spearhead, to think of more ways and means to provide retraining for our lower skilled workers to enable them to carry on to contribute to the economy, which they have been doing for so long up to now. Various schemes are presently in place - skill certification scheme, skill redevelopment scheme, etc. However, more are needed. More support from the Government and the employers is needed.

To appreciate this particular problem, I have just said that 40% of our workers of 1.8 million in the workforce have a lower secondary education. To train these workers in a classroom is not so effective. But I believe these people have plenty of commonsense if we can get the message to them in their own language.

In 1996, the total amount of grants committed for skills development training was, according to the annual report that I read, $67.8 million for 483,000 places for all ages and education class. The average training grant per training place was therefore about $140. About 26% of the grants committed goes to workers with below secondary and NTC 3 education, with the total grant for this category at $17 million. The average training grant per training place in this category is therefore at about $107. If you work at a standard $6 per hour of wage, this works out to approximately 18 hours of training. Of course, at full cost, which means if you consider not just the skills development funded but the other part of the cost that is borne either by the trainee or by the employer, the full cost could well be six to seven times, as was pointed out by the Secretary-General. I believe that this is not too high a figure. In other words, the urgency of the task is actually to raise this amount.

I believe a hand holding kind of approach on-the-job training by the private sector with specific targets, monitoring and output evaluation according to performance criteria combined with a compensation scheme by the Government for the period of hand holding OJT should be initiated.

Presently, there is a scheme for On-The-Job (OJT) training administered by the Skills Development Fund for a National Competency Certificate. It is training about 2,000 places per year, according to the SDF Annual Report, administered by a limited number of companies. I believe the urgency of the task before us is so great that a more flexible OJT scheme with a wider net of companies is needed. And time is not on our side.

Ordinary manual workers can be retrained to operate control panels in automated mechanical systems in modern factories and warehouses. I have seen how it worked at the SIA latest flight kitchen. Senior citizens can be trained to operate user friendly Point of Sales (POS) machines in retail outlets. The next time you visit McDonald restaurant, please take a look at their POS machines. The key buttons that the senior citizen is punching the order for you are all in pictures, not in words, to facilitate the senior citizens who work there. The days of the macho guy operating the port container lifting crane, sitting on top of the world, are numbered, because modern port cranes can be controlled on the ground, two at a time even by a female staff.

Naturally it takes longer for confidence building and hand holding and familiarising with a new job environment. Companies in operation should be encouraged to retrain their staff and to have another option through this hand holding OJT. They should be compensated for the full cost of the retraining period, and I suggest even including any under-productivity variance during this period of retraining. I am here referring to retraining assistance for those genuine workers who are under-trained who genuinely need and seek work and to add value to the economy.

In the World Development Report of 1995, Workers in an Integrating World, it was reported that the success of public retraining schemes generally, in the experience of most countries, has not been very positive. Hence, I am suggesting we should embark on more private retraining schemes, provided by employers and support them, before the workers are laid off, when they become public retraining cases, which is always too late and not specific and targetted.

The World Development Report 1995 reported that careful targetting, monitoring and evaluation of retraining schemes are keys to ensuring their effectiveness and preventing the waste of scarce public resources.

This tripartite partnership should reaffirm its commitment to the global integration of the world economy. By virtue of our openness, Singapore has no choice but to compete. By competing internationally, our businesses have to find their own niches and fortes. Capital investment and talents will gravitate towards those areas most suitable to reward them and most efficient to compete. Fortunately, for a small country like us, the world economy is only global; it is not all round.

In embracing the reality of globalisation and our need to integrate into it, the NTUC is actually checking itself and ensuring its own relevance. The best way to face the competitive market challenge is to embrace it; to think and act global, and not to claim to think global and act local. The NTUC will also have to manage the stress and the strain of this emerging duality in the labour market, and to work in partnership to come up with various retraining schemes in place sooner rather than later.

In this respect, the NTUC has been ever conscious of the larger role that it can play and has played. Under the guidance of the PAP Government, it has developed successfully the social goal. It has developed successfully many NTUC cooperatives to advance the welfare of workers and Singaporeans. In this respect, I must also say that we need to have no apologies for it. Just now, Mr Chiam claimed that the NTUC is getting more and more into business. Definitely, with a social aim. For example, the NTUC Fairprice has been a major player in the food retailing scene to ensure stable and reasonable prices for basic consumer necessities. INCOME has also served workers and Singaporeans with a broad range of insurance needs. NTUC Childcare is also a leading childcare service provider for working mothers. There are others such as FOODFARE, DENTICARE, HEALTHCARE for pharmaceutics, and the latest, the NTUC Choice Homes for executive condominiums. These are all extensions of cooperative businesses which have the ultimate aim of serving the interest and welfare of the workers. Various NTUC Clubs and Lifestyle Centres have also served workers' interests and their families' needs.

These social services that the NTUC provides through its cooperatives are all done through the competitive markets. The social role of the NTUC Cooperatives often go unsung and unnoticed. They make the workers' dollars stretch more and help raise their standard of living by moderating the cost, and showing the private business sectors and competitors, whether they are French, local, Dutch or Americans, the standard and the benchmarks in cost and quality.

The NTUC Cooperatives are meeting the tripartite challenge on equal grounds. If the NTUC Cooperatives can run supermarkets, insurance, childcare services, healthcare services, taxi services, recreation clubs or golf clubs successfully, there is no reason why it cannot run buses, before-and-after-school care, eldercare services, or HDB estate maintenance services equally well, if we choose to do so. The role of the unions is not restricted to collective bargaining for collective agreements and to maintaining the industrial peace. That is the old mindset. They have a social role and today the NTUC Cooperatives and the NTUC is even a launch pad for information technology in a joint project with the NCB in launching the smart card for electronic cash and retailing transactions for the unions and cooperatives.

In this new vision to tripartism, I urge the Government and the employers to join hand with the NTUC unions in widening the social role for all three parties. They meet on equal ground. Businesses must also shift towards a more social perspective in their longer range thinking. After all, they can only survive if they can find a customer whether the businesses are in computers, software, IT or food retailing.

One meaningful social role the employers and Government can do is to join hands with the NTUC in a redoubled effort at upgrading skills and retraining of our workers. Broadening OJT is a good way. I urge the Government to help by encouraging more private employers as well to obtaining easier grants and compensation in a more flexible skill retraining scheme.

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed (Cheng San): Sir, before I speak on the motion proper, allow me to say a few words on what Mr Chiam had said.

As you know, Sir, we are in the midst of the fasting month and no matter how tempting it is to partake in a debate with Mr Chiam, I would rather opt for food for the soul. So in the spirit of Ramadan, I shall not belabour the point. Enough, however, for it to be said that although this is the month of enlightenment, unfortunately, there are still some people, as the Malays would say, sudah terang, lagi bersuluh, meaning still looking for light when it is very clear.

Incidentally, Sir, I think we were all reminded yesterday by the NCMP, Mr Jeyaretnam, that he is not only here as an NCMP but also as the leader of the Workers' Party, but unfortunately when we are here discussing a very important issue of tripartism and the fate and welfare of the workers, Mr Jeyaretnam is nowhere to be found.

Allow me also, Sir, to use a glaring, and if you will excuse the pun, the Blair-ing example of how even the British Labour Party had to bow to certain pragmatic realities to live up to contemporary demands. Mr Blair's visit to Singapore and his tribute to our labour movement speaks well of our system.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

4.35 pm

Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed (Cheng San): My message is simple. Be realistic. Accept facts. Most workers do and the results speak for themselves, be it in terms of continued employability, rising standard of living and quality of life for workers and a meaningful role for workers in shaping their own future.

Let us now see how best the workers have shaped their past, through tripartism, and create their future, through teamwork. After all, tripartism is not only about understanding the past but also gearing for the future.

