SINGAPORE - The Workers' Party (WP) has changed its position on the $1,300 minimum wage it advocates, Senior Minister of State for Manpower Zaqy Mohamad suggested on Tuesday (Nov 3) during an exchange in Parliament with WP MP Jamus Lim.

This prompted Associate Professor Lim (Sengkang GRC) to clarify that his party's position of $1,300 is for monthly minimum take-home wage, not gross income, and to assert that the WP has been consistent on its position.

In a parliamentary question, Prof Lim had asked for the number of Singaporeans earning $1,300 a month or less on a take-home basis, excluding employer and employee Central Provident Fund (CPF) contributions and other income deductions.

Mr Zaqy replied that there are around 30,000 Singaporean workers earning less than that amount per month after including Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) payouts and CPF contributions.

When Prof Lim pressed for the figures he wanted in a follow-up question, Mr Zaqy said "it would not be meaningful nor accurate to consider income according to the parameters of (Prof Lim's) query", given international conventions on how income is measured.

Using gross income - which includes CPF contributions but before tax deductions - as a benchmark is aligned with how the International Labour Organisation (ILO) defines gross earnings, and "is not a pure Singapore definition", said Mr Zaqy.

"If you use the ILO definition on earnings, for example, they include social security, pension schemes, insurance premiums, union dues, and other obligations by the employees," he said.

"So this is how it's done internationally, therefore we keep to the same conventions because it provides for meaningful comparisons and benchmarks."

Mr Zaqy also noted that countries with a minimum wage system, such as the United States, Germany, and South Korea also stipulate that the minimum wage is subject to taxes and social security contributions.

Turning the question around, Mr Zaqy asked Prof Lim to clarify the level of minimum wage that the WP stands for.

The senior minister of state said that in previous Parliament debates Prof Lim had said his party was proposing a minimum wage of $1,300, but that his current query suggested the WP is now proposing a minimum take-home pay of $1,300.

"That's a shift in where the line is - if this is the case, then the gross wage, inclusive of CPF contributions, should be higher - between $1,600, $1,700, thereabouts," he said.

Prof Lim replied that the premise of his question had nothing to do with the minimum wage.

"The question did not specify anything about the minimum wage... in part, the reason why we raised $1,300 was because that was the notion of how much a reasonable basket of goods and services for adequate living in Singapore would entail," he said.

Mr Zaqy replied: "Mr Speaker, I think the Member is evading the question because I have shown that in the (WP) manifesto, it was $1,300 mentioned. The last few debates too, the same figure was mentioned but in different definitions.

"At the root of the issue now is the WP changed its definition for its minimum wage line."

Prof Lim disagreed that he was evading the question, because Mr Zaqy had "imputed an inference" from the $1,300 figure in his question.

Asked once more by Mr Zaqy if the WP's proposed minimum wage line is $1,300 in gross income, Prof Lim said this was correct and "a fair characterisation". But he later clarified that his party's position is for a minimum take-home pay of $1,300 a month for full-time work, and not gross income.

At a previous Parliament sitting last month (Oct), a prolonged debate had ensued between the National Trades Union Congress' deputy secretary-general Koh Poh Koon and Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh.

Then, Dr Koh suggested that having a universal minimum wage could leave workers and firms worse off, with the exercise to determine the wage level devolving into a political auction.

Mr Singh had said that a universal minimum wage is a moral imperative and an act of national solidarity, and the Government's progressive wage model is taking too long to implement across all sectors.