The referenced article from the Straits Times website will be
withdrawn after 3 days, and available through subscriptions from
the archives :
Govt defends jobs open-door
policy
If foreigners were driven out, eventually firms would shut
down and economy and Singaporeans would suffer, House is
told
By Laurel Teo
ACTING Manpower Minister Ng Eng Hen yesterday laid out the
Government's policy on foreign workers and stressed that it was not
being pursued at the expense of jobs for Singaporeans.
Like all other policies, its open-door approach to foreign workers
is geared to the interests of Singaporeans, he told
Parliament.
He took the House through on the Government's reasoning: If it were
to drive out foreigners - as some had clamoured for - firms here
would be discouraged from growing their business when they cannot
get the workers they want.
Eventually, they will shut down or relocate. Their exit will only
spell further trouble for the economy - and for Singaporeans.
'We cannot force companies to hire more Singaporeans by depriving
them of foreign workers,' he said.
Such protectionist labour practices had worsened unemployment in
other countries, he added, citing France and Germany as
examples.
As he defended the case for foreign workers, he signalled the
concern in Government that Singaporeans were getting unneccessarily
distracted over how many jobs were going to foreigners.
The real issue right now, he said, should be on creating new jobs
and his ministry was committing its 'full energy' on this
front.
His statement marked yet another attempt by the Government to snuff
out the controversy that erupted recently after two Nanyang
Technological University economists said that three in four new
jobs in the last five years went to foreigners.
The ministry rebutted the academics the following day, pointing out
that the correct figure was one in 10 jobs. The dons had used the
wrong data set, it said.
Yesterday, MPs went right to the heart of the controversy when they
noted that while the figure was reassuring, it did not match with
ground perceptions. Why were people still so troubled, asked eight
MPs in various ways as they rose 12 times to grill Dr Ng.
MP S. Iswaran (West Coast GRC), for example, said:
'Unfortunately... the outcome of this whole episode is that it's
created a perception in the minds of many Singaporeans that
government data in the public domain may not be giving the full
picture.'
Replying, Dr Ng said that while he could understand the emotions at
a time of near-record high unemployment, the controversy over the
ratios was an 'unnecessary distraction'.
He noted that between 1993 and 1997, when the economy was chugging
full steam ahead, no one complained when 60 per cent of the 475,000
new jobs went to foreigners. Because then, there were three jobs
for every Singaporean, who could afford to eschew many of the more
undesirable jobs.
Thus, said Dr Ng: 'The ratio of foreign to local workers is
unimportant when enough jobs are created.'
But the situation was reversed between 1998 and last year, when
skilled workers from China and India entered the global market. And
at the same time, the country was hit by the Asian financial
crisis, Sept 11, and the Bali blasts.
The total number of jobs created fell to 102,000. Even though only
one in 10 of these went to a foreigner, he conceded that it was
cold comfort to Singaporeans, who saw new jobs for them halved -
from 185,000 to 93,000 - over the two periods.
To create new jobs, he outlined four strategies: grow the economy
through new investments, emphasise skills upgrading so that workers
become competitive, free up the labour market, and coax
Singaporeans to take up jobs they used to shun.
On how his ministry arrived at
its figures, Dr Ng said no one had ever disputed their veracity.
But if people still doubted them, there was little he could do to
convince them, he said.
In a voice thick with emotion, he added: 'But I know what I can do. I can try to bring jobs back
and this is what I will do.'