Sir, I rise in support of the motion by NMP Mr Cyrille Tan, a highly respected leader of the labour movement. First, allow me to declare my interest. I am currently the Executive Secretary of the Singapore Port Workers' Union (SPWU) and a member of the PSA Board of Directors.

Sir, if I may be allowed to share my personal experience. I have been in management for about 25 years, but my recent immersion in the NTUC and the SPWU is most educational in appreciating tripartism. Not only is it alive and well, but thriving.

The SPWU takes teamwork among the union, management and Government very seriously, for it benefits the workers. In fact, it benefits all. But I must hasten to add that this harmonious state of affairs did not appear like magic. It came through blood, sweat and tears.

SPWU, the oldest union in Singapore, had a colourful and chequered past. Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew can personally vouch for the tumultuous years the union went through in its early history. There was so much distrust then that no union leader worth his salt dared even to think of constructive engagement. It was Mr Lee's strategic intervention that saved the situation.

SPWU never looked back since then. In many ways, the SPWU-PSA industrial relationship is exemplary now.

When PSA corporatised last year, the spirit of tripartism showed its human face. Whether during bargaining for the new Collective Agreement or when adjusting the former statutory board's prerogatives to the Employment Act's requirements, the union and the management worked constructively well to secure a win-win situation for all. The Ministry of Labour was always there to lend a hand. In fact, a tripartite workshop-cum-dialogue on the Employment Act proved very successful.

This practice of tripartite consultation and decision-making has been institutionalised in many key policy-making institutions, for example, in NWC, NPB (now the PSB), CPF, ComChest, HDB, IE, EDB, the polytechnics and the universities, even in the ad hoc committees to review and formulate recommendations on national and economic policies such as the Economic Committee (1986), Wage Reform, Cost Review, Flexible Wage System and Employment Act of 1994.

I have here a picture, and possibly it was the first NWC meeting, where most participants looked very solemn, in fact, at first very sullen, but compare it with the recent NWC meeting. You can see very happy faces. This is because they realise and they acknowledge the contributions made by tripartism through institutions like NWC. I quote Prof. Lim Chong Yah:

"The National Wages Council could not have been formed (in 1972) without the support of the NTUC. The union representatives were there to look after the workers' interests, but at the same time they were also prepared to take national interests into consideration. There has always been cordial but tough bargaining among the three parties in the process of coming to a consensus. Over the years, the NWC has contributed to the building of tripartite cooperation and goodwill."

Sir, when we look at the history of tripartism in Singapore, we will see that from the time when the economy was coming out of the doldrums in the early years of independence to the recession of the mid-80s and the many good years following that, tripartism had withstood the test of time. I am confident it will continue to do so. Whether in economic turbulence, tranquillity or transition, tripartism triumphs.

There is effective communication and understanding of each other's role, even trust. While each has its own perspective and interest, when it comes to the crunch, national interests prevail. As SM Lee once said:

"Each generation of union leaders must earn afresh the trust and respect of the workers they lead and of the managers they negotiate with. Similarly, managers must also earn the trust and respect of their workers to do well, they must balance the needs of their workers with those of management, and of Government. That is the context in which tripartism can succeed."

It is no masak masak or kelong of relations, like some Members may like to suggest that unions are controlled by PAP MPs or PAP personalities. Tripartism has indeed succeeded. In the words of PM Goh, "let's not change formulas which have proven to be a success and useful for us." But obviously, we cannot rest on our laurels.

Just how important a close working relationship among the three parties is will be clearly shown in the near future as Singapore, together with the rest of ASEAN, fight to restore the confidence and stability shakened by the current turmoil in regional economies caused by plunging currencies and stock markets.

There are three steps which we can take in preparing for the 21st century, as far as tripartism is concerned.

(a) Understand the lessons of the past and pass them down to subsequent generations for tripartism went through different phases during difficult times and good times.

(b) Learn from other experiences and refine our models of tripartite relationships.

(c) Find ways to strengthen workers' stake and role.

It is about understanding mutually reinforcing roles. There is a need to try to bring aims and aspirations of labour and management to a happy middle ground. Labour will have to work hard towards helping businesses succeed via higher productivity and no unnecessary demands.

It is after all basic commonsense. It is like a three-legged stool. It will stand if all three are strong. If any of them is weak, the stool will collapse. It is therefore in everyone's interest to see all succeed. It is like the "prosper-thy-neighbour" concept. All must pull in the same direction.

Let us also look at different models of tripartism working (or not working) today, including those outside Singapore, and improve ours where and when necessary. The question of giving workers a bigger stake, for example, the question of worker representation on company boards can also be looked into.

It will be a time when tripartism will be put to a test. We need to be creative to see how each party will have to play its role. Take training and retraining, for example, not many companies will be keen to do it during difficult times, when it is all the more important. Unions and the Government could help to look into this and also the plight of those who might be affected by the likely economic turmoil in the next few years.

I do not want to sound alarmist, but in these troubling times, businesses will face difficult conditions and some will fail. Some, if not many, workers will lose their jobs. The Government will have a harder time charting the economic course of the country. But if all work together, the damages would be lessened. Fewer business failures, fewer retrenchments, lower unemployment and fewer social and political problems. And when the time comes for sacrifice - on everyone's part - we must be prepared to do so.

We have shown what we can do collectively in the mid-80s recession, and we can do it again, if need be. When things get really critical, as they could well turn out to be for Singapore and the region in facing the current economic turmoil, as the saying goes, we must hang together, or most assuredly, we would hang separately.

Sir, I support the motion.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I have a clarification on the speech by the Member for Cheng San GRC?

Mr Deputy Speaker: Did he misunderstand any part of your speech? I do not believe he misunderstood your speech.

Mr Chiam See Tong: No. I want a clarification from him.

Mr Deputy Speaker: All right. Make it short.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Much obliged, Sir.

I regret that the Member for Cheng San GRC should be bringing religion into this matter that I spoke. He says that this is the month of Ramadan and therefore he is more tolerant, otherwise his criticism of me will be more severe, if I have got him right. I must inform the Member for Cheng San that I am not a new MP. If I had been taken in by criticism, I would not be in this House. This is my fourth term. So he can criticise me as he likes, whether it is Ramadan or not.

A clarification, Sir, in regard to this tripartism which I have attracted criticisms from the last four speakers. To me, probably to any ordinary person in Singapore, you have a Minister from the political party, who is also the head of the trade union movement, how can there be true tripartism if, in fact, the trade union is controlled by a Minister? A Minister must abide by Cabinet's collective decision. You cannot stray away from it. So if the political party has made a policy, when this Minister goes to sit as the head of the trade union movement, he must abide by the decision of the Cabinet. And, therefore, if you look at it truly, this is not tripartism under this system, although it works well. Whether it works well is another issue. What I am talking about is just looking at it, whether it is tripartism or, in fact, it is dualism, I would say. It is not true tripartism.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Chiam, that is not a clarification at all.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I want the speakers to see whether or not what I said is correct.

Mr Deputy Speaker: We are running short of time. I will not allow any more clarification. Mr Lim.

Mr Lim Swee Say (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this motion is about tripartism in Singapore and how we can strengthen tripartism to prepare Singapore for an even more challenging future. But it is not easy to understand what is tripartism. So a little boy asks his father, "Daddy, what is tripartism? How does it work and how does it affect the life of the people and their future?" The father says, "Son, it is very simple. Look at this family. I represent the capitalist. Your mother, she is the government. You represent the people. Our maid, she represents the labour. And your baby sister, she represents the future."

Mr Chiam See Tong: Can I interrupt, if Mr Lim is willing to give way?

Mr Lim Swee Say resumed his seat.

Mr Chiam See Tong: The example he is giving is way out. There is no comparison between this tripartism and members of the family. As the mother ---

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. Mr Chiam, that is not a clarification. Can you resume your seat?

