Mr Speaker: Order. I wish to inform hon Members that I have received a letter from the Prime Minister this morning, which read as follows, I quote: \"Mr Speaker, following Parliament's resolution on 14 January 2026 and my subsequent written exchange with the Central Executive Committee of the Workers' Party, I wish to inform Parliament, through you, that Mr Pritam Singh's designation as the Leader of the Opposition, has ceased, and that the position of the Leader of the Opposition in this Term will remain vacant until such time that the Workers' Party nominates another suitable elected Member of Parliament to take on this responsibility.\"
For the record, Mr Pritam Singh's designation as the Leader of the Opposition ceased with effect from 15 January 2026.
Questions for oral answer.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Mitigating Cost Impact on Customers with Beverage Container Return Scheme's Roll-out in April 2026","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"1 Ms Poh Li San asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment for the Implementation of the Beverage Container Return Scheme (BCRS), how will NEA ensure that (i) the locations of all BCRS vending machines are known to consumers and (ii) retailers and shops do not sell beverages in non-returnable containers at the same price as returnable containers to consumers.
2 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment in respect of the Beverage Container Return Scheme (a) what measures will be put in place to mitigate the impact of potential price increases on consumers, particularly for products from smaller producers; and (b) what assistance will be provided to vulnerable residents not living near return points to claim their container deposits.
3 Mr Foo Cexiang asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether NEA took reference from other countries in designing the Beverage Container Return Scheme; (b) whether NEA has considered alternatives which could have a lower cost impact on producers and consumers; and (c) how will NEA ensure that producers and consumers are not adversely and severely impacted.
4 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how many operational reverse vending machines and return points will be available at the onset of the Beverage Container Return Scheme on 1 April 2026; (b) how will adequate capacity for redemption of deposits be assured during the roll-out of the scheme; and (c) how will unredeemed deposits be managed with full transparency.
5 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment given that the Beverage Container Return Scheme is projected to add 25 to 60 cents to prices of bottled and canned drinks of which only 10 cents is refundable, what assessment was made of the affordability impact on lower-income households before confirming the April 2026 launch.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I answer Question No 1 through to Question No 5, and written Question No 22, on today's Order Paper, please?
\tMr Speaker: Please proceed.
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, the response to these questions also addresses related Parliamentary Questions on the Beverage Container Return Scheme (BCRS) filed by Members of Parliament Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik and Ms Lee Hui Ying1, 2, 3 for Sittings on or after 4 February 2026.
Sir, I thank Members for their interest in the upcoming BCRS, which will commence on 1 April this year. This scheme was debated three years ago during the Second Reading of the Resource Sustainability (Amendment) Bill and Members had expressed support for the scheme. Engagements and discussions with industry and the public had started even earlier.
The scheme was first proposed by a Recycle Right Citizens’ Workgroup in 2019 to increase household recycling rates and reduce contamination in the recycling bins. These intentions remain relevant today. The amount of packaging waste generated in Singapore forms one third of our domestic waste generated and our overall recycling rate remains low.
The BCRS aims to increase the recycling of beverage containers using an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) concept. And this is the second such scheme to be introduced in Singapore, building on our experience with the e-waste recycling programme. The scheme features a deposit paid at the point of purchase to incentivise consumers to return their containers. By nudging consumers to make a small change in their lifestyle, we hope to increase recycling of beverage containers and spark a change in our recycling habits.
In designing the scheme, we studied the experiences of other jurisdictions. Schemes in Norway, Denmark and Lithuania have achieved high collection rates, and one common factor was having an industry-led, not-for-profit entity run the scheme. We have adopted a similar approach in Singapore, because the industry stakeholders are best placed to determine the most effective way to recover used beverage containers. They are also incentivised to operate the scheme efficiently and effectively to ensure that the cost impact on producers is manageable.
The scheme operator, BCRS Ltd, was formed by the industry and is governed by a Board that has both large and small producer representatives, comprising Coca-Cola Singapore Beverages, F&N Foods, Pokka, Wanin Industries and Chia Khim Lee Food Industries. Licensed by the National Environment Agency (NEA), they are required to report the amount of 10-cent deposits collected from the producers and refunded to the consumers in their annual report for public accountability.
Several Members asked questions about the cost of the scheme and the effect on beverage prices.
All regulated beverage containers supplied in Singapore will attract a 10-cent deposit, which is fully refundable. Such containers will bear a deposit mark for easy identification. Consumers will pay this 10 cents at the point of purchase and obtain their refund when they return the containers for recycling.
All producers will also need to pay a producer fee of three to four cents per container to the scheme operator, BCRS Ltd. This fee covers the logistics to collect and recycle the containers and is comparable to fees in other jurisdictions.
From our engagements with stakeholders, producers of about 80% of beverage containers can incorporate the deposit mark and barcode requirements directly on their containers. Beyond the once-off implementation cost, these producers should see costs per container close to the producer fee of three to four cents, which should keep compliance costs low for most drinks sold.
Some producers may need to, or may choose to, place a sticker on their containers, instead of changing the design of the container, in order to comply with the scheme. The cost of stickering will vary, depending on the quantity of containers put to market and how their supply chains are organised. Some can do so for about three cents per container, if done at source overseas and at scale. For small quantities done locally, the cost to the producer would be higher.
We appreciate that some producers may find the transition more challenging. NEA and the scheme operator BCRS Ltd have been engaging both large and small producers regularly and providing practical support to help them come on board. Responding to feedback from producers that they needed more time to comply with the scheme requirements, we have extended the transition period from three months, to six months. We also introduced a transition grant of $2,500 to help smaller businesses.
We will continue to be flexible and supportive to producers who reach out to BCRS Ltd to help address their concerns. Over time, we expect producers to work with BCRS Ltd to optimise their processes and find cost effective ways to meet their responsibility to the environment.
The consumer pricing of beverages is a complex and commercial decision. Consumer demand patterns and marketing strategies will also affect the price.
We have designed the scheme to be run as efficiently as possible, with a low cost to producers. Any cost pass-through to consumers will likely be further moderated by price competition among industry players, as consumers have a wide variety of choices. This has been the experience in some jurisdictions that have implemented this, where studies found that the introduction of deposit return schemes did not have a significant direct impact on beverage prices or beverage sales.
Members have also asked about the accessibility of our return point network. At launch in April, the public can return their empty plastic and metal beverage containers bearing the deposit mark at over 1,000 Reverse Vending Machines (RVMs) located across Singapore to obtain a 10-cent refund. These RVMs will be located at larger supermarkets and other publicly accessible locations with high footfall, such as void decks of HDB blocks and some hawker centres. Sir, 90% of residents in HDB housing estates will live within a five-minute walk to one of these return points. BCRS Ltd will provide more details on the RVM locations in the coming weeks.
We aim to double the number of return points to 2,000 RVMs within the first year of implementation. While the scheme officially starts in April, containers bearing the deposit mark will gradually enter the market during the transition period, with widespread availability expected by August and September. During this initial period, we will closely monitor return patterns and gather community feedback to determine the optimal location for these additional return points.
We want to create a scheme that works for all of us. At launch, we will deploy ambassadors on the ground to guide the public on how to use the RVMs. We recognise that some seniors and vulnerable members of the community may require additional assistance to adapt to the scheme. NEA and BCRS Ltd, together with our community partners, are committed to providing additional support to better address their needs.
A key focus for us in the coming weeks is to work closely with all stakeholders to build understanding and support for the scheme. We will be reaching out to grassroots organisations, schools, youth groups, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and corporate partners to share how the scheme works and why it matters. Many are already champions of our sustainability initiatives and I hope will continue to advocate for how BCRS is a very important step in our journey to look after our land, our resources and our environment.
We are also in discussions with other key stakeholders, including coffeeshops and smaller retailers, to help them understand the scheme and explain it to consumers. This includes posters and collaterals to assist in distinguishing new beverage containers bearing the deposit mark, from older or non-regulated beverages that are not subject to the deposit.
The beverage container return scheme is a significant step forward in Singapore’s recycling journey. It will take time for all of us to adjust. We will not get everything right from the start. We ask for feedback, suggestions and understanding as we transit to this new way of recycling. As we gather more data, we will refine and improve the scheme.
We need everyone’s support to make this scheme a success. We want to thank the producers who have helped to bring the scheme to where it is today and call upon those who have yet to register for the scheme to come forward and do their part for the environment.
The scheme cannot succeed without the support of our residents. I encourage Members of the House to rally their communities to participate actively, and extend a helping hand to those who may need assistance in returning their containers, as we all do our part for Singapore’s sustainability journey.
Mr Speaker: Ms Poh.
\tMs Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Thank you, Speaker and the Senior Minister of State. I have two supplementary questions. First, we expect this collection of return containers, with over 1,000, to even in future, 2,000 return points to be quite a substantial operational and logistical effort. What is the estimated additional manpower that is needed for collection and transportation of all these collected containers?
And related to this, my second supplementary question: how would consumers be protected? Should the cost of drinks go beyond the three to four cents of operational costs, as imputed in these logistical operations, will that lead to much more expensive drinks in future for consumers?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Ms Poh for the questions. On the first matter, the RVMs are operated by the return point network operators. They have entered into contractual arrangements with companies to then do the reverse logistics – to empty out the RVMs at least once per day, and more if there is a high return rate at that particular machine. They also maintain the cleanliness and operations of the machines.
The reverse logistics operators are companies and entities that are already well known to us. They are actually part of our public waste collection and Town Council operations. They are they are not new companies being set up just for this purpose. I do not have a specific answer in terms of the number of man hours. This is something that will be adjusted over time, depending on which RVMs require frequent clearance and which ones only require clearance once per day. But we will be watching this closely and we are working with the companies to make sure that their operations can be done smoothly. We have to make sure that the machines maintain their up-time as a service to the residents, so that the ability to return these beverage containers is always there.
To her second question about protection for consumers, there are several reasons to have some degree of confidence in what is going to happen moving forward. The first is the experience in other jurisdictions where the introduction of such schemes has not led to an increase in price of beverage containers. More than 50 jurisdictions around the world have introduced similar schemes.
So, in designing our scheme, we took reference from those lessons around the world and started with our BCRS, which is industry-led. Secondly, the competition in this industry is quite significant. For 80% of the beverage containers that are put to market, the producers of these 80% of the containers have told us that their cost for doing so is about three to four cents. They have been quite engaging and open about this. There is a long tail of smaller producers that will face some challenges, and as I have explained, we will be flexible and supportive to assist these businesses in dealing with the transition and will try to help them come on board.
The protection for the consumers is that our consumers are quite discriminatory and they will adjust purchasing behaviour if there is indeed some attempt to extract excessive profits through this process. Nevertheless, NEA will be watching the beverage prices after we introduce this scheme and through the transition, very closely.
Mr Speaker: Mr Foo Cexiang.
\t
\t
Mr Foo Cexiang (Tanjong Pagar): Thank you, Speaker. My clarification for the Senior Minister of State is this: I thank him for his response that there will be about 1,000 RVMs set up country-wide, with an aim to increase to about 2,000. But in context, there are about 15,000 vending machines in Singapore and I believe a significant number of them are vending drinks. So, in comparison, the ratio is about 1,000:15,000. Given that everyone who buys a can will have to return the can to the vending machine to get back to 10 cents, do we anticipate queues and long waiting periods at the RVMs? And also, have we taken into consideration of the logistical arrangements in terms of malfunctions or that sort of operational challenges with the RVMs?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Mr Foo Cexiang for his questions. We are deploying 1,000 RVMs in the first instance. The way in which we are doing it, this phased approach, is indeed to then learn about how best to deploy, where best to deploy and how best to then have ambassadors come and assist people. So, we are deploying 1,000 machines together with operations to have people stand by the machines at certain times of the day to assist seniors particularly, but also anybody who is asking for help. We will learn from that experience to decide how we should deploy the next 1,000 machines and where we should deploy them.
Again, we are learning from the experience of jurisdictions overseas. We are also learning from the experience here in Singapore, where we had about 50 RVMs operate through a pilot programme over four years. We collected about 16 million containers through that process. The operators of that pilot are also one of our return point network operators and on the board of BCRS Ltd. So, we are taking those lessons in and through all of that, we have assessed that we do not need 15,000 RVMs. There is a certain minimum volume collection per day that makes the logistical arrangements cost-effective, and we think that number is much closer to the 1,000 to 2,000 RVMs we are planning to have. Nevertheless, we are going to look at the data very closely and make sure that we make the RVMs accessible to Singaporeans so that they can return their beverage containers.
Addressing malfunctions and making logistical arrangements are part of licensing requirements for BCRS Ltd, and contractual arrangements that they have with their return point network operators and vendors of their machines. There is a contractual requirement for these machines to maintain 90% up-time. In other words, you only have 10% of your time for cleaning, clearing the beverage containers and doing repairs. For the rest of the time, it needs to be available. This is a metric that we will be watching very closely, and BCRS Ltd will be watching in terms of their contractual arrangements with the return point network operators.
Mr Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
\tMs Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Thank you, Speaker and Senior Minister of State. I have two clarifications for the Senior Minister of State. First, could the Ministry provide additional grants and support, including on a longer-term basis, for smaller drinks producers to help defray the costs of complying with the scheme?
Second, would the Ministry consider waiving the requirement to have the deposit mark after the transition period, given that there should be sufficient public awareness by then and retailers no longer need to distinguish products with and without the 10-cent deposit?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Ms Joan Pereira for her two questions. We are currently providing a grant of $2,500. That grant is given to all registered producers. But it is sized to especially address the needs of the smaller producers. For a smaller producer, which we define as less than 50,000 beverage containers put to market per year, and that represents about one quarter of the producers in our estimate, the $2,500 is more than sufficient to cover both the product registration cost as well as the producer fees for the first year, which is about $2,000 in total. So, that is how we have sized the grant.
We are prepared to exercise flexibility and look at further support, but we also have to recognise that the purpose of this scheme is to shift some of the responsibility to the producer. Today, if we purchase a beverage container, the entire responsibility for recycling that beverage container rests with the consumer. What we want is to shift some of that responsibility to the producer, so that they think about their supply chains, about the materials that are used and about how they commissioned their product and put it to market.
So, we will consider these factors, but in general, we are prepared to be flexible and supportive in order to make sure that this scheme includes as much material as possible that we can successfully recycle.
Mr Speaker: Ms Valerie Lim — Yes, Senior Minister of State?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Speaker, I am sorry. I think Ms Pereira had a second question that I have not yet answered, about waiving the deposit mark after the transition. It is a reasonable question. However, not all beverage containers will be covered by the scheme and a consumer will need to know that the beverage container that they have in their hand is ineligible for the deposit. So, the deposit mark will be necessary for some time as the scheme does not cover 100% of beverage containers, and we want to make sure that consumers know which ones will attract the deposit and hence, be eligible for use at the RVMs for refunds. I would like to make the point that for containers that do not bear the deposit mark, we would like to encourage consumers to recycle them through the existing blue bins.
Mr Speaker: Ms Valerie Lee.
\tMs Valerie Lee (Pasir Ris-Changi): Thank you, Speaker and thank you, Senior Minister of State. I have two supplementary questions. The first is whether the deposit value will be revealed over time and what criteria will trigger such a review?
And for the second supplementary question, what is the increase in the national recycling rate that we expect to see as a result of this scheme?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, if I may clarify with Ms Valerie Lee, the deposit value she is referring to is the total amount or the 10 cents? Okay. So, whether the 10-cent deposit amount may be subsequently reviewed. Indeed, we will review the scheme as we go along. The quantum of the deposit in the 50 jurisdictions that we have studied does vary and some are significantly more than what we have here in Singapore. It is something we will review as we go along, to ensure that the scheme is effective.
As for the recycling rate, we are hoping that we can get a good recycling rate of beverage containers. Some of the best schemes in the world have recycling rates of over 90%. Most of them that we have studied, that we are trying to emulate, are closer to the 70% to 80% range. That is the sort of recycling rate that we would be hoping to achieve through this process.
Mr Speaker: Mr Kenneth Tiong.
\tMr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. The deposit rate is fully refundable at 10 cents, but I believe media reports have put the projected price increase at 25 to 60 cents. So, the difference is about 15 to 50 cents of permanent compliance costs, which the vending machine will not return. So, what assessment has been made of this non-refundable portion as a share of income for lower-income households?
The second supplementary question: the only current confirmed refund method is EZ-Link. So, can the Senior Minister of State confirm that the cash refund or cash voucher refund option will be available at all return points from Day 1.
The third supplementary question: a lot of parallel importers face $40,000 a month of fees under the scheme. With the transition grant at $2,500, that is quite disproportionate. So, these parallel importers are the companies that bring the cheapest drinks onto the market. Has the Ministry assessed the risk that this scheme eliminates the discount beverage segment entirely?
And final supplementary question: I note that the Senior Minister of State has said that they will monitor to see if the price increases will go beyond three to four cents. But as we all know, price increases are sticky. So, what will the Government do if the price increases go beyond three to four cents?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Mr Tiong for his questions. On his first point, he quotes it as a projection. The 25 to 60 cents was a media report from a handful of producers. Our assessment is that 80% of the market will have a 3% to 4% increase. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment\", Official Report, 3 February 2026, Vol 96, Issue 15, Clarification section.]
Indeed, there will be smaller producers who, because of their supply chain or the size of their operations, will have higher challenges and we are prepared to be flexible and supportive, as explained. The grant that we sized already covers about one-quarter of the producers and especially those that have put to market of less than 50,000 units.
For the refund methodology, we have explained that EZ-Link SimplyGo is available as a refund methodology and there will be further refund methodologies. We are not, at this point, planning for cash or cash voucher as forms of refund. We are hoping to use digital means and BCRS Ltd will be announcing the other means for refund in the future.
We have indeed engaged with a variety of importers, including some of the smallest importers. I think the smallest producer that we have directly engaged has a put to market of 1,000 units. We are trying to understand their challenges, and we are trying to find ways to help them participate in this scheme while remaining viable as a business.
Was there a fourth question?
\tMr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat: What will the Government do if price increases —
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: So, we will monitor. It depends on what is the behaviour. If there is evidence of collusion or profiteering, there are mechanisms for that to be reported and dealt with. We will look to see what are the factors that have led to that.
Mr Speaker: Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik.
\tMr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik (Sengkang): Thank you, Speaker. Since small beverage producers may likely pass the compliance cost to consumers, what percentage price increase does the Ministry consider acceptable for consumers to bear as a result of this scheme? And was this consumer impact factored into the decision to set the grant at only $2,500?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I anticipate significant competition within the market to be the biggest protection that consumers will have; that there are quite a wide variety of choices available, and 80% of the beverage containers will only be attracting, for the producer, a cost of three to four cents. That availability of choice and the functioning of the market are likely to be the biggest protection.
We have indeed engaged with the producers, retailers and a variety of representatives representing all stakeholders, to understand what the dynamics are and what the concerns are.
The industry players, of course, are also concerned that they remain competitive within this industry. We will be monitoring the transition and how this process plays out.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment what are the actions taken by the Beverage Container Return Scheme operator to ensure that the concerns of smaller local producers, businesses, and importers are incorporated in implementing the scheme.","2 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how many return points have been prepared for the launch of the Beverage Container Return Scheme in April 2026; and (b) whether the Ministry has assessed that there are sufficient return points so that consumers will be able to conveniently return beverages and recover the deposit.","3 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the Ministry can provide an update on the progress of the roll-out plans for the Beverage Container Return scheme; and (b) whether the Ministry will take steps to monitor retail prices of pre-packages beverages to (i) detect any pass through of compliance costs and (ii) prevent opportunistic price hiking; and (c) if so, how?"],"footNoteQuestions":["1","2","3","4","5"],"questionNo":"1-5"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Moderating Shop Rental Increases in Heritage Precincts Such as Chinatown and Kampong Gelam","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng asked the Minister for National Development what measures is the Ministry taking to moderate increases in shop rentals in heritage precincts, such as Chinatown and Kampong Gelam, in order to support the sustainability of long-standing heritage businesses and prevent their displacement.
7 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Government is aware of the trend of bidding wars and subletting driving up rents in Kampong Gelam; and (b) if so, whether the Government intends to take any action to curb this practice, and if not, why not.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Dr Syed Harun Alhabsyi) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 6 and 7 on today’s Order Paper together, please?
Mr Speaker: Please proceed.
\tDr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: My response will also cover matters raised in the questions by Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin and Mr Saktiandi Supaat, which are scheduled for a subsequent Sitting.
The Government carefully monitors retail rents across Singapore. As shared recently by the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA), median rents for retail spaces in historic districts of Kampong Gelam, Little India and Chinatown, including sublet arrangements, have increased at a moderate pace of around 2% per annum over the past two years. These increases were comparable with rental increases of conventional retail space in the Central Area and lower than nominal gross domestic product (GDP) growth over the same period.
There has also been some interest about the recent closure of Warong Nasi Pariaman in Kampong Gelam. It was reported in the media that a representative from the family recently clarified that the closure was not related to rental issues and we should not wrongly conclude that this was due to high rental. That notwithstanding, Mr Speaker, like many Singaporeans, I am saddened by the sudden closure of this heritage business, and the agencies are in touch with Warong Nasi Pariaman to discuss how we can facilitate their continuation should they decide to do so.
The Government will continue to support our heritage businesses. The Inter-Agency Task Force for Heritage Businesses, Traditional Activities and Cultural Life has also introduced new measures, such as marketing and business consultancy support under the National Heritage Board's (NHB's) SG Heritage Business Scheme. This also includes enhanced place management support to better showcase the heritage trades and activities in each historic district.
\t
\tMr Speaker: Ms Phua.
\tMs Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Thank you to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. My first supplementary question is, may I ask the Ministry to provide the source of data to say that the rental hike is comparable to the central district, and if the central district, which is really big, is really the appropriate segment to compare those rentals with? And also, to specify where the data says that a lot of these rental hikes are lower than the GDP growth?
My second supplementary question is, with Minister Faishal Ibrahim and myself, we work quite closely in, for example, the Kampong Gelam area. We know that the rental hikes are not an issue that is easily managed and that there are different views and interests of the different stakeholder groups, like the tenants, the landlords, the public and the heritage groups. Can the Ministry advise how and when it will coordinate with the relevant agencies, like the Ministry of National Development (MND), the Ministry of Trade and Industry, the National Arts Council, NHB and URA, for instance, one, to identify what qualifies as a heritage business; two, to list the different options available and being considered to balance the interests of the different stakeholder groups? Landlords, of course, want higher rates, tenants want as low as possible, and the heritage folks want the nature of heritage to be preserved. So, questions for you, Sir.
\tDr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: I thank Ms Denise Phua for her supplementary questions. Indeed, when it comes to heritage businesses where there is so much character as well as value that they bring to the society, when one closes, it really hits the heart quite strongly, especially for the specific communities relating to Kampong Gelam, Chinatown as well as Little India.
The first question was relating to the source of the data and the Member alluded to the statement made by URA some days ago with regard to the moderate rental increases. The majority of leases in Kampong Gelam saw moderate rent increases below that of nominal GDP growth and comparable to the increases of conventional retail spaces in the Central Area. This is based on comprehensive rental records submitted for the stamp duty purposes. So, this is where URA's data came from. We understand that some of the data cited in some media reports may be based on anecdotal or incomplete data, and this data may not be representative of the overall rental situation in Kampong Gelam.
We note that the rentals might not be homogeneous across the entire district. As the Member has alluded to, the Kampong Gelam district is actually quite big. While the median rents of the historic shophouses in Kampong Gelam increased at a moderate pace, there was also a small proportion of leases signed between 2023 and 2025 which did see higher rental increases of 25% or higher. In this particular aspect, these included leases in streets with high footfall – in Kampong Gelam specifically, such as Haji Lane and Bali Lane. And some of these leases were previously contracted at below market rates, and therefore, subsequent to that, they may have experienced a larger increase from their low base when the rates normalised toward the prevailing market rate.
Notwithstanding the rental increases, their rental rates remained around 20% to 60% below that of conventional retail spaces in the Central Area as a whole.
On to the second question by the Member, with regard to the variety of views from the members of the public and from heritage groups, indeed, there are a wide variety of stakeholders interested in preserving our heritage as well as culture. Specific to that, the Member has already alluded to the promulgation of the Inter-Agency Task Force for Heritage Businesses, Traditional Activities and Cultural Life that brings together key agencies to develop policies and schemes to better support heritage businesses in historic districts.
In October 2025, NHB launched the SG Heritage Business Scheme to recognise heritage businesses and encourage public appreciation of their cultural value. Today, 42 businesses have been designated under the scheme, including 21 in Kampong Gelam and Chinatown. NHB's Organisation Transformation Grant also supports heritage businesses to adopt innovative projects for long-term viability.
So, we do recognise that it takes a whole-of-Government approach, spanning a few different Ministries, to be able to look at the heritage space. One aspect of it is with MND, but we are also working with the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth, which looks at NHB and certainly, with URA. In parallel, URA works with local business associations to curate and support businesses that contribute to the place identity of such historic districts.
It takes an entire village to be able to raise the awareness of heritage and its value for our society and that is something that the Government will continue to work towards.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Fadli Fawzi.
\tMr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. I have three supplementary questions. Firstly, in light of the sustained increase in shophouse transactions and prices over the past years, does the Government have any plans to extend the Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) and Seller's Stamp Duty (SSD) to commercial properties in heritage districts, considering their limited supply and heritage value?
My second supplementary question is, will the Government consider changing the way property tax is calculated for commercial purposes in heritage districts to incentivise or reward landlords who reduce the rents for their tenants and/or take steps to retain the character of their heritage district?
For my third supplementary question, I refer to my written Question No 66 on the Order Paper. I asked about the number of shophouses in Kampong Gelam that are on Wakaf land. I want to ask whether MND has any plans to work with Warees Investments to protect the cultural identity and historical value of such shophouses, and if not, why not?
\tDr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: I thank the Member for his three supplementary questions. The first, in relation to plans for ABSD or property tax changes to commercial property, there are no current plans that the Ministry has with regard to these two steps. With regard to the question on Wakaf land and shophouses within, I believe that is not within the remit of the questions that I will be answering for this set of Parliamentary Questions.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Nadia Samdin.
\tMs Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Thank you, Mr Speaker, and also to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the explanation. I would like to add two supplementary questions.
If I am not mistaken, there are already planning guidelines for the types of activities and use of premises in the areas closest to Sultan Mosque. Will the Government consider reviewing whether the coverage of that area should be extended to other parts of the Kampong Gelam area to ensure that business activities are aligned with cultural heritage values and local community functions, as well as promote suitable activities that foster local entrepreneurial spirit?
(In English): And the second supplementary question in English, please. Heritage districts, such as Kampong Gelam, often function not only as conserved heritage spaces but also as natural entry platforms for culturally rooted and community-based enterprises because they offer visibility, clustering effects and market access that support early brand formation. And I am sure many agree that there have been younger brands that have grown in Kampong Gelam, which introduced local flavours to the community and to tourists.
Has the Government considered whether conservation and place management approaches could also incorporate elements of business incubation and structured tenant mix to encourage some of these younger businesses?
\tDr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: I thank the Member for her two supplementary questions. With permission, I will answer both in English, even though I understood quite clearly the first question in Malay.
With regard to the Member's question on ensuring the appropriateness of the activity within the heritage district, which is her first question, and wanting to be able to strengthen the businesses there in keeping with the intent of the heritage districts, I wish to reassure the Member that to safeguard the vibrancy of our historic districts, whether they be Kampong Gelam, Chinatown or Little India, the URA has put in place controls to exclude non-heritage users, such as fast food restaurants, supermarkets and new bars, even to the extent of ensuring the number of souvenir shops are maintained by a certain measure, from the core areas of these historic districts. This helps to shape the tenant mix that aligns with the district's historic character as well as unique identity.
In terms of potential expansion of the space, I think the current delineation of the districts are also related to their historical significance to the community there. But that is something we can take back and see whether the borders of the district or certainly, the activities within the district, can be further expanded and enhanced. And that is certainly the intent – to be able to enrich and enliven the activities there.
On the Member's second question with regard to historic districts being a natural entry platform and clustering access especially for younger brands, I was at Kampong Gelam over the weekend where there was the Urban Arts Festival and certainly, there is also a very thriving youth community there. I wish to reassure the Member that the work continues through the work of the Inter-Agency Task Force where therein lies a very close partnership, for example, in the upcoming Ramadan bazaar between URA as well as Kampong Gelam Alliance. At the same time, you see similar patterns in the heritage district of Chinatown, where you find that the local community is there, including the People's Association as well as the Citizen's Consultative Committee (CCC), engaging the trade associations to promote the Chinese New Year Festive Fair this year.
So, you see that the partnership is not only on account of the Government alone, but also together with the ground, including the businesses, the trade associations as well as their relevant alliances within the heritage districts and also the natural organic community that arises from the different districts to make sure that our heritage districts continue to be protected and preserved, especially given the deep value that they have for our communities.
\tMr Speaker: Last supplementary question, Mr Saktiandi Supaat.
\tMr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I do not want to belabour the point that was raised earlier by earlier Members about the support for heritage-linked small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to balance between sustainability and market forces. It is especially so, with the closure of Pariaman, because a lot in the Malay community are very sad to hear about the closure of Pariaman. Many of us go there over the past decades. So, it is the multi-year food and beverage (F&B) businesses, such as those in the area, being affected, which affects some of those in the Malay community.
My question is, Mr Speaker, beyond this, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned about the Kampong Gelam Alliance, my main question is, in terms of support for businesses – not just F&B businesses around the Sultan Mosque area, but also, in general, heritage businesses – but in particular, for example, around the Sultan Mosque, some of the non-F&B businesses around the area provide a distinctive feel to the area around the Sultan Mosque.
My question is whether there will be further support, going forward, to work with the Kampong Gelam Alliance, or other alliances for that matter, in other heritage areas, and possibly with the SME Centres to make sure that we find out the issues that they face – whether it is non-rental or rental or manpower issues – so that they can be addressed beforehand. And whether there can be more proactive action to be done together with the Government and non-governmental consulting services to help them before they reach a situation where there is no turning back, so that we can maintain the distinctive feel of those businesses.
\tDr Syed Harun Alhabsyi: I thank the Member for his supplementary questions as well as his deep concern for the SMEs within the area, specifically Kampong Gelam.
As I mentioned in my Parliamentary Question reply, certainly, it is within the scope and attention of the Inter-Agency Task Force for Heritage Businesses, Traditional Activities and Cultural Life to be able to further amalgamate the interests and concerns of the diverse stakeholders, already mentioned by Ms Denise Phua earlier, to be able to understand and see how best we can move forward. It takes beyond the Government to be able to find some of the solutions as well as navigate through the different challenges and interests of the different stakeholders. And certainly, as alluded to by the Member earlier, we will be looking towards wanting to partner the different alliances and the different stakeholders to be able to find the most suitable outcome moving forward for our businesses.
To that end, I would also stretch it further. Beyond the aspects of costs, through the work of the SG Heritage Business Scheme, they have also looked at how to uplift the businesses, specifically the designated heritage businesses, in terms of marketing as well as consulting support. We have been working together. And the bazaar is one such example that is coming up, towards ensuring that the space is well and alive, where people come to congregate and also support the local businesses as well.
It continues to be a work-in-progress. It continues to be up to the stakeholders to be able to guide and support our businesses in turn, so that the heritage businesses can continue to flourish in the relevant districts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Appropriate Use of NRIC Numbers across Public and Private Sector Transactions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"The following question stood in the name of Mr Sharael Taha –
8 To ask the Minister for Digital Development and Information what progress has been made to ensure the appropriate use of citizens' NRIC numbers across both public and private sector transactions.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Question No 8.
The Minister of State for Digital Development and Information (Ms Jasmin Lau) (for the Minister for Digital Development and Information): In January 2025, the Government explained through a Ministerial Statement, its plans to improve the way National Registration Identity Card (NRIC) numbers are used. We are making progress in two main areas: stopping the misuse of NRIC numbers as passwords for authentication, in other words, to prove you are who you claim to be; and also, moving away from the use of partial NRIC numbers for identification. I will elaborate on these two areas.
First, we are committed to stopping the use of NRIC numbers for authentication. Your NRIC number should not be used like a password because other people might know it. Government agencies stopped this practice over a year ago and we are now working with private organisations to do the same. The Personal Data Protection Commission and Cyber Security Agency have issued guidance to all private organisations.
Government agencies, such as the Infocomm Media Development Authority, the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Ministry of Health, are also working with sectors like telecommunications, finance and insurance and healthcare to take action to stop this practice. While organisations will have adequate time to adjust their practices for compliance, those that flagrantly misuse NRIC numbers can be penalised under the Personal Data Protection Act.
Second, we are moving away from the use of partial NRIC numbers, starting with the public sector. Partial NRIC numbers, like the last four characters, are not reliable for identifying people because some individuals share the same partial NRIC numbers. Some individuals even share both the same name and partial NRIC number.
Government agencies are changing our practices in two ways. One, where there is no need to accurately identify someone, most agencies have stopped using the NRIC number completely. Two, where individuals must be identified accurately, agencies are starting to use the full NRIC number instead, such as in official documents like licences and employment letters issued by the Government.
For the private sector, the Government will consult the public before making any changes to guidelines for the use of partial NRIC numbers. We will ensure that we balance protecting personal data and meeting legitimate business needs.
Since June 2025, we have been educating the public about proper NRIC number use through social media, traditional media, roadshows and community touchpoints. We will continue our national campaign across multiple platforms in English and vernacular languages to raise public awareness and understanding on the proper use of NRIC numbers.
We recognise that organisations need time to adapt to these changes. During this transition period, we encourage the public to continue reporting cases where NRIC numbers are mishandled, as the feedback helps us ensure proper implementation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Take-up Rate of SkillsFuture-supported AI-related Training Course","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Mr Ng Chee Meng asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the take-up rate of AI-related skills training courses supported by SkillsFuture; and (b) whether the Ministry has targets on the number of workers, especially among professionals, managers and executives, who should go for such upskilling.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Education (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, there are around 1,600 artificial intelligence (AI)-related courses supported by SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG), with 137,000 training places taken up by more than 105,000 individuals last year.
AI has been advancing rapidly and has the potential to transform the way we work across industries and jobs. While we do not set targets specifically on the number of workers who go for AI training, we encourage all Singaporeans to pursue upskilling and lifelong learning to stay relevant, including by keeping abreast of AI and other developments. The Government will continue to support Singaporeans in their upskilling journey through substantial course fee subsidies as well as the SkillsFuture Credit to offset out-of-pocket costs.
Mr Speaker: Mr Ng.
\tMr Ng Chee Meng (Jalan Kayu): Thank you, Mr Speaker. There is indeed very good work done by the Ministry of Education and SSG in this area, and we are deeply appreciative. The 1,600 or so AI courses listed do cost a few hundred dollars to a few thousand dollars, even after funding. And for many workers, including professionals, managers and executives (PMEs), this myriad number of courses can be quite daunting for them to survey and find out what they should really be embarking on for equipping themselves to be AI-ready.
So, three supplementary questions. How can we better redesign our skills framework and courses to help our PMEs equip themselves to be AI-ready? Will SkillsFuture consider curating a list of courses tailored for PME needs, from foundational AI literacy to maybe more specific AI deep skills to tailor for their job roles or new possibilities? And lastly, for the PMEs who want to take higher level AI courses, would the Ministry or SSG consider additional targeted funding? Because some of these higher-level deep AI courses do cost a few thousand dollars after subsidy support. Can we consider targeted support, such as enhanced funding or even possibilities of workplace-supported learning?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Sir, I thank Mr Ng for his questions. The short answer to all three is that we will continue to review how we signpost, direct and curate courses, and encourage Singaporeans to take up these courses to be able to support their lifelong learning and make every opportunity that they are aspiring to available to them.
We are working with the industry to look to see how we develop the list of tasks and map them to the courses – to address his first point. We will continue to do so. We are trying to improve our signposting, both in terms of the websites, the online offerings as well as the counselling that people get, so that there is a sense of where the journey should take them as they develop their AI skills. And we will continue to review how we support Singaporeans through the variety of subsidies and funding arrangements.
Mr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. Just one supplementary question. Does the Government plan to track the deployment of individuals and workers at the workplace after their attendance of such AI courses, in view of the significant public subsidies that the Government expenses on these courses?
\tDr Janil Puthucheary: Certainly, we work closely with the economic agencies and the industry to understand how individuals who go through training then subsequently are deployed and use their skills.
The overall approach is there, but to say that we do so specifically for AI, may be a little bit harder. Because an AI course can be something introductory which someone needs in order to remain in their current job role and increase their productivity and efficiency, all the way through to a transformative course where they are pivoting to a different company, a different job role and a different career path.
But we will continue to study this and find ways to make sure that the type of support that we provide, the training that is made available, is best suited to the aspirations of the individual learner but also makes possible opportunities within our landscape.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"AI Adoption's Impact on Employment of Fresh Graduates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Assoc Prof Terence Ho asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the adoption of artificial intelligence is prompting employers to slow down the hiring of fresh graduates of Institutes of Higher Learning in certain sectors or occupations; and (b) whether the Ministry has plans to help boost the employability and opportunities available to fresh graduates facing such challenges.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Manpower (Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong) (for the Minister for Manpower): Mr Speaker, the employment rates of fresh graduates from the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) have remained broadly stable over the decade, with some year-to-year fluctuations due to cyclical changes. These fluctuations reflect a combination of factors, including broader economic uncertainty, geopolitical developments and changing career aspirations of graduates.
While artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping the labour market, its specific impact on entry-level professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) jobs remains uncertain.
To prepare graduates for the AI era, IHLs are working closely with sector agencies and industry partners to keep their curriculum relevant, integrating AI competencies, domain-specific training and core skills, like critical thinking, creativity and communication. These efforts are complemented by work-based learning programmes, such as the AI Apprenticeship Programme, which provide opportunities to apply AI skills in real workplace settings.
In this fast-changing environment, our students must continue to remain adaptable. We will support them to navigate their career pathways. Students and fresh graduates can access Education and Career Guidance services within their IHLs, as well as career matching and coaching services through programmes offered by Workforce Singapore (WSG) and the National Trades Union Congress' (NTUC's) Employment and Employability Institute (e2i).
In view of the heightened economic uncertainties in 2025, the Government introduced the GRaduate Industry Traineeships (GRIT) Programme to support young graduates to obtain industry-relevant experience and facilitate their transition to permanent employment.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Terence Ho.
\tAssoc Prof Terence Ho (Nominated Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. I just have two supplementary questions. One is, while I acknowledge that the outlook of the impact of AI is still uncertain, I am wondering, as more sectors and firms adopt AI at scale, whether the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) foresees that the impact on entry-level jobs may then be higher, whether judging from the trends observed in other countries or any incipient trends in Singapore.
The second question is that as many firms and organisations review their work processes to adopt AI, to leverage AI or automation, they are also looking at redesigning jobs. I wonder whether the Ministry will look into providing any support, not just for job redesign, but specifically for human-centric job redesign, such that AI will augment rather than displace human input.
\tMr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong: I thank Assoc Prof Ho for his two supplementary questions. For the first supplementary question, whether there are any impact or trends, MOM is currently monitoring and observing as well as getting feedback from the employers. And we will work with the employers closely, together with NTUC to see from a tripartite perspective whether more is needed to help abate these trends.
For the second question, you asked about job redesign. In fact, there are many aspects and provisions that we have done. We are encouraging job redesign. For example, WSG's Jobs Transformation Maps, which help guide employers and workers on how AI actually reshape roles and some of the required skills, enabling early job redesign rather than elimination of positions. There are other things that we are doing as well, in terms of strengthening entry level opportunities, for example, the AI Apprenticeship Programme, under the AI Strategy 2.0, which helps build a pipeline of young AI practitioners through on-the-job training.
The second one is also providing more support for reskilling, for example, the Infocomm Media Development Authority's Tech Skills Accelerator programme, as well as some of WSG's Career Conversion Programmes. So, these are a few programmes that the Member could consider.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Policy on Optimal Class Sizes Given Increasingly Complex Challenges Faced by Teachers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Minister for Education what is the Ministry's current position on optimal class sizes given recent findings that teachers face increasing complexity in their roles, including supporting students with diverse learning needs, mental health challenges and special educational needs.
\tThe Minister for Education (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her question. The Ministry of Education's (MOE's) approach for class sizes is guided by the learning needs of our students. More teaching resources are deployed for students with greater needs and hence, smaller class sizes for such students because they need more support and scaffolding.
Let me give you a few examples.
Primary 1 and 2 students learn in class sizes of around 30. Why? Because they have just started their educational journey and we want to be able to better support in that transition.
TRANsition Support for InTegration (TRANSIT) classes, conducted in even smaller class sizes of up to 10. Why? Because TRANSIT classes help our Primary 1 students who are identified with social and behavioural needs to develop foundational self-management skills when they start schools. In fact, recently, I sat in one of these TRANSIT classes to see how they carry out the approach, pedagogical as well as socio-emotional learning.
\t
Another example is the Learning Support Programme, conducted in pull-out classes of around eight to 10. Why? Because this is a specialised early intervention programme in our schools for lower primary students who need additional help with the English language.
School-based Dyslexia Remediation Programme, conducted in classes of four to six students. Why? Because with these special education needs, we want to better support them, because overcoming some of these challenges or managing these challenges, like dyslexia, allows them to access support for many other subjects.
With Full Subject-Based Banding, our secondary school students attend different subject classes of between 20 and 40 students, depending on their learning needs and the nature of the subject.
Additionally, schools may deploy two form teachers for classes on a needs basis where school resourcing allows.
Sir, class sizes are not the only way we support students with diverse learning needs. Schools also have school counsellors to strengthen the social-emotional skills of our students and the special education needs officers to provide learning and behavioural support for our students who need it. We have grown the number of trained school counsellors and special education needs officers in schools from around 800 to 1,300 over the past decade. We will continue to study the effectiveness of our approach, including on class sizes and are prepared to adjust our strategies where necessary to create conducive learning environments for our students.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Elysa Chen.
\tMs Elysa Chen (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, I thank the Minister for his response. It is heartening to know that MOE is already taking good steps in this direction. I wanted to ask the Minister, does the Minister agree that in a world with artificial intelligence (AI) disrupting the learning of content in a nation of smaller family sizes, it is even more important that children learn the soft skills which no machine can teach, and develop emotional and psychological strengths which only humans can nurture? And given that human mentoring and the learning of soft skills cannot scale so easily with technology, will MOE relook class sizes?
\tMr Desmond Lee: I thank the Member for recognising that social-emotional skills and competencies are important, not just now, but for a future, such as one where AI presents both opportunity, as well as uncertainty and disruption. Indeed, in our AI in education framework, we want to teach our children what is AI, how to use AI, how to learn with AI and most importantly, how to learn beyond AI.
And so, through the 21st Century Competencies Framework, which was recently enhanced, we seek to provide support and strengthen our children's learning of these important values and skills through a combination of weaving through academic subjects through co-curricular activities (CCA), Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) and other forms of support in school. And this means that teaching is not just academic teaching of subjects, but also more holistic teaching of a child and empowering them with 21st century competencies and social-emotional learning through activities like CCA.
So, with this in mind, we continue to see how best to support our children, and by putting more resources for students with greater needs, we ensure that they get more holistic support – not just through teaching support, but also support of Special Educational Needs Officers and counselling support.
\tMr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
\tAssoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Sir, there has been recent research in the cognitive sciences that suggest that the biology of learning is such that humans tend to retain information and understand best when they are interacting with another human. I understand, as the Minister has shared, that advances in learning technology, especially AI, now afford customised education. But based on this research, it seems like such customised education is not a justifiable substitute.
To this end, I wonder if the Ministry will therefore look at alternatives other than purely reducing class sizes, such as the possibility of increasing allied teachers or teaching assistants within the classroom? And if so, what the Minister has to share with regard to the decision by the Ministry to scale back on allied educators when it comes to teaching and learning?
\tMr Desmond Lee: I think the Member makes a very good observation. I thank him for supporting the move to augment our teaching force with allied educators, particularly in the form of school counsellors, special educational needs officers, as well as the outdoor education allied educators. The shift from the existing scheme to one where we focus on these allied educator professions, enables us to specialise the support that we give to our children.
The Member is also absolutely right that edtech is important. Edtech allows for some degree of customisation. Edtech, including AI in the Singapore Student Learning Space (SLS), for instance, allows our children to get extra scaffolding and support in class and outside the class; in school and outside the school. But there is no substitute for human-based teaching, for the human touch, for the teacher in the classroom to be able to coach a child, to be able to teach the class; not just subject matter, but also demonstrate values and social-emotional skills that are very important in day-to-day life. In that regard, edtech is never a substitute for the human touch, and I would like to thank the Member for being so supportive.
\tMr Speaker: Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh.
\tAssoc Prof Kenneth Goh (Nominated Member): Thank you, Speaker. And I thank the Minister for his responses to the questions. I have a question about the resourcing of schools. I think the Minister mentioned that the class size, the teacher-student ratio will be dependent on whether the school has resources. And my question is, is there some sort of a threshold or target that helps school leaders or MOE determine when there is enough resources to support their students in this regard?
\tMr Desmond Lee: Indeed, this is a continuous conversation between our school leaders, who are in touch with the ground, in close contact with their teachers in the classroom, as well as their MOE headquarters (HQ) leadership – our superintendent, zonal directors, director of schools and the HQ in general – to better understand the specific needs of different schools and to be able to allocate resources accordingly.
Of course, there is baseline support in terms of teaching, allied resources and admin staff for each school. But there may be needs in particular schools that require us to deploy, say, more counsellors or more student welfare officers or more special educational needs officers. And some of these resources are not just school-based, but also cluster-based, giving flexibility to school leaders to be able to ask and get more resources.
But ultimately, whether it is class sizes or other forms of resources, basically, our mission in MOE is this: we have our resources; we also have to operate within constraints, because MOE does not operate our budget independently of other Ministries' needs and Singapore's needs, as well as the opportunities that are presented to us, such as new studies, new pedagogical methods, new methods to impart social-emotional learning. How do we optimise between our resources, operate within constraints and the opportunities we seize? How do we optimise between these three in order to achieve the goal of holistic development of our children and helping the most instrumental group – our teachers and our allied educators – to be able to manage their workload to work with meaning and impact, so that they can again help us to achieve holistic development of the next generation?
And so, it is this combination that makes us focus the resources that we have now on students with greater needs; whether because of their youth, Primary 1, Primary 2; or because they have special education needs, like dyslexia; or because they may have other challenges, for example, they learn at different levels. So, Full Subject-Based Banding does require more resources to help students who may need more support for certain subjects.
And to talk about class sizes, if we were to increase the number of teachers, then we need to operate within the constraint of the impact on other important sectors that serve society. We also need to make sure that in hiring many more teachers, our profession reminds us that we must uphold standards and quality of the whole profession. And if we were to increase the number of classes that teachers teach, then, in managing overall workload and impact, we will then have to recalibrate and reimagine what teachers do on a day-to-day basis.
In some countries teachers teach many more classes, partially because of workload and resourcing. But if in Singapore, if we were to do that, it would probably have to be a combination of three things: one, increasing recruitment; two, increasing the number of classes that teachers teach; and then, recalibrating the other things that teachers do – CCA, CCE, admin, class preparation, marking and so on. And lastly, of course, harnessing technology tools, including AI, to empower teacher to do so much more.
The classroom of today is very different from the classroom of our time. We can continue to see progress and changes; and I would say three things are on the horizon that will allow us to try to transform education to make Singapore ready for a very uncertain future, one that is still full of opportunity and hope.
One, would be the review that we announced recently, the education conversations that we hold across Singapore to allow us to relook at the academic race, the \"arms race\", so that we focus on deep learning and not academic pursuits through high stakes exams. And in the same vein, we look at holistic education through a review of CCE and CCA, so we see it in totality. That is a major exercise.
The other, of course, is the AI in education framework that I mentioned. And it is not just about edtech and tools, but how do we reimagine teaching in an era where AI can do certain things, do more things and how can people remain on top as masters of technology? So, these are the areas that we are looking at.
And, of course, more holistic support for children coming from families with greater challenges; how do we better support and integrate with the social services around us?
So, these are three of the many ongoing, as well as impending, reviews, including the 2024 Reimagining the Teaching Profession Taskforce recommendations that are still ongoing, in terms of application and implementation, that will require us to relook at how the classroom is like for the future and the kinds of needs that we will have to support our children.
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cooperation with Foreign Jurisdictions to Disrupt Cross-border Vape Supply Chains","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Mr Jackson Lam asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) how the Ministry works with overseas platforms and foreign jurisdictions to disrupt cross-border vape supply chains; and (b) how effective have current blocking and takedown measures been over the past two years.
\tThe Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA), the Central Narcotics Bureau and the Singapore Police Force (SPF) engage in information sharing with their foreign counterparts. With the help of intelligence sharing, in 2025, joint operations between the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) and ICA detected 59 large-scale smuggling cases, seizing around 230,000 e-vaporisers and related products.
HSA works with e-commerce, social media and messaging platforms to remove online listings of e-vaporisers. HSA also collaborates with the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) and the Online Criminal Harms Act Office under SPF to block e-vaporiser websites targeting locals. Over 10,000 online advertisements, including those found on messaging platforms, were removed in 2024 and 2025.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Lam.
\tMr Jackson Lam (Nee Soon): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two supplementary questions. First supplementary question, what proportion of the vape listings removed were hosted on overseas platform beyond Singapore's jurisdiction? Second, whether stronger legal tools are needed to address overseas-based sellers?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: Mr Speaker, to date, from our records, approximately 99% of the sites taken down are linked to overseas posts that appear on platforms, like Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, WeChat, YouTube and Telegram, and the remaining are more local platforms like Carousel and Lazada.
On the second question, certainly, we will continue to look at how to improve our efforts in enforcement, but we are not without levers. We already have a cadence of operations that HSA does. On a daily basis, there is a surveillance done with bots to target commercial sites, to trawl and see what other sites that are offending that we need to take down. This is complimented by the efforts by HSA officers who look at the social media sites. We also work off the tip-offs, ad hoc tip-offs from public and partner agencies. Once the offending sites are taken down, we will work together with IMDA, SPF and the Online Criminal Health Acts Office to block specific vape commercial sites.
