MISREPRESENTATIONS of the India-Singapore Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) have caused much unnecessary public concern, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who highlighted Tuesday's Parliament debate on the matter.
Mr Lee said in a Facebook post on Tuesday that Health Minister Ong Ye Kung and Manpower Minister Tan See Leng had set out the facts about free trade agreements (FTA) and CECA to put the public debate on a sound factual basis.
"Singaporeans are anxious about jobs, foreign competition, as well as the impact of the large number of foreigners working and living here," he said.
"These are valid concerns which we will address. But if we put the blame on CECA, that will not solve our problem but instead make it worse."
Mr Lee stressed that Singapore needs access to global markets to earn a living. FTAs play a crucial role in letting the country do so, and he highlighted how Singapore's network of FTAs has created investments and opportunities for businesses here, as well as jobs for Singaporeans.
"They have helped make us a leading global hub," added Mr Lee, who also thanked officers who have spent years negotiating FTAs.
In two ministerial statements on Tuesday, Mr Ong and Dr Tan laid out the importance of free trade pacts and debunked falsehoods about CECA, whose immigration-related elements have come under fire on social media and by the Progress Singapore Party (PSP).
They also stressed that changes in foreign workforce numbers over time are to be expected, given that policies, as well as countries' industry needs, change over time.
Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, who was Singapore's chief negotiator of CECA, also posted about the debate on Tuesday.
"Both Ministers Ong Ye Kung and Tan See Leng gave comprehensive explanations to rebut baseless allegations made by the PSP that CECA gave professionals from India a 'free hand' to enter Singapore. This is simply false," said Mr Heng.
"Nothing in the agreement implies Singapore must unconditionally let in PMEs from India. Contrary to PSP's claim, our ability to impose requirements for immigration and work passes has never been in question in CECA or any other FTA that we have signed. We must put a stop to this misinformation."
Mr Heng, who rose to speak in the debate on Tuesday, said that he felt compelled to clarify one of the false allegations made related to a chapter in CECA.
This chapter, on the movement of people, pertains to temporary entry of individuals into both countries and has been highlighted as part of criticisms of CECA paving the way for Indian professionals to take jobs from locals.
He said in his Facebook post: "I put on record that we did not sacrifice our positions on the 'movement of national persons' as a bargaining chip during the negotiations. This chapter of CECA - which some wrongly believed allowed Indian nationals free movement into Singapore - was one of the most difficult chapters to conclude.
"But we did not and would not give away the rights to decide who can enter to live, work or reside in Singapore. In the end, we landed on an agreement that benefited both countries, while also protecting our vital interests."
It is about time for him to step down.
We need Global talents, not talents from majority only 1 source from South Asia. They still never get the message across.
I believed in science and thus only believed in data..
Show me the numbers how Singapore benefited from CECA from all areas, and not just plucked the number from 1 area and keeping saying that you debunked falsehoods of CECA..
Pap know that there something wrong in the system.In general yes ceca is good.problem is because of the FT is abusing the system to their advantage. they own ppl cover own ppl.
He lost all respect that Mr LKY earned. Till date, still cannot convince us that CECA benefits us in the 3 areas-
Jobs & Career
Cost of Living
Quality & Quantity of CECA
I know who actually spread falsehood.........
as usual it’s either our fault or oppo fault….never their fault…not sian meh
the entire cabinet can be fitted up by CECA skills..
PAP does not fully understand the ground sentiments. All we want is a reduction of number of India Indians in Singapore. If, as they said, CECA is not the problem, then the problem lies with the lax policies of ICA. Now, which is which. They can deny CECA as the problem, but surely they cannot push away the blame from our immigration policies.
no no no
the pm cant, unable, impossible to address this concern.
simply because their brain is kopi O kosong!
they only know open leg because because BECAUSE....
its the easiest!
Ceca gets all the plumb, IT jobs while locals get grab driving, food delivery jobs. When the oil & gas sector collapsed the govt was so lucky uber was around to absorb all the pmets as drivers to make ends meet. Implement cpf contributions for all types of worker esp EP holders. Only this method can we see the locals get the chance of a meaningful life.