Mr Chiam See Tong resumed his seat.

Mr Lim Swee Say: Thank you, Sir. So the son asks the father again, "Yes, I understand all these components. But how do they link together?" So the father says, "Son, don't expect me to teach you everything. Just observe how we interact among ourselves and you will understand the relationship." That night, in the middle of the night, the son was trying to sleep but could not, still thinking about tripartism. Then he heard his baby sister crying very loudly for quite a while and somehow nobody attended to her. Finally, he decided to call his mother. He went to the master bedroom. His mother was sound asleep. The strange thing was that his father was not in the bedroom. He thought, "Okay, since mummy is sound asleep, maybe I should call the maid to attend to my sister." He groped in the dark and went to the maid's room. Before he could knock on the door, he heard his father's voice in the maid's room. And the maid was telling his father, "Sir, please leave me alone. If not, tomorrow morning I am going to report to your wife." He went on to the baby's room and found that the reason why his baby sister was crying was because she did a big job. Anyway, he went back to sleep.

The next morning, during breakfast, his father asked him, "Son, have you figured out what is tripartism?" His son said, "Daddy, it is very simple. When the government is sleeping, the capitalist will try to exploit the labour. The people will have to grope in the dark, and the future will be in a big mess."

Sir, I use this story to illustrate the point that it is not easy to achieve harmony in tripartism. In fact, if you look at the world today, because of rising unemployment, tripartism today is under even greater stress. In June this year, I was in France. The French union recommended that the government should reduce the working hours from 39 hours to 35 hours a week by the year 2000. The socialist-led government endorsed the proposal. The employers' federation objected violently to that proposal. Finally, the head of the employers' federation decided to resign. His members called on him to stay on. But his comment was, "What you need now is not a negotiator, not a collaborator. What you need now is a fighter to be your leader." Basically, the tripartite partners in France had decided to go to war.

Two months ago, I was in Japan to attend the biennial convention of RENGO, which is the equivalent of NTUC, in Japan. When the new leader of RENGO was elected, the next day he appeared on the front page of a Japan newspaper and the headline was something along the line that "RENGO new head calls on SDP to quit LDP." Basically he was quoted as calling on the SDP to end its alliance with the LDP, so that the opposition parties can go against the government. Here is another example of how tripartism is not working in a harmonious manner.

I have made use of these two examples to illustrate that at the end of the day, if the tripartite partners cannot work well together, it is the people, the workers, who will suffer. In the case of Singapore, the NTUC, the Government and the employers' federation would always work closely together under a spirit of mutual support and mutual respect. But sometimes, unfortunately, this spirit is being misunderstood as the labour movement under the control of the Government. I want to take this opportunity to highlight, firstly, that within the labour movement, the highest level of decision-making is the Central Committee of the NTUC, comprising 21 members. These 21 members are elected by the 260,000 union members that we have through their delegates once every three years. Of these 21 Central Committee members, a majority of them, in fact, two-thirds of them, are grassroots leaders, leaders who are respected, like Cyrille Tan, and so on. Basically, anybody who wants to go into the Central Committee would have to gain the trust and the respect of the labour movement, of the members, because if they are not elected, they cannot be in the Central Committee.

Sir, the Secretary-General of the NTUC - I want to make it very clear - is not appointed by the PAP Government to be Secretary-General of the labour movement. He is elected by the labour movement and elected by the Central Committee to be its Secretary-General. Some may have the impression that if the MPs are advisers to affiliated unions, the labour MPs are running the unions. Here again, I would like to point out that under the NTUC, we have 78 affiliated unions and the affiliated unions do not have to be affiliated to NTUC if they do not see the benefit of being affiliated to the NTUC. There is no law in Singapore to say that unions must be affiliated to the NTUC.

Secondly, the affiliated unions are run by the Presidents and the General Secretaries. Take, for example, the electronic unions. NMP Cyrille Tan is the General Secretary of the United Workers of Electronic and Electrical Industries. So he is the CEO of the union, and therefore it is not right to say that the affiliated unions are being controlled or managed by the labour MPs. My main point is this - even though the labour movement is an independent movement, it does not mean that we must adopt a confrontational approach towards tripartism.

The reason why we have this symbiotic relationship with the PAP Government is for very simple reasons, and very often we forget about these. We must always remember who are the members of the labour movement - they are the workers of Singapore. And who are the workers of Singapore? They are the citizens of Singapore. And if you think about it, when the labour movement talks about helping our workers to live a better life, it is completely in line with the PAP Government's objective of making Singapore the best home for all Singaporeans. It is because of this complete alignment of our interest that we have this symbiotic relationship, this harmony in tripartism.

In the labour movement, we believe that the best way to serve the interest of our workers, as our Secretary-General has said many times, the best welfare that we can give to any worker of Singapore, is to give him a job. The best protection we can give to our workers of Singapore is to achieve full employment. Because in a full employment situation, no employer would be able to try to exploit the workers even if he wants to. Guided by this end objective of protecting and looking after the interests of the workers, who are also the citizens of Singapore, the tripartite partners have always worked together under this spirit of mutual support and mutual respect. As a result, let me remind this House that since 1973 to 1996, over this period of about 23 years, according to labour statistics, the real income of Singaporeans has gone up by 5.4% a year over the last 23 years. I believe that this is an achievement no other country is able to match.

Sir, having talked about how tripartism has succeeded up to now, I would like to touch on the future. Why do we debate this motion in this House? Because the Asia-Pacific is going to be a very different Asia-Pacific by the year 2000. And for that matter, the whole world is going to be a very different world by the year 2000. The reason is very simple. Today, with rising unemployment all over the world, with 35 million people in USA working on part-time basis; 18 million in Europe unemployed; 2.31 million workers in Japan jobless, every country is now taking tough measures to reform themselves. The OECD countries, just two months ago, held a two-day job conference in Tokyo to discuss how they can create employment for the youths and how they can work together to retrain the workers. In Korea, a tripartite panel has been set up to look into how they can legalise layoff of labour. By the year 2000, I am very sure that all these countries are going to be much more competitive because they are prepared to bite the bullet. They are prepared to take tough measures. In Singapore, today we are in a much better position than anybody else. The question is: are we prepared to take tough measures today so that by the year 2000, we will continue to remain ahead in a more competitive world?

Mr Chiam See Tong disagreed with what the Secretary-General said on the retrenchment sequence and I think his point is that foreign workers should go first and local workers ---

Mr Chiam See Tong: No. I did not say that.

Mr Lim Swee Say: So you agree with Mr Lim Boon Heng.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I said they can be abused.

Mr Lim Swee Say: My apologies. Let me repeat again, if there is such an idea, I like to explain why such an idea is not the right idea. Because the important issue which we must understand is that the challenge facing Singapore today is not an employment problem. It is an employability problem and I think this is an issue most people do not understand fully. If I may quote an example and this is a real life example. In October last year, a consumer electronics company closed down their operation in Singapore. They had 938 workers retrenched. Of the 938 workers, a majority were unskilled workers. So the union talked to the workers and we identified 240 of them whom we thought could have the potential to be retrained to go into the new growth sector, like wafer fabrication. After six months of hard work, we finally managed to channel about 40 of them to go into the wafer fabrication operation. We found them the employment. We provided the training to them. Within two months, more than half of them had left the jobs. And, today, we are down to about 15 of them.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my point here is this. In Singapore today, we are not having an employment problem. What we have here is a problem of employability. If our retrenched workers who are unskilled or semi-skilled and if they prefer to remain as unskilled workers, then in time to come, they may find themselves not able to take on the job, not because there is no job in the economy, but because they do not have the right skills to take on the job.

