[Bigiron]

what are the rounds about answer in this article Parliament votes in favour of amended PSP motion on supporting hawkers
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/singapor...112024_cna

The article discusses a parliamentary motion on supporting hawkers in Singapore, with the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) proposing a series of initiatives to help the hawker industry. Here are some instances of roundabout answers:
 
- On Hiring Work Permit Holders:
- Roundabout Answer: Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment Koh Poh Koon states that "a full liberalisation" for foreign manpower "may alter the nature of our hawker centres significantly", a change that some Singaporeans may not be able to accept.
- Why it's Roundabout: This answer avoids directly addressing the PSP's proposal to allow each hawker stall to employ one work permit holder. Instead, it focuses on potential negative consequences of full liberalization, which is not the same as the PSP's proposal.

- On the Hawker Center Tendering Model:
- Roundabout Answer: Dr. Koh defends the current bidding system, stating that it's "open, transparent and straightforward" and "enables market mechanisms to work at hawker centres."
- Why it's Roundabout: This response doesn't directly address the PSP's suggestion to move away from the tendering model altogether. It instead focuses on the perceived benefits of the existing system.

- On Central Procurement for Ingredients:
- Roundabout Answer: Dr. Koh mentions that some hawker centres already offer bulk purchasing services, but the take-up has not been widespread. He attributes this to hawkers having established relationships with existing suppliers and being particular about ingredient quality.
- Why it's Roundabout: This response doesn't directly address the PSP's proposal for a central procurement system. It instead focuses on why existing bulk purchasing services haven't been widely adopted, implying that the PSP's proposal might face similar challenges.

- On the Hawkers' Development Programme and Hawkers Succession Scheme:
- Roundabout Answer: MP Poh Li San acknowledges that these schemes have low take-up rates but suggests pushing harder with "more creative incentives."
- Why it's Roundabout: This response avoids directly addressing the PSP's concerns about the effectiveness of these schemes. It instead focuses on the need for more effort and incentives, implying that the schemes themselves are not inherently flawed.
 
Overall: The article highlights a disagreement between the PSP and the government regarding the best approach to supporting hawkers. While the government seems to be open to reviewing its policies, it appears to be more cautious and less receptive to the PSP's specific proposals.

[Bigiron]

这篇文章讨论了新加坡议会关于支持小贩的动议，其中前进党（PSP）提出了一系列举措来帮助小贩行业。以下是一些回避性回答的例子：
 
- 关于雇用工作准证持有者：
 
- 回避性回答：国家发展部兼环境及水源部高级政务部长许宝琨表示，完全放宽外国劳工的政策“可能会显著改变我们小贩中心的性质”，这种改变可能无法被一些新加坡人接受。
- 为什么是回避性回答：这个回答回避了PSP关于允许每个小贩摊位雇用一名工作准证持有者的提议。相反，它侧重于完全放宽政策的潜在负面影响，这与PSP的提议并不相同。
- 关于小贩中心招标模式：
 
- 回避性回答：许部长为现有的招标制度辩护，称其“公开、透明和直截了当”，并且“使市场机制在小贩中心发挥作用”。
- 为什么是回避性回答：这个回应没有直接解决PSP关于完全放弃招标模式的建议。相反，它侧重于现有制度的感知优势。
- 关于食材集中采购：
 
- 回避性回答：许部长提到，一些小贩中心已经提供批量采购服务，但普及率不高。他将此归因于小贩与现有供应商建立了关系，并且对食材的来源和质量很挑剔。
- 为什么是回避性回答：这个回应没有直接解决PSP关于集中采购系统的提议。相反，它侧重于现有批量采购服务普及率低的原因，暗示PSP的提议可能面临类似的挑战。
- 关于小贩发展计划和小贩传承计划：
 
- 回避性回答：议员白丽珊承认这些计划的参与率很低，但她建议“以更具创意的激励措施”来推动参与。
- 为什么是回避性回答：这个回应回避了PSP关于这些计划有效性的担忧。相反，它侧重于需要付出更多努力和激励措施，暗示这些计划本身并没有根本缺陷。
 
总体而言：这篇文章突出了PSP与政府在支持小贩的最佳方法方面存在分歧。虽然政府似乎愿意审查其政策，但它似乎更加谨慎，对PSP的具体提议接受度较低。