• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Opposition responds to Budget 2012

Char_Azn

Alfrescian (Inf)
Asset
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
4,968
Points
48
SINGAPORE - The National Solidarity Party (NSP) has suggested that the maximum number of foreigners let in annually for the next decade should not exceed 50,000.

This is double the 23,000 births required to hit the 60,000 babies needed each year to replace the Republic's population, said secretary-general Hazel Poa in the party's response to the Government's Budget announced on Friday.

Ms Poa said it is difficult to assess whether the proposed expansion in capacity for buses and hospitals, as announced by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance Tharman Shanmugaratnam, is adequate because there is "an absence of a population plan for Singapore".

This was one of three areas the NSP felt was "inadequately addressed" in what it described as an otherwise "well-balanced Budget, (that was) hard-nosed in some areas and compassionate in others".

The NSP also said that while there were measures to take better care of older Singaporeans, it was "very disappointing" that there were none announced to address the problem of the falling total fertility rate (TFR).

"Our falling TFR is by far one of the most important issues facing the Government. For a "Budget for our future", it is very disappointing that the budget statement failed to mention any initiatives to continue battling this problem," she said. "We hope that Parliament will debate over this matter and develop fiscally supportable proposals in the coming days."

The third suggestion was for greater flexibility in the withdrawal of Central Provident Fund (CPF) for certain groups of older Singaporeans. For example, someone who was over 55, unemployed and diagnosed with a terminal illness like cancer, could be allowed to use the money in their CPF for treatment.

"The gradual raising of the CPF withdrawal age has created real difficulties for some Singaporeans who really need their money that is sitting in the CPF account," said Ms Poa. "While we agree with the general principle that people need to save up for their retirement, there are always circumstances when departing from the principle is the sensible thing to do."

The NSP also repeated its proposal of allowing more bus operators into the market to spur competition, as well as bring in added capital and capacity.

"This will make it unnecessary for taxpayers to foot the full S$1.1 billion bill to increase the bus capacity of private bus operators," she said.

SPP's response

Like the NSP, the Singapore People's Party (SPP) also welcomed the proposed further curbs on foreign labour, which had caused businesses some degree of concern.

SPP chairman Lina Chiam agreed with the Government's stance that "the flood of cheap foreign labour had provided Singapore an unsustainable economic model".

"The effect of foreign labour is akin to the use of performance-enhancement drugs in sports. Growth of the economy is our end goal," said Mrs Chiam, who is a Non-Constituency MP. "Sustainable economic growth that brings about prosperity of existing Singaporeans should be the key measure of our economic performance."

She added though, that the People's Action Party has to "think out of the box for more creative solutions to enhance productivity in our industries during this tough economic year".

Conditions must be conducive for Small and Medium Enterprises to grow alongside the multinational corporations the Trade and Industry Ministry brings in, said Mrs Chiam, who noted the recent complaints about labour, cost of doing business, and industrial rental rates.

"The Government should be publicly accountable for each of these issues that dampen the entrepreneurial abilities of local businesses," she added.

The NSP, said the quota cuts "underscores the fact that the Government has heard the electorate and taken steps to address some of their concerns".

Both parties also welcomed the slew of other measures Mr Tharman announced that were aimed at helping the elderly and low-income.



SDP's response

The Singapore Democratic Party (SDP), meanwhile, felt this year's Budget was "nothing new". "Without significant re-allocation of our expenditure, our economy will continue to remain unstable and prone to wild swings," said SDP treasurer Vincent Wijeysingha.

"As a result, Singaporeans will continue to hurt and their socio-economic problems will not be addressed."

The SDP said it will present its Shadow Budget tomorrow.

The Workers' Party has reserved comments on the Budget, while the Reform Party did not respond by press time. Teo Xuanwei

http://www.todayonline.com/Singapore/EDC120219-0000023/Opposition-parties-weigh-in-on-Budget-measures

In conclusion
NSP and SPP: kinda Agree
SDP: *gives government the middle finger*
WP: No Comment
 
In conclusion
NSP and SPP: kinda Agree
SDP: *gives government the middle finger*
WP: No Comment

Hardly surprising....
Most of these parties are without a clear message, let alone to challenge the almightly PAP.

I reckon most of the vote swings (for oppo) in the last GE was a reflection of resentment against the policies set by PAP. If you are to ask the population at large who would make a better government, there is no contest really. It does not even come close to 60-40%.
 
Hardly surprising....
Most of these parties are without a clear message, let alone to challenge the almightly PAP.

I reckon most of the vote swings (for oppo) in the last GE was a reflection of resentment against the policies set by PAP. If you are to ask the population at large who would make a better government, there is no contest really. It does not even come close to 60-40%.


Opposition is lousy.

But to say the government is good?

Hardly.
 
Back
Top