1 Ms Usha Chandradas asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth what is the estimated dollar value of the net economic return expected from Government grants and subsidies issued to pop singer Taylor Swift and her team, with the aim of motivating them to hold Swift's The Eras Tour concerts in Singapore in 2024.
2 Mr Xie Yao Quan asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what is the total economic value-add expected from Taylor Swift's The Eras Tour concerts in Singapore; and (b) how were the size and conditionality of the grant offered by the Government to bring the tour to Singapore determined.
3 Mr Xie Yao Quan asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what is the total economic value-add expected from concerts held in Singapore in the first half of 2024; (b) whether the Ministry has set a target for the total economic value-add derived from hosting concerts in Singapore for the full year; (c) if so, whether the Ministry expects to be on track to achieve the full-year target; and (d) what are the Ministry's strategies to remain on track to achieve its target amidst intense regional competition.
4 Mr Xie Yao Quan asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth whether the Ministry is looking into ways to make concerts by marquee acts such as Coldplay and Taylor Swift in Singapore more inclusive and accessible for Singaporeans.
\tThe Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai): Mr Speaker, with your permission, may I take Parliamentary Question Nos 1 to 4 together?
\tMr Speaker: Please proceed.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Thank you, Sir. Sir, the Government took over the Singapore Sports Hub in 2022, with the vision: one, to establish Singapore and the Sports Hub as the leading sports and entertainment destination in the region; two, to inculcate a strong sense of affinity between Singaporeans and the Sports Hub; and three, to maximise synergies across the suite of facilities in the broader Kallang Alive precinct, in order to better activate the precinct.
Kallang Alive Sport Management (KASM), the entity that was put in charge of operating the Sports Hub after Government takeover, set out to be more than simply a venue for hire. KASM has a team which actively identifies and curates suitable content and programmes, and brings them into Singapore. Our aim is to bring a whole spectrum of events to Kallang for Singaporeans, from top-tier marquee events to community-related ones, and from music concerts to sporting and social events. Since we took over, the Sports Hub has seen a 30% increase in sports, entertainment, and community and lifestyle event days since the Government takeover, compared to the best number of event days prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.
There were some questions at takeover around whether the Sports Hub would be able to continue to attract top-tier events into Singapore. In the last year, apart from the ongoing Taylor Swift concerts, we have brought in several world class acts, such as Mayday, Coldplay, Ed Sheeran and Jacky Cheung. We have also brought in marquee sporting events, including the FIBA Intercontinental Cup that came to Asia for the first time in 2023, the Super 750 Series Singapore Badminton Open, HSBC Sevens Singapore, WTT Singapore Smash, of which the third edition will begin sometime later this week, and innovative concepts, such as fitness racing series Hyrox.
In the case of Taylor Swift, we moved fast and early to bring her show into Singapore. We did so as we recognised the large Swifties fanbase in Singapore and in the region and were keen to deliver the concert experience to them, right here at the Sports Hub.
The idea for A-list marquee events to be staged at the Sports Hub was conceived of even before the Government takeover in December 2022, as we recognised the tremendous upside of such concerts to Singapore.
In February 2023, my colleagues and I from the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY), SportSG and KASM went to the United States (US) to study the sport and entertainment industry. When the opportunity to discuss holding a Taylor Swift concert in Singapore came up, we broached it immediately, subsequently discussed it in detail and, thereafter, reached an agreement for Singapore to be one of Taylor Swift’s tour stops. We also saw the opportunity to make this a uniquely Singapore experience and it hence made sense to take a whole-of-Government approach and subsequently, other agencies, such as the Singapore Tourism Board (STB), were brought in.
STB undertook its own assessment of the potential benefits of bringing the concert to Singapore and subsequently offered a grant to the concert promoter. STB assesses whether to give grants on a case-by-case basis, judiciously weighing up the benefits which might accrue to Singapore if the event was brought in. There has been some online speculation as to the size of the grant. I can say that it is not accurate and not anywhere as high as speculated but due to business confidentiality reasons, we cannot reveal the specific size of the grant or the conditions of the grant.
However, I can assure Members of the House that the economic benefits to Singapore are assessed to be significant and outweigh the size of the grant. The direct economic benefits include, for instance, additional tourist arrivals and additional spending on tickets, flights, hotel stays as well as entertainment, retail and dining in Singapore. Other cities which have hosted Taylor Swift concerts similarly reported an increase in economic activity arising from the concerts and we would expect the same in Singapore. Several market analysts have estimated a dollar range of the economic upside which we are likely to see from the staging of the concerts and whilst the event has not yet concluded, these may well be right.
In addition, beyond the tourism and economic benefits, being able to host A-list artistes, such as Taylor Swift, will help position Singapore as a cultural hub in Southeast Asia, capable of hosting a range of different arts, music and culture events, as well as major sporting and lifestyle events. This helps to brand Singapore as a fun, vibrant destination.
The Straits Times noted, for instance, that the benefits include, I quote, “economic growth, cultural enrichment, to global recognition”, whilst Nikkei Asia reported that the concerts, I quote, “underscore the city-state’s growing status as a pop culture destination”. The Business Times also noted that these events made us, I quote, “look like a modern, open-minded and vibrant place”.
I would add that grants alone would not decide where a performer goes. Promoters of top artistes will do their own calculations and assess where they want to perform and for how long. One major consideration is the location, which is key. There are many reasons why world-class artistes choose to host large-scale concerts in Singapore. These include Singapore’s strategic location, quality infrastructure, good amenities, safety, efficiency and diverse cultural offerings. KASM also proactively works with the artistes and promoters to make their experience of performing in Singapore a good one. All of this helps when attracting top-class events into Singapore.
Singapore faces intense regional competition for these concerts and other such events, and we will need to continue investing in our infrastructure and software to continue attracting marquee entertainment, lifestyle and sporting events into Singapore.
Sir, I want to add, before I conclude, that KASM’s mission goes beyond adding economic value to Singapore. It also extends to building Singaporeans’ affinity with the Sports Hub, as I said at the outset. We are exploring ways for more Singaporeans from all backgrounds to enjoy marquee acts. To Mr Xie Yao Quan's specific question, for some concerts including high demand ones like Coldplay and Taylor Swift, KASM retains some tickets and works with SportCares, which is SportSG's charity and philanthropic arm, SG Cares Volunteer Centres, SouthEast Community Development Centre and other organisations to give tickets to beneficiaries from lower-income families or at-risk families, as well as volunteers from these organisations, so that they too can be a part of the Sports Hub experience.
On other occasions, we have also activated areas in the precinct to allow other members of the community to bask in the atmosphere. This includes both entertainment events, such as the Taylor Swift concerts, as well as sporting events. For example, at the Singapore Smash 2023, we had community activations at the OCBC Square and also across the island with tables set up at 18 venues through Singapore whilst the main event was happening at the Sports Hub. This provided Singaporeans with the opportunity to try their hand at table tennis and doing it on the same top-class tables that were used by the best players in the world.
Beyond marquee entertainment and sports events, KASM has a dedicated team that looks at delivering more community programmes. While we cover a range of top-tier events that are ticketed, there are also non-ticketed and non-revenue-generating events, such as the large-scale festivals during Chinese New Year, Hari Raya and Deepavali. This ensures that we have strong social return by providing programmes for everyone to bond, interact and build affinity with the Sports Hub. For example, Sports Hub had hosted a record 43 National School Games (NSG) Finals event days in FY2023. That is more than twice the number of 16 NSG finals event days before COVID-19, which stood at 60.
Sir, MCCY, SportSG and KASM will work hard, continue to hustle and do our best to bring top-class events here, but also continue to make the Sports Hub even more accessible to all Singaporeans.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Usha Chandradas.
\tMs Usha Chandradas (Nominated Member): Sir, first of all, let me thank the Government for its very hard work in bringing all these top-tier events to Singapore. I think the community really appreciates the work that has been done. I have two supplementary questions for the Minister.
First of all, as part of the terms and conditions of the deal that was struck to bring Taylor Swift to Singapore exclusively with the support of Government grants, was there the potential to include the involvement and profiling of local musicians? So, for example, when Coldplay performed earlier this year, local musicians featured as opening acts; when Ed Sheeran performed in Singapore, he famously did a duet with JJ Lin and he also profiled a watch strap that was made by a local company. So, my question is, were similar cross-marketing opportunities contemplated when negotiating with Ms Swift's team and if not, is it something that the Government can keep in mind for future concert deals?
My second question relates to the disclosure of the terms of the deal that was struck between Ms Swift's team and the Singapore Government. As we have seen in the news, the exclusivity clauses have struck a nerve with some of our neighbouring countries and caused some amount of tension. So, my questions are these: were confidentiality clauses about the exclusivity arrangements built into the contracts and if they were, were these terms breached? And if so, will the Government be taking any enforcement action against the relevant parties?
\tMr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: I thank Ms Usha Chandradas for her comments. On her first question on cross-marketing, obviously, where possible, we would endeavour to do so. And that is why we have seen, in the case of Coldplay, having a local opening act. In other cases as well, what we try and do on some occasion is, even if we cannot do it at the main event itself, at the periphery, on non-event days or in the lead-up or build-up to the A-list event that takes place in Singapore, we try to involve as many local artistes as possible. The Member has brought up some examples, and we will continue to do so.
In the case of artistes, very often the terms and conditions stipulate not just who is performing, their overall set-up, but also the opening act for each of the performers. So, in those cases, we will not be able to change the sequence or change the identity of the performers. But rest assured that when we can, we will endeavour to expose our local artistes to such platforms.
On the second point, yes, there is a confidentiality agreement and we will assess the terms, and we will take the appropriate measures under advisement.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Xie Yao Quan.
\tMr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong): Thank you, Mr Speaker. First, I must thank the Minister for personally leading the Singapore delegation to Los Angeles to negotiate a deal to bring in The Eras Tour. I think that is a huge personal involvement on his part and I thank him for that.
I would like to quote the Chairman of KASM, Mr Keith Magnus, who said that there is now a new DNA and passion that has been brought into the operating culture of the organisation, and to quote him, \"we are constantly in deal mode.\" I fully support this basic orientation to go out and make deals and hustle. So, in line with that orientation and to my original question on whether there is a target for the total economic value-add from the concert economy that we are trying to grow in Singapore, could the Minister perhaps shed a bit more light on whether we should consider setting a more tangible target in terms of deal volume and deal flow, even if not economic value-add, the numbers that we expect to see from the concert economy that we are trying to grow in Singapore?
\tMr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Sir, I thank Mr Xie for his remarks. He has raised an important point, but I think we should also set it in context. When we first considered the idea of taking back the Sports Hub, there were questions around whether we had a team who would be able to engage with some of the world's top artistes and promoters. Were we able to do this with large-scale crowds? Not forgetting that, as we were embarking on these plans, we were still in the midst of dealing with COVID-19. And so, when we looked at the plans overall, obviously, those are factors that had to be taken into account. Eventually, I think it is important for us to work out a broader horizon, mid-term through to long-term, and understand where we want to go in terms of targets. And we will do that.
But I want to stress to Mr Xie that, as I said at the outset of my answer, KASM is not trying to deal with the Sports Hub only for economic return. To us, it is equally important that we have social return to the Sports Hub. To give the Member an example of how we have been able to achieve this, we work with top-tier marquee events, obviously high and good revenue-generating events. Coldplay, Ed Sheeran, Jackie Cheung and Taylor Swift, being some examples.
But in doing so and in making that revenue, we are able to plough it back into non-revenue-generating but highly impactful social events. I gave the example of the National School Games taking place at the Sports Hub. Almost three times the number of events compared to the best prior to COVID-19 days. All of that brings a certain feeling and resonance of school athletes to be playing at the top venue in Singapore at the Sports Hub.
I have given this example to the media as well. Last year, we worked with the schools to stage the rugby finals right after the Singapore Sevens. So, we had a pitch that was world-class. We had a venue that was world-class, finished on Sunday with the finals. On Monday or Tuesday, the schools stepped in. And because we were able to host it without the financial restrictions in particular that we had before, we had 8,000 school children at the arena, at the stadium, supporting and cheering on their schools. I was there and I think the feeling of camaraderie, the feeling of togetherness, being able to cheer your top athletes at such a forum is something that we value tremendously.
So, these and other examples are what we want to go for, using the Sports Hub as a draw, as a vehicle and as an asset that the Government can use right across the spectrum and also combining it with non-Sports Hub facilities. For example, the rest of Kallang Alive, the precinct which I mentioned, there are parts which can be activated in support of and in tandem with the Sports Hub.
So, all these are the main motivations for KASM when they do their calculations for events for any particular given year.
\tMr Speaker: I am trying to move the Parliamentary Questions (PQs) along. We are still at the first set of PQs. So, I will allow for a few more supplementary questions, but please keep them succinct and, likewise, replies to be succinct. Mr Gerald Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply. I assume he is answering the question that I filed for tomorrow as well.
Sir, given that Singapore is such an attractive destination for marquee events, why is there even a need to give taxpayer-funded grants to attract them?
And secondly, did the Government negotiate to make Taylor Swift's The Eras Tour the only blank space in Southeast Asia and did it realise that this may be perceived by some of our neighbours as being mean?
\t
\tMr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Sir, I will try not to make my answer the 10-minute version. Mr Giam filed a question for tomorrow with the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) on STB's position on grants. That will be taken separately. So, I am not answering on behalf of STB.
On the Member's two questions, well, let me deal with the second, which I think is also related to the first question. The real question is this: you have to make your calculations and work out what is in Singapore's and Singaporeans' best interests. If you do not have a certain economy of scale to play in Singapore over \"x\" number of nights for a period of time, you would not be able to reap the economies of scale. Then, there is going to be a very different balance to the considerations. The concert might take place in Singapore but for far fewer nights, or it might not even take place at all in Singapore.
So, we have to look at the overall calculation and decide, for a particular event, what is the resonance with Singapore and Singaporeans? What international, regional draw might it have? We make this calculation overall and it is not in every case that we decide that we need to make a grant or we need to negotiate in a particular way. Every event, whether it is lifestyle, sporting, arts, culture or music, has a different consideration. We are motivated by different outcomes that we want to achieve. So, whether we shape it in one way, give a grant in another way or organise our framework to host the event in a particular way, all that is shaped by the outcomes that we want to achieve.
In this case, we were mindful that if we looked at it holistically, if we wanted an opportunity for Singapore to be one of the stops, and then you look at the past tour history, it is very difficult to be one or two nights alone because of the setup. So, we had to look at that as quite a material consideration for discussing with the Taylor Swift team on how long and for what duration to host it in Singapore. And then we also have to judge what is the demand that we have in the local market.
So, these, I hope, explain to Mr Giam some of the suite of considerations that we have in deciding how to approach this, which events to put a grant out to, on what terms, how to structure it and also taking into account the overall demand and objectives in Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Use of Nasal Inhalers \"Energy Sticks\" in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether there have been any reports of the use of nasal inhalers or “energy sticks” in Singapore, especially amongst children and students; and (b) whether the Ministry has studied (i) the effects of such inhalers and (ii) the need to treat them like vaporisers and e-cigarettes.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Janil Puthucheary) (for the Minister for Health): Sir, my response will also cover matters raised in the written question by Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim1 for a subsequent Sitting.
“Energy stick” nasal inhalers claim to give users an energy boost. They contain ingredients that are similar to the conventional nasal decongestant inhaler. The Ministry of Health and the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) are closely monitoring their use, especially when the marketing on social media and its availability of flavours target the young. We will continue to evaluate these products to ensure they are not adulterated with harmful ingredients, such as nicotine, as they evolve, and we will take the necessary actions to protect public health.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Question subsequently withdrawn: To ask the Minister for Health (a) whether HSA is monitoring the trend on the use of “energy stick” inhalers among youths; and (b) whether the Ministry will be raising awareness of the dangers of such inhalers as gateway devices for potential drug abuse."],"footNoteQuestions":["5"],"questionNo":"5"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Justification for POFMA Correction Direction Issued on 15 February 2024 with Details of Couple's Financial Information","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Social and Family Development regarding the POFMA Correction Direction issued on 15 February 2024 that contained details of a couple’s financial situation, including their CPF and MediSave balances, (a) how does this level of disclosure align with the privacy protection standards under the Public Sector (Governance) Act (PSGA); and (b) whether the Ministry considers the detailed personal financial disclosure necessary given that it can lead to identification of the couple concerned.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mr Speaker, it is unclear why the Member believes that referring to the Central Provident Fund (CPF) balances of an anonymous couple would lead to their identification. To be clear, the Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act (POFMA) Correction Direction issued on 15 February 2024 did not identify the couple in any way.
The disclosure of the couple’s CPF and MediSave balances were necessary to dispel falsehoods in a public statement by Mr Leong Mun Wai about Government assistance to the needy. In particular, Mr Leong falsely claimed the woman’s MediSave account was depleted and that she could, therefore, not afford to continue paying for her hospital physiotherapy sessions. Mr Leong also referred to their low quantum of monthly support they receive, without taking into account that they were eligible to withdraw from their CPF Account.
It is unfortunate that there is a habit of rushing to publicise cases of persons in need. Instead, I would advise members of the public and Members of the Chamber to let social services know of such cases. I hope that we can agree that it is more important to first be assured that such individuals are, indeed, receiving the help they need, rather than to use them to prove or substantiate one’s policy or political arguments.
When cases are publicised with errors of fact, they create the misleading impression that we as a society are failing those of us who are in need. Government agencies then have to set the record straight, in the public interest, and this is consistent with the Government's Instruction Manual and the Public Sector (Governance) Act on data governance standards, which provide that, among other reasons, personal data can be disclosed, if necessary, in the public interest.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Giam.
\tMr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his reply. Just one supplementary question. Does the Senior Parliamentary Secretary agree that this response from the Government, in this case, will instil some fear in residents against sharing their worries with people who are genuinely trying to assist them and seeking to assist them?
\t
\tMr Eric Chua: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I think, in the whole process, we have been very mindful to make sure that the anonymity of the couple is assured. In the Ministry of Social and Family Development's (MSF's) statement that was issued on 15 February as well as on the factual clarifications that were made on Factually.gov.sg, I think we had done our utmost to be assured of that. I think the whole exercise was to put out the facts and that is what it was all about.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
\tMr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mr Speaker, I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his reply and his assurances. Mr Gerald Giam asked a question on the disclosure of private data. On the same note, I would like to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether MSF knows how Mr Leong Mun Wai came to know about the couple and their personal difficulties? I am just wondering whether there is any information leak from any agencies that had been dealing with the couple? Perhaps the Senior Parliamentary Secretary could clarify that.
\t
\tMr Eric Chua: Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Melvin Yong for his supplementary question. The short answer is there was no breach.
But this is what we know of Mr Leong Mun Wai's involvement. Following the post by Mr Leong on 12 February, our volunteers spoke with the couple to find out what had happened because we know the couple and we had been helping them consistently, and that what Mr Leong had put out contained falsehoods. The couple told our volunteers that they were surprised to find Mr Leong at the door on 12 February because they had neither approached the Progress Singapore Party (PSP) nor Mr Leong about their situation.
Instead, they said that they had actually written to Mr Pritam Singh four years ago in 2020. Then, there was no response from the Workers' Party (WP) or Mr Pritam Singh. Meanwhile, during these years, MSF and other Government agencies had been helping the couple and the extent of the help provided was set out in the MSF statement issued on 15 February.
The couple said that on 11 February, four years after they had written to Mr Singh, they received a call from him. Mr Singh spoke about the couple getting in touch with him four years ago and he told the couple that someone would visit them. Then, one day later, on 12 February, Mr Leong Mun Wai went to visit the couple.
The couple told us that they were told that Mr Singh had informed Mr Leong regarding the email that Mr Singh had received four years ago. As to why Mr Singh did not do anything for four years and why he then chose to speak with Mr Leong, and whether Mr Singh knew or agreed with Mr Leong that this matter will be highlighted on social media, just four days before the Budget Statement was due to be delivered on 16 February, that is not clear to us.
I do not know what Mr Singh was trying to do and I make no specific comment on his motivations. But I am sure he and everyone in this Chamber here will agree with me that people, especially the vulnerable ones that we serve, and their plights should not be politicised. Instead, there must be a sincere intent to help.
It is an old art in politics – highlight one case, hopefully get attention, colour perceptions, then make people think negative thoughts about the Government as a whole. Interesting that this happened a few days, just before the delivery of the Budget Statement on 16 February, perhaps to try to make people think that the Government does not help those who need help. But whether that is anyone's motivation, I do not know and I cannot make a statement on that.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I think since I have been referred to, I ought to stand up and clarify matters.
Indeed, there was a letter sent by someone who had not left their address. I get various letters all the time. I picked up that letter as I was clearing up my files in my office. This resident had made certain statements. I do not wish to reveal them here because I have not cleared these matters with that resident. I was just checking in on them to say, \"Look, are things better now?\" That resident gave some feedback about still being in difficulty. I asked for the address, since the address was not on the letter. I realised that it was in an area where Mr Leong and his party are active. So, I said, \"Look, have you seen your Social Service Office (SSO) or at least gone to the SSO?\" The couple said, \"No, we cannot, because I am blind.\" And the gentleman said that his wife was immobile. For that reason, I got in touch with Mr Leong. I said, \"Look, if your team is visiting, you may want to find out and follow up.\"
For the record, maybe the Senior Parliamentary Secretary knows this, I receive similar feedback from my own residents about trouble that some other people may be facing in a different constituency. He would have had knowledge of an email that I sent to the SSO — I beg your pardon, centrally to MSF, telling them, \"Look, I have got this information. Can you please follow up with this resident who does not stay in any constituency which the WP are involved in?\"
So, I hope the MSF acknowledges that in this House, that this is how the WP operates as well. By the way, I did not know how Mr Leong Mun Wai followed up after that. But certainly, when we know of residents who are in trouble, who are in need, who are in difficulty, it is not in the WP's interest to go online and to point figures at Government agencies or point fingers at organisations like SSOs for no rhyme or reason.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Singh, we are approaching the end of Question Time and I want to allow the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to give a very short reply.
Mr Pritam Singh: Yes, Sir. And so, the idea must always be: how do we follow up with this individual? So, I hope that clarifies to MSF that when we know of residents who are in need in any constituency, we will try and get assistance rendered to them, be it through people who we know are active on the ground or through the MSF and SSO on their own.
\tMr Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Chua, if you can give a short reply, please.
\tMr Eric Chua: Sir, a quick reply to Mr Singh. I thank him for his answers. I think we set out to seek the facts. The questions we asked were: whether Mr Singh did alert Mr Leong to the couple's situation; and second, why Mr Singh waited for four years to do so?
No disagreement with the process that has been in place all this while and we are definitely not saying that the WP and Mr Singh are going out there on social media platforms to point fingers at the Government. But I think the original first two questions were not answered.
I just want to round back to a point that I made earlier, about not using the vulnerable ones in our community as Trojan horses, as pawns or as chess pieces, because every time I go on night walks, every time I visit the families in the rental flats, the specifics of their situations already pain me. And for us to add further stress to their situation by subjecting them to such situations, it is neither good faith nor does it do any good for their actual situations.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Order of the Day.
