Skip to content

Labour Policies, CPF Reforms, and the Fight for Local Talent - Discussion with Jeremy Tan

Picture of The Financial Coconut
Follow The Financial Coconut

 

Singapore’s economic engine is sputtering. With an aging workforce, rising competition from foreign talent, and a CPF system under scrutiny, the GE2025 election has ignited fierce debates about the future of work and wealth. In a no-holds-barred panel discussion on TFC GE2025 Special, experts dissected the policies—and pitfalls—shaping Singapore’s labor landscape.

CPF accounts of 300,000 foreigners will close from April 1, 2024

CPF: Safety Net or Straitjacket?

The Central Provident Fund (CPF) dominated the conversation, with panelists split on its role. Anthony Ong, TFC Co-host and Retail Investor, argued, “CPF isn’t my retirement plan—I focus on building wealth beyond it.” He criticised its rigidity, noting that younger Singaporeans view it as a “safety net with holes,” given uncertain long-term governance.

Eddy Hirono, a lawyer and founder of SailorFanTalk, took a harsher stance: “CPF is paternalistic. It stifles creativity and ownership. We’re training a generation to rely on the state instead of innovating.”

Get To Know The New Under-35 Candidates Of GE2025 - 8days

Meanwhile, Jeremy Tan, Independent Candidate for Mountbatten SMC 2025, defended CPF’s intent but acknowledged flaws:

“The system should adapt to gig economies and non-linear careers, not just traditional salaried roles.”

 

Foreign Talent: Boon or Brain Drain?

The panel clashed over Singapore’s reliance on foreign professionals. Anthony highlighted a visceral frustration: “Companies hire cheaper foreign grads, displacing locals. A 48-year-old retrenched worker can’t compete with a 23-year-old overseas hire, even with reskilling subsidies. 

Jeremy proposed radical solutions:

  • “1 EP per $100k local salary”: Companies earn Employment Pass quotas by investing in local talent.
  • “Train-to-replace” programs: Incentivize firms to upskill Singaporeans for specialized roles.

Eddy warned of unintended consequences: “Protectionism could deter global investors. But without safeguards, our workforce becomes a revolving door for transient talent.”

Catch the livestream playback here

Education: Mismatched Skills, Missed Opportunities

The panel lambasted Singapore’s education system for prioritising conformity over creativity. Anthony shared an anecdote: “A parent told me, ‘My kid wants to start a business, but I’m forcing law school—it’s safer.’ That mindset kills innovation.”

Jeremy echoed the sentiment: “MOE’s 21st Century Competency Framework sounds great on paper—self-directed, resourceful learners—but the system still rewards rote memorisation.” He cited the story of Neil Tan, a viral example of a student pressured into traditional paths despite entrepreneurial ambitions.

Eddy called for systemic change: “We need to stop churning out ‘PR-ready’ graduates and start nurturing problem-solvers. Let’s teach kids to build companies, not just resumes.”

Lack of required skills, mismatched salary expectations make tech, nursing vacancies hard to fill, say recruiters - TODAY

Retrenchment & Reskilling: Too Little, Too Late?

Retrenchment policies faced sharp criticism. Anthony highlighted a loophole: “Firms abuse the $600 reskilling grant. They ‘interview’ laid-off workers while hiring cheaper foreign talent.”

Jeremy proposed accountability measures: “Tie grants to outcomes. If a company retrenches, claw back subsidies unless they prove genuine upskilling efforts.”

Eddy questioned the viability of reskilling older workers: “A 45-year-old retrained in AI competes with 25-year-olds who’ve coded since childhood. It’s demoralising and impractical.”

 Singapore postcard
 

The “Postcard City” Dilemma: Who Benefits?

The panel debated whether Singapore’s policies favour global elites over locals. Anthony quipped, “We roll out the red carpet for foreign wealth but ignore the ‘food-insecure seniors’ highlighted in STP’s manifesto.”

Jeremy warned of a growing divide: “We’re becoming a playground for the rich while locals struggle with stagnant wages. That’s not sustainable.”

 

A Call for Bold Stewardship

Singapore stands at a fork in the road: double down on globalisation or prioritise local resilience. As Eddy put it, “Policies must balance openness with fairness. We can’t be a hub for global talent if our own people feel left behind.” 

With GE2025 looming, voters face a choice: incremental tweaks or systemic overhaul. The panel’s consensus? “The CPF isn’t broken—it’s outdated. Foreign talent isn’t the enemy—it’s mismanaged. And the education system? It’s a relic of the past.” The future hinges on who dares to reimagine it.
,

Let us know what you think of this post