So, there are already efforts in place and also, we look at the various platforms on a regular basis to see how we can further improve our efforts. This is an ongoing effort. We do take a multi-pronged approach as well. It is not just about the enforcement but also about educating the public and our people in understanding and reporting some of these sites that are available online.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Details on Stepped-up Surveillance for Central Kitchens, Including Different Classification for those Supplying School Meals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"13 Mr David Hoe asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what does the targeted and stepped-up surveillance entail in practice for central kitchens under SFA's risk-based food safety inspection regime; and (b) whether SFA will consider classifying central kitchens supplying school meals as a distinct higher-risk tier and subjecting them to sustained stepped-up surveillance, in view of large volumes served to children and heightened consequences and disruptions from any lapse.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Goh Hanyan) (for the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment): Central kitchens are licensed by the Singapore Food Agency (SFA). They are subjected to more frequent inspections as they have a larger scale of food processing or preparation. This is consistently applied to central kitchens and caterers serving all consumers, including other vulnerable consumers such as persons in nursing homes.
In addition, central kitchens are graded under the Safety Assurance for Food Establishment (SAFE) framework. In the event of a major food safety lapse, they will be downgraded upon completion of suspension or Court conviction and inspected more regularly. The up-to-date representation of the establishment’s food safety performance via its SAFE grade allows service buyers and consumers to have a peace of mind to make more informed decisions on the food establishment to procure from.
Since August 2025, SFA has stepped up checks on central kitchens supplying school meals under the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) Central Kitchen Meal Model programme.
SFA and the Communicable Diseases Agency will continue to work closely with MOE schools and their appointed central kitchens to strengthen the food safety management systems from kitchens to when the food is transported, stored and distributed for consumption.
\tMr Speaker: Mr David Hoe.
\t\tMr David Hoe (Jurong East-Bukit Batok): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for her response, in particular, about the frequent inspection for the central kitchen. Against this backdrop, I have four supplementary questions.
First, let me begin upstream. What kind of assurance does SFA give on compliance and safety for ingredient suppliers to our central kitchens? Because they prepare and they distribute quite a significant amount of food.
On the second topic – which would be about our target population, which is our children – beyond frequent inspection would the Ministry consider placing more safeguards on central kitchens, given the vulnerable young children and also the impact if such lapses were to occur again?
Third, on operator selection. What assurance mechanism would there be for schools to be confident that the central kitchen operators are fully compliant with SFA requirements, not only just at appointment, but on an ongoing basis?
Lastly, before food distribution, what kind of requirements and checks must be met before it is being sent out? And in light of the recent incident, would SFA consider tightening the requirements before food can be sent out?
\tMs Goh Hanyan: Sir, I thank the Member for his four supplementary questions. I will reply in turn.
The first one was about assurance around ingredient suppliers in central kitchens. First, SFA requires all importers and manufacturers to comply with food safety requirements and central kitchens and in fact, all food establishments should source from these licensed importers and manufacturers. SFA also, of course, inspects central kitchens to ensure food handling is done properly and there is proper segregation between raw ingredients and food products. That is for the first supplementary question from the Member.
The second one was about what we can do beyond more frequent inspections. As I covered in my main reply, beyond more frequent inspections, and this is largely due to the larger scale of food preparation and processing that caterers and central kitchens do, additional inspections are also done on these central kitchens if they are found to have repeated food safety lapses. So, there is an additional step-up in terms of frequency of inspections.
I think it is also important to then note that these gastroenteritis outbreaks are due to more than one factor usually. And this is not just from issues that arise from the central kitchens but also could be due to onsite handling and preparation issues or it could be due to handling during the transportation process by the transport service provider. So, it requires then SFA to work with all the relevant stakeholders to ensure that our food management system addresses all points of this process.
The third part, in terms of operator selection, the Member asked on assurance mechanisms. As part of licensing conditions, the central kitchens do have to implement food safety measures and of course, as the regulator, SFA then conducts inspections to ensure compliance. At the same time, there were some Parliamentary Questions filed on the SAFE framework that was just launched. Phase 1 was implemented on 19 January 2026. For all Government procurement, we then take into consideration the SAFE grades of these suppliers and central kitchen providers to ensure that they have a proper track record of food safety, due to past inspections and the results of that. This is a shift from the annual snapshot assessments that the previous grading system was based on.
And lastly, there was also a question around pre-distribution requirements for central kitchens to adhere to. There are a couple of requirements under SFA's licensing requirements. For example, adopting a uni-directional process, meaning that it helps to segregate ready-to-eat from non-ready-to-eat food products. This ensures that there is no cross contamination. We also require them to identify what we call critical control points along the food preparation process and this helps to monitor potential risks in critical junctures of the food handling process within the central kitchens.
And finally, we also then require appointment of a food hygiene officer to oversee the implementation of these measures.
So, holistically this helps to hopefully ensure that there is some level of standards before these foods are distributed out of the central kitchens.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancing Food Safety Measures Following Recent Gastroenteritis Cases at Primary Schools and Incentives for Operators of School Canteens","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"14 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Government will proactively engage displaced food and beverage operators to mitigate the ongoing shortage of canteen operators in schools; and (b) whether the Government will consider incentivising such pivots, providing these operators with stable, low-rental business environments while ensuring students have access to affordable quality meals.
15 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the 60 gastroenteritis cases at River Valley Primary School are linked to the food provided under the new Central Kitchen Meal Model; (b) what steps will be taken to strengthen food safety at the school; and (c) whether any punitive actions will be taken against the caterer, and if not, why not.
16 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education in light of recent gastroenteritis incidents at River Valley and North View Primary Schools (a) what checks are in place (i) at school level and (ii) at Ministry level to ensure food safety; and (b) whether the Ministry has examined evidence on the quality and safety of food prepared in central kitchens versus onsite preparation.
17 Mr Foo Cexiang asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry has considered paying individual hawkers to set up stalls in the school canteen to sell cooked food.
18 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Education (a) how many days after adopting the Central Kitchen Meal Model did the River Valley Primary School gastroenteritis outbreak occur; (b) whether central kitchen operators must meet Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) standards and the three-zone hygiene system as required in Japan; and (c) whether the Ministry will publish food safety audit results for all such operators.
19 Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan asked the Minister for Education with regard to the Central Kitchen Meal Model where a single operator serves multiple schools (a) what risk assessment framework has the Ministry developed to address the concentration of food safety risk across multiple school populations; and (b) whether there is a cap on the number of schools a single central kitchen operator can supply to.
20 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Minister can provide an update on the case where 147 North View Primary School pupils suffered suspected gastroenteritis symptoms; and (b) how the Ministry has been supporting affected students and their families.
The Minister of State for Education (Ms Jasmin Lau) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, my response will address the questions raised by Members on the Central Kitchen Meal Model and other school canteen matters. May I have Mr Speaker’s permission to answer oral Question Nos 14 to 20 and written Question Nos 45, 46 and 54 on today’s Order Paper?
Mr Speaker: Go ahead.
Ms Jasmin Lau: My response will also cover related oral and written questions filed for subsequent Sittings from Ms Lee Hui Ying, Ms Joan Pereira1, Ms Elysa Chen2 and Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim.
As parents and Members of this House, we all understand how important school meals are for our children's growth and well-being. The Ministry of Education (MOE) is fully committed to ensuring that every student has access to affordable, nutritious and balanced meals.
For decades, we have relied on individual stallholders running our canteen stalls – the familiar model many of us grew up with, where we fondly remember our favourite uncle or auntie serving our go-to dishes. We always looked forward to recess and lunch. Today, 95% of our schools continue with this trusted approach, and stallholders have been doing an excellent job providing affordable and healthy meals to our students.
However, we do face a real challenge. An increasing number of schools are struggling to fill their vacant canteen stalls, leaving students, especially those with dietary needs, very limited options. In some cases, these students may have to eat the same dish for weeks; and as parents, all of us would want our children to have a better experience.
Mr Louis Chua, Miss Rachel Ong, Ms Lee Hui Ying and Mr Foo Cexiang asked whether additional measures would be provided to sustain individual stallholders.
Let me first assure all Members that MOE provides substantial support to help our stallholders succeed because we believe that their food and their presence can add to the positive school experience for our students. Stallholders pay very low rentals of between five and 15 dollars per month, and we waive these during school holidays when there are no customers. We also seek preferential electricity tariffs through demand aggregation and we pass these savings directly to stallholders. We regularly review our food pricing guidelines to ensure that stallholder operations can remain viable while keeping the meals affordable for our students and their families.
But the challenges go deeper than just costs. School canteens have a small customer base and limited business hours due to the school schedules. Elderly stallholders may also start to have regular medical appointments and may not be able to operate their stalls daily. This is a complex issue with no easy solutions, but we will continue to explore new ways and different ways to support our stallholders.
Mr Louis Chua asked about the number of schools that MOE expects to adopt the Central Kitchen Meal Model by 2030. We did not start the Central Kitchen Meal Model so as to replace the traditional canteen model. We wanted to explore alternative models to help our schools that were struggling to attract stallholders and had severe shortages of functioning stalls. We want to avoid putting students in these schools at risk of not having good access to affordable, nutritious and balanced meals.
So, we started with a pilot at Yusof Ishak Secondary School, which relocated from Bukit Batok to Punggol and did not have existing stallholders at the Punggol site. After seeing positive results, we decided to try out a range of Central Kitchen Meal Models in 13 additional schools that faced challenges in securing sufficient stallholders. This allowed students in these schools to continue to have access to healthy and affordable food options.
We will explore the Central Kitchen Meal Model only with schools with such difficulties. We have no intention to scale this to all schools, nor do we have a target in mind.
Ms Joan Pereira and Ms Elysa Chen asked about our openness to other models. We are indeed taking an open and flexible approach, and hence, we are trying out a range of possible models. Some schools are using hybrid models, where operators both deliver pre-ordered meals as well as prepare fresh food onsite. In several schools, students can still choose and watch their meals being prepared at live cooking stations, alongside having the pre-ordered options. We will continue to look at different options that best serve our students’ needs and refine the model based on feedback.
We do see some positive outcomes in our schools. Students spend less time queuing for food during recess and have more time for play and interaction with one another. Parents have also shared that they now know what their children eat in school and can better support their children in achieving a balanced diet. Our teachers also now have access to a wider range of meal options in school.
We appreciate the concern that many Members have shown towards the stallholders affected by the transition in schools that are trying out the new models. I want to assure Members that our schools have been actively supporting the stallholders throughout this process. Several of them have joined our three operators and now enjoy more stable income. Others have found placements at different schools, pursued new opportunities, or chosen to retire. MOE continues to welcome applications from anyone interested in operating school canteen stalls, including private entities for schools with persistent vacancies. All available opportunities are listed on our website.
Several Members asked about food safety measures and the applicable good hygiene standard. Food prepared by central kitchens is not inherently unsafe or less safe. Central kitchens are licensed by the Singapore Food Agency (SFA). They are subjected to more frequent inspections, as explained by Senior Parliamentary Secretary Goh Hanyan, as they have a larger scale of food processing or preparation. In addition, central kitchens are graded under the Safety Assurance for Food Establishment framework. In the event of a major food lapse, they will be downgraded and inspected even more frequently.
MOE will continue to work with SFA, the Communicable Diseases Agency (CDA) and the operators to strengthen food safety management systems. This covers everything from preparation at the central kitchens to transportation, storage and eventually, when the food is served to the students.
\t
Ms Lee Hui Ying asked for data on gastroenteritis cases from January 2022 to December 2025. The number of gastroenteritis incidents in schools have averaged six cases a year in the past three years across all food service models.
Many Members also asked about the recent suspected gastroenteritis incidents in River Valley Primary School and North View Primary School. SFA, CDA and MOE are still investigating the causes for both incidents.
River Valley Primary School currently uses one of our Central Kitchen Meal Model operators, while North View Primary School has traditional stallholders. Both schools immediately stepped up the cleaning and sanitisation of their canteens and premises. Students were also reminded about good personal hygiene and to rest at home if they are unwell. Throughout both incidents, the schools maintained close, regular communication with parents and caregivers and continue to work vigilantly with SFA and CDA to monitor any developments. At both schools, all affected students have returned to school.
While the investigations continue, we have reinforced with the Central Kitchen Meal Model operator at River Valley Primary School and also with the stallholders at North View Primary School the critical importance of maintaining the highest food safety standards and full compliance with SFA requirements. This includes kitchen cleanliness and safe food handling practices.
Ms Eileen Chong and Mr Fadli Fawzi asked about our protocols for suspension, termination and contingency measures. Where food safety breaches are detected, whether at central kitchens or individual stalls, SFA takes immediate enforcement action and requires rectifications. Operations may be suspended or terminated for severe food safety breaches or ongoing disease transmission, with other punitive actions considered based on the findings.
For schools using our Central Kitchen Meal Model operators, MOE has established contingency protocols to ensure that students will continue to have access to school meals. These include activation of alternative central kitchens, while implementing more permanent solutions. We have also taken a cautious approach by limiting each operator to just serving just four or five schools. This helps to contain the impact of any operational issues and also allows us to observe different operators' performance and have back-up options ready if needed.
Mr Speaker: Minister of State, if I could just interrupt you for a moment. I believe Leader wishes to move a Motion.
SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS
(Extension of Question Time)
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, as we have gone past the usual time for Parliamentary Questions, but at the same time, this is a topic of some public interest, I wish to seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that Question Time at this day's Sitting be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 22(1) so as to enable the questions for oral answer to continue until the completion of Question No 20, including relevant supplementary questions thereon.
Mr Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Leader have the general assent of hon Members present to so move?
[(proc text) Hon Members indicated assent. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Leader, please proceed.
[(proc text) With the consent of Mr Speaker, and the general assent of Members present, (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, that notwithstanding Standing Order No 22(1), Question Time at this day's Sitting continue until the completion of Question No 20 including relevant supplementary questions thereon. – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Minister of State Lau, you may continue.
ENHANCING FOOD SAFETY MEASURES FOLLOWING RECENT GASTROENTERITIS CASES AT PRIMARY SCHOOLS AND INCENTIVES FOR OPERATORS OF SCHOOL CANTEENS
(Resumption for Question Nos 14 to 20)
\tMs Jasmin Lau: While the Central Kitchen Meal Model operators have had some initial pre-ordering problems in the first few weeks, the situation has stabilised. We will continue to monitor the performance of the operators closely and also actively take in feedback from students, parents and teachers.
I want to end by thanking Members for the concern for our students and for the stallholders, and for the many good suggestions that had come in. We are committed to providing every student access to affordable and healthy meal options in our schools. We will continue to listen, to learn and to adapt to serve and support our children better.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Hany Soh. You are partially blocked.
\tMs Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Speaker, it is rather unfortunate that we have experienced two incidents at the very early stage of the school reopening, where many of our little ones, especially the Primary 1 students have just entered schools, and the incidents happened in primary schools in this instance. I believe this has invariably caused some anxiety for parents, especially for those whose children have just entered primary schools for the very first time.
In this regard, can I ask the Ministry, how has MOE worked with the schools to communicate updates to the parents and what has been the feedback received thus far in relation to the handling of these issues on the ground in the schools?
The second supplementary question is whether, following from these incidents, we are ramping up our efforts in raising more awareness and encouraging our students to practise good personal hygiene?
\t
\tMs Jasmin Lau: I thank the Member for her questions. First, when suspected incidents do happen, the schools monitor the well-being of the students very closely through daily checks on attendance or when students exhibit or report symptoms. They then check with students who are absent from class to make sure that the students are okay, or to check in if there is a pattern of the cases emerging.
Both cases are still under investigation, so we are not able to say for certainty if the incidents resulted from the operators' management of the food or from the stallholders' management of the food. But indeed, in both cases, the schools have reminded the students about good personal hygiene and have communicated throughout the incidents with parents to assure them that sanitation and cleaning has been done throughout the school premises.
We definitely hope to do more education about food safety, but also about the Central Kitchen Meal Model in general to Singapore. Again, because this is really to ensure that all students have access to good and affordable options.
\tMr Speaker: There are still many Members who wish to ask questions. While we have extended Question Time, my request is to Members as well as Minister of State Lau to keep the questions and the answers succinct. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
\tAssoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Sir, I acknowledge Minister of State Lau's response about how there is no inherent difference between the safety of central kitchen versus onsite preparation. But my supplementary question has to do with the quality of meals, specifically along the dimension of variety.
As a parent of a very picky six-year-old eater, I am sympathetic to arguments that that the kind of food that the central kitchen may serve up on any given day may simply be forgone by such students. Setting aside how we really need to expand our daughter's palate, is the Ministry concerned that the central kitchen model may inadvertently give rise to nutritional deficiencies among a certain segment of this student population?
\t
\tMs Jasmin Lau: I thank the Member for his question. Our Central Kitchen Meal Model operators currently have between six and 14 options a day, and the menu does change on a weekly basis.
The meals are also checked by MOE to ensure nutritional sufficiency. In fact, many parents of students who are in the schools with Central Kitchen Meal Models now do say that now they know what their kids are eating in school and they are able to view the meal options as well as the nutritional value of the meals through the apps where they do the pre-ordering.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Foo Cexiang.
\tMr Foo Cexiang (Tanjong Pagar): Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for her really empathetic response and I, in particular, appreciate the support that MOE has given our individual stallholders.
My supplementary question is really my main question, which is, has MOE considered paying individual hawkers to set up stalls in the canteen?
And I ask that for the same reason that Minister of State raised in the speech, because if our objective is affordable, nutritious and balanced meals, I can understand that where you do not have individual food stallers who want to do so, you turn to the central kitchen model. But if our objective on top of that is the positive school experience where the canteen and school is a microcosm society of the hawker centres in the public spaces, then where there is a dearth of individual stallholders, would it not be then time for the Government to consider paying people to provide this experience for our students?
\t
\tMs Jasmin Lau: I thank the Member for his question. First, in the Central Kitchen Meal Model, in many of the operations now, there is still a live stall where students can interact with stallholders and humans as they decide what kind of food they want to buy. But we are not closed to the idea of any model at all out there that could give our students access to good, affordable and healthy food. We are not closed to any model.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Fadli Fawzi.
\tMr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Speaker, I have two supplementary questions. Firstly, if there are other further cases of gastroenteritis in schools using the Central Kitchen Meal Model, will the Government consider returning to the traditional canteen model or any other catering model for schools, such as the onsite central kitchens located within the school itself?
Second, the Minister of State mentioned that challenges for traditional kitchens go beyond cost. How will the Government make the traditional canteen model more attractive for vendors?
\t
\tMs Jasmin Lau: I thank the Member for his questions. First, I need to reiterate that the investigation is still underway. So, we should not assume that the Central Kitchen Meal Model was the reason for the gastroenteritis cases. But indeed, if the results do show that, I think we would definitely have to take a look to ensure that central kitchen models do not undermine the safety of the food that we give to our students.
I mentioned in my reply earlier that we will look at all types of ways to support our stallholders better. As Mr Foo Cexiang had asked, we are open to all possible models, including paying the stallholders, if need be, to and again, ensure that our students have good access to healthy and affordable food.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Kenneth Tiong.
\tMr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. Two supplementary questions.
Firstly, since 2005, Japan has employed diet and nutrition teachers, professionals who hold both a nutritionist qualification and teaching licence in schools to create menus, oversee food safety and teach nutrition in the classroom. Will the Government consider making similar nutrition and safety roles accredited professionals? That is my first question.
The second supplementary question: I quote The Straits Times on their reporting of the River Valley Primary school case, \"Some parents told ST that their children had noticed the chicken on the pizza tasting a bit strange. A few parents said their children were fine after consuming the pizza as they had picked the chicken off. A pupil told his mother that the chicken did not smell good but he ate it anyway and had diarrhoea the next day.\" So, can I just ask what is the status of the investigation into the chicken? If it was the chicken, how did it make it past the food hygiene officer?
\t
\tMs Jasmin Lau: On dietary teachers, I think that was the term the Member used, and food safety officers, in Singapore, we do work closely with the Health Promotion Board to ensure that the food that we provide to all our students from preschool to primary school to secondary schools have good nutritional value and meet the needs of our students. We also have food hygiene officers in our schools with the Central Kitchen Meal Models, and they do make checks on the way that the food is handled to make sure that the food is safe.
On the second question, I would suggest that the Member wait for the investigation results before talking more about the River Valley Primary case.
Mr Speaker: End of Question Time. Senior Minister of State Janil, did you want to make a clarification?
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Minister for Education regarding the Central Kitchen Meal Model for some schools, whether the Ministry would consider an alternative model where the meals and food are prepared onsite at the school premises, to prevent food spoilage due to transportation or storage.","2 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Minister for Education in light of the recent gastroenteritis outbreak at River Valley Primary School under the new Central Kitchen Meal Model which highlighted potential vulnerabilities of centralised food service provision, will the Ministry consider implementing a single central cafeteria in each school to better address food safety concerns while still providing economies and retaining benefits of children’s interactions with localised stall-keepers."],"footNoteQuestions":["14","15","16","17","18","19","20"],"questionNo":"14-20"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Janil Puthucheary): Thank you, Mr Speaker, for the opportunity to clarify.
Sir, in my reply to Question No 1 through to Question No 5, and in the answer to the supplementary questions, I repeatedly referenced the point that producers of 80% of beverage containers registered under the scheme would see a price increase of three to four cents per container. I understand that on one occasion I said, \"an increase of 3% to 4%\". [Please refer to \"Mitigating Cost Impact on Customers with Beverage Container Return Scheme's Roll-out in April 2026\", Official Report, 3 February 2026, Vol 96, Issue 15, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
My apologies. This is incorrect. And all instances should state three to four cents per container. Thank you, Sir.
Mr Speaker: Order. Introduction of Government Bills.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Coastal Protection and Other Amendments Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Public Utilities Act 2001 and the Sewerage and Drainage Act 1999, and make related and consequential amendments to certain Acts, for coastal protection purposes, and to make other amendments to the Public Utilities Act 2001 and the Sewerage and Drainage Act 1999 concerning utilities\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien) read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Suspension of Standing Orders to Allow Senior Minister of State and Minister of State to Speak More than Once, and to Remove Time Limit for Speeches","subTitle":"Suspension of Standing Orders","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Speaker: Before I call on the Acting Minister, Leader.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the proceedings under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(3) to enable Senior Minister of State Ms Sim Ann and Minister of State Mr Baey Yam Keng to speak more than once in respect of their speeches for the Second Reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill; and also, be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(8) to remove the time limits in respect of Senior Minister of State Ms Sim Ann's and Minister of State Mr Baey Yam Keng's speeches for the Second Reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill.
Ordinarily, a Member, other than the mover of the Bill, will only have the right to speak once. Acting Minister Jeffrey Siow will be moving the Second Reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill and will speak on the amendments pertaining to the Electronic Road Pricing 2.0 system and serious vehicular offences.
I understand Minister of State Mr Baey Yam Keng will speak on the active mobility related amendments and Senior Minister of State Ms Sim Ann, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs, will speak on the new offences and increase in penalties relating to the speed limiters and other miscellaneous amendments.
Senior Minister of State Sim Ann and Minister of State Baey will, in the course of the debate, have to respond to queries and clarifications from Members, and although their speeches, they assure me, are short and keeping it tight, they may not be able to complete within the time limit. And so, as a matter of precaution, I am asking to lift the time limit in respect of their speeches.
Mr Speaker: I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of hon Members present to so move.
[(proc text) Hon Members indicated assent. (proc text)]
[(proc text) With the consent of Mr Speaker and the general assent of Members present, (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved,\t\"That the proceedings under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No 48(3) to enable Senior Minister of State Ms Sim Ann and Minister of State Mr Baey Yam Keng to speak more than once for the Second Reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill; and also, be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order 48(8) to remove the time limits in respect of Senior Minister of State Ms Sim Ann's and Minister of State Mr Baey Yam Keng's speeches for the Second Reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill.– [Ms Indranee Rajah.] (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Land Transport and Related Matters Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Acting Minister for Transport.
The Acting Minister for Transport (Mr Jeffrey Siow): Mr Speaker, Sir, I move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
The Land Transport and Related Matters Bill is an omnibus Bill that regularises provisions across several existing Acts. It is also a joint Bill by the Ministry of Transport (MOT) and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) covering several key areas.
I will speak on amendments pertaining to the Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) 2.0 system and increasing penalties for serious vehicular offences. Minister of State Baey Yam Keng will introduce amendments related to active mobility, including regulations on personal mobility aids (PMAs), and the keeping of unsafe personal mobility devices (PMDs). Senior Minister of State Sim Ann will address the MHA components of this Bill, including penalties for speed limiter offences.
The transition to ERP 2.0 has been discussed extensively in this House before. But let me recap quickly why we need ERP 2.0 and the benefits that it will bring.
The current ERP system has been in place since 1998. In combination with vehicle ownership policies, road pricing has kept traffic congestion in check during the peak hours. However, after almost three decades, the current ERP system is reaching its end of life. Replacing obsolete components and infrastructure had become unsustainably challenging and expensive. Hence, in 2013, we decided to prepare to move to a new ERP 2.0 system using Global Navigation Satellite System technology.
While ERP 2.0 was intended to be a step up, providing useful features for motorists such as real-time traffic information, it was nevertheless based on prevailing technology in 2013. The implementation of ERP 2.0 took longer than initially planned. Technology has improved since 2013. Some features envisioned for the On-Board Unit (OBU), such as displaying charging information and traffic alerts, can now also be done via other means, for example, on smartphones. Nevertheless, the ERP 2.0 design, with an OBU, remained fit for purpose for accurate and efficient road charging.
Since we first began the OBU installation exercise in 2024, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) has received much feedback. LTA has taken the feedback on board and this has helped to improve the user experience. For instance, after feedback, vehicle owners were given the option to choose not to have a display screen, which would be more similar to the ERP 1.0 experience. But I note that in the end, the vast majority of car owners chose to install display screens.
To date, more than 90% of vehicles have the OBU installed. And having tried out the new OBU, more motorists have now given positive feedback. Motorists tell us that they find some features useful, such as car park availability, reminders on speed limits and bus lanes in operation.
We have been introducing these and other new features progressively. Since September last year, motorists can use the OBU to pay for missed ERP charges by simply clicking a button. Soon, motorists will be able to use the OBU for contactless toll payments at land checkpoints as well as for roadside electronic parking. This is why we are introducing clauses 59 to 64 in this Bill to simplify settlement processes and to decriminalise missed ERP charges, which are currently an offence under the Road Traffic Act.
Compared to ERP 1.0, ERP 2.0 will be more precise and finer in targeting road congestion. It allows us to introduce new charging points without the need for expensive and large physical gantries. We can also spread out ERP charges in smaller amounts across several locations as opposed to just one location and this will be fairer.
At this point, let me reassure motorists that we will be judicious in adding new charging points, doing so only when needed at persistent congestion hotspots.
My intent is to ensure a smooth transition so that the ERP 2.0 experience will be as similar as possible to the ERP 1.0 experience, as we switch over. This means that we will not be introducing distance-based charging in the immediate term. Distance-based charging is something that we will continue to study and explore after motorists have gotten more used to the new system and the situation is more stable.
I want to thank the 93% of vehicle owners who have already installed the OBU. For the remaining ones, LTA is issuing a final reminder. These vehicle owners, who have already been previously notified, will have another three months to install their OBUs at no cost. After that, OBU installation fees will apply. So, I strongly encourage the remaining vehicle owners who are holding out to install their OBUs as soon as possible.
On 1 January 2027, when the ERP 2.0 is completely rolled out and ERP 1.0 is decommissioned, the OBU will be mandatory for all Singapore-registered vehicles. This is because ERP 2.0 uses satellite technology, rather than gantries, to determine the vehicle's location for charging. Clause 65 of the Bill amends the Road Traffic Act 1961 to allow for this.
For foreign-registered private vehicles, we encourage them to install OBUs for usage-based charging, although we recognise that occasional visitors may prefer not to do so. Vehicles without OBUs can still pay a daily flat fee, like cars without the In-vehicle Unit (IU) today. Malaysian taxis, however, will be required to install the OBU, as this is necessary for us to track and enforce against such vehicles if needed within Singapore.
To safeguard the integrity of the ERP 2.0 system, it will be an offence to tamper with or modify OBUs without authorisation, and provide or advertise services on the OBU similarly without authorisation. And these will be set out in subsidiary legislation. For serious cases of deliberate non-compliance or misuse, the legislation provides for penalties of up to $20,000 and/or imprisonment of up to two years. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Acting Minister for Transport\", Official Report, 3 February 2026, Vol 96, Issue 15, Correction By Written Statement section.]
This Bill also covers housekeeping amendments that harmonise penalties for two categories of vehicular offences.
Today, there are over 1,000 cases of illegal vehicle modifications detected annually. And to deter workshops from doing illegal modification on a large scale, clause 52 of the Bill raises the maximum penalties for such illegal alterations. Under the Bill, individuals can face fines up to $20,000 and/or imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, with penalties doubled for repeat offenders. For non-individuals, first time offenders can be fined up to $40,000, and up to $80,000 for repeat offenders.
Another serious vehicular offence is keeping or using of unregistered or deregistered vehicles. Clause 57 of the Bill increases the penalties for offenders, who will face fines of up to $20,000, and/or jail of up to two years for the first offence, again with penalties doubled for repeat offenders. These enhanced penalties are necessary as we are seeing a growing trend of unregistered vehicles on our roads. Some of them are used for criminal activities, such as drug trafficking. These vehicles also pose serious road safety risks, as they operate without valid insurance or inspections, and are often involved in hit-and-run accidents. Going forward, ERP 2.0 will also make it easier to detect and enforce against such vehicles.
This Bill also includes a few supporting amendments.
Clauses 46 and 47 will amend the Land Transport Authority of Singapore Act to expressly empower the LTA to grant financial incentives, support, grant, aid or assistance. This gives flexibility for potential future schemes where direct disbursement may be necessary.
Clauses 48 to 50 will amend the Parking Places Act to enable prosecution in the case of inaccurate lodgements.
Mr Speaker, Sir, let me conclude. The provisions in the Bill support the transition to ERP 2.0 and harmonise vehicular offence penalties across our regulatory system.
I will now invite Minister of State for Transport to elaborate on the active mobility measures in this Bill, followed by Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs who will elaborate on the measures under MHA. Sir, I seek to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Minister of State Baey Yam Keng.
The Minister of State for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Mr Speaker, I will now elaborate on the active mobility components of this Bill which represent a significant strengthening of the active mobility legal framework to improve safety.
First, the Bill amends the Active Mobility Act 2017 to implement the new rules on PMAs to ensure their safe and responsible use. Second, the Bill amends the Small Motorised Vehicles (Safety) Act 2020 to make it an offence to keep an unsafe active mobility device (AMD). This grants LTA greater enforcement powers against devices that pose fire safety risks.
Mr Speaker, this House has returned to the issue of active mobility many times over the past decade, reflecting the persistent challenges and evolving nature of regulating active mobility. Since the landmark Active Mobility Act came into force in 2017, we have adjusted our laws multiple times to keep pace with a landscape that moves fast. We introduced the Small Motorised Vehicles (Safety) Act 2020 to stem the flow of non-compliant devices into Singapore and the Shared Mobility Enterprises (Control and Licensing) Act 2020 to bring order to the business of shared AMDs.
Throughout this journey, we have witnessed a relentless desire for mobility options that are faster, cheaper and more convenient. But ever so often, this came at the direct expense of path safety. Following the ban on e-scooters from footpaths in 2019, we have seen a shift in misuse towards PMAs. Regrettably, as soon as one regulatory gap is closed, another is exploited. This underscores the need for this House to adjust our laws, not out of a desire to restrict and burden individuals with red tape, but out of a duty to curb misuse and keep our paths safe for all.
Many of us have heard from residents who feel increasingly unsafe as larger, faster devices weave through our paths under the guise of being mobility aids. We need to restore the original purpose of these devices to serve their intended users.
To recap, there are three main types of PMAs. First, a mobility scooter, which is a motorised device with a single seat, steered with a handlebar and typically supported by a stem at the front of the device; two, a motorised wheelchair, which is propelled by a motor that forms part of the wheelchair and usually operated by a joystick; or three, a non-motorised wheelchair, which has no motor and is usually mounted on two or more wheels. In this Bill, the first two, mobility scooters and motorised wheelchairs, will be regulated as \"mobility vehicles\".
As our population ages and more people have to use PMAs, there is a growing need to ensure that they are used safely and responsibly. We face a concerning trend of able-bodied individuals who are misusing mobility scooters. Although the device is a replacement for walking, some ride at top speeds on paths or operate large devices that endanger other path users, especially seniors and young children.
Members, disability groups and the public have consistently called for the tightening of rules on PMAs and improvement in path safety. We hear you. This Bill thus takes a holistic approach to the problem of PMA misuse, speeding and oversized devices. I will not specify the exact clauses as they span across the Bill.
First, we will lower the speed limit for mobility vehicles on public paths to six kilometres an hour.
Second, we will introduce dimension and weight limits for PMAs used on public paths.
Third, we will require that users of mobility scooters be certified to have a medical need for the device, in order to ride a mobility scooter on public paths.
Fourth, we will also go upstream and require that mobility scooters are checked for compliance and registered before they are sold. This upstream rule reduces the likelihood of users obtaining non-compliant mobility scooters.
All four measures were developed following discussions with the Active Mobility Advisory Panel (AMAP) and careful study of the issue and engagement with key user groups, including PMA users, disability groups, occupational therapists, general path users and food delivery riders. Since we announced the tightening of PMA rules in 2024, we have been working with stakeholders and user groups to prepare for the shift.
This includes readying the healthcare sector to conduct the assessment to grant a Certificate of Medical Need, also known as the Assessment for Mobility Scooter (AMS). We have also been encouraging retailers to shift to new stocks of PMAs that are compliant with the new rules. To give stakeholders sufficient transition time after this Bill, we intend for the rules to take effect from 1 June 2026.
Let me now introduce each of the changes in order.
First, we are reducing the speed limit for mobility scooters and motorised wheelchairs, also known as mobility vehicles, from 10 kilometres per hour to six kilometres per hour. Today, mobility vehicles have a 10-kilometre per hour limit, even if they travel on shared paths where the path speed limit is 25 kilometres per hour. This was recommended by the AMAP in 2018 and intended to discourage able-bodied misuse.
However, experience has shown this limit to be insufficient. Mobility vehicles are generally larger and heavier than bicycles. Travelling at 10 kilometres per hour may still pose a danger to other path users, as it is much faster than typical walking speed. At six kilometres per hour, mobility vehicles match the pace of a brisk walker, which meet the needs of genuine users who have difficulty walking. This will also make our paths safer.
This means that from 1 June 2026, selling mobility vehicles with a device speed limit above six kilometres per hour will carry penalties of up to $20,000 or imprisonment up to 24 months, or both, with higher penalties for non-individuals and repeat offenders. Displaying and advertising such non-compliant devices will carry penalties of up to $10,000 or imprisonment up to 12 months, or both.
An individual who rides or drives a mobility vehicle at a speed exceeding six kilometres per hour on a public path will face fines of up to $2,000 or up to six months' imprisonment, or both, with higher penalties for repeat violations. To ease the transition, we will allow existing mobility vehicles with a device speed limit of up to 10 kilometres per hour to be used on public paths until 31 December 2028, but they need to ride within the six kilometres per hour limit and meet all other rules. From 1 January 2029 onwards, all mobility vehicles used on public paths must have a device speed limit of six kilometres per hour and below.
Second, we will introduce device dimension restrictions for PMAs to address the problem of large PMAs that inconvenience and endanger other path users. This will be aligned with the existing dimension restrictions on public transport.
From 1 June 2026, PMAs must not exceed a width of 70 centimetres, a length of 120 centimetres, a height of 150 centimetres and a laden weight of 300 kilogrammes. Offenders caught riding such devices on public paths face penalties of up to $10,000 in fines or imprisonment of up to six months, or both, with penalties increasing for repea offences.
Selling oversized mobility vehicles will be an offence, with penalties of up to $20,000 or imprisonment up to 24 months, or both, with higher penalties for non-individuals and repeat offenders.
Third, to curb misuse, only those with genuine medical need will be allowed to ride a mobility scooter on public paths from 1 June 2026. We will require users to have a Certificate of Medical Need to ride a mobility scooter on public paths. This targets the core problem of able-bodied users misusing devices meant for those with mobility needs.
When we engaged stakeholders, they welcomed the recommendations. For example, some genuine users shared that the increased misuse of mobility scooters has caused them anxiety because they have had to deal with increasing scrutiny from the public.
Currently, we only intend to require certification for mobility scooters. We do not see a problem of misuse of motorised wheelchairs. So, wheelchair users do not need a Certificate of Medical Need.
The certificate will be available later this month, from 27 February 2026, through the AMS process. The assessment was developed jointly with the Ministry of Health (MOH), with input from professional healthcare associations. A circular and guidelines were issued in November last year to prepare the sector.
Under the AMS, users with medical conditions which result in mobility difficulties will be certified to have a medical need to drive or ride a mobility scooter. Users can approach their regular doctor or occupational therapist for the assessment or a general practitioner who offers the service. We have worked with MOH to engage the healthcare sector to encourage clinics to offer the AMS so that it will be widely available. Based on our survey of clinics, more than 140 clinics intend to offer the assessment. Users will have choices to help keep costs reasonable.
Based on LTA's survey of clinics, fees are expected to range from $20 to $150, with a median fee of $50. Given that a budget mobility scooter costs around $1,000 and mid-range models can reach up to $2,000, the cost of the assessment is relatively modest compared to the price of the device itself. We hope users can understand that this would help to ensure that mobility scooters on public paths are only for those with genuine medical need.
The charges will vary depending on the complexity of the consultation. We have simplified the information that assessors have to provide to LTA. They centre on three key things: first, whether the individual has a medical need to use a mobility scooter; second, whether this need is temporary or long term; and finally, whether the individual has a medical need for a device that exceeds the dimension requirements.
A list of clinics that offer the AMS will be available on LTA's website from tomorrow. Users should contact their preferred clinics directly to enquire about the cost and book an appointment in advance. We encourage users to consult their regular healthcare providers who already understand their medical history, to streamline the assessment process.
We recognise that going to the doctor to obtain certification will take time and cost for users. We will thus take a risk-managed approach to minimise the impact on our healthcare system and on genuine users.
Seniors aged 70 and above will be exempted from the certification requirement. We recognise that as seniors age, the likelihood of mobility challenges increases. The risk of able-bodied seniors abusing mobility scooters is expected to be low. This is especially given the reduced speed limit. We will monitor the situation and calibrate accordingly, if necessary.
We will also exempt users who have had their mobility needs or disability assessed and submitted relevant information to the Government. This includes existing beneficiaries of subsidised mobility scooters from the Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund (SMF) and Assistive Technology Fund (ATF). It also includes individuals already certified with Activities of Daily Living (ADL) needs in \"mobility\" or \"transferring\" who have applied for MOH disability schemes, such as the Home Caregiving Grant. These exemptions will apply automatically and users need not do anything. Agencies will issue letters to notify existing SMF and ATF beneficiaries, as well as individuals with the relevant ADL needs who have applied for MOH disability schemes previously.
Moving forward, those applying to SMF for a subsidised mobility scooter will obtain the certificate as part of the subsidy application process. Those obtaining an ATF-subsidised mobility scooter and applicants for MOH disability schemes with the relevant ADL needs, will be automatically exempted.
From 1 June 2026, mobility scooter users on public paths must have this Certificate of Medical Need. Users will have the next three months to obtain the certification, and enforcement officers will engage and educate users on these new rules during this transition period. Those caught riding a mobility scooter on public paths without the Certificate of Medical Need will face penalties of up to $2,000 in fines or imprisonment of up to six months, or both.
Going back to our intention of introducing this rule to curb misuse, our enforcement officers will focus on visibly able-bodied individuals misusing mobility scooters. Our intention is not to inconvenience genuine users. However, some mobility challenges are not visible. So, I seek users' understanding that our enforcement officers will need to do their job and check for their certification at times.
It will also be an offence for businesses to employ or permit an individual to ride a mobility scooter on public path during the course of work, without ensuring that the rider has valid Certification of Medical Need. Offenders will face penalties of up to $2,000 in fines or imprisonment of up to six months, or both.
This is similar to how it is an offence for businesses employing or permitting an individual to ride a power-assisted bicycle (PAB) in the course of work, without ensuring the rider has the mandatory theory test certification.
Fourth, we will require mobility scooters to be registered with LTA to strengthen upstream enforcement. Today, PABs and e-scooters need to be registered with LTA to ensure devices comply with rules and are affixed with identification marks.
To strengthen upstream enforcement and improve the overall effectiveness of PMA measures, mobility scooters will need to be registered. Only mobility scooters that comply with device dimension and speed restrictions can be registered to persons with valid Certificates of Medical Need, exempted persons or whitelisted businesses, such as retailers.
In addition, LTA and the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) will make clear through an industry circular that mobility scooters fall under the classification of medical devices as they are specifically designed for individuals with walking difficulties. This means that under HSA's regulations, importers must have an HSA licence and list their devices on HSA's database before import. LTA will only allow mobility scooter models that are listed on HSA's database of medical devices to be registered. Existing mobility scooters need not meet this requirement.
To ensure the registration regime is effective, it must apply to all mobility scooters eventually. If we exempt existing mobility scooters, it will be challenging to distinguish new devices from existing ones.
To give users time to adjust to the rule, we will implement the registration regime in phases and keep the process user-friendly. We will start by requiring registration for mobility scooters sold from 1 June 2026. The sale of an unregistered mobility scooter for use on public paths will be an offence from 1 June 2026, with individuals facing penalties of up to $20,000 or jail of up to 24 months, or both, and higher penalties for non-individuals and repeat offenders.
Thereafter, from 1 January 2029, all mobility scooters will need to be registered before they can be used on a public path. Offenders face penalties of up to $2,000 or jail of up to three months, or both, with higher penalties for repeat offenders.
We have designed the registration process to minimise burden on users. For devices sold from 1 June 2026, retailers will handle registration, creating a seamless experience for consumers.
For existing devices, we will give some time for users to register their devices ahead of the requirement by 1 January 2029. Users will be able to register their devices, if they are compliant, at roving stations that LTA will roll out in mid-2027 at community touchpoints. Devices registered as part of this exercise need not be listed on HSA's database of medical devices.
I know many users may want to rush to register their devices ahead of the rules. LTA will include a survey link on its website for users to indicate their interest in registration. This will help us to better deploy resources for the roving registration stations.
I must emphasise here that only compliant mobility scooters will be allowed for registration. If you have a mobility scooter that does not comply with the six kilometres per hour device speed limit or dimension and weight limits, please replace your device. These new rules were announced two years ago in March 2024 and users should transition to compliant devices by 1 January 2029 – almost five years later.
LTA has engaged retailers on the new registration requirements and we will provide guidance to roll this out smoothly. For AMD retailers, many will be familiar with the existing registration regimes for power-assisted bicycles and e-scooters. We will pay special attention to medical device retailers who may be less familiar with the process.
Mr Speaker, the Bill strikes a careful balance between access and safety. We want to ensure genuine users have access to PMAs, which can significantly improve their quality of life. At the same time, we need to keep paths safe and address the problem of misuse.
In designing our regulations, we also recognise the unique needs of PMA users, who have mobility challenges. This is why we will implement exemptions from the Certificate of Medical Need requirement for seniors and existing Government scheme beneficiaries. We will also keep the registration process streamlined and user-friendly.
Thus far, we have focused on the PMA proposals, which are intended to strengthen path safety. Turning to fire safety, the Government takes a strict enforcement approach towards the import, sale and use of non-compliant AMDs.
Since 2021, local retailers must seek LTA's approval for the import of PABs and PMDs, and they must be registered before use. These devices must also be compliant with safety standards. For PABs, it is the EN15194 standard, while for registrable PMDs, it is the UL2272 standard.
Despite years of regulatory tightening since 2016, we continue to grapple with the fire safety risks from AMDs. In 2025 alone, we recorded 49 AMD-related fires. PMDs accounted for most cases at 31, and the bulk of PMD fires involve non-UL2272-certified devices. We can do more to prevent such fires and we will do more.
Today, it is an offence to ride a non-UL2272-certified e-scooter on public paths or roads, but not to keep such devices. This means that if LTA enforcement officers come across a non-UL2272-certified e-scooter, no action can be taken unless it is being used.
This is unlike the case for non-compliant power-assisted bicycles, where it is already an offence to keep such a device under the Road Traffic Act 1961. We will address this gap. Clauses 84 to 91 will amend the Small Motorised Vehicles (Safety) Act 2020 to prohibit the keeping of unsafe devices. Devices that do not comply with the prescribed safety requirements, such as the UL2272 safety standard for registrable personal mobility devices, will be unsafe devices.
Some may ask why we are only doing this now. LTA's mandate has traditionally focused on path and road safety. However, recognising the fire safety risks of AMDs even when they are not used on paths or roads, we are extending the function and duty of the LTA to include the regulation of the keeping of unsafe devices.
Clause 46 will amend the Land Transport Authority of Singapore Act 1995 to expand LTA's function and duty to include regulating the keeping of unsafe devices. The Bill will make it an offence to keep such unsafe devices.
Penalties include fines up to $2,000 or imprisonment up to three months, or both, with higher penalties for non-individuals and repeat offenders. LTA will leverage feedback received via official channels and social media, surveillance as well as day-to-day operations to detect and seize non-UL2272 e-scooters.
Mr Speaker, these measures represent an important shift to implement upstream controls and strengthen our laws, to make our paths safer for everyone. It will enable those with mobility needs who genuinely need to use PMAs to use them safely alongside other path users.
Ultimately, Mr Speaker, we must return to the heart of this matter: the vision of a gracious \"we first\" society. MOT and LTA are strengthening our laws and enforcement, but they are not a panacea. We must acknowledge the reality that the \"cat\" – the regulator – will never be fast enough to catch every \"mouse\" – every errant rider. Path safety is and must always be a collective responsibility. Errant riders and device owners must realise that they are not just breaking the law but endangering themselves and our communities. Responsible riders among us must also speak up and help shape the right culture on our paths.
While the Government will do its part through regulations, infrastructure and enforcement, it is the individual's behaviour and the community's social norms that will ultimately make our paths safe for everyone.
I will now invite the Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs to address the MHA components of this joint Bill.
Mr Speaker: Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.
The Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs (Ms Sim Ann): Mr Speaker, allow me to outline the amendments proposed by MHA to the Road Traffic Act and the Road Vehicles (Special Powers) Act under this Bill.
MHA will be making two key amendments. First, to strengthen the regulatory framework around speed limiters to better deter and detect non-compliance. Second, to clarify that the mandatory disqualification periods prescribed for certain offences under the Road Traffic Act are minimum periods and that the Courts can impose longer disqualification periods.
I will focus my remarks on these two amendments, before briefly touching on the other amendments.
Members will recall that in 2024, we commenced the mandatory installation of speed limiters in lorries. This is to mitigate the risks posed by heavy vehicles, which can cause more severe consequences in the event of an accident. We have adopted a phased implementation approach, depending on the weight and registration date of the vehicle. As of 5 January 2026, around 72% of lorries required to have speed limiters installed by the various deadlines have done so.
We have reviewed the existing speed limiter offences and found them to be inadequate in deterring non-compliance and there are also gaps in accountability. To close these gaps, clause 56 of the Bill introduces several new offences and raises the penalties for existing offences.
First, we will hold owners and drivers liable for knowingly causing or permitting the use of non-compliant speed limiter-required lorries and for tampering with installed speed limiters.
Under the current speed limiter rules, only the driver commits an offence for driving a non-compliant lorry. However, there may be situations where such non-compliance occurs under the instruction of the owner of the lorry, who is not liable under the existing rules. The proposed amendment closes this gap by extending the scope of the offence to anyone who knowingly causes or permits the use of a non-compliant lorry, including the owner.
In addition, while tampering with a speed limiter is already an offence, currently, only the person who tampered with it is liable. The current law does not expressly make liable, persons who instructed or caused another person to do so, nor persons who offer to alter speed limiters. Our proposed amendment ensures that all parties who are involved in speed limiter tampering can be held accountable.
Second, we will impose a duty on Authorised Agents to report suspected tampering of a speed limiter.
Currently, only Authorised Agents of the Traffic Police may install or service speed limiters. With this amendment, such agents will be required to notify the Traffic Police if they know or have reason to believe that a speed limiter has been tampered with or is non-compliant. This will enable prompt investigation and removal of non-compliant lorries from the roads.
Third, we will prohibit the advertising of speed limiter services by unauthorised parties. This deters the supply of illegal tampering services and reduces opportunities for tampering.
The Bill will also raise the penalties for existing speed limiter-related offences.
Currently, first-time offenders face a fine of up to $1,000 or imprisonment of up to three months, while repeat offenders face a fine of up to $2,000 or imprisonment of up to six months. These penalties have not been updated since 1999. The Bill updates the penalty framework by increasing the maximum fines to $10,000 for a first conviction and $20,000 for subsequent convictions. The imprisonment terms will be retained. This ensures that the penalties are a credible deterrent and are commensurate with the potential harm posed by speeding heavy vehicles.
Next, clauses 69 to 73, 75 and 77 of the Bill clarify that the mandatory disqualification periods prescribed for certain offences under the Road Traffic Act are minimum disqualification periods and that no special reasons are required for a Court to order a longer disqualification period. The disqualification period that the Court may impose can be any period equal to or above the prescribed minimum disqualification period, including a lifetime disqualification period if it thinks fit.
These amendments seek to address the observations in the recent High Court judgment of Ng En You Jeremiah v Public Prosecutor. The High Court, in considering a sentencing framework for the relevant driving offence, noted that the offence already imposed a mandatory 12-year disqualification period, “unless the court for special reasons thinks fit to not order or to order otherwise”. The High Court also held that “special reasons” had to be exceptional and that the 12-year disqualification period should apply regardless of the applicable sentencing band for that particular driving offence. The High Court's judgment thus appears to suggest that special reasons must be present before a Court may impose a disqualification period that is longer than the prescribed minimum period.
For serious road traffic offences, such as driving under the influence of drink and car racing, a mandatory minimum disqualification period is prescribed because such conduct poses a serious risk to public safety. The amendments make it clear that there is no need for special reasons before a Court may impose a disqualification period that is longer than the prescribed minimum period.
