How many of you know what Slyvia spoke in Parliament 19 Sep?
-
The lack of coverage on parliamentary debates, the reasons to which is still widely unknown, has in its way largely contributed to the politcal apathy of many in Singapore.
If political debates were televised once a month in Singapore, imagine the interest stirred up. The young to old, poor to rich, educated to not so educated would all be drawn in.
This is what the government doesn't want, isn't it? A socially, politically and economically wise populace.
Here are excerpts from Sylvia's speech:
First, we should recognise that delaying the DDA in effect is an economic pressure on workers to continue at the same pace as before. However, as mentioned by Minister in charge of the Civil Service during question time on Monday, there will be employees who decide that at 62, it is time to slow down e.g. a Head of Department in a school might want to be a teacher and relinquish HOD responsibilities.
If such a person was not able to concurrently receive his monthly CPF payments at 62, he may not have the luxury of making such a choice. Others, who have slogged for 40 years in the rat race, may want to find peace by devoting more time to volunteer work or charitable acts. By indirectly compelling them to continue working into their mid-60s, there would be fewer younger retirees to form a backbone of manpower for social, community and even religious activities. How would that impact the morale and quality of life of our society? -
.......fixing the retirement age at 65 does not mean everyone will be working up to 65. Yesterday Minister of State for Manpower sought to assure the House of the viability of the plan to re-employ workers after 62. For residents between the age of 55 and 64, the employment rate is currently about 54%. MOS said that the Ministry’s target was to raise this to 65%, which was, in his own words, “an ambitious target”. Thus, we are not at all certain that 65% is achievable. And even if it was achieved, what about the other 35% who are not working?
-
The proposed law to re-employ people after 62 may only reach those who are employed at 62. Even then, what recourse will employees have if employers do not re-employ them? Yesterday MOS sought to assure the House that the law would be enforceable, but gave few details, except to say that a tripartite committee would be formed to look into the issue and report on later. On Monday, Manpower Minister said the tripartite committee would report on the re-employment regime and guidelines within 2 years from now! If that is so, how can we agree to delay the DDA now, when these details are still up in the air? Will the new law become just a piece of paper?
-
......those who work beyond 62 are vulnerable to having reduced income. A study was done of unionised companies that re-employed workers beyond 62 in the last 18 months (ST 25/8/07). It was revealed that only 20% retained workers at the same job and pay, while 70% had to work the same job but for lower pay, and 10% got a different job altogether. As this study only captured those who did re-employ workers who reached 62, it is not known the fate of those who were not re-employed. On Monday, Minister Teo Chee Hean also mentioned the re-employment of retired teachers as adjunct teachers. This suggests income reduction in the public sector as well.
-
.......the Minimum Sum to be left in CPF at 55 years has gone up progressively over a short time. Since 2003, the Minimum Sum has progressively gone up – from $80,000 to the current $99,600 within 4 years, and will continue rising till it reaches $120,000 in 6 years’ time. Apart from this, we are also required to leave a Medisave Required Amount in the CPF. This Medisave Required Amount will go up rapidly, from the current $11,500 by $2,500 per year and in 6 years’ time it will be $25,000. This means that Singaporeans will soon need to have a total of $145,000 kept locked in the CPF when they reach 55. On top of this much larger sum, it also takes longer to accumulate savings due to reductions in employer’s contributions. Employer’s CPF contributions had in recent memory been cut from 20% to 13% and recently only partially restored to 14.5%.
Besides all the above, the rule allowing members to withdraw 50% of their savings is being phased out starting from Jan 2009. In 6 yearsÂ’ time, if members cannot meet the Minimum Sums when they reach 55, they will not be able to withdraw anything except $5,000. -
There is sufficient empirical evidence that workers over the age of 40 already have difficulties competing with younger workers, even foreigners, for jobs. Even if they find work, there are issues about the amount of income, and job security. Part-time work or contract work is the lot for many.
It was reported in the press that in 2006, about 12% of the resident workforce or 172,000 workers were on contract work, the bulk of whom were older and with less education (ST 24/8/07). There must be unreported cases in the informal sector as well. It is not uncommon to find sole breadwinners doing odd jobs to feed school-going children. -
-
Various Ministers sought to remind the public that the government was spending more than $1b to increase interest rates, fund Workfare etc. However, it should be noted that government revenues have enjoyed significant increases arising from taxpayersÂ’ dues. Business Times (Sep 8-9, 2007) reported that IRASÂ’ collections for FY 2006 rose 15% from the previous FY, part of a steady increase since FY 02. These comprise corporate and personal income tax, GST, and stamp duty and property tax. In dollar terms, the taxes collected rose by more than $6b compared to 5 years ago.
-
In all Goodness of God....
Do you actually think, PAP will expose to public apprehension such debates by Ms Formidable Sylvia Lim???
I tell you, PAP & their cohorts, are clearly INTIMIDATED by her sharp wit & clear presentations of their flawed ideals as well as "solutions" & or 'Policies'...
Stop hiding from the truths, PAP...It's time you take on some REAL responsibilities to care for the population of Singapore.... not evasise & vaguely structured policies around the CPF Totem Pole...
Stop the dance, start your walk from your talks... -
Besides all the above, the rule allowing members to withdraw 50% of their savings is being phased out starting from Jan 2009. In 6 yearsÂ’ time, if members cannot meet the Minimum Sums when they reach 55, they will not be able to withdraw anything except $5,000.
kinda sad really we need to have our $145,000 lock in CPF account!! after paying off the HDB flats how many of us could left a further S145k in CPF account? what happen to you singaporeans who vote for them have to say about it. it is time we heard both side of the story. come one PAP supporters, find your reason to support your PAP policy!! -
The Singapore mainstream media is basically useless and worthless as a source when it comes to political discussion and debate.
