Not enough worker protection:
Opposition MPs
Straits Times
Mar 10, 1998
OPPOSITION MPs yesterday criticised the government for
unveiling a disappointing budget, which failed to offer Singaporeans adequate
protection from the full impact of the regional economic crisis.
To redress this shortcoming, Workers' Party MPs Low Thia Khiang and J.B. Jeyaretnam urged the government to suspend the Goods and Services Tax (GST) until the regional economic crisis had passed.
Singapore People's Party chief Chiam See Tong wanted retrenched workers to be allowed to withdraw up to $300 each month from their Central Provident Fund (CPF) savings.
Accusing the government of being overly optimistic about how badly the regional turmoil would affect Singapore, Mr Jeyaretnam suggested that the "evil and unfair" GST should be suspended until the region's economic outlook had improved.
The Non-Constituency MP asked if while drafting the budget, the government had considered suspending the GST on all goods or even just on basic necessities, like food, clothing and education.
He also suggested that other taxes on utilities such as water and electricity should be suspended to help reduce the cost of living faced by Singaporeans, especially those retrenched this year.
"We were told that the water tax was because there was a threat to cut off Singapore's water supply, but now the Malaysian government has said that it has no intention of cutting off the water supply.
"So will the government suspend or lower this water tax, which affects every household here?" asked the Workers' Party chief.
Echoing his call, Mr Low (Hougang) warned that the regional economic crisis could affect the value of the Singapore dollar and make imports more expensive.
This, he said, would result in higher prices for many goods and reduce the spending power of Singaporeans. To help ease the burden, the government should suspend the GST until the crisis was over.
Mr Chiam (Potong Pasir) suggested that retrenched workers be allowed to withdraw up to $300 from their CPF savings per month.
He argued that there were two strong reasons for this -- the number of retrenched workers here was expected to increase and they did not have enough savings to fall back on.
Citing a study by two international consultancy firms, he said that 62 per cent of local workers had only enough savings to survive three months and another 22 per cent had just enough for six months.
With the number of retrenched workers this year expected to hit 15,000, he said, there was "good reason for the government to allow CPF savings to be drawn out by retrenched workers, especially if there are sufficient funds in their CPF accounts".
"After all, it is the workers' own money and they should be allowed to use it when they are out of a job, unable to find alternative employment, or have dependants to support," he said.