Sir, I will now briefly run through several other miscellaneous amendments. Clauses 68, 74 and 79 will enhance the operational efficiency of the Singapore Armed Forces and Traffic Police.
Clause 68 addresses an ambiguity under section 49 of the Road Traffic Act. Currently, the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) contracts commercial bus companies to ferry soldiers to various locations. In view of the shortage of bus drivers, SAF intends for its personnel to drive the commercial buses it leases. However, section 49 may be interpreted to limit SAF personnel holding military driving licences to driving only vehicles owned by SAF. The amendment makes it clear that the exemption applies to vehicles owned or leased by SAF.
Currently, Police officers are required to manually review, themselves, images and footages captured by Police cameras and manually issue, themselves, the traffic notices, even for straightforward violations, such as red-light beating and speeding. Clauses 74 and 79 amend the Road Traffic Act to allow processing of such violations to be carried out by authorised civilians, including service providers, subject to appropriate safeguards. This would free up Traffic Police officers to focus on enforcement and complex cases.
Clause 82 amends section 4 of the Road Vehicles (Special Powers) Act relating to the forfeiture of road vehicles used to commit any offence prescribed in the Schedule of the Act. Forfeiture is currently mandatory if the Court is satisfied that a road vehicle has been used to commit any scheduled offence or to convey persons to the scene or facilitate escape of any person from the scene where a scheduled offence has been committed. The amendment will make the forfeiture of road vehicles discretionary in all scenarios if it is proved to the Court's satisfaction that the person who committed the scheduled offence involving the vehicle is not the vehicle owner and had used the vehicle without the consent of its owner.
Mr Speaker, in summary, the amendments proposed by MHA in this Bill will update, clarify and strengthen our road traffic laws. But these moves alone are not enough. MHA remains concerned by the road safety situation and has plans to further tighten our laws and regulatory framework. We will share more at the upcoming Committee of Supply debate.
We also call upon all road users to exercise responsibility, patience and graciousness. It is possible to achieve zero road injuries and fatalities but only if we all do our part.
Mr Speaker: Ms Tin Pei Ling.
Ms Tin Pei Ling (Marine Parade-Braddell Heights): Mr Speaker, Sir, land transport affects Singaporean’ daily lives and livelihoods. Today’s debate on the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill reflects this and is therefore of public importance.
Our Transport Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) is giving this Bill close attention, as are many of our People’s Action Party (PAP) Parliamentary colleagues. A total of 18 PAP Members of Parliament (MPs) will speak on the new regulations on PMAs, ERP 2.0, vehicle safety and other related issues.
In the course of our respective work on the ground, my PAP colleagues and I have engaged different stakeholder groups, including private hire drivers, union workers, industry representatives and, of course, our own residents. These engagements gave us precious opportunities to hear their feedback first-hand, understand their lived experiences and challenges faced and gather practical suggestions. My PAP colleagues will share more in their speeches.
At the heart of our interest is the principle of ensuring fair, inclusive and safe use of our public roads and space. In a society where our people have diverse needs, co-existence is key. This means that our public infrastructure and spaces offer choices and accommodate different user groups, and that our legislations enable people yet protect the vulnerable.
Overall, my fellow PAP MPs and I support the intent of the Bill and we will set out our arguments in our respective speeches. We will also be highlighting our concerns pertaining to practical implementation, costs and impact on vulnerable groups, such as low-income groups and platform workers.
Here, allow me to raise a few points.
Firstly, transitioning to ERP 2.0 is a step toward a smarter transport future. This is progress. Despite initial teething problems from mass OBU deployment, ERP 2.0 enables a more intelligent road use management. Real-time data collected via the OBUs can be integrated with existing systems to enable situational awareness and faster incident detection. Over time, these data can support incident and demand predictions. Removing physical ERP gantries eventually will also free up valuable land space. Hence, I support this progressive move.
Second, OBUs are central to ERP 2.0, but the installation was delayed by the global chip shortage from 2021 to 2023. Although most vehicles now have OBUs, full installation is only expected to complete by 2027, at least seven-year gap from original approval to completion. Even longer, if you consider that the OBUs were based on the technology back in 2013.
Given how rapidly technology evolves, how will the Government ensure that the hardware and software, including the operating system, do not become obsolete before we can achieve the smart transport management objectives? Upgrading devices is costly in manpower and money, and it places burdens on vehicle owners. So, we really do not want a situation whereby very shortly after we complete the OBU deployment in 2027, and then we have to go into another round again.
Third, the use of OBUs will make distance-based ERP pricing feasible. I understand the Minister mentioned that it will not be an immediate deployment, but it is feasible. While charging by distance is fairer in principle, it also risks disproportionately affecting those who earn their living on the road, especially delivery riders and private hire drivers who often work long painful hours but also often earning just enough to make ends meet. These workers will be unable to optimise pathways and can only be “price takers” in this instance. So, in the eventual situation whereby distance-based ERP pricing is implemented, may I ask what measures will be in place to support these workers?
Fourth, PMAs are increasingly important, particularly in an ageing society. Many elderly residents depend on them for mobility and well-being. But irresponsible use poses real safety risks to both the device users and others around them. Today, there are effectively no restrictions on who may use mobility scooters. I have personally seen riders moving at high speeds on pedestrian paths and instances of multiple able-bodied users on a single scooter endangering others.
Just to illustrate with an example from a few years ago, I witnessed three young and able-bodied persons riding a mobility scooter along the covered walkway cutting through Circuit Road. I stopped the scooter and attempted to tell the three riders to dismount as it was dangerous. They gave me a puzzled look and then sped off. Unfortunately, I did not manage to chase them down. That was perhaps the most outrageous instance I encountered and thankfully, the only time so far. But the point is that such irresponsible use is dangerous to other pedestrians, especially when we have many frail and elderly residents using that walkway. Hence, I welcome the Bill’s measures to limit PMA speeds and to require a Certificate of Medical Need.
Next, strong enforcement is critical to achieving the Bill’s objectives. Current enforcement is challenging. Officers cannot be everywhere; active mobility patrols rely heavily on volunteers and camera deployments have been piecemeal and temporary. Where cameras are present, behaviour improves. And when they are removed, problems often recur. For example, after temporary cameras were installed in 2024 on the pedestrian bridge between Paya Lebar Way and Aljunied Crescent in MacPherson, compliance improved. But the problem of riders speeding cross the bridge returned once the cameras were taken down.
As such, how will the Government strengthen enforcement capacity? Will more permanent cameras be installed and can our network of cameras support intelligent, real-time monitoring to identify and act, whether it is through warnings or issuance of notices, on non-compliant PMA riders more promptly? I should add that this should include wilful cyclists and other mobility device users as well.
In addition, requiring PMDs and PABs to meet the UL2272 and EN14194 standards has been a prudent safety measure that reduced fire risks from charging. This is a positive outcome, but more can be done to keep fires down further. Hence, I support making the possession of non-UL2272 e-scooters an offence. Keeping such a device tempts one to still use it. Moreover, if it cannot be used, then there is no reason to keep it.
In conclusion, let me reiterate that at the heart of the Transport GPC along with fellow PAP MPs' interests, we want to ensure fair, inclusive and safe use of our public roads and spaces. Co-existence is key to living in a diverse and highly built-up Singapore. We need to keep spaces open for all to live, work and play, but we must also intervene to support or protect the vulnerable.
Overall, this Bill strikes a sensible balance between enabling mobility and managing the risks that come with new usage patterns and technologies. I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Mr Speaker, the Land Transport Related Matters Bill introduces significant changes to our transport landscape. A key shift in this Bill is the reclassification of what we currently know as PMAs. The Bill replaces this term with a new legal category: \"mobility vehicles\". This category, in part, encompasses both motorised wheelchairs and mobility scooters. I will first speak briefly on ERP 2.0, while the rest of my speech will focus on the regime changes for these mobility vehicles and raising several concerns.
ERP 2.0 and data protection. Mr Speaker, the shift to ERP 2.0 brings with it a significant change in how vehicle movement data is collected and used. Under clause 81, a document certified by the registrar containing transaction and location data from ERP 2.0 devices will be admissible as evidence in court. This marks the departure from the privacy-centric design of ERP 1.0.
As noted in The Straits Times article on 16 April 1993, the registry of vehicles explicitly chose a system using prepaid smart card so that, I quote: \"all the information is in the card and not with the authorities managing the system\".
While the old IU kept trip data local, the new OBUs enable continuous central logging. Can the Minister clarify what specific technical encryption and anonymisation protocols are applied to data transmitted from the OBU to the central server? Furthermore, what are the legal safeguards to prevent this data from being accessed by other agencies for purposes entirely unrelated to road pricing?
Consistent enforcement and public education. Mr Speaker, I have spoken in this House many times since the 13th Parliament on the urgent need for consistent enforcement and robust public education for all AMDs. This includes bicycles, PABs, PMDs and of course, PMAs or mobility vehicles. Yet on a daily basis we still witness widespread disregard for road safety, cyclists and PAB users not keeping left, beating red lights, riding without helmets or using footpaths with little regard for pedestrians. This is notwithstanding statistics revealed by the Traffic Police, I think it was yesterday, of 650 summons issued to errant cyclists in the first half of 2025.
How many cyclists or e-bike riders are aware, for example, that it is an offence riding on the right side of a motor vehicle unless they are overtaking or about to make a right turn? It is also not uncommon to see riders not riding on the left lanes. Are users of rental bikes made aware that helmets must be worn when riding on the roads? These are just examples.
The human cause is evident. In December, a 71-year-old lady was severely injured by an e-bike while exiting Pasir Ris Mall, requiring jaw reconstruction. In January, another lady in her 60s suffered torn ligaments and fractures after being knocked down while crossing the road. In November last year, the Minister of State, Baey Yam Keng himself, was bumped into by a female cyclist travelling in the wrong direction.
Such in these incidents underscore a poor riding culture rooted in years of inadequate public education and enforcement, points I raised repeatedly in this House since 2017. I am reminded of the Road Safety Park at East Coast launched in the 1980s. Its objective was ambitious then: to introduce road safety as a way of life. By its 20th year, more than one million students in Singapore had passed through its gates to participate in traffic games.
They role played as pedestrians and drivers to internalise road courtesy. This was a society wide effort that instil safety consciousness through practical engagement. To truly change our AMD riding culture, we must move beyond static signage to immersive learning. The road safety park's success in the early years shows that when we have the will to invest, we can shape an entire generation's behaviour.
Authorities have cited limited resources as far as AMDs are concerned. Recently, Minister of State Baey Yam Keng reiterated that LTA will do its best within constraints. But Mr Speaker, there should be a greater political will to invest in the resources needed for a safer riding culture and for safer footpaths.
Changes to the PMA regime. Yet, even as enforcement resources remain limited, this Bill introduces more changes, more rules and changes for PMAs: implementing the Certificate of Medical Need requirement, imposing dimension limits and reducing the speed limit for mobility scooters from 10 kilometres per hour to six kilometres per hour. It also mandates the registration for PMAs.
While these measures directly address concerns regarding the misuse of mobility scooters by able bodied individuals, speeding and the use of oversized devices, I am again concerned about the practical execution of the measures designed in this Bill, given the inability to significantly improve safe use and riding culture for different forms of AMDs so far. How will LTA ensure non-compliant mobility scooters are not used after 2028, or unauthorised riders do not continue with their use after the passing of this Bill?
The same gap worries me about clause 84 to 91, regarding the proposed banning of non UL2272 e-scooters or PMDs. In a September 2025 Parliamentary Question reply, Minister Shanmugam said that 187 fires in Housing and Development Board (HDB) estates were caused by AMDs. Of these 46% by PMDs, 42% by PABs and 12% for PMAs. It is disturbing that five years after PMDs or e-scooters were supposedly banned from mainstream use, except on park connectors, they are still the main cause of fires for all AMDs. One can imagine how many more are kept in homes and continue to be used. It is also reflective, at least to some extent, of the effectiveness of past and former enforcement efforts in curbing non-compliant use.
On 20 November 2025, an island-wide operation targeted non-compliant devices. What measures were taken for units where occupants were not at home? Five years after the ban, they remain a primary fire risk. How will the offence of keeping these PMDs be enforced on a regular basis? Will there be regular door-to-door inspections? Could the Ministry consider concentrating officers in a specific zone for a sustained period for intensive enforcement? This will send a strategic message rather than spreading our limited resources too thinly.
Impact on seniors and infrastructure. The change of the PMA regime. The reduction of mobility scooter speed limit to six kilometres per hour raises some concerns, and I have spoken on this in this House previously. The Government previously noted that this speed takes reference from walking speeds. However, a 40% drop in speed significantly increases travel time and exposure to the elements for seniors. Can the Minister clarify whether any studies were conducted on the impact of this reduction on the travel range of elderly users?
Some of my residents who use their PMAs to travel beyond their immediate neighbourhood had provided feedback to me that the reduction in speed will increase the time they need to travel and ultimately, reduce the distance they can travel within the time that they have.
At the 2024 Committee of Supply debate for MOT, I had urged the Government in the run-up to the introduction of the new PMD regime to reconsider permitting seniors aged at least 67 or 70 to be allowed to use mobility scooters, even in the absence of a formerly diagnosed musculoskeletal or medical condition. I am glad that the Government has decided to exempt seniors aged 70 and above from the certification requirement.
Mobility scooters do provide seniors with confidence to be out and about, which is a good thing. So, for these individuals, mobility scooters can be invaluable at maintaining mobility, independence and quality of life during their golden years, allowing broader access to seniors above 70 would empower them to remain active and engaged in community life, promoting both physical and mental well-being.
I would also like to suggest that the Government could explore expanding the capacity of occupational therapies in restructured hospitals to provide mobility scooters, assessments and training. This would ensure that seniors and others with genuine mobility needs receive proper guidance on the safe and responsible use of these devices. Such a measure would not only enhance user safety but also foster greater confidence among the public in the appropriate use of mobility scooters.
Next, outreach to existing users who have to discontinue use. I am also concerned about the impact on existing mobility scooter users who have to discontinue their existing use of mobility scooters. There are some parents who use their mobility scooters to ferry their young children or some seniors who ferry their spouses with mobility or health issues on their existing PMAs. These PMAs will not be authorised under this Bill due to their sizes. We must be sensitive to understand that some of these individuals have real transportation needs that in their views are not adequately met by the proposals in this Bill or what is otherwise available out there. So, how will LTA reach out to these affected individuals effectively on the law change and get them to understand the risks perceived by the authorities as posed by such devices on the users and fellow footpath users, and to get their buy-in on the new law?
Finally, Mr Speaker, I must again touch on the last mile problem for some users of mobility scooters. The law disallows PMAs from riding on the roads, presumably except when crossing roads. In 2019 and 2020, I raised in this House how narrow or blocked footpaths in, for example, private estates, would usually force PMA riders onto roads. In January 2023, I had asked in a Parliamentary Question about statistics of enforcement against PMA riders who were caught on the road and the range of punishments imposed. MHA revealed that while notices were issued and fines of up to $2,000 were imposed, the number of formal prosecutions was relatively low, often handled through compensation fines first.
In another reply to my Parliamentary Question in 2024, MHA also confirmed that enforcement against PMA users on roads had increased with 10 users caught between January and August 2024, compared to four in 2023.
Mr Speaker, I do often see PMAs on the road and this is not just in private estates or when they are merely crossing the road. I am surprised by the low statistics of enforcement cited. While I agree that it may not be safe for PMAs to use the road, I recognise that our infrastructure needs to catch up to ensure that there is no reason for PMA riders to use the road.
Today, in 2026, we are slowing these seniors down even further to six kilometres per hour. If we are going to enforce a strict walking pace and a strict road ban, the Government must first guarantee that the last mile footpath in our private estates, for example, are actually wide enough and clear enough to be used. For example, are the pavements free of obstacles and trees to allow free access? Otherwise, it is unfair and unsafe for elderly PMA users. If our seniors are forced to use the road, they should not fear being prosecuted.
On the other hand, from my conversation with many mobility scooter riders, it seems that many are still not even aware that it is illegal to use their mobility scooters on the road. This brings us to the same familiar problem of the need for more and better public education and adequate regular enforcement, as is the case for other AMDs, which I touched on earlier. I would like to ask the Minister to update the House on what public education measures it is intending with the passing of the Bill and also to enhance his efforts to improve the riding culture for all AMD users, including mobility scooters.
In closing, Mr Speaker, I hope the Government will consider the proposals and suggestions I have made. Notwithstanding my concerns and reservations, I support the Bill's intent to improve safety and better regulation. I urge the Ministry to ensure strong public education, effective enforcement and thoughtful implementation so that we build a safer environment for all.
Mr Speaker: Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Punggol): Mr Speaker, this Bill seeks to strengthen transport safety and efficiency – from improving active mobility safety, to tightening enforcement against illegally modified vehicles and streamlining the collection of missed ERP charges. These are important objectives and I support them.
But as we consider these changes, we must remain clear-eyed about who will be most affected on the ground, especially our workers, many of whom depend on our transport system not just to get around, but to earn a living.
I declare my interests as Assistant Secretary-General of the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), Advisor to the National Delivery Champions Association (NDCA) and Executive Secretary to the National Transport Workers' Union.
Mr Speaker, I recognise the intent behind the enhanced regulations on PMAs, including reducing the speed limit from 10 kilometres per hour to six kilometres per hour, introducing size limits, mandatory registration and the Certificate of Medical Need. These measures are meant to improve safety for all footpath users and that is a goal we all share. But how we implement them matters.
We must be careful not to unintentionally place additional hardship on persons with genuine, often permanent mobility impairments, many of whom rely on PMAs to undertake delivery work as their primary and sometimes, only source of income. For our riders, platform work is not a convenience. It is a hard-won pathway to financial independence.
First, the reduction in PMA speed limits will lengthen delivery times. For riders who are already push themselves daily, those extra minutes compound quickly. Fewer completed jobs mean lower earnings, and for riders living close to the edge, even a modest drop in income can translate into real trade-offs between food, utilities or even medical needs. Media reports have already highlighted concerns that riders' earnings may be significantly affected and these reflect what we are hearing consistently on the ground through our union engagements.
Mdm Farhana Binte Ahmad Mashon, the General Secretary of the National Delivery Champions Association, is herself a mother of six and soon to be a grandmother. She fully supports the intent behind these safety measures, especially to protect young children who may be too small to be seen easily by riders and are particularly vulnerable to careless riding. At the same time, Hana is also a full-time delivery rider who relies on her PMA for her work. Based on her experience, she expects her earnings to fall by 30% to 40% under the six kilometres per hour speed limit if incentives and work conditions are not adjusted. This illustrates the real tension we must address between improving safety and ensuring that riders who depend on this work are not pushed into financial hardship.
As worker representatives, our platform work associations, including the NDCA, have raised these concerns directly with platform operators. We have since obtained commitments and in-principle agreements from platform partners through bilateral negotiations to review delivery targets and work arrangements for our full-time PMA riders, so that safety improvements do not come at the expense of livelihoods. I also urge the Government to work closely with platform operators to monitor post-implementation impacts and to be prepared to offer targeted transitional support if hardship emerges.
Mr Speaker, we support the safety intent, but safety improvements should not disproportionately penalise those who depend on PMAs the most.
Second, while I support the Certificate of Medical Need to prevent abuse, the criteria must not be so rigid that deserving users are excluded. Medical needs are not always binary. Mobility challenges exist on a spectrum. We should avoid overly narrow thresholds that unintentionally create new barriers for those who genuinely need PMAs for safe and independent mobility.
In our engagements with our PMA riders, we see a wide range of profiles and needs. Some, like Ms Toh Bee Tin – a familiar name to many in this House as she was a Para Table Tennis athlete – are born with mobility disabilities and rely entirely on their PMAs, not just for mobility, but for their delivery livelihoods. Others, like Ms Siti Sabarinah, turned to a PMA after suffering a serious leg injury from a delivery cycling accident last year. While she is on the path to recovery, she is still unable to walk independently over longer distances. For riders like her, the concern is not just access today, but the longevity and viability of a significant PMA investment under the new regulatory framework.
These examples remind us that eligibility should be guided by real functional needs, not narrow thresholds. As we tighten safeguards against misuse, we must also ensure that those who genuinely depend on PMAs for safe, independent mobility and to earn a living are not left behind.
Mr Speaker, there is also the issue of cost. Medical certification can range from $50 to $100, which is significant for lower-income riders. To support our members, the NDCA will provide financial assistance to help subsidise and co-pay out-of-pocket compliance costs arising from this Act. This includes expenses, such as medical certifications and installations of attached-on speedometers. In addition, NDCA is in discussion with affiliate general practitioner (GP) partners to make medical assessments and certification more affordable and accessible.
These efforts reflect our shared commitment to upholding road safety, while also protecting the dignity and sustainability of work for those who rely on PMAs to earn an honest living.
I also ask the Government to consider additional support measures, especially for riders, like Siti, who are recovering from health conditions and will eventually need to transition out of PMAs. Support during this transition period is important, so that recovery does not come at the cost of livelihoods. In addition, I seek the Government's consideration for assistance with the purchase of essential equipment, such as speedometers, which will be critical in helping riders comply with this new speed limit.
Finally, I ask the Ministry to clarify whether polyclinics will be able to issue the required medical certificates, so that costs remain affordable and accessible for those who need PMAs the most.
Third, while I appreciate the advance notice given since 2024 and the meaningful consultations with NDCA, I urge an education-first approach during the initial enforcement. Some users will need time to adapt, whether to speed limits, device requirements or certification rules. Reasonable grace periods and room for discretion, especially for genuine mistakes, will go a long way in ensuring compliance without undue stress. Clear rules matter but compassionate implementation matters just as much.
The NDCA has engaged riders extensively across Singapore not just in meeting rooms, but where our riders actually work and rest. These sessions covered recruitment, rider safety, enforcement issues, Central Provident Fund (CPF) clarifications, last-mile delivery challenges and discussions with LTA and our platform operators. This feedback is not abstract. It reflects lived realities and this is why NDCA continues to work closely with platform operators through the tripartite framework to mitigate livelihood impact while complying to these new rules.
We thank our platform operators partners, like Grab, who have given in-principle assurances to adjust performance targets, and NDCA will continue to support riders through the transition to defray costs, including medical certification and device modifications.
Mr Speaker, this is how lives, livelihoods, safety, dignity at work go hand in hand, the tripartite way.
Turning to electric buses. I support the amendments to section 6 of the LTA of Singapore Act 1995 recognising the promotion and regulation for the safe use of electric vehicles (EVs). In Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] By 2030, electric buses will make up half of our public bus fleet. This is no small matter and whether we can navigate this path steadily depends mostly on our bus captains.
Currently, companies do provide training, but each has different arrangements. When manpower is tight, training is sometimes shortened.
But bus captains are different. They drive large vehicles with complex systems, carrying passengers and bear heavy responsibility. Some captains have told us that driving electric buses requires not only getting used to new equipment and rules, but also constantly monitoring screens, unlike before when it is mostly monitoring through the rear mirrors. Over time, this causes eye strain and even dizziness. This is no small matter!
I would like to ask LTA whether they could consider establishing a unified, clear and mandatory training for electric buses, so that captains have confidence when transitioning to electric buses, making the road safer.
(In English): Mr Speaker, I now turn to the issue of speed limiters for lorries. Road safety must always remain our top priority. Measures that protect lives on our roads are necessary and I recognise fully the intent behind mandating speed limiters for heavy vehicles. This intent is also understood and broadly supported by the fleet operators and lorry owners whom I have spoken with.
That said, as with many transport policies, the real test lies not in the intent, but actually, in the implementation.
One key concern raised by drivers and operators relates to speed differentials on our expressways. Passenger vehicles may travel at up to 90 kilometres per hour, while heavy vehicles are capped at 60 kilometres per hour. This wide gap can disrupt traffic flow, lead to frequent overtaking, sudden braking and in some cases, paradoxically increasing accident risks rather than reduce them.
Another concern is enforcement consistency. Local operators who comply with speed-limiter requirements may find themselves disadvantaged when foreign-registered heavy vehicles, which may not be subjected to the same standards, continue travelling at higher speeds. This creates uneven road behaviour and undermines both safety objectives as well as fair competition.
Mr Speaker, my point is not to revisit the policy intent, but to emphasise that implementation must be holistic. Speed limiters alone cannot deliver safer roads. They must be complemented by consistent enforcement, clear lane discipline and policies that reflect the realities of mixed traffic conditions.
I, therefore, urge the relevant Ministries to continue engaging drivers and operators to apply enforcement with judgement, and to ensure that implementation remains practical, fair and grounded in real-world conditions so that our roads are not just regulated, but genuinely safer for everyone.
Mr Speaker, with these points raised in the spirit of fairness, safety and grounded implementation, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Fadli Fawzi.
Mr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I have a few considerations to share on the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill.
At the outset, let me state that I recognise the importance of ensuring safety and order for all users in Singapore. Our roads, footpaths and shared spaces must be safe for pedestrians, cyclists, persons with disabilities and motorists. As mobility patterns and technologies evolve, our laws must be updated to reflect these new realities on the ground.
One of the most significant developments in recent years has been the rapid rise in the use of mobility devices, such as PMAs, PMDs and PABs. Their use is not limited to elderly Singaporeans or persons with visible disabilities. Even working adults, caregivers and delivery workers are using them, which reflects the last mile connectivity challenges they face.
Mr Speaker, my point here is simple. The increased use of mobility vehicles by Singaporeans is more often than not driven by a practical need. Singaporeans rely on this informal low-cost mobility solution simply to get by and get on with their daily lives.
With the Certificate of Entitlement prices shattering records year after year, a private car is now firmly out of reach for many working families. Even motorcycles, traditionally seen as an affordable alternative, have become significantly more expensive. Against this backdrop, it should come as no surprise that to meet their everyday transport needs, Singaporeans have turned to mobility vehicles that cost from a few hundred dollars, to $1,000 or $2,000 – just a fraction of the price of a motorcycle or a car. For many Singaporeans, these devices are the only viable way to bridge the last mile between their homes and essential destinations, such as workplaces, schools, markets and food centres.
Mr Speaker, I fully understand and acknowledge the Government's concern about the misuse of such vehicles by able-bodied individuals in ways that compromise public safety. There have been genuine incidents involving reckless riding, excessive speeds and conflicts on footpaths.
These issues must be addressed, but we must be careful not to inadvertently cause hardship to Singaporeans who rely on these devices out of necessity. Many such individuals now use mobility vehicles to earn a living, including completing food and parcel deliveries for platform companies, such as Grab. For them, these vehicles are essential tools of work rather than toys for amusement or recreation.
The Bill proposes to reduce the speed limit for PMAs from 10 kilometres per hour to six kilometres per hour. In an article published by Mothership on 27 January, platform workers shared that this reduction in speed limit is likely to reduce the orders they can complete by 20% to 30%, or even up to 50%. This will translate to a loss in earnings. While some workers will be able to make up for this by working longer hours, others who have caregiving needs or health problems may not be able to do so.
Besides being a tool for employment, mobility vehicles can also prove to be the most convenient or practical option for some residents to get around the neighbourhood. Let me illustrate with some examples from my own ward of Kaki Bukit. Take a resident who lives at Block 530 in Bedok North Street 3, which is right next to Kaki Bukit Community Centre. To head to Red Swastika School, the resident has no direct bus route. There are indirect bus options, but this involves switching either at Bedok Interchange or at Heartbeat at Bedok. And that will take more than 35 minutes. The other option is to walk 1.2 kilometres, which Google Maps indicate will take around 17 minutes. To reach Bedok Reservoir Park or Damai Secondary School, the resident has two options to walk – 1.9 kilometres for 26 minutes or to walk one kilometre for 14 minutes to a bus stop near along Bedok North Avenue 3; and then take a three-minute bus ride for three stops.
Mr Speaker, I do not mean for these examples to be comprehensive or exhaustive. Rather, they are meant to demonstrate that for certain short but significant journeys in Kaki Bukit, there are sometimes no direct or convenient public transport options. The only realistic alternative is to walk directly from point to point. This is the healthiest option, but may be challenging for the elderly, those with mobility difficulties or parents with young children who are pressed for time – not to mention the hot and humid weather in Singapore, which does not make for a comfortable walking experience. In such circumstances, a PMA can be useful, especially for caregivers with children or working workers rushing to and from shifts.
Mr Speaker, regulation without viable alternative risks deepening inequality. Transport policy should be concerned with more than efficiency and safety, but also consider equity and inclusion, especially for those with the least resources.
As I mentioned earlier, the increasing reliance on AMDs is driven by practical necessity. Residents turn to these devices to cope with and adapt to what they see as gaps in our public transport network, especially when it comes to last mile connectivity or travelling to neighbourhood amenities that are just slightly too far to walk to comfortably. For such persons, mobility devices are the most viable options, after taking cost, time, convenience and accessibility into account.
As such, improving our public transport links, including boosting capacity for last mile connectivity must be a priority. Furthermore, Mr Speaker, I would encourage the Ministry to offer seed funding to pilot and test community bus shuttles in different towns, including Kaki Bukit, with the intention of providing coverage for those short but significant journeys around the neighbourhood that are currently underserved by our public transport operators. We can even call this the \"we first\" shuttle. These local shuttles should be targeted to the specific practical needs of residents and reflect how they actually get around the neighbourhood. This may reduce their reliance on mobility devices.
These improvements would also make our public transport network more fit for purpose for our ageing population. Our elderly should find it easy and convenient to take a bus for a few stops to visit their friends or run errands in another part of the neighbourhood. They should not be faced with the choice of either walking that kilometre or two, or having to rely on a mobility device. And I believe we also owe it to them to make these bus journeys free-of-charge.
Sir, in London, those over the age of 66 enjoy free travel across the public transport network at any time, save for the morning rush hour. Over there, they call it the \"Freedom Pass\". I see no reason why we cannot or should not do the same for our seniors and give them a Merdeka Pass to travel freely on our public transport. Mr Speaker, in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] We need to prioritise improvements to public transport links, including boosting capacity for last mile connectivity. I also suggest that MOT establish seed funding to study and test \"community bus\" services in towns like Kaki Bukit. The service is intended to provide coverage for \"short but significant\" journeys around the neighbourhood. Public transport is still limited for short journeys like these. The proposed community buses should target the specific practical needs of residents and reflect how they get around their neighbourhood. This can help to reduce reliance on mobility devices.
These measures can align our public transport network with the needs of senior citizens. They should view taking bus rides as something very convenient. They should not have to choose between walking or using mobility devices. And I think we are responsible for providing bus journeys free of charge to senior citizens.
Sir, in London, citizens over the age of 66 enjoy free travel on public transport, except during morning peak hours. Over there, they call it the \"Freedom Pass\". We should provide a similar service for our senior citizens and give them a \"Merdeka Pass\" to travel freely on our public transport.
(In English): Mr Speaker, this Bill is an opportunity to consider how different modes of mobility may necessitate the long-term transformation of our last mile connectivity infrastructure. The mobility devices that we are discussing today are here to stay. Ultimately, if pedestrian safety is our concern, this is best achieved by segregating pedestrian traffic from motor-powered mobility devices.
We can achieve this by moving more decisively towards a more coherent and integrated network of dedicated cycling paths that are clearly separated from pedestrian footpaths, wherever possible and then confining the use of mobility devices to these cycling paths. Currently, this is not possible in many neighbourhoods where cycling paths share space with pedestrian footpaths.
Mr Speaker, other dense cities across the world have shown that this is possible. It requires us to fundamentally rethink how we allocate existing road space, rather than incrementally increasing cycling and non-pedestrian infrastructure at the margins. Since we expect private vehicle growth to be capped as car-lite policies take effect, the Government should seriously reconsider reclaiming road space currently dedicated to cars, including underutilised lanes and on-street parking – and repurposing them for cycling and walking infrastructure. In this way, we also make space for the safe use of mobility devices.
Mr Speaker, I believe we need to address the underlying problems and develop a more compassionate vision of mobility in Singapore. We must address the structural gaps that drive people to rely on mobility devices in the first place. This means investing in better neighbourhood connectivity, more responsive public transport planning and infrastructure that reflects and facilitates how people actually move around their communities. Sir, notwithstanding these concerns, I support this Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Poh Li San.
Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Mr Speaker, PMAs are wonderful inventions that are meant to give independence, dignity and an opportunity to earn a livelihood to seniors and people with mobility challenges. Unfortunately, self-regulation by users is weak.
Over the past few years, misuse of PMAs have resulted in nuisance to pedestrians, injuries and even deaths to PMA users. They have also caused severe negative externalities including fires that result in property damage and loss of lives. It is finally time to reset the original intent of PMAs. The Bill's amendments to tighten PMA users' eligibility, operating rules and specifications are overdue. But better late than never.
The Bill's amendments are well-thought out and eliminate most scenarios of misuse, while preserving as much inclusivity as possible for genuine users. Notwithstanding, I would like to raise a few concerns.
I would like to address concerns of residents below their 70s, who cannot walk well or depend on PMAs for their livelihood, yet are physically unable to use PMDs or PABs. They are also worried that they are unable to get a doctor's letter. While 70 years old may be a reasonable eligible age for automatic eligibility, there are also many instances of younger people who are unable to walk far due to excessive weight or temporary conditions such as gout but are unable to obtain a doctor's certificate of eligibility. I would like to ask if age, rather than need, is a good way to delineate the eligibility?
To be clear, I agree that the inclusion of all seniors above age 70 is an efficient way to implement the policy. What I am worried about is over-exclusion of a specific group; that is, a small group that needs PMAs but may now be excluded. Some of them may even have been using PMAs to earn a livelihood, such as food delivery. And given their physical limitations, it may not be possible for them to switch to using other transport modes like PABs. Also, for those in their 50s and 60s, they may not be able to secure other forms of employment.
While this may be a small group, I hope that LTA will consider extending conditional PMA user eligibility to them if they have not chalked up speeding offences in the past. I do recognise that this is indeed a difficult provision to make in terms of legislation. Mr Speaker, please allow me to speak in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Although the age of 70 may be considered reasonable for automatic eligibility, there are also many younger individuals who are unable to walk far due to being overweight or having temporary conditions like gout but are unable to obtain a certificate of eligibility from a doctor.
I agree that the inclusion of all senior citizens aged 70 and above is an efficient way to implement the policy, but my concern is the possibility of over-exclusion of a specific group.
There is a small group of individuals who require PMAs but may no longer be eligible. Some of them also use PMAs to earn a living, such as food delivery. Given their physical limitations, it may be difficult for them to switch to other modes of transport such as PABs. Furthermore, for those in their 50s and 60s, they may face difficulties securing other forms of employment.
Although this group is small, I hope that LTA will consider extending conditional PMA user eligibility to them, provided they have no record of prior speeding offences. I do recognise that such provisions are indeed difficult to implement from a legal standpoint.
(In English): Sembawang West constituency happens to have quite a lot of PMAs. Many of them are plying on shared paths with pedestrians. Several residents, especially the more elderly pedestrians, have given feedback that some PMA users are rude and dominate the shared paths, sometimes, in a dangerous way while others blast loud music even late at night.
These bad behaviours cause near-accidents, especially when pedestrians are forced to make way for them. They also cause noise pollution as the loud music reverberates, sometimes, jolting residents resting at home from their sleep. However, the new rules in the Bill's amendments do not address these behaviours and I am concerned that such eligible but errant PMA users may continue to behave like they own the shared paths.
Again, I recognise that it is difficult to use laws to constrain such behaviour, as eligibility criteria should be based on objective need, not social behavioural norms. Yet, the latter are the stuff of our everyday experience in our homes and towns, and they make a big difference between the safe, quiet enjoyment of our space, or an experience of risk, danger and high emotions. In addition to eligibility criteria, can LTA consider a basic workshop or course on responsible use so as to reduce instances of anti-social PMA users? Mr Speaker, I would like to say a few words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Within the Sembawang West constituency, the use of PMAs is quite prevalent, with a considerable portion operating on paths shared with pedestrians. I have received feedback from many residents, particularly the elderly, regarding some PMA users who are rude on shared paths and dominate lanes inappropriately, sometimes, in a dangerous way. There are also users who blast loud music late at night.
These behaviours cause dangerous situations when pedestrians are forced to give way, whilst also generating noise in residential areas that affects residents' rest at home. Although these issues are isolated incidents, their impact on the community's safety and quality of life cannot be overlooked.
However, the current amendments focus primarily on usage eligibility and technical specifications, and do not directly address behavioural issues. I am concerned that some PMA users who meet the eligibility criteria but engage in inappropriate behaviour may continue to use their device improperly on shared paths.
I understand that it is not easy to regulate such social behaviours through legal means. Eligibility for PMA usage should be based on objective need rather than subjective behavioural assessments.
Nevertheless, these behaviours represent real situations that residents face in daily life and directly affect the peace and safety of common spaces. Beyond defining usage eligibility, I would like to ask the Minister whether LTA could consider complementary measures, such as establishing courses or workshops for PMA users to guide them in responsible usage of PMAs, enhance safety awareness and thereby, better safeguard the safety of both pedestrians and users.
(In English): Another concern is related to implementation challenges. The rules will kick in from 1 June 2026. Although PMAs are currently not required to be registered with LTA and hence, we do not know how many PMAs there are nation-wide. PMDs, however, do need to be registered and currently, there are about 5,100 of these.
While we do not know how many PMAs there are, retailers have reported increasing sales of hundreds of PMAs each year. They are everywhere and are mobile. The success of this new rule is highly dependent on the speed and comprehensiveness of enforcement operations.
Enforcement officers are usually stationed at designated locations. The ineligible users will be on alert and will avoid these officers who can be seen from far, even though they may be wearing plain clothes. Some users may be still riding their PMAs late at night, which are hard to see from far. I would like to ask the Ministry, how many enforcement officers and for how long will they be deployed following the 1 June start date.
The second enforcement process is related to oversized PMAs and non-UL2722 compliant e-scooters. Over the past years, I have received many residents' feedback on their neighbours parking or even charging their oversized PMAs or non-UL2722 compliant e-scooters along HDB flats' common corridors. They are not only a source of fire hazard. They can also become obstructions during emergency escape.
The neighbours of these PMAs and e-scooters owners are a useful source of accurate information of where and when these PMAs and e-scooters are parked which would be valuable information source to LTA enforcement officers. May I ask the Ministry if LTA will provide a direct channel perhaps through an app, for residents to provide feedback and photo or video evidence to LTA, so that enforcement officers can act promptly? Also, should the non-compliant PMAs or e-scooters owners refuse to remove them, are LTA enforcement officers vested with the powers to confiscate these items?
Finally, following the roll-out of this new rule, we can expect many non-compliant PMAs and e-scooters may be disposed of as there may not be a viable secondary market locally. Wearing my Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment GPC hat, I hope LTA will set up collection points for these vehicles to be deposited and thereafter, arrange for them to be sold and be used in overseas markets. Alternatively, I urge LTA to arrange for these disposed PMAs and e-scooters to be scrapped and parts be recycled appropriately so that they do not create a new problem for our environment.
This year, Singapore becomes a super-aged society. There will be more seniors who will need PMAs to move around. Let us reset the original intent of PMAs as a mobility aid. Let us protect and support our seniors and those with mobility challenges. Let us put a stop to unnecessary injuries and deaths due to PMA and PMD fires. Let us keep our homes safe for everyone. Mr Speaker, I support the Bill amendments.
Mr Speaker: Order. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will assume the Chair at 4.00 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.39 pm until 4.00 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.00 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.
Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sengkang is one of Singapore's densest estates and our residents regularly shared with us their transport immobility experiences and challenges while going about their daily lives in the community.
I support the core objectives and the amendments being tabled before us today but would like to seek clarifications relating to how the enforcement of the new regime to regulate the use of PMAs will take place and in particular, how these policies are developed in conjunction with the AMAP.
One of the key questions that I have relates to how authorities propose the enforcement take place against PMA users who are potentially breaching the upcoming rules.
While the amendments introduce the Certificate of Medical Need system, how would trying to catch users without the requisite certification look like in practice? For example, would enforcement officers be required to identify potential rule breakers based on clear rationale? For instance, whether the certificate or the registration mark is visible on the mobility scooter? While circumstances like having multiple people squeezing onto a mobility scooter might be a reasonable means of identification, as it is unlikely that multiple people travelling to the same location may have mobility affecting disabilities, I am concerned that casual, visual perception of able-bodiedness would be used instead.
Complicating this is that I understand that LTA's OneMotoring site listed several exemptions from the Certificate of Medical Need. These include users aged 70 and above, beneficiaries of the Assistive Technology Fund and Seniors Mobility Enabling Fund, and individuals assessed to require assistance with ADL under various assessments. How will enforcement officers thus identify these users and how will we ensure that certified PMA users just trying to move about their everyday lives are not subject to constant interruption or compliance checks?
Having clear published guidelines will also help with public education efforts. This is especially important given that we can see from various news reports that so many of the confrontations between PMA users and pedestrians take place without an enforcement officer present. How can we ensure that vigilante justice will not rear its ugly head with passers-by leaping to hasty or even erroneous conclusions about whether or not a PMA user is indeed eligible? Having spoken to people with disabilities and advocacy groups, it remains common in our society to visually perceive able-bodiedness, including in the national press. We must avoid such stigma being perpetuated inadvertently.
In view of the concerns above, can the Government share how it proposes to address with them with a view to ensure that misconceptions about what disability means, visible or hidden, affecting young or old are not further entrenched?
Mr Deputy Speaker, a further concern raised was that it appears that enforcement of the new rules may be given inadequate time to come in. Four months. There are only four months until mid-2026.
The Disabled People's Association highlighted this point in their comments on this Bill, stating that a one- to two-year implementation period would be more comparable to other laws, such as the Workplace Fairness Act. With the new regulations adding quite a few requirements to the already extensive rules on active mobility, I believe it would be fair to give users more time to get used to the regime and to ensure compliance with it.
Lastly, I have some comments on AMAP, which developed the review of regulations for PMAs that forms this Bill.
I note that in the report, while there is consideration of other legislation in other jurisdictions, I could not find much direct analysis or assessment of the available scientific literature on the issue of PMAs, particularly in relation to road safety, for instance, on the recommendation of reducing the speed limit to six kilometres per hour from the current 10 kilometres per hour. Can the Minister of State share what is the actual data used to determine how reducing the speed limit to six kilometres an hour is significantly more likely to reduce the risk of serious injury, affect reflex time and prevent more accidents to begin with?
My colleague from Hougang single member constituency, Dennis Tan, had earlier and also during the 2024 Committee of Supply, raised concerns too that the proposed six kilometre per hour speed limit appears to be tied to the average walking speed. This may be too slow and end up increasing the journey time for users and those who are reliant on it to move beyond their immediate neighbourhoods and also may have actual financial impact on those who rely on PMAs for their livelihoods. Could the Minister of State thus provide more specific details about how the new speed limit was arrived at?
This is a similar issue with other reports, like the Panel's Review of Active Mobility Regulations for safer path sharing, which introduced the 10 kilometre per hour speed limit on footpaths, which I understand is based largely on work with focus groups.
While such focus groups are important for understanding these issues in Singapore's urban and cultural context, we must also engage with the research material, given that we regulate primarily for safety rather than more subjective concerns. We should understand how the science factors into these recommendations and I ask whether the panel should be updated to include more representation from academia.
In conclusion, while I support the Bill in principle, I hope that some of the issues I raised will be taken to account to inform enforcement. I also hope that future reviews of regulations would be driven primarily by research and that this research is communicated together with any proposed new regulations.
PMAs are useful to persons with disabilities and seniors by supporting their mobility in our communities and neighbourhoods, and can be important tools for removing barriers to accessing public transport. They bring significant co-benefits in the form of promoting connections within the community, sociability, improving health and offering mobility, all with much lower carbon emissions than cars. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Hamid Razak.
Dr Hamid Razak (West Coast-Jurong West): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill 2026. This is a timely and necessary Bill that strengthens our transport regulatory framework amid evolving user behaviours, new mobility devices and rapid technological change.
The amendments relating to PMAs and PMDs, ERP 2.0 and road safety reflect a forward-looking effort to keep our public spaces safe and our system trusted. I would like to offer a few suggestions that I hope can further enhance public safety while preserving fairness and accessibility.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in the weeks leading up to today's Second Reading of the Bill, me and my colleagues on the ground sat at common spaces in the Jurong Spring-Gek Poh Constituency, and just in a few evenings, we observed multiple near-misses involving PMAs: pedestrians stepping aside at the last minute, seniors hesitating before crossing paths, parents instinctively pulling their children closer.
These encounters may not make the headlines, but they shape how safe residents feel in our estates. And when it comes to our common spaces and roads, safety cannot be optional.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, PMAs are now a permanent part of our mobility landscape, particularly for seniors, persons with disabilities, delivery riders and those making short, everyday trips. At the same time, misuse and unsafe behaviour remain deep concerns. Most users are responsible, but it only takes a few unsafe acts to undermine public trust and confidence for everyone. These affect not just riders, but pedestrians, families and entire communities.
First, while the Bill rightly strengthens the enforcement tools and registration requirements, I suggest that we consider a more graduated and targeted approach to penalties, especially for repeat offenders who knowingly disregard safety rules. This is really not about being harsh but rather being clear, consistent and protective, particularly for those who are vulnerable.
Second, to complement device identification, I propose we could explore a simple and visible rider identification system, especially for mobility devices issued for medical needs. This would help enforcement officers act with confidence, while reassuring the public that these devices are being used legitimately.
Third, PMD-related fires remain deeply worrying. Many arise from uncertified batteries, unsafe modifications or prolonged overnight charging at unsuitable locations. I encourage the introduction of national charging-safety guidelines, covering approved chargers, safe charging durations, designated charging zones and clear prohibitions against corridor charging.
Next, Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to speak briefly on the healthcare implications of the proposed Certificate of Medical Need. As a practising doctor, I support the intent to ensure that mobility devices and scooters are meant for those who need it and are directed to those who genuinely require them. This protects public safety and preserves trust in the system.
Not too long ago, a Member in this House spoke about the effects of sarcopenia and aged-related muscle loss. If our seniors and individuals who are actually physically able to walk end up using these devices, they could inadvertently lose their muscle mass and increase the risk of frailty in our community.
However, we should be mindful of the practical impact on healthcare professionals and patients, especially those with temporary mobility limitations, such as individuals recovering from surgery, fractures, strokes or acute illnesses. Clear guidance on who can certify, streamlined criteria and digital or time-limited certification pathways will be important to avoid unnecessary clinic congestion, administrative burden on doctors and healthcare professionals alike, as well as delays for patients who genuinely need short-term mobility support.
I understand that MOH and LTA have issued a circular pertaining to the guidelines to this effect, and I am also happy to note that exceptions are given to those aged above 70 and those already on assistance programmes related to mobility. After all, a safety framework works best when it protects patients without overwhelming clinics. I encourage closer collaboration with healthcare providers as this framework is implemented.
Next, on the ERP 2.0 and the trust-based enforcement that ensues.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the move to decriminalise ERP non-payment. This reflects a mature regulatory approach that recognises that most cases of non-payment are due to administrative oversight rather than intentional evasion. With the new penalty model, the Government reinforces trust with motorists while maintaining accountability.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, moving on to road safety. If there is one area where we should continue to strengthen our approach, it is in addressing dangerous, negligent or reckless driving that results in serious injury or even loss of life. The data is indeed concerning. In 2024, Singapore recorded 7,049 traffic accidents involving injuries, with more than 100 fatalities. Speeding violations continued to rise. So, too, drink-driving arrests. We have also seen cases where fatal outcomes arising from negligence or excessive speed resulted in sentences that, while legally consistent, have left the public uneasy.
I, therefore, urge the Ministry to consider a comprehensive review of sentencing frameworks, particularly for causing death by dangerous or drink-driving. When harm is irreversible, our sentencing framework must reflect that gravity. A calibrated approach would reinforce our national commitment to safety.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill represents a strong and forward-looking update to our land transport laws. It tightens PMA regulation, introduces a trust-based approach to ERP 2.0 and modernises enforcement in meaningful ways.
The suggestions that I have raised on calibrated deterrence, visible identification, charging safety and healthcare-sensitive certification are offered in the spirit of strengthening safety while ensuring fairness and compassion. With these observations, I support the Bill and look forward to the Minister's response.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Sylvia Lim.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to seek clarifications on two aspects of the Bill.
First, to MOT on the keeping of unsafe devices under the Small Motorised Vehicle Safety Act, and secondly, to MHA on the proposed outsourcing of traffic violations processing under the Road Traffic Act.
On the new offence of possession of unsafe devices, Part 6 of the Bill will introduce a new offence of keeping an unsafe AMD by amending the Small Motorised Vehicle (Safety) Act 2020. First, let me say that I strongly support this amendment. From time to time, I have encountered AMD fires in my ward caused by overnight charging of devices suspected to have non-compliant batteries. Such fires are fierce. The damage caused is not just to property, but also to residents of nearby units who suffer from smoke inhalation injury, such as swollen eyes and respiratory airways, and carbon monoxide poisoning. There is also trauma and psychological damage. Long after the fire subsides, residents look on AMDs at the common areas with trepidation, for fear that the next fire outside their door might leave them trapped.
Nationwide, the effect of AMD fires has also been sobering. On 12 January, in response to an Adjournment Motion filed by Workers' Party's Non-Constituency Member of Parliament Andre Low, MHA confirmed that AMD fires have been disproportionately fatal. The media release on this Bill by MOT also acknowledged that non-compliant e-scooters pose severe fire risk.
Given this experience, I would expect LTA to take the lead in enforcement actions against non-compliant devices, especially those found at HDB blocks, where harm to many residents is most imminent.
It would thus be useful for MOT to clarify how enforcement actions will change when the Bill becomes law. Based on correspondence with LTA in July last year, I was given to understand that LTA's enforcement then was focused on non-compliant devices that were being ridden on public paths. This was a point alluded to by the Minister of State in his speech earlier as well. Our Town Council was told that for non-compliant devices parked at common areas, the Town Council should do its own enforcement or review its bylaws, but clearly, Town Councils are not the subject matter experts as to whether a device is compliant or not.
