LABOUR MARKET 2005 REPORT

Column: 1718

LABOUR MARKET 2005 REPORT: 12.

Assoc. Prof. Ong Soh Khim asked the Minister for Manpower in light of the most recent Labour Market 2005 report (a) what is the percentage of the 63,500 jobs that were added in 2005 for local people, that went to Singapore citizens and permanent residents respectively; (b) what is the percentage distribution of the 49,800 jobs that were added in 2005 for foreign workers, with respect to sectors,

Column: 1719

salary range, education requirements and skill sets; and (c) what are the factors leading to high foreign employment gain in 2005.

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, we do not have a breakdown of local employment data by Singapore citizens and permanent residents. We collect them as locals. We have started collecting data, but it is too premature to release to the public. It is not precise enough and we need to double check the figures.

We have the breakdown of foreign employment gain by sectors, but not by salary, education requirements and skills sets. But of the 49,800 jobs created last year that went to foreigners, 46% were in the services sector, about 40% were in the manufacturing sector and 13% were in the construction sector.

More jobs were created for both locals and foreigners last year, in tandem with the strong economic growth. While the job gains for foreigners were high, ie, 49,800 or 44% of all jobs created, they were less than for locals. For locals, it was about 56%. In recent years, more jobs have gone to locals, ie, Singaporeans and PRs, every year, in both good and difficult times.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, I would like to seek a clarification from the Minister. Is there any reason, whether historical or statistical, that we classify PRs and citizens together as one category called "locals"? Would it be clearer to actually segregate the two categories?

Dr Ng Eng Hen: Sir, we have followed international convention. That was the first metric on which we collected data. In that sense, we never needed that finer granularity or sensitivity when we produced data.

But I take the hon. Member's point. It may be instructive for us to see, in terms

Column: 1720

of the number of jobs created for locals, how many went to citizens and PRs. Our look at preliminary data when we started trying to get them from a number of sources - this is not the precise way to do it and, therefore, I am reluctant to give the exact figure until we have clear data - was that neither group was over-represented. In other words, the proportions of Singaporeans and PRs were equally represented in terms of jobs created.