Most of it is just PAP or government propaganda. -
hi rock star, i read with great interest the excerpts you have posted, though i'm 20 and more often than not, politically apathetic like my peers. May i know where's your source? Also, is it possible for public to sit in parliament speeches?
-
no choice lah, mediac0cks r pap's dogs who only report one side stories.Originally posted by HyperFocal:In all Goodness of God....
Do you actually think, PAP will expose to public apprehension such debates by Ms Formidable Sylvia Lim???
I tell you, PAP & their cohorts, are clearly INTIMIDATED by her sharp wit & clear presentations of their flawed ideals as well as "solutions" & or 'Policies'...
Stop hiding from the truths, PAP...It's time you take on some REAL responsibilities to care for the population of Singapore.... not evasise & vaguely structured policies around the CPF Totem Pole...
Stop the dance, start your walk from your talks...
-
u think pple will watch?
-
no choice lah, mediac0cks r pap's dogs who only report one side stories.
Very sad and pathetic situation.
This is one of the factors that people like thousandisland and his peers are ignorant and apathetic about singapore politics.
Because the mainstream media is worthless for political issues and discussions.
Taiwan Media Analyze Singapore Politics
http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2007/07/taiwan-current-affairs-tv-show-on_24.html -
looking at it, our media only good at digging out the dirts of opposition parties, while singing the praise of MIW.
such a report really make u wondering who r the ones who putting on these wayang shows.
take example:
president election, they showing nathan on his good side while digging at the the person (forget his name) who standing for election of all his past ugly history.
becos of the media, this prataman managed to walkover two-times! -
Only in a Totalitarian Society will the leadership attempt to convince the Citizens that they are all living in an environment that is equal to Utopia, and disguise the ugly truth in every palatable forms that is imaginable. -
Good for you, your query reveals your latent desire to walk out of political apathy. I was once in your shoes too and I'm glad I came to know the truth.Originally posted by thousandisland:hi rock star, i read with great interest the excerpts you have posted, though i'm 20 and more often than not, politically apathetic like my peers. May i know where's your source? Also, is it possible for public to sit in parliament speeches?
I took this from www.wp.org.sg. Try theonlinecitizen.com for a start too.
On the other hand, some sites are just pure rants and senseless.
As for sitting in parliament speeches, I'm not too sure what pre-requisites one requires but you can easily download them from channelnewasia.com.
Good luck. -
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
ah pak: media coverage is one of the reason for political apathy amongst my peers. but i think the bigger reason is because the issue of politics does not come directly into play at least in the phase of my current life. people at my age (20+) worry about their ORD date, post -ord plans, what to study in uni, short term prospects (able to secure employment) etc. This kinda concerns i already consider pertaining to the better educated bunch of my peers, what say those who are lesser informed. why would one take the effort to be accquainted with politics if they are not directly affected?
Very sad and pathetic situation.
This is one of the factors that people like thousandisland and his peers are ignorant and apathetic about singapore politics.
Because the mainstream media is worthless for political issues and discussions.
[b]Taiwan Media Analyze Singapore Politics
http://singaporemind.blogspot.com/2007/07/taiwan-current-affairs-tv-show-on_24.html[/b]
For me, i guess it's a mixture of reasons though i regret not being proactive at an earlier age. I'm currently serving the grassroots at a YEC and i've the opportunity to listen to the cries from the lower strata of the society. At certain instances, i feel for them and that policies implemented arent foolproof and as wide covering as our government claims it to be. Hence, i'm starting to get interested in empirical evidence that opposition parties put up. yup.
rock star: thanks for your links. will take me some time to digest what was transpired all this while. -
Parliament sessions are open to the public, but seats are limited, so check the Parliament website regularly to keep track of their sessions.
Go down and listen, it will help you to be better informed.
http://www.parliament.gov.sg -
We can't depend on the local media for they are working for the interest of the gahmen. Let's just continue to educate those around us about the way the regime works and do what we can to post excerpt/speech of oppositions on the website.
It is important we continue to expose the PAP regime so as to encourage people to be wise and bold and discourage them to be intimidated by these despots. -
i'm part of the cc yec which is under the pa youth movement but my main involvement is really to be involved in grassroots work. yet i'm drawn to wp's ideas. what a conflict of interests.
-
wah, the CPF fund debate run over here. Sylvia was a law lecturer. If she taught me law I would have failed her. What is she talking? Employment is a contract between you and your employer - not a jail sentence. Have you heard of these words "I quit"? At anytime you can hand in your resignation. Who can make you work if you don't want to? If I strike TOTO, I will give Sylvia money to re-study law again!
-
Whatever, I respect her for she has the heart to serve the people as compared to the PAP regime who is all the way out to get our money.Originally posted by TheGoodEarth:wah, the CPF fund debate run over here. Sylvia was a law lecturer. If she taught me law I would have failed her. What is she talking? Employment is a contract between you and your employer - not a jail sentence. Have you heard of these words "I quit"? At anytime you can hand in your resignation. Who can make you work if you don't want to? If I strike TOTO, I will give Sylvia money to re-study law again! -
now Slyvia would have to be very careful in whatever she threads, becuz any small mistake she makes no matter how small will be blown out of proportion , courtesy of the propaganda papers.. in order to discredit her..