Two days ago, LTA had indicated to our Town Council its openness to including one of our hotspots in a possible island-wide operation against non-compliant AMDs. I welcome the Minister of State's statement earlier also, that under this Bill, the LTA's role will be enlarged in enforcement, in this area. So, Sir, with the amendments proposed today, could MOT confirm that LTA will be taking the lead in the enforcement of the new provisions in the common areas of HDB estates?
Sir, next, on the outsourcing of processing of traffic violations, clause 79 of the Bill proposes to outsource processing of traffic violations from the Traffic Police and LTA. According to the MHA's media release of 12 January, civilian contractors will be tasked to process traffic notices for camera-detected violations. It was stated that such a move would enable the Traffic Police to outsource the processing of straightforward cases and hence, free up resources to focus on more complex cases.
Sir, while I appreciate that outsourcing will result in cost efficiencies, it is important to elicit some details to understand how this move will affect members of the public. To this end, I have four queries that I would like the Ministry to clarify.
First, it was mentioned that the outsourcing will be to civilian contractors. These civilian contractors are presumably private sector companies. What are the criteria for selection of these contractors? Will there be more than one contractor appointed concurrently?
Secondly, clause 79 of the Bill provides that an assessment framework for the prescribed offences will be prepared by the Traffic Police or LTA, which these contractors must adhere to. Could the Ministry clarify at what level of detail these assessment frameworks will be pitched? A case example using a specific offence would be useful to understand this.
Thirdly, residents may wish lodge appeals for offences to be waived or reduced. Although camera-detected violations might seem straightforward and not appealable, I have not found this to be true in all cases. For instance, in one case, a resident of mine was initially charged with beating a red light. After appealing to the Police, the charge was reduced to a lesser one of not forming up correctly when making a right turn, which carried a lower fine and less demerit points. When the provisions on outsourcing are activated, who will decide on appeal cases? It seems to me that some human judgement and discretion is required, which is better exercised by our public servants in the Police and the LTA.
Fourthly, on viewing of camera footage. So far, the Police have been forthcoming in arranging for the public to view camera footage to confirm if they have indeed committed certain traffic offences. Will the contractors similarly make such arrangements when requested?
So, Sir, in summary, while I support the Bill, I look forward to the clarifications from the two Ministries.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Cai Yinzhou.
Mr Cai Yinzhou (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Deputy Speaker, between July and October last year, I walked through the aftermath of three major fires in Toa Payoh Central. I stood alongside neighbours during chaotic moments of evacuation, offering immediate aid and a listening ear.
In one of these fires, we faced the ultimate tragedy – the loss of two of our own residents. Post fires, residents shared insecurities of living in their own homes. One major concern involved living near neighbours with AMDs.
Since debates commenced in this House in September, I have asked seven Parliamentary Questions on AMD safety, six Parliamentary Questions on electrical battery safety and three Parliamentary Questions on fire safety. I filed a total of 16 questions across MOT, MHA and MTI, because one fire is a fire too many, especially in what is supposed to be a safe abode. And it is given this context that I respond to the Bill.
I rise in support of the Bill and commend its decisive measures to improve the safety of our public paths and roads for all. In particular, it addresses common concerns of Singaporeans about the misuse of PMAs. By strengthening enforcement powers against AMDs, the Bill ensures safer roads, fairer usage of transport infrastructure and more sustainable mobility for all. To better aid enforcement and implementation of the Bill, and to support vulnerable demographics that may be impacted, I would like to raise four points of clarification for the Ministry's consideration.
First, there is a need to complement the implementation of the new regulations with community education to avoid inadvertent violations by genuine PMA users, particularly on the new rules regarding medical certification and registration. Some users, such as the elderly, are already not familiar with existing regulations. For instance, the AMAP noted during their focused group discussions, that several participants were confused about the distinction between PMAs and PMDs. This points to a potential gap between legislative intent and user awareness. Thus, changes brought about in this Bill must be communicated effectively to ensure compliance.
In addition, some of the changes introduced requires active steps to be taken by existing PMA users, such as visiting their healthcare provider for a certification that they are eligible to use or registering and obtaining an identification mark for their PMA. Genuine users have raised concerns and questions as to what this will entail. The Disabled People's Association has recommended that the Ministry optimise inclusivity and ease the process for obtaining medical certification and registration for genuine users, such as by: (a) ensuring that grants or subsidies be established to cover any potential costs of certification and registration; (b) clarifying that the relevant \"certification\" needed does not require a formal medical diagnosis, but simply documentation from an assessor noting the need for the use of a PMA; and (c) ensuring that \"medical need\" to ride a PMA is assessed on a broad and inclusive basis.
I would like to ask the Minister, what specific plans will be put in place to ensure the proper dissemination of information to existing PMA users, such as the elderly and the disabled? How can these groups, particularly the elderly, be supported in navigating changes such as obtaining medical certification and registering their PMAs, in time before the enforcement of the new rules? I would like to highlight that the Disabled People's Association has published a very comprehensive commentary on the Bill and I hope that the Ministry will consider their perspective for genuine users of PMAs.
My second question relates to the disposal of non-compliant PMAs. The Bill introduces new size and design requirements of a PMA, such as requiring it to only have one seat and to not exceed the maximum dimensions stated. I note that the Bill will also make it illegal to keep unsafe devices at home and those who currently possess non-compliant PMAs will have to dispose of it.
I would like to ask the Minister for clarifications on the disposal process, especially for some owners who may fear reproach or penalties and instead discreetly dump it. When the Government introduced regulations against PMDs in 2019, LTA worked with e-waste recyclers to set up designated disposal points across HDB estates, which facilitated the disposal of PMDs at no cost to existing owners. Moreover, to incentivise early disposal, registered owners who stepped forward for disposal qualified for an early disposal incentive. Separately, weeks before etomidate was classified as a Class C illegal drug, the \"Bin the Vape\" Campaign offered a form of amnesty period – voluntary, no-questions-asked disposal of vape devices and related products.
I would like to ask whether the Ministry will consider setting up similar initiatives this year in partnership with agencies like HDB, Town Council and People's Association for the disposal of non-compliant AMDs.
My third point relates to the enforcement and implementation of speed limits. A key development in this Bill lowering of the speed limit from 10 kilometres per hour to six kilometres per hour for PMAs. I support this move, as it better reflects the intended use of PMAs to replace walking for users with mobility challenges.
For vehicles on the road, there are cameras to track when vehicles go past the speed limit. Will the Ministry also install similar cameras along walkways and shared paths to ensure that errant PMAs are properly fined for speeding offences? While members of the public may report incidents of errant device users on public paths to LTA, it is more often difficult to do so practically. Similar to how the Police and NEA has volunteers with enforcement powers, will the Ministry consider empowering LTA volunteers instead to check on PMA licences?
Enforcement of the new rules should not just focus on the behaviour of PMA users in our communities, but actions should also be considered to be taken against retailers and sellers of these non-compliant PMAs and illegal PMDs. In this vein, I would like to clarify whether the Ministry will move beyond physical patrols to collaborating with community marketplaces, like Carousell, to automatically flag and delist these devices, and whether a proactive social media monitoring unit or public whistle-blowing mechanism will be established to identify users and retailers of modified devices.
How does the Ministry intend to address the issue of platform workers who currently use PMAs for food delivery, who are concerned that the lowered speed limit would affect the number of deliveries they can make and their livelihoods directly? Platform workers are a valued part of the Singapore workforce, many of them work tirelessly to make ends meet. Does the Ministry have plans to work together with platform operators like Grab and Foodpanda, to introduce initiatives that will ease the burden of the impact of new regulations on their livelihoods?
My fourth point relates to fire safety. The disproportionate fire risk and danger of AMDs is widely recognised, with data shared by MHA revealing that while such devices accounted for less than 5% of residential fires in the past five years, they caused more than 25% of fatalities.
I note that the bulk of these fires occurred from devices that were illegally modified, or those that were not tested and certified. This highlights the significance of robust fire safety standards and enforcement measures. To this end, LTA has implemented a series of regulations, such as the UL2272 standard and periodic inspections every two years for PMDs and the EN15194 standard for PABs. These comprehensive measures have undoubtedly prevented many fires and greatly improved the safety of AMDs.
In my Parliamentary Question filed on 23 September last year on having PMAs to undergo periodic inspections, the reply noted that there are currently no commonly recognised international fire safety standards for PMAs. However, the fire risk posed by PMAs is no less serious than that posed by PMDs and PABs. Furthermore, PMAs are used by individuals like seniors with walking difficulties, who may not be able to escape to safety without substantial assistance in the event of a fire. For this vulnerable demographic, fire regulations should be even more stringent, as commensurate with the increased vulnerabilities of the persons involved.
Considering the potentially long wait for an internationally recognised fire standard for PMAs to be established, I call upon the Ministry to strengthen fire regulations for PMAs with periodic inspections.
Notwithstanding these clarifications, I support this Bill and look forward to the implementation on 1 June 2026.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Wan Rizal.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill which seeks to improve the safe usage of transportation modes on our roads and footpaths as well as the storage within our homes and neighbourhoods.
Transport safety does not begin only at home. It does start the moment we step on the road too. It begins at home with our families, our neighbours and the choices we make in shared spaces.
Electric-powered PMDs have gained popularity as an affordable and efficient means of travel for many. However, these devices also pose higher fire risks in our homes and neighbourhoods. As such, fires are often more severe and more likely to result in serious injuries and fatalities.
This is why Singapore has placed strong emphasis on the use of PMDs that comply with UL2272 fire safety standards. Even so, improper use of unsafe charging practices can still pose significant risk to device owners, family members, neighbours and of course, our firefighters. A firefighter once shared with me that the e-scooter battery fires are unlike the typical fires that they face. They can reignite, generate intense heat and spread rapidly, especially in confined spaces. The most distressing moments are when families are trapped behind close doors while corridors are filled with toxic smoke from burning lithium ion batteries. I, the,refore commend our Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) officers for continuously upskilling our firefighters to respond to fires involving PMDs.
But at the same time, prevention must remain our first line of defence. In this regard, I support the move to go beyond banning the use of non-UL2272-certified e-scooters on public paths and roads and to make it an offence to keep such devices.
I urge all owners to check their devices and to use only UL2272-certified models to protect the safety of themselves and their loved ones. And in a neighbourhood where we all live together, it is especially important that we remain vigilant and support each other in such a manner.
Mr Speaker, the use of AMDs on public paths has been a challenging issue in many neighbourhoods. In land scarce Singapore, pedestrians and device users must share our limited space. When accidents occur, the consequences can be serious, especially for elderly pedestrians who often sustain even more severe injuries and take much longer to recover. I recall when I was a grassroots leader in Pasir Ris many years ago, I was distraught at the thought and sight of an elderly lady being hit by an e-scooter. That memory is still fresh in my mind and I do not want that to occur anymore.
I note that this Bill seeks to strengthen the operating safety of PMAs by reducing the limit from 10 kilometres per hour to six kilometres per hour by January 2029, extending size restrictions, requiring registration and introducing a Certificate of Medical Need for the use of PMDs on public paths.
While these regulatory changes aim to improve pedestrian safety, which I really support, you must recognise that PMDs are medical devices that support persons with mobility impairments too. So, for many PMDs like those in my constituency, which is aged and we have many elderly residents, PMDs are not merely a means of transport but an essential enabler for independence and dignity. They allow my residents to move about in their neighbourhoods, attend medical appointments, purchase daily necessities and manage personal errands independently. I therefore call on the Ministry to implement these regulations in a manner that does not place additional burden or hardships on those with genuine needs. In particular, Sir, I seek clarification on whether assessments for the Certificate of Medical Need can be conducted at polyclinics so as to help manage costs and ensure accessibility.
Sir, this Bill also sends a clear signal on the importance of road safety for all road users. In 2024, speeding violations reached a 10-year high, with the number of cases doubling compared to the previous year. More than 6,000 cases involve lorries and other heavy vehicles. When I was an SCDF officer many years ago, I witnessed an accident where a lorry was hit and the workers who were in the vehicle were thrown all over the road. At the site of that, being a part of the SCDF team, it just reminds me that we cannot allow these things to happen. I really support this part of the Bill.
Sir, I support the increased penalties for breaches involving failure to install speed limiters by the compliance deadline as these are important measures to protect heavy vehicle drivers, the workers conveyed on such vehicles and other road users.
I also welcome the strengthening of penalties for illegal vehicle modifications, including the tampering with speed limiters which undermine the intent of safety regulations. I urge companies to comply fully with the speed limit rules, including early installation ahead of the 1 July 2027 deadline. At the same time, I ask whether the Ministry is studying the challenges companies may face, whether cost, operational or technical to ensure that enforcement is effective and sustainable. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Sir, I recently met a resident who uses a PMA due to permanent mobility constraints. The PMA enables him to leave home independently, buy food, go for medical appointments and manage daily needs without relying entirely on family members. He moves slowly, carefully and complies with regulations. His concern is not about safety, but about access – whether the process and cost of obtaining a Certificate of Medical Need will complicate something that is essential to his daily life.
Sir, safety is not merely a matter of regulations. It is a matter of shared values and responsibility.
Safety begins at home. When mobility devices are not safely stored or charged, the risk falls not only on one individual but on the entire family as well as neighbours around them. Fire and smoke know no boundaries of housing units.
On the issue of PMAs, we must be clear that these devices are medical necessities for individuals with mobility constraints. For them, PMAs are not a luxury. Rather, it is a device for independent living, for mobility and for continuing to contribute to as a member of society.
Many PMA users are also our platform workers. They leave early in the morning and return late at night, not by choice, but out of their duty to support their families. This kind of work is employment with dignity; livelihood earned through one's own effort.
As a labour movement, NTUC takes seriously the impact of implementing these regulations on our workers' daily lives. Through continuous engagement on the ground, NTUC and workers' associations, such as the National Delivery Champions Association (NDCA), have met delivery workers at their workplaces, where they rest, where they work, listening directly to concerns and worries they have about income, compliance costs and changes to their work routines.
Their feedback will form the basis for ongoing discussions with platform operators and relevant agencies, so that safety can be enhanced without sacrificing livelihoods. Fair safety is safety that takes into account the reality of workers' lives.
Sir, in conclusion, this Bill requires us to find a balance between safety and social justice. Protecting lives, without denying the dignity of work and the right to earn a living. When we care for the most vulnerable, the families, the senior citizens, persons with disabilities and workers, we are building a society that is safer, more humane and more resilient. I support this Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Haresh Singaraju.
Dr Haresh Singaraju (Nominated Member): Mr Deputy Speaker, this is an omnibus Bill that amends six Acts. I rise to speak on the Certificate of Medical Need for driving or riding mobility vehicles.
I am a family physician. I run a polyclinic. Some of our residents need mobility scooters. My team and I know who they are. The ah ma with severe arthritis. Her knees have given way, but her spirit has not. She still wants to go to the market, she still wants to choose her vegetables. The uncle who has lost his leg to diabetes. He is not asking for pity, he is asking to get around. The pakcik recovering from stroke. Six months ago he was walking, now he is learning to live differently. These are the people this provision is meant to protect.
I support this Bill. I have three points. The first two are practical, the third is a reflection.
First, guide residents to their primary provider. The Bill requires a Certificate of Medical Need, but it does not specify which doctor should assess. This matters. A certificate is only as good as the assessment behind it and an assessment is only as good as the information available to the assessor. When a resident needs a Certificate of Medical Need, my advice is simple: see their regular doctor, their family physician, their enrolled Healthier SG clinic. Why? Because they know the resident. They have the medical history. They have watched the residents' mobility change over time. They understand the home environment, the daily routine, their goals, their values. That is the doctor best place to certify need.
I therefore ask that public messaging reinforces this clearly, not just see a doctor, but see your doctor. And for those who do not yet have a regular doctor to enrol into Healthier SG, start building their relationship. It will serve them well, not just for this, but for their health over the long term. Right doctor, right records, right outcome.
For those already using scooters and unsure if they qualify, we should encourage them to have an honest conversation with their doctor. For some, this may be the first medical review in years. Conditions change, some may have improved, some may benefit from intervention. This is not just certification, it is an opportunity for care. And for those who may not qualify, our role is to help them understand their options, including alternatives that may serve them better.
Second, the guidelines are sound, but refinement will be needed. Mr Speaker, I have read the guidelines. These were developed after consulting 11 professional bodies. The guidelines give us a foundation. We are not starting from zero, but clinical practice will surface grey zones conditions that do not fit neatly. Residents whose function fluctuates, residents whose needs are hard to access in a clinic room.
Consider the resident in her 60s who can walk but has fallen three times this year. She is not immobile, but is she safe? These are the cases that do not fit neatly into \"yes\" or \"no\". Without clear guidance, different doctors may reach different conclusions and residents may learn to shop around. Consistency protects both the resident and the system. For some of these cases, we welcome the option to tap on our occupational therapists. They assess function where it matters: in the home, on the path, in real life. That said, we will need supplementary guidance over time, learning from real cases, refining our approach.
I ask that the Ministry gathers feedback after roll-out and convenes sessions where practitioners can learn from case studies. The Singapore Medical Association's guidelines on medical assessment of fitness to drive is a good model. It matured over years, it is now a trusted reference. I note that the \"Frequently Asked Questions\" (FAQ) clarifies that assessors acting in good faith will not be second guessed. We welcome that assurance. These consultations may be difficult, especially when a resident wants a scooter but does not qualify.
But this is not new to us, we navigate these conversations every day. I encourage my fellow clinicians to approach these assessments with confidence. These are opportunities for meaningful conversation to understand our residents' needs, review their conditions and help them move forward safely.
Third, a reflection on the system. Mobility scooters have been around for years. They serve those who needed them, often under funding safeguards that ensured appropriate use. But as these devices became commercially available, usage grew far beyond the intended population. And now, we respond with certification, with healthcare as gatekeepers.
I understand why this response is necessary and I credit the Ministry for consulting the professional bodies and developing guidelines before roll-out. But I ask the Government: how did we get here, reacting downstream instead of having built in safeguards upstream from the start?
Healthcare will do her part for public safety and the public good. We always have. But let me name what such a reactive policy costs. Ideal implementation in healthcare takes time. In the meantime, there will be workarounds, goodwill, clinicians doing what needs to be done. This is added to existing responsibilities. Workarounds in our systems, goodwill is not infrastructure.
The question now is: how do we avoid being here again? This is not the first time across-Ministry policy has landed at healthcare door. It will not be the last.
So, I say this: continue to consult healthcare at design. We know what good design looks like, driving licensed medical assessments where verification is needed before you drive, work permit medical examinations where clearance is needed before the permit, disabled parking labels, where need is verified upfront. These systems work because they are tied upstream with verification built in from the start.
For mobility scooters, the gap was the commercial market. When devices became available commercially, there was no equivalent gate. I am glad to note that mobility vehicles will now need to be registered with LTA. Pegged with healthcare certificate or medical need, this creates a system that is tight at entry. This is good design and I welcome it. Prevention is better than cure. This is true in medicine. It is true in policy too.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I return to where I started – the ah ma, the uncle, the pakcik. Let us set up this policy well for them. The assessors, let us continue refining our guidelines and supporting our clinicians and occupational therapists to do their work with confidence and let us learn from this for what may come next.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Elysa Chen.
Ms Elysa Chen (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill.
Mobility is freedom. Thus, I appreciate Minister of State Baey's acknowledgment of the Bill's attempt to balance access and safety. Both access and safety are critical for this freedom that mobility offers us. Under this Bill, pedestrians have freedom from injury and neighbours, freedom from PMD-related fires. And the gracious use of our transport system helps to increase this sense of freedom.
Recently, I met with parents of young children together with my fellow Group Representation Constituency MP Cai Yinzhou, to hear about their struggles on commuting, whether it is carrying strollers onto public buses or whether they are fearful of sharing paths with fast-moving personal mobility devices. As a mother myself who takes public transport, I completely understand the struggle.
Singapore's transport infrastructure is a shared space. It is built on a social compact and understanding that we move through the city as members of one community, not merely as separate individuals seeking to reach our destinations. This is where graciousness comes in. We need to show grace, patience and kindness to one another as we travel together. This Bill addresses three critical areas where that graciousness is tested.
Firstly, on disabled persons and mobility aids. The amendments to mobility scooters and PMAs do not punish disabled persons. They protect them and they protect our shared spaces. The issue is misused. Able-bodied individuals operating mobility devices unsuitable for pedestrian paths have created genuine hazards for the elderly and young children.
The measures proposed – requiring medical certification, reducing speed limits and establishing device registration – serve to ensure that those with genuine needs can move safely and with dignity. When someone who cannot walk risks collision because an able-bodied person misuses a scooter, this affects the community. When an oversized device occupies space meant for a young child, the dignity of the disabled user is compromised alongside the safety of others.
Good regulation is an expression of grace toward all, including our disabled citizens. It communicates that all our needs are real, that our dignity is protected and those around us will be safer when sharing space with us. This Bill affirms that commitment.
Secondly, on accountability for heavy vehicles and PMDs without UL2272 certification, which are illegal on our roads, but can still be kept in our homes. The speed limiter, amendments for lorries between 3.5 and 12 tonnes will reduce road fatalities and protect our communities. The substantially increased penalties for illegal alteration of motorised vehicles, up to $10,000 for individuals and $40,000 for corporates, send a clearer signal on the non-negotiable ability of safety.
The same can be said for PMDs without UL2272, which remain fire hazards. Seventy-two percent of AMD-related fires in the last three years were related to non-compliant devices, and I am glad that we are removing those safety hazards from our homes.
Thirdly, regarding the ERP 2.0 system and the decriminalisation of charges. This change reflects a mature, refined approach to accountability. Vehicle owners will face real consequences, helping us to ensure compliance without the bluntness of criminal prosecution. If vehicle owners do not pay what they owe, they would not be able to renew their road tax or sell their vehicle until the payments are settled.
These measures protect the community by ensuring that those who use our roads do so responsibly and the enforcement mechanisms serve the broader good.
These three areas share a common thread. They are all expressions of a single principle: when we use shared transport infrastructure, we do so as members of a community, not in isolation. That community comprises the elderly gentleman on a mobility scooter, the young mother with a child, or a lorry driver navigating a residential area, the casual road user and all of us who depend on moving safely through Singapore. Graciousness does not mean the absence of rules. Graciousness means rules that protect the vulnerable while serving the legitimate needs of all.
As this Bill moves towards debate and implementation, I wish to invite all members of our community to consider two commitments. First, a commitment to graciousness towards the young, disabled and elderly persons on our transport systems – the people whom we should be looking out for. They deserve safe and dignified passage. This is not charity. It is recognition of the equal standing in our community. They deserve the same freedoms that we enjoy, the same access to the transport infrastructure that we use and the same dignity as we commute together.
One of my volunteers also shared about a time when he was unable to enter a lift after waiting 15 minutes even though he had a young child in a stroller with him. This was because the lift was full of able-bodied commuters. He eventually had to take the escalator even though it posed a safety risk. Can we do better for such commuters?
I encourage members of the public to show graciousness towards them and others like them to understand that the disabled person on a mobility scooter, navigating a crowded path, or an elderly uncle lumbering on a public sidewalk are not obstacles to go around, but people exercising their right to move independently.
Second commitment regarding noise levels from PMAs using paths near residential areas. I have received several complaints from residents about PMA users who play music very loudly throughout the day, disrupting online meetings, children's naps and our residents' rest. As our city becomes busier, the noise in our environment, where the buses, trains, stations or footpaths has deteriorated. This is not merely aesthetic. Noise is a form of pollution that affects the well-being of all commuters, particularly the elderly and those with sensory sensitivities. Transport operators and enforcement officers should be empowered to enforce reasonable conduct standards. Commuters can be mindful that personal music, loud phone conversations and unnecessary noise in public are intrusions on the shared space.
This is graciousness in its most equal form, the recognition that the time another person spent on public transport is as valuable as your own and that you have an obligation to protect their experience of that journey, that our homes and communities are places of rest and should be safe from noise and disruption.
Accordingly, Mr Deputy Speaker, I commend this Bill to the House. May we move forward with the understanding that a gracious transport system is one that accommodates all of our citizens, young and old, disabled and able-bodied, with equal care for their safety and dignity.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Ng Shi Xuan.
Mr Ng Shi Xuan (Sembawang): Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this amendment Bill and its intent to improve safety on our public paths, reduce fire risks from unsafe devices and strengthen accountability in the personal mobility space.
I will be addressing the active mobility provisions in my clarification and I would like to frame my comments around three topics: first, users and their caregivers; second, consistent enforcement; and lastly, device safety, storage and the role of our community.
The certificate of medical need is well-intentioned. It ensures PMAs are used appropriately and by those who genuinely need them. But on the ground, situations are rarely black and white.
A resident in my Naval Base constituency is medically weak due to multiple complications and relies on her husband to accompany her on her PMD. In another case, a couple shared that the wife would ride the PMD after the husband completes his dialysis as he is too weak to do so himself. They are concerned that such arrangements may now face penalties under the new framework.
Under the existing Active Mobility Act 2017, a \"mobility scooter\" is defined to mean a vehicle that has a seat and is designed to carry a single individual. Arguably, it does not extend to a scooter that is designed for two persons, for example, where a caregiver rides the scooter with an incapacitated pillion rider.
Clause 2(g) of the amendment Bill introduces certain amendments to the definition of a \"mobility scooter\", which emphasises that the mobility scooter should only have a \"single seat behind the footboard\".
However, clause 2(h) of the amendment Bill introduces a new definition of \"mobility vehicles\" to include \"any other motor vehicle designed to carry an individual who is unable to walk or has difficulty in walking and prescribed for the purpose of this definition\".
In addition, clause 16 of the Amendment Bill introduces a new section 23I, which, in subsection (2), creates an exception to the offence of driving or riding a mobility vehicle without a certificate of medical need in circumstances prescribed in regulations.
Taken together, these provisions leave open the possibility that certain vehicles, such as the two-seater vehicles that I have mentioned as an example, being prescribed as mobility vehicles and permitted for use under certain circumstances. Would the Ministry further study such practical needs when developing the subsidiary legislation?
There may be circumstances where it may be necessary or convenient for an incapacitated individual and his caregiver to use a two-seater vehicle for legitimate mobility purposes, for example, if the individual is exhausted from dialysis or otherwise temporarily incapacitated from operating the vehicle.
While enforcers may exercise discretion, policy clarity gives confidence to families and certainty to enforcement officers.
In addition, I would like to ask: one, how does the Ministry to balance the risk of \"assessor shopping\" with the provision of avenues for applicants to seek a second opinion in good faith? Two, what are the proposed timelines from application to clinical assessment and issuance of the certificate? And three, how will the Ministry ensure that fees are affordable? For example, would individuals with permanent and irreversible medical conditions be granted certificates with an indefinite validity period to minimise the inconvenience of periodic renewals?
Sir, in addition to permanent conditions, we also see many time-bound mobility issues in our community. Residents recovering from surgery, fractures, stroke, chemotherapy or dialysis may only need a mobility scooter for a few weeks or months, not permanently. In this regard, I note that clause 16 of the Amendment Bill introduces a new section 23K of the Active Mobility Act, which contemplates that each certificate will have a validity period. So, I would like to ask: will the framework allow for short-duration certificates and can validity periods be proportionate to medical need, instead of a fixed renewal cycle?
Ultimately, clarity on the form of the certificates would be helpful as this avoids over-medicalising temporary conditions and repeated clinic visits for residents who are already unwell.
The reduction of the PMA speed limit from 10 kilometres per hours to six kilometres per hour is sensible. Lower speeds do reduce injury severity. Furthermore, PMAs will now be required to carry registration marks which allow for enforcement. But enforcement consistency and deterrence matter. Recently, LTA installed a temporary enforcement camera right outside Canberra Primary School. Parents welcomed it. School leaders supported it. However, residents were surprised when it was removed after just three weeks.
So, I would like to ask, can LTA publish clearer criteria on where cameras are likely be deployed, for how long and what conditions trigger removal or extension?
Visibility of such cameras builds trust and acts as an effective deterrent and assures road users that we are doing our best to keep our roads and pathways safe for all. My suggestion is to consider permanent cameras at school zones, downward slopes and high foot-traffic areas; temporary cameras to rotate between key junctions and supported by roving enforcement elsewhere.
While PMDs are still in its nascency in Singapore, it is consistency in enforcement that will likely change behaviour.
Should there be a lack of resources or funding for such permanent cameras, could we also explore a co-funding model between local Town Councils and LTA for estates which want to participate in enforcement?
Making it an offence to keep unsafe devices is necessary. Fire risks are real, and we have seen tragic consequences. Under the Active Mobility Act, there is already provision for authorised officers and public path wardens, including volunteers. Enforcement exists today, but residents' feedback that coverage and visibility can feel uneven, especially at hotspots.
My question is, can MOT and LTA expand the use of this existing framework to educate, identify high-risk devices and prevent incidents early? For example, strengthening public path warden presence, partnering Town Councils and Community Emergency and Engagement (C2E) Committees and empowering our Active Mobility Community Ambassadors (AMCA).
Today, residents can already report illegal vehicle parking through OneMotoring. So, I would like to suggest for MOT to explore a similar structured reporting channel, perhaps through OneService, for PMD and PMA issues. For example, uploading your photo, tagging your location and simple categorisation. This will allow for faster response, active community eyes on the ground and early detection of unsafe devices. It strengthens safety without over-reliance on enforcement alone.
MHA shared recently that in the past three years, 77, or 72%, of the AMD-related fires in HDB estates involved PMDs and PABs which were either non-UL2272 compliant or non-EN15194 compliant; or had been modified, rendering them non-compliant. This means that a significant 28% or more than one in four AMD-related fires involved compliant devices. As the Government has noted previously, although AMD-related fires form a small proportion of fires in HDB estates, such fires are typically more severe and more likely to result in fatalities and injuries.
While registration and the requirement for devices to be UL2272-compliant are useful in reducing the risk of fires, they do not adequately address the fire risk of compliant devices. How can the Government reduce the threat to safety and property, given that more than one in four fires are caused by these compliant devices? I encourage the agencies to conduct a feasibility study and share the study with public on allowing these devices to be parked at HDB Multi-storey Car Park (MSCP) as an option and to build fire-resistant charging infrastructure in MSCPs for users to charge their PMDs and PMA batteries. Alternatively, we could consider sandboxes in MSCPs where usage is low.
This idea is not plucked out from thin air. I deal with batteries on a daily basis and last Saturday, also had a chat with a retailer on the sideline of our fire safety talk. Similarly, they agreed that with three to four connectors head and three to four voltages, the permutation is not that many for such a sandbox to be deployed quickly. In Mandarin, Sir.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, I would like to briefly present my views in Mandarin. This amendment Bill is heading in the right direction, but the real key lies in how to implement the policy effectively.
First, on Certificate of Medical Need. This system is heading in the right direction, but real life is often more complex than legal provisions. In the community, there are many elderly people who are temporarily weak after dialysis, chemotherapy or surgery, and need family members or caregivers to assist them in using mobility aids. I hope the policy can provide clear guidance so that caregivers do not have to worry about enforcement risks in reasonable circumstances.
At the same time, we also see many residents who are only temporarily mobility-impaired, such as after surgery or fracture. I hope the system can allow short-term or time-limited medical certificates, whilst for permanent medical conditions, consideration could be given to longer validity periods which needs less frequent updating, to reduce the burden of repeated medical consultations for patients.
Second, regarding speed limits and enforcement consistency. Reducing the speed limit for mobility aids to six kilometres per hour is reasonable, but the key to truly changing behaviour lies in consistent and sustained enforcement. Taking school areas as an example, if enforcement is only short-term, it easily creates a mentality of \"things will be fine once the attention dies down\". I hope the authorities can clearly explain the deployment principles for speed cameras and consider establishing permanent enforcement points at high-risk locations, with roving enforcement in other areas, to give the public a stable sense of security.
Third, regarding registration and fire safety. The registration system is important, but for many elderly people, digital processes are not user-friendly. If registration responsibility could be moved forward to points of sale, ensuring compliance from the source, this would both reduce pressure on the elderly and lower subsequent enforcement costs.
Regarding fire prevention, even compliant equipment still poses certain risks. I hope the Government can study setting up fire-resistant charging or parking solutions in HDB multi-storey car parks and, through pilot testing, further reduce threats to residents' lives and property.
Mr Deputy Speaker, laws are only the start. Implementation is the key. As long as the policy can truly accommodate family needs, be feasible for businesses and allow community participation, this Bill can achieve a better balance between safety and inclusiveness.
(In English): Sir, this Bill sets the right direction. But laws succeed only when families feel supported, users and companies can comply and communities feel safe. My intent today is to help make this policy work better on the ground. I look forward to the Minister's clarifications and how we can refine implementation together.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Choo Pei Ling.
Dr Choo Pei Ling (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to declare that I am a registered member of the Allied Health Professions Council, and my work involves accessing, treating and educating on disability.
This Land Transport and Related Matters Bill is important for its impact on safeguarding lives and preparing our transport system for the future. Speeding remains one of the leading causes of fatal crashes. The mandatory speed limiter regime is necessary.
I commend EnterpriseSG for stepping in with support, covering 50% of eligible costs for small and medium enterprises through the Productivity Solutions Grant. Yet, as of early January, more than 140 lorry owners had not complied. This is not a trivial figure. It points to real challenges in implementation.
I would like to ask if the Government has identified the obstacles faced by these lorry owners. Where genuine difficulties exist, can more assistance be rendered? Safety should never be compromised because of affordability or administrative hurdles.
Mr Deputy Speaker, fire tragedies involving AMDs have been unfolding in our estates, sometimes right at the doorsteps of our neighbours. Between 2022 and 2025, over 70% of such fires involved uncertified or illegally modified devices.
The Bill rightly prohibits even the possession of non-UL2272 e-scooters. Yet, enforcement will be the true test. With thousands of devices in circulation and illegal spare parts easily available online, accountability must extend beyond users to the platforms that enable such risks.
The question before us is this: how can enforcement be scaled sustainably across our estates? How can agencies work with communities to build awareness and vigilance? And how can we ensure that online marketplaces take responsibility, so that unsafe devices are not just removed from our paths but from our homes altogether?
PMAs are essential for those with genuine walking difficulties. But misuse by otherwise mobile individuals can create new problems. Over-reliance on mobility scooters may lead to muscle wasting, loss of balance and reduced independence. Instead of preserving mobility, unnecessary use can erode it.
This is why the prescription requirement, through a Certificate of Medical Need issued by doctors or occupational therapists, is so important. It ensures that PMAs remain tools of necessity, not convenience, protecting both the safety of our shared paths and the health of our residents.
The reduction of PMA speed limits from 10 kilometres per hour to six – the pace of brisk walking – is a welcome move. It directly addresses concerns in towns with young children and seniors. Dimension limits of 120 centimetres by 70 centimetres, harmonised with public transport standards, will prevent oversized devices from dominating shared paths.
Yet, enforcement on the ground remains the challenge. In Tengah, residents have raised concerns about riders whizzing past pedestrians, with near-miss collisions involving young children along Plantation Plaza's retail street. With our ageing population, we can expect more PMAs on our paths too.
Doctors provide the vital role of diagnosis, ensuring medical conditions are properly identified. Physiotherapists, however, are the movement experts, the mobility experts. They specialise in biomechanics, gait analysis and functional rehabilitation. As part of their work, they prescribe wheelchairs and mobility aids for persons with disabilities, and they work daily with patients to help restore movement – to stand, to walk and to carry out their ADLs with dignity and independence.
For residents already under physiotherapy care, requiring a separate doctor consultation for certification may create duplication and inconvenience. Could the Minister of State explain the rationale for excluding physiotherapists from issuing Certificates of Medical Need, particularly for patients already under their care? The exclusion warrants reconsideration. For continuity of care, patients already receiving physiotherapy should not require separate consultations solely for certification purposes. Doctors diagnose, but physiotherapists help people move again – to stand, to walk and to live.
Additionally, while these measures improve safety, infrastructure remains a concern. Shared paths of two metres are dwarfed by roads spanning 18 metres. If active mobility is to grow, will the Government commit to expanding pedestrian‑only path infrastructure proportionately? Safety is not just about rules; it is also about space.
ERP 2.0 represents a fairer, usage-based model, charging only for actual road use. That principle is sound. But fairness must be felt across income groups and vehicle types. How will lower‑income families who rely on private‑hire vehicles for essential transport be protected from disproportionate burdens under future distance‑based models?
And while decriminalising missed payments is sensible, shifting liability from drivers to vehicle owners may create complications for shared vehicles. How will these be addressed?
Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill advances safety and modernisation on our roads. It is a step forward. But as always, the true measure lies in implementation, in enforcement, in fairness and in infrastructure. I support the Bill and I look forward to the Minister's clarifications.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill's objectives to enhance safety for all path users and road users. However, I would like to seek clarifications from the Minister of State on several implementation matters that will affect our residents and businesses.
First, medical certification for PMAs. The new regulation requiring valid medical certification for mobility scooters is necessary. It addresses legitimate public concerns about misuse by able-bodied individuals and preserves these devices for those with genuine mobility challenges.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
However, I ask the Minister of State to consider a special category of users who may fall into a grey area. They are delivery riders who may not meet strict medical certification criteria but have genuine mobility problems that make cycling or walking long distances very difficult.
In 2019, when e-scooters were banned from footpaths, approximately 7,000 delivery riders were affected. Recognising the impact on livelihoods, the Government provided a $7 million transition assistance package. Today, delivery platforms acknowledge that a portion of their riders rely on PMAs. The Government had expressed its commitment to inclusivity for riders with mobility challenges.
Would the Minister of State clarify if there will be transition support for affected riders? What constitutes mobility issues sufficient for certification? Must it be a diagnosed medical condition, or can occupational factors be considered? For riders performing physically demanding work who experience joint pain or fatigue but lack formal diagnoses, is there recourse?
Second, dimension limits, speed limits and enforcement. I fully support the new dimension limits and speed limits for PMAs. These measures harmonise public path and public transport regulations while addressing safety concerns, particularly for seniors and young children. However, enforcement effectiveness remains a question.
Residents have shared that despite numerous feedback, uncertified and modified PMAs continue to be out and about. Could the Minister of State define what \"good enforcement\" will look like? Will LTA expand mobile closed-circuit television (CCTV) deployment beyond the current hotspot rotation? Will plainclothes operations increase in frequency and coverage? Public feedback suggests enforcement officers may be too conspicuous. Will LTA adopt more covert tactics to deter violations effectively? Sir, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Residents have shared that despite feedback, uncertified and modified PMAs continue to be out and about. Could the Minister of State explain what \"good enforcement\" will look like? Will LTA expand CCTV deployment beyond the current hotspot rotation?
Will plainclothes officers’ operations increase in frequency and coverage? Public feedback suggests enforcement officers may be too conspicuous. Will LTA adopt more covert tactics to deter violations effectively?
(In English): Third, ban on keeping non-UL2272 e-scooters. Prohibiting the possession of non-compliant e-scooters will greatly enhance fire safety in our residential estates. However, enforcement of this \"keeping\" offence raises practical questions. How will authorities detect possession within private homes without infringing on privacy?
Could the Government consider leveraging existing home visit programs? Officers are currently already doing inspections. With appropriate legislative amendments and officer training, could these existing touchpoints be utilised to identify non-compliant e-scooters during routine visits? This would expand enforcement capacity without creating a separate inspection regime. What safeguards will be implemented to protect residents' privacy while ensuring fire safety compliance? Will there be disposal programmes to encourage voluntary surrender?
Fourth, speed limiters for heavy vehicles. I am gratified that the Government has decided to introduce a series of firm measures for speed limiters for heavy vehicles. These include increasing penalties for violations, including tampering. Since 2017, I had asked for speed limiters for motor vehicles in this House a few times. I hope we will be able to progress to higher-risk passenger cars to improve safety on our roads too.
Finally, may I ask about speed limiters for foreign heavy vehicles on our roads? What are the regulations and enforcement measures for them?
In conclusion, I seek the Minister's assurance that all these measures will be implemented with adequate support, clear timelines and proportionate enforcement. I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Jackson Lam.
Mr Jackson Lam (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak on the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill. I do so not only as a Member of this House, but as someone like many Singaporeans who uses our transport system every day – walking through neighbourhoods, sharing footpaths and relying on our roads and common spaces to feel safe and predictable.
Transport policy may be debated here, but its impact is felt outside this Chamber. It is felt on our footpaths, in lift lobbies and in the confidence that people have when they move around their neighbourhoods. In that sense, this Bill is not just technical or administrative. It is about how we update our rules to reflect how people live today, while continuing to keep everyone safe and included.
Over the past years, many Members would have seen reports of mobility devices colliding with pedestrians, or fires linked to unsafe or modified devices stored in residential blocks. These incidents are unsettling. Not because mobility aids are the problem – they are not. But because they show that our rules have not fully kept up with how these devices are being used and sometimes misused, in shared public spaces.
Mobility devices today are more powerful and more widely available than before. If used properly, they make a real difference to people's lives. If used irresponsibly or without safeguards, they can pose risks to others. This Bill is timely in addressing that gap.
The clearer definitions of mobility vehicles, together with mandatory registration and the requirement for a Certificate of Medical Need for certain devices, strike a careful balance. They recognise that many seniors and persons with disabilities, these devices are not conveniences. They are essential tools that allow people to remain independent, mobile and connected to the community.
At the same time, the Bill reinforces an important principle: our footpaths and common spaces are shared. As devices become faster or heavier, greater responsibility must follow. Clear rules protect pedestrians, but they also protect responsible users who rely on these devices and do not want to be unfairly judged because of the actions of a few.
When I speak with residents, the concern is rarely about seniors who truly need these aids. More often, it is about uncertainty. People ask: what is allowed? What is safe? And if something goes wrong, who is accountable? When there is uncertainty, trust in shared spaces begins to erode. This Bill provides much-needed clarity.
That said, rules alone are not enough. Implementation will matter just as much. Seniors navigating medical assessments, online systems or registration processes should not feel anxious or overwhelmed. I encourage the Ministry to continue pairing regulation with strong outreach through community centres, healthcare providers and grassroots organisations, especially during the transition period. Compliance should come from understanding and support, not fear.
I also welcome the Bill's focus on upstream responsibility, particularly the stronger controls on the sale, advertisement and possession of unsafe or non-compliant devices. Too often, enforcement falls mainly on end-users, even when powerful devices are marketed without proper safeguards or clear information. This does not feel fair. By placing clearer responsibility on sellers and platforms, the Bill improves accountability and sends a clear message that safety must be built in from the start.
Related to this are the provisions dealing with unsafe devices, including those that are modified or uncertified. Many of us will recall reports of fires in residential blocks linked to such devices. These incidents are frightening because they do not affect just one household. They put neighbours, families and the entire block at risk.
The introduction of an offence for keeping unsafe devices, even when they are not actively used, reflects an important reality that risks often arise long before an incident occurs. At the same time, I welcome the reasonable-excuse safeguards and transitional arrangements. These ensure enforcement remains proportionate and humane. Clear public education will be essential so that people understand what is expected of them.
Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill also addresses road safety more broadly, particularly through amendments to the Road Traffic Act. I welcome the clarification that mandatory disqualification periods are minimum periods, restoring the original legislative intent following recent judicial interpretation. Too often, attention comes only after something bad happen – when lives are lost or permanently changed. Clearer statutory guidance strengthens deterrence, while still allowing Judges the discretion to respond fairly to the seriousness of each case.
The enhanced speed limiter regime for heavy vehicles is also timely. When safeguards are bypassed, the harm caused can be severe and irreversible. Tightening these controls reflects lessons learned through experience and reinforces our commitment to road safety.
Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to touch on a broader theme that runs through this Bill – trust in systems, especially as Singapore relies more heavily on automation and digital enforcement.
From speed cameras to electronic charging systems, technology now plays a central role in transport management. The Bill updates evidentiary and enforcement provisions to reflect this reality. But even as systems become more efficient, it is important that people continue to have access to clear explanations and meaningful recourse. Systems must not only work well, they must also be fair, transparent and understandable.
Singapore has always done well because people trust that our systems are designed with care, applied proportionately and corrected when they fall short. This Bill helps to maintain that trust by modernising our laws while keeping people at the centre.
Mr Speaker, this Bill is not about regulation for its own sake. It is about responding responsibly to technological, demographic and social change. It seeks to protect seniors, support mobility, improve safety and modernise enforcement, without losing sight of fairness and common sense. With careful implementation and continued engagement, the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill 2026 will strengthen, not just our transport system, but also the confidence Singaporeans place in it. I therefore support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill, which seeks to make amendments to various pieces of legislation to empower LTA to improve active mobility and vehicular safety and to enable the transition to the ERP 2.0 system.
However, I have some questions and suggestions.
Sir, firstly, I support the Bill's proposal to strengthen the regulation of PMAs. Preventing the misuse of PMAs by seemingly able-bodied individuals, tackling speeding and restricting the use of overly large devices, are good proposals by the AMAP and I am glad that the Government has adopted these recommendations.
We must not compromise the safety of other path users, especially seniors and young children, when allowing AMDs to share our paths. Beyond the measures proposed, I would like to urge the Government to do more to tackle the occurrences of fires caused by these AMDs.
In my Radin Mas constituency, I have seen our fair share of fires caused by PMDs. I understand that some of these fires were due to the use of unapproved PMDs, or in some cases, modifications to battery packs to improve the devices' range. In addition to endangering themselves, the owners of unapproved or illegally modified devices can cause harm to their neighbours in the event that these devices catch fire. Electrical fires can spread far more rapidly and the damage to surrounding HDB flats also tend to be more excessive.
Sir, the Bill proposes to make it an offence to keep non-UL2272 certified e-scooters. I would like to ask if the same certification standard applies to all other forms of AMDs. According to a 2024 research article published in the Journal of Burn Care and Research, burn injuries related to lithium-ion batteries from PMDs can often be more severe than other types of burns, due to the thermal runway caused by such electrical fires.
The British Safety Council has also issued a warning that, once a chemical reaction causes thermal runway, the lithium-ion batteries found in these PMDs could spontaneously ignite and such fires are hard to extinguish.
Members may also remember the unfortunate 2021 incident, where a man died after his modified PMD burst into flames while he was inside a lift. This means that we do not need to be charging the batteries for them to catch fire. We must therefore do all we can to prevent people from possessing devices that have been illegally modified, due to the risk of devastating electrical fires that can result in the unfortunate loss of lives.
Sir, I support the provisions in the Bill related to Singapore's transition to the ERP 2.0 system.
I would like to ask if the Minister could provide greater clarity on when the existing ERP gantries would be removed. I note that LTA had previously said that these gantries would be progressively removed once ERP 2.0 begins and I am wondering if the Minister could provide more information on the timeline.
Workers who travel extensively on our roads for their livelihoods, are rightfully concerned about the impact of distance-based congestion pricing that would be enabled by the ERP 2.0 system. I urge the Ministry to consider in its implementation the disproportionate impact that distance-based congestion pricing would have on these workers and their livelihoods.
Sir, the Bill also proposes that vehicle owners, instead of drivers, will be responsible for unpaid ERP charges. Those with outstanding payments would be unable to transact with LTA on some essential services, such as road tax renewal, until the missed ERP charges are settled. I think this is a sound move.
However, in the event where the vehicle owner fails to renew his road tax due to outstanding ERP payments, and the driver, who is an employee, is unaware of this and drives the vehicle, who would be liable for the resulting offence? Should we therefore align the current framework to also hold the vehicle owner liable, instead of the driver?
Mr Speaker, the proposals under the Bill are timely in enhancing the safety of our roads and in reducing disamenities to other users who share our roads. I support the proposal to increase penalties for several road traffic offences, such as the illegal alteration of motor vehicles and taking to task those who allow illegal modifications to take place within their premises.
I also support the proposal to increase penalties for keeping or using unregistered or deregistered vehicles. Absent from the stipulated vehicle inspections, these unregistered or deregistered vehicles can pose a safety risk to other road users.
I would therefore like to ask how many cases did the Police investigate regarding the use of unregistered or deregistered vehicles on our roads in the past three years and how do we intend to do better enforcement to catch the users of such non-registered vehicles? Can the ERP 2.0 system be used to monitor and locate these vehicles? And if so, would the Police be able to use this system, so that they can take prompt enforcement actions?
Mr Speaker, thus far, I have spoken about my support for the Bill and how I think that the measures would improve the safety of our shared paths and our roads. I therefore thank the two Ministries – MOT and MHA – for working on this comprehensive Bill to make our roads and shared paths safer for everyone.
However, in my view, this omnibus Bill was a missed opportunity to strengthen legislation to improve workers' safety. Sir, if you would indulge me, I would like to once again raise the plight of workers transported at the back of lorries.
We have seen numerous traffic accidents involving workers being transported at the back of lorries happen over the years. More recently, an accident on 28 January 2026, that was just last week, involving a lorry along Orchard Road, resulted in 12 workers being sent to the hospital. Thankfully, there were no fatalities.
Accidents like this remind us time and time again that more needs to be done to improve the safety of workers being transported at the back of lorries. NTUC and the Migrant Worker Centre have previously called for clearer restrictions on the co-mingling of workers with goods. Carrying passengers alongside goods and machinery is dangerous. When loads are not properly secured, workers face the risk of being struck or crushed during collisions or sudden braking. This is a foreseeable and preventable risk and the co-mingling of goods and passengers should be prohibited by law.
Ideally, we should use proper transportation, such as buses, to transport our workers to and from their worksites. In the meantime, we should, at the very least, mandate seat belts to protect passengers from being flung out of the vehicle in the event of an accident.
Sir, I have been raising these key points about workers' safety and workers' transportation over the years, and I will continue to do so at every opportunity. I therefore urge the Government to adopt these proposals because the lives of every worker matters.
Mr Speaker, in conclusion, the Bill makes important legislative amendments to strengthen the safety of our active mobility landscape, helps reduce the risk of non-compliant devices catching fires within our homes and is timely in aiding our transition to the new ERP 2.0 system.
I hope that the Government could consider my proposals to strengthen enforcement against unsafe deregistered vehicles from plying our roads and to improve the safety of workers, currently being transported at the back of lorries. Sir, notwithstanding that, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Gho Sze Kee.