[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.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Estimates of Expenditure for the Financial Year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025","subTitle":"Committee of Supply – Paper Cmd 27 of 2024","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [4th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)","subTitle":"A resilient economy with diverse pathways and opportunities for all","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Head K (cont) – (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [1 March 2024], (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\" – [Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Dr Wan Rizal.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Chairman, lifelong learning and SkillsFuture Level-Up seems to be the buzzword. Many Members of Parliament (MPs), including myself, have spoken about it. I highlighted that amid all this excitement, there are potential stresses and anxieties surrounding career transitions or just returning back to school after so many years. Therefore, some clarity is needed as well as increased support in their endeavours.
Could the Ministry clarify how the programmes or courses are chosen, whether companies are ready to take in these graduates and whether there are enough vacancies in the job market for them to transit to or join as graduates in a new field? Additionally, would the Ministry consider introducing more tailored financial support schemes to reduce the financial and emotional burden on individuals pursuing their studies?
Next, would the Ministry consider developing flexible and innovative learning pathways for a more inclusive approach for education as well as training? By offering part-time and innovative modular courses, we can cater to a mature learner's diverse needs and schedules, some of whom are parents and caregivers. This can reduce the pressure of a full-time commitment and facilitate a smoother integration of learning into their daily lives.
Lastly, would the Ministry consider establishing a comprehensive support system encompassing career guidance, like what we see for our secondary school students, mental health resources and networking opportunities that would aid in the professional development of our mature workforce and support their mental and emotional well-being throughout this journey?
The Chairman: Assoc Prof Razwana Begum. You can take your two cuts together.
Assoc Prof Razwana Begum Abdul Rahim (Nominated Member): Sir, I declare my interest as an educator with the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS) and as an advocate for continuous education and lifelong learning. I welcome the initiatives announced by the Ministry last week and the Minister's remarks about education as a continuing journey.
Lifelong learning is a powerful tool for promoting social mobility, creating positive change within our communities and unlocking opportunities for everyone to thrive and contribute meaningfully to society. SkillsFuture is an initiative that facilitates and promotes both lifelong learning and Singapore's growth.
In view of this, my questions are: how will the Ministry assess the effectiveness of the SkillsFuture movement, including with respect to strengthening the social mobility of Singaporeans? What programmes are in place to encourage employers to approve leave for employees wanting to participate in the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme, ensure that those who graduate from such programmes are able to secure employment in the area of their study, and mentor those wanting to participate in such programme to ensure that they are making an informed career choice?
Lifelong learning within the education system goes beyond imparting knowledge. It is about equipping children with the skills, confidence and curiosity to become lifelong learners who are motivated to pursue their aspirations and reach their full potential. In view of this, my questions are: what programmes are in place to introduce the concept of lifelong learning into early childhood education and care settings, and what programmes are in place to encourage school-aged children to explore and adopt a philosophy of lifelong learning?
Lastly, parents play a fundamental role in nurturing lifelong learning in their children. Providing the foundation, support and encouragement needed for them to become curious, motivated and self-directed learners throughout their lives. In view of this, my questions are: what programmes are in place to assist parents to discuss the concept of lifelong learning with their children at home, and what programmes are in place to encourage parents to actively support their children to pursue life choices, including academic and vocational choices, based on personal interest or aptitude rather than social or cultural expectations or norms?
Mr Baey Yam Keng (Tampines): Chairman, Forward Singapore's Equip pillar sets out how education and learning can equip Singaporeans with the knowledge and skills to seize new opportunities and maximise their potential. Minister Chan Chun Sing shared last week more details on the subsidies for Singaporeans aged 40 and above to pursue another full-time diploma at the local polytechnic.
It is not easy for someone well-past the conventional graduation age of early 20s to go back to full-time studies. Mature students are likely to have financial commitments to support their families. They could already be parents and may also have to take care of their own elderly parents' financial commitments. The newly announced monthly training allowance of up to $3,000 for up to 24 months will be useful to mitigate the loss of income during their training period.
Given that the allowance may still not be enough for some mature students with significant financial commitments, I would like to ask the Ministry if these students could still take on part-time work during their training to supplement their income? Would this act against them in their eligibility for the training allowance?
As the term lifelong learning goes, learning does not stop in the early 20s after graduation nor does it restart at 40 years old. Are there support provisions for Singaporeans aged under 40 years old? How about Singaporeans who want to go further than a second full-time diploma? What support could be made available for those whose career paths and aspirations would benefit more from a second degree programme?
Mr Mark Lee (Nominated Member): Chairman, the Government's commitment to lifelong learning, SkillsFuture and SkillsFuture Level-Up is crucial for propelling Singaporeans up the value chain, garnering support from employers. However, the business sector would like to suggest more specialised, sector-specific training for SkillsFuture to meet industry's needs. This is particularly evident in the manufacturing sector where there is a significant demand for courses in areas, like artificial intelligence (AI) in manufacturing and sustainability reporting.
Such specialised training is deemed essential for building a talent pool with the advanced skills necessary to achieve the Manufacturing 2030 vision. In light of these industry demands, could the Ministry share any plans to enhance the SkillsFuture programme with more in-depth, sector-specific training opportunities?
As the job landscape evolves rapidly, recognising workplaces as extensions of our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) could enable a more practice-based and application-oriented approach to human capital development. Trade associations and chambers (TACs) may have a part to play in overseeing and accrediting workplace training, and this adjustment could ensure that the workforce remains agile and employable in the face of changing industrial requirements. As such, will the Ministry of Education (MOE) consider expanding SkillsFuture support to include various forms of workplace training?
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Chairman, for myself and many in this Chamber, one of the most striking announcements in Budget 2024 is the significant investment the Government is making to support lifelong learning, upskilling and reskilling. The SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme, which includes the SkillsFuture Credit, giving mid-career Singaporeans a second shot at a subsidy for publicly funded full-time diplomas and the training allowances, have been welcomed by almost all quarters.
At the same time, these are significant investments and it will be important to demonstrate the impact and value of these investments over time.
Indeed, beyond the direct investments in the course fee subsidies and training allowances, significant effort will need to be made to curate the right courses, raise awareness, help people overcome the mental, physical and financial hurdles to take ownership of their learning, match them to the right courses and use the newly-acquired knowledge and skills to land a job or move up in their current roles with better salaries and prospects.
We also need to make sure that people are resilient and adopt a never-give-up attitude, both in learning and in looking for jobs. The Government will need to track the right metrics, which are not so much the percentage shake-up but the outcome metrics, such as placement into roles that use the skills acquired. How will the Government ensure that this significant investment will achieve the desired results, in particular, of helping Singaporeans grow in their careers and take on new careers?
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Chairman, I declare my interest as the Chief Executive Officer of the Wealth Management Institute, a training provider serving the finance sector with programmes eligible for SkillsFuture Credit. Sir, I agree that our current publicly funded IHLs can contribute to lifelong learning in addition to their core mandate of pre-experienced education.
But I urge the Government to nurture a new generation of industry-linked training providers, specially designed to serve the unique learning needs of working adults. This is particularly important to ensure that we have SkillsFuture programmes designed specially to target skills upgrading and acquisition, rather than to achieve academic qualifications.
By drawing lessons from similar setups in Sweden and Switzerland, these specialised training providers ought to be established with the following criteria. First, there must be assurance that training delivered is highly applied and practice-based, with clear reference to industry skills-maps. This approach ensures that the learners acquire practical skills and hands-on experience, making them job-ready upon completion of their courses.
Second, it is essential for instructors and trainings to have strong industry experience. Educators with an industry background bring a wealth of knowledge, real-world insights and practical skills to the classroom. The teaching pedagogy for adult learners must be contextualised within the industry landscape, leveraging real-world case studies and use cases.
Third, the credentials awarded upon training completion must translate into industry-recognised and valued qualifications, rather than merely reflecting academic grades. The learners should receive credentials that will demonstrate their ability to apply learned skills in real-world settings recognised and importantly, endorsed by employers.
Fourth, the active participation of employers in the training design ensures direct relevance to industry requirements and that training is rooted in real-world applications than in theory. They should be involved in the identification and prioritising of training programmes that will address the most sought-after skills and competencies in the job market.
The endorsement and commitment of employers to adopt these training programmes must be an integral part of the design and funding process of SkillsFuture. In countries like Sweden and Switzerland, industry-specialised schools are often led and governed by industry leaders, exemplifying this approach.
Sir, we can actually see some of the elements I mentioned above already being practised selectively. So, to establish an ecosystem of training providers that will yield high employment outcomes, it is necessary to pivot SkillsFuture to support industry-linked training providers.
These industry-linked training providers must be deeply integrated with the sectors they serve. Forming partnerships with the industry and employers is crucial to ensure their curricula are directly informed by current and future skills needs. The course offerings should undergo regular review cycles to remain responsive to evolving industry trends and skills demands.
Additionally, the assessment of learning outcomes must align with industry relevance rather than concentrating on academic rigour, the assessment should prioritise skills acquisition and the performance of relevant skills and tasks in real world settings. Furthermore, it is imperative that industry leaders have a strong representation on the board of directors of these schools to ensure strong alignment of the schools' resources and outcomes to industry needs.
In the development of this new ecosystem, the Government can assume a pivotal role by introducing a SkillsFuture quality accreditation framework. This framework could implement a differentiated funding model, based on several key factors: the curriculum's relevance to practice, the involvement of qualified industry trainers and instructors, industry and employer involvement and endorsement as well as employment outcomes.
Industry-linked training providers that have a proven track record of delivering strong outcomes should, over time, receive support and recognition comparable to that accorded to publicly funded IHLs. Implementing such a measure would foster the evolution of a new generation of highly specialised schools, each with deep domain expertise in their respective industries.
Sir, I am confident that the introduction of such a SkillsFuture framework will significantly boost both employers' and trainees' motivation for training. Knowing that their time invested in training has a real impact on boosting business performance and career growth will be a key driver for participation and commitment.
Ms See Jinli Jean (Nominated Member): Chairman, freelancers I spoke with welcomed the new SkillsFuture Level-Up programme. They include platform workers who appreciate the Government's consideration of their challenges faced when exploring career transition.
Some, such as Miss R, a freelance delivery courier and an Institute of Technical Education (ITE) graduate, asked if the Government could consider extending the SkillsFuture Level-Up programme and/or the ITE Progression Award to her and her peers in their 30s. She turned to food delivery after she was displaced some years ago. Then, she had found it challenging to upgrade her qualification as she had breadwinner responsibilities. Now, as she contemplates her career options against the backdrop of economic uncertainty and an appreciation of CPF utility for ageing, health and housing needs, she hopes that the sandwiched group of ITE graduates, like her, can also be considered for the ITE Progression Award and/or the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme. In this regard, I would like to put forth three possibilities for the Minister's consideration.
First, could the Ministry extend, or as a baseline, contextualise the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme and the ITE Progression Award to Singaporeans in their 30s who need a boost to their career health and, in the same vein, extend the SkillsFuture Credit to Singaporean workers below age 25?
Second, might the Ministry and SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) work closely with the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) and its freelancer-centred associations to include, under the SkillsFuture Level-Up programme, training options and accreditations that are helpful to progressing the work prospects of those who are dictated by business models in the arts, creative, media and coaching sectors to freelance as a career?
Third, might the Ministry and SSG work closely with NTUC and its freelancer-centred associations as well as relevant sector agencies to establish fair and balanced guidance that communicate the surveyed costs for freelancers, such as coaches and creatives, to deliver quality service of professional standards?
These professional standards could be benchmarked against occupation-specific competency frameworks that were outlined in the Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) 2018 Tripartite Workgroup report on support for self-employed persons. The guidance would also recognise the differentiated premiums for expertise mastery that freelancers, like coaches and creatives, accumulate through upskilling efforts.
By contextualising initiatives, we can take concrete steps together to boost freelancers' career prospects and their value-add to the Singapore economy.
Ms Usha Chandradas (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, the newly announced SkillsFuture Level-up $4,000 grant will be applicable to courses with \"better employability outcomes.\" Would the Ministry be able to clarify how exactly the grant will benefit freelancers and self-employed persons (SEPs), a large proportion of whom work in the arts?
Skills relevant to the latter group might not be directly related to \"employability\". For example, freelancers and SEPs may benefit more from training in targeted areas, such as the negotiation of contract terms, business and accounting management and product marketing. Undoubtedly, these skills may be valued by prospective employers as well, but I would like to seek clarification from the Ministry on how SkillsFuture Level-Up courses will take the specific learning needs of freelancers into account.
My second point has to do with the training allowance that has been announced in the Budget Statement, capped at $3,000, and which is based on a person's average income earned in the previous year. The Minister has stated that the long-term unemployed and caregivers who have left the workforce will not be entitled to the allowance, as it is meant to provide support for workers and, specifically, those who experience income loss when they commit to full-time training.
The benefit, therefore, for now, excludes people, such as caregivers who have had to take time off from paid work in order to look after children or the elderly, and it appears to gloss over the fact that caregiving is also a kind of work. It is just unpaid and outside the formal confines of an employer-employee relationship. If the Government wishes for seniors to be able to age in place and for more women to bear children, there must be recognition of the fact that time-consuming and all-encompassing caregiving duties will necessarily be borne by Singaporeans and, most typically, by women.
I would like to suggest that the Government should acknowledge the key role that caregivers play in our community as well as the opportunity costs faced by them when they give up work. I hope that the Government can consider an eventual extension of the training allowance to caregivers if they wish to upskill themselves with a view to re-entering the workforce when their caregiving duties have ceased or when they become less onerous.
Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Mr Chairman, I would like to thank MOE for the SkillsFuture Level-Up scheme and enquire about the Mid-Career Training Allowance, specifically, what arrangements or provisions will be made regarding training allowance for Singaporeans who have been unemployed for more than a year.
There are significant numbers of Singaporeans who lost their jobs during the COVID-19 years of 2019 to 2022. They have been struggling to make ends meet through ad hoc or freelance contracts sporadically over the past three years. Their annual income is a far cry from their last-employed full-time income. Will MOE consider basing the training allowance on the last-drawn full-time income instead of the previous year's income?
Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Chairman, I applaud the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme, which provides $4,000 top-up for Singaporeans aged 40 and above, subsidies to the second publicly funded diploma or publicly subsidised diploma, and the ITE Progression Award. On the SkillsFuture Top-Up with targeted scope, I have spoken regularly on this over the past few years, and I am glad to see that the top-up is confined to selected training programmes, which are industry-oriented, with better employability outcomes.
Given that there are over 29,000 courses on the SkillsFuture website, how will the Ministry decide which training programmes will be eligible for this top-up funding? What will be the criteria? How will SSG work with the industry to identify courses which are industry-oriented with better employability outcomes?
There are often multiple training vendors for one type of training. How do we prevent over-inflated training fees to prevent excessive claims by training vendors? And instead of tying it for better employment outcomes, can we also have some of it tied to the productivity or improvement outcome it brings to the company?
Miss Rachel Ong (West Coast): Chairman, in my Budget speech, I highlighted the issue faced by persons with disabilities (PwDs) when encountering training providers who are either unwilling or not equipped to provide necessary accommodations. This often results in PwDs being turned away or not receiving the support required to fully engage in further education and training opportunities.
These accommodations could range from providing screen reader-friendly course materials and websites for those with visual impairments, to adjusting assessment methods to cater to an individual's disabilities. Unfortunately, as the provision of reasonable accommodation is not yet a legal requirement in Singapore, PwDs have limited avenues for recourse in such situations.
As Singapore continues to equip its workforce with the skills needed for an evolving economy, it is crucial that PwDs have equal access to skills upgrading opportunities to remain competitive.
In light of this, what are the ways the Government can collaborate with continuing education and training (CET) centres to ensure that SkillsFuture courses eligible for the newly introduced SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme are accessible to PwDs, particularly those with visual impairments or neuro-diverse needs? This is to ensure that PwDs are not left behind in the upskilling process and that they have the necessary support to thrive in a competitive job market.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Chairman, I commend MOE's efforts for its dedication to lifelong learning in Budget 2024, focusing on younger ITE graduates and mid-career Singaporeans. I seek MOE's response to what I raised in my Budget speech on the challenges these groups face, such as opportunity costs or income loss, and also ensuring positive job outcomes from further education.
I am also concerned about those who are outside these groups, such as the non-ITE graduates and non-mid-career Singaporeans who are in low-skilled jobs, including some gig jobs. How will MOE urge them to take up training and opportunities in emerging sectors, like the digital, care and green economies?
Many Singaporeans aspire for further education beyond diplomas, including Master's degrees, for example, in fields like sustainability. They want to take a second bite of the cherry of tertiary level studies. Given these high costs though, how will MOE support these ambitions?
In addition, I seek MOE's inputs on whether the investment in certifiable diplomas means a move away from MOE's vision of a more eclectic mix of pathways to lifelong learning. What about promoting more bite-sized, modular and skills-based certificates of competency, instead of going only for diplomas and, possibly later, degrees and other ambitions?
Next, I would like to continue to speak up for the lifelong learning needs of PwDs. The SkillsFuture course landscape offers a vibrant array of over 20,000 courses for adult learners, now further enriched by the SkillsFuture Level-Up initiatives and so forth. However, this vibrant and optimistic lifelong learning scenario does not extend to school graduates and adults with special educational needs (SEN). This is regardless of whether they graduate from SPED schools or mainstream schools. To ignore the \"cliff effect\" of learners with disabilities or SEN would be to create a larger pool of Singaporeans relying on state welfare and who might be leading sub-optimal lives at adulthood.
So, Sir, while MOE, SG Enable and their learning partners have made commendable efforts to support recent school graduates, these initiatives are insufficient to ensure lifelong learning for all. Current learning efforts often appear fragmented and constrained by the scope and budgets of each Ministry, making it challenging to discern a unified vision or ecosystem where these efforts synergise.
As a leader in education and with the Minister championing lifelong learning for all Singaporeans, MOE is positioned to spearhead this domain. There is a pressing need for MOE to commission a comprehensive study to map the current landscape for lifelong learning for all, analyse disability profiles and assess learning needs. This would pave the way for a more robust vision and the development of a more strategic, cohesive Lifelong Learning Plan for All.
Innovative, cost-effective learning solutions should be explored, for instance, rather than merely reducing fees for SPED schools, which are, of course, welcomed, could we also direct or add some grants to support learning into adulthood in MOE schools and beyond?
In summary, I urge MOE to refine its strategy for lifelong learning to include all Singaporeans, ensuring no one is left behind. I urge MOE to take its place and lead in developing a more inclusive and comprehensive learning ecosystem for all Singaporeans, regardless of ability and background.
Dr Wan Rizal: Chairman, in an economy that is increasingly valuing diverse skills and lifelong learning, the move to encourage our ITE graduates, especially those aged 30 and below, to pursue further education and skills enhancement is very timely.
This brings us to an important question: what is the range of diploma programmes that this initiative covers? What flexibility is allowed for students to discover courses other than the ones they initially took? I have known of students who change their interest halfway through and they would like to try something else.
What support systems, both academic and focused on mental well-being, would we provide prospective diploma students, especially those who have not been engaged in formal study for a long time?
Additionally, would the Ministry expand financial support mechanisms, such as scholarships and grants, to ensure these programmes are accessible to all ITE graduates who wish to further their education? This support would alleviate the financial and emotional burden on students and their families, making it easier for graduates to commit to further education.
Finally, I would like to ask the Ministry, how aligned are the chosen diploma programmes with the current and future job market demands and whether the programmes are designed in partnership with industry leaders. I have known such collaborations would actually encourage not just the students but the IHLs to work closely with the companies and hence, it is a win-win situation for all parties.
By doing so, we ensure that the skills, knowledge and mental resilience acquired by the graduates are relevant and highly sought after by employers, and this enhances their employability and, of course, their career progression opportunities.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, over the years, ITE has evolved significantly to meet the changing needs of Singapore's economy and workforce. Initially focused on providing basic vocational skills training, ITE has expanded its curriculum to offer a wide range of courses catering to various industries, such as engineering, design, business, hospitality and healthcare. This evolution reflects Singapore's shift towards a knowledge-based economy and the growing demand for skilled workers in the diverse sectors.
One key aspect of ITE's evolution is its emphasis on providing students with not just technical skills, but also soft skills and employability skills. ITE, indeed, places a strong emphasis on holistic education, ensuring that graduates are equipped with communication skills, problem-solving abilities, teamwork capabilities and a strong work ethic. During my time in polytechnic, I had a chance to work with many such ITE graduates who went on to polytechnic, and I can certainly testify to the quality of these students.
While ITE provides guidance and support to help graduates navigate future pathways and also informed decisions about their career aspirations, it is heartening to hear the Deputy Prime Minister mention the ITE Progress Award in his Budget speech. I also noted that Minister Chan Chun Sing had also talked about the ITE Progress Award in his Committee of Supply (COS) speech as well.
I would like to ask if the Government could also consider, for the ITE Progression Award, to not just be applicable for enrolment and study in full-time diploma programmes or diploma programmes from the Government polytechnics, but also be considered for diploma programmes in other institutions and even for professionally-certified courses, provided these courses are conducted by reputable private education institutes (PEIs)?
Mr Sharael Taha: Mr Chairman, how will the Ministry intend to introduce the ITE Progression Award? What are the types of diplomas that will be applicable for this award that is in line with the needs of the industry? Will it be applicable for diplomas from independent schools?
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, I speak to many ITE students when they receive their Edusave awards. For many of them, they aspire towards graduation with a Higher Nitec certificate and then pursuing a diploma from the polytechnic. However, not all of them will be able to get into a polytechnic and, for some, they may not be able to be admitted into a course of their interest in polytechnic. For some students, they are asked to consider a course in engineering when they are already struggling with Mathematics. So, it is a mismatch of the student's interest. As a result, their only option is to go for the ITE Work-Study diploma.
Sir, I am concerned as to whether an 18-year-old student freshly graduated from ITE would be able to cope with study and work at the same time. Some of our ITE students are late bloomers. They need more encouragement to help them find a suitable field to excel in and they should not be compelled to start work and concurrently study when they are ill-prepared.
May I ask the Minister, for the past three years, how many ITE graduates have completed and graduated with the Work‐Study Diploma (WSDip)? And of those who have graduated with the WSDip, how many went on to university? Is the WSDip widely accepted by employers within their specific industry? How many companies are participating in the work-study programme? How are these employers equipped to deal with ITE students who are first-timers in the workforce and still have to take classes and study for their diploma at the same time?
Can the polytechnics consider expanding their classes to specially curate courses for ITE graduates which are more technical-based, rather than academic-based? Here, I am talking about having separate polytechnic classes, vis-à-vis the usual polytechnic diplomas that are issued. So, there should be one specifically for ITE students. We should give the students every opportunity to pursue their dreams and the opportunity to graduate with a recognised polytechnic diploma.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Chairman, there is abundant research to show that the early years are critical to a child's development. Quality early childhood education is very important. I am glad, therefore, that the Government had embarked on MOE Kindergartens and created an opportunity to develop a body of knowledge on the best pedagogies and practices for early childhood education. As early childhood education has a significant impact on a child's trajectory, it becomes necessary to intervene early, especially if a child from a family in challenging circumstances is not given the full experience of quality education.
