Parliament debate 2020/2021

[Sdf4786k]

4 hours ago, Playtime said:

It's actually very troubling inspite of the memes and jokes they provide. 

If someone were to talk this way in the office,  it probably won't go down well with the bosses.

The fact that those ministers cannot speak on the spot... let alone debate... is worrying. Put them in the British parliament Q&A and chances are they'd die on live TV.... yet they hold our future. 

There’s a reason why it’s no longer live telecasts but more of podcasts 

[Lethalstrike]

4 minutes ago, Sdf4786k said:

There’s a reason why it’s no longer live telecasts but more of podcasts 

You got that right. 

And also is to edit out the speeches and responses from the opposition as they deem appropriate, before airing it on TV. 

Cheap move, but effective. 

[Volvobrick]

3 hours ago, Kopites said:

https://mothership.sg/2020/09/singaporeans-two-jobs//amp

Quote"S'porean workers should be allowed to take up 2 jobs for 'better job security': Chong Kee Hiong"

 

Stupidity has no boundary!

This joker learns from the ministars mah, most of them have 2 or more portfolios. One portfolio cannot make it, move to the spare one. 

With hundreds of staff support in each ministrybof course. 

[Volvobrick]

3 hours ago, Carbon82 said:

I finally know why OYK is out of MOE. The statements below just make no sense from Mathematics and English point of view

Parliament: Singaporeans in senior roles in financial services grew more than 50% from 2014 to 2019, says Ong Ye Kung

In 2014, there were 1,700 Singaporeans holding such top-level positions - from managing director and above. The number grew to 2,600 last year, said Mr Ong.

"That is more than a 50 per cent increase in five years, or an additional 900 Singaporeans taking up senior roles, embarking on a new and fulfilling stage in their careers," he said.

According to MAS estimates, Mr Ong said the total number of senior positions in the financial services sector grew from 3,900 in 2014 to 5,900 last year.

While the proportion of Singaporeans in these roles has held steady - at about 44 per cent - their absolute numbers have increased, he added.

2014

• Total no. of senior positions in financial services sector => 3,900
• Total no. of Singaporeans holding senior positions => 1,700 (43.59%)
• Total no. of non-Singaporean holding senior positions => 2,200 (56.41%)

2019

• Total no. of senior positions in financial services sector => 5,900
• Total no. of Singaporeans holding senior positions => 2,600 (44.07%)
• Total no. of non-Singaporean holding senior positions => 3,300 (55.93%)

Absolute numbers:

• Additional 900 Singaporeans taking up senior roles (+52.94%)
• Additional 1,100 non-Singaporeans taking up senior roles (+50%)

End of the day, there are still more jobs going to non-Singaporean (there is also a 50% increment in non-Singaporean taking up senior roles), so the last statement by OYK is absurd to say the least.

Never say how many are new citizens converted because they were in high paying banking positions. Statistics amd statistics! 

[ToyotaShuttle]

5 hours ago, Sdf4786k said:

 

If the bank was identify to be in breach of the discrimination practice, the people of Singapore may start to do a bank run to proof a point.

 

You sure you live in the same Singapore as the rest of us? 

😁

[Throttle2]

13 hours ago, Thaiyotakamli said:

In short her answer in summary is

 

 

i don’t know😜😜😜😜

I would rather she say that. Then garner some support anf feedback to try to implement the right policies or tweak accordingly.

but no no no.

[ToyotaShuttle]

5 hours ago, Yewheng said:

JT in parliment, off hand maybe do not have the figure. It is not immediate get the figure out of nowhere. Need someone to give the figure, even if can chun out figure fast, she need to call, email or WhatsApp or what and need to wait for the person to reply. This process can be all done in parliament sitting itself? 

Yes. Everytime there is parliament sitting, there is a team on standby waiting to support the minister with numbers.

Other ministries have but MOM don't have?

[ToyotaShuttle]

3 hours ago, Yewheng said:

Ya lor.. Wtf man.. This one also need to bring up parliment to debate? This one is between employer and employee agreement lao leh. If employer just don't want employee to have 2nd job outside and this employee feel that he/she would like 2nd employment outside. Then this employee should decide for him or herself whether to join this company or find other company that allows him or her to take 2nd employment. So no need parliament debate to tell employer what to do what.. 

 

They thought they could micro-manage everything? How can it be? They are not working in that company, so how they know what's happening on the ground? Companies sure have reasons to make certain decisions, no need government step in and micro-manage and make things worst. They do not work in that company and yet want to have a say and micro-manage? Common.. 

ACtually yes. Considering the govt is the largest employer in Singapore, this is the best avenue to debate it.

Govt can lead the way with their own HR policy.

[Yewheng]

3 minutes ago, ToyotaShuttle said:

ACtually yes. Considering the govt is the largest employer in Singapore, this is the best avenue to debate it.

