Tag: Gerald Giam

  • Workers’ Party Visits East Coast GRC And Fengshan SMC

    Workers’ Party Visits East Coast GRC And Fengshan SMC

    The likely Workers’ Party (WP) candidates for East Coast GRC and Fengshan SMC made their first public appearance together yesterday, visiting major markets there to meet stallholders and residents.

    Non-Constituency Member of Parliament Gerald Giam, 37, who was part of the WP’s East Coast team, which garnered 45.2 per cent of the vote in the 2011 General Election, is almost certain to enter the fray once again in the constituency.

    He was joined yesterday by other potential candidates: National University of Singapore associate professor and sociologist Daniel Goh, 42; law firm partner Dennis Tan, 44; research and consultancy firm chief executive and former civil servant Leon Perera, 44; and librarian Mohamed Fairoz Shariff, 36.

    East Coast GRC was a five-MP constituency at the last general election, but will be a four-MP constituency at the next one. This means three of the four new faces could be Mr Giam’s running mates, while one might go it alone in Fengshan SMC.

    Also at the walkabout were WP chief Low Thia Khiang, 58, Aljunied GRC MPs Sylvia Lim, 50, Chen Show Mao, 54, and Faisal Abdul Manap, 40, and Hougang MP Png Eng Huat, 53.

    Non-Constituency MP Yee Jenn Jong, 50, who is expected to lead the WP team in Marine Parade GRC, was there too, with potential candidate Terence Tan, 43, a lawyer who has been doing house visits.

    The GRC will absorb Joo Chiat SMC, where Mr Yee stood in 2011 and lost by 388 votes to Mr Charles Chong of the People’s Action Party.

    The WP has been walking the ground daily in recent weeks, with the elections expected next month.

    It said it has not finalised its candidates or where they will stand.

    Speaking to reporters after yesterday’s walkabout, WP chairman Sylvia Lim said the party will formally introduce its candidates after National Day.

    The party said it will also contest Jalan Besar and Nee Soon GRCs, as well as Sengkang West and MacPherson SMCs.

    Last night, the WP held a Hari Raya dinner in Aljunied GRC’s Kaki Bukit ward, attended by party leaders – and the man who stepped down last week from his post as chairman of the PAP branch in the ward, Mr Kahar Hassan, 45.

    Mr Kahar said Mr Faisal had invited him to the dinner “some time back”, and he was there in his personal capacity.

    When asked by reporters if he had joined the WP, Mr Kahar said: “That will never happen – I’ve been a (PAP) member for 20 years. I was invited to this dinner a long time ago.”

    Mr Faisal told reporters that he invited Mr Kahar to the dinner because they both serve residents in the area.

    “We have a working relationship… sometimes I refer residents to him, and sometimes he refers residents to me,” he said.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Gerald Giam: Caught In The NSEW Line Breakdown

    Gerald Giam: Caught In The NSEW Line Breakdown

    I was caught in the massive breakdown of the North-South and East-West Line (NSEWL) of the MRT yesterday evening as I was heading to a meeting at the WP HQ in Jalan Besar. When I reached Dover station at about 7.05pm, the eastbound train was already at the platform but with all its cabin lights off. I got onto the train anyway, but waited almost 5 minutes before it finally moved off. The westbound train on the opposite track was similarly stalled. My train stopped midway to the next station and all its lights went out again. This pattern was to repeat itself several more times over the next 25 minutes. When I reached Outram Park station at about 7.35pm, the lights in the train went out a final time and we were told to detrain as it was no longer in service.

    The PA system announcements at the station informed us that train service on the entire NSEWL had been suspended and free shuttle buses were available. So I exited the station thinking I could hop onto one of the buses. Big mistake! The street level was packed with people and there were no buses to be seen and no directional signs to guide the stranded commuters. Someone asked me where the buses were. I told him honestly that I had no idea.

    Knowing that it would be pointless to attempt taking a cab, I headed back down to the station, against the flow of the crowd, hoping to get in again and take the North-East Line (NEL). But all the fare gates were closed and I was told by an SMRT staff that I had to exit and walk around the station to get into the NEL entrance. I finally boarded the NEL and arrived at my meeting almost half an hour late.

    I consider myself fortunate that I was able to hop onto the NEL. The guy sitting next to me on the East-West Line train (before it stopped at Outram) said that he was heading to his home in Simei. I think he, like hundreds of thousands of other commuters, probably got home much later than usual.

