A Sustainable Population for a Dynamic Singapore

Madam, emotions of many Singaporeans range from surprise, despair to anger, when they read the media headlines of "6.9 million in Singapore in 2030" in media headlines. Many could not go beyond the emotion and decided the entire paper is not worth reading, and depended very much on commentaries as the source of information.

To me, the Population White Paper is a paper that exposes the awkwardness of the Government in engaging Singaporeans in the new normal. In its eagerness to meet some self-imposed deadline for land use and infrastructure planning; in its anxiety to offer a framework to curb Singapore's ever-growing foreign labour workforce, the White Paper was launched in a hurry. It was not circulated in its draft form for public consultation when this important step was what Government would typically do when tabling bills in Parliament. Good intent; bad execution.

The Government missed the precious opportunity to engage the public and garner the views and suggestions of Singaporeans to address the hard truths the White Paper surfaced. Hard truths such as: One, the alarming rates at which the foreign workforce is growing; two, the alarming rate at which Singaporeans are ageing; and three, the alarming rate at which birth rates are declining.

The tone of the White Paper comes across as prescriptive, without offering the different planning scenarios and how they impact the lives of Singaporeans.

It gives the perception of offering a shared vision of Singapore when it does not. It offers little other lifestyle choice to Singaporeans, except that of an urbanised setting. It is the outcome of forms of engagement such as town halls and traditional meetings that do not cover deeper sparring of ideas and options. It should have taken reference from the pace and more updated methods of citizen engagement currently used in the ongoing National Conversations initiated by the Prime Minister and led by Minister Heng Swee Keat.

Madam, many MPs have fed back to the Prime Minister on the responses of the ground to the White Paper. As MPs, we are the proxies of the people we serve and represent their voices, we must. Madam, although our constituents' voices do not often come in one united tune; in this case, many people in the Singapore of 2012 have spoken. An overwhelming majority said "no" to a 6.9 million Singapore in 2030.

The moral of the story Government must learn in exercises of this nature are these – one, more haste, less speed; and two, unless people know how much we care, they do not care how much we know. They do not even want to hear that 6.9 million is not a target.

On a more robust planning tool, Madam, when I was a young Product Manager in the fast IT industry, products then took one to two years to develop. Today, some products are obsolete within months. Many of the planning assumptions one holds for product or service development, whether in the private or public sector, can quickly become obsolete. Such is the pace of change and the level of unknowns we are dealing with in this 21st Century.

I, therefore, find it hard to fathom the confidence in which the future is being predicted -- both in the White Paper by Government and the alternate proposal put together by the Workers' Party. The ability to gaze into the crystal ball and generate firm strategies for even three-year windows is very rare these days, not to mention an 18-year forecast into 2030.

The White Paper is repeatedly punctuated by qualifiers, claiming that the roadmap is subject to many factors such as the external environment, productivity, workforce growth, creativity and how citizens will respond to the incentives in the last Marriage and Parenthood Package.

Even the Workers' Party's attempt at crystal-ball gazing is unconvincing. It has hastily put together an alternate proposal to target a sexy 5.3-million to 5.9-million number, below the 6-million psychological threshold for most Singaporeans. This alternative proposal is also premised on a planning assumption that it would be able to slap and whip the Government to work harder to increase the TFR (Total Fertility Rates) of couples; to get more elderly folks and women to join the workforce; to force SMEs to re-structure their business models now; and to turn off the tap of foreign workers with immediate effect for the next seven years.

Madam, there are foreign workers and foreign workers. Some we do not welcome. But some we need. What does the immediate turn off of the tap of foreign workers mean to people like me who serve in the social service sector? Those of us who run nursing homes and for me personally, day activity centres for the more severely disabled? What if local Singaporeans continue to shun these jobs not because of pay but because it is just plain hard, unpleasant work?

Madam, I believe there are too many unknowns for everyone, for anyone to be truly confident about the population trajectories -- whether they are Workers' Party's 5.9 million, NMP Laurence Lien's preferred 6 million or the Government's "worst-case-scenario" of 6.9 million.

Madam, the thinking model applied in the White Paper and subsequently also adopted by the Workers' Party in the alternate proposal is way too rigid and simplistic for the 21st century. I would suggest developing a more robust forecasting tool that computes a few population scenarios starting from the current 5.3 million and a desired Singapore core; a more robust and sensitive tool that will inform strategies as a result of regular data inputs updates on variables such as the number of citizen babies; the number of new citizens; local work force strengths; and how firms are doing at the productivity front.

One young man, a high-functioning young man with Asperger's Syndrome, suggested to me that perhaps, Ms Phua, the population can be managed like the systolis and diastolis – the heart muscles that relax and contract when they take in blood and release it to the arteries. Do not be rigid, he said. Depending on the performance of both external and internal factors, pull back when it gets higher than expected, and push forth when it is lower.

By all means, play safe and ring fence the land and resources that need to be reserved so that we will not be caught under-providing one day. But let us not be over-zealous in our planning because no one really knows it all.

Think three to five years! One of the reasons why Singaporeans could not emotionally move beyond the media headlines of 6.9 million is that their concerns with the hot-button issues of the day – some of these issues are deep-rooted and quite difficult to solve; but address them, we must. As the parable goes, one would be made ruler over many when one can be entrusted to look after the few. So let us apply what today's amended motion says, settle the current strains on the infrastructure.

Next, 10 suggestions. Madam, the issues of Singapore today cannot be solved with the mindsets and solutions of the past. We need to seriously engage other Singaporeans to inject more innovative and more lateral thinking in addressing the hard truths surfaced by the White Paper.