Children from low-income families should not be denied an opportunity of education and programmes that could make a difference to their development and future success in life. Early childhood education and development are a key aspect of the strategy in sustaining social mobility. The MOE Kindergarten is, therefore, also an important avenue to provide support for families in the lower-income group. I am, therefore, interested to learn about the plans that MOE Kindergarten has in the future to provide more services or support for low-income families. It is heartening to note that there are meaningful services like Kindergarten Care (KCare) where parents who need full-day services can enrol their children in. I understand there are subsidies for KCare. Would there be plans to enhance the support given to the families in need through further subsidies or programmes?
The Chairman: Mr Shawn Huang. Not here. Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Sir, decades of research underscore the significant impact of parental involvement in education, yielding benefits for both students and schools. Evidence also suggests that students of engaged parents are more likely to do better, exhibit better social skills and adapt well to school. Studies found a positive correlation between family involvement and student success, regardless of the family's socioeconomic status.
I commend MOE and neighbourhood schools for fostering Parent Support Groups (PSGs). An overview of their achievements reveals that PSGs in Singapore have shown remarkable progress, enhancing the educational environment through various initiatives.
My study of the landscape also shows that the level of PSG participation and contribution varies across schools. Additionally, I notice that many parents are still seized with worries over the high-stakes examinations, such as PSLE and GCEs, and direct school admissions as to what they perceived as better schools and also pressing issues, such as their children's mental health.
Parents, I believe, can be play a more significant and impactful role. MOE has the opportunity to devise a strategic plan for deeper collaboration with parents, fostering a culture that values learning beyond grades, growth beyond grades, supports good mental health and emphasises character development, all important mantras recited by the Minister for Education himself. MOE can draw inspiration from the organisational structures of multi-level networks in the business sector and also the cell group frameworks and resource support found in faith-based communities. This may help to enhance the cascading of critical information and resources more effectively.
I request an update from MOE on the progress of PSGs over the years, the role of the Community and Parents in Support of Schools (COMPASS) advisory panel and strategies for harnessing parents' energy to strengthen our education system as a whole.
Dr Wan Rizal: Sir, as we stand united in our commitment to the holistic development of our students, we must recognise the indispensable role of parental engagement and the vital support provided by PSGs. The nurturing environment that parents and PSGs create is foundational to our children's success, both academically and in their personal growth. With mental well-being emerging as a paramount concern in today's fast-paced and often stressful world, the collaboration between schools and parents has never been more critical.
Against this backdrop, a pivotal question arises: what initiatives are MOE implementing to enhance parental involvement and collaboration in supporting our students' holistic development, for example, in areas like mental well-being?
Building on this and recognising the potential for even greater impact, I propose two further suggestions for consideration.
Would the Ministry consider establishing a co-curated dedicated platform or portal centralising resources, research and expert advice on children's mental health? This could serve as a comprehensive resource for parents by PSGs, facilitating easier access to information and best practices supporting mental well-being.
Could the Ministry explore partnerships between PSGs and mental health professionals, to conduct regular webinars and workshops for parents and educators? Such initiatives could provide a deeper understanding of how to recognise early signs of mental distress, foster open communication, create supportive environments and, finally, promote resilience in children.
The Chairman: Second Minister Mohamad Maliki Osman.
The Second Minister for Education (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman): Mr Chairman, our vision for an inclusive tomorrow starts with empowering our children to fulfil their potential. We want to meet the unique needs of our diverse learners and provide multiple pathways to support their aspirations. By bringing out the best in every student, we support the collective success of all Singaporeans. Through the Forward Singapore exercise, we have voiced our common desire for an inclusive Singapore that provides opportunities and empowers those in need. MOE will continue improving access to quality education.
First, we want our children from the most vulnerable segment to have a strong start in their education journey. Studies show that attending quality preschool can boost confidence and social skills and lay a strong foundation for life. In our local context, we have also found that children who attend preschool from age three are less likely to require learning support in Primary 1.
We know that lower-income families face multifaceted challenges requiring whole-of-community support, especially in ensuring early access to preschool. Let me focus on shifts in the MOE Kindergartens (MKs). My colleagues from the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will share about the wider preschool sector.
Today, all 55 MKs offer KCare for parents who require full-day care services for their children. To improve the accessibility of MKs, we raised the household income cap for priority admission from $3,500 to $4,500 last year, reaching out to more children. But preschool fees may still deter some lower-income families from enrolling their children in preschool.
Our Singapore Citizen children with working mothers are eligible for the KCare Additional Subsidy (AS). Ms Rahayu Mahzam will be pleased to know that MOE will extend the KCare AS to all families, that is, regardless of their mother's working status and earning up to $6,000 per month from the fourth quarter this year.
This means all families with a gross monthly household income of up to $6,000 will receive subsidies. Those with a gross monthly household income of $3,000 and below will pay as low as $3 a month for MK and KCare. We hope that this will further encourage preschool enrolment among our lower-income families.
Beyond that, we know that good attendance is also key. Thus, MOE is strengthening initiatives to facilitate regular attendance and provide learning support. This will help narrow the gap in learning and development outcomes of children from lower-income families vis-à-vis their peers.
These moves, alongside plans that my MSF colleagues will share, will give our children a strong start to their education journeys.
Second, we will continue supporting students who face difficulties in school due to challenges in their home settings through the Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce (UPLIFT), which was established in 2018. We have made good progress. In 2023, UPLIFT supported about 16,500 students in around 300 schools.
UPLIFT provides holistic support through partnerships between schools and the community. The UPLIFT Enhanced School Resourcing, another programme under UPLIFT, equips schools to provide customised help. For example, student care centres in all primary schools engage students meaningfully after school, while the GEAR-UP programme offers students in around 120 secondary schools mentoring and interest-based activities. These programmes boost students’ socio-emotional competencies and their sense of belonging to school.
The community also plays a key role in UPLIFT. In 2020, we piloted the UPLIFT Community Network (UCN) to coordinate support at the town level and to connect families with resources in the community. Outcomes have also been positive. More than six in 10 students improved in attendance, and seven in 10 parents showed improved parenting habits and parent-child relationships. Encouraged by this success, we expanded the network to more than 100 schools across all 24 towns nationwide in 2023.
Last year, I spoke about strengthening whole-of-Government social service delivery alongside other agencies. To facilitate coordinated support, we have since started to integrate the UCN into the ComLink+, led by MSF. Our schools will continue to work closely with partners under ComLink+ to meet the students’ educational needs.
Third, we want to continue enabling students with special education needs (SEN) to fulfil their potential, by supporting them in appropriate educational settings that bring out their best.
Ms Denise Phua asked about our SEN students in our MOE mainstream schools. About 28,500 SEN students, or about 80% of all SEN students, attend mainstream schools today, and receive targeted help. This includes the TRANsition Support for InTegration (TRANSIT) for Primary 1 students with social and behavioural needs, which has been implemented in 139 schools, with the remaining 43 coming onboard by 2026. All primary schools also have at least two SEN officers, who are trained to provide learning and behavioural support.
Additionally, MOE connects with partners like SPARK, Unlocking ADHD and Dyslexia Association of Singapore. We value their role in also supporting students with SEN and their families.
Mr Faisal Manap and Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked how we can help students with moderate to severe SEN, who face higher costs due to the customised and specialised care required. The Government has worked closely with the community to increase funding for special education (SPED) schools over the years and spends more on education per child in a SPED school compared to a mainstream school.
The income eligibility criterion for the SPED Financial Assistance Scheme was also increased last January. Between 2020 and 2023, we worked with social service agencies (SSAs) to reduce maximum fees for Singapore Citizens in SPED schools from $350 to $150.
We will do more. As outlined in the Budget Statement, we have worked with nine higher-fee SPED schools serving students with Autism Spectrum Disorder and Multiple Disabilities to lower their fees by up to 60% for Singapore Citizens by mid-2025. With this, the maximum monthly fees for any Singapore Citizen in SPED schools will be reduced from $150 to $90. More than 3,500 students and their families will benefit.
I would add that about 50% of all SPED students currently pay similar fees as students in the mainstream schools. Together with efforts by MSF, I assure Members that SPED students and their families will be supported in their educational and caregiving needs.
I thank Ms Rahayu Mahzam for the call to support our SPED teaching force. To enhance the attractiveness of the SPED teaching profession, we have reviewed SPED teachers’ and teacher aides’ (TAs') salary guidelines to be commensurate with their expected roles, their responsibilities and their competencies. Between 2024 and 2026, existing trained SPED classroom teachers can see salary enhancements of up to 12%. Salaries for SPED TAs can increase by up to 15% from 2024. From this year, we will also increase starting salaries for SPED classroom teachers by up to 15% and by up to 17% for TAs.
These salary enhancements will vary depending on individuals’ prevailing salaries, and their experience, competencies, job role and work performance. Funding will be provided to SSAs to implement them progressively.
To strengthen SPED teachers’ capabilities, we will introduce more professional development programmes to develop expertise in supporting different disability profiles. A School Staff Developer will also be appointed in each SPED school to enable professional growth in all SPED teachers. We appreciate our SPED teachers and remain committed to supporting them.
We agree with Mr Darryl David and Ms Denise Phua that preparing SPED students for post-school to community transition is very important. From age 13, SPED students are supported with transition planning, which facilitates progression to suitable post-school pathways. We will continue taking a whole-of-Government approach to this, with MSF taking the lead.
Beyond the Government’s efforts, students with SEN and their families need the community’s understanding and respect. I assure Mr Ong Hua Han that students from mainstream and SPED schools are given opportunities to develop appreciation of differently abled peers, through meaningful and sustained interactions. Such efforts will help students with SEN integrate into the community.
Parents have shared with me their difficulties in navigating their everyday life with their SEN children. Those with autism, for instance, who struggle to regulate emotions, may exhibit anti-social behaviours like screaming. Complaints from neighbours can lead to stressful visits from the relevant authorities. We do hope that the community is more supportive and understanding of their neighbours. Our vision is for an inclusive Singapore, where families with SEN children feel at ease in their community, supported by understanding friends and neighbours. So, I urge all Singaporeans to partner us in realising this vision.
Mr Chairman, beyond supporting those in need, we will develop diverse pathways to support students’ aspirations. With the implementation of Full Subject-based Banding (Full SBB) in all secondary schools this year, students will take more subjects at different levels, based on learning needs and abilities. We have done away with the previous streaming categories and expanded post-secondary pathways to recognise diverse learner profiles and offer greater flexibility.
Let me update on the review of admissions to polytechnic Year 1. With your permission, Mr Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout showing the new pathways available from 2028.
The Chairman: Please proceed. [A handout was distributed to hon Members. Please refer to Annex 1.]
Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Members may also access this through the MP@SGPARL App.
Under the Full SBB, students can take subjects at G1, G2 or G3 subject levels, broadly mapped from the Normal (Technical), Normal (Academic) and the Express standards respectively.
Let me use a student archetype, Jude, to demonstrate the flexibility of the Full SBB. Say, for example, in Secondary 3, Jude opts to pursue his passion in Design and Technology (D&T) as an elective, bringing him to six G3 subjects. After one year, he finds his curriculum load too challenging and he may decide to take D&T at a less demanding level at G2, which will enable him to pursue his passion still. At the end of Secondary 4, Jude will sit for five G3 and one G2 subject at the national examinations, the G2 being the D&T subject.
Today, for entry to polytechnic Year 1, Jude will not be able to use the G2 D&T grade as the current criteria is based on five G3 subjects, namely English Language; two Relevant (R) subjects, relevant to the course that he is applying for; and two Best (B) subjects. That is where the acronym ELR2B2 comes from.
From 2028, students may use one B subject at G2 for admission to polytechnic Year 1. Jude can thus use his G2 D&T grade if it improves his overall score. All students will be assessed on a common benchmark of four G3 subjects and one G2 subject. Students with more G3 subjects will have their grades converted to G2, to determine the best G2 subject for admission.
With this, the net aggregate cut-off for Year 1 polytechnic admission will be adjusted from 26 points to 22 points.
I want to assure the House that this is not a tightening of the admissions criteria but a result of converting one B subject from G3 to G2. For example, if Jude had an ELR2B2 of 26 points today, with a C6 in one of his B subjects, his C6 grade would be mapped to a G2 Grade 2. This gives him an aggregate of 22 points, which will allow him to access polytechnic. If Jude chooses to take the B subject at G2 and obtains Grade 1, his aggregate score will improve to 21 points.
This change will allow our students to focus on their strengths, enjoy their learning more and take subjects at appropriate levels, aligned to their interests and needs. I will allow Members to digest what I have just said.
Mr Chairman, let me highlight how we will uplift and support the continued learning of our ITE graduates. We all are very passionate about the ITE students. We want them to do well and we want them to do well, not just in their studies but also in life. They have built strong foundations in ITE but face a growing gap in their starting salaries compared to that of graduates from polytechnics and autonomous universities.
To provide more upskilling options for ITE graduates, ITE has expanded its Technical Diploma (TD) and the Work-Study Diploma (WSDip) offerings. Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked about employers' acceptance of WSDips. Last year, close to 400 companies partnered ITE to offer WSDips, which were taken up by 1,150 ITE graduates. These companies provide on-the-job training that complements the practice-based curriculum offered on campus. The WSDip model is well-received as it allows both fresh and working ITE graduates to be employed full-time and receiving their ITE qualification salaries, because they go in with their ITE qualification already, while gaining up-to-date skills that can be immediately applied at work.
The continued ramp-up of ITE's diploma programmes will allow ITE graduates to choose the pathway aligned to their aspirations and needs, in addition to diplomas offered by polytechnics and arts institutions. Employers, likewise, will be able to select diploma graduates who best fit their job profile and compensate them based on skills and experience.
Many ITE graduates I met want to deepen their skills. I am sure many of our colleagues in the House have met them, as Mr Lim Biow Chuan has mentioned, at the Edusave ceremonies. But they find it difficult to juggle studies and work and upskill only later in their careers.
Hairul, for example, deferred his upskilling aspirations after graduating in 2017, to support his family. Understandably, many of them do have family obligations and they want to support their families. For Hairul's case, with his company's sponsorship, he recently completed the WSDip in Electrical Engineering as a top graduate and obtained a promotion and a pay raise to $2,500, commensurate to his diploma qualification and skillset.
We will help ITE graduates like Hairul access a better wage trajectory by upskilling early. MOE will set aside around $100 million annually for the ITE Progression Award (IPA) and support Singaporean ITE graduates aged 30 and below on their upgrading journeys.
On diploma enrolment, ITE graduates will receive a $5,000 top-up to their Post-Secondary Education Accounts (PSEA). On diploma completion, they will receive a further $10,000 top-up to their CPF Ordinary Account (OA). These top-ups will help offset the costs of obtaining a diploma and boost their savings to support their longer-term goals.
I am pleased to inform Dr Wan Rizal, Mr Darryl David and Mr Sharael Taha that the IPA will be awarded from 2024 to eligible ITE graduates enrolling in diplomas issued by the polytechnics, ITE, Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts (NAFA) and LASALLE College of the Arts, which meet industry needs. Singaporean ITE graduates who are currently enrolled in diplomas will also receive the OA top-up on diploma completion.
The IPA is our investment in the longer-term prospects of our ITE graduates. With the IPA, more ITE graduates will deepen skills mastery and secure stronger progression prospects in their chosen careers.
Mr Chairman, our students should also play a role in creating a better future for Singapore. Indeed, the future is theirs to own. One important area where our youth can make an impact is in sustainability. This is in line with MOE's support of the Singapore Green Plan 2030 and our goal to nurture stewards of the environment.
Beyond learning about sustainability concepts in class, polytechnics and ITE will pilot a new sustainability initiative this year. Students from each institution will \"adopt\" three blocks near their campuses and engage residents through workshops and visits to reduce water consumption and electricity consumption and increase recycling and greening efforts. They will also drive change within their own households and communities to live a sustainable lifestyle. Students will work with relevant agencies to monitor key indicators of change in the households they engage.
In schools, students will continue to learn about sustainability issues under MOE's Eco Stewardship Programme. Since our focus on food sustainability last year, more than 80% of our schools have enacted related initiatives on food security. With these efforts, our students will be empowered as changemakers to make Singapore a sustainable home.
Mr Pritam Singh has asked about the instruction of Non-Tamil Indian Languages (NTILs). NTILs are taught through In-School Parallel Programmes (ISPPs) and Weekend Centres (WECs). Each request for new ISPPs is considered based on available resources and individual school needs. When not feasible, the WEC provides a more viable option. We also manage students' curriculum loads by ensuring that they do not take NTIL lessons in both ISPPs and WECs.
As NTIL teachers are employed by Community Groups (CGs), MOE does not set guidelines on their salaries. MOE last reviewed the funding for NTIL learning in 2022 and will continue supporting the CGs in providing quality instruction. Mr Chairman, allow me to continue in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] To achieve our vision of an inclusive Singapore, where we accept and value contributions from every Singaporean. Therefore, we must continue our efforts to fulfil the needs of diverse learners and develop multiple pathways that bring out the best in each child.
We understand the challenges that parents face. We will continue to enhance efforts so that children from lower-income families, students with complex needs and students with special education needs are given better educational opportunities. We will also work with social service agencies to raise salaries for SPED teachers and teacher aides, and strengthen their professional development. With these, more students will be able to learn and grow, regardless of their background or needs.
With most families using English dominantly in our homes, we recognise the importance of continuing efforts to deepen students’ interest in their mother tongue. The Mother Tongue Language Learning and Promotion Committees (MTLLPCs) spend around $5 million annually to promote Mother Tongue Languages learning and usage.
At the primary level, starting this year, we are introducing a refreshed Malay language curriculum that uses more games and technology in the learning of Mother Tongue. At the secondary level, the Malay Language Learning and Promotion Committee will introduce a new competition for secondary school students this year. This initiative builds on the success of the “Cepat Tepat” Quiz at the primary level, which is already in place. This new competition aims to encourage the use of the Malay language beyond the classroom and promote interest in Malay culture and literature. We will continue to make Malay language learning more engaging, both in and out of school.
At the polytechnics and ITE, we will introduce further shifts to support our students’ aspirations. In line with the Full Subject-Based Banding (SBB) in secondary schools, wider profiles of learners will gain access to polytechnic Year 1 from 2028. These changes will allow students to choose the subjects most suited to their own strengths and learning preferences.
We introduced the new ITE Progression Award (IPA) which aims to support our young ITE graduates to upskill to a diploma and secure more progression prospects. The award helps with the costs of obtaining a diploma and reduces expenditure for their longer-term goals. I urge more ITE graduates to press on with their upgrading efforts, so that they can deepen their skills and thrive in their chosen professions.
Apart from diploma courses in the polytechnics, they can also upskill through the ITE Work-Study programme or the Technical Diploma as well as LASALLE College of the Arts and NAFA diploma courses. We will continue our efforts to provide more learning pathways that can uplift our students’ capabilities to secure a better future for them.
(In English): Mr Chairman, it is our enduring mission to enable all to learn, progress and contribute. With our community's help, we will support our students in charting their paths to meaningful vocations and diverse callings, to fulfil our shared goal of an inclusive success.
The Chairman: Minister of State Gan Siow Huang.
The Minister of State for Education (Ms Gan Siow Huang): Mr Chairman, lifelong learning is now a key pillar of our social compact.
Since the start of the SkillsFuture movement in 2015, we have built a strong lifelong learning ecosystem, comprising individuals, employers and training providers. We have expanded our partnerships to include NTUC, trade associations and chambers, professional bodies and SkillsFuture Queen Bee companies. We will continue to build on the foundation and expand our partnerships so that upskilling leads to better outcomes for both Singaporeans and businesses.
Let me elaborate on how individuals, employers and industry can each play a role.
First, on individuals. Last year, more than 500,000 individuals benefitted from training supported by SkillsFuture Singapore. That is one in five in our local workforce. This includes both individual-initiated training where SkillsFuture Credit was used, as well as company-initiated training programmes, both of which were supported by SSG with subsidised course fees. We are introducing the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme to further strengthen training support for Singaporeans.
Members have asked how we can ensure good take-up and outcomes from this Programme. To do that, we must cater to the diversity of individuals' needs and aspirations.
For a start, we have curated over 7,000 courses, covering a good range of sectors and job profiles. These courses are conducted by our IHLs and established private training providers, such as the NTUC Learning Hub and the Singapore Hotel Association Training and Education Centre (SHATEC). SSG will review the courses eligible for SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme over time, with input from sector agencies, industry intermediaries and professional bodies.
Last Friday, Minister Chan Chun Sing spoke about the SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme (SCTP). SCTP courses are geared towards individuals who wish to move into high growth areas, such as the digital, care and green economies. On top of training, SCTP courses include career advisory and employment facilitation, so that trainees have a better chance of getting employed after completing the course.
Take the example of Ms Low Danli, aged 41. She had been working in the ICT industry for 14 years when she sought a career change. Ms Low previously used her SkillsFuture Credit for some courses on corporate environment sustainability. After attending a SkillsFuture Roadshow, she took up an SCTP course in Sustainability at the SMU Academy. With 90% Mid-Career Enhanced Subsidy, the course fee payable by Ms Low was about $2,000. She used her remaining SkillsFuture Credit to offset a part of the course fees. Through the course, she learnt about climate issues, sustainable supply chains and green finance. She is now a Sustainability Client Engagement Specialist at the Singapore Environment Council.
The SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme seeks to enable more mid-career individuals like Ms Low to pursue a substantive bout of upskilling. If Ms Low decides to further deepen her skills in a few years’ time and enrol in a full-time course, for example, a diploma in sustainability, the $4,000 SkillsFuture Credit top-up will be sufficient to cover at least half her course fees and she will also get training allowance amounting to 50% of her last drawn salary, up to $3,000 per month.
If you are a Singaporean aged 40 and above, you will soon be notified by SSG of your eligibility for the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme. Given the wide range of courses available, you may need some help to make a decision. Do spend some time to chart your skills journey. There are various ways for you to seek advice: (i) you can refer to online resources, such as MySkillsFuture website and SSG's reports to understand skills that are in demand; (ii) you can also use the CareersFinder tool on the MyCareersFuture portal to discover career opportunities and skills gaps based on your personal profile and work history; and (iii) if you prefer to speak to someone, you can go to a Skills Ambassador for personalised course recommendations. Skills Ambassadors can be found at some community clubs, Workforce Singapore (WSG) Careers Connect Centres, job fairs and SkillsFuture roadshows across the island.
Career transition is not a one-step change. It can involve self-discovery, seeking out advice and more than one bout of skills training. As we shift SkillsFuture to a higher gear, we hope that every individual will take charge of their career health and invest in building their own career resilience.