    This 3.5 hour service disruption, which happened simultaneously on the two busiest MRT lines during the Tuesday evening rush hour, was probably the most serious service disruption ever. I had flashbacks to November 2011, when I had another close shave — I just missed getting on one of the trains from City Hall station that was to eventually stall in the middle of the tunnel.

    According to SMRT and LTA, the outage was due to a power fault. Preliminary investigations found that a faulty train could have caused the power to trip. I find it astonishing that a fault with a single train could cause power to be cut to trains at all 58 stations on the NSEWL. Is there so little redundancy in the system? Or are all the circuits strung together in series like a cheap set of Christmas tree lights?

    As of the time of this writing, it is still unclear if the MRT service will be available in time for the Wednesday morning rush hour. SMRT has already advised commuters to make alternative travel plans. Both the Minister for Transport and LTA have come out to apologise for the breakdown and demanded that the faults be investigated and rectified. That is little comfort for the quarter-of-a-million or so commuters who suffered this massive inconvenience and frustration.

    The Commission of Inquiry (COI) into the November 2011 MRT disruptions had identified maintenance (or lack thereof) as a key cause of the multiple breakdowns then. Now, almost 4 years later, with a new CEO at the helm who promised to focus more on engineering and maintenance capabilities, we seem to be back to square one. What can we expect moving forward? Another COI?

     

    Source: http://geraldgiam.sg

  • Workers’ Party MPs Questions PR Policy And Edusave Awards To Full-Time Madrasah Students

    Workers’ Party MPs Questions PR Policy And Edusave Awards To Full-Time Madrasah Students

    In the Parliamentary sitting on 13 April, WP MPs raise questions ranging from the number of foreign students offered permanent residency, reviewing/extending Edusave awards to full-time Madrasah students, effectiveness of AVA’s monitoring and warning systems for fish farmers, ‘net neutrality’, data on Eldershield, and more.

    Questions for Oral Answer:

    *6. Mr Yee Jenn Jong: To ask the Minister for Transport (a) whether Singapore-based airlines have a two-person cockpit rule or other systems to protect the cockpit; and (b) whether their pilots are required to be subjected to periodic psychological tests.

    *9. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the weight limit on the transport of gold and other precious metals in and out of Singapore by individual travellers; (b) whether diplomats are exempt from this limit, if any; (c) whether the Police is aware of a diplomat carrying up to 27 kg of gold bars in his luggage on a flight out of Changi Airport in March 2015; and (d) what measures are in place to ensure that diplomats do not abuse their diplomatic immunity to carry precious metals, drugs or weapons in and out of Singapore in their luggage.

    *15. Ms Lee Li Lian: To ask the Minister for Transport whether there are plans to extend bicycle crossings at traffic junctions to other parts of Singapore.

    *16. Mr Png Eng Huat: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs from 2001 to 2014, what was (i) the number of foreign students who were offered and who had accepted permanent residency when they reached Secondary 1 or later; (ii) the number of such student PRs who had gone on to become citizens; and (iii) the number of such students who had renounced their PR or citizenship.

    *17. Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap: To ask the Minister for Education whether the Ministry will consider reviewing and extending the Edusave Awards to full-time madrasah students.

    *20. Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the number of families that have come under the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) scheme since its implementation in 2004; (b) what is the percentage of families under HOPE that have managed to keep their number of children at two; (c) whether the Ministry can provide an update on the profile of families that have broken the conditions of the scheme and their plight; and (d) whether the Ministry considers the HOPE scheme a success.

    *23. Mr Yee Jenn Jong: To ask the Prime Minister whether the Ministry is working with banks to improve SMEs’ access to foreign exchange hedging products, including renminbi hedging.

    *24. Mr Yee Jenn Jong: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) whether AVA’s real-time monitoring and early warning systems are effective in alerting fish farmers ahead of time of the occurrence of harmful algal blooms to prevent massive fish kills; (b) whether there is a need to relocate fish farms away from areas prone to algal blooms; and (c) whether persistent algal blooms have made it difficult for Singapore to achieve its target of 15% of fish supply to be from local sources.

    *26. Mr Png Eng Huat: To ask the Minister for National Development when will plans to develop Hougang Town Centre under the Remaking Our Heartland programme announced in 2011 be released given that the projected timeline for the development site to be launched is three years.