I suggest 10 ways to enhance workforce participation, TFR and productivity, for Government's consideration.

(1) For the senior Singaporeans, remove ageism practices such as CPF cuts from the age of 50 and annual employment extensions from 62.

(2) Start a jobs creation and clearing house for seniors to innovatively design or redesign jobs that will match the skills, physical wellness and preferred hours of the seniors. Include Stay-Home-Parents if they so wish to take on some flexible job postings.

(3) For persons with disabilities, put up added incentives to have corporations collaborate with disability groups to start Social Enterprises to train, to employ and to coach those who are able to work.

 Do not give up on those who cannot work at full productivity. Many of the people with special needs can still contribute in the workforce and welcomed by employers if they are paid by employers based on their productivity level. Do not let what the world calls "Minimum Wage" or "Progressive Wage" deprive them of a chance to work. Make the Special Employment Incentive already launched in Budget 2012 for the disabled a permanent feature.

(4) For foreign domestic helpers already here, increase their productivity whilst ensuring they will not be exploited. Some small families or those with grown children do not need full-time helpers. Let employers share on the condition that these helpers are compensated better and the working hours transparent and conditions favourable.

(5) For National Servicemen, tap on them to take on assignments in projects in education, healthcare and social service sectors as well -- projects that will not only improve their resilience physically, emotionally but also give them exposure to know what they are defending. Bring Total Defence to the next level!

(6) Seriously consider closing one casino to divert manpower from the IRs to the SMEs. I fully agree with NMP Mr Teo Siong Seng's observation that the IRs have now become contributors to the manpower crunch in the service industry.

(7) For couples who cannot conceive, aggressively help to facilitate child adoptions. Provide family education trainings to help them become better parents; in addition to the good adoption leave incentive that was announced under the Marriage and Population (M&P) Package.

(8) For Singaporeans with foreign spouses and Singaporean children, relax the criteria for approval, especially the criteria relating to academic qualifications. Comb through and approve past rejection cases where the foreign spouse of Singapore children were rejected even if they have lived in Singapore for many years. And please, especially look out for my past appeals which were rejected!

(9) For SMEs, rank them and assign productivity coaches to those with higher-potential of scalability and increased national regional or even global footprints. Do not only write cheques; groom them, help them.

(10) In education, seriously study the Finnish system and adapt it for Singapore. There is serious merit in piloting models that take away the high-stake exams such as the PSLE to allow students a through-train to Secondary 4 or Secondary 5 within the same school. Stay far away from the South Korean system which is a worse pressure cooker than Singapore in education.

Next, on putting the horse before the cart. Madam, the amended motion now provides for medium term reviews of the population policies and assumptions. The White Paper on population needs to be updated. I propose doing that after the next phase of the National Conversations.

So far, more than 16,000 Singaporeans have given their views on the kind of society and the kind of people they would want to become in 20 years' time. More than 130 unpaid volunteers helped out in these conversations. The scope of the National Conversations covers more than just population and infrastructure. It is bigger than the scope of the Population White Paper. Participants in the National Conversations dream of a home of hope and heart -- of shared values, of strong families, of other ways to define success, of giving a leg up to those who are disadvantaged, of active and dignified ageing. There are some common and shared aspirations; but there is extreme difference in some areas too, for example, between the conservatives and those of us who are more liberal.

But these aspirations must be the horse that comes before the cart. They must form the foundations of the White Papers of the future.

Phase Two of the National Conversations will look at a consolidation of the key inputs that Singaporeans have for 2030. The data consolidated in this Population White Paper would serve as excellent contextual information for meaningful discussions and better idea-generation.

I urge the Opposition MPs and especially the Workers' Party to join in crafting a shared vision together. As part of the Singapore family, do not withhold your participation; do not withhold your ideas to use them as fodder for Government bashing. In fact, stop the Government bashing; enough of it already. Stop repeating the narrative that the PAP Government is a heartless common enemy of the people that has brought Singaporeans nothing but misery. The narrative has continued from political rallies to this House. Oftentimes, both its tone and content are not constructive. It discourages good people, whether they are public servants or volunteers, who have contributed to try to make Singapore better, imperfect though they are. The narrative has divided and polarised our country, pitting one against the other and prevented the healing that some of us were hoping for after each political election – so that we can come back and focus on nation building.

As MPs of the incumbent ruling party linked to Government, we promise to try harder and work harder for the people. The only thing that we cannot promise, the only promise we cannot make, is to turn our cheek every time we are slapped.

In conclusion, Madam, the people have spoken through their MPs and through their direct valuable feedback. Unless the Government acknowledges and acts on it, we may win the battle in this House but lose the war for the hearts of our people outside this House. I am heartened that the Prime Minister has listened -- loud and clear. And yes, the Government is not gunning for the 6.9 million and will do all it can to address the top concerns of Singaporeans, I hear.

The original motion has been amended. Had the motion not been amended, a number of us PAP MPs would find it very difficult to support it. When some of us say "Aye" later, we are supporting a motion that: one, acknowledges that 6.9 million is not a population target of the Government; two, a motion that supports a Singapore core with top priority in encouraging Singaporeans to get married and have children, with a calibrated pace of immigration to prevent our citizen population from further shrinking; we support an amended motion that recognises and places priority on resolving the infrastructure problems of today; we support an amended motion that will improve the current White Paper by carrying out medium term reviews of the population policies and the assumptions.

Let us do all of the above; engage not only our heads but our hearts and our hands and work towards a dynamic population for a dynamic Singapore! On this note, I support the amended motion.