[Blasterlord2]

Er... I think it goes without saying the government will not state explicitly you are promised a job after attending a course. I believe that's basic common sense that we don't need to repeat here. The problem here is the government apparatus has always strongly implied that these courses will help greatly in finding a new job in a new field once you've done them. 

How many times have we seen articles, adverts and Mediacorp dramas with the following plot lines:
1) Existing PME who used to do very well now face some difficulty in his/her job like getting retrenched, fired, horrible boss etc
2) He/she emo for a while and finally decided to be positive and upgrade and learn skills
3) He/she attended a government upgrading course
4) After the program, he/she found a new calling in a new job which is very satisfying and now very happily working

Now picture someone who really go to attend a 9 month diploma courses and found out it was very basic 101 academic text book and of not much value add. It's hard to expect this person to swallow this line of "oh that's just a first step in the right direction, please continue to upgrade more and in time you will be able to make a career switch". I suppose we can say adults should be more discerning and not take everything in the news and TV at face value, but surely there's an element of misrepresentation in this whole communication?

Also your rhetorical question of "And it's better that the govt give you money than without to learn something right? Or you'd rather they don't?" is a false premise to start with. Commenting on serious shortfalls of the program in not being able to lift up to its expectations means there is room for improvement that I think the government can reconsider. 

For e.g. is the communication too aggressive and out of touch? Are the training providers really adding value as opposed to simply milking the grants? How can polytechnics modify their courses to be more relevant instead of simply copy & paste from existing program for 17 year old students? Should there be some sort of quality review and tracking at the implementation level because right now all the focus seems to be only on funding and policy? 

I do not think deflecting criticisms with a standard "give you money you complain then I take away you happy?" is helpful. I have also feedbacked to the WSG manager who came down to my company to encourage our staff to sign up for courses, but sadly it's been some years and nothing much seems to have improved.

Last but not least, I do agree with your observations a lot of people rest on their laurels and never constantly upgrade their competencies. Panicking and starting to take action only when shiit hits the ceiling often makes things more difficult than it needs to be.

Of course the govt will tell you that upgrading your skills give you a chance at changing career. What do you expect the message to be? 

It is on the individual onus to decide if taking a few classes will give them a job. It's just wishful thinking and naive of people to think like that it will.

"And it's better that the govt give you money than without to learn something right? Or you'd rather they don't?" is not a false premise because this is exactly what it is - you want the money or don't want? I think in the end you want the govt to say, "take the money to go for training but whether you get a job or not it's up to you". 

IMO, it's natural that the govt will come up with schemes and paint a rosy picture of them. Sinkies seriously need to think for themselves than always depend on the govt.

Come on lah, don't be so critical of every attempt of the govt. It may not be perfect but at least people benefitted from it. When the govt is deserving of criticism we should criticize but credit should be given where it deserved.