    *27. Ms Lee Li Lian: To ask the Minister for National Development (a) whether the revision to the Code on Accessibility in the Built Environment requiring 1.5 metres of minimum clearance along common corridors applies to buildings built before 1 April 2014; (b) if so, whether there are plans to align SCDF guidelines with this; and (c) if not, whether Town Councils will need to have two sets of by-laws for flats built before and after 1 April 2014.

    *31. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Minister for Communications and Information with regard to ‘net neutrality’ (a) whether Internet Service Providers (ISPs) or network operators are allowed to (i) throttle legitimate Internet content, albeit without rendering them unusable and still remaining above the threshold of IDA’s minimum Quality of Service (QoS) requirements; (ii) impose extra charges on consumers or providers of over-the-top (OTT) services like WhatsApp and Skype; and (b) whether there are any plans to introduce net neutrality regulations to prohibit discriminatory network management practices which negatively affect consumers’ experience when using legitimate Internet services.

     

    Questions for Written Answer

    3. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) if he can provide an update on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations; (b) when is the Agreement expected to be successfully concluded; (c) what are the key obstacles that need to be overcome; (d) to what extent the TPP is likely to improve market access for Singapore-based firms in US, Japan and other markets; and (e) what are our economic agencies doing to prepare Singapore firms, especially SMEs, to take advantage of the improved market access that a successfully concluded TPP can bring.

    4. Mr Chen Show Mao: To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Ministry will consider monthly releases of services exports data so as to provide closer trend indicators as well as to help dampen the effects of fluctuations in monthly goods exports data.

    8. Mr Chen Show Mao: To ask the Minister for Health (a) what is the cumulative number of people who have received payments under Eldershield300, Eldershield400 and the Interim Disability Assistance Programme for the Elderly (IDAPE) respectively; (b) what is the cumulative number of Eldershield300, Eldershield400 and IDAPE recipients who were deceased before the end of their respective payout periods; and (c) what is the cumulative number of Eldershield300, Eldershield400 and IDAPE recipients who remained in need of assistance beyond their respective payout periods.

    13. Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: To ask the Minister for Manpower for each year since 2005 (a) how many CPF members have successfully applied for CPF withdrawals on each of the following medical grounds: (i) permanently incapacitated from ever continuing in any employment (ii) terminally ill with a life expectancy of 12 months or less (iii) suffering from a severely shortened life expectancy (iv) mentally incapable of handling and receiving monies (v) other reasons; (b) what is the proportion of successful applications which have been granted a full CPF withdrawal; and (c) how many applications have been rejected.

     

    Source: The Workers’ Party

  • The Workers’ Party Calls For More Flexibility In CPF Draw Down Age, De-Link From Retirement Age

    The Workers’ Party Calls For More Flexibility In CPF Draw Down Age, De-Link From Retirement Age

    By Non-Constituency MP, Gerald Giam
    [Delivered in Parliament on 3 Mar 2015]

    Mdm Speaker,

    The DPM and Finance Minister has laid out the key thrusts for the Government in his Budget statement. My speech will focus on retirement adequacy and the CPF scheme in particular.

    Th CPF scheme has a long history in Singapore that pre-dates our independence. The Central Provident Fund Bill was introduced by the Singapore Progressive Party in the Legislative Council in 1951, while Singapore was still a British Colony. The CPF scheme provides a mandatory retirement savings plan for local workers. It is a “defined contribution” scheme, whereby every member takes out only what he has contributed. This has helped the Government avoid the heavy burden of Budget-financed pension liabilities that many other countries face.

    While CPF provides a basic payout for retirees, it does not assure full retirement adequacy, particularly for those in the lowest income groups, including home-makers and people with disabilities.

    Minimum Sum

    The Minimum Sum requirement, which has been renamed to “Retirement Sum” by the CPF Advisory Panel, was introduced in 1987. It prevents CPF members from withdrawing their entire CPF savings in one lump sum when they retire. They are only allowed to withdraw amounts in excess of the Minimum Sum, plus another $5,000, at age 55.

    This has been deeply unpopular among many Singaporeans. Many feel that since the money in our CPF accounts belongs to us, why should the Government control when and how much we can withdraw? “We’re not children after all,” some would say. A recent poll by Channel NewsAsia found that the majority of respondents would like a choice to withdraw all of their CPF money at age 55.[1]

    I empathise and identify with these sentiments. I too would like to be able to withdraw all my CPF when I turn 55. Apart from paying off day-to-day expenses, I feel confident of being able to manage my own money well and not squander it. However, the reality for me, and I think many other working Singaporeans, is that if not for the forced savings that CPF has imposed, we would probably have saved much less for retirement.

