Govt should reveal data on foreign labour policies quicker to stamp out misinformation: Pritam Singh

• The Government could have given data much earlier to address concerns about foreign talent
• Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh made this point during a marathon debate on foreign talent and free trade agreements
• He said negative sentiments over foreigners had been simmering before Ceca became widely known
• The Workers' Party proposed changes to one of the two motions being debated were not passed after a vote

SINGAPORE — The Government should be more pro-active in providing data and information on matters concerning foreign labour to stamp out misinformation more quickly and quell Singaporeans’ anxieties on the subject, Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh said.

The Workers’ Party (WP) chief was speaking in Parliament on Tuesday (Sept 14) during a marathon 11-hour debate on two motions filed by Finance Minister Lawrence Wong and Mr Leong Mun Wai of the Progress Singapore Party (PSP). Mr Wong’s was on jobs and livelihoods and Mr Leong’s was on foreign talent policy and free trade agreements (FTAs).

Mr Singh noted that concerns over foreigners had been simmering among Singaporeans “well before” the Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (Ceca) between Singapore and India “entered the public lexicon”.

And so the Government should have been more forthcoming with the data the public sought “years ago” to assuage the feelings of displacement that some Singaporeans are experiencing on the matter, he said.

For instance, in 2016, WP Member of Parliament (MP) Leon Perera had asked then-Manpower Minister Lim Swee Say for the number of intra-corporate transferees from India that had been approved under Ceca from 2005 to the latest year the data was available.

Among other things, Mr Lim said then that the Ministry of Manpower does not disclose data on foreign manpower with breakdown by nationality, and that included data on intra-corporate transferees. 

These transferees refer to foreign employees who have worked for at least a year in overseas offices of multinational corporations and are brought in to work in their branches or subsidiaris in Singapore.

Referring to the incident in 2016, Mr Singh questioned why the Government had “simply refused to answer a question of national relevance for which data was readily available”.

“Can Singaporeans be blamed for assuming that the numbers must have been so huge that the Government saw fit not to reveal them?

“The Government needs to reflect on its own omissions and resistance when it comes to providing data and information, and how it ought to take some responsibility for the groundswell of misinformation about Ceca.” 

'FAIR QUESTION' 

In his speech, Mr Singh also outlined WP’s position on FTAs and Ceca.

He said it is “undeniable” that such trade agreements have created jobs and opportunities for Singaporeans, and acknowledged the Government’s explanation that Ceca does not allow India nationals to freely enter the country,

However, it is still “fair to ask” whether the authorities have failed to regulate work passes “in the best way possible” in the past.

And although the opposition party accepts the benefits of FTAs for Singaporeans, it does not assume that good jobs are “automatically created for Singaporeans by virtue of Singapore’s pro-trade policies and a strong network of FTAs, including Ceca”.

Some groups of people, such as those from the lower-income groups and workers who lack skills, may lose out to globalisation and see depressed wages and fewer good job opportunities, Mr Singh added.

Therefore, “the Government needs to intervene aggressively through policy or legislation to ameliorate this and ensure the availability of stronger safety nets for Singaporeans who cannot make the transition”.

Even so, there have been some people who have used Ceca as a dog-whistle to pass racism off for genuine economic concerns. 

“WP accepts that genuine economic concerns exist and that it is fair to raise concerns about this,” Mr Singh said. 

“However, we abhor and denounce the racism and xenophobia that has become a part of the public narrative in some quarters,” he added, noting that some people have gotten carried away using vile language to vent their frustrations online.

MENDING THE DIVIDE

Aside from his calls for the Government to communicate more, and better, on issues relating to foreign policy, Mr Singh raised four other suggestions on how to address the local-foreign divide festering here.

Among other things, he proposed that the Government tracks, regularly reports and solves underemployment, creates fixed-term employment passes that are tied to the training of, or skills transfer to, Singaporean workers.

It may also create a parliamentary standing select committee dedicated to examining the issue of jobs and foreign employment. It would closely monitor the Government’s efforts by tracking unemployment and jobs-related data, and also call on people to give evidence on job-related issues.

Other WP MPs, including Mr Leon Perera, Associate Professor Jamus Lim and Mr Gerald Giam, also spoke during the debate and raised other issues such as making trades jobs more attractive, the skills gap and manpower shortage in the infocomm and technology sector here, and the downsides to free trade.

Ms He Ting Ru, WP MP for Sengkang Group Representation Constituency, gave a speech and echoed calls for the Government to be pro-active about sharing data and information of Singapore's workforce to squash any misinformation and unfounded claims on foreign talent.

Mr Singh and Ms He had suggested several amendments to the two motions, one of which was to add a line in both that calls on the Government to proactively release information on jobs and employment prospects of Singaporeans, among other things.

Ms He also sought to strike out a line from PSP's motion, which references Ceca as causing anxiety among Singaporeans on jobs and livelihoods.

Speaker of Parliament Tan Chuan-Jin rejected her proposed amendments to Mr Leong's motion, saying that WP should confine the paragraph it wishes to add on transparency of information to one motion. 

He added that striking out the line on Ceca would change the tone of the motion that is being debated, and so the proposed amendments would not be relevant and therefore were not admitted.

Mr Singh’s proposed amendments on Mr Wong’s motion were not passed after a vote at the end of the debate.

DATA CAN BE SENSITIVE

Responding to the WP MPs in his speech towards the end of the debate, Finance Minister Lawrence Wong thanked WP for supporting the Government’s strategy on FTAs.

He also thanked Mr Singh for making clear that the WP is against racism and xenophobia and rejects such rhetoric.

On the subject of making more data available sooner, Mr Wong said there is already a lot of data that has been made available to the public and anyone can study them to decide how the Government’s policies have had an impact on Singaporeans.

“The WP’s line is that more data is better… I would say the Government has a different view.

"We see data and transparency as a means to better governance, and it's not always the case that data is necessarily an unmitigated good.”

He pointed to the example of the United States, which has a Freedom of Information Act, and yet the people’s trust in the government there is still low — nowhere near the high level of trust in the Government seen in Singapore right now.

“The real issue is this — when someone loses his or her job, they will be unhappy, no matter how much data you provide them. In fact, when they lose their jobs, they are not interested in data. They need help.”

Not only that, the Government also has to be careful when it comes to releasing sensitive information, because some of it can be used by external parties, he said.

That is why the Government will not accept WP’s amendments to the motion, adding that WP can table a separate motion on information data provision if it wishes to do so.

Mr Wong’s motion was passed in a vote. The WP MPs did not support the motion and had their dissent recorded.