Ms Jean See and Ms Usha Chandradas highlighted freelancers and self-employed persons as a group that deserves attention. Under the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme, there are a good number of courses in the areas highlighted by the Member, whether to deepen technical skills or broaden business skills, such as digital branding and business administration.
Miss Rachel Ong asked how we can ensure that the courses that qualify for the $4,000 top-up are accessible to PwDs. We have been working closely with SG Enable and training providers to make mainstream training programmes more accessible to PwDs. This is a work-in-progress. As there is a wide spectrum of learning needs for PwDs, we also encourage those interested in the courses to approach the training providers who can then work with the Enabling Academy to assess what assistive support and course modifications could be made to suit specific needs of the individual.
Let me touch on employers on how they can take greater ownership of upskilling their employees to meet their business needs.
We are encouraged that more employers are participating in training, especially the small and medium enterprises (SMEs). In 2023, around 23,000 companies participated in SSG-supported programmes. This is a 15% increase from 2022, driven by small companies with fewer than 50 employees. But from the Forward Singapore conversations, we have also heard feedback that opportunities for employer-sponsored training are uneven. Some workers hope that their employers can do more.
We want to support companies in making training more accessible.
First, we have developed tools that can help companies assess their skills stock, especially for SMEs that tend to have leaner human resources (HR) departments. Together with JobKred, SSG has developed a tool called the Skills Profiler. It allows employers to benchmark the skillsets of their employees against similar jobs in the industry. Companies will then receive customised course recommendations for any skills gaps. The Skills Profiler pilot was rolled out to 400 SMEs last year, with all slots snapped up within seven months. To support more SMEs in conducting training needs analyses, SSG will make the Skills Profiler available to 1,000 more enterprises this year. I encourage companies to come forward and try this out.
How might employers then take action? Mr Mark Lee suggested treating workplaces as extensions of our IHLs. I agree. Indeed, workplace learning as a modality provides an authentic learning environment for employees. It also helps employers better manage the challenges around releasing staff to attend external courses.
Last year, we piloted the Workplace Skills Recognition (WPSR) programme in selected Progressive Wage Model (PWM) sectors with the help of the National Centre of Excellence for Workplace Learning (NACE). NACE has started certifying companies that have established workplace learning systems and skills development plans for their staff. Once certified, the companies will be able to move quickly help their staff into training and to help them acquire WSQ certifications for the skills they have attained at the workplace.
I am happy to hear from NTUC Deputy Secretary-General Desmond Tan that feedback from its partners has been positive, and more employers in NTUC’s company training committee (CTC) network intend to sign up for the Workplace Skills Recognition (WPSR) Programme. We will expand the WPSR so that more employers and workers can benefit from it.
Employers who decide to send their staff for external training can also receive substantive support for training costs. In addition to SSG's subsidies, companies can tap on $10,000 of SkillsFuture Enterprise Credit (SFEC) to further defray their out-of-pocket costs. MTI has announced that the SFEC has been extended to June 2025. And beginning from Year of Assessment 2024, corporate tax deduction for training has been enhanced from 100% to 400% under the Enterprise Innovation Scheme. I encourage companies to make full use of these measures to upskill their employees to stay competitive.
Our jobs and skills ecosystem must come together to address job transformation and skills needs effectively.
We agree with Members on the need for industry involvement in the design and delivery of training. SSG, as the national skills authority, works closely with sector agencies and industry partners to understand industry demand and skills needs. These are translated into skills insights that are publicly available so that everyone can make use of the information. For example, training providers have developed SkillsFuture Series courses to provide skills top-ups in Industry 4.0 and the care, digital and green economies. In areas like AI, where we are making a national push to develop a pipeline of AI talent and AI practitioners, there are a variety of options ranging from bite-sized modular courses to Master’s programmes.
Industry players have stepped in to deliver training as well. BCG has trained close to 1,000 individuals in business-relevant digital skills through its Rise series of courses for companies and individuals. Meanwhile, our IHLs are ramping up industry attachments for their staff and tapping on industry practitioners to deliver CET.
Ms Foo Mee Har suggested introducing a SkillsFuture quality accreditation framework to differentiate funding for training programmes by quality and industry relevance and recognise high-quality training providers. SSG has, indeed, moved in this direction with its outcome-based funding model. By end-2024, all courses that deliver strong manpower outcomes in terms of securing employment and career progression will be accorded the highest tier of SSG subsidies.
To strengthen the reach and impact of SkillsFuture in more challenging sectors, we have introduced new partnership models in the past few years. Intermediaries, like the Jobs-Skills Integrators and Queen Bee companies, can help smaller companies leverage on their industry networks and strengths.
Let me now turn to our students.
To enhance our students' arts and cultural appreciation, MOE regularly reviews our curricular and co-curricular learning opportunities. An example is the Performing Arts-Based Learning (PABL), which was piloted in 2023 across 22 secondary schools to create authentic learning opportunities beyond the classroom for our lower secondary students. Through PABL, students experience live music performance that is specially produced and staged at a professional concert venue, as well as pre- and post-concert music lessons held in class. We received positive feedback from our students and will progressively roll out PABL to all secondary schools from 2024 to 2027.
Last but not least, parents; they are our key partners in supporting students' well-being and development.
Dr Wan Rizal, Ms Denise Phua and Assoc Prof Razwana Begum asked how MOE is partnering parents in supporting our students’ holistic development. MOE has developed resources for parents to guide their children on the various pathways available and in areas, such as children’s well-being, cyber wellness and broadening the definition of \"success\". If you have the Parents Gateway app on your mobile phone, you will find a treasure trove of parenting resources that can make you a more informed parent. MOE also works with the COMPASS Council. COMPASS members have led several projects that offer alternative platforms for parents to learn from professionals and other experienced parents.
In journeying with parents, our Parent Support Groups (PSGs) have been great partners and I am most thankful to our PSGs. Many volunteer and stay on the PSG even after their children have graduated from the school. Their passion is to help other parents and be peer supporters for the parent community. We recognise that each PSG has unique yet useful experiences that other PSGs can learn from. Therefore, to encourage sharing of learnings across PSGs, every PSG will be part of a Support Circle from 2024.
Support Circles are communities of PSGs across various schools where they can share resources and ideas. They can decide on the topics to collaborate on, such as supporting parents of children with special educational needs (SEN) and strengthening our students' mental well-being.
Mr Chairman, it takes a whole-of-society effort to equip Singaporeans with the skills they need to adapt and thrive. It is our duty to build on the foundation of lifelong learning that has been laid. Collectively, we can build a brighter shared future for Singaporeans and Singapore.
The Chairman: Minister Chan Chun Sing.
The Minister for Education (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Chair, may I take this opportunity to say more about MOE's Character and Citizenship Education (CCE) lesson on the Israel-Hamas conflict, building on what I had said in my interview with the media last week.
This issue has stirred strong emotions amongst many. It is also reflected in the range of PQs filed by Members for upcoming Sittings. I thought I will say something here today to allow Members more time than the 30 minutes Question Time on Thursday.
The key questions raised were: why conduct such a lesson? Can MOE teach such a complex and emotive issue effectively? Could MOE have supported our teachers better? What are the learning points from this episode?
Chair, CCE is an established and integral part of the holistic education we provide to our students. We teach CCE in schools because we know how important yet how difficult it is to build our national identity amid the larger forces, including civilisational and religious forces that our multiracial, multi-religious society is subject to.
We know how global and social media news and fake news compete every moment to pull our people in different directions, challenging our efforts to maintain national cohesion and harmony. We do not have the luxury of time or a geographical buffer to insulate our people, including and especially our very young. We need to equip our people, starting with our young, with the skills and values to navigate this fast pace, often divisive and confusing world.
The latest escalation of the Israel-Hamas conflict is a stark reminder that external events can affect our people in different ways and even fracture our society if not well managed.
The young and old can get into heated conversations, insensitive and disrespectful remarks may be made, misinformation abound, especially online. Different parties appeal to our emotions to side with their cause, and information war is being fought all around us. We risk being drawn into other people's fights and conflicts. This is why the CCE lessons on contemporary issues often draw from events happening around us to help students better navigate the vagaries of the world. We can neither shelter our children from the world nor keep the world from intruding into their lives. In the case of the CCE lesson on the Israel-Hamas conflict, our aims are for students to (i) help them understand what is going on, express their own views and manage their own emotions; (ii) appreciate diverse perspectives sensitively and respectfully; (iii) discern information from different sources; and (iv) play their part to support racial harmony and social cohesion.
Let me emphasise what this CCE lesson is not about. It does not tell students that one party in this conflict is good and the other is evil. It does not impose any particular perspective or interpretation of events. It most certainly does not create a wedge between our students' religious beliefs and their national identity. It is also not meant to bring other people's politics into our schools. I hope all Singaporeans can agree with us on the intent and importance of CCE.
The question then is: what do we do in schools to achieve these shared objectives, especially when dealing with sensitive issues like this? What feedback have we obtained so far? For the teachers, by now, our teachers have had a few weeks of experience preparing and teaching the package. We have also heard some of their reflections. Some were initially unsure whether they had sufficient content mastery to teach the lesson. Some needed more time to process their own views and feelings about the conflict. And for those who were still uncomfortable and had asked to be excused from conducting the lesson, their school leaders supported their requests. By and large, most took on the challenge and carried out their duties professionally because they understood the importance of the task. We are grateful to them for stepping up despite any initial hesitations. To conduct CCE lessons well, our teachers will require facilitation skills, much more than just content mastery, and this is not an easy task.
For students, some schools which have conducted CCE lessons have also shared feedback from their students. A Primary 6 student said, \"We should pray for all the innocent victims of the war and cherish the harmony and peace we have in Singapore.\" In one secondary school, some students asked their teachers for more information on why the war started in the first place and why the leaders on both sides could not come to a resolution. Many of them expressed sadness about the tragic situation.
A first-year junior college student said the CCE lesson was beneficial, as the information presented did not force him to agree on a certain stand on the matter but gave him the space to have his thoughts and considerations towards the issue. Some students also asked thoughtful questions like: \"Is there a way out of this circle of violence and hatred?\" and \"What else can we do to help?\" These student voices reflect the intent and learning objectives of the CCE lesson which I described earlier.
We have also received much feedback from parents and other stakeholders. Some thought the issue was too difficult for Primary 5 and 6 students to understand. Some questioned why some slides seemed to focus only on the more recent events in the long history of the conflict. Others wondered if the historical context of the conflict was properly emphasised in this CCE lesson. Yet others felt that we should give our students more information on Singapore's position on the Israel-Palestine issue. We take these concerns and feedback seriously.
Some suggested we drop the lesson altogether. But will this be better for our students and society in the long term? If we agree on the intent of CCE, then we must keep striving to improve our delivery. We are fully committed to equipping our teachers to help our children better navigate this complex world. As I shared with the media last week, we will update our materials to address the feedback and ongoing developments. We will also improve our teaching methods based on the experiences gained. Let me elaborate.
First, we will customise the lesson material further for students of different age groups. At this point, let me emphasise that this CCE lesson was not meant to teach the Israel-Palestine history or Middle East politics. It is impossible to do so in an hour-long session, and it was never our intention in the first place. For younger students, we will simplify our material even more. Our focus will continue to be on sensitising our younger ones to the plight of the innocent victims, how they can express sympathy for and empathise with others, and how they can manage their emotions regarding the conflict. For the older students, we will also teach them to be more discerning of different sources of information. For the most mature students, we will update the lesson material based on more recent events and help them better understand Singapore's national interests. Minister Vivian Balakrishnan had set out at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs' (MFA) COS last week some of these recent developments and how Singapore is responding.
To reiterate, after the 7 October attack, we said Singapore recognised Israel's right to self-defence. But Israel's military response has gone too far. The catastrophic situation in Gaza demands a humanitarian ceasefire to alleviate the suffering of the civilian victims and to enable humanitarian assistance to reach them immediately. We will also explain to our students Singapore's principled position on the Israel-Palestine issue over the decades – and this is for the older students – such as how Singapore had voted in favour of calling for an immediate ceasefire at international platforms, how we have contributed to capacity-building efforts to the Palestinian authority and how we will continue doing our part to advance international efforts towards reaching a two-state solution at the UN. We will certainly continue to reflect the diversity of views from our community within our lesson material and it is a key learning objective for our students to understand how to manage differences and diversity with respect and sensitivity. To the extent possible, we will also design the lesson material to avoid parts being taken out of context selectively.
Second, beyond updating the material, we will also better equip our teachers to engage their students in this CCE lesson. For teachers who would like the extra support, we will organise extra CCE workshops for them to go through the lesson plans with specialists and experienced teachers. Where appropriate, we will involve resource persons to assist with these workshops. This is in addition to the current suite of teachers' preparations within schools.
Given the diversity of backgrounds and experiences of our teachers, some schools have adopted useful approaches, like organising their teachers in teams to conduct the CCE lesson, which enhances the quality of delivery. For example, Jurongville Secondary School carried out this lesson with a pair of teachers. One teacher focused on facilitating the discussion in class while the other looked out for the emotional well-being of students. In Yishun Innova Junior College, the history teacher did a large group briefing on the historical context of the conflict before students discussed the issue further in smaller groups facilitated by their CCE teacher.
For a sensitive topic like the Israel-Hamas conflict, having teachers from different backgrounds and faiths to conduct the lesson together is also a powerful example to our students of how, while we can have different beliefs, we can come together as Singaporeans to discuss complex issues sensitively and respectfully.
We are also making broader efforts to train teachers to teach CCE. Last May, we set up the Singapore Centre for CCE at the National Institute of Education to support professional development of educators in CCE. There is a corps of specialised CCE teachers in the teaching fraternity who are available to mentor their colleagues. Let me assure all teachers that MOE and your school leaders are aware of the challenges you may be facing in delivering the CCE lessons, especially those that touch on sensitive topics. Speak with your school leaders who will support you in carrying out your professional duties.
For us at MOE, there were other useful learning points from this episode.
First learning point: we cannot underestimate the damage that misrepresentation can cause. Let me cite an example. Some online commentators selectively picked out one slide out of many in an MOE lesson deck which was circulated last week, asserting that the schools were telling the students the situation in Israel and Gaza only started on 7 October 2023. This insinuated that MOE was pro-Israel and that we characterised one side as the aggressor and the other side as victim. This riled up many but actually, the words on the said slide were \"events since 7 October\", and it came after a slide that emphasised the long, complex and often violent history of conflict in the region. In addition, MOE had provided background material on historical developments behind the conflict to help teachers better understand the context. This was meant to be shared with students who wished for more information on the history rather than for the teacher to teach history to the whole class, which is not the learning objective of this CCE lesson. This is, indeed, a sobering reminder that in the online space, it is not always easy to separate those who question the material with well-meaning intentions from those who join the fray with ulterior intent to stir up negative emotions on an already sensitive topic.
Our second learning point: managing differences respectfully is still a work in progress. By and large, Singaporeans express our views in a civil and respectful way. Still, some of the online vitriol and anger towards MOE and our teachers from this episode remind us that we cannot take this for granted. Some educators have received rude and abusive comments. We have come across one picture of an educator being circulated online. The caption contained a racial slur, insulting her as an uneducated person of her ethnicity and encouraged others to make this educator's photo go viral online. MOE takes this very seriously. While we may disagree on issues, personal attacks and racial slurs against fellow Singaporeans cannot be condoned. We have to be positive role models for our children. MOE will investigate all instances of abuse, harassment or threats against our educators. They have MOE's full support and the full protection of the law.
Our third learning point: we must be very watchful for potential external interference. Some external online parties have taken an active interest in our discussions. Some show no hesitation to join in the discussions and add their comments to incite anger and unhappiness. Yet others try to play on Singaporeans' conscience to adopt their positions. It is not difficult to guess the agenda of these external parties. We have to be careful to not fall prey to their attempts to rile up our people and undermine our cohesion.
Fourth learning point: our unity depends on sustained commitment and effort. Last week, Second Minister Maliki Osman and I met more than 300 school principals again to listen to their feedback since we last discussed the issue with them in January. Many of them shared the challenges they encountered and how they had overcome them. It has certainly not been an easy time for our teachers and principals. In the light of this episode and criticisms against our schools and teachers, we discussed frankly, should we continue teaching this CCE lesson, given that some people have suggested that we should abandon it since it is so difficult and sensitive? Is it still worth doing it? In response, many of my principals shared this. We asked ourselves: how can we allow the seeds of hatred and distrust to be planted in our next generation? How can we allow our society to be split by this and other similar issues? When we look back in years to come, would we have discharged our duty as educators if our people became more divided, unable to respond as one, view each other with suspicion or become unable to manage differences or diversity respectfully and sensitively? What is our responsibility as educators? We asked ourselves the toughest two questions. If not us, who? If not now, when?
I drew comfort and confidence from their conviction. Indeed, it is our duty to guide the next generation well, help them develop good character and values and build a sound foundation for them to thrive in the future. Education is a serious responsibility. My MOE colleagues and I feel the weight of our mission. We are determined to discharge our duty and do right by our students. I thank all principals and teachers for standing firm by their convictions despite the challenges and the diversity of their beliefs. I extend my deepest gratitude to all who have given us your feedback. We will continue to work with you all as partners in education so that we can plant the seeds of hope and harmony in the next generation. This remains a work in progress and we are fully committed to keep on improving.
Our teachers and principals asked if they would have the public support in this important yet challenging task. I gave them my full support. I hope Members of this House and the public will do, too. Let us stand united as Singaporeans to support this important yet challenging effort for the sake of our children and the future of Singapore. [Applause.]
The Chairman: I see a lot of Members wanting to ask clarifications. Guillotine time is 1.15 pm. I will try my best to make sure that everyone who has raised their hand will be given an opportunity. Mr Patrick Tay.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): Chairman, I have three clarifications as part of the announcements by the political officeholders at this year's MOE COS.
Firstly, on the support for second diploma that has been announced by the Minister last Friday. I think it is good and welcomed news. I am seeing greater disruption, digitalisation and a lot of new in-demand skills. I provided feedback that beyond a diploma, can we also support a second university course? I know we do that for Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs), but can we do that? That is question number one.
Second question is on the entry to polytechnic first year. The Minister just announced the consideration of an additional G2 subject for those wanting to enter first year in the polytechnics. Can the Minister take the suggestion that beyond just one G2, since we are supporting SBB, why not even two G2 subjects? Why one?
Lastly, for the third announcement on the additional $4,000 SkillsFuture Credits for the mature workers. Can we consider allowing, beyond those programmes that the Minister has fleshed out programmes, for example, career coaching and counselling, which are crucial? Because we see a lot of disconnect and dislocation with the mature workers. Can we allow that money to be used for not just career transition programmes but also career coaching, specifically, and counselling?
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Chair, let me address the three questions in turn.
The answer to the first question is, yes. We understand that there are calls for us to extend this to a second degree and so forth. At this point in time, I think let us get the scheme started first and get some experience doing this, and focus our finite resources on the group that need it most, which is the ITE students.
We have not precluded extending this to other training programmes, so long as they are good for the people to start a second career or there is a substantive reason for them to take on other roles. So, we keep that in mind. But as to eventually how much we can extend and to what programmes will depend on the quality of the programmes, the relevance of the programmes, as many Members shared, and also depends on our budget space. So, that is the first comment and we note that.
On the second one, can we allow more than one G2 subject to be considered for polytechnic? I think let us start with one. Our goal is to make sure that the students who qualify for the polytechnic has the capabilities and the capacities to finish the course and do it well. And at this point in time, we start with one. We do not preclude revising this in the future, based on the experience gained from those who enter polytechnic with one G2 subject first.
On the third question, at this point in time, we do not use the SkillsFuture Credit for counselling yet because they can access this through some other means, such as through the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme and so forth. So, we want to focus the resources on the programme course itself rather than the counselling. But we will review this and MOM will be making subsequent announcements on how we intend to help people make the right choices on the type of courses that they might want to consider for the next step of their career.
The Chairman: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Chair. Two questions. One is directed at the Second Minister on the non-Tamil Indian Languages (NTIL) framework. I think the Second Minister did mention that the last time the grants for NTILs were reviewed was in 2022. Can I confirm when the grants were last increased? Does the review mean that the grants also went up? I would appreciate if the Second Minister could confirm that fact. And if not, when was the last time that was done?
My second question is to Minister. I did not expect Minister to respond to some of the questions that had been filed on the Israel-Hamas issue and the CCE curriculum. My question in my PQ was about lessons learned. I think Minister has covered quite a few of these lessons quite extensively, so I render my support to the Ministry's work in trying to ensure that the public conversation is a bit more even-handed and even keeled.
The Chairman: Minister Maliki Osman.
Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: For Mr Pritam Singh's first question, I think the Member's question is: when we reviewed it in 2022, whether it was increased or not. Am I right? Okay.
The answer is, it was reviewed. It was not increased because we felt it was still commensurate with the needs of providing the support for the students who are taking the NTIL lessons. I want to assure Mr Singh that when we reviewed it, we looked at the funding required. And as of now, since the last review until now, we assess that the funding will sufficiently safeguard. The funding that we give to the Board of Teaching and Testing of the South Asian Languages will not undermine and will safeguard the quality of the teaching and the learning of the NTIL students.
When was the last review? I will have to check and get back to you on that.
The Chairman: Mr Darryl David.
Mr Darryl David: Thank you, Chairman. I would like to thank Minister and the political officeholders for answering most of the queries I raised in the cuts. I just have one final clarification to make, which is the issue of Personal Learning Devices (PLDs) for primary school students. I believe I mentioned this in my Budget Debate speech and I mentioned it again in my cut. I am sorry if I missed a reply, but I was here for most of the responses.
If Minister or our political officeholders have not answered that, could I please strongly advocate for that and perhaps get MOE's comment on whether this is something that they are committed to doing? I understand it will take time, but they have done a wonderful job with the secondary school PLDs. So, could Minister please respond to this?
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Chair, MOE has indeed considered this issue very seriously about whether we should issue PLDs to our primary school students. We have also done some pilot studies to see whether it is effective and so forth. Our conclusion at this point in time is that, as a general policy, we will not want to issue the devices to every upper primary school student yet.
The reason is because it is not just about the device. We need the programmes. Also, we need the guidance to make sure that the devices are used appropriately. We need to strengthen how we guide our youngest students to use the devices responsibly so that we do not get into the ills of using those devices inadvertently.
But having said that, what we have done is that instead of issuing every upper primary school student with the device, we have increased the provision of the devices in the school so that for more classes, they can use the devices and to share the devices rather than to own it themselves. So, we are fully committed to leveraging on technology to the extent possible to enhance the quality of teaching in our classes.
But as to the ownership of the device, we will need further studies before we come to a conclusion where we can balance the benefits with the potential downsides of having the youngest students in our cohort managing the devices on their own.
The Chairman: There are many Members wanting to seek clarification. I will give priority to those who have filed cuts. Members, please keep clarifications short, and from the front bench, likewise, responses short. Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Thank you, Sir. I have questions for Minister Maliki and Minister Chan.