The EDB is now targeting to bring in about $8 billion to $10 billion worth of investments every year. Our understanding is that, in the past, for every three jobs created through these foreign investments, two jobs are semi-skilled and unskilled. Today, the situation has changed. Today, and in the future, for every three jobs that will be created in the economy, only one job will be unskilled and semi-skilled. The other two jobs, two-third of the jobs, will require skilled manpower, technical manpower, or professional manpower. So in the face of retrenchment, many of our unskilled workers will be retrenched. The question is: can they move on to this new growth sector like wafer fabrication?

Yesterday, in the newspaper, we read about the speculation that Seagate was retrenching 20% of its workers. But, at the same time, in the same newspaper, we read about EDB announcing that the tenth wafer fabrication plants will be set up in Singapore. Every wafer fabrication plant will create 800 to 1,000 jobs. With 10 wafer fabrication plants, there will be 8,000 to 10,000 jobs. And over the next five to seven years, if we are able to remain competitive and if we are able to achieve the target of having 25 wafer fabrication plants in Singapore, there will be employment opportunities for about 20,000 to 25,000 workers. But the catch is this. Every one of the workers must at least preferably be a semi-skilled or skilled worker. So the issue here is how fast can we move to help our unskilled workers in Singapore to upgrade themselves so that they can take on this better paying job.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, here, I would like to propose that it is now time for action. We have been talking about structural unemployment for the last one to two years. We have been talking about training and retraining for the last many years. But the problem is that training does not necessarily lead to enhanced employability. According to SDF records, of the training supported under SDF, less than 10% led to skills certification, meaning that the majority of the training are functional training, ie, helping workers to be more productive in their current jobs. What we need now is to focus on training our workers for future jobs which will enable them to become skilled workers of the future. So in that regard, I would like to propose that it is about time that we brought the level of tripartism in Singapore to a higher plane.

Dr Lee Tsao Yuan, the NMP, suggested the setting up of a Tripartism Advisory Committee to advise the Government, the tripartite partners. I would like to go one step further. I propose we set up a Tripartism 21 Action Committee because it is time for action. Time is not on our side. With the current financial turmoil, I think we are going to have even less time now.

I propose that the Tripartism 21 Action Committee focus on two areas. The first area is how to remain competitive. Secondly, how to enhance employability. For example, the Action Committee, through the collaborative efforts of the union, the employer and the Government, can firstly identify what kinds of skills are needed in our economy for the next five to 10 years. These skills should include not just technical skills, but also skills relating to technology, thinking skills, interpersonal skills and language skills so that the workers will be well-rounded workers. Secondly, I propose that this committee look into a comprehensive skills certification system. We need to put in place a skills certification system for all the new growth sectors, in the manufacturing sector as well as the services sector, so that there will be a systematic roadmap to guide the skills development of workers. Thirdly, the Action Committee should work on the whole idea of skills redevelopment. We have said enough about 39% of the workforce being unskilled, under-educated, and so on. The question is: how can we help them to go through this whole process of skills certification?

The SRP was launched in December 1996 at the initiative of the NTUC. And, today, we have managed to convince 27 companies to sign up 3,100 workers and everyone of them is going through training that will lead to skills certification. By next month, when we launch the third batch of SRP companies, we are targeting to have 50 companies supporting at least 5,000 workers. The progress is promising and we believe that if this programme is expanded into a national programme and if given the full support of the union, the employer and the Government, we believe we can convince enough unskilled workers to take training seriously so that they can enhance their employability.

Fourthly, the Action Committee should seriously look into how we can channel workers from the downsizing sectors to move into the new growth sectors. The consumer electronics sector, for example, is downsizing very rapidly. In 1997, we saw a few companies moving their operations to other lower cost locations. At the same time, we are seeing many new operations being set up in Singapore, in wafer fabrication, petrochemical, pharmaceutical and other services sectors. What we have to do is to concentrate on these workers who are going to be affected by the downsizing of the lower value, relatively speaking, the more labour-intensive sector and move them into the new growth sectors.

The next area that we are going into is on the need to redesign the jobs in the industry. The workforce is aging. In fact, many workers who are in their 40s have already expressed concern that if and when they are retrenched, they do not have the confidence of finding new jobs. Because if you look at the job advertisements in the newspapers, quite a number of them do specify that they are looking for workers who are either less than 35 or 40 years old. And, increasingly, we are concerned that middle-aged workers and not so young workers may have greater difficulties re-entering the job market should they be retrenched. Therefore, I think this is an area whereby the tripartism committee should look into and see how we can incentivise, and encourage the employers to restructure jobs so that they can be more suitable for the not-so-young workers.

In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in Singapore, the Government has the Singapore 21 Vision. For the NTUC, we have the NTUC 21 Vision. The employers' federation has the SNEF 21 Vision, and all of us are working towards the same objective, which is to make sure that the economy will remain competitive, the companies will remain profitable and that the workers will remain employable. We hope that this motion will be endorsed strongly by this House. We hope that concrete action will be taken to bring the tripartite partners closer so that, as we move forward into the future, we can continue to strengthen the competitiveness of Singapore, and continue to strengthen the employability of our workers so that in the 21st century, our workers can live a better life in Singapore.

Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh (Nominated Member): Thank you, Sir, for giving me this opportunity to speak. I rise to support this motion. In the face of very difficult circumstances and the bad times ahead, it is necessary for us to come together to tackle the growing challenges. I think there will be tough choices, probably tougher than the ones we had in 1985 when we had a recession. We survived that and I hope this one we will do better.

I am going to raise five issues, Sir. During the last recession in 1985, the Government resorted to temporary cutting of the employer's CPF contribution as a measure to revive the economy. Given that, nowadays, most people have drawn down their CPF contribution to service their housing loans or to buy shares, thus reducing the security nests for old age protection, does the Government consider cutting the CPF as still possible this time round?

My second issue. Employers are looking closely at cost cutting and cost containment strategies to ride out this turmoil. One of the key factors in this exercise, and I am sure is the focus of this tripartite discussion, is wage control. In 1986, the Government called for wage restraint policy. I remembered the protests of the workers and the applause from the employers at the same time. And I would like to know if a similar strategy is considered appropriate this time round to ease the cost burdens of struggling enterprises. And to reinforce Mr Tay Beng Chuan's proposal earlier on, since the civil service sector is by far the largest employer in Singapore and its wage policy inevitably sets the tone for the employers in Singapore, will the Government take the lead to set the example and impose a wage restraint policy similar to the one in 1986, if possible with a wage freeze?

My third issue is about productivity and opportunity costs caused by the workers who job-hop. We have heard Members from the floor today who propose changing workers' attitude, increasing productivity and upgrading skills. As an employer, I ask who is going to pay for all that. I have, as a Human Resource Director in my company, trained a number of workers and, at the end of the course, they left for another company for a few dollars more.

Let me give some figures. According to a Business Times' report, the average labour turnover in 1997 was 38.4%. The highest turnover rate being 56.4% in the commerce sector, followed by the clerical and sales sector at 50.4%, the professional and technical sector at 28.8% and production workers at 39.6%. These figures were based on the first quarter of 1997. I hope it was more encouraging in the last quarter. The Political and Economic Risk Consultancy report in 1997 marked Singaporean workers, in terms of company loyalty, at 6.03 in a scale of 0-10 with 0 representing the best situation possible and 10, the worst. We are at 6.03. In the sample of 12 countries, Vietnam is the worst, scoring a high 7; Japan, the best in company loyalty, scoring 2.5; Singapore is the third worst.

I am concerned, Sir, that a lack of company loyalty among Singaporean workers is not helpful during difficult times because now more than before, employers need organisational and operational stability to ride out the currency turmoil.

What measures could we consider to stem out workers' job-hopping behaviour? Will the Government support employers by returning to the company some portion of the personal CPF contribution of workers who leave with no valid reasons within six months of employment? Will the Government consider not renewing the work permits of foreign workers who job-hop within a few months of service? These measures, as argued by some employers and by Mr Tay earlier on, could serve as disincentives for job-hopping while helping employers regain some payments as compensation for productivity loss.