Ms Gho Sze Kee (Mountbatten): Mr Speaker, the biggest part of this Bill is about making our roads, public paths and neighbourhood, safer. Public safety is of utmost importance and I welcome and support the Bill. Some of the measures introduced in this Bill, I feel are long overdue. There are, however, a few points I would like to raise.
Firstly, speed limits. So, the Bill will cap PMAs at six kilometres per hour on public paths. That is only about brisk walking speed. While I share the same reservations with my Parliamentary colleagues, that this may penalise some PMA users, specifically those who make use of their device to make a living as platform delivery workers, I can understand this from a perspective of public policy.
While we have restrained that one group of people with real medical needs to this relaxed pace, I must note that on our shared paths, bicycles, PMDs and PABs are still allowed to go 25 kilometres per hour, and I wonder why. I had raised a Parliamentary question on this issue previously and had an exchange with the hon Minister of State for Transport before. I remember, I noted in that exchange that 25 kilometres per hour is essentially a fit person running at full throttle or sprinting all out. To give a more easily perceived perspective, that is about a 100-metre sprint in 14.4 seconds.
Mr Speaker, both yourself and the hon Minister of State for Transport acknowledged then that speed was beyond the both of you. Indeed, I doubt that there is anyone in this House who could have done so. And I know that there are some very fit Members in this House. And this reinforces my point – 25 kilometres per hour is a very fast speed on our shared paths. The momentum of a person holding down at this speed on our shared paths, whether he be on two legs or a bicycle, or even a PMD, has the potential to make any accidents a serious and even a very deadly one.
Someone dashing and crashing into you at 25 kilometres per hour is no joking matter. This is an issue in my ward, and I have received many residents feedback on speeding bicycles and SMVs in the Tanjong Rhu area. Our shared paths are used by many of our elderly residents, young children and even pets.
Mr Speaker, I credit the progressive steps taken by LTA previously, including the banning of PMD and PABs from footpaths, and lowering bicycle speeds from five to 10 kilometres per hour. It did much to improve public safety. But in the same interest of public safety, I must also call on LTA to review the speed limit for these devices on our shared paths.
Next, I turn to enforcement. I am glad to know that expanded powers that will be given to LTA officers under this new Bill.
Currently, the active mobility act allows LTA enforcement officers to enter and inspect business premises suspected of committing offences, such as illegally modifying devices and selling non-compliant devices, and to seize such devices. But yet, I cannot help but note that majority of the AMD-related fires occurred not in commercial and business premises but private residential homes. With this Bill, mere possession of non-UL2272 PMDs will also be an offence.
I would like to clarify with the Minister of Sate if the intent of this portion of the amendment was also informed by fire safety considerations in private homes and, if so, how does the Ministry plan to exercise enforcement in this context?
Mr Speaker, any piece of legislation without effective enforcement is meaningless and becomes a mere suggestion. Allow me to share a quote from Cesare Beccaria, one of the founding figures of modern criminology and criminal law, \"Crimes are more effectively prevented by certainty than severity of punishment.\" While I am in no way equating possession of an illegal modified PMD to say rape and robbery, this truism is universally applicable. Punishment and sanctions are only half of the deterrence, and the other half is the certainty of getting caught.
I commend the LTA wardens that I and my activists work at the Tanjong Rhu bridge. They are excellent at their job. But the problem we have with bicycles and PMDs persist despite their efforts. Simply put, they could not be everywhere all the time.
Errant PMDs and PABs are still a sight in our neighbourhoods, especially at night. For this Bill to be meaningful and to make our shared spaces safer, the enforcement efforts must be sustained, persistent and adequately resourced. But I do not think that enforcement alone is enough to comprehensively address this issue. While enforcement is critical, we must also examine why risky behaviour persists. Why do so many still obtain illegal devices, modify them and travel at unsafe speeds on our public paths?
So far, most of our previous efforts at addressing this problem have been focused on enforcement and the throttling of the supply of equipment. We have not quite succeeded, otherwise we would not be here debating this Bill. But it is certainly not for lack of trying. I believe we did not succeed because we have never really addressed the root of what drives such unsafe behaviour. It is time that we address the elephant in the room.
Mr Speaker, for many PMD and PAB users, their devices are not simply a means of commute but a tool to make a living. Indeed, I believe performing platform delivery is the primary reason why people acquire these devices. For these users, public and personal safety becomes not just an issue of personal responsibility but also systemic pressures.
In reality, platform riders operate under constant time pressures driven by targets, bonuses and performance-based incentives. Earnings are linked to the number of orders completed, delivery speed and acceptance rates. It also rises non-linearly, with significant jumps once certain quotas are met. Platform riders are under pressure to hit these time limited quotas to substantially boost their earnings. For many of them, the only path to a viable income is by hitting these targets. This pressure cooker environment in which riders are driven to move faster and faster, under such models, speed and output are rewarded while safety is left to individual discretion.
A device illegally and unsafely modified to go faster translates directly into faster deliveries, shorter turnaround times and more completed orders and higher earnings. In this context, risky behaviour may not be explicitly encouraged, but it is effectively incentivised. All this represents a challenging dynamic. The Government enacts and enforces rules to protect public safety, including the safety of the rider themselves, yet the riders run the risk and bear the effect of these rules. The Government gets the blame for trying to keep everyone safe, meanwhile platform companies reap the rewards.
Mr Speaker, this must change. Public safety cannot be the Government's concern alone. It is time to hold platform companies more accountable for the safety of their workers and the communities that they serve. Without the delivery platform stepping up and taking greater responsibility, the powerful motivation and incentive to unsafe behaviour will always be present. The problem of errant AMDs on our public spaces will remain intractable.
I am particularly pleased to note that sections 23E and 23J of the Bill, which will hold platform companies responsible for their workers using a mobility vehicle without a valid Certificate of Medical Need. It seems we have finally started to address the elephant in the room. But there is so much more that the platforms can do and should do.
It is clear that the platforms already have the technological means to flag unsafe behaviour. We know that platforms can and do track riders in real time and track distance travelled. Simple matrix, such as distance over time and turnaround time between delivery and pick-up, can easily flag excessive speed or unsafe behaviour. These simple measures could address much of the problem and platforms clearly have the means to significantly improve safety for both their riders and the public.
Mr Speaker, delivery platforms must recognise that they also have a civic duty. They are stakeholders in the communities that they operate in. We must recognise that safety on the roads and public paths is a shared responsibility.
While the Government can make and enforce rules, platforms should ensure that their operational models do not systematically reward unsafe riding at the expense of public safety. Their systems should protect their workers from unreasonable pressure and protect the public from unnecessary risk. At the same time, this must not become an excuse for platforms to shift responsibility or cost onto their workers.
Our delivery workers deserve to be compensated fairly and sustainably. For their efforts, a system that pressurises riders to take risks just to earn a decent income is neither fair nor acceptable and I am glad to hear from the hon Member Ms Yeo Wan Ling that the NDCA is in discussion with such delivery platforms for a fairer deal.
I look forward to hearing more about the outcome. Our delivery workers should not have to choose between earning a viable living and obeying the law and everyone deserves safety on our roads and public paths. We all deserve to return home safely to our loved ones at the end of the day.
Mr Speaker: Mr Foo Cexiang.
Mr Foo Cexiang (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Speaker, in preparation for today's debate, I partnered the Institute of Policy Studies to convene a \"Citizens Reflections\" session with my residents in Tanjong Pagar-Tiong Bahru. I hoped that through the session, my residents would develop a deeper understanding of our Parliamentary proceedings and a stronger sense of engagement viz these debates.
Hence, after the Bill was tabled in Parliament for the First Reading in January, I met residents who responded to an open call for a full-day session on 17 January where we had robust and enriching discussions on the active mobility segments of the Bill. Following the session, the participants spent an additional week to co-develop a close to 60-page report synthesising our discussion and I will highlight the key points in the report in my speech today.
Mr Speaker, my residents took many positives from the proposed changes in the Bill. At they same time, they also raised several practical considerations and suggestions that were all people-centred, focused on the needs of fellow citizens with mobility challenges. I will cover four key areas today.
First, the introduction of the medical certificate requirement for the driving or riding of mobility vehicles on public paths. We agree that this is reasonable to ensure that the use and the space associated with the use of mobility vehicles is safeguarded for those amongst us with genuine mobility challenges, and coupled with the other specifications on size and speed, this will curb the misuse of such mobility vehicles, which endangers the safety of all path users, especially pedestrians. However, we would like to seek clarification from the Ministry. Will the Government consider providing subsidies for those in need to cover the cost of the clinical assessment?
In addition, there were concerns that different medical practitioners may have differing practices in ascertaining the need, so how will MOH ensure standardised clinical practice? Will there be training for practitioners? Because on the one hand, we want to ensure that those with genuine mobility challenges are able to get the certification with minimum hassle. But on the other hand, we also hope that in making the assessments, our practitioners do not inadvertently encourage the over-reliance on the mobility vehicles for those who are still able to move about relatively independently.
Second, the introduction of the need to register mobility vehicles. We agree that this facilitates greater accountability and can help with enforcement as, currently, the lack of identification marks constrains enforcement even when offences may be detected by the Active Mobility Enforcement Cameras. However, we would like to highlight that this may not fully address the challenge of enforcing against those who do not register and therefore, continue to run around without identification marks on their mobility vehicles. So, therefore, despite the changes in the legislation, adequate presence on the ground continues to remain critical to enforcing against this group.
At the same time, while we acknowledge the potential benefits of registration, several residents asked if the need to register would be too onerous for those with genuine medical need given that they would already have had to obtain the medical certificate and many of whom may be facing financial challenges. Will the Government be able to streamline the process to minimise the hassle for these persons and will the Government also consider the provision of subsidies or grants to cover the registration and associated fees for those among them that face financial challenges?
We would also like to highlight one particular provision in the Act and seek clarification. Specifically, why is an additional identification mark required at the registered responsible person's expense when there will already be a registration mark issued by LTA? What information will be placed on the marks? Several of my residents were particularly concerned about this. Will there be any personal data and privacy concerns as the marks may allow the public to identify people with mobility challenges based on the marks on the mobility vehicle alone even if nobody is using the vehicle?
Finally, we would also like to understand how the registration framework will cover vehicles which are shared amongst families, rented commercially and transferred or sold. Will these modes still be allowed, as these could be more cost-effective options for those in need?
Third, the introduction of greater platform operator responsibilities. As a good number of mobility vehicle users we encounter on the paths are delivery workers, we support these changes. The secondary level of oversight placed on platform operators will complement the medical certificate requirement. However, we hope that these additional responsibilities do not lead to platform operators deciding to deprioritise or stop onboarding mobility vehicle users onto their platforms. In fact, with the lower allowable speeds of such vehicles, it is even more important that our platform operators continue to support those with mobility challenges as they seek to earn a livelihood.
In this regard, I was very glad to hear Ms Yeo Wan Ling's update that the platform workers have been working very closely with NDCA and the union to ensure that this is done. In addition, though, will the Government consider a seamless digital link between LTA's register and the platform operator systems to facilitate automatic verification so that there is less doubt in between the processes?
Fourth, the new rules on the selling and advertising of mobility vehicles. We support commercial regulation as this helps to ensure upstream accountability. We note, however, that the current Bill does not extend to regulating against the advertising of illegal repairs and modifications to mobility vehicles. I repeat that. It is the advertising of these illegal repairs. Is this an area that the Ministry intends to cover? And finally, given that the intent is for mobility vehicles to only be used by those with mobility challenges, did the Ministry consider centralising the supply through healthcare institutions only, for example?
Finally, I would just want to make a quick point on the six-kilometre-per-hour speed limit. I support the reduction to six kilometres per hour, similar to Members like Mr Ng Shi Xuan. I believe it is reasonable and sensible. And, in fact, it is not only Singapore that believes so. A quick check online will show that while there is not a single global standard on what the speed should be, many jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, including France, certain jurisdictions in Australia, in fact, Slovenia as well, recently ruled a new six-kilometre-per-hour for the use of mobility aids on pathways. And I think many of the jurisdictions have all considered that this is based on the fact that it is a brisk walking speed. So, that is, I believe a scientific consideration in the ascertainment of what the speed is.
But the positive effect of all the changes we have in this Bill will only be felt by our residents on the ground if there is effective enforcement. And I think that is something that all Members so far have raised as of critical input to the Bill.
So, Mr Speaker, in closing, I would like to acknowledge the valuable input and perspectives of my residents on the Bill once again and I look forward to engaging them on more Bills, especially those under the Ministries that I am a GPC Member of – the Ministry of National Development, and the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment – as well as those impacting our built environment in general, such as this Bill, because it affects all of us. Notwithstanding the points I have raised, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Acting Minister for Transport.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment of Debate","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Acting Minister for Transport (Mr Jeffrey Siow): Mr Speaker, I move that, \"That the debate be now adjourned.\"
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the debate be now adjourned.\" – [Mr Jeffrey Siow]. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Acting Minister, resumption of debate what day?
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Tomorrow, Sir.
Mr Speaker: So be it. Deputy Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Make (Singapore) Equities Great Again","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Deputy Leader of the House (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\"
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, I would like to give notice that the hon Member Assoc Prof Jamus Lim is also keen to speak on the Motion standing in my name under Standing Order 2(8)(b), and therefore, I propose to share the 20 minutes of speaking time with him. May I proceed as proposed?
Mr Speaker: Please go ahead.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: Thank you, Speaker. Allow me to first declare that I am an equities analyst working in a financial institution in Singapore.
On that note, Mr Speaker, I rise today to speak on an issue that is very close to my heart: the future of Singapore's equities market and by extension, Singapore's role as a global financial centre. Through this Adjournment Motion, I hope we can make Singapore equities great again.
For more than a decade, I worked as a sell-side equities analyst and observed the continual decline in the vibrancy of our capital markets. We witnessed the S-chip crisis, market shrinkage as de-listings far outstripped new initial public offerings (IPOs) and the painful erosion of investor confidence. Our market liquidity had fallen behind not just global bourses, but even regional neighbours'. Every day, this trend affected real lives and livelihoods across our capital markets ecosystem.
In 2024, I put forward the Parliamentary Question on this issue, and the Government's reply, though well-intentioned, felt insufficient. It lacked the bonus needed to reverse decades of decline, with Prime Minister Lawrence Wong sharing that conditions remained challenging for the Singapore equities market as they are for stock exchanges in other countries.
But thankfully, that has changed. I welcome the Government's markedly stronger resolve and put on record my appreciation to the Equities Market Review Group for its work. In particular, I appreciate that the $5 billion Equity Market Development Programme (EQDP) funding demonstrates genuine commitment. And I hope that this will not be a one-off measure but represents the start of a continued commitment to the Singapore market.
That said, as I shared in my Committee of Supply speech in February 2025, our measures must be bold enough to bring our equities markets into the future. However, I believe that the current recommendations by the review group may be necessary but not sufficient to truly drive permanent change. The two work-streams appear to be focused on reducing market friction rather than instituting structural interventions that improve company fundamentals in the long term. Without three critical additional pillars, we risk repeating a familiar pattern, with Thailand’s Vayupak programme providing a cautionary tale.
Let me first establish the scale of Singapore's challenge which my learned colleague, Kenneth Tiong, had earlier shared in his speech on the Finance Bill.
Putting aside the comparisons with other western developed markets, as of end January 2026, 61% of Singapore Exchange (SGX) companies generated return on equity below 8%, compared to 44% in Japan and 24% in Korea.
Too many of our companies are delivering uncompetitive returns. On liquidity, the difference is even more stark. Only 14 SGX-listed companies have daily trading volume above US$20 million. Japan has 305, Korea has 172, Hong Kong has 160.
But perhaps, more telling is this. Based on research from early 2025, 69% of Singapore-listed companies have shrunk in market capitalisation over the past decade. In Japan, the figures only 14%. Only 11% of our companies have doubled their market capitalisation in 10 years, compared to 50% in Japan. It appears the odds are not quite in your favour when looking at investment outcomes in Singapore.
The review group's report states that companies that invest in building strategic shareholder value and communicate their plans effectively will attract strong investor interests. That is precisely correct. But here is the critical gap. The report contains no mandatory disclosure requirements compelling companies to demonstrate improved shareholder returns. An EQDP fund manager told The Edge Singapore in December 2025: \"At the end of the day, what we are looking for is earnings growth, ROIC [return on invested capital] going up, ROE [return on equity] going up. That is really what our main focus is\". Yet, our framework offers no mechanism to compel disclose commitments towards these fundamentals.
As I have shared in my Committee of Supply speech in February 2025, Japan and Korea have already shown the way. They did not rely on volunteerism. They implemented market-wide directives, creating existential pressures on companies to perform. In the case of Japan, in March 2023, the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE) issued a formal request to companies to act on what they called management conscious of cost of capital and stock price. This was not a good-to-have, but a structured disclosure framework with specific requirements. The TSE published a monthly list of companies by their disclosure status, creating constructive market pressure. And within a year, more than half of prime companies have disclosed initiatives, and that is now above 90%.
Here is a crucial part. Companies that put genuine effort into high-quality disclosures outperformed their peers by meaningful margins over the subsequent 12 months.
Korea's Value-up Program, launched in February 2024, requires companies to assess capital efficiency, set quantify ROE and ROIC targets, and disclose dividend and treasury shares plans. Korea has also amended its Commercial Act to expand directors' fiduciary duties to all shareholders and directors themselves have to be accountable now.
Turning to Singapore, while the Value Unlock Programme aims to promote value creation and shareholder engagement, the key measure to achieve this is a $30 million grant. Perhaps, small and newly listed companies may be able to benefit, but for the vast majority of companies, they can very much maintain the status quo after the review group's recommendations are implemented. Companies face no additional disclosure or regulatory requirements to demonstrate how exactly they are going to drive higher shareholder returns or unlock value.
While we are asking the EQDP fund managers to deploy more than $5 billion in capital and expect returns, our listed companies feel no compulsion to demonstrate commitment to improving fundamentals.
What then must Singapore do? We must institute mandatory value-up disclosure requirements immediately. At the most basic level, all listed companies should conduct formal board level assessments of capital costs, profitability and market valuation. Companies must then disclose quantified ROE and ROIC targets across medium- to long-term time horizons and spell out specific plans with annual progress reporting. If the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) believes this to be important, then, I hope a clear timeline on when this may be implemented can be announced.
But disclosure alone is not sufficient. We must also strengthen and enforcement. The review group states efforts to enhance investor recourse avenues must be complemented by robust public enforcement actions. MAS will continue to work with relevant authorities to pursue and take firm actions against wrongdoers. I agree.
I understand the Government's perspective that value creation is the responsibility of boards and management, not regulators. Regulators should not micromanage, but regulators have to maintain standards that protect investors' confidence, ensure fair and timely disclosure and enforce meaningfully against wrongdoers. To quote remarks by Mr Lim Tuang Lee, Assistant Managing Director at the MAS at the SSGI Forum in 2025, \"too many companies here limit themselves to the bare minimum disclosure requirements and in doing so, miss the opportunity to articulate strategic visions and plans.\"
My concern is that even when minimum requirements exist, companies ignore them. SGX rules require disclosure of directors and chief executive officers' remuneration since January 2023. Yet, only 68% of companies disclose exact remuneration by December 2024. Without consequences for non-compliance, why would companies comply? And it is hard to blame companies for refusing to comply on this. After all, the stewards of our national reserves, Temasek Holdings and GIC do not have mandatory remuneration disclosures at all.
I welcome the MAS announcement in May 2025 that a committee is reviewing the Code of Corporate Governance. I hope that refreshed code can hold companies accountable for disclosure lapses to instil investor confidence in our governance regime.
On a related note, the review group advocates for a decisive shift towards a disclosure-based regime, streamlining prospectus requirements and consolidating listing reviews under SGX RegCo to improve time to market.
While reducing regulatory fiction is pro-enterprise, it raises concerns about investor protection. I am reminded of my own experience being a sell-side analyst covering Noble Group, back when Iceberg Research wrote an exposé on alleged accounting fraud at the commodities trader. In 2022, after years of investigation into Noble's disclosures, MAS imposed a $12.6 million civil penalty. Although the case was undoubtedly complicated, one cannot help but feel that the penalties handed out were noticeably disproportionate to the billions that investors lost alongside the company's downfall.
Section 199 of the Securities and Futures Act requires not merely that a material statement or information was false or misleading, but that the wrongdoer either does not care whether it was true or false or knows or ought reasonably to have known that the statement of information is false or misleading in a material way.
Firstly, this is a high bar; and secondly, perhaps as the Noble Group case has shown and as I have shared in my Parliamentary Question in 2022, there perhaps ought to be more robust disclosure obligations and enforcement actions relating to false and misleading statements, and breaches of disclosure requirements.
Allow me now to pass the time to my colleague, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, who will take us through his thoughts on a third pillar premised on macro-financial reform.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Sir, let me begin by echoing the sentiments set forth by my hon friend, Louis Chua, on how the work of the MAS and Equities Market Review Group are a positive step forward. As he shared, these efforts appear to be targeted toward improving market efficiency and functioning, but somehow still fall short of the sort of structural reforms necessary to foster sustained corporate value creation.
Mr Chua suggested two change pillars – enhanced shareholder value, the mandatory disclosures and strengthened corporate governance with more robust enforcement – both of which address reforms to market micro-structure.
In closing, I will take a step back and offer a third pillar premised on macros-financial reform: enrich the capital raising life cycle.
Let me first expand on what Mr Chua shared about the current challenges of our stock market, but from a more macro and comparative perspective.
Our market for publicly listed stocks currently lags those of many other countries, even those with far less developed financial sectors. Singapore's stock market capitalisation, as a share of national output, stood at 117% last year, between India and Malaysia. This is in spite of India's overall financial development being more than two times lower than Singapore's, and Kuala Lumpur being miles away from us as a global financial centre.
Perhaps, more worryingly, this share has steadily eroded over the past two decades. Capitalisation almost reached 300% on the eve of the Global Financial Crisis, but this has steadily eroded by more than three-fifths. This trend is heading in precisely the wrong direction if the goal is to fortify our stock market. Nor should we rest easy just because of SGX's recent performance. The SGX certainly did well last year, posting returns closer to 30%. But so did the stock exchanges of Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Vietnam – and few would claim that these markets are the benchmarks we should aspire to.
Make no mistake. Returns are distinct from liquidity and the primary role of any stock market is to raise capital to fund investments, with returns being secondary.
Our private equities markets fare little better. One estimate places our venture capital market at around $1.2 billion in 2024, a small fraction of the more than $4 billion raised by comparable early-stage rounds from either the Bay Area or the United Kingdom.
Even when scaled to per capita terms, we fall short of a country, like Israel. Hence, while we are deniably successful within East Asia, we remain a distance behind the global leaders.
Indeed, our problem appears more general. Singapore's financial market debt is four-fifths those of South Korea, an economy whose financial developed markets are typically regarded as less sophisticated than ours, and only a little more than half that of Hong Kong, our major financial centre competitor.
While we have made headway in certain segments, notably foreign exchange and real estate, our financial markets still fall short in one of the key functions – to raise funds for doing business.
Improving the life cycle for capital raising, therefore, requires us to look at the full stack for corporate finance – from angel through different stages of venture investments by private equities to IPOs on the secondary board followed by possible graduation to the main board.
Our angel market is mature but shallow. There are close to two dozen angel and seed investment networks here, of which the most prominent, the Singapore Angel Network and the Business Angel Network of Southeast Asia, are well established. The funding environment is liquid with hundreds of deals annually. Moreover, four in five investors even report optimism about the ecosystem.
The Government has also extended significant support to the startup scene. There is both grant money as well as tax breaks for angel investments and co-investment opportunities. Officially sanctioned hubs abound, such as Block 71 and Stage One, along with other incubators and accelerators located in the One-North complex.
The National Research Foundation has also been active in supporting innovations in deep technology, including the launch of the $50 million Graduate Innovation Research Programme to support locally based entrepreneurs.
Given this backdrop, the stage for this stage of the venture cycle appears well positioned.
I, therefore, second the recent decision by Temasek to back away from directing exposures to early stage investing and instead focus on later stage, meaning Series B and later funding rounds. This is logical given Temasek's relative size which makes deploying relatively small sums of capital challenging and potentially, inefficient.
But it is also vital that the institution deepened domestic liquidity for later venture capital stages, which leads me to favour an even stronger focus on the pre-IPO stage with a clearer mandate to target locally based companies. This will help catalyse the market for private investor exit while simultaneously easing the transition of firms to public investment on the secondary board.
There are already some Government-directed efforts on this front, the $1.5 billion Anchor Fund @ 65 and $500 million Growth IPO Fund have been in place since 2022 to support high growth firms with public listings. However, such efforts are relatively small and perhaps, more importantly, incomplete.
Rather than one-offs, what is needed to generate market activity is continuous reinvestment. It will be better to simply enfold these entirely into Temasek's overall portfolio while channelling the fund toward funding more domestic opportunities. The goal is to usher companies toward an eventual listing and to choose SGX as their outlet.
In my view, the fate of our main board will ultimately be tied and dependent on how vibrant our secondary board is.
Alas, activity on Catalist has been disappointing. Last year, there were only six IPOs and it was four the year prior. Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) bourses have all found greater success in their public offerings with Indonesia and Malaysia dominating the region in terms of listing as well as fundraising capacity.
We must shore up local listings on Catalist to increase its attractiveness as an exit destination for our otherwise robust earlier stage venture ecosystem.
The problem is one of chicken and egg. Presently, low liquidity has made venture capitalists wary of listing on this board, while the small number of new listings in turn limits trading and turnover, thereby becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. Breaking this negative equilibrium that SGX has found itself in will require, pardon the pun, a catalyst in the form of temporary stimulus to IPO activity.
This Government understands this. It has, since 2019, sought to underwrite listing expenses with the Grant for Equity Market Singapore Scheme (GEMS), but GEMS is presently biased in favour of main board listings rather than Catalist and it is unclear how much take-up there has been for this scheme.
MAS has also tabled proposals for streamlining primary and secondary listings. This is a positive step which I support. We may also consider piling on financial incentives, such as granting firms that may choose to list continued recognition as SMEs for tax purposes over an interim period as an additional inducement.
I should stress that easing listing requirements does not imply weaker regulation in the long run, contrary to the points made by my hon friend about transparent disclosures and strengthen governance. Rather, I am arguing for initial forbearance to strengthen incentives to list here in the first place.
Enhancing stock market liquidity should not be limited, of course, to public sector incentives alone. We should also enlist our ecosystem of family offices more into this effort – the favourable tax treatment for family offices under sections 13O and 13U of the Income Tax Act only applies when a minimum allocation is made to qualifying investments. This may be further refined to require a minimum allocation to onshore allocations specifically.
We can also do more with other private sector institutional accounts. There are excellent examples of stakeholder capitalism around the world, including Germany, Japan and Scandinavia.
Setting aside advantages and disadvantages of such arrangements, it is difficult to deny that channelling more buy-side exposure toward the SGX would likely improve market depth and foster greater vibrancy. To encourage take-up, we could grant tax-free status for employee stock ownerships. We could even consider giving further inducements to retail investors to leverage the participation of average households. One in two Singaporeans already own stocks and half of the local exchange is already held by individuals. The Central Provident Fund Investment Scheme already allows an opt-in for Singapore-listed shares on the SGX. It will be a small leap to further promote responsible retail ownership of the local market index, ideally through revisions in the Lifetime Retirement Investment Scheme (LRIS) or through additional educational incentives, either associated with the LRIS or independently.
Sweden has demonstrated that such bottom-up participation can underpin stock market success.
On the supply side, we can also develop a deeper pool of front office talent necessary to ensure a robust financial ecosystem.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, a minute left.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim: Sir, ultimately, a successful SGX will require we pay attention to the full capital-raising cycle, from startup through listing on both the buy and sell side. Only then will we have a domestic stock market, commensurate with our status as a global financial centre and only then can we make Singapore equities great again. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Minister Chee Hong Tat.
The Minister for National Development (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Louis Chua and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim for their interest and suggestions in strengthening Singapore's equities market. We welcome such feedback as part of the ongoing efforts to make our equities market more competitive.
I am pleased to report that we are making good progress with our review and have achieved some initial success.
The average daily traded value of securities on SGX grew more than 20% year-on-year to almost $1.8 billion in November 2025. The average daily traded value of securities in 2025 was the highest since 2010.
Recently, the number of Singapore-listed stocks with at least $1 million in average daily trading turnover has risen to 100. This is an increase of 40% compared to August 2024 when we formed the review group. The IPO activity rebounded significantly last year, with more than $2.4 billion in total funds raised, which is the highest level since 2019.
The total market value of listed companies on SGX also crossed the $1 trillion mark.
Sir, the growth has benefited many listed companies, many investors and these companies include both the large-capitalisation and also the small- and mid-caps.
Despite global uncertainties, the Straits Times Index (STI) delivered strong returns last year, with over 28% total returns. And over five years, STI's total returns exceeded 100% in Singapore-dollars terms, outperforming many regional markets.
As global investors rebalance and diversify across Asia, Singapore's reputation as a safe, trusted financial centre, with a strong and stable Singapore dollar, has drawn growing interest.
I hope this positive momentum continues. But we know markets have ups and downs. Our focus, therefore, must be to continue strengthening the competitiveness and attractiveness of our ecosystem.
We have worked closely with the industry to co-create solutions and implement a holistic package that strengthens both demand and supply, as well as enhancing greater connectivity that supports efficient trading.
Over the past 18 months, the Equities Market Review Group engaged widely with brokers, banks, asset managers, listed companies, prospective issuers, research providers and industry bodies and this process helped us to move beyond making individual tweaks towards a comprehensive set of mutually reinforcing moves, to get the momentum of the flywheel going.
Sir, there are three guiding principles that will continue to anchor our work.
First, implementation is key. We will focus on effective and timely implementation to translate policy ideas into market outcomes. To support this important area of work, we have established an Equity Market Implementation Committee, co-chaired by MAS and SGX.
Some of the measures have already been rolled out. For instance, we have allocated $3.95 billion across nine asset managers under EQDP to develop our fund management industry and to increase investor participation in our market. Other initiatives are on track and will be implemented over the course of the year as we modernise market infrastructure and launch new market connectivity initiatives.
Second, innovation in policy requires taking calculated risks. We adopted an approach of allowing for more risk-taking in the equities market review, and with support from Singaporeans and Members of this House, the Government will do likewise for other areas too.
As we push boundaries and take bold steps to try new ideas, we will put in place guardrails, where necessary, to protect against downside risks. We will devote more resources into public and investor education, working with partners, like the SGX Academy and the Securities Investors Association (Singapore), so that stakeholders understand that while taking more risks could yield higher investment returns, they are also prepared to face greater market volatility. This trade-off is relevant when we decide on our personal and family investments. It is also applicable when we decide on the level of risks we want to collectively take as a country.
When we shift towards a more disclosure-based regime, with regulation that is more focused and facilitative, we will continue to seek high quality listings and provide adequate and timely information for investors to make their decisions.
Key stakeholders in the ecosystem must also exercise their respective areas of expertise and responsibility – IPO professionals and research analysts have to uphold high standards of due diligence and analysis to support investors in making informed decisions. MAS will take steps to strengthen investor confidence, such as encouraging transparency and shareholder engagements through initiatives under the Value Unlock Programme, while enhancing investor protection mechanisms, especially for retail investors, such as strengthening their options for recourse against misconduct.
I take Mr Louis Chua's point that some requirements may have to be mandatory, and we are certainly open to looking at these examples. But I hope Mr Chua will agree with me that not everything that can add value to the company needs to be mandated because the companies themselves would have strong commercial interest to want to make sure they can increase their market value.
To maintain trust and confidence in our markets, MAS and the relevant authorities in Singapore will continue to work closely on robust investigation, market surveillance and timely enforcement against breaches of disclosure requirements and market misconduct.
We have also made decisive moves to enhance international connectivity. The SGX-Nasdaq Global Listing Board, when implemented later this year, will enable eligible companies to simultaneously list on both exchanges with one set of prospectus. This can help support their growth plans, widen their investor base and enhance liquidity across time zones.
Third, improving competitiveness is a never-ending journey. It is like a never-ending marathon that you just have to keep running. We will continue to listen, adapt and raise our game in partnership with the industry. And I certainly also welcome feedback and suggestions from Mr Chua, from Assoc Prof Lim and their colleagues from the Workers' Party.
Although our efforts have yielded some initial success, we cannot stand still and rest on our laurels because the competition for global capital is intense and fast evolving. We must continue to play to our strengths and we must continue to innovate to stay ahead, or we will risk falling behind and being over-taken. It is like the Chinese saying, \"逆水行舟不进则退\". (In English): Learning is like rowing upstream; to not advance is to fall behind.
Sir, our strategy is to make Singapore's market more attractive on its own merits, so that capital flows here because the opportunities are attractive and our ecosystem, as a whole, is strong. This philosophy underpins our different measures. We are not trying to go for a silver bullet that can, on its own, solve all the problems. There is no magic pill.
We are also not trying to force outcomes through quotas or administrative allocation. We are building capabilities – in fund management, in listed companies' ability to enhance shareholder value, to engage investors, we are investing in market infrastructure – so that investors and issuers choose Singapore because they are convinced that this makes commercial sense and this has longer-term strategic value for them.
Our goal is to build an equities market where companies sharpen their attention on shareholder value creation, communicate their strategies clearly, optimise capital allocation and thus deliver good shareholder returns.
Assoc Prof Lim is right that we also need to look at how the market can facilitate companies to grow. But I hope Assoc Prof Lim will agree with me that if you do not have good shareholder returns, you would not be able to achieve that outcome. So, the two are not mutually exclusive, they go hand-in-hand.
We also want an equities market where research coverage is broader and more insightful, where market makers operate with clarity and confidence and where trading and post‑trade are efficient and user‑friendly.
Mr Speaker: Minister, you have a minute left.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: That is how our market will earn capital and participation in a sustainable way.
Mr Speaker, developing a vibrant equities market is not a one‑off campaign. It is a multi‑year effort that requires discipline, willingness to innovate sensibly and committed partnership among Government, regulators, exchanges, intermediaries, investors and listed companies.
We have laid the foundations and set in motion a comprehensive programme. If we keep at this work together in close partnership between Government and industry, and with the right incentives and a clear focus on quality and sustainability, I am confident that Singapore's equities market will grow in depth, resilience and attractiveness in the years ahead.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Pursuant to Standing Order 2(3)(a), I wish to inform hon Members that the Sitting tomorrow will commence at 1.30 pm. Order. Order.
Adjourned accordingly at 6.34 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":"Matter Raised On Adjournment Motion","questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Safeguards to Prevent Harm to Vulnerable Users of Gen AI Chatbot App","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"21 Ms Cassandra Lee asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) what safeguards the Ministry has required of X's Grok app to prevent harm to vulnerable users, including children; (b) how the adequacy and enforceability of these safeguards are assessed before and during deployment; and (c) whether interim regulatory measures will be applied to limit exposure to or scale of use of Grok app, and if so, on what basis.
Mrs Josephine Teo: IMDA is engaging X on the recent issue of harmful and inappropriate content, such as non-consensual sexualised imagery, being generated and distributed on X using Grok. We note that X has taken some measures to address the matter globally, which includes preventing the Grok account on X from producing images of women and children in revealing clothing.
There are safeguards in place to moderate Singapore users' exposure to harmful content on social media services and applications. The Codes of Practice for Online Safety require designated Social Media Services, including X, and designated app stores, to have in place measures to minimise users' exposure to harmful content, especially for children. This includes having in place community guidelines, content moderation measures and user reporting and resolution mechanisms. The designated services are also required to submit annual transparency reports detailing the measures they have put in place to combat harmful and inappropriate content.
In addition, the upcoming Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Act will allow victims to seek redress if they face specified online harms, such as online harassment and intimate image abuse. The Online Safety Commission will be set up by June 2026.
We will continue to monitor the issue closely and will work with X to enhance online safety for Singapore users on its platform.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Coordinating Befrienders' Outreach to the Elderly and Scaling Up Use of Technology to Monitor Seniors' Well-being","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"22 Assoc Prof Terence Ho asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health whether the Ministry can support the efforts of social service agencies’ senior befrienders by (i) coordinating their outreach to complement that of the Silver Generation ambassadors and (ii) scaling up the deployment of technology in homes to help family members or befrienders monitor the well-being of vulnerable seniors living alone.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Under Age Well SG, the Silver Generation Office (SGO) and various social service agencies work closely together to support vulnerable seniors. SGO's role is to outreach to all seniors, identify seniors with needs, and connect them to community resources, such as befriending and buddying services at Active Ageing Centres. Befrienders from these social service agencies will then maintain regular contact with seniors, with those accepting the befriending service contacted at least monthly.
The Housing and Development Board has been progressively extending the wireless Alert Alarm System to seniors staying in public rental blocks, to allow them to call for help during emergencies. The Ministry of Health is also implementing the enhanced Home Personal Care service islandwide from April 2026, where eligible seniors can subscribe to a technology-enabled fall and incident monitoring and response service.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Balancing Efforts to Attract High-spending Visitors and A High Volume of Visitors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"23 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Singapore Tourism Board balances between (i) attracting high-yield visitors who spend more and (ii) attracting a high volume of visitors, which supports broader employment, especially in retail and tourism services; and (b) if so, how.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Singapore Tourism Board (STB) is placing greater emphasis on visitors who spend more in Singapore while ensuring sustainable growth in visitor numbers to maintain a baseline demand for tourism businesses. This approach will optimise the tourism sector's contribution to our economy and create good jobs for locals, while working within Singapore's constraints.
This involves targeting high-yield, high-growth segments, such as Meetings, Incentives, Conferences and Exhibitions (MICE) visitors and Active Silvers, as well as established segments such as families with children.
To do so, STB partners the tourism industry to develop high quality, first-of-its-kind or first-in-the-region tourism concepts and developments. Recent examples include Rainforest Wild ASIA and Disney Cruise Line's Disney Adventure. STB will also continue to strengthen our pipeline of events, including MICE events such as Food & Hospitality Asia and Industrial Transformation Asia-Pacific, leisure events like the Formula 1 Singapore Grand Prix, Christmas on a Great Street and Marina Bay Singapore Countdown, as well as upcoming A-list acts, such as BTS.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria for Implementing Free Parking Scheme in New HDB Estates Such as Tengah","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"24 Dr Choo Pei Ling asked the Minister for National Development regarding the Free Parking Scheme (FPS) at HDB car parks on Sundays and Public Holidays (a) what is the current criteria for introduction of FPS in new HDB estates; (b) how Tengah compares with other new estates in terms of implementation progress; and (c) whether the Ministry can provide an update on the plans and indicative timeline for FPS in Tengah.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Free Parking Scheme (FPS) aims to promote social interaction and foster stronger family ties by providing free parking at suitable Housing and Development Board (HDB) car parks from 7.00am to 10.30pm on Sundays and public holidays.
HDB car parks are provided primarily to serve the parking needs of HDB residents. HDB will consider implementing FPS after the parking demand from the residents has stabilised and where there are sufficient parking lots to cater to residents’ needs and the expected increase in parking demand from visitors due to FPS.
HDB has been monitoring the parking demand at the new car parks in Tengah and has started to offer FPS at suitable car parks progressively from 1 February 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expediting Citizenship Applications, Subsidised Healthcare Rates and Other Moves as Support for Singaporeans Adopting Foreign Children","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"26 Dr Charlene Chen asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Government will consider supporting the adoption of foreign children by Singaporeans through (i) expediting the children's citizenship applications, (ii) permitting subsidised rates for healthcare and immunisations, (iii) implementing temporary plans for basic insurance coverage and (iv) allowing parents to claim backdated levy concessions for their migrant domestic workers.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Adoptive parents can submit a citizenship application for the adopted child after the adoption order is granted by the Court. The process to assess a citizenship application takes time, as all citizenship applications are assessed on a range of criteria, including the circumstances of the applicant and the family.
Subsidies at our Public Healthcare Institutions and coverage under MediShield Life, our national healthcare insurance scheme, are reserved for Singaporeans and Permanent Residents. All foreigners are not eligible for these, regardless of whether they were adopted or not. Nevertheless, Singaporean adoptive parents who face financial challenges with their foreign child's medical bills may approach the medical social workers in our Public Healthcare Institutions for financial assistance.
Once the child is granted Singapore Citizenship, the levy concession for the migrant domestic worker will be automatically granted. The Ministry of Manpower will consider appeals for retrospective levy concessions for migrant domestic workers hired to care for the adopted children.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Consideration of Alternative Sites before Forest was Cleared for Jurong Innovation District's CleanTech Park and Bahar Precincts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"27 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) regarding the planned clearance of 52 hectares of forest in the Jurong Innovation District for the CleanTech Park and Bahar precincts, what alternative sites were evaluated to preserve the area’s ecological linkage; (b) why were these alternatives not selected; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider stronger mitigation beyond the proposed 14.5 hectares of retained green space.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Government takes a long-term approach to land planning to support the diverse and competing needs in our land-scarce Singapore. We assess the suitability of various sites before making development decisions, taking into account a range of factors, such as locational attributes and synergies with existing developments.
In the case of CleanTech Park and Bahar, both precincts will be integrated with existing industrial sites at Bulim and upcoming sites at the Tengah Industrial Estate. This will support the overall development of the Jurong Innovation District (JID) as Singapore's hub for next-generation advanced manufacturing activities including robotics, medical technology and smart logistics. Its proximity to the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) will also facilitate close industry-academia collaborations. Collectively, JID is expected to cater for some 95,000 jobs, providing good job opportunities for local residents.
JTC commissioned an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the planned developments at CleanTech Park and Bahar. The EIA identified mitigation measures, such as the retention of forested areas with higher ecological values, transplanting plant species of conservation significance and implementing wildlife management, response and rescue plans. JTC reviewed these in consultation with nature groups and will adopt these mitigation measures as much as practicable and integrate the retained forested areas with new greenery spaces within the industrial developments. JTC will also incorporate features in JID to bring the “live, work and play” concept to life for residents in the Jurong region. For example, JTC has developed a five-hectare green sanctuary known as the Potter’s Garden in CleanTech Park to integrate green spaces and celebrate Jurong's pottery heritage and Singapore's last two heritage dragon kilns.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of Progressive Wage Model on Wage Levels, and Business Costs and Competitiveness","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"29 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) has affected wage levels in adjacent or non-PWM sectors; and (b) what assessment has been made of its impact on business costs and competitiveness in the most affected industries.
Dr Tan See Leng: Most lower-wage workers who are not covered by the Progressive Wage Model nevertheless benefit from the Local Qualifying Salary and the Progressive Wage Mark accreditation scheme, which have contributed to increases in their real wages. This is in line with our policy objective to reduce income inequality between lower-wage workers and the median. From 2021 to 2025, real gross monthly income at the 20th percentile rose cumulatively by 10.1%, outpacing the 7.4% increase at the median.
We recognise that businesses are concerned about increases to costs. In a typical business organisation, lower-wage workers account for a relatively modest share of businesses' overall manpower costs, which, in turn, is a sub-set of overall business costs, including rent and utilities. Lower-wage workers constitute about one-fifth of our resident workforce, and their wages are also relatively lower to begin with.
To help employers invest in upskilling, transformation and productivity increases for their lower-wage workers so that wage increases are sustainable, the Government introduced the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS) in 2022 to co-fund wage increases given by employers to lower-wage workers. Employers can also tap on the Workfare Skills Support (Basic) scheme, which provides absentee payroll for employers who send eligible lower-wage workers for training.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Stages when Students in Mainstream Schools are Assessed for Special Educational Needs and Support to Help These Students Prepare for School","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Dr Charlene Chen asked the Minister for Education (a) how primary schools prepare for Primary 1 students with special educational needs entering mainstream schools, including (i) how such needs are identified or declared prior to admission and (ii) how schools plan and deploy support resources; and (b) whether current processes sufficiently enable early and effective support for these students.
31 Dr Charlene Chen asked the Minister for Education (a) what the typical timelines and stages at which students in mainstream schools are assessed or diagnosed for special educational needs; (b) whether these vary by condition; and (c) how the Ministry ensures early identification and intervention so that students do not fall through gaps or receive support only at later primary levels.
Mr Desmond Lee: My response will cover matters raised regarding support for students with special educational needs (SEN), across three questions by Dr Charlene Chen.
The Ministry of Education (MOE) supports students in mainstream schools based on their learning needs, even when they do not have a formal SEN diagnosis. Before starting school, with parental consent, transition information about children with developmental needs or SEN are shared with receiving primary schools via hospitals and Early Intervention Programme for Infants and Children centres. Such information can also be voluntarily disclosed by parents through school data collection forms. This allows receiving schools to factor in the child's needs when planning school resources, such as class placement and transition support. All teachers are trained with foundational understanding of SEN and provide support for students based on their observed needs.
Upon starting primary school, teachers conduct systematic screenings for language, literacy and numeracy at Primary 1 (P1) to identify students who require additional support for foundational skills. We also deploy specialised officers, known as SEN officers, who work with P1 teachers to observe and identify children with social-behavioural difficulties and adjustment issues. These students would then receive support through learning support programmes for literacy and numeracy, or TRANsition Support for InTegration (TRANSIT), in smaller class sizes, based on their identified needs. Teachers continue to monitor students' responses to these early interventions, and screenings are conducted for students who show persistent difficulties, including screening for specific learning difficulties and observations for symptoms of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and Autism Spectrum Disorder.
For those who continue to demonstrate learning or behavioural difficulties despite intervention, school personnel can refer students, with parental consent, to MOE Educational Psychologists (EPs). MOE EPs' diagnostic assessment services are prioritised at primary schools to enable early identification and intervention. Assessments are completed within an average of two months, though complex cases may take additional time. Students continue to be supported, including time-bound in-class or pull-out support by SEN officers, while the assessments are ongoing. If needed, MOE EPs may also seek input from medical professionals at the Response, Early Intervention and Assessment in Community Mental Health.
As students with SEN progress to secondary schools, primary schools share transition information with receiving secondary schools. Secondary schools use this information to plan targeted interventions, allocate resources such as assistive technology and coordinate appropriate class allocations. Effective strategies are also shared by teachers to students and parents to facilitate smooth transitions. MOE EPs also work closely with SEN officers at the secondary level to ensure continued support for the child.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implications for Singapore's Carbon Tax and Sustainability Pathway Given Recent Moves by the US and Partners in Europe and Region","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"32 Mr Mark Lee asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance in light of the United States' pull-back from UN climate processes while Europe and regional partners remain engaged at a calibrating pace (a) how does the Government assess implications for Singapore's carbon tax and sustainability pathway; and (b) whether there is scope to recalibrate the pace of carbon tax increases to mitigate cost pressures on local industries while meeting long-term climate commitments.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Government takes a pragmatic and calibrated approach in setting our carbon tax trajectory, bearing in mind the pace of international climate action, Singapore's economic competitiveness and the progress of decarbonisation technologies.
The pace of global climate action will ebb and flow as countries grapple with different challenges in setting and meeting their climate ambition. However, the increasingly severe impact of climate change means that all countries will eventually be forced to take more drastic climate action.
Decarbonisation is necessary for Singapore to remain competitive in the long-term as the world transits to a low-carbon future. As an alternative energy-disadvantaged country, decarbonisation is more costly for us. Hence, our carbon tax must be high enough to incentivise investments to reduce carbon emissions. We also need to plan early, given the longer lead time needed to implement decarbonisation solutions. In addition, we have to balance these considerations against nearer-term factors, including how carbon is priced in other jurisdictions. This is to avoid carbon leakage, where companies in Singapore relocate their emissive activities to other jurisdictions with lower carbon prices, without resulting in any net decrease in emissions globally.
The Ministry of Trade and Industry has been engaging businesses to address their concerns and challenges with regard to the carbon tax as well as mitigation measures, and to provide the necessary support and assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Current Healthcare Workforce Strength Compared against Projected Service Demand","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Mr Sharael Taha asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) how the current healthcare workforce compares against projected service demand, including vacancy rates and critical skill shortages; and (b) how workforce planning is being strengthened to meet the needs of an ageing population beyond 2030.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry regularly review our medium to long term manpower plans and translate them into education, training and recruitment initiatives. Our healthcare workforce is projected to grow by 20% from 129,000 in 2024 to about 156,000 in 2030, taking into account evolving care models and areas of growth such as community nurses. Our current healthcare workforce is broadly adequate for the population's healthcare demand. In the public hospitals, which account for the bulk of patients, the overall vacancy rate is low.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reduction in Budget Meal Options for Lower-income Residents with Scrapping of Budget Meal Initiative at HDB Coffee Shops","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Assoc Prof Terence Ho asked the Minister for National Development in view that HDB coffeeshops are no longer required to offer budget meals (a) whether there will be a reduction in budget meal options available to lower-income residents; (b) whether the Ministry will consider providing financial incentives directly to coffeeshop stallholders to offer budget meals; and (c) whether it is feasible to link funding support to the volume of budget meals purchased.
35 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for National Development (a) what are the specific factors considered in the decision to make the budget meal initiative for HDB coffeeshops no longer mandatory on grounds of the scheme’s sustainability; and (b) what factors will be used to monitor and evaluate the impact of the change.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Residents have access to a variety of cooked food options at the Housing and Development Board (HDB) coffee shops and hawker centres. The People's Association and community partners have also implemented various support programmes to assist lower-income residents.
Since the introduction of the budget meal initiative in 2018, HDB has been regularly engaging with operators, stallholders and residents to refine the scheme. Operators and stallholders have shared concerns that the budget meal initiative is not sustainable due to rising costs and low take-up rates. Residents have also given feedback that the quality of budget meals is uneven and portion sizes can be inconsistent.
To address these concerns, HDB is offering more flexibility and funding support to operators and stallholders who choose to offer budget meals. From 10 January 2026, budget meals are optional for all HDB coffee shops when they renew their existing tenancies. Operators now have the flexibility to decide whether to participate in the initiative. Existing operators of rental coffee shops who are currently providing budget meals will continue to do so until the end of their current tenancy. Hence, there will not be a sudden change in the number of coffee shops offering budget meals.
To encourage operators to participate in the scheme, HDB has tripled the funding support to operators who offer budget meals, by extending the 5% rental discount from the current one-year period to the full three-year tenancy term.