First, to Minister Chan. I would like to state that I support the discussion of sensitive national and international student issues in classrooms, and I would like to honour the teachers who took on this challenge to discuss this topic with their students. My question is, were there instances where the CCE lesson on the Israel-Hamas war was delivered lecture-style to several classes at the same time?
If so, would MOE consider ensuring that CCE lessons on sensitive and controversial subjects are conducted in small classes, so there is more opportunity for discussion and dialogue not just between teachers and students, but also between students facilitated by the teacher? I appreciate the examples shared by Minister about the junior colleges, but can this be standardised across all the schools?
Second, to Minister Maliki, I understand that MOE spends more money per student on SPED schools than in mainstream schools, but I am sure Minister Maliki appreciates that parents of students with special needs often have also higher medical expenses and intervention programme costs. So, in the interest of equity and inclusivity, can MOE move towards making all public school fees the same for both SPED and mainstream schools? I appreciate that in this Budget, it has been lowered to $90. But the gulf between $13 and $90 is still quite significant.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Chair, indeed, that is what we are doing. Because different schools have different capacities and different needs, so they will organise their sessions based on their capacities and needs. Some schools have adopted a two-tier approach whereby the one that is more knowledgeable of the context sets the context and then they allow the discussions. And we fully agree with the Member that for many of these, we need smaller discussions because the students are trying to grapple with their own emotions. So, in fact, we have a pedagogy that is called \"Think, Pair and Share\". So, the two persons start sharing about their different perspectives and then coming to recognise each other's differences and diversity of perspective, learning to empathise with one another before we go into the bigger group sharing.
Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Sir, I thank Mr Giam for his question. We fully understand, fully appreciate and fully empathise with families with children with special education needs. And that is the reason why we continue to review, on a yearly basis, how we can continue to support them. This year we have announced that we have brought down the maximum monthly fee to $90. We agree that the gap is still wide and 50% are already paying similar fees. This is really because of the differentiation in the SPED school because the SPED school also varies; not all of them have similar fees.
We try to make sure that, on balance, more of those who are able to bring the fees down, it is more equivalent to our national schools. But we will work with the SPED schools, because in the SPED schools they also have got different variations in terms of their disabilities. And some schools with higher disability needs that they are responding to do have higher fees. We will work with those schools to see how we can help them.
For our students in those schools that really do need further help, we have worked with the SPED schools and encouraged them to go to the SPED schools and get further assistance. And where possible, we will continue to support these schools and these students.
The Chairman: Mr Ong Hua Han.
Mr Ong Hua Han (Nominated Member): Chair, I have two clarifications for Minister Maliki. I thank him for addressing my cut. If I understood the Minister correctly, there will be sufficient opportunities to integrate students with disabilities in mainstream schools. Can the Minister share some examples highlighting how this can be achieved? My second question is, will MOE consider proactively including students with disabilities into activities, like physical education lessons?
Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Sir, as I mentioned in my response, today, 80% of students with special education needs are already in our mainstream schools. And many of those who are keen in the special needs sector also understand that we have to assess the students' conditions and whether they will be able to harness their potential to the fullest when they are in mainstream school vis-à-vis in the SPED school. Some of them do require mainstream school.
So, 80% are in the mainstream school and we will assess such that we try to integrate them as much as possible. And when they are in the mainstream school, they go through a similar programme as the other students, including physical education, where abilities are commensurate to their disabilities.
We are also working towards creating opportunities for mainstream schools to partner SPED schools so that they can continue to also provide opportunities for students from mainstream school, whether they do have peers who are special needs in their schools or not, so that they can continue to also appreciate interactions with students from SPED schools.
The Chairman: Ms Jean See.
Ms See Jinli Jean: Thank you, Chair. I thank Minister of State Gan Siow Huang for her reply. I would like to provide context to the request for the targeted approach to curating training for freelancers. I understand that SSG relies on job transformation maps and industry transformation maps (ITMs) to determine the courses to fund. However, these maps address companies' employment needs, then the needs of freelancers who are actually engaged by businesses to augment their operational needs in specialised areas.
Freelancers, like coaches and creators, want to partake in all these different initiatives because staying relevant is actually more urgent and pressing for them. And therefore, they ask for relevant training that is applicable to their work and must be valued by the service buyers, who also include Government agencies. Could the Minister of State share what approach would SSG take in its approach to course curation, to cater to the needs of freelancers?
Ms Gan Siow Huang: I thank Ms Jean See for that suggestion. Indeed, SSG stands guided by the partners that we work with, whether it is NTUC, the professional bodies or trade associations and yes, job transformation maps do also feature in how we decide on which courses we need to provide upskilling opportunities. If Ms Jean See knows of freelancers or self-employed persons who have additional needs that are not already catered in the range of causes supported by SkillsFuture, do let us know and we will consider them too.
The Chairman: Dr Wan Rizal.
Dr Wan Rizal: Chairman, I would like to thank Minister Chan, Minister Maliki and Minister of State Gan for sharing MOE's plans. I also appreciate Minister Chan's clarification and the way forward to improve our CCE curriculum. I do have more clarifications.
At the top of my head, I am always thinking about the teachers, and I do believe that they need to be protected, especially when certain things are happening online in terms of abuse and online harm. What are the plans for us to protect them? I remember we had the issue in the Ministry of Health (MOH) last year and we did well to issue a Protection from Online Manipulation Act (POFMA) direction to all these false stories online.
Given the evolving nature of global events and the way in which unverified slides and materials, purportedly from the CCE, are being circulated online, how does MOE incorporate the feedback from the various stakeholders, including parents, educators and students, in the development and review of the CCE curriculum? We talked about the PSGs earlier. I wonder if the PSGs can play a bigger role in trying to address these issues?
In the interest of transparency, can the MOE release the teaching materials or the right slides that were used, to the public, so that we can make sure that the false news is not being shared online further.
At the top of my head, I also wonder if we can issue a POFMA direction to such platforms for circulating certain slides.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Chair, first, let me thank both sides of the House for their support for our educators and their support for them in conducting this very challenging CCE lesson. I am truly thankful for their support.
Indeed, teachers are our most precious resources. I have studied very closely the last few years why countries do well and do not do well for their Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and their educational outcomes. And even in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report, it comes out very clearly.
If there is one reason and only one reason that we choose as to why an education system works or not work, it is the quality of the teachers. I asked myself this very difficult question: what determines the quality of the teachers? Is it because of the pay that we give them? Is it because of the infrastructure that we provide for them, the lesson material?
All those are important. But just as the OECD report has highlighted, ultimately, the most important support that we can give our teachers and attract the best and most committed people to join the teaching service in service of our future generation is the respect that we give to our teachers.
When a society loses the respect for their teachers, when their teachers feel disrespected and hassled, no good people want to join the teaching service, then, regardless of the policies, regardless of the infrastructure and the investment that we have, it will come to naught. So, I thank Members for their support.
On Dr Wan Rizal's point, I also discussed this extensively with my colleagues in MOE whether we should just publish the MOE slides. We have come to this one conclusion that even the slides will not do justice to the teaching done by the teachers because the slides do not speak. For parents or the public who have concerns about this, we would rather meet them face-to-face and explain to them how the slides are used. Because we have tested this and no matter how we try to make the slides public or available, if it is done selectively without interpretation, we will still come back to the same issue.
Every teacher must know their own students to customise their teaching accordingly. So, it is not a one-size-fits-all. But, yet, at the same time, we must protect our teachers to not have them be subjected to the pressures from all different sources to change the material according to their versions of the event. So, we find a balance between these two. I will encourage interested parties to contact us and let us go through with you how a lesson is conducted beyond just what is said in the slides.
The Chairman: We are running short of time. So, remember, keep it short, responses short. Ms Hazel Poa.
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): My clarification relates to the Minister's response on my call for a through-train pilot programme. The Minister said that if we see our worth as being defined by examination results, only removing the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) will not remove the stress and neither is removing all stress our goal. Instead, we need to help our students manage and overcome stress.
Does the Minister not agree that if we insist on making the PSLE compulsory and using the scores as a basis for deciding secondary school, then that reinforces the idea that our worth is defined by examination results? Whatever we may say, action speaks louder than words and what parents see are the effects of PSLE results on their children's educational path.
Instead, on the other hand, making PSLE optional will send the message that primary education is not just about the PSLE score and removing the PSLE will not remove all the stress.
Does the Minister not agree that children will have stresses in their lives beyond PSLE? There will be annual school examinations, stresses in other areas of their lives, like relationships with parents, siblings, classmates and friends.
The Minister also made the point on how we select students who are suitable for through-train at the age of six and if we cannot select, how do we support the diverse learning profile, and that PSLE and SEC are a means to help students find a suitable learning environment.
I wish to clarify that the point here is not for MOE to select, but to give parents the choice. Those who believe that all the time, energy and resources put in to prepare students for the PSLE and dealing with all the stresses can be put to better use elsewhere to teach them real-life skills and encourage their natural curiosity towards the unknown.
The Chairman: Ms Hazel Poa, I have given you a lot of latitude.
Ms Hazel Poa: Yes. Does the Minister agree that the annual school examinations and regular assessments can already serve the purpose of identifying different learning needs of students, and SBB within the school can assist in differentiated learning without overtaxing our teachers?
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Chair, I understand that Ms Hazel Poa was not in the Chamber when I gave my answer last Friday. Perhaps, it was a bit late. Maybe Ms Hazel Poa would like to go through what I have said and consider it.
As I have said, every idea is not without merits. But every idea also has implications that we need to step through and those questions that I have raised and shared with this House remain.
That is why MOE is carefully considering all these before we make such an important decision with serious implications for the students that will have to undergo this system. It is not about not giving choices to the parents. It is about how we support our students for the next 10 years, given their diverse abilities, given their diverse needs. Can we do all of these in one school? We already have challenges doing this in one system. So, the challenges are not trivial.
And indeed, over time, we have expanded the Direct School Admissions (DSA) system to allow more dimensions of abilities beyond academic success. Ultimately, exams are but a means for us to help our students find the most appropriate environment to learn for the next stage. It is not a competition with others. It is always to surpass ourselves more than to surpass others.
The Chairman: Mr Sharael Taha.
Mr Sharael Taha: I thank Minister Chan for his reply and addressing our PQs as part of the COS. I think it is important that we provide an opportunity for our students to discuss current affairs in CCE, as they are already presented with this information.
But one challenge of doing this is emotions can, indeed, be very raw and it requires masterful facilitation in order to achieve the intended objective. So, a few supplementary questions for our Minister.
How do we check that our teachers are ready to facilitate such discussions without imposing their own opinions on the matter? I welcome the suggestion that we should do it in pairs or at least provide some guidance to the teachers or some support to the teachers while they go through it for the first few trials.
Second, I welcome the Minister's reply that the information is to be updated. Can I suggest that we share the instances where we re-voted for ceasefire and support for humanitarian assistance, suggested in October 2023, in February, and in the past 50 years, on our stand on supporting humanitarian rights?
Thirdly, as we deal with these changes, will we be pausing the lessons? And before we restart it again, can we trial the lessons with a focus group or with a pilot group of individuals and get their feedback on it?
On information, in particular, there are rumours that the infamous Samuel and Arun slide was not created by MOE. Can the Minister share a bit more insights on to that?
And lastly, I have raised a PQ on what support is provided to teachers when they receive backlash from parents and the general public, and whether the school management will take action against the teachers who are subjected to these complaints. I think we need to support our teachers and educators a bit more in this space.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Chair, let me respond to the five points.
First point, indeed, I shared this with my principals personally, when we had our large group sharing in January. I said when we conduct this lesson, it is not to assign teachers just based on appointment. In fact, we need teachers who are able and willing, and are able to do this professionally. This is why, before they conducted the lessons, the principals and the school leaders had their own internal sessions with the teachers so that they can gauge who is able to do what and then, they can form the composite teams to do this effectively. Of course, as they do more, they will gather experience.
In fact, one of the principals, during the large group sharing told us this, \"We are so inexperienced in this aspect and we need to build our experience to facilitate sensitive conversations respectfully. We need to do this, but if we do not start, we will never be there.\" So, indeed, we want to make sure that the teachers do not impose their views and we do this as a session ourselves before we even do it with the students.
On the second point, well noted. Yes, indeed, I have said in my reply that our record on the Palestine issues will be as part of the materials, but we are careful not to inundate the younger students with all the history. But for the older students who require these materials, these will be made available to them.
Third, we are now in the process of updating the slides and also conducting further training with our teachers as we go along and this is our promise to everyone, that we will continue to do this as we go along. It is not possible for us to stop everything, because things are evolving. And even if we do not conduct the lesson, the questions, as the Member said, are being asked by our students and our teachers must know how to respond, how to guide them to respond sensitively and respectfully.
Fourth point: I will deal with the backlash from some of the public who make threats to our teachers. And as I have said in my statement just now, they have MOE's full support and we will also make sure that they have the full support of the law.
But I truly, truly appreciate the support of Members of this House, because without your support, others might be emboldened to think that they can take advantage of our teachers, even if they do not agree with what we say, because the respect for our teachers is most important. They are doing a very challenging job. They are trying their best. They could have decided not to do this and we are no better off as a society. But the fact that they stepped forward, they do this for us, do this with us, let us do it with them, let us support them.
A last point on the Samuel and Arun slide, there was this slide circulating in the deck that says that MOE trivialised the issue because we equated it with a football match. This was not in MOE's original deck. For those of you who are very good at detecting scams, you will know that the background of the slide is also different from the rest of the deck.
But upon investigation, we found out that this particular slide was inserted in one particular school because there is a particular context for the teacher to take the initiative to help their students of this age group to relate to something that is more relatable to them. I do not fault the teachers for that. I think they tried their best.
But what is happening online is that this is then taken out of context to say that this is the MOE slide for everyone, including the junior college students. This is why I say we need to have confidence and trust in our teachers. Our teachers know their students, and they must be able to have some ability to communicate things with their students in the way that is best for them.
I really appreciate the Member raising this issue because it is never MOE's intention to trivialise anything. The issue is already complicated enough. We do not need to add more complications to the issue.
The Chairman: I will squeeze in one or two more clarifications. Mr Faisal Manap, a quick one.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, I would like to seek a point of clarification from Minister Chan. I heard Minister acknowledging that the issue of the Israel-Palestine conflict is a sensitive one a few times in his speech. I just want to know whether MOE considered in the first place, to consult parents of younger students whether they are comfortable to have their children partake in this particular CCE lesson, which touches on sensitive issues, like what Minister said? I believe this is done similarly for the Ministry's sexuality education. So, just one clarification.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Chair, I would like to make a distinction between sexuality education and CCE lessons.
Sexuality education deals with very personal issues and families' beliefs, and so forth. For CCE issues, we are talking about people relating to one another respectfully and sensitively. It is not talking about the conflict. It is talking about if there are diversity of views, there are differences in view, and how we can manage to proceed as one. This is about interpersonal relations, about how we respond as fellow Singaporeans.
The conflict itself is a context, but it is not the key part of it. The conflict, just like any other conflicts, may pull our people in different directions because of their different backgrounds and different beliefs. But the central part of the CCE is to go back to the four things that we mentioned. How do we help our students deal with their emotions when they are being bombarded by information all around, how to distinguish news, fake news, misinformation and others? How do we discuss things respectfully, given and notwithstanding our differences? How do we build a cohesive society amidst all these challenges?
And I go back to what I said. We are a young nation. Our identity is being formed, and it is never easy because we can always be seen as part of some other larger civilisation forces. And our challenge is not to discard our past and build a new future without a past. Neither is our vision one whereby we all cling on to our past and have no common future.
We want the best of both worlds where we deeply understand our past and yet at the same time have a set of shared values, a set of ethos that can bring us forward together as Singaporeans, united as one.
The Chairman: We have reached the end of the clarification phase. In fact, we have gone over 30 minutes and the guillotine time has been reached. So, can I invite Mr Patrick Tay to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): I would like to thank Minister Chan Chun Sing, Minister Maliki Osman, as well as Minister of State Gan Siow Huang for sharing the MOE's plans, policies and programmes this year. I want to place on record our thanks to the MOE staff, SSG staff, as well as all the educators and trainers across Singapore for banding together and making a difference to all of us and to ensure we stay ready, relevant and resilient – ready with new skills and knowledge, relevant to the new jobs and the future and resilient to the new changes and many curveballs that are hurled at us.
With that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $14,327,475,900 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $620,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head S (Ministry of Manpower)","subTitle":"A resilient economy with diverse pathways and opportunities for all","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head S, Ministry of Manpower. Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
Mr Chairman, our workforce is ageing and growth is slowing to zero gradually. Therefore, we must have as high a workforce participation rate as possible.
Our female workforce participation rate has improved over the years. Over the last 10 years, it has improved from 58.1% to 62.6%, but it still lags behind the rates for males. When women have at least one child, the participation rate drops by 10% to 16% compared to women with no children in 2018. This suggests that caregiving responsibilities reduces workforce participation.
There exists also a gender pay gap.
According to the Ministry's 2018 statistics, the unadjusted gender pay gap is 16.3%. Labour market factors, such as men being over-represented in higher paying occupations such as managing directors, chief executive officers (CEOs) and general managers accounted for roughly 7% of the gap. The natural question is why not more women are taking on such top jobs? Some academics attribute this to women not taking on higher paying roles that tend to demand for work to be prioritised over personal responsibilities. Women are also increasingly better educated than men in Singapore, especially in the younger age brackets; 64% of females aged 25 to 34 years old have university education compared to 56% for men.
Singapore's adjusted gender pay gap is 6% in 2018. This was 8.8% in 2002. There has clearly been progress over the years. What the adjusted gender pay gap means too is after adjusting for education, age, occupation and industry, women in Singapore earn on average 6% less than their male counterparts. This difference is magnified when we consider disparity over a 40- to 50-year-long career.
According to a Ministry of Manpower (MOM) study in January 2020, the authors stated that even though the model can explain for more than half of the unadjusted gender pay gap, the unexplained component could reflect the effects of parenthood, caregiving responsibilities and unmeasured employment characteristics, such as work experience, firm type and job scope as well as discrimination. The same study also observed that more women are primary caregivers, and this could be one of the reasons for the gender pay gap.
In essence, the increase in caregiving responsibilities could have resulted in women exiting the workforce and also getting paid less. We need to tackle this structural problem of the gender pay gap. I agree that it is multifaceted as the 2020 study has noted. I would like to examine two facets of this issue and suggest possible remedies.
Human resources practices. Conceptually, the human resource practice of performance grading could have inherent biases against women. For example, if there is a good performance grade to be given and the choice was between two employees, both are as good but one was away on maternity leave for 16 weeks, which employee would be more likely to get the good grade? This is done for a good reason. The organisation should rightly reward the employee who had contributed more over the full year.
But we can imagine that if this persists over multiple childbirths, and promotion depends on multi-year performance consistency, then we can imagine a mother's progression being derailed. It seems plausible that this could have resulted in women and mothers not being able to scale the heights of their professions. We must guard against such well-intended human resource practice driving unintended biases against women. This is perhaps what we call the \"motherhood penalty\" and we owe a duty to doing right by our mothers.
The solutions are not easy to come by. In 2018, Iceland passed the Equal Pay Standard legislation, which requires companies with 25 or more employees to prove that they pay employees of all genders equally for the same work or work of equal value. Under the Equal Pay Standard, companies must undergo a certification process every three years, during which they are required to analyse their wage structures, identify and rectify any gender-based wage disparities. Failure to comply can result in fines and sanctions. Iceland's pay gap closed by 3.4% subsequent to this passing of the legislation.
While this might be too bold a move for us at this stage or it needs to be contextualised to our needs, there are other steps that we can take.
First, there must be greater disclosure and transparency in the gender composition of senior management roles and compensation. Some employers are rightly concerned about wage transparency, but we can do so like today when board directors' fees are declared in broad tiers. It is still a positive step forward. We can start with the listed companies in the Public Service. Greater transparency and reporting requirements can spur organisations to review and improve or change their practices. I encourage HR practitioners to examine and improve upon the performance evaluation criteria that have embedded undue biases, for example, ranking a mother on maternity leave with other colleagues on the same basis is inherently biased.
Next, we must broaden our caregiving support. There are entrenched societal norms of women in Singapore. Women often bear a disproportionate burden of caregiving responsibilities, and this can be at the expense of their careers. How do we help them to manage their careers and caregiving duties?
This caregiving is beyond those required for children. It includes supporting elderly parents too. We must support our women better, offer affordable childcare, flexible work arrangements (FWAs) and flexible caregiving policies. We have, indeed, made strides in ensuring affordable childcare and I look forward to the release of the tripartite guidelines on FWAs.
I hope that we can also consider implementing leave policies to support employees in caring for elderly parents, particularly considering Singapore's ageing population. Employers have reasonable concerns because there would already be too many leave provisions when manpower is already tight. The reality is maternity and childcare leave consumption will continue to decrease because of our low total fertility rate.
The statistics also show that caregiving can take a worker out of the workforce. Some have questioned if a few days of caregiving leave could make a difference? My answer is yes, because it underscores our commitment to helping our workers. We have to start somewhere, no matter how small the first step is.
The number of employers offering paid family care leave in Singapore has doubled from 15% in 2012 to 30% in 2020. This is, indeed, encouraging. But we must remember that workers' caregiving responsibilities will only increase in the future. We must start addressing this now. Our workers need our support to care for their dependents, young and elderly alike. I wish to call on all businesses in Singapore to take concrete steps in re-examining their leave policies and consider offering caregiving leave. In the longer term, I hope to see the implementation of paid statutory caregiving leave for all workers.
Closing the gender pay gap requires us not to only confront the societal and caregiving expectations of women, but also the structural barriers that limit women's economic opportunities.
Mr Chairman, next, I will speak on supporting our older workers to stay gainfully employed. I have spoken on the importance of harnessing the experience and expertise that our older workers bring to the table, especially in light of our ageing demographics.
We have made significant strides in raising the retirement and re-employment ages for Singaporean workers. And I am heartened that our older workers do appreciate our efforts in doing so. I understand from the Ministry that between 2017 and 2021, around 97% of resident employees were offered and accepted re-employment contracts after reaching the retirement age. Could the Ministry clarify how many percent of these employees were offered re-employment contracts of one year and whether the re-employment contracts were subsequently extended?
On training our older workers, the findings from NTUC's survey conducted in 2022 underscore the keen interest older workers have in upscaling. Yet six out of 10, or of all workers, were of the view that older workers were given fewer training opportunities as compared to the younger ones. Re-employed workers might get even less training opportunities.
On another front, as training participation declines with age, it is crucial to implement age-universal job redesign strategies. Ironically, older workers actually need more training because their odds of skills obsolescence are higher.
The PW Mark was implemented to distinguish employers that have leaned into providing progressive wages voluntarily. We can consider distinguishing progressive and inclusive employers which have significantly improved their business processes, training and job roles to help older workers succeed. Incentives can be provided to such employers, especially in the absence of the WorkPro.