Sir, this may seem to skew towards the side of employers, but employers here argue that the model of tripartism must include in it an ethos of mutual obligations, work commitment and company loyalty, which workers themselves must commit to. Without these fundamental commitments to work and company, there cannot be enduring worker and company growth and, in the long run, sound economic development.

My fourth issue, Sir, is helping employers lower overall labour cost by tapping on a large source of labour for part-time employment. The tripartite partnership in 1996 between the Ministry of Labour, in conjunction with SNEF, NTUC and the Productivity and Standards Board, attempted to get women and retirees back to work. However, despite the offer of training courses and grants and with 4,000 vacancies being created by 18 employers participating in this programme, the take-up rate was low. If we look at our workforce today, while there are workers who are going to be retrenched, there are already one million economically inactive persons. They form 35.4% of the population. Among these, there are 700,000 who are women, 210,000 have O' level, 77,000 have A' levels, diplomas or degrees.

In the 1996 survey, 59,000 indicated that they wanted to work. Most of these people who had indicated that they intended to work were women, most of them married, home-makers, young between 20-49 years old, had secondary education, had worked before, but liked to work part time. There were correspondingly 11,700 potential male entrants. I hope the Ministry will tap this large labour resource, which is young, educated, trainable and employable.

In a Business Times report from interviews they carried out in the back-to-work programme launched in 1996, there were women who liked to work but they did not know where to work. There were also those who wished to work part time, but companies only offered full-time work. Others would like to set up "virtual" offices at home, but offers were very limited. And there were complaints about mismatch of skills and job vacancies.

I hope the tripartite partners in the back-to-work programme will seriously review their strategy, find out the reasons why these employable, educated men and women did not respond to re-employment opportunities and create new ways of mobilising them.

I have a few suggestions: strengthen the mechanism for recruitment of part-time workers in the Employment Service Department of the Ministry, by serving as an effective one-stop clearing house facility to match worker attributes and job specifications.

Second suggestion: launch regularly an awareness campaign island-wide through a variety of media channels and reinforce this effort by offering a toll-free jobline information service. And I think the National Helpline recently launched by CDC may want to consider offering an information and job placement service to its constituents.

Third, broaden up supply base to offer part-time work to industries such as financial, insurance and business services with proper pre-work training and orientation. Currently, most of the part-time work is still concentrated in commerce, community and personal services, and the manufacturing sectors. These are low-end jobs and they are not attractive in the first place.

Fourth, give specific attention to women workers' expectations by helping them get jobs within their residential vicinity and design flexi-time schedule to help them balance work and family needs. There were numerous recommendations being made to the Institute of Policy Studies in September 1997, ranging from fiscal measures, labour legislation, family policies to management practices. Please consult this report.

In the light of current and future labour shortages and our wish to cut down on foreign labour cost for enterprises, the ability to attract females who had left the workforce and want to work, or to retain those who are already in the workforce, take on an economic significance.

My fifth and last point is a call for us to focus on the vulnerable groups. I would like to highlight one vulnerable group who needs, during these difficult times, special attention. These are the single parents, largely female who have little education, low skill, in daily paid jobs and irregular work. The 1990 census reported that single parent family households comprise 60,999 households with widowed parents and 17,585 households with divorced parents, representing approximately 10% of all family-based households. The typical profile of a single parent who is a client in our Family Service Centres is likely to be a divorced person in her thirties, young, with low education, earning a monthly salary of less than $1,000 per month and mother of at least two dependent children.

This is not a case of them being women that we need to protect. It is more a case of protecting our workers who are vulnerable, who happen to be women with young children. Facing the threat of retrenchment during these difficult times, how do unions and Government protect their capacity to generate income to help them fend for their children and, eventually, their old age? As non-unionised workers, what recourses do they have? What kind of special community-based childcare options can unions and Government offer to this group of one-income households? What kind of family-sensitive housing policies can be specially tailored to meet the needs of single parent households to offer them stable, affordable and adequate housing?

A tripartite policy agenda in restructuring, training and raising productivity - all these suggestions brought up by Mr Lim Swee Say earlier on were very convincing - but this has to be balanced with a family policy agenda to minimise the strains and stresses our workers may face in the home front, so that they can concentrate in their work.

Sir, I do not need to over emphasise here that when we allow family life to become weak, the society begins to deteriorate. In the end, the strength of the nation will be undermined.

The Minister for Labour (Dr Lee Boon Yang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of the Nominated Member of Parliament, Mr Cyrille Tan.

I too believe that tripartite cooperation between employers, trade unions and the workers they represent and the Government is a key factor in our competitive advantage. It has, in fact, helped us to maintain harmonious industrial relations and established a non-confrontational framework for resolving labour-management issues. Instead of wasting our limited human resources and efforts on divisive confrontations between union and management, we have been able to concentrate our efforts, our resources on common goals, teamwork, skills and productivity improvements.

Our harmonious industrial relations over the past three decades were very different from the experience of many other countries, particularly those saddled with adversarial labour-management relations. In fact, our strike-free environment over a long period of time may have resulted in harmonious industrial relations being taken for granted, especially by a younger generation of workers.

Sir, BERI, in its worldwide ranking of workers, had consistently ranked the Singapore workforce as No 1, top of the list. This is, to a large extent, due to the labour legislation which reflect the strong spirit and practice of tripartism. Furthermore, the absence of industrial unrest, such as strikes, work stoppages, had contributed to the high relative productivity which has further enhanced our strong ratings by BERI.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, like Mr Zainul before me, I too would like to take this opportunity to remind the House that harmonious industrial relations cannot be taken for granted. In the past, Singapore had experienced the consequences of confrontational and adversarial labour-management relations.

In the 50s and 60s, strikes, work stoppages and other forms of industrial action were common. Just to remind Members, in 1955 alone, there were 275 strikes, resulting in the loss of one million man-days. In 1961, we had 116 strikes and we lost more than 400,000 man-days. If BERI were to rank our workforce on such performance, I have no doubt that the Singapore workforce would be occupying a position quite near the bottom, and not at the top of the list.

Sir, frequent strikes not only disrupted the smooth operations and viability of companies; it also undermined the well being and livelihood of many workers. More importantly, a poor state of industrial relations had scared away potential investors, discouraged business expansion and adversely affected economic growth. So it was not surprising that in the 50s and the 60s, there was economic stagnation and massive unemployment.

Today, the situation in Singapore is very different. Singapore has consistently been rated as one of the most attractive places to invest in and has topped the World Competitiveness ranking. We have enjoyed rapid economic growth over the years, especially from 1987 to 1997, averaging about 8.9% GDP growth annually.

Unemployment is no longer an issue. In fact, we now face labour shortage and tight labour market conditions. We have to admit more than 450,000 foreign talented professional workers, skilled and even unskilled workers to supplement our limited indigenous manpower resource. Singaporean workers have enjoyed substantial wage increases and significant improvement in their terms and conditions of employment. Standard of living and quality of life are comparable to that of many developed countries.

Sir, all these have been made possible through the efforts of a hard-working workforce, sound economic policies, and a strong and deep rooted relationship between employers, workers and the Government, based on cooperation and shared objectives.