To ensure that stallholders providing budget meals receive the rental discounts, coffee shop operators are required to pass on the discount in full to their stallholders providing budget meals. The incentive system for budget meal provision is designed to be simple and operationally efficient, so funding support is not linked to the volume of budget meals purchased. Given the stallholders' busy workloads and the wide variation in locations and budget meal demand across different coffee shops, it will be administratively onerous to do so.
To better meet residents' daily needs, HDB will standardise the scope of the budget meal requirement such that operators who offer budget meals have to provide three meal options: (i) an economy rice option consisting of rice with one meat dish and two vegetable dishes, (ii) a halal meal option, and (iii) a breakfast item. HDB also requires budget meals to be full meal options, and operators are not allowed to limit the daily quantity available for purchase.
We believe the new arrangement is fairer and more sustainable for operators, stallholders and consumers. HDB will continue to engage with coffee shop operators and monitor the response to assess whether further adjustments are needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Leave Days taken by Parents Due to Childcare Centre Closures or Children Falling Ill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"36 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Ministry has conducted studies on the number of leave days taken by parents with children under seven due to childcare centre closures or their children falling ill; and (b) if so, whether such leave usage frequently exceeds the current enhanced childcare leave entitlement.
Ms Indranee Rajah: A working parent with a Singaporean child under the age of seven has six days of Government-Paid Childcare Leave (GPCL) a year. This means that a working couple has a total of 12 days of GPCL to care for their child, on top of their annual leave provisions. The Government does not track the reasons for which parents take GPCL, and we do not have data on whether the leave usage of parents due to childcare centre closures or their children falling ill exceeds the current GPCL entitlements.
As employers only claim reimbursement for those who take more than three days of GPCL, we only have data for this group of parents. In 2023, the proportion of eligible working mothers and fathers who took more than three days of GPCL was 58% and 53%, respectively. Of this group, the vast majority of mothers and fathers took all six days of GPCL each. Data for 2024 is not yet available.
Beyond parental leave provisions, the Government has also introduced the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Requests, which parents can tap on to manage their work and child caregiving responsibilities. We will continue to review our parental leave provisions and work with Tripartite Partners to foster more family-friendly workplaces.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"More Measures to Encourage Seniors to Go for Regular Dental Check-ups","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"37 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health whether measures are being considered to further encourage seniors to go for regular dental check-ups and preventive care in addition to the enhanced Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) subsidies for dental procedures implemented in October 2025 to improve support for dental care.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Singapore has a range of policies and programmes to help seniors access dental care regularly, focusing on preventive care, access to services and financial support.
We recently enhanced CHAS subsidies for preventive dental care in October 2025. We are also working towards bringing dental care closer to where seniors live by expanding dental services at polyclinics and strengthening partnerships with community dental providers to make regular visits and routine care more convenient for seniors. Subsidised dental care in the community is currently available at over 1,000 CHAS clinics and 15 polyclinics.
We encourage seniors to go for regular dental check-ups as part of preventive care. For example, Project Silver Screen (PSS) is a nationwide community screening programme that screens seniors aged 60 and above in their vision, hearing and oral health. Seniors found to have dental abnormalities will be referred to CHAS dental clinics. More than 30,000 seniors are screened under PSS each year.
The National Dental Centre Singapore (NDCS) also runs programmes to support seniors' oral health. The Oral Health Movement 8020 encourages older adults to retain at least 20 teeth into their 80s, reducing oral frailty and enabling early detection of risk factors. Complementing this, the Oral Health Education Programme trains caregivers in long-term care settings to provide basic oral hygiene and recognise dental problems. To improve access, NDCS offers Tele-dentistry Oral Care for Seniors for remote consultations, hygiene support and denture care for residents in nursing homes and home care and has recently launched its first mobile dental clinic to bring dental services closer to the elderly community.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of Voucher Schemes in Helping Singaporeans Cope with Cost-of-living Concerns Sustainably","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"42 Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) when will the Government study the effectiveness of initiatives like the GSTV scheme and CDC vouchers under the Assurance Package in helping Singaporeans cope with cost-of-living concerns sustainably; and (b) what are some structural or cost control measures that can be implemented to better manage cost-of-living challenges, especially among vulnerable Singaporeans.
Ms Indranee Rajah: The Government regularly reviews the effectiveness of our schemes to ensure they continue to help Singaporeans manage cost-of-living concerns.
Over the recent years, in response to higher inflationary pressures, we had progressively reviewed and enhanced the Assurance Package (AP) with additional cash, U-Save, Service and Conservancy Charges Rebate and Community Development Council Vouchers. In total, we increased the support delivered via the AP from the initial $6.6 billion in 2022 to more than $10 billion in 2025.
These enhancements have fully offset the expenditure increase arising from higher inflation for lower-income households, and substantially offset the expenditure increase for middle-income households each year from 2022 to 2025.
The Government also provides substantial structural support to help Singaporeans manage major cost concerns like education, healthcare and housing, and retirement. On top of this, we provide targeted structural support for vulnerable groups, such as Workfare for lower-wage workers, Fresh Start Housing Scheme for lower-income families and Silver Support for seniors who had low incomes in their working years.
Where necessary, we complement these structural measures with additional one-off support for households. This approach allows us to provide more responsive and targeted support, while remaining fiscally prudent.
In the longer term, the most sustainable way to help Singaporeans cope with cost pressures is through broad-based wage growth that outpaces inflation. The Government will continue to pursue this by growing the economy, creating good jobs and supporting Singaporeans in upgrading their skills through continuing education and training.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of US-based MNCs' Exemption from 15% Global Corporate Tax on Singapore's Tax Revenues and Medium-term Fiscal Risks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Ministry has assessed (i) the potential impact of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) decision to exempt US-based multinational corporations from the 15% global corporate tax will have on Singapore’s corporate tax revenues and (ii) whether this poses any medium-term fiscal risks to Singapore.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Side-by-Side package under Pillar Two of the OECD's Base Erosion and Profit Shifting initiative (BEPS) essentially allows US multinational enterprises (MNEs) to continue operating under the US global tax system, which already imposes a minimum level of tax on their worldwide income. This arrangement is deemed to achieve similar policy outcomes as Pillar Two and hence, it is allowed to operate \"side by side\" with the Pillar Two rules.
This new development does not impact other jurisdictions' implementation of Domestic Minimum Top-up Taxes. Singapore will therefore proceed with our Domestic Top-up Tax, and all large MNEs, including US MNEs, operating in Singapore will still have to pay the minimum effective tax rate of 15% on profits earned in Singapore.
Notwithstanding the progress made with BEPS, global competition for key investments is continuing to intensify in other forms, and through other fiscal tools and incentives. We will therefore have to continue making the necessary investments to stay competitive and create good jobs and opportunities for Singaporeans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Error Rate in Sex-sorting Process for Mosquitoes in Project Wolbachia and Process to Ensure These Mosquitoes Lack Physiological Capability to Bite Humans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how many reports of biting by male Wolbachia mosquitoes have been received since 2024; (b) what is the current error rate for the sex-sorting process for Project Wolbachia; and (c) what scientific evidence ensures that these released male mosquitoes lack the physiological capability to bite or draw blood from humans.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: We have not received any report of biting by male Wolbachia mosquitoes. Residents in Project Wolbachia sites may still experience mosquito bites from female mosquitoes of species that are found locally, including those not released by Project Wolbachia. Source reduction efforts, therefore, remain important in suppressing the mosquito population.
Through our rigorous laboratory studies and quality control checks, we found that the sex-sorting process for Project Wolbachia achieved an accuracy of 99.9% The small number of female Wolbachia mosquitoes inadvertently released is negligible compared to the overall mosquito population in the community, and these females have significantly reduced ability to transmit diseases. Neighbourhoods where male Wolbachia mosquitoes have been released have seen an 80% reduction in female Aedes aegypti mosquito populations and more than 70% reduction in dengue risk.
The National Environment Agency has thoroughly studied the Wolbachia-Aedes suppression technology and conducted independent risk assessments, concluding that it is safe and poses no risk to human health. This conclusion is supported by international research and independent reviews.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implications for Singapore from Disputes over US Claim on Greenland","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"45 Mr Vikram Nair asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs what are the implications, if any, for Singapore arising from the dispute between the US and some of its NATO allies over Greenland.
46 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what is the Government’s assessment on the impact that the United States’ claim on Greenland will have on Singapore; and (b) how will President Trump’s threats of applying tariffs on nations that oppose the United States’ claim on Greenland affect the way the Singapore Government approaches the issue.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: This response will address Parliamentary Question No 1210 raised by Member Vikram Nair and Parliamentary Question No 1352 raised by Member Lee Hong Chuang in today's Order Paper.
As a small country, Singapore has to reaffirm the importance of international law and the principles of the United Nations Charter. This includes respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries, as well as the right to self-determination of all peoples. Consequently, any issues concerning Greenland's future should be resolved peacefully, in accordance with international law.
Singapore values our longstanding and substantive partnership with the United States (US). The US continues to play a vital role in the security and prosperity of the Asia Pacific. At the same time, we enjoy friendly ties and mutually beneficial cooperation with many European countries, including Denmark. We will continue to uphold international law and multilateralism, as these principles ultimately protect small states, and contribute to global peace and stability.
47 Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) what is the current construction status and expected completion date of the Tampines North Integrated Transport Hub; (b) what factors contributed to the extended timeline from initial planning in 2013 to expected completion in 2030; and (c) what lessons have been learned to expedite future integrated transport hub developments.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Integrated Transport Hubs (ITHs) are developments with integrated bus interchanges that are seamlessly linked to MRT stations and adjoining residential and commercial developments, such as shopping malls. These developments are typically planned to be completed together with or after the completion of new rail stations. These developments are also complex and require more time to construct compared to a single use development, as they integrate various use requirements within a single site.
The Tampines North ITH was planned to be completed together with the future Tampines North Cross Island Line station. As the construction of Cross Island Line was delayed by one year due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the timeline of Tampines North ITH was also shifted back by a year. Construction of the Tampines North ITH commenced in 2024, and we hope to complete it by 2030. In the meantime, residents in the area are served by the Tampines North Bus Interchange.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data Related to Marriage Status, Parental Age and Number of Children in Single-parent Households","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for Social and Family Development among single-parent households (a) how many are (i) divorced, (ii) widowed, (iii) unwed; (b) how many single parents are aged (i) below 21, (ii) between 21 and 45, (iii) 46 and above; (c) how many children in these households are aged (i) below five, (ii) between five and 16, (iii) 17 and above; and (d) how many of these households have (i) one child, (ii) two children, (iii) three children and more.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Based on data between 2020 and 2024, there is an average of 83,000 single-parent resident households.
Among these single-parent households, 58% are divorced or separated, 39% widowed and 3% are never-married parents, while 54% of these households have one child, 35% have two children, and 11% have three or more children living in the same household.
The Member may wish to refer to the SingStat website for yearly statistics of single-parent households by the age of the single parents, and age band of the youngest child.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessment of 11% Decline in Reading on Trust that Next Generation of Singaporeans Would be Better Off","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"49 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) what is the Government’s assessment of the 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer finding that only 31% of Singapore residents believe the next generation will be better off, a 11% decline from the previous year; and (b) whether internal Government data corroborates this decline in intergenerational optimism.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Edelman Trust Barometer is an annual global survey that captures public sentiment, which can be influenced by prevailing economic conditions and current events. The 2026 findings show a decline in intergenerational optimism and heightened concerns about jobs, not only in Singapore, but across many of the countries surveyed.
The Government regularly gathers feedback from Singaporeans on their aspirations and views about the future. Our own surveys do not indicate a comparable deterioration in the outlook of young Singaporeans. Beyond surveys, we also track objective indicators of intergenerational mobility. Previously published data show that Singapore has performed well in sustaining social mobility compared to other advanced economies. We will release updated findings in due course.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Student Care Centres Not Registered as Fee Assistance Administrator or School-based Centre and Regulation over Such Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the proportion of Student Care Centres (SCC) which are not registered as a Student Care Fee Assistance Administrator or school-based SCC; (b) whether such SCCs are subject to any regulatory oversight; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider subjecting all SCCs to a licensing and regulatory regime similar to early childhood development centres.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: All school-based Student Care Centres are registered with the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF). As for centres which are not school-based, they are only required to register with MSF if they wish to administer the Student Care Fee Assistance scheme.
The general regulatory regime for all Student Care Centres and their staff, irrespective of whether they administer Student Care Fee Assistance, is that they must comply with the prevailing laws, including the Children and Young Persons Act.
MSF will continue to monitor the existing regulatory framework for student care centres and, if necessary, to enhance it.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trend of Foreign Technology Companies Re-domiciling in Singapore to Mitigate Geopolitical Regulatory Risks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"51 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Government monitors the trend of foreign technology companies re-domiciling in Singapore primarily to mitigate geopolitical regulatory risks; (b) what assessment has been made of the reputational risks to Singapore's status as a neutral technology hub; and (c) what criteria ensure such entities maintain substantive business operations and local workforce commitments here.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: All companies domiciled in Singapore, whether local- or foreign-owned, must register with the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority and must comply with our laws and regulations. Some companies may also be subject to compliance oversight by relevant regulatory agencies.
Foreign companies that re-domicile in Singapore must meet minimum requirements for substantive business activity, such as total assets, revenue or employment, in addition to requirements for solvency and legality. The Government does not require companies that re-domicile to Singapore to provide a reason for their application.
We welcome all legitimate technology companies to be established in Singapore. This approach reinforces Singapore's position as an open economy and trusted business hub, contributes to employment creation for Singaporeans and strengthens our growing technology and innovation ecosystem.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complaints Received on Inaccurate Bus Arrival Information on LTA's Online and Physical Platforms","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"52 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) in each of the past five years, how many complaints have LTA received on inaccurate bus arrival information on its online and physical platforms; (b) whether other approaches were considered to fix such inaccuracies before deciding on a system-level reset; and (c) whether the Ministry expects such resets to recur in the near future and what steps are taken to address this.
53 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) for the latest status of investigations into the recent bus ETA system technical issues affecting commuters' access to real-time information; (b) the identified root causes; and (c) what measures are being taken to improve (i) reliability reduce (ii) commuter inconvenience and (iii) prevent recurrence of such system disruptions.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Over the last five years, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) received fewer than 100 complaints on bus arrival timings per month.
The recent disruption to the Estimated Time of Arrival (ETA) system was due to a memory cache build-up in the on-board equipment used to track the live location of buses. The affected buses encountered errors communicating with the server, which led to bus location information not being displayed correctly on apps and at bus stops.
To remedy the problem, the firmware had to be re-uploaded manually on each bus. This required some time. Some transmitters had to be replaced before the ETA system could be fully restored. LTA will examine how to improve system reliability further, including whether over-the-air transmissions can be activated for such software updates.
54 Mr Vikram Nair asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what is Singapore's position in relation to the capture of Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro and his wife by the United States; and (b) what are the implications for Singapore, if any, in view of such developments.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: The Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement on 4 January 2026 stating our views. Singapore expressed grave concern about the US' military intervention in Venezuela on 3 January 2026, which was contrary to international law and the principles of the United Nations (UN) Charter.
Singapore has consistently opposed actions contrary to international law by any parties, including foreign military intervention in any country. We did so in the case of Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the US' invasion of Grenada in 1983. Singapore has also voted accordingly on the relevant resolutions at the UN. This is because a world order based on “might is right” is more unstable and dangerous, especially for small states. It is crucial that all countries respect and uphold international law and the principles of the UN Charter that safeguard the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states.
In the conduct of Singapore's foreign policy, we have taken and will continue to take a principled approach to every issue, in accordance with Singapore's long-term national interests.
59 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what is the Ministry's assessment of the current capacity and coverage of strength training facilities for seniors, in particular programmes, such as Gym Tonic; and (b) whether the Ministry has any plans to expand access to such facilities to meet growing demand among seniors.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: We have been increasing the capacity and coverage of strength training facilities in the community to meet the growing demand among seniors, including fitness corners in Housing and Development Board estates and public parks, as well as ActiveSG gyms located islandwide. More seniors have also benefitted from programmes to improve muscle strength and prevent frailty, organised by agencies such as the Health Promotion Board and Sport Singapore. Many of these programmes are offered at the expanded network of Active Ageing Centres. These complement the facilities and programmes offered by private organisations, such as Gym Tonic. We will continue to monitor and support the uptake of strength training among seniors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for One Budget Meal Option Per Hawker Stall at Centres Managed by NEA and Town Councils","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Mr Foo Cexiang asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the Ministry will review the requirement to keep food affordable such as by ensuring at least one budget meal option is available per stall at hawker centres managed by the NEA and Town Councils in light of HDB's policy revisions on 10 January 2026 that coffee shops renewing leases no longer need to offer budget meals.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The National Environment Agency (NEA) does not require stalls at hawker centres to provide budget meals. Nevertheless, I understand that the Member's question seeks to clarify whether there are plans to review the provision of value meals at Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centres (SEHCs).
At SEHCs, NEA requires operators to propose initiatives to keep food affordable. This is in line with the primary mission of hawker centres to provide affordable food options. So far, SEHC operators have done so by having at least one value meal available at each stall. SEHC operators would have explained the value meal requirement upfront to stallholders before signing tenancy agreements, ensuring that stallholders take into account their costs of operation and pricing options.
Value meals are part of the range of food options offered at SEHCs at a variety of price points to meet the needs of residents. Stallholders are not expected to make a loss from selling value meals. Each stallholder has the flexibility to propose his or her value meal item, while offering other food options at higher prices.
SEHC operators will periodically review value meal prices and have adjusted them based on feedback from stallholders. NEA will continue to require SEHC operators to propose initiatives to ensure food affordability in future tenders.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Range of Total Annual Compensation for Political Office Holders from 2018 to 2024","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) what has been the total annual compensation range for political office holders from 2018 to 2024; (b) what were the ranges for (i) Performance Bonus, (ii) National Bonus and (iii) Annual Variable Component over this period; and (c) whether the Ministry will provide data comparing how political salaries tracked against median and 90th percentile household incomes during this period.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The current salary structure and compensation package for Political Office Holders was established by a review committee in 2012 and implemented from 2011, when the then-Government assumed its new term of office. The framework and salaries have not changed since. Although a subsequent committee was formed in 2017 to review the 2012 framework, the Government of the day decided not to make any changes to political salaries then as the economy then was undergoing transition.
Then, and remains the case today, the norm annual salary of an entry-level Minister is $1.1 million. This is based on a 40% discount to the market benchmark established in 2012.
The salary points for other political appointment holders are pegged as a fixed ratio to the entry-level Minister's norm salary level.
The annual salary is made up of fixed and variable pay components, split around 65:35 respectively. The fixed pay components comprise monthly salary and 13th month Non-Pensionable Annual Allowance and make up 65% of the total annual salary. The variable pay is made up of the National Bonus, Annual Variable Component and individual Performance Bonus, which together make up about 35% of the total annual salary.
The National Bonus is determined equally by four indicators related to the socioeconomic progress of Singaporeans as laid out in the White Paper: namely, the real median income growth rate of Singaporeans; the real growth rate of the lowest 20th percentile income of Singaporeans; the unemployment rate of Singaporeans; and the real GDP growth rate. No National Bonus is paid if the targets are not met. Three months of bonus will be paid if the targets are met, or up to six months if targets are far exceeded.
The Annual Variable Component is the same amount that all Civil Servants receive. Between 2018 and 2024, it ranged between zero and 1.5 months.
The individual Performance Bonus may range from zero to six months each year, as determined by the Prime Minister.
All the components added up – fixed pay plus variable pay, including any and all bonuses – make up the norm level of $1.1 million for an entry level MR4 Minister.
The Member asked how the salaries have tracked against household income. As the issue at hand relates to salaries of individual political office holders, a more appropriate comparison would be with individual incomes.
While political salaries have not changed since the 2012 review, based on the Ministry of Manpower's published data, incomes of Singapore Citizen earners at the 20th percentile and median have conversely increased by 87% and 80% respectively within the same time period.
The Government has recently appointed an independent committee to recommend appropriate salaries and propose refinements to the framework. It will submit its report to the Government when it is ready, after which we will provide an update to Parliament.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Property Tax Deferral Scheme to Give Cash-strapped Persons Option to Postpone Paying Property Taxes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"62 Mr Shawn Loh asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether asset-rich, cash-poor Singaporeans can have an option to defer their property taxes payable with a reasonable rate of interest, such that their taxes can be paid in the future when the properties are transacted or bequeathed.
63 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Government will consider introducing a property tax deferral scheme to assist seniors with cash flow difficulties to postpone paying the property taxes for their owner-occupied home.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Deferring property taxes over long periods can result in significant accumulated liabilities, which may create complications when properties are transferred or bequeathed. The Government, therefore, takes a careful approach in considering such arrangements.
Nonetheless, we recognise that some property owners may face cash flow issues when paying their property tax. Currently, eligible property owners aged 65 and above can already apply for a 24-month interest-free instalment plan for their property tax payments.
We will continue to review the adequacy of our existing measures and consider whether further support is needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Manage \"Tunnel Squatting\" across Rail Network","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"64 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) what proportion of Singapore's rail network is built on marine clay; (b) what long-term measures are in place to manage \"tunnel squatting\" across the rail network; (c) what other portions of rail network are scheduled for maintenance related to ground settlement; and (d) how advanced geotechnical monitoring is integrated into rail maintenance regimes to ensure structural integrity and minimise service disruptions.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Around 10% of our underground rail tunnels run through marine clay.
Rail tunnels are regularly inspected for defects including for tunnel squatting. Tunnel segments that are more likely to be affected are subject to enhanced monitoring, including the use of advanced instruments, laser profilers and high-definition image scanners.
The current works are focused on the tunnels between Paya Lebar and Mountbatten stations. Should further works be needed on other parts of the network, the public will be informed early.
65 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Education (a) will the Ministry issue clear guidance to schools on how to encourage students to speak up about school-related issues through appropriate channels, including discussions with teachers, parents, or on social media; and (b) to ensure that students are not discouraged or penalised by teachers for respectfully expressing concerns or views publicly in the public interest.
Mr Desmond Lee: Schools are safe spaces for students to learn to express their views respectfully and constructively. The Ministry of Education provides schools with guidance on ways to build a positive culture that encourages student voice and provide platforms to allow students to discuss issues with School Leaders, teachers, student leaders and their peers. Schools have the autonomy to decide on the appropriate approaches to take. These could include dialogues, focus group discussions and online channels, like surveys or forums.
Students will not be discouraged from nor penalised for expressing their views respectfully and constructively.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enforcing against E-vaporisers Disguised as Smart Devices or Everyday Items","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"66 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what is the Ministry's assessment of the health risks posed by smart vapes designed as gaming consoles or phones to target youths; and (b) whether current legislation will be reviewed to introduce heavier penalties for manufacturers and distributors who use such deceptive designs to circumvent parental and school supervision and attract young users.
67 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) how many e-vaporisers disguised as electronic smart devices have been seized in the past year; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider enhanced sentencing frameworks for syndicates that intentionally import vapes disguised as common household or student items to evade detection by enforcement agencies at checkpoints.
68 Mr Jackson Lam asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) how enforcement agencies are adapting to vapes disguised as everyday items or smart devices; (b) whether current search, detection, and seizure powers are adequate; and (c) how frontline officers are trained to identify such concealed devices.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: E-vaporisers disguised in the form of USB drives, highlighters, smart devices and other everyday items are not new. The Health Sciences Authority (HSA) has been detecting such cases. HSA has encountered two cases of smart e-vaporisers thus far.
HSA shares intelligence with enforcement agencies so that frontline enforcement officers can effectively identify e-vaporisers of various forms. These officers are already empowered to carry out the necessary enforcement activities.
The Ministry of Health plans to legislate stiffer penalties for importers and suppliers of e-vaporisers, regardless of their form. The use of deceptive designs to evade detection can be presented to the Courts as an aggravating factor warranting a higher sentence.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"LTA's Role and Processes with Respect to Vehicle Recalls","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"69 Ms Hany Soh asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether LTA will review its role and processes with respect to vehicle recalls, especially for safety reasons.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Vehicle manufacturers and motor dealers, including parallel importers, are legally responsible for identifying affected vehicles, notifying owners and arranging rectification of safety-related defects. Vehicle owners receiving recall notices should work with their motor dealers to have any safety-related defects rectified promptly. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) facilitates the vehicle recall process by publishing notices of recent recalls on the OneMotoring website, as reported by vehicle manufacturers or motor dealers to LTA.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expanding Vehicle-specific Data Collection by LTA for More Offence Types","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"70 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Acting Minister for Transport with regard to the sharing in 2023 that vehicle-specific data collected by the Land Transport Authority will only be used for payment, charges and enforcement, such as against non-payment of ERP charges, whether such enforcement includes or will include enforcement of speeding violations or other traffic offences beyond non-payment of charges.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: At the moment, the ERP 2.0 system is designed primarily for payment and charges. It can also be used for enforcement, including for traffic offences like speeding, but further enhancements will be needed. The use of such data will be governed by existing laws, such as the Public Service (Governance) Act. The Member may refer to the Second Reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill for more details on the use of ERP 2.0 for enforcement.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Considerations in Evaluating Invitations for Singapore to Join New Multilateral Groups Such as Board of Peace","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"72 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what considerations Singapore will have in evaluating invitations from new multilateral groups such as the Board of Peace; and (b) whether Singapore will consider adopting a wait-and-see approach before joining any new multilateral groups.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: The Singapore Government is assessing the invitation from the United States to join the Board of Peace.\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Profile of Persons with Forfeited SkillsFuture Credits and Total Value Involved","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"73 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the total value of SkillsFuture Credits forfeited following expiry at end-2025, disaggregated by (i) age group and (ii) income group; and (b) whether the Ministry plans to conduct a nationwide survey to study factors influencing SkillsFuture Credit usage.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Government provided a one-off SkillsFuture Credit top-up of $500 to all eligible Singaporeans aged 25 and above in 2020. Unlike the Opening Credit of $500 given at age 25 and the Mid-Career Credit of $4,000 given at age 40 that do not expire, this top-up had a validity period of five years and expired by the end of 2025. This was intended to encourage individuals to take active steps in upskilling or picking up a new skill.
About 40% of eligible Singaporeans had used their one-off SkillsFuture Credit top-up before expiry. Among those aged 30 to 60, the figure is higher at around 45%. We do not track utilisation by income group.
There are various reasons why individuals may have chosen not to use the SkillsFuture Credit top-up. Some could have attended training that was sponsored by their employers and others could have decided that they do not need to attend additional training at this point in their career. The SkillsFuture Credit is just one of many ways that Government supports Singaporeans in their lifelong learning journey. More importantly, our goal is to encourage and support Singaporeans to undergo meaningful and relevant training, whether or not they tap on SkillsFuture Credit to do so.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Bidders for School Bus Service Contracts for SPED Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"74 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Education with regard to the contract awarding process for school bus services for Special Education (SPED) schools (a) over the past two years, on average, how many bus operators participate in each bidding exercise; and (b) what are the mechanisms in place to ensure sufficient number of unique bidders.
Mr Desmond Lee: This response addresses Oral Question No 74 and the related written question filed by Ms Gho Sze Kee for the subsequent Sitting regarding the contract awarding process for school bus services for Special Education (SPED) schools [Please refer to \"Bus Services Fare Hike at Pathlight School and Analysis of Participants in Tender Exercise\", Official Report, 4 February 2026, Vol 96, Issue 16, Written Answers to Questions section.].
Social Service Agencies (SSAs) that operate SPED schools conduct their own competitive bidding exercises. They select operators based on factors including fare competitiveness, fleet capacity, ability to meet SPED students' complex transportation needs and geographical coverage.
The Ministry of Education (MOE) does not oversee individual SSA tender processes, stipulate bidding mechanisms or track the number of bids submitted to the SSAs. However, to support the SPED schools and to enable broader market access, MOE has extended its Public School Bus Advertisement website portal to SSAs/SPED schools since 2024, enabling them to invite bids from a wider pool of school bus operators in Singapore during tender exercises. SSAs/SPED schools that used the portal received several bids for their school bus contracts, and we will continue to encourage more SSAs or schools to use it.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exposure of Singapore's Reserves to Proposed Changes to Section 892 of US Tax Code","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"75 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Ministry has assessed the exposure of Singapore's Reserves to the proposed changes to section 892 of the United States (US) tax code; (b) whether Singapore has made representations to the US Treasury before the 13 February 2026 comment deadline; and (c) whether the Ministry retains confidence that GIC's and Temasek's US investments are adequately protected from this regulatory change.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Government expects our investment entities to operate on a commercial basis and to fully comply with the laws and regulations of the jurisdictions they invest in. We also expect them to closely monitor regulatory changes in overseas jurisdictions and to adjust their portfolios accordingly should these affect our investment returns or risks.
As with other investors and interested parties, GIC and Temasek may provide feedback or comments on proposed regulatory or tax changes introduced by the United States (US) or other foreign governments, where relevant.
Separately, the Singapore Government maintains regular and constructive engagement with the US Treasury on a broad range of issues, including developments in financial and tax regulations.
The Government retains confidence that our investment entities have the capabilities and risk-management frameworks to assess and manage the implications of regulatory changes and to take appropriate steps to protect Singapore's investment interests.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Rationale for Structuring New HDB Shop Leases as Two Three-year Terms and Proposed Penalties for Early Lease Termination","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"76 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for National Development regarding the six-year rent commitment for Housing and Development Board (HDB) shops (a) what is the rationale for structuring tenancies as two three-year terms instead of a single six-year lease; (b) whether HDB will consider penalties for early lease termination to deter speculative bidding; and (c) how does the new measure prevent well-resourced chains from displacing smaller businesses.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) typically lets out and renews tenancies of rental shops for a period of three years, which is in line with market practice. New tenants who secure an HDB shop after 10 January 2026 and choose to renew when their first tenancy term ends will have their rents maintained based on their winning bids for another three years. By requiring tenderers to commit to tendered rent over a longer period, tenderers are encouraged to submit more sustainable and prudent bids.
Tenants can terminate their tenancies ahead of tenancy expiry with no penalty, as HDB recognises that there could be tenants who face genuine business challenges and financial constraints. Tenants who wish to terminate their tenancy early must provide HDB with one month's notice.
Small and medium enterprises can tap on the suite of programmes offered by Government agencies, such as Enterprise Singapore and HDB, to help them increase cost competitiveness, as well as enhance their productivity and transform their business.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implementing Progressive Wage Credit Scheme as a More Long-term Feature","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"77 Mr Shawn Loh asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme can be made a more long-term feature so as to moderate increasing business costs while encouraging the continued narrowing of the wage gap in our economy.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Progressive Wage Credit Scheme was introduced in 2022 as a transitionary support scheme to help businesses defray the costs of adjusting to lower-wage worker policy moves, such as the expansion of the Progressive Wage Model to cover more sectors and occupations. The intent is for employers to use this period of transition support to invest in upskilling their employees, transforming their businesses and improving productivity to ensure that wage increases are sustainable in the long-term.
We are reviewing the scheme and will provide updates in due time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Summonses Issued to Cyclists for Failing to Display Front and Rear Lights for Night Rides","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"78 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) in each of the last three years, how many summonses were issued to cyclists for failing to display front white and rear red lights at night; (b) which groups of cyclists most frequently commit these offences; and (c) what specific education efforts target this requirement and how is their effectiveness measured against compliance rates observed during enforcement, if any.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Between 2023 to 2025, 167 summonses were issued to cyclists for failing to display front white and rear red lights at night – 42 in 2023, 79 in 2024, and 46 in 2025. The summonses were mostly issued to cyclists on roads.
The Government partners stakeholders, such as through the conducting of school talks, to raise public awareness of safe practices, including the use of lights on bicycles.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Correct Use of Dormitory Transition Scheme Grants","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"79 Dr Choo Pei Ling asked the Minister for Manpower regarding the Dormitory Transition Scheme (DTS), (a) what are the measures to ensure that operators utilise the funding DTS grant responsibly and in line with the intended objectives of DTS; (b) what are the safeguards against misuse or abuse of these funds; and (c) whether there will be regular inspections and audits during the retrofitting processes.
Dr Tan See Leng: The intent of the Dormitory Transition Scheme (DTS) grant is to help dormitories defray the costs of retrofitting to meet DTS interim standards by the end of 2030. The DTS grant will apply to only three specific categories of retrofitting works, such as building an ensuite toilet, installing room partitions and building isolation facilities. Each category will be funded at a piece rate, which has been set in consultation with the industry.
The grant amount for each dormitory will be based on the extent of retrofitting works required to meet the DTS interim standards. The DTS grant will not cover existing facilities that already meet the DTS interim standards or additional facilities that go beyond these requirements.
To ensure that the DTS grant is utilised for its intended purpose, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) will evaluate the retrofitting works to check if they qualify for funding, and disburse the grant only after the dormitory has completed all the retrofitting works and obtained the necessary certifications from their Qualified Persons. MOM will also conduct an inspection to ensure that the dormitory meets the DTS interim standards before the grant is disbursed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Estimated Carbon Footprint and Air Pollutant Emissions from Firework Displays at Major Events","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"80 Dr Neo Kok Beng asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what is the estimated carbon footprint and air pollutant emissions arising from National Day Parade (NDP) firework use; (b) whether the Ministry has any plans to progressively reduce, eliminate or replace fireworks displays with lower-emission alternatives, like large-scale drone light shows, for future NDPs; and (c) if so, whether the Ministry will consider developing local capabilities for large-scale drone light shows.
81 Dr Neo Kok Beng asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the Government has estimates on firework-related carbon emissions and environment pollutants over (i) major events, such as the New Year Eve Countdown and (ii) daily or recurring events such as the Wings of Time Fireworks Symphony in Sentosa; and (b) whether the Government will consider replacing or complementing fireworks with drone light shows to reduce carbon and particulate emissions.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Fireworks events are transient and infrequent, and therefore not a main source of carbon emissions and air pollutants. The Government does not track the carbon emissions from them.
The National Environment Agency has not observed any significant impact to the air quality in Singapore arising from fireworks displays.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Institutionalising Office of the Leader of the Opposition in Constitution","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"82 Dr Neo Kok Beng asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Office of the Leader of Opposition will be institutionalised in the Constitution; (b) if so, what are the criteria for an elected Member of Parliament (MP) assuming the Office; and (c) where there is no elected MP who meets the criteria, whether the Prime Minister will continue to appoint an elected MP to the Office.
Mr Chan Chun Sing (for the Prime Minister): My response is on behalf of the Prime Minister.
The People's Action Party (PAP) Government first formalised the Office of the Leader of the Opposition (LO) in 2020. The Leader of the House had also set out the duties and privileges of the LO in the 14th and 15th Parliament, and these are on the Parliamentary record.
The Government supports, in-principle, further steps to institutionalise the Office. However, as a relatively new institution, its roles, responsibilities and operating arrangements continue to be shaped by Parliamentary practice, experience and the conduct of those who occupy the Office. It would therefore be appropriate to allow these conventions to further develop and mature, so that any eventual codification in statute is informed by established and sound practice.
Dr Neo asked about the criteria for a Member of Parliament (MP) to qualify as the LO. There are several relevant considerations. Normally, the LO should be the leader of the main opposition party in Parliament, provided there is a predominant Opposition party with a significant number of MPs. Furthermore, the LO must uphold high standards of honesty and integrity and command the trust and respect of Parliament necessary to carry out the responsibilities of the Office. If, for some reason, the leader of the main Opposition party does not meet the criteria, then another Opposition MP can be considered.
Should the Office be institutionalised in the future, some of these requirements may be set out explicitly. At the same time, there will always remain conventions of conduct and responsibility that cannot be fully codified, but which are nevertheless understood, respected and observed by all MPs. These conventions are essential to upholding the high standards of personal integrity and honourable behaviour expected of MPs and political leaders in Singapore.
Dr Neo also asked whether the Prime Minister would continue to appoint a LO if no elected Opposition MP meets the criteria. This is a hypothetical and highly unlikely scenario. There is a strong desire among Singaporeans for a greater diversity of views in Parliament. We have also instituted rules to ensure that there will always be 12 non-ruling party MPs in the House. I therefore have little doubt that there will always be Opposition voices in this House, and among them, Members in good standing who are able to meet the requirements of the Office and discharge its responsibilities with integrity and responsibility.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"PolCam Installations for Plantation Village and Grove Precincts at Tengah","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"83 Dr Choo Pei Ling asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether PolCam installations are planned for Plantation Village and Grove precincts; (b) if so, what is the indicative installation timeline; (c) whether deployment beyond standard locations such as lift lobbies, staircases, bicycle bays and car parks can be considered for resident‑highlighted danger zones; and (d) how resident feedback is incorporated into operational considerations.
Mr K Shanmugam: Police cameras are typically installed in all new Housing and Development Board (HDB) precincts within a year after the temporary occupation permit has been granted. However, for Plantation Village and Grove precincts, there has been a delay due to rectification works necessary to ensure the supporting infrastructure for the cameras meet the Police's operational standards. We have been working closely with HDB to resolve this and expect the cameras to be progressively installed from March 2026.
Police cameras are part of the Singapore Police Force's overall strategy in deterring and solving crime in Singapore. When identifying locations for deployment of Police cameras, the Police will consider their operational needs, the prevailing crime situation and public feedback they receive on the local safety and security situation. More focus will be given to public areas with high footfall and crowd congregation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Include Information such as Compensation Ranges and Flexible Work Arrangement Options in Government Job Postings for Transparency","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"84 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Public Service Division will consider including compensation ranges, flexible work arrangements and flexible compensation options in Government job postings to promote pay transparency, attract a more diverse talent pool and reduce jobseeker fatigue.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Public Service Division (PSD) regularly reviews our recruitment processes to create a positive experience for jobseekers to attract suitable candidates and ensure alignment to national guidelines. Today, agencies decide on the information to include in their job posts that best enables effective recruitment and creates a positive experience for jobseekers. Some agencies, like the Ministry of Home Affairs, the Ministry of Education and the Singapore Armed Forces, post starting salaries, while others may provide salary ranges for selected jobs.
The Public Service's position on Flexible Work Arrangements (FWAs) has also been shared publicly. We are committed to offering a range of FWAs that support officers' needs, such as part-time work, staggered working hours or telecommuting, while ensuring the operational effectiveness of the Public Service. Candidates can discuss their needs and preferred working arrangements with their employers during recruitment, and employees have channels to make requests as their needs change. However, FWAs are not entitlements and are subject to operational needs and exigencies of service. Agencies may choose to highlight their FWA provisions in their job postings.
PSD is also continually exploring other ways to reduce jobseeker fatigue and attract a diverse talent pool. For example, in August 2025, we organised the Singapore Public Service Career Fair, which brought together 70 agencies offering over 2,000 job vacancies at a single location. This made it convenient for jobseekers to find information about the roles available in different public agencies. All public agencies' job postings are also sited online in the one-stop portal, Careers@Gov. We continually improve the search and application features.
We thank the Member for his suggestions. PSD will continue to review our recruitment processes and guidelines to create a positive experience for jobseekers and attract suitable candidates.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Foreign Motorists Given Fines in 2024 and 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"85 Ms Cassandra Lee asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the number of foreign motorists who were given fines in 2024 and 2025; (b) what is the breakdown of fines given to foreign motorists classified by vehicle types; and (c) following the multi-agency fine enforcement operations against foreign motorists at the land checkpoints in October 2025, whether the Ministry is considering further enforcement efforts with coordination between relevant agencies.
Mr K Shanmugam: Foreign-registered vehicles incurred 86,492 and 126,820 vehicular-related fines while driving on our roads in 2024 and 2025, respectively. These numbers comprise both fines under the Traffic Police and other regulatory agencies for offences, such as driving, parking and vehicle emissions-related offences.
In 2024, the breakdown of vehicular-related fines involving foreign-registered vehicles was 26% for cars, 41% for motorcycles and 33% for other vehicles, such as buses, lorries and heavy vehicles.
In 2025, the breakdown of vehicular-related fines involving foreign-registered vehicles was 20% for cars, 38% for motorcycles and 42% for other vehicles, such as buses, lorries and heavy vehicles.
Agencies regularly conduct multi-agency operations against foreign motorists who have outstanding vehicular-related fines at the checkpoints, where such foreign motorists are stopped and asked to settle their fines before they are allowed entry into Singapore. The Immigration and Checkpoints Authority may also deny entry to foreign vehicles with outstanding fines.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reviewing Shared Responsibility Framework to Address Banks' Responsibility for Unauthorised Digital Transactions that Occur Within Seconds","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"86 Mr Gabriel Lam asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Monetary Authority of Singapore has plans to further review the Guidelines on Shared Responsibility Framework, in particular, banks' responsibility for unauthorised digital transactions that occur within seconds despite fraud alerts to customers; and (b) whether existing rules adequately require banks to halt or reverse fraudulent transactions when customers report them promptly.
87 Mr Gabriel Lam asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Ministry is reviewing the current real-time fraud detection standards expected of financial institutions in Singapore; and (b) if so, whether stronger real-time verification standards will be mandated.
Mr Gan Kim Yong (for the Prime Minister): Seventy-nine percent of scam cases as at first half of 2025, involved self-effected or authorised transfers rather than unauthorised transactions. In these cases, scammers deceive victims into initiating and authenticating the transactions themselves. We have also seen phishing scam cases where scammers tricked victims to disclose their account credentials and subsequently manipulated them to authenticate fraudulent transactions on their banking app.
Banks continually sharpen their fraud detection systems to sift potentially fraudulent transfers. They also perform step-up authentication for flagged transactions by suspending such transactions or requiring additional confirmation from customers. Distinguishing self-effected transactions that were induced by deception from legitimate self-effected transactions is not an easy task, even for sophisticated fraud detection systems. A substantial number of flagged transactions are ultimately legitimate, underscoring the complexity of fraud detection and the trade-off between security and convenience.
The fraud surveillance duty under the Shared Responsibility Framework (SRF) is aimed at a scenario where there is rapid draining of significant account balances. Banks are required to block or hold such transactions for at least 24 hours to allow customers time to review the fund transfers and decide if they should proceed. This has already caused some inconvenience to legitimate transactions. The Member may refer to the written reply given in this House on 4 November 2025 on how the Monetary Authority of Singapore and banks have worked to minimise disruptions to legitimate transactions [Please refer to \"Easement of Anti-Scam Measures by Banks in \"Whitelist\" and/or Considerable Safe Situations\", Official Report, 4 November 2025, Vol 96, Issue 9, Written Answers to Questions section.].
We need to strike a balance between protecting the users while avoiding inconvenience to the vast majority of customers.
Banks send real-time notifications of online funds transfers to customers and will put in best efforts to recall the funds after being notified of a fraudulent transfer as soon as possible. This may not always be successful as scammers may move funds quickly between many accounts by then. Nevertheless, banks are expected to promptly suspend further transactions from the customer's account when the customer reports a fraudulent transaction. Customers can also activate a kill-switch themselves to suspend their accounts. In assessing customers' claims for compensation, banks must consider if they have fulfilled their obligations, including under the SRF, and whether the victim has acted responsibly, including reporting fraudulent transactions promptly.
Even as banks continually enhance their systems and safeguards, combatting scams requires a whole-of-society approach. We urge consumers to exercise vigilance and heed advisories issued by Government agencies. Consumers can also take steps to protect themselves by setting lower limits for transaction notification and funds transfer, as well as making use of MoneyLock, which allows them to set aside funds which cannot be digitally accessed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Allowing HDB Homeowners to Replace Entrance Doors with Fire-rated Ones under Home Improvement Programme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"88 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for National Development whether the Housing and Development Board can consider allowing homeowners to replace their entrance doors with fire-rated doors under the Home Improvement Programme, regardless of whether their flats require fire-rated doors in accordance with the Singapore Civil Defence Force's Fire Code.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Housing and Development Board blocks are designed and built in accordance with the prevailing Fire Code. Generally, each residential unit is designed as a fire compartment with concrete walls and floor and a fire-rated entrance door to minimise fire spread between units. However, there are situations where a fire-rated entrance door is not required. For example, the entrance door need not be fire-rated if it is more than three metres away from an exit staircase and facing an external corridor. This is because the external corridor is designed for efficient dispersion of heat and smoke, mitigating fire spread between units.
Under the Home Improvement Programme, flats are provided with fire-rated doors only where required by the Fire Code. This approach ensures both regulatory compliance and financial prudence.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Allowing E-polling via SingPass for Home Improvement Programme and Extending Programme to HDB Blocks Built After 1997","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"89 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Minister for National Development in addition to grouping HDB blocks with fewer units for the voting of the Home Improvement Programme, whether the Ministry will consider the additional use of electronic polling including via SingPass to reduce the number of absentee votes and improve voting convenience.
90 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Minister for National Development whether the Ministry has conducted or plans to conduct a review to extend the Home Improvement Programme to HDB blocks built after 1997, given that some of these blocks are now approaching 30 years of age and may require similar essential improvement works.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Home Improvement Programme (HIP) addresses safety and common maintenance issues in older flats, when they are at around the 30-year mark. The Housing and Development Board (HDB) will extend the programme to flats built after 1997, when the selection of older flats built before that has been substantially completed. The exact timeline for doing so will be contingent on budget availability and industry capacity.
Over the years, HDB has progressively enhanced HIP and its processes, including polling and implementation. To improve voting convenience and HIP participation, residents who cannot be around during the HIP polling exercise may appoint a proxy to vote on their behalf. HDB recognises the potential benefits of online voting. This will have to be studied further to ensure voting integrity, system reliability and cybersecurity.
On implementation timelines, HDB announces the blocks selected for HIP as soon as a decision has been made, so that residents can plan their own renovations taking into consideration upcoming HIP works. The average duration between announcement and commencement is about one and a half years. The actual duration varies across projects, depending on the tender process, resident engagement and any site-specific complexities for the HIP works. HDB also needs to cater sufficient time for residents to select their preferred HIP optional items and designs, as well as for contractors to survey the existing flats and procure construction materials.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Due Diligence Conducted to Ensure Independence of Firms Appointed to Assess Carbon Credit Integrity","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"91 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what governance frameworks and due diligence ensured the independence of BeZero Carbon, Calyx Global and Sylvera during their appointment to assess carbon credit integrity; and (b) what oversight mechanisms mitigate potential conflicts of interest regarding these firms' commercial relationships with international credit developers when supporting Singapore's environmental integrity assessments of carbon credits.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The carbon rating service providers – BeZero Carbon, Calyx Global, and Sylvera – were appointed by The National Environment Agency (NEA) through a competitive tender process to provide independent assessment of carbon credit methodologies and projects, supplementing the Government's environmental integrity assessments under the International Carbon Credits (ICC) Framework. Providers were selected based on their independence, transparent publication of their ratings, methodologies and frameworks, capabilities, market expertise, team qualifications, track record and cost competitiveness.
NEA maintains oversight through disclosure and declaration requirements to identify potential or perceived conflicts of interest during the contract period and regularly monitors the providers' commercial relationships. NEA will manage work allocation to providers to ensure that no single provider develops undue influence on assessment outcomes, and that providers are excluded from assessing projects where they have existing commercial relationships or financial interests that could compromise independence.
These providers serve to supplement, rather than replace NEA's environmental integrity assessment of carbon credit projects. Approvals remain with the Government, evaluated against Singapore's Eligibility Criteria to ensure the high environmental integrity of ICCs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Licences Granted to Massage Establishments in Past Three Years and Vice Activities Detected","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"92 Ms Cassandra Lee asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many licences have been granted to massage establishments in 2023, 2024 and 2025; and (b) what is the number of vice activities that have been detected in licensed massage establishments during this period.
Mr K Shanmugam: There were 907, 877 and 868 massage establishment licences in 2023, 2024 and 2025, respectively. During the same time period, there were 45, 40 and 30 vice activities detected in licensed massage establishments respectively.
These numbers do not include open-concept massage establishments. Such establishments are currently exempt from applying for a licence so long as they comply with certain rules aimed at preventing the premises from being used for vice activities.
Police are reviewing the massage establishment regulations to ensure the regulatory regime is updated and fit for purpose. Industry consultation will be done in due course.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Students Switching Courses of Study in Polytechnics and ITEs, and Costs Incurred","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"93 Mr David Hoe asked the Minister for Education (a) in each of the last five academic years, how many students in the polytechnics and ITEs have switched courses of study; (b) what are the typically incurred costs to switch courses, including depletion of subsidised semesters under the Tuition Grant Scheme and non-subsidised fees payable; and (c) what are the key reasons for students deciding to switch courses.
Mr Desmond Lee: About 200 polytechnic and ITE students have switched courses annually, over the last five years. The key reason for switching courses is that the student feels they are better suited to the new course.
Requests by students for a course transfer are assessed holistically. Beyond academic readiness, the institutions consider the student's reason for transfer and provide the necessary Education and Career Guidance to help students to make an informed decision. This is important as switching courses mid-way typically means that students will take a longer time to graduate.
The duration of tuition fee subsidies is typically long enough for students to complete their course, including those who need slightly more time than the normal course duration. Students requiring additional financial assistance for their fees can approach their institutions who will assess how best to assist them.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Take-up Rates for Public Transport Vouchers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"94 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) what are the Public Transport Voucher take-up rates since January 2020; (b) how is its effectiveness in offsetting commuting cost pressure evaluated; and (c) whether there are plans to further enhance transport affordability support beyond the current $60 voucher benefit.\n
Mr Jeffrey Siow: In the exercise that concluded in October 2025, about 360,000 Public Transport Vouchers (PTVs) were issued, which is 72% of the 500,000 eligible households.
To improve take-up rates, we have enhanced the application process in recent years. First, we no longer require past beneficiaries to re-submit an application each year – their household receives PTVs as long as they remain eligible based on the criteria for that year. Second, for newly eligible households or those who had not applied for PTVs in the past, we have introduced online applications so they can submit applications almost year-round, either online or in-person as preferred. We have further enhanced the online application process such that eligible households that apply online are immediately informed of their successful application and can redeem the vouchers more quickly after receiving them via SMS.
PTVs cover roughly half a year of fare increases for a typical household of two adults and two concession cardholders. Households who require more support can request additional vouchers through their Community Centres or Clubs.