Perhaps, there is now a renewed need to reinstate WorkPro, which was previously implemented as a scheme for companies to receive grants of up to $425,000 to implement age-friendly workplaces with an emphasis on retaining older workers.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong): Chairman, what might our future workforce look like? First, it will become more intergenerational because our population is ageing, and people are working and staying in the workforce longer. At the same time, because of more rapid technological changes than ever before, the difference in backgrounds, mindsets and skillsets across different generations will become sharper.
Second, there will be more churn in our future workforce for all of us, again, because of the pace of change. Our economy must allow for creative destruction to stay relevant and vibrant, but for the individual, churn in one's career is tumultuous. We must help Singaporeans cope.
Third, there will be a greater need for our future workforce to engage in agile and deep learning throughout life to deal with churn. We must create a pervasive culture of learning and skilling throughout life in Singapore.
Fourth, amid these challenges, there will be growing needs for FWAs because our family structure is getting smaller and so, caregiving burdens are more concentrated on individuals. At the same time, our knowledge of care itself has become more advanced, whether it is for seniors, special needs or mental health. And so, the caregiving demands of tomorrow will be far greater and we need FWAs.
Fifth, our future workforce will be increasingly cross-cultural because there is simply not enough Singaporeans and we will need human capital from around the world.
Amid this confluence of complex changes, how does MOM plan to develop a future-ready workforce that is more intergenerational and cross-cultural, more prepared for a new normal of churn, more engaged in agile and deep learning throughout life and more flexible in its work arrangements?
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Chairman, at last year’s MOM COS, the Manpower Minister announced the setting up of a new feature in the MyCareersFuture portal known as the CareersFinder. Perhaps because of his medical background, he couched it as a tool to keep tap of our career health, very much like physical health.
When I heard of it last year, I thought it was a refreshing approach to encourage workers to take stock of the state of their career health, starting with better insights and awareness of our own employability situation and thereafter, taking proactive and purposeful steps to keep career health in good shape.
The CareersFinder beta version was launched in the third quarter of last year. It uses the data on skills adjacencies and jobs churn in the workforce to help workers discover the personalised upskilling needed and identify possible career opportunities based on their individual profiles.
By harnessing the power of artificial intelligence (AI) and the data, it is hoped that the efficacy of job matching can be improved and friction reduced. This new feature is particularly important and useful to those in their mid-careers who tend to be more career vulnerable and hence, need better career agility and resilience.
In my conversations with those in their mid-careers, many have concerns on the durability of their current skillsets and jobs and how the fast-paced technology advancement, such as AI and blockchain, would impact their jobs and career development.
In that context, can I ask the Minister for an update on the CareersFinder beta? How has the take up been and has it achieved the outcomes intended? Also, as a whole, how can the various career health initiatives benefit individuals, employers and the economy?
On the upcoming support to assist the involuntarily unemployed jobseekers, I know the details of the support measure is still to be finalised. Nevertheless, can I ask if the Minister can share the broad principles and the parameters that will be featured in this new scheme? Has the Government taken in feedback from the public and as well as the tripartite partners in the design of the support scheme?
Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Temporary financial support for the involuntarily unemployed is not something new in Singapore and for some residents, the ComCare does just that.
Some countries have practised some form of support for the involuntarily unemployed but many end up with poorly designed unemployment benefits, which can inadvertently make it more attractive for involuntarily unemployed workers to stay unemployed rather than to return to the workforce.
How has the Ministry incorporated learnings from these countries and feedback from the public and tripartite partners in the design of the upcoming support scheme for involuntarily unemployed jobseekers? How will the support scheme be administered? What is the anticipated average duration of support required for the involuntarily unemployed? How do we ensure that while the support scheme must assist the involuntarily unemployed, it does not make it more attractive for the involuntarily unemployed workers to stay unemployed? Can we ensure retraining and upskilling using SkillsFuture credit and actively searching for jobs including compulsory attendance for career, curriculum vitae and interview coaching be prerequisites for support?
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Chairman, firstly, I commend the expansion of the Government's Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS), which significantly aids businesses in supporting higher wages. In the medium term, wage increases can only be supported along with productivity increases. Hence, we need to continue assisting employers in creating an environment conducive to workers' training to increase workers’ productivity and support employers to realise enhanced firm productivity. What are MOM's plans to support our employers to do so?
The rise in Local Qualifying Salary (LQS), as announced in Budget 2024, from $1,400 to $1,600 indicates broader cross-sector backing to uplift lower-wage workers. Nevertheless, as the PWM expands across additional sectors and wage ladders commence from an average of $2,650 for an entry-grade security officer and $1,915 in the food and beverage (F&B) sector, how will LQS support a greater number of lower-wage workers? I seek MOM to share the number of lower-wage workers expected to experience wage increases due to the elevated LQS.
Yet there are many challenges faced by employers, such as escalating utility costs and increasing manpower expenses. I wish to highlight the shared responsibility of consumers and employers in supporting lower-wage workers here. What are the strategies to enhance consumer awareness of the PWM Mark to bring the consumer's role to the forefront in supporting businesses committed to fair wages?
Mr Chairman, Singapore must maintain its openness to talent and uphold global connections, particularly amid declining local labour force growth stemming from our ageing population and low birth rates. As we remain open, it is crucial to continuously review and calibrate foreign workforce policies. How can we ensure that these policies contribute to Singaporeans' real wage growth? Is it timely to establish clearer distinctions between various work passes based on the specific job appeal to Singaporeans? Alongside these distinctions, should we adjust the dependency ratio ceiling to ensure that enterprises have the necessary manpower to thrive while ensuring equitable access and higher wages for Singaporeans?
It is important to note that existing foreign worker levies, LQS and the PWM are effective levers to support higher wages for Singaporeans.
The persistent challenge of not being able to send workers for training due to manpower shortages necessitates a nuanced approach. As part of the strategy to ensure that foreign workforce policies foster business growth while enhancing collaboration with local talent, I propose implementing temporary quota increases contingent upon commitments to human capital development and local worker training.
Furthermore, I suggest that the temporary quota be linked to a commitment to participate in the Institute of Human Resources Professionals' (IHRP's) human capital diagnostic tool (HCDT) professional programme and to implement its recommendations. This approach allows time for local workers to engage in training, leading to overall improvements in human capital development within firms and maximising Singaporean workers' growth potential.
Programmes, such as SkillsFuture Level-Up, and various improvements to SkillsFuture, are a key pillar to empowering Singaporeans to take up good jobs. With enhanced SkillsFuture funding, the challenge is to ensure that employees, while in their jobs, can identify and acquire new skillsets aligned with corporate objectives. Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) without an HR business partner (HRBP) role may face difficulties in corporate alignment. Chief HR Officer (CHRO)-as-a-service can be a solution to mimic the HRBP role and maximise the translation value of SkillsFuture credits.
The increased disruption in job scopes highlights the need for improved job redesign capabilities, especially with the support for acquiring new skills in Budget 2024. Developing measurement tools and benchmarks for equitable assessment of salary ranges for newly acquired skillsets is crucial.
We need to support employers to drive transformation by redesigning jobs for new and emerging opportunities. Job redesign can also help to assimilate older workers as they reach retirement and extend their working duration. Coupled with FWAs, it will create the nexus for a future-ready labour market. Hence, I would like to ask MOM how we are empowering employers to re-design jobs. How are we empowering workers to improve their career health?
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Chairman, according to the preliminary estimates released by MOM, retrenchments in Singapore have more than doubled in 2023 from 2022 to 14,320 cases. Recent stories about ongoing retrenchment and redundancy exercises in companies, such as Lazada and Electrolux, have only intensified discussions in public about retrenchment.
With the threat of retrenchment for our workers all too real, it comes as a surprise to many Singaporeans that the right to retrenchment benefits is not enshrined in legislation here in Singapore for any category of worker. Generally, benefits upon retrenchment depend on the company's policy of severance package and retrenchment benefits, as well as the terms of the contract of employment.
In the LifeSG guide on retrenchment benefits, the prevailing norms on paying retrenchment benefits are around two weeks to one month for each year of service, with unionised companies seeing one month of salary for each year of service. In contrast to our prevailing practice, many jurisdictions around East Asia have enshrined both the right to some form of retrenchment benefits and the amounts to be paid.
For instance, under Part 5A of the Employment Ordinance in Hong Kong, both the right to severance payments, except in cases of dismissals, and the amount of severance payment to be paid are enshrined in legislation. Malaysia regulates both the employment termination and layoff benefits regulations. Thailand's Labour Protection Act also determines the severance pay amount for workers depending on their employment period. South Korea grants full-time employees severance pay under the Labour Standards Act regardless of reasons of termination. Taiwan sees employers liable to pay severance pay under the Labour Standards Act. Indonesia has a minimum statutory severance and long service pay. In general, such payouts are close to a month's wages for every year of service.
In 2018, I asked the previous Minister of Manpower how it ensures companies pay retrenchment benefits that meet industry norms as defined by the tripartite standards for companies that retrench workers for reasons not related to financial distress.
The Minister confirmed that according to the MOM's survey on retrenchment benefits in 2017, around 90% of establishments which retrenched workers paid retrenchment benefits while more than 70% of them paid benefits which met or exceeded prevailing norms.
Sir, the Forward Singapore exercise made it a point to identify Singaporean workers who undertake hand and heart work, such as trade professionals like electricians and plumbers, as well as those in the healthcare and aged care sector. It called to ensure that they are rewarded fairly, since these workers contribute to our collective higher standard of living. In view of the respectable number of employers according to the Retrenchment Benefits 2017 report who are already providing retrenchment benefits meeting or exceeding the prevailing norms, I ask MOM to review its position on retrenchment benefits and progressively consider mandating retrenchment benefits for hand and heart workers to nudge employers to do so.
At the same time, we should also look at mandating retrenchment benefits for workmen and employees covered by Part 4 of the Employment Act to start with. Some groups I mentioned are the most deserving among us with wages below the median and it is crucial that we pay special attention to them. Legislating their right to retrenchment benefits would be one concrete way of supporting workers in the name of Forward Singapore.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Sir, there are approximately 186,000 craftsmen and trades workers in Singapore. Their median salary is $2,700 and their median age is 56 years. Over 70% are foreigners. The low wages, ageing workforce and heavy reliance on foreign labour in this crucial sector is concerning. I acknowledge the efforts by MOM, industry associations, unions and institutes of higher learning (IHLs) to professionalise these trades. However, attracting young Singaporeans remains a pressing challenge.
To overcome this, we need to first boost societal respect for the skilled tradesperson, or \"tradies\", as they are affectionately called in Australia. Schools and trades associations can create greater public awareness about what tradies do. They are not all dirty, difficult and dangerous jobs. For example, licensed plumbers often do more supervision and inspections of plumbing works than the dirty work themselves. Young people who prefer working with their hands should be encouraged to consider skilled trades instead of forcing themselves to study an academic subject they have little interest in.
Second, we need to lower the barriers for entry for Singaporeans to become licensed tradespersons. All courses and mentorship programmes leading to licensing should be more subsidised under SkillsFuture, even for workers under 40. And more places should be set aside for Singaporeans.
Third, to raise incomes of skilled tradespersons, agencies must rigorously enforce regulations against unlicensed individuals performing tasks that are legally reserved for licensed tradespersons. This will uphold the required quality and safety standards and prevent licensed tradesperson's earnings from being unjustly undercut by unlicensed competitors.
Sir, for avoidance of doubt, I declare that I am the director and shareholder of a company that provides technology solutions to training providers.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): As we look towards building a resilient and future-friendly workforce, it is crucial to recognise the invaluable contributions of skilled tradesmen in essential professions like plumbing, electrical work, air conditioning servicing and mechanical repairs. Our skilled tradesmen and women have forged fulfilling careers over the years, but as Singapore transforms itself economically over the years, these are taken for granted, but essential trades are at risk of a diminishing Singaporean worker base.
We must continue to make these trades exciting to attract new talents, such as youths and mid-careerists. To achieve this, we must provide clarity on the career pathways for those entering the skilled trades. Given that master tradesmen are forged from a blend of strong foundations in theory and practical unique ground experiences, it makes sense to reintroduce the apprenticeship programmes. Apprenticeships can offer clear milestones and support to progress to the next levels.
This includes opportunities to attain certifications, licences and eventually to become master-level tradesmen. From our discussions with our trade associations and guilds, master-level tradesmen can earn upwards of $8,000 a month, particularly if they become business owners. Clarity on career progressions is essential as many may not be aware of the potential for growth and advancements in this field.
To this end, NTUC has started work on the career progression model to better the viability of such trades as livelihoods.
How would the Ministry further the career progression model through tripartism? Would the Ministry further their work with trade associations and guilds to not only highlight the career paths available but also in articulating clear wage and career progression levels?
Mr Chairman: Mr Patrick Tay, you can take your two cuts together.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): I am glad that we have seen a series of enhancements to SkillsFuture at Budget and at MOE's COS debate earlier. Professionals, managers and executives (PMEs), especially those above 40 years of age, are anxious about the prospects of their employment and employability. I have three suggestions for MOM to bolster SkillsFuture to empower Singaporeans.
First, with the new growth sectors and crafts and to meet the needs, passion and interests of Singaporeans, especially PMEs who are looking at career conversions, can MOM consider expanding the range of courses and programmes beyond the current suite of Career Conversion Programmes (CCP) offerings?
Second, mindset shift training as well as career coaching and counselling are key to reducing unemployment and under-employment and increase employment and employability. I hope as we strengthen the career health of Singaporeans to provide greater support in this space, including to employers and placement arms and intermediaries, such as e2i.
Third, with the SkillsFuture training allowance support just announced, which will be up to $3,000 per month for Singaporeans to undergo programmes at our IHLs, I suggest for MOM to review the current CCP training allowance rates during the training stint and period.
I wish to ask MOM for the status of the strengthening of the Singaporean Core efforts in Singapore. I am aware that work for the Workplace Fairness Legislation is under way. On the same note, can MOM also update us on the Fair Consideration Framework, the status of the triple weak watchlist, and the number and type of cases reported, investigated and closed at the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practice (TGFEP)?
I also wish to ask if the Minister has any updates, now that COMPASS has been in action for the past six months, and the review of the Employment Pass (EP) qualifying salaries?
By the same token, human capital practitioners, practices and processes are key to foster a fair and inclusive workplace, including one with a strong Singaporean Core. I am aware IHRP is doing good work to certify human capital practitioners with the IHRP certification, as they are also the national Job Redesign Centre of Excellence, to help companies, including through their human capital diagnostics tool, to level up companies' practices and processes and productivity.
Can MOM progressively mandate the certification of HR practitioners with the IHRP certification? And in the interim, perhaps companies should have at least one IHRP-certified HR professional before they can be allowed to hire foreign manpower. I think the upcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation is an opportune time to push this ahead and perhaps, even incorporate some of these primers on the upcoming piece of Workplace Fairness Legislation into IHRP syllabus, as well as certification.
Mr Desmond Choo: Mr Chairman, with an ageing population and local workforce growth that is slowing to zero, we need to augment our workforce with either more capital or labour, so that Singapore's economy can continue to maintain its vibrancy.
Without a thriving economy, everyone suffers the adverse consequences of wage stagnation and loss of jobs. But we need to do it carefully to maintain the centrality of a Singaporean Core. That must be our unwavering commitment to our Singaporean workers.
There have been significant moves, especially the COMPASS scheme and the Shortage Occupation List (SOL). Can the Ministry update on how COMPASS has helped to support Singapore's economic needs since its implementation? And how has SOL allowed companies to fill hard-to-fill jobs or roles, so that companies can continue to preserve and create jobs for locals?
Our local workforce has also been improving in quality, with median wages increasing annually. This is also evident among the graduates. Based on the latest Graduate Employment Survey, the median gross monthly salary among fresh graduates in full-time permanent employment increased by 2.7%, to S$4,313 from S$4,200 in 2022. The figure increased by 10.5% between 2021 and 2022.
This also means that we need to ensure that our EP holders must not unduly compete against them because EP holders tend to have more work experience and might be prepared to take a lower pay. How would the Ministry adjust the qualifying salary to balance the needs of our Singaporean Core and business needs?
Mr Pritam Singh: Chairman, SOL in the COMPASS EP framework offers a pathway to acquire 10 to 20 extra points towards the 40 points required for an EP, beyond the standard metrics, to ease the filling of known skill gaps in our economy with foreign labour. To gauge its effectiveness so far, I would like to ask: (a) what percentage of EP applications, since September 2023, have taken advantage of the bonus points prospective EP applicants receive; (b) has publishing SOL increased the absolute quantity or quality of applications to these occupations compared to pre-COMPASS? What specific SOL jobs continue to lack applications or suitable candidates despite these incentives? Can MOM name these jobs and briefly outline what it thinks could be the root causes of their lacking suitable candidates thus far?
Given that it has been almost six months since COMPASS was introduced, does the Ministry have a view on whether the SOL mechanism is effective as a signal to companies and foreign labour? More importantly, for such identified talent shortages, we should also ensure Singaporeans are trained to fill these gaps.
In view of the wider-ranging announcements made to the SkillsFuture Framework, including the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme, how does the Ministry work with MOE and other agencies, like SkillsFuture, to systematically nudge Singaporeans into these occupations and sectors with training opportunities? We need to ensure that local workforce development is not just reactive but predictive, aligning closely with future industry needs.
Sir, in 2022, Harvard economist Lawrence Katz wrote a paper reviewing four US sectoral employment programmes under the umbrella of Work Advance. These programmes, targeting a mix of US lower-wage workers, high school graduates and young adults, combine training, job placement and support services aiming to transition participants into higher-wage jobs within specific sectors. Sectors were chosen because of local labour market demand and long-term career prospects, for example, healthcare, IT and manufacturing.
The evaluations revealed substantial earning gains of 14% to 38% for participants about a year after training completion, with gains persisting from five to 11 years after participation in the programme. The success of these programmes was attributed to targeted skills training, certifications recognised within the industry, comprehensive wraparound support services, as well as leveraging community-based organisations with deep local knowledge to facilitate recruitment.
In this light, Sir, particularly in view of enhancements to SkillsFuture at this Budget, how does MOM plan to report on the success or otherwise of the initiatives, to improve the employability prospects of the broader Singaporean workforce to fill the strategic gaps in our economy on an ongoing basis?
Mr Sharael Taha: Chairman, there are many industries in Singapore that are growing and competing for local workforce. SkillsFuture provides the platform for the current workforce to develop the skills required in the economy and WSG supports with assisting the workforce with job placement and career conversion through programmes, such as CCP.
While we strengthen and provide the opportunity for our Singaporean workforce, we must continue to remain open and connected to support economic growth. Can the Minister provide an update on how our foreign workforce policies will continue to support our business needs while ensuring that local workers can continue to compete fairly for good jobs? And while the number of Work Permit holders have rebounded post COVID-19, how does the Government intend to manage the inflow of Work Permit holders, given the resource and infrastructure constraints?
Mr Chairman: Mr Mark Lee, take your two cuts together.
Mr Mark Lee (Nominated Member): Chairman, can MOM share insights on which sectors have successfully utilised the Manpower for Strategic Economic Priorities (M-SEP) Scheme and the key lessons and best practices enabling its wider applications?
Furthermore, is there consideration for allowing firms in the M-SEP scheme to gradually increase their foreign worker quota up to 5%, based on exceeding local hiring or training targets within two years, rather than maintaining a fixed threshold?
Finally, might MOM extend the scheme beyond two years for companies that notably advance Singapore's economic goals and invest in local talent, while also adjusting renewal criteria to accommodate the varied growth and development across industries?
Chairman, the current tight labour market highlights the challenges that businesses across the diverse services industry face. This sector includes a wide range of businesses, from modern services, like financial, insurance and infocomm service, to lifestyle services, such as hospitality, retail and food services. It also encompasses transport and storage services, and community, social and personal services.
The unique workforce composition and varied demand and supply dynamics within each sub-sector demonstrate that the existing one-size-fits-all quota system for foreign workers does not adequately address the specific needs of these industries. Given that certain job roles within the services industry consistently struggle to attract local talent, perhaps a more talented approach to managing foreign worker quotas is necessary.
As such, would implementing a sub-sector specific quota system, addressing jobs like heavy vehicle drivers and certified opticians, be a more effective tool in managing manpower needs, ensuring that areas with persistent low take-up rates by Singaporeans receive the necessary support?
Therefore, could the Minister consider initiating a targeted review in selecting sub-sectors of the services' sector, and a nuanced approach can be selected sectors to show overall productivity growth, if given extra manpower?
Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Sir, the upcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation (WFL) will be important in ensuring that certain groups do not experience discrimination at the workplace. I would like to share views on several key areas.
First, the Tripartite Committee recommended that WFL only cover direct discrimination. This means that workers may still be exposed to indirect discrimination, discrimination-related harassment as well as discrimination by association and perception.
The laws of many countries already prohibit all these forms of discrimination, and the Tripartite Committee's recommendations are inconsistent with our obligations under international law, including Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which require us to prohibit all forms of discrimination.
The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP), which is meant to run alongside WFL, also do not address the types of discrimination mentioned above. As a first step, will it be made clear that all of these different forms of discrimination are prohibited under the guidelines? Will MOM also commit to a timeline to update WFL to protect Singaporeans from all forms of discrimination at the workplace in the next five years?
On grievance handling, the processes in WFL must be inclusive and accessible to all who may face barriers when seeking redress, whether workers have disabilities or have difficulties navigating a perceived intimidating tribunal system in a language they are not familiar or comfortable with, MOM must pay attention to their particular needs to ensure that they are able to exercise their rights under WFL on an equal basis as others.
This also extends to the mandatory mediation and Employment Claims Tribunal. More needs to be done to ensure that workers who face barriers are able to access justice if they have been discriminated against at the workplace.
The Committee further recommended an expansive approach to prohibit all acts done to victimise an individual who has reported their employer for workplace discrimination. However, are workers protected from retaliation for reporting forms of discrimination that are not prohibited under WFL? Can MOM clarify if the WFL's prohibition against retaliation would also protect employees who report their employers to TAFEP for forms of discrimination that are not prohibited under WFL?
Next, on the gender pay gap, I was disappointed that WFL does not include any mechanism to address this. Other developed economies have taken steps to legislate salary and transparency to address the gender pay gap. I reiterate the WP's manifesto's call, that employers with 10 or more employees should be required to report to MOM the gender pay gap for the same job description. This information must be made publicly available in aggregate form. Only with such publicly available basic data on a regular basis could we have a better idea of the problem and move to close the gender wage gap.
On information to be provided by jobseekers, MOM has accepted the Committee's recommendation to prohibit the use of words or phrases in job advertisements that indicate a preference for a protected characteristic. But we can include the prohibition of asking for other information, such as last drawn salary, relationship and NS PES status. An employer should be exempted from this prohibition only if such information is a genuine and reasonable job requirement, a concept already used in the Committee's final report. The burden should be on the potential employer to explain why such personal information is needed when requesting the information.