I would like to point out that tripartite cooperation had served us well, not just in times of success, economic growth and prosperity. Tripartism had enabled workers, employers and the Government to work as a team in times of adversity to overcome difficulties. Several other MPs have spoken on the recession in 1985-86. I think that was a real test and a hallmark of the depth and strength of our tripartite relationship. In 1985-86, we faced the first economic recession after nearly 20 years of steady economic growth. While the onset of recession was sudden, the Government was equally swift in its response. An extensive package of anti-recessionary measures was formulated and implemented successfully with strong support from the employers, trade unions and their members. These measures included the drastic reduction in the employers' CPF contribution from 25% to 10%, and the acceptance of severe wage restraint and even wage cut. The prompt and thorough implementation of the cost-cutting measures helped companies and the economy to turn around quickly. Growth resumed in 1987 and since then, Singapore has continued to enjoy strong economic growth and workers have been rewarded with substantial wage increases and good bonuses. Coupled with low inflation, the purchasing power of workers has risen significantly and so has the quality of life. This is reflected in better housing, better health care, better education, access to more leisure and recreational facilities and even the means to travel widely during their holidays.

Sir, tripartite cooperation has allowed us to adopt a proactive approach in tackling difficult issues affecting the economy, businesses, and the well-being of our workers. Nominated Member of Parliament, Dr Lee, has observed that the National Wages Council (NWC) is a tripartite institution. I too would like to highlight the NWC as an example of tripartism at work. The NWC comprises representatives from the union, employers' organisation and the Government. It was set up in 1972 to formulate and recommend wage increase guidelines. The guiding principle was that workers should be rewarded equitably but wage increases should not undermine our competitiveness in the global market. Each year, the NWC issues wage increase guidelines taking into consideration past year's economic performance, future economic prospects, productivity gains that have been achieved and wage costs as compared to economic competitors. For the past 25 years, NWC guidelines have helped to achieve sustainable wage growth and ensure that the economy remains on track with increasing regional and global competition. In many countries, wage negotiation is one of the most troublesome aspects of labour-management relations, often resulting in very violent consequences and protests. In Singapore, tripartite cooperation has allowed us to turn this process into a rational and forward-looking system of resolving the needs of both the workers and the employers.

Apart from dealing with wage increases, the NWC also studied other wage-related issues to further enhance our competitiveness. Hence, in 1986, the NWC proposed that a flexible wage system be introduced to address the problems caused by a rigid wage system which hampered the employers' ability to cope with changes in the business cycle. Currently, more than 70% of companies in Singapore have implemented a flexible wage system which has enabled them to be more responsive to changing business conditions and to remain viable despite the emergence of more competition.

As the Secretary-General of NTUC has pointed out, the flexible wage system has allowed companies to first trim wage cost instead of turning to retrenchment as the first response to a downturn in business cycle. I hope that all employers will heed this message and adopt this approach of using the existing flexible wage system as a measure to respond to slower growth and to avoid turning to retrenchment of their workers as a first reaction.

Mr Deputy Speaker, allow me to quote yet another example of how tripartism had helped us to address difficult issues, especially issues which are going to affect us in the future and which may not be immediately apparent to workers in particular. In late 1995, we established the Tripartite Committee on the Extension of the Retirement Age. The Committee comprises Government representatives and representatives from a wide cross section of employers' organisations and, of course, trade union leaders. The Committee set out to study the complex issues relating to our ageing workforce and came out with a comprehensive and bold package of measures to cope with the impact of an ageing workforce on our economic vitality. These measures included the introduction of the base-up wage system to replace the existing seniority-based wage system, wage reduction for workers after the age of 60, an alternative medical benefit scheme to encourage more responsible use of medical benefits, and the capping of retrenchment benefits to help companies to remain competitive. Some of these measures are major departures from current practices and may not be well-understood or well accepted by workers and employers at this juncture.

However, in the Tripartite Committee, there was full consensus and commitment from union leaders and employers that the adoption of these measures is necessary if Singapore were to overcome the problems created by a rapidly ageing workforce and to ensure that the economy remains competitive in the future. A Tripartite Working Committee has now been formed to monitor the implementation of these recommendations and to develop guidelines for unions and management to smoothly raise the retirement age from 60 to 62.

Sir, the effectiveness of the NWC and the Tripartite Committee on the Extension of the Retirement Age would not have been possible without a high level of cooperation among the three social partners and the ability to work together to address and solve issues that have national implications. This is the essence of tripartism which has served us well and which we must continue to nurture and strengthen.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as pointed out by Mr Hawazi and several other MPs, this debate on tripartism is taking place against a deeply disturbing backdrop of economic crisis spawned by the regional currency and stock market turmoils. Because our fiscal policies have always been based on sound economic principles, we have not been affected to the same extent that our neighbouring countries have. Singapore's economic fundamentals remain strong despite the regional upheavals. Government will continue to adopt prudent financial policies. The Government is also aware of the problems facing businessmen arising from the recent financial turmoil and economic slowdown in the region. These factors will be taken into consideration in formulating the FY 98/99 Budget.

However, Singapore cannot completely avoid the adverse impact from the regional economic crisis. We cannot assume that we will be able to sail through this critical period without some pains. We must, in fact, be prepared that the tidal waves which are lashing at our neighbours will also cause us some damage. We must be prepared for more difficulties ahead of us, as it will take quite a few years for our neighbouring countries to resume their normal growth. 1998, in particular, will be a more difficult year for Singapore and growth is likely to be less than what we have enjoyed before. It is thus more important at this juncture for workers, trade unions, employers, and the Government to work closely together to ride the storm. Therefore, I agree wholeheartedly with Mr Cyrille Tan and the other MPs that we need to further strengthen the tripartite partnership to enhance our competitiveness so that we can meet the challenges in the years ahead of us as we enter the 21st century.

The question, Sir, is what must we do and what new ideas or areas of cooperation will help to strengthen tripartism. I would now like to touch on some of the important and practical ways of strengthening tripartism.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in moving the motion, Mr Cyrille Tan referred to the need for the labour movement to stay relevant and focused on workers' needs. This, I believe, is absolutely necessary. For tripartism to work effectively, we must have a strong labour movement capable of providing leadership and constructive input to strengthen labour-management relation. This means a strong NTUC receiving full support from workers, with a growing membership fully supported by employers and Government.

Mr Chiam has referred in his speech to the labour movement being controlled by the PAP. I think my colleague, Mr Lim Swee Say, has ably rebutted that point. What I would like to say at this juncture is that the NTUC is a fully independent trade union movement. The rights of workers to be a member of the union is enshrined in the Employment Act. It is provided for, subject to the laws on trade unions. So any worker or group of workers who thinks that an NTUC-affiliated trade union is not serving their interest will always have the opportunity of forming their own unions, if they believe that it will better serve their interest. The fact is that out of 82 registered trade unions in Singapore today, 73 are NTUC-affiliated. There are nine unions that have chosen not to be affiliated to NTUC. So there are plenty of opportunities for workers who feel that their interests have not been served to find alternative avenues. The truth of the matter is that NTUC has over the years proven to have been an effective champion of workers, to have served the interest and addressed the concerns of all the workers. That is why it has remained the mainstream union movement.

In many countries, trade unions are mainly concerned with the pursuit of sectional interest at the expense of the overall national objective. This has often given rise to conflict with the management and the government, which has resulted in poorer economic performance and inability to compete. As a result, in many of these countries where there has been a strong tendency to adopt a confrontational and divisive kind of approach, trade unions have become increasingly irrelevant in meeting the challenges of a highly competitive global environment which actually requires a high level of teamwork and cooperation among all the social partners, rather than more confrontation.

In the case of Singapore, our trade unions have always placed national objectives before sectional interest, and long-term benefits of workers over short-term gains. This has ensured the continued relevance of the labour movement in Singapore and has allowed the movement to play an important role in our economic development for the benefit of all workers.

The Government recognises the constructive and valuable contributions made by the NTUC. The Government therefore has always been supportive of the labour movement's efforts and initiatives to improve the economic and social well-being of workers. For example, the Government has provided assistance to the labour movement to set up many cooperatives so that these cooperatives can provide more and better benefits for union membership. The Government has also provided annual grants to the NTUC's Research and Administration Unit to carry out research and provide expert assistance to the trade unions in their wage negotiation and industrial relations matters. In order to assist the unions in developing higher quality and higher level leadership, the Government had provided annual grants to the Singapore Institute of Labour Studies (SILS) where they conduct courses on leadership development and leadership training. To ensure that the Institute has sufficient resources to develop and upgrade the quality of union leadership, the Government has given a one-time grant of $2 million to the Institute's Endowment Fund in lieu of the annual grant.