In addition to PTVs, the Government provides over $2 billion in annual subsidies to fund bus and train services. In recent years, the Government has also provided additional subsidies of $200 to $300 million, which has allowed the Public Transport Council to defer the bulk of the fare increases in recent years. Discounted fares and monthly passes are also available for concession groups, including Workfare recipients. Our public transport fares are one of the lowest in the world and have become more affordable over the past decade. For lower-income households, the proportion of household income spent on public transport has fallen, from 3.1% in 2015, to 2.4% in 2024. For average public transport users, the figure has also fallen, from 2.2% in 2015, to 1.7% in 2024.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Appeals for Additional CDC Vouchers from Different Households Sharing Same Address","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"95 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) since the inception of the \tCommunity Development Council (CDC) Vouchers Scheme, how many appeals for additional CDC vouchers have been received from different households sharing a single home address at each tranche; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider accepting additional forms of proof beyond address-related documents, such as rental agreements, to verify separate households for such appeals.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: I am answering in my capacity as the Minister charged with the responsibility for the People's Association (PA).
Every Singaporean household can claim one set of Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers per tranche. If there is more than one unrelated Singaporean households residing at the same address, the additional household(s) at the address remain eligible for their set of CDC vouchers and can apply for the vouchers at any Community Centre or Club by providing the necessary supporting documents.
The application process is simple and various types of supporting documents that show proof of a distinct household, such as tenancy agreement and marriage certificate, are accepted. In general, the application will be approved as long as the applicants are not from the same Singaporean household and have not previously claimed the CDC vouchers. Those with difficulties claiming the vouchers can approach their nearest Community Centre or Club for assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Verifying that Subsidised Courses for Licensed Professions are Aligned with Prerequisite Qualifications","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"96 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Education (a) how does SkillsFuture Singapore verify that subsidised courses which purport to support licensed occupations are aligned with the prerequisite qualifications stipulated by relevant licensing and regulatory authorities; and (b) how is this information is made clear to learners at the point of enrolment.
Mr Desmond Lee: SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) subsidises a wide range of training courses to meet the learning needs of Singaporeans. This includes courses that support licensed occupations, as well as courses targeted at workers from Progressive Wage Model (PWM) sectors with licensing requirements.
For courses that support workers in licensed or regulated occupations, training providers must provide evidence of support from the relevant Government agencies for the course when applying for SSG funding support. Learners can refer to the specific licensing requirements from the relevant licensing bodies and identify suitable courses through a search on the MySkillsFuture portal for courses relevant to specific occupations or industries, or by the PWM tag for courses specially curated for PWM sectors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Participation Rate and Profile of Participants at Events Organised by People's Association","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"97 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) over the past five years, what is the participation rate of Singaporeans in events organised by the People's Association; (b) what is the breakdown in participation by (i) age group and (ii) race; and (c) whether there are the plans to encourage more participation.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: I am answering in my capacity as the Minister charged with the responsibility for the People's Association.
The People's Association's (PA's) mission is to promote social cohesion and racial harmony, and build bridges between people to people, as well as people and the Government. This is achieved through a wide range of programmes and events that bring residents from all walks of life together to interact and bond with one another.
PA organises hundreds of events every month across Singapore, which are open to everyone, regardless of their background, age, race or religion. These events range from local gatherings, such as block parties and festive celebrations, to national level events like the National Day Parade @ Heartlands and many others. Participation rates are generally healthy and may vary depending on the needs and interests of residents of a particular constituency. PA strives to enhance our programmes and other offerings to keep them relevant to evolving needs and interests of our population.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of US' Withdrawal from International Bodies on Singapore's Interests","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"98 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs following the United States' recent withdrawal from various international bodies (a) how will the withdrawals impact Singapore's interests; and (b) how will the Government work with partners to sustain the viability of these institutions, specifically those headquartered here or where Singapore holds leadership roles.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: My response addresses both the Oral Parliamentary Question by Mr Yip Hon Weng in today's Order Paper and a question for written answer on the same subject by Mr Gerald Giam scheduled for a later Sitting [Please refer to \"Impact of US' Withdrawal from International Organisations on Singapore and Resultant Contribution Changes\", Official Report, 4 February 2026, Vol 96, Issue 16, Written Answers to Questions section.].
The United States (US) has withdrawn from 66 International Organisations, including 31 United Nation (UN) entities. The immediate direct impact on Singapore is limited. However, there will be long-term impairment of the collective management of the global commons. For example, the loss of US leadership, funding and technology will set back the world's capacity to deal with climate change and pandemics.
The new world order is still evolving and new platforms for partnership are developing. Many countries, including Singapore, support international cooperation on climate change, as well as other issues like global health. Singapore will continue to work with these countries to shape international norms and promote cooperation. The US remains a part of many other major international entities. We will continue to encourage constructive collaboration with the US and other countries in those areas.
Of the 66 entities from which the US is withdrawing, there are two which have established premises in Singapore. First, the Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia (ReCAAP) Information Sharing Centre. Second, the Global Forum on Cyber Expertise (GFCE) which has its Southeast Asia Hub located in Singapore. The GFCE works with Singapore's Cyber Security Agency and other partners to deliver cyber capacity-building programmes to countries in the region. For both ReCAAP and GFCE, the US' withdrawal is likely to have minimal impact on their funding and operations within the region. Singapore will continue to work with like-minded countries to support these entities.
Member states' annual contributions to the UN's regular budget are based on an agreed scale of assessment, which is reviewed every three years. Singapore remains strongly committed to the UN Charter and will continue to support international law and the multilateral system.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Requiring Developers to Publish Noise Level Reports and Fund Noise Mitigation Measures for Housing and Commercial Projects Near Public Infrastructures","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"99 Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the Ministry will consider requiring (i) developers of housing and commercial projects to publish environmental factors disclosure reports covering noise and proximity to Mass Rapid Transit viaducts, expressways and substations and (ii) buyers to acknowledge these reports prior to purchase.
100 Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the Ministry will consider requiring developers of housing and commercial projects to bear part of the costs to address noise-related issues arising from pre-existing public infrastructure near said projects for up to a year after the new owners receive Temporary Occupation Permits, similar to the one-year Defects Liability Period for Housing and Development Board projects.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: As part of the building approval process, the National Environment Agency requires developers of new residential and noise sensitive developments, such as hospitals and nursing homes, located near pre-existing land traffic noise sources to conduct and submit a Noise Impact Assessment (NIA). Developers will need to put in place mitigation measures to ensure that traffic noise identified in the NIA meet noise limits specified in the Technical Guideline for Land Traffic NIA. Examples of such measures include placing windows or openings away from noise sources, or using non-noise-sensitive buildings, such as multi-storey carparks and electrical substations, as noise buffers.
That said, even as developers ensure that noise levels remain within the applicable noise limits, it is inevitable that some level of traffic noise will remain. Buyers of residential properties are therefore encouraged to conduct their own assessment on surrounding noise before making property purchases.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Possibility of Sentient AI Developing in Singapore's Networks and Systems","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"101 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether the Government has done any studies or research on the possibility of sentient Artificial Intelligence (AI) developing and evolving in our networks and systems; and (b) if so, whether the Government has any safeguards against the possible damage that rogue sentient AI could cause in the networks and systems of critical areas, such as defence, finance and transport infrastructure.
Mrs Josephine Teo: There is no evidence that today's artificial intelligence (AI) systems are sentient and the Government has not conducted studies specifically on \"sentient AI\" arising in our systems. If AI capabilities advance significantly in the future, that would be a global development. In the meantime, we focus on practical safeguards – strong cybersecurity controls, access restrictions, monitoring and human oversight – to protect Government systems and critical services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Refreshing Practical Support Measures for New Mothers Given Reasons for Women to Delay Childbirth","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"102 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance in respect of the key drivers affecting women's decisions to delay childbirth, whether the Ministry will consider refreshed practical support measures, such as structural help with daily tasks and labour and postpartum guidance.
Ms Indranee Rajah: There are various reasons why women may decide to delay childbirth. These include prioritisation of other life goals like career and concerns about whether they can manage the changes that come with parenthood.
The Government provides a comprehensive Marriage and Parenthood package with support measures across areas, like housing, healthcare, parental leave and child caregiving, to help couples to start and raise families. Support measures are regularly reviewed to address the needs of parents. For instance, from 1 April this year, parents will have 10 weeks of Shared Parental Leave on top of maternity and paternity leave to give them more time to bond with their newborns and adapt to the new routines of parenting.
Pregnancy and labour, and the period after childbirth can be challenging to navigate especially for first-time parents. We have been strengthening support for them. For example, polyclinics now provide mothers with practical support in areas, such as antenatal education and post-natal recovery. Family Nexus sites also provide guidance on parenting programmes.
Parents can also visit the Families for Life Parenting Portal or Parent Hub to access a wide range of resources on topics ranging from pregnancy to child health, to parenting tips. We will continue to look into ways to strengthen support for parents.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Finding on Consumption of Infant Formula Products Contaminated with Cereulide Toxins","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"104 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether any infants have consumed infant formula products contaminated with cereulide toxins; and (b) what steps the Government is taking to increase the surveillance of infant formula products to ensure their safety.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: As of 30 January 2026, the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) and the Communicable Diseases Agency (CDA) have identified three cases who had consumed the affected products with mild symptoms likely associated with cereulide exposure. All cases have since recovered.
SFA ensures both imported and locally manufactured infant formula meet safety requirements through our food safety surveillance. Cereulide is an uncommon contaminant in infant formula products that should not be present with effective controls in the manufacturing process.
SFA was alerted to overseas recalls of infant formula contaminated with cereulide in a raw ingredient in early January 2026 and has stepped up testing of infant formula products for cereulide. SFA has directed and announced the recall of infant formula products detected with cereulide.
The CDA is also working closely with SFA, and conducting surveillance with doctors and hospitals to monitor for potential cases of cereulide poisoning in children.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore's Working Hours Compared with OECD Economies and Plans for Moderating Working Hours","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"105 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower in light of The Economist's ranking which drops Singapore's economy to eighth after adjusting for working hours (a) how is Singapore's working hours compared with other Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and advanced economies; (b) what is the top three professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMET) and non-PMET occupations with the longest hours; and (c) what measures are being considered to help moderate working hours for workers.
Dr Tan See Leng: Employed residents in Singapore worked an average of 41.4 hours per week in 2025. This has declined steadily over time, from 44.2 hours per week a decade ago. Even after adjusting for working hours, Singapore is still placed higher in The Economist's ranking of richest economies compared to other Asian economies.
In 2025, Health Professionals, Production and Specialised Services Managers, and Administrative and Commercial Managers were among the professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMET) occupations with the longest working hours. Among non-PMET occupations, Protective Services Workers, Drivers and Mobile Machinery Operators, and Clerical Supervisors recorded longer working hours. The relatively longer working hours do not translate to lower pay. On a per hour basis, wages in Singapore remain the top 10 among Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries.
To remain a thriving business hub, Singapore must successfully compete with other regional economies and serve global customers across different time zones. Instead of regulating working hours which would limit options available to employees who have different needs and requirements, we have promoted flexible work arrangements to enable workers to achieve better work-life harmony and balance their work and personal commitments. This is achieved through the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Requests which sets out the process for workers to formally request for flexible work arrangements and for employers to consider these requests on reasonable business grounds.
Beyond flexibility, changing how we work can also help moderate working hours. The Government supports employers in adopting technology and redesigning jobs through enterprise and workforce transformation initiatives, so that work can be done more efficiently. This enables workers to deliver higher value in less time, improving both productivity and work-life harmony.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Factors for Continued Decline in Full-time Permanent Employment Rate for Polytechnic Graduates Since 2022","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"106 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what factors contributed to the (i) continued decline in the full-time permanent employment rate for polytechnic graduates since 2022 and (ii) increase in involuntary part-time employment rate over the same period; and (b) whether the Ministry will intervene in sectors with significant reductions in local polytechnic graduate hires, including by reviewing S-Pass dependency ratio ceilings.
Dr Tan See Leng: The change in polytechnic graduate employment rates since 2022 reflects a moderation from a post-pandemic surge in hiring, when employment rates were elevated compared to historical norms. It also reflects a more cautious hiring sentiment amid broader economic uncertainty and geopolitical developments.
Looking at the longer-term trends, polytechnic graduate outcomes have remained stable in the last 10 years, with around nine in 10 graduates securing employment within six months after graduation. Entry-level job opportunities for fresh graduates also remain available, with about 39,000 entry-level Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians vacancies in September 2025, up from 31,000 in June 2025.
We regularly review the polytechnic curriculum to equip graduates with industry-ready skills. Our polytechnics collaborate closely with industry partners to provide industry exposure opportunities, such as internships for our polytechnic students.
Our foreign workforce policy aims to provide business with access to skilled foreign manpower whilst encouraging them to build a strong local core. The S Pass Dependency Ratio Ceilings are already kept tight at 10% in Services, and 15% in the other sectors. In addition, the Ministry of Manpower has been progressively increasing the S Pass Qualifying Salary to raise the quality of S Pass holders, and ensure that they do not undercut the wages of local associate professionals and technicians.
We will continue to work together with our polytechnics and industry partners to support our fresh graduates in finding good jobs. Graduates who require more help to find a job can approach their polytechnics' career services centre, Workforce Singapore or NTUC's Employment and Employability Institute's career centres for additional assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Non-residents Residing in Singapore for More than Five Years and those Who Have Unsuccessfully Applied for Resident Status","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"107 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many non-residents have resided in Singapore for more than five consecutive years; (b) how many have unsuccessfully applied for resident status; (c) what support or pathways exist for long-term residents who wish to integrate but have not obtained Permanent Residence; and (d) whether and how the Ministry tracks the social integration outcomes of this group.
Mr K Shanmugam: As of December 2025, there were about 390,000 non-residents who have been in Singapore on their current work passes or long-term immigration facilities for more than five consecutive years. The majority of them are work permit holders and migrant domestic workers. A large majority of them are unlikely to qualify for Permanent Residency status in Singapore. We do not track the number of them who have unsuccessfully applied for Permanent Residence.
On (c), the general approach taken is that these non-residents are in Singapore because their employers need them, and in other cases, they are allowed to stay in Singapore for the economy, for family or other similar reasons. Most of them, as stated, will not qualify for Permanent Residency. Work permit holders, for example, are generally restricted from setting up roots in Singapore.
This context has to be understood. Nevertheless, there will be some who may be keen to engage with our community. They can learn about Singapore's shared values, history and culture through visits to our museums and heritage sites. Second, they can – in so far as they are able to, and to the extent that they are not restricted by the conditions of their passes – build ties with locals by participating in community grassroots programmes, such as neighbourhood trails, cultural festivals, local sports and arts events. Third, they can also contribute through volunteering opportunities.
The Government has to decide how to focus its limited resources – in assessing how much it should do, in the context of integrating such non-residents. The Government regularly engages locals and non-residents to understand their sentiments including on this issue.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Digital Break and Cyber Wellness Programmes for Students in Light of Social Media and Gaming Addiction Trend","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"108 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry will consider incorporating digital break workshops into the standard co-curricular activities (CCA) curriculum for schools as social media and gaming addiction are highly concerning; and (b) how is the effectiveness of existing cyber wellness programs measured against the increasing prevalence of algorithmic content delivery to students.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Ministry of Education has introduced Cyber Wellness lessons in Character and Citizenship Education for primary to pre-university students in our schools to teach them the importance of maintaining a healthy balance of online and offline activities and to be discerning users of technology. This includes learning to manage their use of social media and online games, recognise risks in the digital space and manage negative influences. School programmes, such as the annual \"Safer Internet Day\", also encourage screen-free time, emphasising the importance of balanced and safe use of technology.
From 2026, all primary and secondary schools have disallowed the use of smartphones and smartwatches during school hours, including during Co-Curricular Activities.
From our internal reviews, students in our schools have been able to learn relevant skills through Cyber Wellness lessons and school programmes. However, these students are at an age where they are still learning to manage their time and resist the extended use of social media and online games. Hence, efforts to teach our young requires a whole-of-society effort, including from parents and the community. Schools will continue to work with parents by sharing resources, expert insights and strategies to help them guide their child in the use of technology and devices.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reforms to Sustain Emission Reductions in Manufacturing, Power, Waste and Water Sectors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"109 Ms Poh Li San asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment in view of the reduction of national carbon emissions to 55.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent in 2023, whether the Government will step up structural reforms that lead to emissions reductions in the manufacturing, power, waste and water sectors, which account for 70% of total national emissions, to continue this downward trend.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Singapore's national carbon emissions in 2023 was 55.5 million tonnes (Mt), a 5.3% reduction from 2022's 58.59Mt. This was primarily due to reduced output in the petrochemical sector, driven by a global downcycle in the sector. Consumption of petrol and diesel in the domestic transport sector also continued to fall, reflecting progress towards achieving our target of 100% cleaner energy vehicles by 2040.
Singapore is committed to global climate action and positioning ourselves for success in a low carbon future. We are progressively implementing our decarbonisation plans across all sectors of the economy to meet our 2030 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC), as well as our 2035 NDC which we submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in February last year. For example, we are working closely with companies to help them improve their energy efficiency and lower the carbon intensity of their products and services, through schemes like the Enhanced Resource Efficiency Grant for Emissions.
For a country like Singapore, our lack of resources requires us to depend heavily on global technological advancements and effective international cooperation to decarbonise. We are closely monitoring global developments, particularly on technology, renewable energy and carbon markets, to decarbonise in the most cost-effective way possible.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assisting Vulnerable Residents to Apply for Certificate of Medical Need to Ride Mobility Scooter on Public Paths","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"110 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Acting Minister for Transport with the implementation of Certificate of Medical Need Requirement for individuals who drive or ride a mobility scooter on public paths from mid-2026, how will the Ministry assist vulnerable residents who may not have the technological means of obtaining the necessary permits.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Member may refer to the Second Reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill for more details on the implementation of the Certificate of Medical Need requirement and how users can obtain certification.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Closing Gaps to Support Caregivers' Long-term Financial Security and Re-employment Pathways","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"112 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Minister for Manpower in light of the progressive enhancement of caregiver support through the Caregiver Support Action Plan, enhanced Home Caregiving Grant and expanded respite services, what are the future plans to close the gaps that remain regarding (i) long-term financial security and (ii) employment re-entry pathways for individuals who reduce work hours or exit the workforce to provide unpaid caregiving.
Dr Tan See Leng: Caregivers who are ready to return to work can tap on a suite of employment facilitation and reskilling programmes offered by Workforce Singapore and NTUC's Employment and Employability Institute. These include Career Conversion Programmes and the Mid-Career Pathways Programme, which help individuals improve their employability and be placed in a new role. Caregivers can also access SkillsFuture support for training, such as course fee subsidies and the SkillsFuture Credit.
The Majulah Package's one-off Retirement Savings Bonus paid in December 2024, as well as recent enhancements in January 2025 to the Silver Support Scheme and Matched Retirement Savings Scheme will boost the retirement adequacy of seniors, some of whom may have caregiving duties. Working caregivers may also be eligible for the Workfare Income Supplement as well as Earn and Save Bonus, which supplement eligible workers' income and retirement savings.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Deployment of Community Relations Unit Powers beyond Pilot Run in Tampines for Severe Hoarding Cases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"113 Mr David Hoe asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Municipal Services Office will consider accelerating the deployment of Community Relations Unit (CRU) powers beyond the Tampines pilot for severe hoarding cases posing persistent public health or fire risks, and where repeated multi-agency interventions have failed; and (b) if so, whether adequate resourcing for the CRU can be reflected in Budget 2026 to support such accelerated deployment.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Hoarding Management Core Group (HMCG), led by the Municipal Services Office, coordinates efforts across Government agencies to resolve severe hoarding cases. HMCG assesses and prioritises cases based on the severity of hoarding and the impact on public health and safety.
For example, if the hoarded unit is infested with rats, cockroaches or other vectors, the National Environment Agency may direct the hoarder to tackle the infestation, such as removing the clutter that is harbouring the vectors. Where there is severe clutter obstructing exits, agencies coordinate with the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) to ensure occupants have a passageway to exit the unit during an emergency. SCDF can also require the hoarder to cease hoarding flammable items.
The New Environment Action Team has been working hard to identify cases early and address the underlying issues to provide more well-rounded support to hoarders and relief to their neighbours.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expanding CDC Voucher Usage from Participating Supermarkets to Heartland Merchants","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Shawn Loh asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether CDC vouchers available to spend at participating supermarkets could also be allowed to be spent at heartland merchants, but not vice versa, so as to accommodate residents who do not shop at supermarkets, while also abiding by the policy intent to support heartland merchants.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers scheme is designed to be a simple broad-based scheme to help Singaporean households with daily expenses, as well as support heartland merchants and hawkers. Under the original scheme, the vouchers could only be used for heartland shops and hawkers. However, there was strong public feedback requesting that the Vouchers be extended to supermarkets as that is where many Singaporeans purchase their groceries. To strike a balance between the dual objectives referred to above, the allocation of CDC Vouchers was split equally between participating supermarkets and heartland businesses since January 2023.
This simple equal split remains fit for purpose to meet Singaporeans' varied needs. The utilisation of both categories of vouchers remains high, with almost equal amounts utilised at supermarkets and at heartland businesses and hawkers.
As such, we will maintain the parameters of the scheme for now.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Property Tax Increment on Non-Owner-Occupied Properties to Address Wealth Inequality","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Shawn Loh asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Government has any further plans to increase property taxes on non-owner-occupied properties, in order to address wealth inequality; and (b) if so, what are the considerations for these plans.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Non-owner-occupied residential properties are subject to higher property tax rates as they are mainly investment properties.
To enhance the progressivity of our property tax system, we increased non-owner-occupier residential tax rates in 2023 and 2024, from 10% to 20% to the current 12% to 36%.
We will continue to review our property taxes to maintain a progressive and fair system of taxes and transfers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact Assessment of Hainan Free Trade Port on Potential Trade Flow Disruption for Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Ms Gho Sze Kee asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry what is the assessment of the potential impact and opportunities of the Hainan Free Trade Port on Singapore and the region, in particular the potential disruption to trade flows and routes.\n
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Hainan Free Trade Port (FTP) offers zero tariffs on a broad range of goods, improved customs clearance processes and tax incentives. It allows for imports with at least 30% value-added processing in the Hainan FTP to enter mainland China tariff-free, to encourage businesses to locate processing facilities in the Hainan FTP to serve the China market.
The impact on Singapore is likely to be limited as Singapore already has free trade agreements with China through the China-Singapore Free Trade Agreement, the ASEAN-China Free Trade Area and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. For example, the China-Singapore Free Trade Agreement eliminates tariffs for 95% of Singapore's exports to China. We will continue to monitor trade patterns and adjust our strategies as necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trade Diversification Strategy in Building Supply Chain Resilience through Strengthening International Partnerships","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry in view of rising geopolitical tensions and economic nationalism (a) how is Singapore expanding and renewing trade relations with large and small countries; and (b) how is the Ministry increasing engagements with regional and international counterparts to manage tensions and prevent future supply disruptions.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Singapore is deepening our cooperation with major economies and expanding our trade links with emerging markets, such as Latin America, South Asia, the Middle East and Africa. We are also furthering cooperation in growth areas through digital and green economy Agreements, such as the European Union (EU)-Singapore Digital Trade Agreement and the Green Economy Partnership Agreement with Chile and New Zealand.
In addition, Singapore is strengthening our regional and bloc-to-bloc engagements. For example, we upgraded the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Trade in Goods Agreement last year. Dialogues to explore areas for collaboration between the members of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and ASEAN, as well as between the CPTPP and the EU are ongoing.
We are also developing new forms of partnerships. In September 2025, Singapore, Switzerland, New Zealand and the United Arab Emirates launched the Future of Investments and Trade Partnership to champion a forward-looking trade agenda. This informal group of 16 like-minded small, medium and trade-dependent economies will collaborate on issues, such as supply chain resilience and leverage technology to facilitate trade and investment.
In October 2025, under the bilateral Comprehensive Strategic Partnership, Singapore and New Zealand agreed on a legally binding supply chain resilience agreement to trade essential goods even in times of crisis, a first-of-its-kind for Singapore. We will continue to explore similar agreements with other like-minded economies, to protect our access to critical supplies.
These efforts and collaborations will deepen and broaden our network of economic partnerships, diversify our markets, open more opportunities for our businesses and strengthen our resilience in an increasingly fragmented world.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review on Local AI Start-up Manus's Acquisition by Meta and Implications on Singapore's AI Ecosystem","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore is reviewing Meta's acquisition of local AI start-up Manus; (b) how the Ministry assesses the impact of such acquisitions on the competitiveness of Singapore's domestic AI innovation ecosystem; and (c) whether the current merger notification framework remains adequate.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Singapore adopts a voluntary merger notification regime to balance between effective regulatory oversight while keeping compliance costs low and not stifling innovation. Merger parties are expected to self-assess whether their transaction gives rise to potential competition concerns. They may approach the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCS) for pre-notification discussions or seek guidance on whether the merger may be anti-competitive.
CCS is not currently reviewing Meta's acquisition of Manus. The parties involved have not notified CCS for a merger assessment and there has been no reason to suggest that the acquisition may result in potential competition issues in Singapore. CCS is empowered to step in if it obtains information suggesting otherwise.
Singapore's artificial intelligence (AI) innovation ecosystem is a vibrant one, with many companies and start-ups developing a broad range of products and services. Mergers and acquisitions is a common exit strategy for start-ups and their investors, especially in a new, fast-growing sector. CCS will monitor developments in the AI market to ensure that it remains competitive and facilitates innovation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Value of Locally Produced High-end AI Chips and Efforts to Overcome Existing Key Constraints from 2020 to 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) in each of the last five years, what is the dollar value of advanced computing commodities and high-end artificial intelligence chips that are produced locally; (b) what are the key constraints in raising the share of high-end chipmaking in Singapore; and (c) what efforts are being undertaken to overcome them.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Singapore's semiconductor output grew from $100 billion in 2020 to $133 billion in 2024. Companies do not disclose product-specific data to the Government.
High-end chipmaking is attractive because it is technologically complex and capital intensive. It can potentially produce higher value but also carries higher risks. As a result, global competition for semiconductor investments is intense and has increased over the last few years, as countries seek to participate in the supply of artificial intelligence chips. However, chipmaking is land and energy intensive, which requires Singapore to be selective as to the projects we pursue.
We adopt a multi-pronged strategy to grow high-end chipmaking in Singapore.
We are expanding the manufacturing footprint of globally leading semiconductor companies in Singapore. Recent wins include KLA's new manufacturing facility for some of its most advanced inspection tools and Micron's $30 billion investment to build a new NAND flash memory chip plant in Singapore.
We are also promoting these semiconductor companies and promising semiconductor start-ups to establish and expand their research and development (R&D) activities here, to deepen our technological capabilities in high-end chipmaking. An example is A*STAR's partnership with GlobalFoundries to accelerate advanced packaging and silicon photonics innovation in Singapore.
In addition, we are deepening our public R&D capabilities, including the setting up of national platforms that support companies and start-ups in their translational research, such as A*STAR's National Semiconductor Translation and Innovation Centre. Doing so uplifts the semiconductor ecosystem to remain globally competitive and attractive to leading semiconductor companies to invest in Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"1777 Hotline Emergency Screening Protocols and Cost Implications for Non-Emergency Ambulance Service Case Redirection","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) what are the screening protocols for 1777 hotline operators for non-emergency ambulance services to identify and divert emergencies to 995 and whether exclusion criteria are communicated to callers upfront; (b) how many cases received through 1777 are re-directed to 995 annually; and (c) whether consumers are required to pay the associated costs if the private ambulance deems a case unsuitable upon arrival.
Mr K Shanmugam: The 1777 hotline operators use a structured screening protocol to assess whether a patient's condition may constitute a medical emergency. The protocol guides operators to identify symptoms, such as major trauma, stroke, cardiac arrest or other life-threatening conditions. Where a case is assessed as a medical emergency, the caller will be advised that the patient's condition warrants an emergency response and the call will be redirected to Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF), unless the caller declines. Between 2024 and 2025, an average of 1,420 cases were redirected annually from 1777 to SCDF.
Callers are informed upfront that 1777 services are intended for non-emergency medical conveyance. Should a caller insist on engaging a private ambulance1 despite being advised that the patient's condition warrants an emergency response, the 1777 operator will dispatch a private ambulance licensed under the Healthcare Services Act as an Emergency Ambulance Service2 (EAS) provider. The EAS provider would then be able to convey the patient to the hospital.
For cases initially triaged as non-emergencies, a Medical Transport Service (MTS) provider would instead be dispatched. The crew would not be equipped to manage emergency cases and would activate SCDF if they assess upon arrival that the patient's condition warrants an emergency response.
The payment of fees is subject to the terms and cancellation policies of private ambulance operators, which may vary. Callers may incur fees for services rendered by the private ambulance operator, even if the case is subsequently redirected to SCDF.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : In such scenarios, callers may prefer conveyance to a medical facility of their choice as SCDF ambulances will only convey patients to the nearest public healthcare institution.","2 : The two types of ambulance services licensed by the Ministry of Health under the Healthcare Services Act are: a) Emergency Ambulance Service (EAS); and b) Medical Transport Services (MTS). EAS are qualified to convey patients with life-threatening conditions requiring urgent medical intervention, while MTS are for stable patients requiring medical supervision during transportation."],"footNoteQuestions":["7"],"questionNo":"7"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Quarterly Statistics on Traffic Accidents from 2023 to 2025 Linked to Substance Use and Traffic Police Assessment Protocols for Such Cases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) whether the Traffic Police assesses motorists involved in traffic accidents for vaping or drug use as part of its standard protocol; (b) in the past three years, what is the number of traffic accidents that have been linked to vaping or drug use, per quarter of each year; and (c) whether stricter penalties can be considered for such offences.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Traffic Police (TP) assesses motorists involved in an accident for impaired driving. If TP suspects drug or etomidate use, a blood test will be required. Drivers may be liable for the offence of driving while under influence.
Between 2023 and 2025, 77 accidents were suspected of drug and/or etomidate use. About 25 of the 77 cases were suspected of drug use, while the remainder were suspected of etomidate use. Of all these cases, two were suspected to involve drug and etomidate use. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs\", Official Report, 8 April 2026, Vol 96, Issue 28, Clarification section.]
Today, there are already enhanced penalties if a motorist causes an accident while driving under influence. For example, a first-time offender convicted of dangerous driving causing death while driving under influence face an imprisonment term of up to 10 years and a minimum 12-year driving disqualification. The Ministry of Home Affairs will continue to monitor the adequacy of our penalties.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"SPF Property Seizure Statistics over Past Three Years and Efficiency Rate of Return Process","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Ms Hany Soh asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs in the past three years (a) what are the number and proportion of cases investigated by the Singapore Police Force (SPF) where there was seized property; and (b) how does SPF ensure that all properties are returned without delay to their rightful owners.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Police do not track the number and proportion of cases investigated with seized properties.
There are established procedures to ensure that seized properties are returned to the rightful parties when they are no longer required for investigations or prosecution. Otherwise, they will be returned to the rightful parties only upon the conclusion of the case. Parties who require their seized properties to be returned urgently may contact their investigation officer-in-charge, who will assess the request carefully. In all cases, a Court order must be obtained before the seized property can be returned.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Accident Statistics for Past Three Years and Traffic Safety Measures against Speeding and Yellow Box Violations at Loyang Avenue and Old Tampines Road Junction","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many accidents have occurred at the junction of Loyang Avenue and Old Tampines Road over the past three years; (b) what measures have been studied to improve road safety at this junction; and (c) whether the Traffic Police will consider installing traffic cameras to enforce against speeding and yellow box violations at this junction.
Mr K Shanmugam: There were 13 accidents at the junction of Loyang Avenue and Old Tampines Road between 2023 and 2025.
The Traffic Police (TP) has put up signs along Loyang Avenue to alert motorists to manage their speeds. In the next few months, the Land Transport Authority will be making the traffic light signals more visible and installing additional signs to remind motorists to keep within speed limits.
Traffic enforcement cameras are typically deployed by TP at locations prone to accidents and traffic violations, subject to space availability. Given the space constraints at this junction due to ongoing road and construction works, it is not practical to install enforcement cameras, but TP will step up manned enforcement as an interim measure instead.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Number of Notices of Traffic Offence Issued to Malaysia-Registered Motorcycles for 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs in 2025, what is the annual number of Malaysia-registered motorcycles that were issued with Notices of Traffic Offence.
Mr K Shanmugam: In 2025, about 22,000 Malaysia-registered motorcycles were issued with Notices of Traffic Offence.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"MAS and Life Insurance Association of Singapore (LIAS) Collaboration on Clinical Guidance for Insurance Medical Record Disclosure Context Requirements for Claims","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Dr Haresh Singaraju asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health in view of the requirement for clinicians to disclose only information relevant to an insurance claim to insurers, whether the Ministry can provide guidance on how clinicians shall disclose patient medical records to insurers when (i) the insurance request forms do not state what the claims are for (ii) requests are made for all medical records of claimants.
13 Dr Haresh Singaraju asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health whether the Ministry will work with MAS and the Life Insurance Association of Singapore to ensure that insurance request forms provide sufficient context for clinicians to determine what information is relevant to disclose.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Under the Healthcare Services Act (HCSA), licensees including clinicians are required to: (a) maintain the confidentiality of every patient health record; and (b) protect patient health records from unauthorised access, disclosure, copying or use. In addition, the Health Information Bill strictly prohibits access to the National Electronic Health Record (NEHR) for insurance related purposes.
Where the purpose of the insurer's information request is unclear, clinicians should request for and the insurer should provide, clarifications to ensure relevant information is provided. Clinicians should prepare separate medical memos or clinical summaries for the insurer, based on their own clinical records. They must not access NEHR for such purposes.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) has clarified these matters through a circular issued to all licensees under the HCSA. With the Monetary Authority of Singapore's support, MOH also issued a guidance note to insurers on the above-mentioned, as well as the appropriate practices and scope when requesting patient medical records from clinicians. We expect insurers to ensure that their practices are aligned with the guidance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Percentage of Reported Vaping Activities during and After-operating Hours and Extending Hotline Operations or Automating Vaping Reporting Systems for Timely Enforcement","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Miss Rachel Ong asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what percentage of reports on vaping activities are received (i) within and (ii) outside the 9.00 am to 9.00 pm hotline hours; and (b) where a significant volume of sightings occurs after-hours, whether the Ministry will extend hotline operations or automate reporting to ensure more timely enforcement against the use, purchase and sale of e-vaporisers.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Members of the public can report vaping activities through the Health Sciences Authority hotline during its operating hours or through the online reporting channel at https://go.gov.sg/reportvape.
Since the enhanced vaping enforcement operations on 1 September 2025, majority, or about 70%, of the reports are submitted online, with the remaining 30% submitted via the hotline during its operating hours. Approximately 20% of the reports are submitted outside hotline operating hours, through the online channel.
All reports of vaping activities, including those submitted outside the hotline operating hours, will be responded to promptly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Five-Year Statistics on Medisave and MediShield Life Coverage Adequacy towards Lifelong Dialysis Treatment and Healthcare Financing Enhancements for Working Patients","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Mr Gabriel Lam asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health over the past five years (a) whether the current Medisave withdrawal limits and MediShield Life coverage have been sufficient for working patients undergoing long-term dialysis; (b) how many patients have exhausted both the limits annually; and (c) whether enhancements are being considered to better reflect the lifelong nature of kidney failure.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Dialysis patients receive lifelong financing support through Government subsidies, MediShield Life and MediSave. These financing schemes are regularly reviewed, to ensure that dialysis remains affordable for all Singaporeans.
For instance, MediShield Life claim limits for dialysis were reviewed and increased by about 60%, from $1,100 to $1,750 per month from April 2025. The Ministry of Health has also enhanced Government subsidies for subsidised dialysis patients since 1 July 2025.
Beyond these, eligible patients can also receive charity assistance and other forms of discretionary support, such as MediFund. Most subsidised patients pay no cash out of pocket for their dialysis treatments. No one will be denied appropriate care due to an inability to pay.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"CREST and COMIT Referral Statistics by Source in Past Three Years and Assessment on Appropriate Care Tiers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Dr Hamid Razak asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) in each of the past three years, how many referrals have been received by Community Outreach Teams (CREST) and Community Intervention Team (COMIT) workers as broken down by referral source, such as step-up, step-down or self-referrals; and (b) how does the Ministry assess whether referrals are appropriate to the intended tier of care.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This reply will also address similar questions raised by the Member scheduled for today's Sitting. The Ministry of Health (MOH) currently does not track the registration status of Community Outreach Teams (CREST) and Community Intervention Team (COMIT) professionals.
Since 2025, minimum qualifications have been established to ensure consistent competency across CREST and COMIT staff. CREST and COMIT professionals also receive training to achieve competencies defined in the National Mental Health Competency Training Framework. This includes participation in regular case discussions with psychiatrists from our public hospitals.
From 2022 to 2024, CREST supported over 19,000 clients a year on average. Each professional managed about 90 clients per year, with clients receiving six to seven sessions annually, with an average programme duration of one and a half years before discharge. Of the referrals received, self-referrals, referrals from other agencies and step-down referrals from hospitals and primary care accounted for 46%, 41% and 13% respectively.
From 2022 to 2024, COMIT supported over 14,000 clients a year on average. Each professional managed about 70 clients per year, with clients receiving five to 11 sessions annually, with an average programme duration of one year before discharge. Of the referrals received by COMIT, step-down referrals from hospitals and primary care, referrals from other agencies and self-referrals accounted for 41%, 36%, and 23%, respectively.
The Practice Guide for Tiered Care Model for Mental Health provides referral criteria and guidance to CREST and COMIT.
MOH, together with the Agency for Integrated Care, maintains close monitoring of service capacity of CREST and COMIT to determine future care model including resourcing of manpower, to ensure that quality care is delivered sustainably to meet the needs of our residents.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Community Health Post-Expansion and Heartland Public Health Screening Programme Plans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health in light of the expansion of community health posts in more neighbourhoods, whether there are plans to run more public health screenings in heartland areas.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Community Health Posts complement the family doctor's care. They support residents to achieve their health goals by providing services, such as medication management and lifestyle counselling. As part of Healthier SG, we are encouraging higher take-up of health screening through family doctors. The family doctor is best placed to assess the resident's health conditions, recommend the appropriate regular screenings, explain screening results and guide follow-ups. Under Healthier SG screening, eligible Singapore Citizen enrollees can access fully subsidised screening at their enrolled primary care provider.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"EatWise SG Performance Indicators for Detecting Malnutrition Risk among Seniors, Current Performance Levels and Annual Targets for Nutrition Screenings","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether the EatWise SG initiative has defined performance indicators for early detection and referral of seniors at malnutrition risk; (b) what are the current performance levels; and (c) what annual targets have been set through 2030, given projected ageing demographics.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: EatWise SG is an initiative to equip healthcare workers to deliver better diet recommendations for the prevention and management of chronic diseases and malnutrition. Under this initiative, an EatWise SG resource and training package was developed to help doctors and nurses deliver nutrition advice, including during Healthier SG and Nurse Counselling sessions. E-learning programmes and workshops on nutrition risk identification including malnutrition and diet advice are also being rolled out to primary care doctors, nurses and community care providers.
Through EatWise SG, primary care and community providers can conduct nutritional assessments during opportunistic frailty screening to identify at-risk seniors who would benefit from diet interventions. As EatWise SG pilots are still in the early stages, the Ministry of Health does not have sufficient data to report on outcomes or referrals for seniors with malnutrition risk. We will monitor effectiveness of the capability development efforts through indicators, such as patient satisfaction with nutrition care and patient-reported adherence to the recommended diet strategies.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on \"My Healthy Plate\" Guidelines for Ultra-Processed Food Consumption Tracking and Health Impact among Singaporeans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health in light of the 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans which prioritise real whole foods over ultra-processed foods (a) what is the Ministry's assessment of the guidelines' applicability to Singaporeans; (b) whether the Ministry tracks Singaporeans' average percentage of daily caloric intake from ultra-processed foods; and (c) whether the Ministry will update the My Healthy Plate guidelines to specifically discourage ultra-processed foods.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This reply will also address a similar question for oral answer raised by Mr Yip Hon Weng for a subsequent Sitting.
The Health Promotion Board's latest National Nutrition Survey shows that ultra-processed foods account for less than one-third of Singapore residents' total caloric intake. This is lower than that in Western countries, such as the United Kingdom and United States, where ultra-processed foods contribute to more than half of total caloric intake. Generally, products with higher levels of processing have less favourable nutrient profiles which are characterised by elevated caloric density, excessive nutrients of concern and reduced dietary fibre and essential vitamins. Our current guidelines already discourage consumption of such foods based on their nutrient profiles.
We will continue to monitor emerging evidence and international developments, as well as encourage industry reformulation to improve nutrient profiles of food products via our Healthier Choice Symbol programme.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Private Health Insurance Coverage Disputes Impacting Access to Timely Clinical Treatment over Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Dr Hamid Razak asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether available data shows if disputes between patients and private health insurers over coverage have increased over the past three years; (b) whether evidence exists of how such disputes affect patients' access to timely and appropriate care in both public and private healthcare settings; and (c) what safeguards are in place to ensure insurers' decisions do not undermine clinically indicated treatment.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Government assures Singaporeans universal access to healthcare through subsidies, MediShield Life, MediSave and MediFund. Private insurance is optional, mostly for non-subsidised healthcare and usually involving private hospitals.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) also expect insurers to process claims fairly, according to policy terms. MAS will take action against insurers who do not do so.
MOH does not actively track disputes between patients and private health insurers, as these are matters relating to private contracts. For disputes that cannot be resolved directly with the insurer, policyholders may seek recourse at the Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre. Data on private health insurance disputes will be provided separately by MAS.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore's Participation in US-Led Board of Peace and Considerations on Existing Membership and Fee Structures","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what are the factors to be considered in deciding whether to join the US-led Board of Peace; and (b) what is the expected fee for Singapore to pay for joining the Board on a three-year membership term or with indefinite membership, respectively.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: The Singapore Government is assessing the invitation from the United States to join the Board of Peace.\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Updates on Beverage Container Return Scheme Point Locations and Infrastructure Planning","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Mr David Hoe asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the approximately 1,000 Beverage Container Return Scheme return points have been identified; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider (i) prioritising locating the return points at high-footfall HDB blocks and precincts and (ii) exploring tie-ups with existing commercial parcel locker or collection-point machines to leverage on existing infrastructure.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: This question has been addressed in the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment's combined answer to Question Nos 1 to 5 on the Order Paper for 3 February 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Investigation Panel Report of Tanjong Katong Road South Sinkhole Incident on 26 July 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"
23 Ms Gho Sze Kee asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment regarding the sinkhole incident at Tanjong Katong Road South on 26 July 2025 (a) whether the independent investigation panel has finished their work; (b) if not, when can the panel's report be expected; and (c) whether there are any results or findings that can be shared.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: We will share the outcome of the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment's internal investigations when ready. The Building and Construction Authority is also conducting an investigation under the Building Control Act.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Noise Monitoring Protocols of Construction Sites and Usage of Noise Readings in Addressing Resident Complaints","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Ms Gho Sze Kee asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how does NEA monitor noise levels at construction sites, including (i) how many Leq-5-minutes readings are taken per day per work site, (ii) how many noise meters are emplaced for each work site and (iii) whether NEA also measures Lmax or maximum noise levels; and (b) how does NEA use these values in assessing compliance and addressing resident complaints.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Contractors of construction sites within 150 metres of noise-sensitive premises, such as hospitals, schools and residential premises, are required to install noise meters. The National Environment Agency (NEA) specifies the number of noise meters to be installed and their locations, based on the construction site characteristics. These noise meters take measurements continuously and record the equivalent continuous sound level (Leq) at five-minute intervals throughout the day. They are also able to measure spikes, such as the maximum noise level (Lmax).
NEA refers to the recorded Leq noise levels to determine compliance with the permissible noise limits stipulated under the Environment Protection and Management (Control of Noise at Construction Sites) Regulations. This is aligned with the World Health Organization's guidelines which recommend Leq measurements for continuous and ongoing noise. NEA takes strict enforcement action against contractors who exceed the permissible noise levels, with more severe enforcement action typically taken for repeated offences as well as those with a longer duration of exceedances.
NEA will continue to review the regulations, including the possible use of Lmax, to ensure that they remain relevant and effective in protecting public health.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reforming Hawker Centre Management Model for Improved Efficiency Standards","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Shawn Loh asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether there are differences in public satisfaction, cleanliness and operating efficiencies between hawker centres managed by Town Councils, such as Whampoa and Bendemeer markets, and those managed by NEA; and (b) if so, whether the Government can consider a model where a single Government agency owns and runs all hawker centres, but tenders certain elements like cleaning based on geographical regions.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The National Environment Agency (NEA) or NEA-appointed operators manage and maintain hawker centres owned by the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment, including both general and table cleaning. The town councils (TCs) manage and maintain hawker centres owned by the Housing and Development Board, including general cleaning, alongside hawkers' associations, which manage table cleaning.
Cleanliness levels may vary across different centres regardless of whether they are managed by NEA or TCs. Multiple factors affect the cleanliness at hawker centres, including the size and age of the centres, patron profiles and cleaning service providers. Ultimately, upholding cleanliness standards at hawker centres requires all stakeholders to work together and play their part.
While there are no plans to change the current arrangement, NEA will continue to monitor cleanliness outcomes at hawker centres to ensure they remain clean and comfortable dining spaces.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessment on Lower Floor Residents' Exposure to Secondhand Cigarette Smoke from Common Areas and Implementing Buffer Zones to Reduce Exposure","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether the Ministry has assessed residents' exposure, particularly those living in or near ground-floor units, to secondhand cigarette smoke from common areas; and (b) whether the Government will consider introducing additional buffer zones or regulatory measures to better protect residents from involuntary exposure to second-hand cigarette smoke in residential settings.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Smoking is prohibited in most common areas, such as at Housing and Development Board void decks, playgrounds, exercise areas, pavilions and covered walkways, to limit residents' exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke (SHS). My Ministry has not conducted studies on exposure to SHS from such common areas as smoking at these places is not allowed. We will continue to review our policies on smoking prohibition regularly and will take feedback from the public into consideration.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Health Impacts of Long-term MRT Noise Exposure for Commuters and Inclusion in National Health Prevention Strategies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether repeated MRT noise exposure has been assessed to affect the long term health among commuters; (b) if so, whether such exposure will be included in the national health promotion or prevention strategies in collaboration with transport agencies; and (c) whether the Ministry will strengthen research, monitoring and public education on MRT noise through an interagency initiative.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The National Environment Agency sets environmental noise limits to safeguard public health and well-being in residential settings. These limits reference international standards which determine safe noise thresholds based on health risks at different noise levels.
Noise experienced by commuters within mass rapid transit (MRT) systems is monitored by the Land Transport Authority (LTA). The MRT system is designed to maintain average noise levels within the train cabin to below 85 decibels. Where the train goes through tight curves, noise levels within the train cabin may exceed this threshold momentarily. Over certain stretches of the Thomson-East Coast Line, where there are more curved tracks, additional noise reduction measures have been implemented, such as the moderation of train speeds and grinding of track surfaces to smoothen contact between the tracks and train. LTA is also trialling the use of tuned mass dampers to further reduce noise along the noisiest stretches.
Both agencies will continue to review their noise management policies and efforts to ensure that they remain current and effective in protecting public health.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Children under Non-Parental Care Due to Parent Incapacity","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) how many children are under non-parental care due to their parents being unable or unwilling to care for them, including cases where parents are incarcerated for a long duration or otherwise incapable of providing care; and (b) of these cases, how many children are being cared for by grandparents or other relatives.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: When parents are unable or unwilling to care for their children as a result of protection concerns, incarceration or other circumstances that render them incapable of providing safe care, the children are placed temporarily in out-of-home care. This may include family-based care, such as foster or kinship care, or residential care, until it is assessed to be safe for them to return to their families. As of 2024, there were a total of 1,454 children in out-of-home care, of whom 386 children were placed in kinship care.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics of Male Domestic Violence Victims with Protection Orders over Past Five Years and Addressing Under-reporting of Male Victims","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Gabriel Lam asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) over the past five years, how many domestic violence cases involved male victims; (b) how many sought protection orders or support services; and (c) whether the Ministry will publish gender-disaggregated data to better understand and address under-reporting of such cases among men.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Member may wish to refer to the Domestic Violence Trends Report 2025 for available sex-disaggregated data.
From 2020 to 2024, there was an average of about 2,000 Personal Protection Order applications per year, of which, approximately 25% were made by male victim-survivors of domestic violence.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extension of LPA Form 1 Filing Fee Waiver beyond 31 March 2026 Deadline and Plans to Encourage Singaporeans to Execute LPAs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Alex Yeo asked the Minister for Social and Family Development in light of the impending deadline of 31 March 2026 (a) whether the Ministry can provide an update regarding the further extension of the waiver of the Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) Form 1 filing fee for Singaporeans beyond this date; and (b) if not, whether there are alternative plans to continue encouraging Singaporeans to execute their LPAs.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: We have no updates on a further extension of the waiver of the Lasting Powers of Attorney Form 1 filing fees. We encourage all citizens to make their LPAs as soon as possible, to take advantage of the waiver before it expires on 31 Mar 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Special Needs Trust Company's Trust Services Take-up Rates by Household Income and Race, and Plans to Boost Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the take-up rate of Special Needs Trust Company's trust services with a breakdown by (i) household income (ii) per capita income and (iii) race; and (b) whether the Ministry is monitoring take-up rates and considering any plans to boost them, particularly among median income families.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: There are 1,410 trusts that have been set up under the Special Needs Trust Company's (SNTC's) trust services, as of 31 December 2025. SNTC does not collect income data from every client as income is not a pre-requisite for opening a trust account with SNTC. Chinese clients hold the largest proportion of SNTC trust accounts, followed by Malays and Indians.