Finally, for reasonable accommodation, the Tripartite Committee recommended that this be covered by an advisory instead of legislation. However, many countries already recognise the right to reasonable accommodations and the UN CRPD has also called on Singapore to adopt legal provisions to recognise the denial of reasonable accommodation as a form of discrimination, not just in the employment context, but in all areas of life.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Chairman, the issue of retirement adequacy lies close to the hearts of many Singaporeans.
The recent Forward Singapore initiatives, including the Majulah Package, increased Enhanced Retirement Scheme (ERS) payouts and so forth, are commendable steps towards strengthening retirement adequacy and our social compact. They promise support for seniors who need more help, ensuring greater peace of mind, especially in this inflationary environment. Can the Minister elaborate on how these changes and initiatives translate to tangible benefits for citizens, especially for those who require more support?
Next, the Silver Support Scheme (SSS) continues to play a critical role in ensuring financial support for vulnerable seniors. However, with the rising cost of living, is the current SSS quantum adequate to meet their basic needs and maintain a decent standard of living? Can the Minister elaborate on plans to review and potentially adjust the Scheme's payout to reflect evolving needs?
These policies represent a renewed commitment to a multi-pronged approach involving the Government, families, employers and the wider community. By working together, we can create a supportive ecosystem that empowers our seniors to retire with dignity and security.
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, I had previously asked why the Matched Retirement Savings Scheme (MRSS) did not cover seniors above 70. The Progress Singapore Party (PSP) welcomed the announcement in this year's Budget that these seniors will now be covered by the MRSS. As I discussed in my speech on the Public Finances Motion early this month, the Government likely earns a higher return from investing CPF savings with GIC than the interest rate it pays to Singaporeans. This difference goes into the Reserves, instead of CPF accounts.
The hon Member Mr Louis Chua has pointed out in his Budget Debate speech that, over the years, many MPs from all sides have been urging the Government to let CPF members benefit directly from the higher returns. The PSP shares their views and urges the Government to be transparent about the returns it has earned on investing our CPF savings and find a way to give this back to CPF members. We can adopt a different approach based on age. Younger CPF members with more than 20 years to go before their retirement can take more risk for higher returns. Those who are closer to retirement should lean more towards risk-free returns.
Can the Government consider setting up two options? One for risk-free returns as in the current arrangement and another option which incorporates some risk, like pegging to the GIC's annual investment return or other investment options. Allow younger CPF members who are prepared to take some risk to allocate some of their savings to the latter option, but gradually adjust the proportion allowed downwards with age, so that the portfolio becomes lower-risk as they age. CPF returns can also be raised through the Lifetime Retirement Investment Scheme (LRIS), which was recommended by a CPF panel in 2016 and accepted by the Government.
In November 2023, my colleague Mr Leong Mun Wai asked why LRIS has still not been implemented. The Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister have since replied on different occasions, that further studies need to be made. But the Government has had almost eight years to study this. I call on the Government to make a decision soon. LRIS can also be implemented in conjunction with my proposal of age-related allocation. The LRIS can be one of the options that takes some risk. The allocation caps can then limit the risk of this option.
Next, I will touch on the closure of the special account for CPF members above age 55. The Minister has said that the closure of the Special Account (SA) is not aimed at saving interest monies. But if the SA savings go to the Ordinary Account (OA) instead of the Retirement Account (RA), the Government can be expected to save on interest payments. What is the amount expected to be saved?
If this is not about saving money, can the Government channel any interest savings towards paying higher interest for those with low balances, for example, by raising the threshold for additional 1% interest from the first $60,000 to the first $100,000, or pegged to the Basic Retirement Sum (BRS)? The PSP notes that the maximum amount that CPF members can keep in their RA will be increased four times the BRS. What is the reason for capping this amount? Why should we stop CPF members from enhancing their retirement adequacy by putting more into their RA if they wish to do so? Does this impose additional cost on the Government? Finally, will the Minister consider adjusting the MediSave annual withdrawal limit every year, in line with healthcare inflation, just like the way BRS is adjusted yearly?
The Chairman: Mr Louis Chua, you can take your two cuts together.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Chairman, I would like to once again take the chance to raise concerns that I had previously voiced out in Parliament over the past three years and also earlier this year, during the debate on our Reserves.
There are already certain financial instruments available for members to invest their CPF balances under the CPF Investment Scheme. However, for the benefit of all Singaporeans' retirement, we need to ensure that the long-delayed LRIS is implemented. As described in a poster explaining the benefits of the LRIS, such a scheme involves low fees, is simple and fuss-free. CPF savings are pooled together with other members to enjoy economies of scale, investments follow a market index and there are fewer choices and less headache over which funds to choose and does not need active management to adjust risk.
Against the backdrop of inflationary pressures and headwinds in the global investment environment, I hope that the Minister will not respond to this cut calling for the LRIS to be implemented as soon as possible, once again, by saying that he will provide updates when ready, but that he is now ready to provide updates.
Chairman, I would like to once again repeat my call for us to reform the long-outdated and archaic formula in which OA interest is computed. This was last changed in 1999, when the ratio of fixed deposits to savings was updated from 50-50 to 80-20, to reflect the longer duration that CPF OA monies remained with CPF Board. A reform is a long due.
As shared by the Monetary Authority of Singapore in its reply to my Parliamentary Question, deposit rates are set competitively in the market. Apart from basic savings accounts, consumers can choose from a range of other savings and fixed deposit products with higher interest rates offered by banks. Yet, despite much higher market rates for both fixed deposits and savings deposits, the CPF deems the level of deposit interest rates to be an unbelievable 0.66% for the period from August 2023 to October 2023. The least we can do is to reflect prevailing rates in the market. I hope the Government will proactively review CPF interest rates to ensure their relevance in the prevailing operating environment.
The Chairman: Mr Desmond Choo, you can take your two cuts together.
Mr Desmond Choo: Mr Chairman, the recent announcement of the closing of the Special Account (SA) for CPF members above the age of 55 years old has generated much discussion. This is not surprising because of how central CPF savings are in providing for retirement adequacy. A key factor contributing to its effectiveness is the provision of high and risk-free interest rates on CPF monies.
With CPF contributions earning up to 4.08% per annum on the SA, Singaporeans benefit from a secure avenue for retirement adequacy. In a world of financial uncertainty, the CPF scheme offers guaranteed tangible benefits to every Singaporean and bolstering our economic resilience. This is also testament to the effectiveness of the CPF system.
Could the Ministry shed more light on why it is timely to make this policy move to close the SA now? How many CPF members will be affected by this closure? And how many CPF members would benefit from the raising of the ERS?
During my recent house visit, a Tampines resident shared with me that it was logical to earn fixed deposit rates. The money should be naturally locked up for longer and not withdrawn easily, as in a savings account. However, she was concerned about what her options are, going forward, if she exceeds the enhanced retirement sum. It is understandable that residents would want to maximise their retirement monies, especially as we are likely to be in a higher inflation rate but slower growth environment for quite some time. Can the Ministry provide more information on its website or other channels on the options that residents could explore if they wanted to get more than the 2.5% from the OA?
The Majulah Package will benefit our lower- to middle-income young seniors. Together with the Pioneer and Merdeka Generation Packages, it provides for a robust social compact. It is also very good news for caregivers and homemakers, who prioritise the well-being of their loved ones at the expense of putting off their careers. While the Earn and Save Bonus component of the Majulah Package offers support to eligible working caregivers, there remain concerns for those who have not been working or of low income.
First, for the lower income, would the Package allow them to achieve basic retirement adequacy by the time they retire? Second, for those who are not working, such as homemakers and caregivers, without the Earn and Save component, achieving retirement adequacy would appear to be more difficult.
I have two suggestions for the Ministry to consider. First, for the lower-income employed residents: to provide a higher quantum of top-ups so that they can achieve the BRS. The current way of topping up or supporting such residents is via ComCare or other forms of social assistance. Topping up via work can preserve work ethics and the dignity of work. Second, for homemakers and caregivers: to expand upon the quantum of matched retirement savings, so that employers and family members can help them to reach BRS. The current limit is up to $600 top-up per year. This would likely not be enough, especially for those who have been homemakers or caregivers for most of their working lives.
Such earned or matched top-ups are also aligned with our social compact. Those who have contributed and needed help would be helped by those with more. It also acknowledges the value of unpaid labour and provides them with enhanced financial security in retirement.
Mr Ong Hua Han (Nominated Member): Chairman, the Home Protection Scheme (HPS) serves as a crucial safety net for Singaporean families, ensuring they can continue to reside in their Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats even if they were to lose income earning capacity due to unforeseen circumstances. HPS should go beyond the standards set by private mortgage insurers.
In the past three years, about 1.2% of HPS applications were not approved due to serious pre-existing medical conditions. We must expand HPS to ensure that most Singaporeans, including PwD breadwinners with a track record of employment, have access to comprehensive protection of their most precious asset – their home. Could MOM consider reviewing the HPS risk assessment framework so that more in-need families, who cannot turn to private insurers, get the coverage they need? After all, we are talking about public housing, not private properties.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Sir, foreign domestic workers (FDWs) deserve to be protected. They live in their employers' homes and are potentially vulnerable to ill-treatment and abuse behind closed doors. Employers who ill-treat their workers must be punished in accordance with the law. On the other hand, some complaints are unfounded. Some employers have been victims of frivolous complaints.
Let me just take one scenario. After the worker has successfully entered Singapore at the cost of an employer, the worker makes a complaint in the hope of changing employers or a desire to return home. Based on the accounts of some employers who have been subject to investigations, they did not know what to expect of the protocol or procedures to be adopted. The investigations could take weeks or months, during which, the employer's eligibility to hire a replacement helper would be suspended, disrupting household arrangements. In other cases, the decision may be made to take no further action against the employer. Nevertheless, an advisory might be issued to the employer not to commit offences in the future. This could happen even when the employer was never interviewed by the investigators. How does MOM balance the need to safeguard workers' welfare and, at the same time, ensure that investigations are efficient and employers are accorded due process? Will advisories serve as adverse records against employers if they wish to hire other helpers in the future?
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Currently, under the Child Development and Co-Savings Act, working parents are eligible for up to six days of paid childcare leave a year. While I suspect that many parents find this insufficient, especially if they have multiple children, each with unique contingencies that could keep them out of school, I wish to speak about how there remains a symmetry between childcare and eldercare leave.
As our demographics evolve and ever more children find themselves providing care to elderly parents, they find that there is no equivalent support for them as they ferry their parents to and from medical and related care appointments. This is especially trying for those who are an only child of single children living with their elderly parents, who generally default into the role of being the primary caregiver.
This has, unsurprisingly, resulted in caregiving employees facing depression and reduced quality of life, as shown in a 2021 Duke-NUS study. And this is disproportionately borne by women, as revealed in a 2019 report published by the Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE).
While Civil Servants have two days of parental care leave, a benefit that half of the Service exercises and an average of taking both days, there is no equivalent entitlement for the private sector. Some employers have been willing to voluntarily offer such leave, but the share is trifling, at just 13%.
I propose an expansion of family care leave. This is an idea that has bipartisan support. Member Mr Louis Ng has tirelessly advocated for paid parent care leave and, if I heard correctly, as has Mr Desmond Choo just now, and so has my former colleague Mr Leon Perera.
As a start, we can include two days of paid leave for the only child of aged parents as well as singles living with their elderly parents. While it may seem like an additional cost for businesses, the resulting improvement in economic security and well-being of these employees is more than likely to pay for itself in terms of elevated productivity and reduced turnover.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Sir, the number of women aged 40 to 59 in the labour force has risen by 97,000 from 2012 to 2022. Many in this group of workers will be undergoing perimenopause, which can present various physical and emotional challenges that may impact their well-being and work performance.
Awareness of the health-related impact of perimenopause on women's well-being does not seem be widespread in Singapore. The Straits Times, in a piece titled, \"Is Singapore ready for menopause wave from a super ageing society?\", interviewed women who quit their jobs or suffered through the pain at work. This loss of productivity may ultimately be costly to businesses and the economy, not to mention the human toll it takes on female workers. Based on a National University Hospital (NUH) study and extrapolating for the current mid-life working population, as many as 388,800 women may be bearing the ill-effects of perimenopause at work
It is important for employers to recognise and accommodate these changes and foster a supportive work environment that addresses the unique needs of these women. It is notable that the United Kingdom (UK) and Australian Parliaments have convened Member of Parliament-led consultations to raise awareness nationally.
In Singapore, we can start with incentives for women who turn 45 to seek pre-emptive check-ups and for those who need physiotherapy for their joint and muscle pain to either subsidise the treatment or give them time-off for it. If women are forced to cut short their working life during their menopause transition, their health and finances may worsen and our economy will lose out on their valuable contributions. This scenario is entirely preventable.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: Given that women traditionally take on the brunt of caregiving duties at home and that there are some 260,000 women of economic age not in the workforce, more must be done to support women workers to stay or return to the workplace. The implementation of FWAs is critical in this support and we see tailwinds with the adoption of the tripartite standards for FWAs and the upcoming Tripartite Guidelines for FWA requests. However, a multifaceted approach is needed.
Would the Ministry consider the provision of more caregiving leave to support our workers in an ageing Singapore and can the coverage of existing leave policies be expanded to include a wider range of family members requiring care? Will there also be additional support for women returners in the form of more paid training support to ensure a smooth transition back to the workforce?
Miss Rachel Ong (West Coast): Chairman, many caregivers seek employment to cover expenses for dependents, like individuals with disabilities or seniors, often needing jobs with FWAs due to caregiving demands. In exchange for greater flexibility in schedule, caregivers sometimes settle for low-paying roles that may not match their education levels or skills.
The financial strain of caregiving can be great, especially if they have had to quit their jobs or reduce their working hours to be a caregiver. This problem is particularly pronounced where the caregivers are single. May I ask, what employment support will be made available to caregivers to PWDs and seniors? And for caregivers who are single, whether there is additional support for them?
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: FWAs have become a key consideration for caregivers and senior workers deciding to stay or return to the workplace. It is arguably also a rising consideration for younger workers who choose to work flexibly so as to pursue side gigs and taking on higher degrees. As more employers embrace FWAs and as the dust settles on the implementation and proliferation of FWAs, it is important that fair workplace norms be created in the support of win-win employer-employee outcomes.
Employers must see productivity gains in the introduction of FWAs and employees must be fairly assessed and treated when it comes to performance appraisals, work assignments and their requests for FWAs. Beyond acceding to more family care and caregiving leave, which may prove to be untenable in the longer run, employers see FWAs as a more sustainable way to support their workers.
However, it is important that for true sustainability, FWAs be rolled out in planned, managed ways so that productivity is not impacted and trust continues to be built between employers and their workers. To this end, what will the Ministry be doing to further equip and support our companies in the redesign of their job roles and in the re-engineering of their work cultures?
Some companies have also expressed their concerns as service providers in third-party outsourcing business sectors, such as cleaning and security. They have shared that while they hope to implement FWAs in their industries, which faces manpower crunches, service buyers may continue to stick with more traditional contracts that are not outcomes-based. How will the Ministry be promoting and closing this gap as we move towards FWAs as a nation and economy?
Indeed, the need for job redesign is critical in the role of FWAs to fair worker outcomes. The Women and Family Unit of the NTUC has been advocating for FWAs, long before COVID-19. In the earlier days, some industries have pushed back citing reasons that the nature of their job types make FWAs untenable. This includes jobs in healthcare, services and manufacturing.
However, FWAs are not only about work-from-home. They too include part-time work, doing remote work from a regional office and flexible hours. I am glad to note that post-COVID-19, our Healthcare Services Employees Union have partaken in a pilot to introduce flexible loads and flexible timing for our healthcare frontliners in hospitals.
In the wide-scale introduction of FWAs, how will the Ministry encourage more sectors to roll out FWAs creatively and fairly? In an introduction of the upcoming Tripartite Guidelines for FWA requests, what measures will the Ministry take to guard against employers rejecting without fair and proper consideration on employees, rejecting requests for FWAs citing business reasons?
Miss Rachel Ong: Chairman, as Singapore's population continues to age and birth rates decline, it has become increasingly important to support the physical and financial independence of our seniors in order to ease the economic burden on the workforce.
The good news is that with better education and skillsets, we would expect to see seniors open to staying economically active for a longer time, whether for financial reasons or just to stay active, with 41% of the labour force now holding at least a university degree, a significant increase from just 27.6% in 2010.
However, seniors who are not pressed financially may like to work part-time after retirement to balance leisure time and professional engagement for a healthier pace of life. Others would like to reduce work hours due to health reasons and supplement retirement income against rising costs.
What plans are there to support older persons who are willing and able to contribute to work but with reduced hours? Will the upcoming Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Requests include considerations for older workers who require both reduced and flexible work hours due to age-related health issues?
Mr Yip Hon Weng: Chairman, today, I want to focus on two key aspects of building a more inclusive workforce: harnessing the potential of senior workers and fostering FWAs.
First, as Singapore's population ages, raising retirement and re-employment ages is a positive step in the right direction. However, maximising their potential requires more than just extending their tenure. Can the Ministry share plans to support structured career planning, re-employment opportunities and job redesign to harness the potential of senior workers?
Second, FWA unlocks true inclusivity in our workforce. I commend the Public Service for leading the way. It is encouraging to see more companies implementing diverse and sustainable approaches since the pandemic. These include work arrangement autonomy, flexible hours, compressed workweeks, remote work and job-sharing.
The key message is this: output, not location, should matter. FWA empowers a diverse workforce to thrive, regardless of personal limitations or preferences.
However, extending flexible work opportunities to the frontline, shift and blue-collar workers present unique challenges. To truly foster inclusivity, can the Ministry share on strategies that cater to diverse roles and responsibilities? This could empower individuals like caregivers, PwDs and others who require flexibility to join or remain in the workforce.
FWA benefit employers too. Looking at Singapore's best employers ranking list, working from home is clearly a key factor, with Google topping the list for its hybrid work arrangements even after the pandemic. Let us move beyond simply offering FWA as a benefit. Let us strive to make FWAs the norm, accessible to everyone regardless of their profession or position.
Mr Sharael Taha: Chairman, I am heartened to see that while we work on growing our economy and equipping our workers with the right skillsets, we are also focusing on strengthening our social compact by ensuring growth is inclusive and with work-life balance for workers.
FWAs will be a key enabler for this, but it must be done in a way which balances the needs of both employers and employees. FWAs can be in the form of flexible time, flexible place and flexible load. Does the Minister have any updates on the guidelines on FWAs and how its adoption in the public and private sector can be encouraged?
How do we harness the potential of senior workers, mobility-challenged residents, caregivers and women back to work through FWAs? Have our guidelines moved the needle for hiring them? How do we assist companies to manage FWA requests while maintaining harmony, fairness and productivity in the workplace?
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Chairman, the NTUC U Women and Family and PAP Seniors Group collaborated recently to conduct a survey for Singapore residents above the age of 50 who are currently working. Most of those surveyed were in favour of raising retirement and re-employment ages. Nearly 88% support a retirement age of 63 and above, and around 80% support a re-employment age of 68 and above. The findings also highlighted that concerns relating to negative employer attitudes and age discrimination ranks high at 63.4%.
Indeed, these are real concerns among the older workers. PAP Seniors Group has been engaging with many of them. In Bukit Batok East, I also received feedback and appeals from more senior workers who feel that they are not given the job just because of their age. At times, they feel gradually cast aside at work and were eventually asked to leave on the pretext of poor work performance.
A lot has been done by the Government to change attitudes, including by giving employers incentives to hire senior workers and supporting the redesign of jobs. Could the Ministry share some of the latest efforts and plans to continue building a conducive environment for seniors to participate in the workforce?
We should leverage on the voices of advocates who care about the plight of older workers. There are also more enlightened employers who have good practices that should be emulated. What more can these employers and community partners like seniors groups do? How can they meaningfully champion the cause and amplify their efforts?
Mr Keith Chua (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, every senior should be given the opportunity to decide how they wish to live out their older years. Some may choose to retire at a suitable point, others may desire to continue working for a few more years or perhaps find meaningful engagement in serving the community.
In order to have the ability to make choices, financial considerations will be one major factor. Some seniors may need to work a little longer to build up enough retirement adequacy. To facilitate this, we may need to bring forward the current timing of raising the retirement age to 65.
Employers need to appreciate the experience and value of seniors in various vocations. To all employers currently providing job opportunities for seniors, thank you very much.
May I enquire, what are some ways the Ministry can encourage employers to retain seniors or to give suitable second career opportunities to seniors? Secondly, will consideration be given to raising the retirement age to the next level before 2030?
Miss Rachel Ong: I am encouraged to learn that one of the recommendations put forth by the Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness involves the issuance of a Tripartite Advisory on providing reasonable accommodations to individuals with disabilities.
It is imperative that individuals with disabilities are not unfairly excluded from job opportunities simply because they require reasonable accommodations. These accommodations are crucial for both employers and employees to achieve their full potential and drive business success. They can encompass a variety of adjustments, such as physical modifications, changes to job tasks, technological aids as well as fostering understanding and support from colleagues.
While some employers may view reasonable accommodations as optional, we must recognise that for PwDs, these accommodations are essential for their livelihood.
As the Tripartite Advisory on Reasonable Accommodations is currently in the form of guidance rather than a legal requirement, it is crucial to monitor its implementation and effectiveness among employers, as well as its impact on individuals with disabilities. May I request the MOM to provide updates on the roll-out of this advisory to employers, including details on how and when it will be implemented, as well as the metrics that will be used to evaluate its success?
Additionally, I am curious to know if there are plans to eventually incorporate reasonable accommodations for PwDs into Workplace Fairness Legislation in the future.
Ms He Ting Ru: Sir, how is the Government ensuring that insurers are adequately compensating injured workers under the Work Injury Compensation Act (WICA) which applies to both local and migrant workers? Insurers obtain premiums paid for by employers and have incentive to keep costs low by limiting insurance payouts. Yet, insurers, instead of MOM, are now in charge of adjudicating work injury claims, unlike in the past.
Can the Government release the code of conduct for insurance companies for transparency, including whether there are procedures for workers to hold the insurance companies accountable and the timelines for their claims. How long have insurers taken to process claims, for example, and how many claims have been rejected?
Ms See Jinli Jean (Nominated Member): Chairman, businesses in sectors such as creative, media, coaching and delivery have evolved their business models to tap freelancers as the main labour pool. These businesses prefer freelancers for their expertise and responsiveness. They also prefer freelancers for efficient budgeting as labour can then be reflected as a unit cost.
Oftentimes, the commoditisation of freelancer services meant that businesses were conditioned to find ways to spend less on freelancers as a component. This included holding back from providing injury coverage to freelancers, whether by direct insurance or by preferring freelancers who include the cost of injury insurance into their fees.
The commoditisation of freelancer services also means that at work sites, businesses might prioritise business needs over the health and safety of freelancers. For instance, post-pandemic, it was common to hear of freelance production crew working on shoots for 16 or more hours at a stretch, just so that the production house could compact filming into one day and thus save on venue and equipment rental costs. Upon shoot completion, these freelance crew must still make the trip to return the production equipment, thus many might only call it a day after nearly 20 hours at work.