Govt can lead the way with their own HR policy.

That is gg.. The country cannot be solely run by the government. The government cannot win the market. 

[RH1667]

26 minutes ago, Lethalstrike said:

You got that right. 

And also is to edit out the speeches and responses from the opposition as they deem appropriate, before airing it on TV. 

Cheap move, but effective. 

Not to forget remove images of MP " in deep thought " during the session. 

[ToyotaShuttle]

6 minutes ago, Yewheng said:

That is gg.. The country cannot be solely run by the government. The government cannot win the market. 

Who said it will be solely by govt? I said govt can lead the way via their civil service and maybe even GLC. I didn't say they should legislate it.

If it is a lousy policy, the market is free not to follow.

[RH1667]

4 hours ago, Kopites said:

https://mothership.sg/2020/09/singaporeans-two-jobs//amp

Quote"S'porean workers should be allowed to take up 2 jobs for 'better job security': Chong Kee Hiong"

 

Stupidity has no boundary!

I would also happily take up a part-time MP job or simi director title ( with Director fee of course )  if it is offered to me, but too bad, no offer . 

Edited September 2, 2020 by RH1667

[Philipkee]

22 minutes ago, ToyotaShuttle said:

You sure you live in the same Singapore as the rest of us? 

😁

Actually every time there is an announcement of pending increase in car tax, there is always a rush of people buying cars.

Or rumour of DORSCON orange, people flock to NTUC.

So if a bank is found in breach and potentially facing govt penalties, who is to say a bank run is out of the question?

[Philipkee]

6 minutes ago, RH1667 said:

I would also happily take up a part-time MP job or simi director title ( with Director fee of course )  if it is offered to me, but too bad, no offer . 

Do mods get paid a stipend? Is it considered a second job?  Or do they only get the chance to work with @BabyBlade?

[RH1667]

5 minutes ago, Philipkee said:

Do mods get paid a stipend? Is it considered a second job?  Or do they only get the chance to work with @BabyBlade?

i have no idea about first question, but i dont think so, for second questions, i think that maybe consider as one of perks 

Edited September 2, 2020 by RH1667

[ToyotaShuttle]

1 hour ago, Philipkee said:

Actually every time there is an announcement of pending increase in car tax, there is always a rush of people buying cars.

Or rumour of DORSCON orange, people flock to NTUC.

So if a bank is found in breach and potentially facing govt penalties, who is to say a bank run is out of the question?

How much do you think a fine for breaching Work permit "guidelines" will be? It will be peanuts for any bank.

The question is whether Singaporeans will be willing to punish a bank by withdrawing their funds from a bank who is found to be hiring foreigners over Singaporeans. Will they go through the hassle of closing their bank account for the principle of it? What about if the bank is paying 0.1% more interest than another bank? Is your principle worth the extra 0.1%?

I know for me, I will be too lazy to close an account much what more to say for an extra 0.1% yield.

 

[Chongster]

wet armpits!  

[Wind30]

5 hours ago, Carbon82 said:

I finally know why OYK is out of MOE. The statements below just make no sense from Mathematics and English point of view

Parliament: Singaporeans in senior roles in financial services grew more than 50% from 2014 to 2019, says Ong Ye Kung

In 2014, there were 1,700 Singaporeans holding such top-level positions - from managing director and above. The number grew to 2,600 last year, said Mr Ong.

"That is more than a 50 per cent increase in five years, or an additional 900 Singaporeans taking up senior roles, embarking on a new and fulfilling stage in their careers," he said.

According to MAS estimates, Mr Ong said the total number of senior positions in the financial services sector grew from 3,900 in 2014 to 5,900 last year.

While the proportion of Singaporeans in these roles has held steady - at about 44 per cent - their absolute numbers have increased, he added.

 2014

• Total no. of senior positions in financial services sector => 3,900
• Total no. of Singaporeans holding senior positions => 1,700 (43.59%)
• Total no. of non-Singaporean holding senior positions => 2,200 (56.41%)

2019

• Total no. of senior positions in financial services sector => 5,900
• Total no. of Singaporeans holding senior positions => 2,600 (44.07%)
• Total no. of non-Singaporean holding senior positions => 3,300 (55.93%)

Absolute numbers:

• Additional 900 Singaporeans taking up senior roles (+52.94%)
• Additional 1,100 non-Singaporeans taking up senior roles (+50%)

End of the day, there are still more jobs going to non-Singaporean (there is also a 50% increment in non-Singaporean taking up senior roles), so the last statement by OYK is absurd to say the least.

... I think he meant 1700->2600. I don't think it is absurd. 

In fact, I give him lots of marks for showing the numbers for "SIngaporeans" and not the bulls**t "locals" number.