Skip to main content
Advertisement

Pritam Singh rounds up debate on cost of living crisis

13:56 Min

In Parliament on Tuesday (Nov 7), Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh closed the debate on a motion he and Workers’ Party (WP) MP Louis Chua had moved, calling on the Government to review its policies to lower cost of living pressures on Singaporeans and their families. Mr Singh said WP rejected the amendments proposed by MP Liang Eng Hwa. He said the first amendment, stating that cost of living is a global concern, read as an attempt to “minify” the role the Government can and should play to reduce cost of living burdens on Singaporeans. The second amendment, to use the words “continue pursuing policies” rather than “review its policies”, suggested that the status quo is fine - which WP disagreed with. It had proposed specific structural changes to the system that it believed would work better than current policies. Mr Singh said WP had no substantive quarrel with the third amendment, as the party’s proposals would neither undermine Singapore’s fiscal sustainability nor unduly burden future generations. The WP MPs and NCMPs from the Progress Singapore Party did not vote in favour of the amended motion which was passed.

In Parliament on Tuesday (Nov 7), Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh closed the debate on a motion he and Workers’ Party (WP) MP Louis Chua had moved, calling on the Government to review its policies to lower cost of living pressures on Singaporeans and their families. Mr Singh said WP rejected the amendments proposed by MP Liang Eng Hwa. He said the first amendment, stating that cost of living is a global concern, read as an attempt to “minify” the role the Government can and should play to reduce cost of living burdens on Singaporeans. The second amendment, to use the words “continue pursuing policies” rather than “review its policies”, suggested that the status quo is fine - which WP disagreed with. It had proposed specific structural changes to the system that it believed would work better than current policies. Mr Singh said WP had no substantive quarrel with the third amendment, as the party’s proposals would neither undermine Singapore’s fiscal sustainability nor unduly burden future generations. The WP MPs and NCMPs from the Progress Singapore Party did not vote in favour of the amended motion which was passed.

Advertisement

You May Also Like

Advertisement