In recent years, the Government has also supported the labour movement in the development of many social and recreational facilities such as the Orchid Country Club and Pasir Ris Resort by allocating large tracts of land at concessionary rates through the Singapore Labour Foundation (SLF). More significantly, the Government has allocated a prime site in Marina South for the construction of a new NTUC building in place of its existing office in Shenton Way.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Government will continue to give strong support to the labour movement in its efforts to enhance the well-being of workers and to enable it to play a constructive and important role in economic development and nation-building. I am confident that the NTUC will continue to be a valuable social partner in our non-confrontational tripartite framework. Because the PAP and the NTUC have similar objectives to improve the lives of Singaporeans, we have worked closely together for the past 32 years. This is not surprising. We have the same objectives, we want to do the same thing to benefit Singaporeans. So we work together. And this commonality has evolved over the years into a distinct symbiotic relation between the PAP and the NTUC. This relationship complements the already strong tripartite relationship which has served us so well.

For this reason, the People's Action Party will explore various ways and means to strengthen its links with the NTUC. For a start, as the Prime Minister has indicated last Sunday, we will be organising joint seminars to discuss important issues confronting workers and the economy. Such seminars can provide additional inputs for our economic policies to further reinforce our tripartite relations and also to enhance workers' understanding of key issues confronting the country. We hope that through such interactions, we will be able to reinforce the symbiotic relations between the PAP and NTUC.

Sir, to ensure that the economy remains stable, on an even keel, in such troubled times, the needs of companies must also be addressed and Government and workers must help employers to cope with increasing competition which follows from the recent massive devaluation of regional currencies. The Nominated Member, Mr Tay Beng Chuan, had asked Government to review its levies and charges in order to assist businessmen and to reduce the costs of doing business. I have already earlier on mentioned that Government will take the new economic conditions into consideration in formulating its financial policies for the coming year. Government will do what is necessary to assist employers to cope with the economic downturn.

The Nominated Member, Mdm Claire Chiang, had said that in 1985-86 we were able to reduce the CPF contribution from 25% to 10%, a 15% cut, and she asked whether it is still feasible today to reduce cost by cutting the CPF. I would say, yes, it is entirely possible and feasible, but the question is whether our situation is so serious and so severe that we need to take such a drastic step. In 1985-86, we were in recession with negative growth. But presently, although we are facing serious economic challenges and drastic change in the economic environment, the likelihood of Singapore being able to achieve growth in the coming year is still very strong although, as I said earlier on, growth will be slower and harder to come by. So at this juncture, perhaps it is premature to talk about reducing workers' CPF, but certainly the fact that each worker is contributing 20% plus another 20% from the employer to the CPF represents opportunities for us to reduce wage cost, if there is absolute need to do so. And it would be considered if the situation deteriorates to that level.

As I said, Mr Deputy Speaker, growth will be slower this year, and perhaps for quite a few more years, before normal growth pattern in the region resumes. So here I want to make a point that in view of the new circumstances, the new economic environment, workers must moderate their wage expectations and be prepared to work harder and more productively. The current regional economic crisis may also result in more companies having to downsize and retrench workers. My Ministry will help affected workers to seek re-employment. We will consider setting up a tripartite panel to coordinate re-employment assistance to retrenched workers. At the same time, the easing of tight labour market, in view of retrenchment and slowing down of the economy, may well mean that the concerns expressed by the Nominated Member, Mdm Claire Chiang, about job-hopping will solve itself. Because job-hopping to a certain extent is very much a phenomenon linked to a tight labour market and a rapidly growing economy. When jobs are scarce, not many people are likely to hop around. The current surveys by the newspapers reflect the thinking of the workers on the ground that their concern today is more on job security than bonuses and wage increase. I think the problem of job-hopping may well be on its way out and that may be replaced with a more critical concern on security.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Mr Cyrille Tan, in moving his motion, also spoke in support of the need to bring in more foreign talent to supplement our local manpower. I think this requires courage and it also highlights the far-sightedness of our trade union leaders. In the present environment, to stand up and say, we support the Government's move to bring in more foreign talents, requires courage. Because as a union leader, the standard reaction would be to protect their members first and therefore keep foreigners out. But here he is prepared to argue that in order to ensure that the economy can remain competitive in the future, we should continue to maintain an open-door policy towards talent and to welcome more talent to come to Singapore to supplement our limited manpower resources. I think this is the characteristic of the far-sightedness of the trade union movement in Singapore. Instead of adopting a defensive and sectional interest attitude, labour leaders have always embraced the national perspective and taken the stand of, for instance, welcoming foreign talents to supplement the local workforce.

Sir, with limited manpower resources, it is essential for us to attract talent to Singapore. Foreign talent will add experience and skills to our economy and enable us to achieve faster growth, create more jobs and add value to the economy. The availability of foreign talents to supplement local talents will make us more attractive to foreign investors. We must continue to open our society and economy to foreign talents. Some Singaporeans may not quite understand why we should give away jobs to foreigners, especially during this period of economic uncertainty. This is where a strong NTUC, with strong grassroots support, can help the Government and employers to reach out to the rank-and-file to explain the benefits that foreign talents bring to us and how they can help us to become more competitive. The trade union movement has an important role to play in explaining to workers the rationale of our efforts in attracting foreign talents and to allay the fears that foreigners may displace some Singaporeans.

Sir, I next turn to an area which many Members have spoken about, that of employability and skills training. Several Members have noted that inwith an increasingly knowledge-based economy, workers with lower education who are currently employed in low value-added industries, may not be able to take up jobs in the high value-added industries of the future if they do not upgrade their skills. I think this is a very relevant point. In fact, BERI in its annual ranking of workforces round the world has also noted that our workers are not well placed in terms of skills and work attitude. These are areas that we have to make improvements on. If nothing is done, many of the low-skilled and low-educated workers may not be able to remain employed asthe economy upgrades, to cope with increasing competition from countries with larger and lower-wage workers force the pace of changelabour force. As our economy upgrades, there is a real danger that lower educated and less-skilled workers would be displaced and may end up being the new unemployable in the workforce. This is the structural unemployment currently experienced by many European countries, which has been observed by Mr Cyrille Tan and the other speakers.

However, knowing that this can happen, we can, and we must, take steps to avoid or minimise this undesirable outcome. What we have to do is to upgrade workers' skills. As several Members have pointed out, nearly 40% of the labour force have less than secondary education. We will have to invest more in workers' training and skills upgrading.ence, it is crucial for us to upgrade workers' skills. This is another area where the spirit of tripartism can provide a synergistic effect. The effort to upgrade workers' skills requires changes in the attitudes of the workers and the employers. It will require, in fact, a strong spirit of tripartism to achieve the best results. On its own, Government would have great difficulties in overcoming resistance from workers who may not be convinced of the need for skills upgrading or are just simply unwilling or unable to find time to undergo such skills upgrading upgrading. Likewise, Government will also have difficulty overcoming employers' mindset, such as unwillingness to release workers for training because they are unsure of the benefits or unwilling to bear their share of the cost. A tripartite effort with inputs from all three parties - Government, unionsworkers and employers - is more likely to succeed in making workers and employers more aware of the importance of skills upgrading.