    As pointed out by Mr Donald Low from the LKY School of Public Policy in a commentary in The Straits Times last week, faced with a choice between an immediate reward and a larger delayed benefit, people often choose the former.

    Also, even if CPF members make an effort to invest their retirement savings after they are withdrawn, not many have investment skills that are good enough to consistently beat the current 4% CPF Retirement Account interest rate in the long term.

    We also have to be on guard against swindlers who will try to find ways to persuade vulnerable elderly folks to part with their CPF money if they withdraw the full amount at one go.

    Therefore, while we understand Singaporeans’ strong sentiments about the Minimum Sum “locking up” our CPF money, for the reasons I just mentioned, the Workers’ Party is not asking for CPF members to be allowed to withdraw all their CPF money in a lump sum, except under special circumstances.

    Flexibility in Draw-Down Age

    Having said that, there is still room for providing CPF members with more flexibility in determining when to start receiving monthly payouts from their CPF. Currently, members can start drawing down their CPF only upon reaching their DrawDown Age, now known as the Payout Eligibility Age, which will be 65 from 2018 onwards.

    Some CPF members may have genuine reasons for needing monthly payouts to start earlier than age 65. For example, they may have been retrenched and, because of a skills mismatch or age discrimination, may not be able to secure another job. Or they may be labourers who are simply be too old to do manual work. When I observed the young men who helped me move the heavy furniture in my home recently, I wondered how long they would be able to continue in that role, and what jobs they would do once they are not strong enough to carry such heavy loads.

    The Workers’ Party therefore proposes lowering the Payout Eligibility Age to 60. This will give CPF members the flexibility to start receiving CPF monthly payouts earlier, if they need to, instead of having to wait until age 65. This was a call made by my colleague, the Member for Hougang, Mr Png Eng Huat, in May 2014.

    I agree with the CPF Advisory Panel’s recommendation to give members flexibility to defer their Payout Start Age to as late as 70, with a permanent 6 to 7% increase in monthly payouts for every year that they defer.[2] In line with this, under the Workers’ Party’s proposal, there would be a permanent 6 to 7%decrease in payouts for every year that members choose to bring forward their Payout Start Age. Members must be made aware that their monthly payouts could be significantly less should they choose this early payout option.

    De-link Payout Eligibility Age from Retirement / Re-employment Age

    Many Singaporeans have expressed frustration about the constantly increasing Payout Eligibility Age. It is was 63 last year, 64 this year and will be 65 in 2018. It seems to be moving up together with the Re-employment Age. Perhaps it is assumed that people are able to work until the Re-employment Age and do not need to draw down their CPF savings before that.

    However, just because the Re-employment Age has been raised does not mean that everyone will be able to work until 65, as I explained earlier. Furthermore, the statutory Retirement Age is now only 62. This leaves a gap of 3 years that a retiree will have to tide over, should his company not offer him re-employment until 65.

    I would like to reiterate the Workers’ Party’s earlier calls for the Payout Eligibility Age to be de-linked from either the Retirement Age or the Re-employment Age. Even if the Retirement Age is increased, the Payout Eligibility Age should remain constant at 60. This will provide members with more assurance of when they are eligible to start drawing from their CPF, regardless of their employment status, instead of wondering when the target will move again.

    Public education on CPF system

    Madam, I would like to touch on the public education aspects of the CPF scheme. The CPF Scheme is not easy to understand, regardless of one’s level of education. The large amount of technical jargon, acronyms, figures and different conditions that apply to people with different birth years, all add to the confusion.

    There is a pressing need to increase and improve public education about the CPF scheme. The CPF Advisory Panel has also recommended that more public education on CPF is needed.

    A recent poll by REACH, the government feedback unit, found that only 13% of respondents under 55 were able to provide the estimated monthly payout amount under CPF LIFE if one met the Minimum Sum requirement. With greater choices provided in the CPF scheme, it is important that CPF members are fully aware of the implications of their choices, including the lower payouts if they choose to start withdrawals earlier or withdraw a lump sum.