More can be done to raise awareness and encourage more families to take up SNTC's trust services. As announced at Budget 2025, the Government will be providing a dollar-for-dollar matching grant of up to $10,000 to encourage lower- and middle-income caregivers of persons with disabilities to set up and top up their SNTC trust accounts. The grant will be launched later this year and more details will be announced soon.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancing Statutory Penalties to Minimise Impact of Sudden Closures of Early Childhood Development Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) in the past five years, how many licensees of early childhood development centres have failed to give at least six months' notice before ceasing operations; and (b) whether the Ministry has considered enhancing the statutory penalties or taking other measures to minimise the impact of sudden closures of such centres.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Under the Early Childhood Development Centres (ECDC) Act, Regulations and Code of Practice, licensees are required to provide at least six months' notice to parents and the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA). Operators that breach these requirements may face regulatory actions, including warning letters, financial penalties or being barred from applying for future preschool licences. An average of 26 preschools per year have failed to give at least six months' notice before ceasing operations in the past five years.
ECDA takes such regulatory breaches seriously and will continue to reiterate the need to meet the regulatory requirements to all operators. In cases of abrupt cessations, ECDA's priority is on the continuity of care for children. We will take steps to mitigate their impact on children and parents, such as assisting affected parents who require help with the placement of their children in alternative preschools.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Due Diligence Measures before Processing Adoption of Children","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Ms Cassandra Lee asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Government is considering measures that will assist adoption agencies and families to conduct due diligence before processing the adoption of children; and (b) if so, what will some of these measures be.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Singapore agencies are working closely with the relevant Indonesian authorities on the recent alleged child trafficking cases. When the facts are clearer, the Ministry of Social and Family Development will review whether existing adoption processes should be enhanced. In doing so, we will take a calibrated and proportionate approach as there are trade-offs. More stringent checks may lengthen processing times or render overseas adoption infeasible in some cases and may unfairly affect the majority of adoptions where there is no indication of illegality.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics of Eligibility of Enabling Employment Credit Employers and Barriers Preventing Greater Uptake","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"34 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) of the employers eligible for the Enabling Employment Credit, what proportion have utilised it; (b) what are the main barriers preventing greater uptake; and (c) given the target of 40% employment rate for persons with disabilities by 2030 versus the current 32.7%, what additional measures are planned to close this gap.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Employers who hire resident persons with disabilities earning less than $4,000 per month are eligible for the Enabling Employment Credit and will be automatically enrolled in the scheme based on their Central Provident Fund contributions to these employees.
The Member may refer to the written reply we had given on 14 October 2025 on addressing challenges that prevent special needs young adults from securing and retaining employment, which mentions the barriers faced by employers in hiring persons with disabilities and measures put in place to support them and persons with disabilities. [Please refer to \"Addressing Challenges that Prevent Special Needs Young Adults from Securing and Retaining Employment\", Official Report, 14 October 2025, Vol 96, Issue 7, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
The Taskforce on Assurance for Families with Persons with Disabilities, announced in December 2025, will also study and develop recommendations to further strengthen support for employers and build resilience for persons with disabilities in the workplace.
Taken together, these measures will support our continued efforts to raise the employment rate of resident persons with disabilities aged 15 to 64 to 40% by 2030, from 34.7% for the period of 2024 to 2025.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Police Reports on AI-generated Non-consensual Intimate Images on X's Grok Platform","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"35 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) how many police reports have been made about AI-generated non-consensual intimate images on X's Grok platform to date; (b) how many cases that were investigated have led to directions against X; (c) what enforcement actions are being planned if X fails to meet these directions, if any; and (d) whether the Ministry will consider an outright ban of Grok.
Mrs Josephine Teo: As of January 2026, there have been no Police reports lodged in Singapore in relation to artificial intelligence-generated non-consensual intimate images on X's Grok platform.
The Infocomm Media Development Authority is engaging X on the issue of harmful and inappropriate content, such as non-consensual sexualised imagery, being generated and distributed on X using Grok. We note that X has taken some measures to address the matter globally, which includes preventing the Grok account on X from producing images of women and children in revealing clothing.
We will continue to monitor the issue closely and will work with X to enhance online safety for Singapore users on its platform.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of SkillsFuture Credit Utilisation by Age","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"36 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education as at the end of 2025, what is the breakdown of SkillsFuture Credit utilisation rate by age group (i) 25 to 40 (ii) 40 to 55 and (iii) 55 and above, respectively.
Mr Desmond Lee: As of end-2025, the overall SkillsFuture Credit (SFC) utilisation rate was about 46%. The SFC utilisation rates for different age groups are in the table below.
37 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry will review the $5,000 Special Educational Needs (SEN) Fund cap for students with learning and behavioural disabilities in light of rising costs for private specialised support; and (b) how many such students currently benefit from both the SEN Fund and the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme with newly expanded income criteria.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Ministry of Education (MOE) regularly reviews the provisions of the MOE Special Educational Needs (SEN) Fund to ensure that it can meet student support needs. The $5,000 cap for students with learning and behavioural disabilities has been sufficient based on utilisation patterns thus far.
The revised income criteria for Government bursaries were announced in October 2025 and take effect from academic year 2026, which commenced in January 2026 for the Institute of Technical Education and will commence in April 2026 for polytechnics. As students may apply for the SEN Fund and Government bursaries at different points throughout the academic year and the new academic year has not yet started for most institutions, there is no data yet on the number of students who receive both the SEN Fund and Government bursaries under the revised income criteria.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Detecting Bullying Incidents and Strengthening Reporting Channels in view of Smartphone Usage Restrictions in Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"38 Mr Gabriel Lam asked the Minister for Education given the restriction on smartphone usage in schools (a) what measures are in place to detect bullying incidents that may no longer be captured through student-taken videos; (b) in the past five years, how many bullying cases were substantiated through student-provided videos; and (c) whether the Ministry will strengthen reporting channels or publish comparative bullying data before and after restricting smartphone usage.
Mr Desmond Lee: As mentioned in an earlier reply on 23 September 2025, schools have various measures to detect bullying incidents, such as self-reporting, peer reporting and teacher observations. Reporting channels for students include online platforms, such as emails or online forms and during regular check-in conversations with their teachers. When bullying is reported, school personnel use information gathered from different sources during the fact-finding process. These sources include visible marks on the body, eyewitness testimony and students' written accounts. These are not affected by the restriction of smartphone use in schools.
As student-taken or student-provided videos can provide a one-sided account from a particular perspective, they are not taken as the sole form of evidence. The Ministry of Education does not track the number of bullying cases which were reported via student-provided videos.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Pre-tertiary Peer-to-peer Sexual Misconduct Cases Reported and Counselling Support Protocols Available","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for Education (a) in the past five years, how many pre-tertiary peer-to-peer sexual misconduct cases were reported to the Ministry at the (i) primary and (ii) secondary levels, respectively; and (b) what support is available for families in counselling such students and what is the protocols if parents decline intervention services for the alleged perpetrator.
Mr Desmond Lee: The number of peer-to-peer sexual misconduct cases involving primary and secondary students reported to the Ministry of Education has remained low in the past five years.
When there are reported incidents of sexual misconduct, schools manage the cases holistically. This can include taking disciplinary measures, reporting to the authorities, strengthening support for victims and reinforcing education of the students involved.
School counsellors are trained to guide and support the students involved, including addressing social-emotional and other underlying issues. When parents decline support from school counsellors, schools will explore alternatives, including referring the students to social service agencies for specialised support. Schools are committed to engaging the parents to ensure their child receives the appropriate guidance and intervention.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Strengthen Socioeconomic Mixing in Oversubscribed Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"40 Mr David Hoe asked the Minister for Education in its ongoing refinement to the PSLE and Secondary 1 posting framework, whether the Ministry is willing to consider measures to strengthen socioeconomic mixing in oversubscribed schools, including but not limited to setting aside a small number of places for students from disadvantaged backgrounds or introducing a socioeconomic tie-breaker in instances requiring balloting.
Mr Desmond Lee: As part of our ongoing review of these issues, we will not close off any possibilities. We will review all suggestions and ideas, including the Member's.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of Lesson Time Spent on Financial Literacy-related Curricular in Character and Citizenship Education","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"41 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the proportion of Character and Citizenship Education lesson time spent on compulsory financial literacy-related curricula in (i) primary and (ii) secondary levels, respectively; (b) whether the Ministry evaluates any metrics amongst parents and students in each school to assess the effectiveness of these contents; and (c) if so, what these metrics show across educational levels.
Mr Desmond Lee: Our students learn financial literacy through various subjects from primary school to pre-university level. For example, Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) teaches students to differentiate between needs and wants, the value of thrift and the importance of accumulating savings. About five hours of CCE lesson time at primary level is allocated to financial literacy.
Beyond CCE, Mathematics teaches \"money\" as a topic at the primary level and the concepts of interest, profit and loss at the secondary level. Through Food and Consumer Education at the lower secondary level, students learn financial values and behaviour, such as living within one's means, using credit responsibly and to be responsible and discerning consumers.
The Ministry of Education and MoneySense, our national financial education programme, carry out surveys and studies to monitor our students' and youths' levels of financial literacy. Internal surveys show that most secondary school students have age-appropriate financial literacy, such as knowing the difference between needs and wants, understanding concepts like compound interest and inflation and appreciating the importance of saving and budgeting.
Students also take part in financial literacy programmes organised by MoneySense and partners which complement the curriculum. For example, the Institute for Financial Literacy conducts seminars for Junior College students, focusing on concepts and skills in investment management.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"New Round of SkillsFuture Funding for Adult Singaporeans amid Rapidly Evolving Job Market Requirements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"42 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Minister for Education in view of the rapidly evolving job market requiring continual updating of skills, whether the Ministry would consider providing all adult Singaporeans with a new round of SkillsFuture funding or subsidies.
Mr Desmond Lee: SkillsFuture Singapore provides generous course fee subsidies of up to 90% to support the training needs of Singaporeans. In 2024, we introduced the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme to further enhance support for Singaporeans aged 40 and above, who face a higher risk of skills obsolescence, in pursuing a substantive skills reboot. Government will continually review how to better support Singaporeans in their skills upgrading, but there are no immediate plans to provide another round of SkillsFuture funding or subsidies.
43 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education (a) how many government-funded PhD scholarships in science disciplines were awarded to (i) Singapore Citizens (ii) Permanent Residents and (iii) international students, respectively, over the past five years; (b) what is the average scholarship value per student by group; (c) what is the proportion in each group that failed to complete their bond obligations; and (d) what recovery mechanisms are triggered in default cases.
Mr Desmond Lee: Over the past decade, an average of about 6,000 PhD students have been enrolled in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) courses in the autonomous universities (AUs) annually. The proportion of Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents has been stable at around one-third of the PhD student population.
About 90% of the STEM PhD students in the AUs are Government-funded through tuition fee subsidies and stipends. \tSingapore Citizens receive the highest level of funding to reflect the privileges of citizenship. For example, \tSingapore Citizens receive $4,300 per month in stipends, compared to $3,900 for \tPermanent Residents and $3,500 for international students.
The PhD students carry out teaching and research supervision duties at the AUs as a service obligation. These students serve out their service obligation during their PhD candidature.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of PSLE Results by Percentage of Achievement Level Scoring Bands for Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"44 Mr Foo Cexiang asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry can provide a breakdown of PSLE results by percentage of Achievement Level scoring bands for (i) English Language (ii) Mother Tongue Language (iii) Mathematics and (iv) Science for the past three years.
Mr Desmond Lee: The percentages of students who obtained Achievement Level (AL) 6 or better in the Primary School Leaving Examination standard subjects have remained consistently high from 2023 to 2025, with at least nine in 10 students achieving this standard in each subject.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Circumstances for Suspension or Termination of Caterer's Operations under Central Kitchen Meal Model","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"45 Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan asked the Minister for Education (a) under what circumstances will the Ministry suspend or terminate a caterer's operations under the Central Kitchen Meal Model; and (b) what contingency protocols exist to ensure that students continue to have access to school meals during such periods of operational suspensions.
Mr Desmond Lee: This question has been addressed as part of the Ministry of Education's oral reply to Parliamentary Question Nos 14 to 20 on 3 February 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Protocols to Ensure Timely Detection, Confirmation and Parent Notification of Gastroenteritis Outbreak in Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"46 Ms Eileen Chong Pei Shan asked the Minister for Education in respect of the recent gastroenteritis outbreak at North View Primary School (a) what protocols govern the timeframe for confirming such outbreaks; (b) whether these protocols were followed in this case; and (c) if not, whether the Ministry will review these protocols to ensure more timely outbreak detection, confirmation and parent notification.
Mr Desmond Lee: This question has been addressed as part of the Ministry of Education's oral reply to Parliamentary Question Nos 14 to 20 on 3 February 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Average Timeline of SPED School Placement Process for 2,880 Unenrolled Children","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"47 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Education of the approximate 2,880 Singaporean children who did not participate in the 2025 Primary One Registration Exercise (a) how many of them (i) are in the process of or (ii) have received placement in special education (SPED) schools; and (b) what is the average time taken for a child to secure a place in a SPED school.
Mr Desmond Lee: Of the approximately 2,880 Singaporean children who did not participate in the 2025 Primary One Registration Exercise, 885 applied for Special Education (SPED) schools. Of this, 864 applicants have been offered places. We are still processing the remaining 21 applications, which were received mostly in November and December 2025.
The average time between the application date and the date that the child is offered a place is six months. However, the wait time can be longer if we need to identify an alternative school due to vacancy constraints, or when further professional advice is sought to ensure that the child is placed in a suitable SPED school which meets the child's needs. In particular, as demand for a SPED school children with autism spectrum disorder with intellectual disability have grown significantly, children with this profile may face longer wait times.
The existing 26 SPED schools have been expanding their capacity to increase student enrolment. We will further expand SPED school capacity and will continue to work closely with social service agencies operating our SPED schools to attract, retain and develop our SPED educators.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of PhD Students in Science Disciplines at Autonomous Universities by Citizenship for Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"48 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education (a) for each of the past five years, what proportion of PhD students in science disciplines at each autonomous university are (i) Singapore Citizens, (ii) Permanent Residents and (iii) international students, respectively; and (b) how have these proportions evolved compared to 20 years ago.
Mr Desmond Lee: Over the past decade, an average of about 6,000 PhD students have been enrolled in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) courses in the autonomous universities (AUs) annually. The proportion of Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents has been stable at around one-third of the PhD student population.
About 90% of the STEM PhD students in the AUs are Government-Funded through tuition fee subsidies and stipends. \tSingapore Citizens receive the highest level of funding to reflect the privileges of citizenship. For example, \tSingapore Citizens receive $4,300 per month in stipends, compared to $3,900 for \tPermanent Residents and $3,500 for international students.
The PhD students carry out teaching and research supervision duties at the AUs as a service obligation. These students serve out their service obligation during their PhD candidature.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Rise in Involuntary Part-time or Temporary Employment among Fresh Polytechnic Graduates from 2023 to 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"49 Mr Sanjeev Kumar Tiwari asked the Minister for Education given the rise in involuntary part-time or temporary employment among fresh polytechnic graduates from 1.5% in 2023 to 2.3% in 2025 as well as those not securing employment from 4.7% in 2023 to 11.5% in 2025, (a) what factors have contributed to these increases; and (b) whether there are any concerns with this trend.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Ministry of Education will provide an answer to this question, together with other questions which have been filed on this topic, at the next available opportunity.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Transition Planning of Students with Special Educational Needs from Primary to Secondary School under Optional Formal Declaration Framework","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"50 Dr Charlene Chen asked the Minister for Education how secondary schools use information received on students with special educational needs from primary schools to (i) plan early interventions, (ii) allocate resources, (iii) determine appropriate class placement and (iv) determine whether preparations are made before students enter Secondary 1 to ensure continuity of support where formal declaration is optional.
Mr Desmond Lee: This question has been addressed as part of the Ministry of Education's reply to oral Parliamentary Question Nos 30 and 31 on 3 February 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Factors Determining Requirement of Shadow Teacher or In-class Support Aide for Students and Financial Assistance for Lower-income Families","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"51 Dr Charlene Chen asked the Minister for Education (a) how schools determine when a student requires a shadow teacher or in-class support aide; (b) what is the role and scope of such support; and (c) how schools support students from lower-income families where engaging a privately funded shadow teacher may not be feasible.
Mr Desmond Lee: In mainstream schools, students receive developmentally appropriate support based on their needs, regardless of whether they have a formal diagnosis. This includes targeted programmes and interventions, such as TRANsition Support for InTegration (TRANSIT) offered in primary schools.
In exceptional cases where a student shows significant difficulties in adapting to their learning environment even with school support, parents may choose to engage a transition aide in consultation with the school to provide in-class assistance as interim support, which the Ministry of Education refers to as Transition Aide Support.
Transition Aide Support is a planned, time-bound process with defined targets and roles that helps students develop skills and work habits, adjust to new routines in mainstream learning environments and build independence during specific transition periods. The aide must work closely with teachers to enable the student to participate in the main classroom activities. We do not support the engagement of transition aides for extended periods of time, as students who need such prolonged support will be more appropriately placed and supported in Special Education schools.
For families who are unable to engage a transition aide, their children will receive school-based support and other additional measures as necessary, including in-class or pull-out support by Special Educational Needs Officers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Employment Outcomes for SPED Graduates from 2022 to 2024 and Publication of Annual SPED Graduate Employment Data","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"52 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Education (a) what proportion of Special Education (SPED) school graduates in 2022, 2023 and 2024 were placed into employment within one year of graduation; (b) of these graduates, what proportion remained in employment as of end 2025; and (c) whether the Ministry will publish annual SPED graduate employment data comparable to the Graduate Employment Survey for universities.
Mr Desmond Lee: Students in Special Education (SPED) schools have moderate-to-severe Special Educational Needs and require specialised support and curriculum customisation to cater to their diverse needs. As the range of needs is broad and diverse in SPED, students in SPED learn essential knowledge, skills and attributes that can help them live independently to the best of their ability.
Of the approximately 500 SPED graduates each year from 2022 to 2024, about half were placed into employment in open or supported settings, enrolled in internship programmes or progressed to institutes of higher learning within six months of graduation. Those employed found jobs in sectors, such as retail, horticulture and hospitality. SPED graduates with higher needs may proceed to services, such as sheltered workshops and day activity centres, to develop skills for community living.
The Ministry of Education works with the Ministry of Social and Family Development and SG Enable to study the outcomes and experiences of persons with disabilities, which are reported through publications, such as the Disability Trends Report 2024, which reports holistically on a range of outcomes, including employment.
The recently launched inter-agency Taskforce on Assurance for Families with persons with disabilities will study how to better support persons with disabilities, including SPED graduates, to achieve positive and sustained employment outcomes. More information on the Taskforce's findings and recommendations will be shared in due course.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Student-Athletes Incurring Additional Tuition or Administrative Fees due to Longer Time-to-graduation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"53 Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh asked the Minister for Education (a) whether student-athletes representing Singapore at major games who take lighter academic course loads at school due to national training or competition requirements incur additional tuition or administrative fees as a result of a longer time-to-graduation; and (b) if so, whether any Government support is provided to mitigate such costs.
Mr Desmond Lee: Our schools and Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) are committed to supporting our national athletes in balancing their sporting and academic pursuits.
Student-athletes in schools may apply for Leave of Absence (LOA) if they need extended time away from school to focus on training or competition. School fees are waived but a nominal LOA fee may be imposed to defray the school’s administrative cost.
IHLs offer flexible arrangements for athletes, such as LOA, where necessary. Student athletes who apply for an LOA in advance and defer their candidature due to training or competitions will not incur additional fees. Schools and IHLs may provide further financial support for student athletes, if necessary, based on their individual circumstances.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Additional Measures to Support Sustainability of Individual Stallholder System","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"54 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Education (a) whether additional measures are planned to further support the sustainability of the Individual Stallholder System; and (b) what are the Government's expectations for the number of schools that will adopt the Central Kitchen Meal Model by 2030.
Mr Desmond Lee: This question has been addressed as part of the Ministry of Education's oral reply to Parliamentary Question Nos 14 to 20 on 3 February 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Mothers Re-entering Workforce through Career Conversion and SkillsFuture Career Transition Programmes for Last Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"55 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Minister for Manpower over the last five years, how many mothers have re-entered the workforce after a caregiving break through the Career Conversion Programme and the SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme, respectively.
Dr Tan See Leng: Workforce Singapore and SkillsFuture Singapore do not track whether female participants in their Career Conversion Programmes and SkillsFuture Career Transition Programmes are mothers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Discrimination Complaints Received from 2021 to 2025 with Breakdown of Types of Discrimination","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"56 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower for each year from 2021 to 2025, what is the number of discrimination complaints received by the Ministry and the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) with breakdown by types of discrimination.
Dr Tan See Leng: Between 2021 and 2025, the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) received an average of 296 workplace discrimination complaints each year. The breakdown by type of discrimination complaints is in Table 1 below.
57 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Manpower for the last three years (a) what is the number of Singaporeans categorised as Not in Employment, Education or Training (NEETs), broken down by age group; (b) what is the median duration these individuals remain as NEETs; and (c) what percentage of Singaporean NEETs aged 40 and above have remained outside the workforce for more than 12 months.
Dr Tan See Leng: Consistent with the practice of international organisations, such as the United Nations and the International Labour Organisation, the Not in Employment, Education or Training (NEET) indicator is used to track early-life labour market vulnerabilities of young persons during their transition from formal education to employment. The indicator is, therefore, usually compiled for youths aged between 15 and 24, but not extended to older age groups whose labour market participation is shaped by different considerations, such as caregiving responsibilities and health conditions.
While the traditional NEET definition does not fully reflect how some youths today explore options outside formal education or employment, the number of NEETs continued to decline. In Singapore, the number of residents1 aged 15 to 24 who were categorised as NEETs declined over the past three years, from 17,100 in 2023 to 16,900 in 2024 and 15,900 in 20252. Over the same period, the average duration of NEET status was 6 months, suggesting that NEET spells among youths were generally transitory due to short breaks between jobs or periods immediately after leaving school rather than prolonged unemployment.
Data on the percentage of NEET residents aged 40 and over is not tracked. For such residents, sustained detachment from the labour market is monitored using indicators, such as long-term unemployment, labour force participation and economic inactivity, which are more appropriate for capturing their labour market circumstances.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Residents refer to Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents.","2 : Data for 2025 is preliminary. Annual figures are the simple averages of the figures obtained at more frequent intervals in the year."],"footNoteQuestions":["57"],"questionNo":"57"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Tackle Increased Numbers of Long-term Unemployed Resident PMETs above 50","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"58 Mr Sanjeev Kumar Tiwari asked the Minister for Manpower what are the Ministry's plans to tackle the issue of increasing numbers of long-term unemployed resident professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) aged 50 and above, notwithstanding that their overall unemployment and long-term unemployment rates remain low.
Dr Tan See Leng: The increase in the absolute number of resident PMETs aged 50 or older who are long-term unemployed reflects the ageing of our labour force and the growing number of mature workers. In proportional terms, the long-term unemployment rate of resident PMETs aged 50 and above has declined slightly from 1.2% in 2024 to 1.1% in 2025. It remains below the pre-COVID-19 average of 1.3% from 2015 to 2019.
The Government remains committed to supporting every worker in their job search. We have invested strongly in reskilling and career conversion programmes, several of which offer a higher level of support for mature workers. This includes programmes such as Workforce Singapore's (WSG's) Mid-Career Pathways Programme and Career Conversion Programmes, as well as SkillsFuture Singapore's SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme and SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme. Jobseekers can also tap on employment facilitation services offered by WSG and the National Trades Union Congress' Employment and Employability Institute.
The Ministry of Manpower and our tripartite partners have convened the Tripartite Workgroup on Senior Employment to refresh our senior employment policies as our population continues to age. Its recommendations are slated for release in 2H 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on LUP Status for Blocks Determined to be Unfeasible and Application Rate for Enhanced LHG","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"59 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for National Development (a) of the approximately 140 HDB blocks identified in 2025 as lacking direct lift access, how many were offered the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) in the past year; and (b) what is the current number of blocks where same-floor lift access remains unfeasible due to technical or cost constraints.
60 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there has been an increasing number of applications for the enhanced Lift Access Housing Grant (LHG) that pays up to $80,000 since April 2025; and (b) if not, whether HDB plans to conduct more outreach efforts to inform the relevant HDB flat owners about the enhanced LHG.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Since its introduction in 2001, the Lift Upgrading Programme (LUP) has been successfully implemented in the vast majority of more than 5,300 Housing and Development Board (HDB) blocks originally built without direct lift access on every floor.
In 2025, LUP was announced for six blocks. There are plans for LUP to be extended to about 40 more blocks progressively. Thereafter, there will be about 100 blocks which have not benefitted from LUP due to high costs, costing more than $200,000 per benefiting unit. HDB will continue to explore new technologies to provide direct lift access to remaining blocks, where feasible.
To further support residents in these blocks who are in urgent need of direct lift access due to medical conditions or mobility reasons, the Lift Access Housing Grant (LHG) has been raised from $30,000 to $80,000 in April 2025, for residents to buy another flat with direct lift access. In the eight months after the LHG enhancement in Apr 2025, HDB received 18 LHG applications. This is an increase from the 11 applications received per year prior to the enhancement.
Residents staying in units without direct lift access who face mobility challenges can approach HDB for assistance on their LHG application.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Percentage of Sheltered Playgrounds and Outdoor Fitness Stations within HDB Estates and Public Parks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"61 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Minister for National Development (a) what percentage of playgrounds and outdoor fitness stations within HDB estates and public parks are currently sheltered; and (b) whether the Government will consider providing specific funds to retrofit existing public facilities with shelters so as to improve the well-being of children and seniors using them.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Housing and Development Board and the National Parks Board (NParks) adopt various measures to enhance thermal comfort for users of playgrounds and outdoor fitness stations while preserving the outdoor recreational experience. Agencies use tools, such as sun-shade analysis, to locate these facilities in the shadow zone of nearby buildings where feasible. Trees and greenery are also planted to provide shade and reduce ambient temperature.
There are existing funding schemes and upgrading programmes for Town Councils and NParks to rejuvenate playgrounds and outdoor fitness stations, which may include providing more shade through greenery or shelters.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Status of Local Wild Boar Population Following 2023 African Swine Fever","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"62 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there is a decrease in the local population of wild boars following the 2023 African Swine Fever (ASF); (b) whether changes in the wild boar population due to the ASF outbreak have impacted forest biodiversity; and (c) what measures are being taken or considered to manage any potential ecological imbalance caused by changes in the wild boar population.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: While the 2023 African Swine Fever outbreak led to a reduction of the wild boar populations in Pulau Ubin and the western part of Singapore, they have since shown signs of recovery. The National Parks Board will continue to monitor and manage the wild boar population, including any impact to the biodiversity in these areas, as part of its science-based approach to wildlife management.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complaints on Pest Bird Nuisance and Measures to Reduce Such Nuisances in Last Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"63 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the number of complaints on pest bird nuisance received in the last five years; (b) what measures have NParks and other Government agencies adopted to reduce pest bird nuisance in the last five years and how effective are these measures; and (c) whether the Ministry is adopting more measures to effectively manage pest bird nuisance.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Over the last five years, we have received an annual average of about 22,000 cases of feedback on pest birds. The National Parks Board (NParks) has been working with the National Environment Agency, the Singapore Food Agency and Town Councils to step up its multi-pronged efforts to manage pest bird-related disamenities and safeguard public safety. For instance, under the pigeon management plan, agencies are working together to reduce human-generated food sources, carry out direct population control with enhanced trapping and removal methods, enforce against illegal bird feeding and carry out education and outreach efforts.
To further mitigate crow-related disamenities, NParks has also stepped up its crow and crow nest removal efforts and is working closely with the Singapore Police Force to resume the shooting of crows.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Considerations for Pro-rating ABSD Remission Timeline for Developers by Size of Residential Development","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"64 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Government has considered pro-rating the Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) remission timeline for developers by the size of the residential development as measured by Gross Floor Area (GFA) or projected number of residential units; and (b) if not, why not.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The ABSD regime for licensed housing developers, also known as ABSD (HD), is intended to ensure the timely release of housing supply by developers. Since March 2025, we have extended the ABSD (HD) remission timelines for the commencement, sale and completion of complex projects, which include large en bloc redevelopments where the site yields at least 700 residential units upon redevelopment and the number of residential units upon redevelopment is at least 1.5 times the number of residential units of the existing development.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Ensure Meal Quality and Portion Compliance in Revised Budget Meal Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"65 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for National Development regarding the revised budget meal scheme (a) what measures will ensure compliance with standards of meal quality and portions; (b) whether participating stalls are permitted to set daily quantity limits; and (c) whether additional incentives will be considered for operators or stallholders providing budget meal options exceeding the minimum requirements.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Residents have access to a variety of cooked food options at Housing and Development Board (HDB) coffee shops and hawker centres. The People's Association and community partners have also implemented various support programmes to assist lower-income residents.
Since the introduction of the budget meal initiative in 2018, HDB has been regularly engaging with operators, stallholders and residents to refine the scheme. Operators and stallholders have shared concerns that the budget meal initiative is not sustainable due to rising costs and low take-up rates. Residents have also given feedback that the quality of budget meals is uneven and portion sizes can be inconsistent.
To address these concerns, HDB is offering more flexibility and funding support to operators and stallholders who choose to offer budget meals. From 10 January 2026, budget meals are optional for all HDB coffee shops when they renew their existing tenancies. Operators now have the flexibility to decide whether to participate in the initiative. Existing operators of rental coffee shops who are currently providing budget meals will continue to do so until the end of their current tenancy. Hence, there will not be a sudden change in the number of coffee shops offering budget meals.
To encourage operators to participate in the scheme, HDB has tripled the funding support to operators who offer budget meals, by extending the 5% rental discount from the current one-year period to the full three-year tenancy term.
To ensure that stallholders providing budget meals receive the rental discounts, coffee shop operators are required to pass on the discount in full to their stallholders providing budget meals. The incentive system for budget meal provision is designed to be simple and operationally efficient, so funding support is not linked to the volume of budget meals purchased. Given the stallholders' busy workloads and the wide variation in locations and budget meal demand across different coffee shops, it will be administratively onerous to do so.
To better meet residents' daily needs, HDB will standardise the scope of the budget meal requirement such that operators who offer budget meals have to provide three meal options: (a) an economy rice option consisting of rice with one meat dish and two vegetable dishes; (b) a halal meal option; and (c) a breakfast item. HDB also requires budget meals to be full meal options and operators are not allowed to limit the daily quantity available for purchase.
We believe the new arrangement is fairer and more sustainable for operators, stallholders and consumers. HDB will continue to engage with coffee shop operators and monitor the response to assess whether further adjustments are needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics of Shophouses in Kampong Glam on Wakaf Land and MUIS' Preservation Plans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"66 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs (a) how many shophouses in Kampong Glam are on wakaf land; and (b) how does MUIS intend to preserve the cultural identity and historical value of such shophouses.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: The Islamic Religious Council of Singapore (MUIS) and its subsidiary, Warees Investments, manage wakaf properties in Singapore in accordance with the terms in the wakaf deeds of each property. In Kampong Glam, 26 shophouses are situated on wakaf land.
In managing wakaf properties, MUIS and Warees consider the cultural identity and historical value of the locality. They work closely with relevant agencies to preserve and enhance heritage value and legacy. For instance, Warees has partnered with agencies in recent years to support local heritage businesses in Kampong Glam, in sectors, such as food and beverage as well as retail. MUIS and Warees are also supporting other rejuvenation and placemaking efforts, such as the Kampong Gelam Place Plan, to enhance Kampong Glam's heritage offerings and experiences.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessing Noise Generated by Roads, MRT Lines and Airport as Part of Transport System Design","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"67 Mr Jackson Lam asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) how the Ministry assesses noise generated by roads, MRT lines and airports as part of transport system design;(b) whether cumulative noise exposure on nearby residents is considered; and (c) how noise mitigation is prioritised alongside capacity and efficiency objectives in transport system design.\n\n
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Noise impact assessments are conducted to determine the combined noise impact of all transport infrastructure as part of transport system design. Simulation models of projected noise levels help identify areas where cumulative noise may exceed the noise guidelines. Noise measurements are also taken on the ground. Noise mitigation measures are implemented where necessary. These measures include maintaining appropriate buffer distances from noise-sensitive developments, like residential areas, and implementing noise mitigation measures, such as noise barriers.
As for airports, aircraft is routed away from residential areas when wind conditions permit. Stringent aircraft noise requirements aligned with the International Civil Aviation Organization's requirements apply. A night curfew is also in place for Seletar Airport from 10.00 pm to 7.00 am every day, except for medical evacuation and emergency flights.
Overall, these approaches balance the aim of delivering efficient transport connectivity while maintaining liveable communities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of Noise Barriers, Low-noise Pavement and Rail Modifications on Residential Noise Level Reductions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"68 Mr Jackson Lam asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) over the past five years, how effective have existing noise barriers, low-noise pavements and rail modifications been in reducing residential noise levels; (b) how are their effectiveness measured; and (c) whether newer technologies or standards will be adopted.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Noise mitigation measures, such as noise barriers installed along rail and road viaducts and low-noise pavements, have been effective in reducing train and traffic noise levels by up to five to 10 decibels. Upon the installation of such measures, further noise measurements are carried out to verify that the resultant noise levels are within the National Environment Agency's guidelines.
The Land Transport Authority will continue to explore new technologies for noise reduction and adopt them where feasible and effective.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ensuring Residential Liveability Near Expressways and MRT Corridors in Long-term Transport Expansion Plans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"69 Mr Jackson Lam asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) how long-term transport expansion plans account for residential liveability near expressways and MRT corridors; (b) whether alternative alignments or design trade-offs are considered to reduce noise; and (c) how is feedback from residents incorporated into planning decisions.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The alignment of future rail corridors and expressways considers the impact of such developments on residents, including noise levels. The plans account for sufficient buffer distance between residential developments and rail corridors and incorporates noise mitigation measures, such as noise barriers, upfront into the design. These measures ensure that eventual noise levels are within the National Environment Agency's noise guidelines. The Land Transport Authority also reviews feedback received from residents through public feedback channels as well as ground engagements to assess the adequacy of noise mitigation measures, including through taking noise measurements on the ground to determine actual noise levels and considers further mitigation measures where needed.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Increase Charging Points in High Demand HDB Car Parks in View of 60,000 EV Charging Points by 2030 Target","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"70 Mr Ng Chee Meng asked the Acting Minister for Transport with respect to the target of deploying 60,000 electric (EV) charging points by 2030 (a) how the Ministry plans to increase charging points at HDB carparks in high demand areas; and (b) whether the Ministry accounts for residents' expected growing demand for EVs in deciding where to allocate EV charging points.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: We remain on track to achieve our target of deploying 60,000 charging points by 2030, in tandem with the growing demand for electric vehicles (EVs).
Housing and Development Board (HDB) residents have access to EV chargers, which are now installed in nearly every HDB carpark. The Land Transport Authority monitors their usage and works closely with EV Charging Operators to install more charging points at carparks with high demand, where electrical capacity permits.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Improvements of Early Morning Train Service Reliability for Essential and Shift Workers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"71 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Acting Minister for Transport how the Ministry will improve the reliability of early morning train services by (i) preventing early departures and (ii) reducing long intervals, so that essential and shift based workers who rely on pre-peak travel can plan their journeys with confidence.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Train services operate at a frequency of about five to seven minutes during off-peak periods, including pre-peak. Based on anticipated loading, train arrival frequencies are adjusted to meet the demand. The Land Transport Authority monitors the rail operators' adherence to train schedules, which includes their adherence to first train departure timings. In 2025, all rail lines met punctuality standards.
Due to operational reasons, there may be variances in intervals between train as trains may sometimes have to dwell longer at a station to allow for the safe boarding and alighting of passengers. To keep commuters informed of the latest train arrival timings, timing information is available on digital displays at the entrances and platforms of all train stations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implementation of Clearer Accountability Measures and Formal Documentation for Extended or Irregular Train Service Wait Times for Affected Commuters","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"72 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will introduce clearer accountability measures for extended or irregular wait times for train service, such as providing late slip notices when delays exceed the norm, so that commuters are not penalised at work or school for disruptions beyond their control.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Commuters affected by a train service disruption may request a travel chit or delay slip from station staff or from the rail operators' websites. These can serve as proof to employers or schools that commuters were affected by a service disruption.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Addressing Concerns Relating to Public Charger Quality and Charger Interoperability Issues to Encourage Continued Purchase of Electric Vehicles","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"73 Mr Foo Cexiang asked the Acting Minister for Transport with reference to recent reports that more car buyers intend to purchase or return to internal combustion engine vehicles over electric vehicles, how does the Ministry plan to address concerns, such as public-charger quality, charging interoperability and being risk-averse to other advanced technologies, to ensure that Singapore remains on track for The Green Plan.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Demand for electric cars remains strong. Of all cars registered in 2025, 45% are electric, 40% are hybrids and the remaining 15% are internal combustion engine cars. As we ramp up our charging infrastructure to support growing electric vehicle adoption, we will also need to keep up with the latest in charging technology.
First, we constantly review our regulations and the national charging standard to ensure relevance. Second, we have licensing requirements for operators of public chargers to fulfil, such as maintaining a minimum service uptime of 90%. Third, we also work with the industry to trial new technologies through regulatory sandboxes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Scheduling System for MRT Train Frequencies, Conditions Triggering Injection of Additional Trains and Reviewing Commuter Feedback","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"74 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether MRT train frequencies currently operate on fixed timetables or dynamic schedules responsive to real-time demand; (b) what specific thresholds of platform crowding, loading or other metrics trigger the injection of additional trains; and (c) how frequently are these thresholds reviewed against actual commuter feedback.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Our mass rapid transit trains operate on fixed schedules, planned to meet anticipated passenger demand and maintain regular train arrival frequencies. The schedules are not typically adjusted during service hours, as any adjustment or train injection will disrupt the smooth flow of trains, especially during peak periods where the train arrival frequency is already high.
The Land Transport Authority works with rail operators regularly to adjust train schedules in advance, based on demand and loading trends as well as commuter feedback. Operators are required to plan the schedules such that crowding is maintained below five passengers per square metre. In practice, they have ensured that the loading is kept well below this level, to alleviate platform crowding and avoid situations where passengers have difficulty boarding.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Peak Hour Waiting Times and Capacity Improvement Measures for Service 43 at Bus Stops along Buangkok Green after Withdrawal of Service 43M","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"75 Mr Victor Lye asked the Acting Minister for Transport following the withdrawal of Service 43M (a) what are the observed peak-hour waiting times, headway regularity and left-behind rates for Service 43 at bus stops along Buangkok Green; and (b) whether the Ministry has assessed or plans to implement measures to improve capacity or service regularity to address prolonged waits.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Trips have been added on Service 43 to reduce the average wait from 10 minutes to six minutes during the morning peak and from 13 minutes to eight minutes during the evening peak. Commuters are generally able to board the first bus that arrives. As Service 43 operates through busy corridors, such as Serangoon and Yio Chu Kang, traffic conditions can cause some variance in bus arrival times. The bus operator will continue to optimise operations to improve the regularity of the service with the added trips.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cost-benefit Analysis for Escrow Deposits in Private Hire Car and Taxi Rental Industry","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"76 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether the Government has considered having private hire car and taxi rental companies place rental deposits in escrow; (b) if so, what are the assess costs and benefits from such a measure; and (c) if not, why not.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Imposing escrow arrangements would result in increased costs, as taxi or private hire car companies would require additional working capital for their operations. These costs would likely be passed on to hirers through higher rental rates, and to passengers of point-to-point transport services through increased fares.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Electric Vehicle Charger Breakdown by AC versus DC Type and Kilowatt Rating","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"77 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Acting Minister for Transport what is the breakdown of electric vehicle chargers in Singapore by (i) alternating current versus direct current type and (ii) kilowatt rating.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: There are around 28,300 charging points in Singapore. About 24,900 have alternating current, of which about 50% have charger power ratings of 7.4 kilowatt (kW) and below. About 3,200 charging points have direct current, of which over 90% have charger power ratings of 50 kW and above, that is, fast chargers. The remaining 200 charging points are battery swapping points for electric motorcycles.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Survey Findings and Publication of 2024 and 2025 Findings","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"78 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether the Public Transport Council had conducted the Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Survey (PTCSS) in 2024; and (b) if so, when will the findings for the surveys conducted in (i) 2024 and (ii) 2025 be published.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Survey was not conducted in 2024 as the Public Transport Council (PTC) was reviewing the survey methodology. The PTC subsequently conducted the survey in 3Q 2025 based on a new methodology. Findings from the 2025 survey will be shared later in 2026, after the PTC completes its analysis of the responses.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Daily Entry Statistics of Malaysia-registered Motorcycles and Data on their Involvement in Road Safety Incidents in 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"79 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) in 2025, what is the annual number of Malaysia-registered motorcycles entering Singapore daily; and (b) of these motorcycles, how many were involved in an accident in Singapore in 2025.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: On average, about 69,000 Malaysia-registered motorcycles entered Singapore daily in 2025 and the number varies from month to month.
There were about 1,600 Malaysia-registered motorcycles involved in accidents in Singapore in 2025.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Feasibility Assessment of Existing Bus Service along Buangkok Green to Connect Buangkok Crescent to Ang Mo Kio MRT Station","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"80 Mr Victor Lye asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether the Ministry has assessed, using origin-destination demand, transfer volumes, journey times and capacity utilisation data, the feasibility of looping an existing bus service along Buangkok Green, such as Service 88, into the Buangkok Crescent bus stops serving Buangkok Square Mall to provide a direct bus connection to Ang Mo Kio MRT station; and (b) if so, what were the findings.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Looping Service 88 to ply Buangkok Crescent would benefit around 150 residents but significantly lengthens travel time and increases fares for more than 4,000 existing commuters. Doing so would also increase total travel time for Service 88 past the two-hour limit recommended by the Bus Safety Tripartite Taskforce.
To provide residents from Buangkok Crescent with a direct connection to the North-South Line, Service 114 was extended to Yio Chu Kang mass rapid transit (MRT) station. Commuters can then take the North-South Line to onward destinations, including Ang Mo Kio MRT station.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Alternative Solutions or Public Space Designation Plans for Youth Arts Activities at Bayfront MRT Station","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"81 Mr Victor Lye asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether time-based or location-specific alternatives have been considered to balance the needs of pedestrians and of youth dancers at Bayfront MRT station, instead of the deterrent measures adopted; (b) whether there are plans to designate or pilot public spaces to support youth arts activities; and (c) how does the Ministry assess the use of public spaces for cultural and community value.\n
Mr David Neo: The Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) works with partners to provide accessible spaces for youths to pursue their interests and activities, including youth arts activities. These include dance spaces that can be booked at no cost at six ActiveSG Sport Centres and at open space locations equipped with full-length mirrors in The Kallang precinct, as well as open spaces at *SCAPE for community use. Under the SG Youth Plan, MCCY is also redeveloping Somerset Belt as a youth precinct that supports youth aspirations and empowers them to shape the space into something to call their own.
The National Arts Council (NAC) also works with partners to unlock suitable spaces for artists and arts groups, including young and budding artists, to enable access to spaces that support the different stages of their artistic needs, from creation to rehearsals to presentation.
For example, under the Super 24 Training Grounds initiative, NAC, in collaboration with Singapore Mass Rapid Transit and O School, activated three mass rapid transit (MRT) stations as accessible rehearsal spaces for Super 24 dance competition participants. Similarly, initiatives, such as ArtsEverywhere@CDC, activate community spaces, such as community centres, to provide arts groups and practitioners with performance opportunities to reach new audiences in the heartlands.
The underground linkway connecting Bayfront MRT station to Gardens by the Bay is privately owned and managed by Marina Bay Sands. With regard to the use of public spaces for cultural and community activities, we consider factors, such as accessibility, safety, impact on other users and the intended purpose of the space. The key is finding the right balance – supporting our youths and our vibrant arts community whilst ensuring shared spaces remain accessible and safe for all users.
MCCY will continue working with agencies and partners to identify spaces that support our youths' diverse needs and interests.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implementation of Coaching, Safety and Governance Standards across Commercial and Community Sports Providers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"82 Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) how does the Ministry encourage the adoption of coaching, safety and governance standards among sport programmes operated by private commercial entities, industry partners, or community groups; (b) whether adherence to these standards is voluntary or are they required to partner national sports associations; and (c) what levers beyond engagement or accreditation exist to incentivise the adoption of these standards.
Mr David Neo: The National Registry of Coaches (NROC), the National Registry of Exercise Professionals (NREP), and the Safe Sport Unified Code under SportSG set baseline requirements for professional certification, standard first aid and safe sport practices for coaches and exercise professionals.
SportSG and public agencies that engage the services of significant numbers of coaches and exercise professionals have taken the lead to adopt these standards by engaging only NROC-registered coaches or NREP-registered exercise professionals for their programmes and initiatives. Some National Sports Associations have also done so. For example, Singapore Sailing Federation (SSF) requires all coaches at SSF-affiliated clubs, events and programmes to have full NROC membership from 1 July 2025.
At this point in time, rather than mandating this, we are taking the approach to encourage private commercial entities and community groups to do so voluntarily, so that we can uplift standards for the sector together.
We will continue to engage with the sector to encourage the adoption of these standards and monitor their impact on the industry and the sporting community.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring Continuity of Sports Participations of DSA Applicants and Minimising Attrition Rates among Late Developers or Less Advantaged Youths","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"83 Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether the Ministry monitors the continuity of sport participation among youths who apply for DSA (Sports and Games), including those not admitted; (b) what proportion of athletes in national youth or senior pathways entered secondary school via DSA, Singapore Sports School, or non-DSA routes; and (c) how can early selection outcomes minimise avoidable attrition, especially among late developers or less advantaged youths.
Mr David Neo: The Government does not monitor the continuity of sports participation among youths who apply for Direct Schools Admission (DSA) (Sports & Games), including those not admitted, after their schooling years.
Other than DSA, SportSG and the Singapore Sports School (SSP) work closely with partners, such as the National Sports Associations (NSAs), to allow multiple entry points into the national youth and national teams. For example, NSAs can onboard talented athletes into SSP at any point in their development, as long as they meet the performance criteria.
Our talent identification and development programmes cover a wide base and cater for athletes across different sports and ages. This includes the Learn-to-Play programmes, the Junior Sports Academy and the SSP's Multi Sport Academy, which offers Primary 6 student-athletes with strong movement competencies the opportunity to enrol in SSP to develop their athletic skills without the need to specialise in a specific sport.
Under our Sport Excellence framework, we work closely with our carded athletes, including late bloomers, or those whose sporting performance may fluctuate for various reasons, to support their sporting and non-sporting needs so that they can stay in competitive sport for as long as they can.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Usage Statistics of 2026 CDC Vouchers Spent on Heartland Businesses and Impact on Household Consumption and Small Business Resilience","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"84 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) how many Singapore households have claimed the 2026 $300 CDC vouchers; (b) what proportion of that value has been spent at heartland businesses; and (c) how does Government assess the impact of CDC vouchers on household consumption and small business resilience.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: I am answering in my capacity as the Minister charged with the responsibility for the People's Association. The Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers Scheme 2026 (January) tranche was launched a month ago. While it is still early to share the claim and spend rate of the latest tranche, $3.995 billion worth of CDC vouchers and SG60 vouchers has been spent over the last four years. Of this, $2.127 billion was spent at heartland merchants and hawkers, and $1.868 billion was spent at supermarkets.
Beyond fulfilling its goal of helping Singaporeans households with their daily necessities, the spending of CDC vouchers boosted the businesses of participating heartland merchants and hawkers while also increasing the vibrancy of heartland shops.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Acting Minister for Transport","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statement was made in a speech given by the Acting Minister for Transport (Mr Jeffrey Siow) during the Second Reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill at the Sitting of 3 February 2026: (proc text)]
The Acting Minister for Transport (Mr Jeffrey Siow): To safeguard the integrity of the ERP 2.0 system, it will be an offence to tamper with or modify OBUs without authorisation and provide or advertise services on the OBU similarly without authorisation. And these will be set out in subsidiary legislation. For serious cases of deliberate non-compliance or misuse, the legislation provides for penalties of up to $20,000 and/or imprisonment of up to two years. [Please refer to \"Land Transport and Related Matters Bill\", Official Report, 3 February 2026, Vol 96, Issue 15, Second Reading Bills section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Mr Jeffrey Siow circulated with the leave of the Speaker, in accordance with Standing Order No. 29(5): (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to my speech given during the Second Reading of the Land Transport and Related Matters Bill at the Sitting of 3 February 2026. My speech should read as follows:
The Acting Minister for Transport (Mr Jeffrey Siow): To safeguard the integrity of the ERP 2.0 system, it will be an offence to tamper with or modify OBUs without authorisation and provide or advertise services on the OBU similarly without authorisation. And these will be set out in subsidiary legislation. For serious cases of deliberate non-compliance or misuse, the legislation provides for penalties of up to $20,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":6974,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260203/vernacular-3 Feb 2026 - Ms Nadia A Samdin - SQ to PQ 6 and 7.pdf","fileName":"3 Feb 2026 - Ms Nadia A Samdin - SQ to PQ 6 and 7.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6975,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Yeo Wan Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260203/vernacular-Yeo Wan Ling LTA 3Feb2026 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Yeo Wan Ling LTA 3Feb2026 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6976,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Fadli Fawzi","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260203/vernacular-3 Feb 2026 - Mr Fadli Fawzi - Land Transport Bill.pdf","fileName":"3 Feb 2026 - Mr Fadli Fawzi - Land Transport Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6977,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Poh Li San","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260203/vernacular-3 Feb 2026 - Ms Poh Li San - Land Transport Bill.pdf","fileName":"3 Feb 2026 - Ms Poh Li San - Land Transport Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6978,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Poh Li San","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260203/vernacular-Poh Li San LTA 3Feb2026 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Poh Li San LTA 3Feb2026 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6979,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Wan Rizal","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260203/vernacular-3 Feb 2026 - Dr Wan Rizal - Land Transport Bill.pdf","fileName":"3 Feb 2026 - Dr Wan Rizal - Land Transport Bill.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6980,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Ng Shi Xuan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260203/vernacular-Ng Shi Xuan LTA 3Feb2026-Chinese - Copy.pdf","fileName":"Ng Shi Xuan LTA 3Feb2026-Chinese - Copy.pdf"},{"vernacularID":6981,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Joan Pereira","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20260203/vernacular-Joan Pereira LTA 3Feb2026-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Joan Pereira LTA 3Feb2026-Chinese.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}