One such example of a tripartite effort was mentioned by Mr Lim Swee Say. This is the Skills Redevelopment Programme (SRP) which is initiated and administered by NTUC, supported by the Government, and and the employers. Under the SRP, workers with lower education in low value-added industries are given training in skills that are needed by the new high-value added operations. SRP will enhanceIn the process, these workers' skills and employability would be greatly enhanced to we could avoid the problem of structural unemployment. SRP is an example of how tripartism can synergise the resources of Government, trade unions and employers to achieve the objective of Our objective is to produce a well-trained and highly skilled workforce. This will enable us toenable Singapore to attract high quality investments which would create more and better paying jobs for workers. Government will expand on the scope and outreach of the SRP to reach out to more workers and employers. We will develop, apart from the SRP, new programmes to provide training and skills upgrading for mature workers to help them to cope with the changes in the future.

Sir, next I would like to touch on an integrated approach in manpower training. Manpower is ourwill always be Singapore's only resource - I think this was mentioned by the Nominated MP, Mr Tay Beng Chuan. It canwill also be a major limiting factor in our growth and could become an impediment to new business investments and business expansion. We must therefore fully develop our manpower resources so as to hone our competitive edge and remain relevant in an increasingly competitive global environment. This is why, as Mr Lim Boon Heng, Secretary-General of NTUC, and several other MPs before him noted, the Prime Minister welcomed the suggestion made at the PAP Convention last Sunday for the Government to consider establishing a central national agency to undertake the task of manpower planning, development, and management.

At present, these crucial economic functions are undertaken by several Ministries and Government agencies. For example, the EDB is responsible for anticipating meeting the manpower needs of new investments; the Productivity and Standards Board is tasked with skills and productivity upgrading; the Immigration Department is in charge of granting Employment Passes to foreign talents; whilst the while the Ministry of Labour, apart from many other duties, is responsible fortasked with regulating the inflow of mainly unskilled foreign workers. Such an arrangement is not entirely satisfactory and can result in a mismatch and lackslack of coordination and an an overall strategic direction. We shouldneed to look at manpower issues from a total national perspective and adopt an integrated and comprehensive strategy for meeting the national manpower needs in numbers and quality.approach to achieve better results. An integrated approach would ensure that manpower planning, development, and management remains well-coordinated and relevant to the needs of an evolving economy.

Sir, by adopting an integrated approach, we can develop a world-class workforce with capabilities and skills to succeed in the new global knowledge economy. The development of such a world-class workforce requires total commitment and efforts on the part of Government, trade unions, workers and employers. The Government, in considering the need for an enlarged Ministry of Labour with manpower planning and development function, will also study closely how to involve the participation rate of the labour movement and employers' organisation in the formulation and implementation of manpower policy, including workers' training and skills upgrading programmes. This is in line with our tripartite approach in meeting the challenges ahead and will enable us to reap the full benefitssynergy of tripartite cooperation.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in summary, tripartite cooperation has benefited Singapore in at least three major areas. It has brought about industrial harmony, thus creating a favourable investment climate for rapid economic growth. It has enabled the three social partners to work closely together to overcome adversity during bad times and share the fruits of economic success in good times. Equally important, ourthe tripartite framework ofor cooperation has enabled the three social partners to participate in and contribute to the formulation of national policies. The tripartite partners' participation and contribution have enabled us to more effectively tackle complex and difficult national issues that have long-term implications.

Sir, the task ahead of us is to build on the already sound tripartite foundation. We must strengthen the bonds between workers, employers and Government, so as to build a more resilient and adaptable framework fornetwork of industrial relations to prepare Singapore for the challenges of the 21st century. While existing approaches have served us well, we must consciously review their relevance as the world around us changes and the regional economic crisis begins to affect us. We must examine our mindsets and make innovative use of theour tripartite framework to address national manpower issues. My Ministry, therefore, welcomes new ideas and suggestions put forward by MPs on how tripartism could be elevated to a higher plane to help develop a more efficient and highly competitive workforce. Hon. Members have made many suggestions. We will study these carefully and we will discuss them in the appropriate tripartite fora, such as NWC, tripartite committees and working groups that have been formed to address specific issues. Where feasible, we will implement these new ideas for the benefit of workers and employers. We will continue to strengthen our work for a stronger tripartite relationship and institutions by exploring new areas for tripartite cooperation.

Sir, I support the motion.

Mr Cyrille Tan: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank all the Members who have spoken in support of the motion.

Please let me state again clearly. Mr Lim Boon Heng was elected as the Secretary-General of the NTUC by the grassroots leaders, ie, by myself and others. Also, he has been appointed as the Minister because he was elected as a Member of Parliament and the Prime Minister finds him fit to be a Minister.

MPs who are advisors to unions, to put it bluntly, have a tough job. Sometimes, when they have dialogues with our union leaders and members, they were scolded for explaining unpopular policies. And our leaders are very blunt because some of them from the ground can be very rough. But they are doing a good job and I think we should thank them for continuing to do a good job. This is because of the PAP and the NTUC symbiotic relationship.

Nowhere in the world have unions taken the initiative to visit developed countries to study unemployment problems. It is because 40% of our workforce today are 40 years and above with low education and they have contributed significantly to the economy for the past years. It would be a waste if they are caught in structural unemployment. That is why Mr Lim Swee Say said that we need action now and it is very serious because we know the problems of structural unemployment.

The NTUC-PAP symbiotic relationship has been an important factor in Singapore's progress. With the support of the trade unions, the PAP Government has been able to create conditions for wealth creation. This has benefited employers and workers. The Government has helped workers in many other ways, ie, through home ownership schemes, savings in the CPF, good medical and social programmes. As a result, workers have seen their assets enhanced. Because we have this symbiotic relation, we have been able to forge a tripartite relationship with the Government, employers and unions working together to make Singapore a better place.

As Dr Lee Boon Yang, the Labour Minister, says, "For tripartism to work effectively, we must have a strong labour movement." This means a strong NTUC receiving full support from workers, employers and Government. A strong labour movement is one of the five pillars of NTUC 21, our blueprint for the 21st century. Without a strong labour movement, we cannot achieve the other four objectives, which are to enhance workers' employability for life, to help make companies more competitive, to build a healthy body and a healthy mind, and to care more and share more. A strong NTUC needs constant infusion of leaders from the rank and file as well as from other sources, a point made by Mr Lim Boon Heng, Secretary-General of NTUC.

For tripartism to succeed, there must also be strong government and strong employers as well. As a trade unionist, I know what it means to deal with strong as well as weak management. With a strong management, you strike a deal and that is it. With a weak management, you can never come to a satisfactory arrangement. Likewise, if union leaders are not strong and cohesive, then we cannot serve our workers' needs. If we bicker for power, we will not have time to plan for the future. Then we can forget scenario planning. Dr Lee has mentioned many projects of the labour movement that have received strong support from the Government. I am sure my fellow unionists would want me to thank the PAP Government for this strong support.

We face a difficult year ahead because of the regional financial crisis. There will be more retrenchments. So we welcome the proposed formation of a tripartite force that will help retrenched workers get alternative employment as soon as possible. I hope employers will also heed Mr Lim Boon Heng's call on training. Mr Lim told the employers that they should not cut back on training just because they face a period of uncertainty. I also hope that employers will see money spent on training as an investment for their well-being. Because we have tripartism in place, we have the mechanism to deal with the problems confronting us today, we need to face them in the same way as we did in the past. Now is the time for all parties to reaffirm their commitment to tripartism.

Our job as a labour movement is to safeguard workers' interest. We know we can do this job well if we can work only in tandem with the Government and employers. So I hope the House will support my motion. We have seen how tripartism helps us in all fields. What we are asking the House to do is to recognise tripartism as a key competitive advantage of Singapore. It will be a vote of confidence for a better Singapore in the 21st century.

Resolved,

That this House recognises tripartism as a key competitive advantage of Singapore, and calls on Government, employers and unions to further strengthen tripartite partnership in Singapore so as to enhance Singapore's competitiveness as we face new and greater economic and social challenges in the 21st century.