I said before and I said again publish numbers that tell the full story before and after CECA.
The govt claimed that there are still jobs for Singaporeans since ceca signed....but this is not evidence that CECA has improved the situation.
1. What is % of Singaooreans in IT before CECA and after CECA.
2. What is the number of Singaporeans who have to downgrade employment to driving PHV and food delivery BEFORE and AFTER CECA?
3. How many PMETs.were retrenched before CECA and after ceca.
To see if something is good or not good we need to see the numbers BEFORE and AFTER.
The ruling party failed to appreciate the support of the citizens and is often blinded by their own ego or the masked feedback from the plp minions of theirs.
The above statement holds as much weigh as PM Lee's comment, until we get to see the actual figures on how they can show and justify that ceca benefited the citizens of Singapore. Please don't tell me another more gst voucher story. A good govt will not need to have 1.2mil Singaporeans on handout if they had done great work to allow citizens to have meaningful and affluent living standards.
(05-08-2021, 08:16 AM)BigBossX Wrote: [ -> ]MISREPRESENTATIONS of the India-Singapore Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement (CECA) have caused much unnecessary public concern, said Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong, who highlighted Tuesday's Parliament debate on the matter.
Mr Lee said in a Facebook post on Tuesday that Health Minister Ong Ye Kung and Manpower Minister Tan See Leng had set out the facts about free trade agreements (FTA) and CECA to put the public debate on a sound factual basis.
"Singaporeans are anxious about jobs, foreign competition, as well as the impact of the large number of foreigners working and living here," he said.
"These are valid concerns which we will address. But if we put the blame on CECA, that will not solve our problem but instead make it worse."
Mr Lee stressed that Singapore needs access to global markets to earn a living. FTAs play a crucial role in letting the country do so, and he highlighted how Singapore's network of FTAs has created investments and opportunities for businesses here, as well as jobs for Singaporeans.
"They have helped make us a leading global hub," added Mr Lee, who also thanked officers who have spent years negotiating FTAs.
In two ministerial statements on Tuesday, Mr Ong and Dr Tan laid out the importance of free trade pacts and debunked falsehoods about CECA, whose immigration-related elements have come under fire on social media and by the Progress Singapore Party (PSP).
They also stressed that changes in foreign workforce numbers over time are to be expected, given that policies, as well as countries' industry needs, change over time.
Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat, who was Singapore's chief negotiator of CECA, also posted about the debate on Tuesday.
"Both Ministers Ong Ye Kung and Tan See Leng gave comprehensive explanations to rebut baseless allegations made by the PSP that CECA gave professionals from India a 'free hand' to enter Singapore. This is simply false," said Mr Heng.
"Nothing in the agreement implies Singapore must unconditionally let in PMEs from India. Contrary to PSP's claim, our ability to impose requirements for immigration and work passes has never been in question in CECA or any other FTA that we have signed. We must put a stop to this misinformation."
Mr Heng, who rose to speak in the debate on Tuesday, said that he felt compelled to clarify one of the false allegations made related to a chapter in CECA.
This chapter, on the movement of people, pertains to temporary entry of individuals into both countries and has been highlighted as part of criticisms of CECA paving the way for Indian professionals to take jobs from locals.
He said in his Facebook post: "I put on record that we did not sacrifice our positions on the 'movement of national persons' as a bargaining chip during the negotiations. This chapter of CECA - which some wrongly believed allowed Indian nationals free movement into Singapore - was one of the most difficult chapters to conclude.
"But we did not and would not give away the rights to decide who can enter to live, work or reside in Singapore. In the end, we landed on an agreement that benefited both countries, while also protecting our vital interests."
ALERT ALERT = White thieves IB identified
(05-08-2021, 11:17 AM)sgbuffett Wrote: [ -> ]I said before and I said again publish numbers that tell the full story before and after CECA.
The govt claimed that there are still jobs for Singaporeans since ceca signed....but this is not evidence that CECA has improved the situation.
1. What is % of Singaooreans in IT before CECA and after CECA.
2. What is the number of Singaporeans who have to downgrade employment to driving PHV and food delivery BEFORE and AFTER CECA?
