Leader of the Opposition, Pritam Singh, contested Deputy Prime Minister Wong’s assertion that the opposition merely aims to deplete reserves, underscoring their meticulous consideration of financial prudence.
Following Mr Wong’s budget 2024 closing speech on Wednesday (28 February), Mr Singh sought clarifications and contended that the opposition’s call for more information is integral to their efforts to comprehend fiscal prudence in Singapore.
Additionally, he underscored that sustainable growth is the paramount factor for Singapore’s progress in this decade.
DPM Wong accuses the opposition of advocating increased use of reserves for current spending
In his concluding speech for the 2024 Budget debate, DPM Wong stressed the crucial need for Singapore to proactively plan its fiscal policies, ensuring the nation can fulfil collective aspirations and capitalize on every opportunity.
However, he redirected the discussion by scrutinizing the opposition, accusing them of advocating for increased utilization of reserves for current expenditure.
He reiterated the government’s stance on reserves, stating that it would result in having less for the current generation and leaving less behind for future generations.
He emphasized the importance of prudence, fairness, and sustainability in fiscal policy.
Additionally, he mentions that some governments in advanced economies face rising debts and fiscal challenges due to what he refers to as “fiscal fantasies” – unrealistic assumptions, overreliance on taxing the rich or postponing fiscal problems for the future.
“Let’s not indulge in fantasy thinking, not in this house, not in Singapore, ” he said.
“I call on everyone in this House, let’s commit to upholding these values: fiscal responsibility, discipline, ensure that our fiscal system meets the needs and aspirations of both current and future generations of Singaporeans.”
Mr Wong then challenged the opposition to make the issue of drawing more from the reserves an election matter.
He suggests that they can seek a mandate from the people to change the constitution and allow for greater use of the reserves.
Mr Singh rebuts DPM Wong’s allegation
In response, Mr Singh, Workers’ Party Chief and Member of Parliament for Aljunied GRC, acknowledged and thanked DPM Wong for stating that the government would provide more information on government policies.
He considered this important, especially in the context of discussions about the usage of reserves and addressing funding gaps.
Mr Singh countered the suggestion that the opposition merely wants to dig into the reserves, emphasizing that they carefully consider financial prudence.
“I would be cautious to suggest that the opposition essentially just wants to dig into the reserves because we do think about the financial prudence question quite carefully.”
He mentioned a specific proposal by the WP for an employee and employer-financed scheme, challenging the notion that the opposition solely advocates for tapping into reserves.
He further emphasized the importance of sustainable growth rather than just growth.
He highlighted that the key question for the future is not just about achieving growth but ensuring it is sustainable.
In response, Mr Wong noted that WP previously objected to the GST increase, calling for Singapore to dig into its reserves to meet its needs.
DPM Wong questions WP’s position on GST and reserve usage
DPM Wong acknowledged Mr Singh’s clarification but raised a specific point about the Workers’ Party’s position on the Goods and Services Tax (GST).
He accused that WP had initially objected to the GST but eventually accepted it at rise.
DPM Wong questioned whether now that the GST has been implemented at seven percent, the WP would accept a nine percent GST as a reality.
DPM Wong also asked if this would mean that WP’s proposals to use more of Singapore’s reserves “are therefore no longer relevant”, and that the party is “fully consistent” with the People’s Action Party (PAP) in terms of the use of the reserves.
Mr Singh said the opposition makes proposals based on the information available to them at the time.
It has no insight into how the government spends money to fund policy objectives, so it cannot make any promises on committing to raising revenues.
Mr Singh referred to an earlier exchange in the debate between Member Mr Murali Pillai and his colleague Associate Professor Jamus Lim.
He highlighted that there is a lack of insight into matters such as the allocation of the S$40 billion for Forward Singapore initiatives committed by the Minister of Finance.
Due to this lack of information, he stated that he cannot make any promises or commitments regarding the opposition’s stance on funding policy objectives.
“I think the vision or whatever is before the Workers’ Party … (is) we’ll have to work with the information that we have. We are not in government. And if it means that we have to look at all options, we will look at all options.”
Mr Singh acknowledges shifts in PAP’s approach to reserve usage
DPM Wong then probed whether there was a difference in fundamental fiscal philosophy between the PAP and the WP.
He pointed out that there was a time when there was alignment in the House, specifically mentioning Mr Low Thia Khiang, former WP Chief.
“It seemed to me that this had changed under Mr Pritam Singh,” he said.
DPM Wong asserted that the PAP would unwaveringly adhere to fundamental principles, irrespective of policy adjustments.
“This must never be compromised. This must never change. These principles were put in place by our founding leaders. They have continued under successive leaders of the PAP and they will certainly continue under my watch,” said Mr Wong.
In response, Mr Singh acknowledged familiarity with such statements in the House.
“I do agree with the Finance Minister. Policies change. A PAP government yesterday would return the money that it has used from the reserves as a matter of principle. ”
“But today a PAP government may not return the money it uses from the reserves. That’s my response.”
PAP MP Mr Sitoh and Mr Singh’s exchange
Sitoh Yih Pin, PAP MP for Potong Pasir SMC later weighed in on the debate, sought clarification from Mr Singh’s remark claiming the current PAP government does not return reserves to the people, while the past government did.
Mr Sitoh then asked if Mr Singh was suggesting that the government has to top up the reserves it drew during COVID, considering the potential massive amount and the funding challenge.
In response, Mr Singh said Mr Sitoh “had just made the case he was emphasizing.”
“In one situation, you can; in another situation, you can’t. You have to look at the statements made when the money was returned, and then you see in a different situation, a different context, there’s a different explanation. ”
Mr Sitoh then conpared the last time reserves were topped up after a drawdown was in 2009, with $4 billion being added after the global financial crisis.
He highlighted the substantial drawdown of more than $40 billion during COVID-19, expressing the need for understanding how to top up such a significant amount.
He sought insights into how WP would top up $40 billion if in government.
Mr Singh referred to the recently announced extended instalment plan of up to 24 months for property tax payments, part of Budget 2024, implying a similar approach could be an idea.
Despite Mr Sitoh’s insistence on the WP Chief elaborating on measures, he failed to address Mr Singh’s point regarding the instalment plan.