Tripartite partners have ‘heated’ debates, says Tan See Leng, as WP questions independence of NTUC

SINGAPORE: Behind closed doors, tripartite partners engage in heated discussions and do not always agree on matters affecting workers, Manpower Minister Tan See Leng said on Tuesday (Sep 10).
His comments came as lawmakers wound down a spirited debate on the independence of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) given its symbiotic relationship with the ruling People’s Action Party (PAP).
The debate started on Monday as parliament considered a landmark Bill to protect platform workers’ rights, which has since been passed into law.
Member of Parliament (MP) Gerald Giam (WP-Aljunied) gave a speech questioning whether NTUC could “fully advocate” for workers’ rights “without fear or favour”. This drew sharp rebuttals from across the aisle.
On Tuesday, Dr Tan said Singapore’s “unique” model of tripartism among workers, employers and the government was one of the country’s greatest strengths.
“Together, we have robust discussions, we push back. We have intense debate behind the scenes. And when we formulate ideas, we turn them into actions, and we overcome challenges as one united people.”
He said the government plays a “key moderating role” to balance the interests of workers and businesses, and make sure decisions are made “for the long-term good for everyone”.
“I know you keep talking about independence,” he said. “Behind closed doors, the tripartite partners do not always agree.
“Heated discussions happen behind closed doors on many, many issues,” he said, citing the raising of the retirement age and upcoming workplace fairness legislation as examples.
Earlier, Senior Minister of State for Manpower Koh Poh Koon also stressed the importance of tripartism in his wrap-up speech before MPs voted on the Platform Workers Bill.
“We must understand that there is a natural tension between the interests of businesses and workers, which stems from the competing goals of maximising profits on the one side and securing fair treatment and compensation on the other.”
He said it was easy for a government to be pro-business or pro-worker, but very difficult to be both at the same time.
“The symbiotic relationship of the PAP and NTUC has allowed us, as a ruling party, to run a government that is both pro-worker and pro-business at the same time.”
Dr Koh also said other countries try to emulate Singapore’s success but are unable to because they do not have symbiosis between unions and the governing party, nor tripartism.
He then said: “What is dangerously clear to us is that the Workers’ Party will seek to dismantle this.”
Dr Koh said that Mr Giam was “in fact saying that the Workers’ Party will not align itself with any unions, or form any relationship with any unions”.
“So all workers and employers should sit up and take notice. Because the WP leadership wants to destroy tripartism as it stands here today. The Workers’ Party will kill tripartism.”
He also said this was ironic as the WP’s founder, David Marshall, started the party in 1957 with the idea of a “political party whose membership is exclusively confined to members of trade unions”.
“Somehow along the way, they lost the trust and the relationship with the unions. So now Mr Gerald Giam says, like a bit of a toxic ex-boyfriend: ‘Because I can’t have a relationship with unions, no one else should have as well.'”
In response, Mr Giam contended that it was “ridiculous” for any ruling party not to seek good relations with unions.
He said what the WP wanted was to “untether the NTUC from the PAP and free up unionists to be independent advocates for workers in Singapore”.
At this point, NTUC deputy secretary-general Desmond Tan (PAP-Pasir Ris-Punggol) asked Mr Giam for data points or personal experience showing that union leaders face restrictions speaking up.
The senior minister of state in the Prime Minister’s Office also shared feedback that he received from union leaders after Monday’s debate, where they disagreed with Mr Giam’s characterisation of their experiences.
Mr Giam in turn asked for “any instance where the NTUC has taken a public position that’s contrary to government policy in recent times”.
Mr Tan pointed to the new SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme, saying that the government did not agree at the start but came round after NTUC had raised the issue for 14 years.
Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh (WP-Aljunied) then joined the debate to reject Dr Koh’s comments on the WP, including the claim that the party was against harmonious tripartite relations.
On what Dr Koh said about the WP’s founding, Mr Singh also said that it “disregards an important fact that more than 60 years have elapsed and the political situation has changed dramatically and significantly”.
He referred to a 1966 NTUC publication in which then NTUC secretary-general Ho See Beng “took issue with government leaders, particularly the prime minister, for speaking unendingly of labour’s obligations while hardly touching on labour’s rights and major grievances”.
Mr Singh asked Dr Koh if he could raise “a single example of where an NTUC secretary-general or a deputy secretary-general has spoken out against a 3G or 4G leader to defend the rights of workers”.
“Now, I am not suggesting that this is the gold standard or the test … But this comes to the heart of what people see and believe to be a conflict of interest,” said the WP secretary-general.
“And when NTUC delegates are saying ‘majulah PAP’, I think people are entitled to question, do you speak for the party first? Or do you speak for workers first?
“The point is not about moving Singapore in a direction where employers, employees, workers, government, fight each other to the detriment of our society and our economic growth,” he said.
“Party interests cannot be more important than the interests of our workers.
“And a symbiotic relationship does not mean that the NTUC is neutered or cannot openly speak out in the interests of workers,” said Mr Singh, adding that he had no reason to believe rank-and-file members of NTUC do not speak out for workers.
Dr Koh replied: “Just because the Workers’ Party lost the relationship with worker unions long ago, doesn’t mean that because we can preserve the relationship for 60 years, there’s something wrong with a symbiotic relationship.”
Mr Singh rose to say that “there’s no question of losing a relationship in any way”.
In closing the exchange, Dr Tan shared an anecdote by the immediate former president of the Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF).
Dr Robert Yap had told a foreign counterpart that contrary to the view that unions in Singapore are weak, “the unions here are strong because they get what they want without striking”.
Dr Tan said that the strength of the tripartite system was that it delivered positive outcomes through negotiation rather than open confrontation, and without disruption.
The manpower minister also urged the House to “look at the record” of what tripartism has achieved for Singapore.
“Together, we’ve protected jobs, we have created stability, we have ensured prosperity for our workers, our businesses. I hope we can continue.”