3. How many PMETs.were retrenched before CECA and after ceca.
To see if something is good or not good we need to see the numbers BEFORE and AFTER.
If we just focus on jobs, we are already falling into PAP trap.. CECA is more than jobs, which is why if govt can show that Singapore gained as a whole in other areas, but gave in on jobs part, then at least it get some buy in that CECA is really benefiting Singapore.
Of course, jobs is important for Singaporean, so if govt gave in on jobs part in CECA, then be prepared for the fury of those affected..
But then, don't fall into the trap that lead us to just focus on 1 area of CECA.. It is the whole CECA that need to be looked at.. For a layman like me, simple numbers to determine if Singapore has benefited will be:
1) Export to India
2) FDI from India to Singapore
Those 2 areas, there wasn't significant increase after signing CECA. Ironically, Singapore is India's largest FDI.. Which lead back to how did Singapore benefited from CECA as a whole.
(06-08-2021, 11:36 AM)ArielCasper Wrote: [ -> ]If we just focus on jobs, we are already falling into PAP trap.. CECA is more than jobs, which is why if govt can show that Singapore gained as a whole in other areas, but gave in on jobs part, then at least it get some buy in that CECA is really benefiting Singapore.
Of course, jobs is important for Singaporean, so if govt gave in on jobs part in CECA, then be prepared for the fury of those affected..
But then, don't fall into the trap that lead us to just focus on 1 area of CECA.. It is the whole CECA that need to be looked at.. For a layman like me, simple numbers to determine if Singapore has benefited will be:
1) Export to India
2) FDI from India to Singapore
Those 2 areas, there wasn't significant increase after signing CECA. Ironically, Singapore is India's largest FDI.. Which lead back to how did Singapore benefited from CECA as a whole.
Yes, cannot just look at jobs. No one can tell what will happen if a particular policy is not implemented, so there's no way you can compare before and after.
If one just looks at the economic impact, then again he cannot win against PAP because there's no data to speak of, or superficial data could be easily put out to give a false impression.
We should instead look at the social impact, then there's something to argue for. The govt surely cannot say that our feelings are wrong. We're simply uncomfortable with having so many of them here, and even LKY acknowledged that this was a concern.
(05-08-2021, 10:59 AM)menghuii Wrote: [ -> ]no no no
the pm cant, unable, impossible to address this concern.
simply because their brain is kopi O kosong!
they only know open leg because because BECAUSE....
its the easiest!
can madam milo kosong gao address the concern?
so funny keep saying how the treaty benefit SG, yet cannot provide data or have some transparency? lol
(06-08-2021, 11:36 AM)ArielCasper Wrote: [ -> ]If we just focus on jobs, we are already falling into PAP trap.. CECA is more than jobs, which is why if govt can show that Singapore gained as a whole in other areas, but gave in on jobs part, then at least it get some buy in that CECA is really benefiting Singapore.
Of course, jobs is important for Singaporean, so if govt gave in on jobs part in CECA, then be prepared for the fury of those affected..
Yes, PAP is taking us for a dumb ride to nowhere.
Why do we need excess Foreigners ( FTs, PRs & their Dependents) to create a few miserly pathetic low end jobs?
Other developed countries are not even overly dependent on Foreigners yet survive well.
Something wrong with Lim SS, JoTeo and Tan SL.
.
They are telling you to appreciate a foreigner that took your job. Song boh?.......
faster open Border la i want to get out of here
(06-08-2021, 12:26 PM)Blasterlord2 Wrote: [ -> ]Yes, cannot just look at jobs. No one can tell what will happen if a particular policy is not implemented, so there's no way you can compare before and after.
If one just looks at the economic impact, then again he cannot win against PAP because there's no data to speak of, or superficial data could be easily put out to give a false impression.
We should instead look at the social impact, then there's something to argue for. The govt surely cannot say that our feelings are wrong. We're simply uncomfortable with having so many of them here, and even LKY acknowledged that this was a concern.
Which is why all of us need to do our part, educate the folks around us not to fall into the trap.. When enough people understand where we are coming from, things will change slowly a few years later.. Hopefully by then it is not too late..