    I am aware that there are many ways in which CPF Board tries to get its message out, including pamphlets, public seminars and even advertisements on YouTube. However, none of these ensures that a CPF member is fully aware of the choices he has to make at critical junctures, like at age 55 and 65. A letter is sent to CPF members just 1 to 2 months before they turn 55, to inform them that they can apply to withdraw their CPF. This may not give them enough time and information to consider their choices carefully.

    My observation is that public education on CPF currently focuses a lot on how CPF benefits Singaporeans, or to clarify misunderstandings about CPF. The questions asked in the REACH poll are quite telling. They include questions like “If you do not meet your Minimum Sum requirement, do you need to top up the shortfall in cash?” and “Do you think you will receive a monthly payout from age 65 if you do not meet the full Minimum Sum?”

    Public education on CPF should be more tailored to individual members, focusing on the information and numbers that are directly relevant to them and the choices they have to make. We should not confuse people with numbers that are irrelevant to them, like the different Minimum Sum amounts and Draw-Down Ages for different age groups. While the CPF website has a number of useful calculators, not every retiree is technically-savvy enough to access and use them correctly.

    I would therefore like to suggest that before reaching the age of 55, every CPF member should be invited to meet one-on-one with a CPF Board officer, who should explain the details of the scheme, including how much he has in his account, how much he can withdraw, when he can withdraw, the choices of CPF LIFE plans and what his monthly payouts will be. This should be conducted in a language or dialect that he is comfortable with, and he should be allowed to bring a few family members to the meeting. It should be done at least a 3 months before the member becomes eligible to withdraw his CPF.

    This personalised meeting should be done on top of the public seminars that are available to CPF members. It will provide a channel for important information to be explained personally to the member and to give him an opportunity to seek clarifications from the officer.

    Silver Support Scheme

    The last matter I wish to raise concerns the Silver Support Scheme. While CPF payouts are usually enough to meet the retirement needs of seniors who have the Full Retirement Sum or more at retirement, there is a sizeable number of Singaporeans whose CPF payouts are insufficient to meet basic household expenditure.

    The solution for these individuals cannot be to postpone their CPF withdrawals or place further restrictions on their use of CPF and Medisave. This will only exacerbate their difficult financial situation. I am glad the Government has finally acknowledged that individual responsibility through the CPF system has its limits, and that it is time to provide a form of old age support for needy senior citizens.

    While the details of the Silver Support Scheme are still being worked out, I would like to make some remarks on the scheme based on what the Finance Minister has announced.

    First, the Silver Support quantum seems rather low, ranging from $100 to $250 per month. This is much lower than what even the poorest 20% of households spend each month on basic household necessities, which is $761 per month for all households[3] and $317 per month for retiree households, according to last year’s Household Expenditure Survey.[4]

    Can the DPM share his basis for deriving the Silver Support quantum? Does it look at household expenditure, and does it assume that all retirees receive additional forms of income like children’s contributions?

    Given the increasing cost of living in Singapore, I urge the Government to ensure that Silver Support is enough to cover retirees’ basic household expenses and that it also increases over time to account for inflation.

    Second, while I agree that the Silver Support Scheme should provide targeted support, the evaluation criteria should take into account the current financial situation of the seniors and should not be so stringent that genuine cases end up being excluded. In particular, the “household support” criteria must not deny Silver Support to seniors whose children are unable to support them or whom they are estranged from. Needy seniors should not have to suffer for their children’s inability or unwillingness to support them.

    My third request on Silver Support is that it should be paid out monthly instead of quarterly. Silver Support recipients are not working and receiving a salary, unlike Workfare recipients, yet they still have monthly household expenses like bills, food, transport and rental. A monthly payout would help seniors in their cash flow management.

    Conclusion

    Madam, in summary, I would like to reiterate the four main proposals in my speech:

    First, more flexibility should be given to CPF members to start receiving CPF payouts as early as age 60, if they need to, so as to help those who are not able to find work at that age. Second, the CPF Payout Eligibility Age should be de-linked from the Retirement or Re-employment Age, to provide more certainty for seniors.

    Third, personalised public education should be conducted for all CPF members, in their preferred language or dialect, well in advance of their 55th birthday, so as to give them more time to consider their options and discuss with family members. And fourth, the basis for calculating the Silver Support quantum should be made public and it should take into account the current financial situation of seniors to ensure that the needy are not excluded. It should also be paid out monthly instead of quarterly.

    Thank you, Madam.

     

    Source: http://wp.sg