Should a freelancer get injured during work, past cases have shown that it could be very trying to obtain compensation from the business for the freelancer’s medical bills and downtime. This is especially difficult if the freelancer was injured badly because of the work or work conditions.
While the tripartite standard on procurement of media freelancers’ services urges adopters to provide insurance for freelancers on set for injury and gear damage, this is not a pervasive practice.
Likewise for freelancers who provide exercise coaching or delivery expertise, they are often instructed to adhere to work instructions set out by service buyers and intermediaries. In the course of work, they might injure other persons or property by accident. Again, it is seldom that the service buyer and intermediaries provide the freelancer liability insurance via direct coverage or by engaging freelancers whose fees have factored in liability coverage. A lack of injury and liability insurance thus exposes the freelancer to risks that he or she is not equipped to deal with.
In this regard, I would like to ask if the Minister would consider directing service buyers and intermediaries to be responsible for the workplace health and safety of the freelance or self-employed service providers that they engage? This could mean that the service buyer and intermediaries provide the freelance service providers with injury and liability insurance via direct coverage or engages freelance service providers who already possess coverage of such insurances.
As businesses continue to restructure and de-risk, it would take collective will and guardrails than mere goodwill to ensure that workers, whether employees or freelancers, are valued as contributors and their safety and health at work is regarded and prioritised.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: Chairman, I wish to raise the issue of predatory employment contract terms, which many Singaporeans, especially of a younger disposition, may be unknowingly entering into.
To better protect our Singaporean workers and educate them on their rights to fair employment and rein in errant employers who make use of unfair terms in employment contracts to gain advantage at the cost of employees' well-being, it is critical to examine some practices and review whether we need to re-examine our stance of not introducing regulations against these. Some examples of these unfair or predatory employment terms are in the position of early termination fees, training recovering fees, replacement fees and other financial penalties that arise when an employee decides to leave a workplace. These terms are often justified by employers as necessary to protect their commercial interests, but in practice, restrict the avenues for alternate employment.
Another example is in the position of non-compete clauses or restrictive covenants into certain employment contracts which do have any basis beyond sharing the same industry segment. A recent example is that of retrenched Lazada employees who were bound by a lengthy 12-month non-compete clause covering an extensive list of technology, retail and logistics companies, which extend far beyond the firm's key competitors, according to a news report.
Chairman, I urge the Government to investigate how prevalent such practices are in Singapore and whether or not they are justified in the ordinary course of business for an employer.
The reality is that even though a contract should ostensibly be entered into by willing parties, the imbalance in economic circumstances and bargaining positions between Singaporean employees and employers leaves little room for employees to challenge such unfair employment terms.
Further, employees may not see it as in their interest to embark on their new careers by going through the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) or the Courts before they even start work. As my Sengkang colleague shared in Parliament earlier this year, even if these are unenforceable in the Court of law, the danger is that they have a chilling effect on employee rights even before they can be potentially challenged.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim: Non-compete clauses are included in many modern labour contracts and impose restrictions on a worker joining or otherwise doing business with a rival firm even after employment with the firm in question is over, usually for a specified period of time. Many companies sign non-competes in the name of protecting proprietary knowledge. In addition to the benefits to the employer, employees may also benefit, assured that its trade secrets are safe, the firm may be more willing to invest in their workers. Non-competes can also promote efficiency since companies are reassured that knowledge transfer within the firm do not come back to bite them after staff members depart.
But non-competes can have detrimental effects on worker rights and freedoms. After all, the contract literally constrains what an employee can do even after they are no longer employed. Evidence also suggests that it suppresses wages and can depress innovation.
In Singapore, many non-competes have been declared invalid or unenforceable, but restraints have nevertheless been imposed under certain circumstances. Yet, regardless of the law, many non-competes have become ever more common in local labour contracts. Perhaps more perniciously, they are now increasingly found even in contracts for mid-level employees, not just top management, where the cost-benefit calculus in permitting such clauses are even more shaky. This was amply on display during the recent Lazada trade layoffs, where retrenched workers found themselves bound by a year-long non-compete, adding insult to the injury of losing their job. Given the effects of non-competes on the competition in the labour and product markets, policymakers should not abrogate oversight of such clauses to the judicial system alone but exercise an interest in its regulation.
The Government, under the tripartite framework, has indicated that it is developing a set of guidelines on the inclusion of non-compete clauses in local employment contracts. I would like to go a step further and urge the Ministry to consider either providing strong guidance against non-competes or even banning them outright, especially for mid-level and low-level employees. This could be defined by salary of, say, less than $10,000 a month and/or complemented by job scope for all non-C-suite executives. This applies especially to sectors where the frequent movement of employees is a matter of course, such as healthcare and infocomm technology (ICT).
The problem with non-competes is not just about whether or not they are legally enforceable. Indeed, in a recent case, e-commerce firm Shopee failed to prevent an employee from joining a rival firm despite the presence of non-compete clauses. It is instead the chilling fact that the mere presence of such clauses has on employees, especially mid-level ones that may be less familiar with human resource matters and labour protections, when they seek to pursue other job opportunities. What may be worse is absent regulation or guidance. Human resource departments may simply include such boilerplate language in standard contracts. This inadvertently erodes employee rights and diminishes labour market vitality, regardless of whether they do or do not carry the day in court.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: The last round of Employment Act review was passed in 2018 and effective April 2019. With the rise in median wages, changes in the nature of work, workforce and workplaces, I am asking if MOM will embark on a review of the Employment Act with our tripartite partners. I want to draw attention to three areas which needs to be reviewed.
First, to raise the salaries caps of workmen and non-workmen prescribed in Part IV of the Act. I opine that both the salary caps as stipulated in section 35 of $2,600 and $4,500 respectively should be raised.
Second, there continues to be questions in the interpretation of section 18A of the Employment Act on transfers which impact workers affected by ongoing company restructuring, mergers and acquisitions. Can MOM review section 18A as part of the Employment Act review and issue a set of tripartite guidelines in the interim to provide guidance on what falls within and outside of section 18 of the Employment Act?
Third, is the provision on \"dismissals\" under section 14. At present, I am aware that employers terminate employees with notice pay but without giving reasons for the termination. It therefore makes it difficult for employees to bring a case of unfair dismissal against the employer. I propose that employers should be required to give their reasons for termination or discontinuation of employment explicitly in all cases of cessation of employment initiated by the employer.
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas (Nominated Member): Sir, Part IV of the Employment Act provides certain protections for more vulnerable workers, including provisions for rest days, hours of work and overtime pay. The Employment Act currently sets the threshold salary at $2,600 for non-workmen and $4,500 for workmen.
As elaborated by the Deputy Prime Minister in his Budget speech, the wages of lower-income workers have grown faster than the median wage over the past decade. This is one of the impetus for the increase in the LQS.
As the Part IV threshold was last amended in 2021, I would like to ask the Minister if there are any plans to review the threshold to reflect current wages and anticipated wage growth. It would be useful to give employers sufficient lead time to accommodate any intended changes.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: Chairman, employers of work permit holders have been sounding the alarm bells on surging costs of workers' accommodation. Ministry statistics show that median monthly rentals for a bed hit $420 at the start of last year, up from $280 four years before. That is an 11% annual inflation rate, which is not entirely unexpected given the number of migrant workers in the construction, marine and process sectors is 18% above pre-COVID-19 levels and at the highest for all the years MOM has published statistics for.
In the 2010 Construction Productivity Roadmap, the Government set a 20% to 30% improvement in site productivity by 2020. The final outcome was 19.5% in the decade past. I understand that there have been no new targets since, with the only productivity related target being the design for manufacturing and assembly adoption in the 2023 Built Environment Industry Transformation Map. But this is a target for process adoption rather than a target for productivity outcomes per se.
A meaningful target is important because it helps us understand how much we can raise productivity before we need to increase capacity for workers.
Conversely, if, in the meantime, we are unable to increase productivity and reduce manpower reliance as fast as we would like, we need to ensure that companies are able to access adequate accommodation at reasonable standards and prices so as not to have soaring costs passed through to end consumers eventually, which appears to be what is going on now.
MOM shared that migrant workers' numbers cannot keep rising and, hence, the Government should also look to organic ways of retaining talent among work permit holders, which would also improve productivity. One way is to reduce repatriation of workers who have years of experience here. There are workers who are already socially integrated and have picked up English or even Mandarin during their stay. Workers who are more familiar with Singapore's work practices can hit the ground running without needing training from scratch.
Currently, workers can only obtain a new job without their current employer's consent during the 14- to 21-day window before the work permit expires, meaning the employers who anti-competitively want to prevent other companies from hiring their workers in the future and for a long period to block them from doing so. Qatar has a 90-day grace period after the expiry of a permit during which a worker can change jobs without employers' permission.
We should look to tilt the balance of power to the worker because this is healthy for the industry and workforce.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): In my Budget Debate speech, I shared about how our policies on migrant workers differentiate between \"us\" Singaporeans and \"them\" migrant workers.
First, many workers do not have enough space. Our current dormitory standards require at least 3.5 square metres per resident. We are asking dormitories to only increase this by 0.1 square metre within the next six years. By contrast, our full-time National Servicemen (NSFs) have at least seven square metres per resident. Will MOM ensure that migrant workers have at least the same amount of space as our NSFs?
Second, many workers do not have safe food. The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) requires all catered food be consumed within four hours after it is prepared and be labelled with a \"consume by\" timestamp. Workers tell me that many of them are catered food without the timestamp and they regularly consume food way past the four-hour time frame. Will MOM ensure that food catered for workers in dormitories comply with existing food safety requirements?
Third, and lastly, many workers are made to pay illegal kickbacks. Kickbacks are a form of corruption but are punished less severely. Will MOM increase the penalties for employment kickback offences to be equivalent to corruption offences and have better whistle-blower protections?
Ms He Ting Ru: Sir, on the topic of creating a sustainable workforce, can MOM ensure that if migrant workers lose their job after filing a complaint, the worker will have at least one month to look for a new job before they are repatriated? Workers sometimes face retaliation by employers when they make a complaint. Employers can cancel work permits and repatriate the worker. This repatriation can take place virtually overnight. This applies to domestic workers, too. Currently, employers can decide unilaterally whether to send a domestic worker home or to allow a transfer.
Reform of these rules will help Singapore utilise available labour quickly in a tight labour market as well as retain workers who are already here and have the language and work skills to fit in. After all, workers who have fallen out of favour with one employer may be well-liked and seen as productive by another.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mr Chairman, over the past three years, the spotlight has been on workplace safety and health (WSH), ever since the COVID-19 pandemic caused a spike in the number of workplace fatalities and injuries. I filed numerous Parliamentary Questions (PQs) and raised two Adjournment Motions on the need to keep our workers and workplaces safe.
I was therefore happy to hear from MOM that the annual workplace fatality rate has dropped to 0.99 per 100,000 workers in 2023, five years ahead of our WSH 2028 goal. This was only possible through the collective efforts of the tripartite partners and buy-in from both workers and supervisors on the ground to engender safer work environments.
But we cannot rest on our laurels, as it only takes a momentary lapse and fatalities will spike again. How does MOM intend to build on this positive trend to ensure safer and healthier workplaces moving forward? Can MOM share how are the respective sectors doing in terms of major workplace injuries?
In October 2023, the workplace safety demerit point system was extended to the manufacturing sector. Has this move been effective, and can MOM consider extending this to other high-risk sectors?
Lastly, I hope that MOM will consider my repeated calls for there to be a mandatory WSH representative in every company, regardless of size and industry. WSH must be a foremost concern and priority in every company.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: Uplifting our lower-wage workers is a whole-of-society effort. Besides employers, consumers and service buyers in third-party contract models, such as those seen in the security and cleaning sectors, everyone must unite in support of lower-wage workers, actively renegotiating contracts and endorsing companies with the PW Mark. I thank the Ministry for an earlier tripartite advisory on best sourcing practices, giving guidance on the adoption of fair and transparent procurement practices.
However, service providers have continued to cite difficulties in renegotiating longer-tail contracts without fear of future consequences, such as unfair debarment. Some others share that contracts are renegotiated with the downgrading of worker skillsets to avoid paying the higher PWM wages. What more can the Ministry do to further educate the service buyers and their procurement managers on PWM best practices?
Will there be better protections for service providers facing unfair and unsustainable contract negotiations due to PWM introductions?
Mr Yip Hon Weng: Chairman, the well-being of our lower-wage workers is critical to a fair and inclusive society. Therefore, I would like to commend the efforts taken to uplift their wages and working conditions through the PWM.
Can the Minister share an update on the progress of the PWM expansion across different sectors? Are we on track to achieve the intended outcomes, particularly in ensuring lower-wage workers receive liveable wages that reflect their contributions in this inflationary environment? Is there a plan to review and potentially further raise the LQS to benefit a larger pool of lower-wage workers?
While Government policies play a vital role, collective action is key to truly uplifting lower-wage workers. In this regard, I would like to highlight two important stakeholders.
First, employers. Investing in upskilling and training lower-wage workers not only increases their productivity and employability but also empowers them to access higher-paying jobs. Can the Ministry explore further initiatives with relevant agencies to incentivise upskilling programmes for lower-wage workers across more sectors?
Second, consumers. Supporting businesses that have attained the PW Mark showcases our commitment to ethical and responsible consumption. Can we partner with MTI to raise public awareness about the PW Mark and encourage conscious consumer choices that reward good practices?
Mr Sharael Taha: Chairman, we have made progress in uplifting wages of lower-wage workers. Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) and PWM are two important policies that must go hand in hand to uplift the wages of lower-wage workers.
Firstly, what is the progress on the expansion of the PWM?
I welcome the raising of the income qualifying cap from $2,500 to $3,000 for those 30 years and older. What will be the percentage of workers who will benefit from WIS with the higher qualifying cap? What is the target of lower-wage workers that the Ministry would like to provide support for?
The raising of PWCS ceiling from $2,500 to $3,000 and the raising of the co-funding level for the increase in wages of the lower-wage workers from 30% to 50% shows the Government’s commitment to help increase the wages of the lower-wage workers while helping businesses with this wage cost increase. How long will these co-funding levels last?
The support of consumers and employers are integral in this success. How has the PW Mark assist businesses?
Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman (Marine Parade): Chairman, in light of the recent adjustments to the LQS, it is evident that Singapore remains steadfast in its commitment to ensuring fair wages for local workers while maintaining effective quota controls. Whilst LQS will help workers, some employers have raised concerns over the upcoming increase in LQS, noting that it elevates business costs.
Therefore, could MOM share how it will work with employers to ensure that the increase in LQS is bearable and not too onerous for them? Furthermore, the planned increase in the PWCS wage ceiling to $3,000 in 2025, accompanied by a $1 billion top-up to the fund, underscores the Government's commitment to enhancing support for lower-wage workers. This enhancement not only provides financial relief to employers but also empowers workers to pursue higher standards of living and greater financial stability.
In this context, I would like to enquire about MOM's comprehensive strategy for implementing these measures effectively and ensuring that they reach a broader spectrum of low-wage workers. Additionally, could Minister elaborate on initiatives aimed at encouraging consumer support, such as the PW Mark, and strategies for fostering employer investment in upskilling low-wage workers to enhance their earning potential and overall well-being?
The Chairman: Order. I propose to take a break now.
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.20 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 2.57 pm until 3.20 pm.
Sitting resumed at 3.20 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate in Committee of Supply resumed. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Head S (cont) – (proc text)]
The Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): Mr Chairman, I thank Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) MPs and others who have deep interests in MOM's work and spoken in support of our workers and our employers. Let me first give an overview of the labour market.
Overall, the labour market expanded in 2023. Resident employment grew in sectors with higher productivity or pay, such as financial and professional services. Resident unemployment rate remained low at 2.7%. This is one of the lowest among OECD countries. Real income fell slightly last year due to higher inflation, similar to what many other countries also experienced. However, businesses are more optimistic this year.
Our recent surveys indicate an improvement in hiring and wage growth expectations from employers. Nevertheless, the risks of near-term headwinds remain, and this will weigh on our labour market in the year ahead.
Beyond the near-term headwinds, we will continue to face tight labour market constraints. Our population is ageing. Our birth rate continues to fall, despite our best efforts. We have to confront a slowing local workforce growth. If we continue on this trajectory, our workforce will taper off and decline.
In the next decade, it will become harder for us to sustain high economic growth primarily from workforce growth. The only sustainable approach is to pursue productivity-driven growth and that is enabling our local workers to move up the value chain and taking in foreign workers who can complement our local workers.
Many people have asked me what keeps me awake at night. Members of the House, keeping our competitive edge is what we should all be concerned about. If we do not succeed in sustaining our productivity in the next 10 years, my worry is that we will suffer real declines in economic growth. Businesses and talent will find Singapore less attractive. As a result, we will create fewer good jobs for Singaporeans and incomes will stagnate. You have seen this story play out in other mature economies, whether in Europe, Asia or elsewhere.
However, Singapore has a chance to write a different story. There are exciting developments on the horizon. With the accelerating pace of transformation, there will be more opportunities in new areas, like the green economy and AI.
Mr Edward Chia asked about how we plan to improve the productivity and competitiveness of our workforce. I could not agree with him more that maximising our human capital is key. This means improving the skills profile of both the local and the foreign workforce and ensuring that our employers put these skills to the fullest use. As our economy transforms, we must also channel more workers to the more productive areas of the economy. We have to rally and unite our employers and workers towards achieving a new Forward SG social compact. I will elaborate on these points further.
In my MTI speech, I spoke about how the Government will support businesses in unlocking resource constraints. I will build on this in my MOM speech by sharing how the Government will work hand-in-hand with workers and employers for a brighter future.
Our priorities for this year are centred on three themes: strengthening you, uplifting you and caring for you.
Our first focus is to \"strengthen you\", by helping businesses become more productive and helping workers to take on better jobs. I will provide an update on our efforts to spur business transformation through our foreign workforce policies. We will also help employers strengthen the capabilities of their workforce and empower our local workers to take charge of their career health and seize new opportunities.
Our second focus is to \"uplift you\", to ensure no one is left behind. As announced at Budget 2024, we will roll out the Majulah Package to support our \"young seniors\", who are currently in their 50s and early 60s. Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will recap the measures to provide greater assurance for our seniors who may be more vulnerable. Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad will elaborate on how our tripartite partners work hand-in-hand to uplift our lower-wage workers.
Our third focus is to \"care for you\", by fostering more inclusive and fair workplaces. We will empower senior workers to continue working, if they wish to, by raising our retirement and re-employment ages. Minister of State Gan Siow Huang will provide more details, and she will also be giving updates on other workplace policies.
The Government will continue working closely with our tripartite partners on all three focus areas. On this note, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to President Sister K Thanaletchmi, Secretary-General Brother Ng Chee Meng, immediate past president Sister Mary Liew from the NTUC, Brother Dr Robert Yap, President of SNEF and to all of our sisters and brothers in NTUC and SNEF for their strong support in the past year and the years ahead. [Applause.]
Let me start with our efforts to strengthen businesses and workers. I will first share our approach to spur business transformation through our foreign workforce policies, before outlining our efforts to empower our local workers.
As an open economy, we will need to welcome global talent to compete on the world stage. But as a small country, we cannot increase the number of foreign workers indefinitely due to resource constraints. We have to, therefore, be very selective about the quality of foreign workers that we take in and ensure that they are deployed in the more productive areas of our economy.
So, with this in mind, we introduced major changes to our Work Pass framework over the past two years. In January 2023, we launched the Overseas Networks and Expertise Pass (ONE Pass). It is a highly selective pass and is aimed at facilitating the recruitment of top global talent who possess valuable networks, as well as deep skills and expertise.
In an era where talent is scarce, businesses follow talent. Our ONE Pass holders are the proverbial \"rainmakers\". While they are not large in numbers, they are the creators of opportunities and they generate good jobs in their respective fields.
We have received good interest in the ONE Pass. As of 1 January 2024, we have approved nearly 4,200 ONE Pass applications. Let me share with Members two examples.
Mr Phil Inagaki is the managing director of Xora Innovation, an early stage, deep-tech investment platform of Temasek. Before he assumed his current position, he founded and raised US$120 million in funding across five startups in businesses and industries, such as AI, clean energy and semiconductors. He helps our local startups translate scientific breakthroughs into commercial successes.
The ONE Pass is also targeted at talents in areas, such as sports, arts and academia. Assoc Prof Marco Tomamichel from the National University of Singapore (NUS) is an example of academic talent. His work focuses on quantum cryptography, which allows sensitive information to be encrypted and decrypted securely. Our young local Singaporeans have also benefited from attending his many courses.
In 2022, I announced the Complementarity Assessment framework (COMPASS). It assesses EP candidates more holistically, based on individual and firm-related attributes. This has been implemented in September last year. Businesses, as well as HR professionals, have welcomed the introduction of COMPASS. The transparent criteria provided clarity for their manpower planning. With the enhanced Self-Assessment Tool, businesses can see how their potential applicants fare on COMPASS before submitting their application. If their candidates cannot pass COMPASS, businesses will know precisely why and what they need to do to pass.
To ensure that the quality of our foreign workforce improves in tandem with our local workforce, I have said previously that the minimum costs of hiring for S Pass and EP holders would be pegged to the top one-third of our local associate professionals and technicians (APTs) and professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) respectively. By regularly updating the qualifying salaries based on the set wage benchmarks, we ensure a level-playing field for locals. For the S Pass, we had previously announced a three-step increase in the S Pass qualifying salary and levy, with the next step taking place in 2025. Therefore, there will be no adjustment to the S Pass qualifying salary and levy this year.
For EPs, in line with how the benchmarks have moved, we will be increasing the EP minimum qualifying salary from $5,000 to $5,600 per month. For the financial services sector which has higher wage norms, this will be revised from $5,500 to $6,200 per month. The EP qualifying salary will also continue to increase progressively with age.
MOM has heard the concerns from the various trade associations and chambers, such as the Singapore Business Federation, on rising costs of manpower and constraints in hiring. The revised EP qualifying salary will only apply to new EP applications from 1 January 2025 and to renewal applications from 1 January 2026. This means that firms with existing EP holders have a longer runway, potentially up to 2028, to manage the impact of these changes and prepare their hiring plans.
Even as we continue to attract top talent to grow our economy, our Work Pass framework needs to be strengthened to ensure that firms develop their local workforce and treat locals fairly. Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Patrick Tay asked how our EP framework and Fair Consideration Framework will help to achieve this.
Under COMPASS, firms with a lower local PMET share relative to their sector will score fewer points on the firm-level criteria, making it harder to pass COMPASS. These firms are, hence, incentivised to improve their local PMET share.
TAFEP has been engaging and supporting firms that score poorly on firm-related attributes under COMPASS to help them improve their workforce profile and adjust to COMPASS. More than 440 firms have attended TAFEP's workshops over the past year. Firms with unfair hiring practices will still be taken to task under the Tripartite Guidelines for Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP) and under the Workplace Fairness Legislation in the future.
Mr Pritam Singh and Mr Desmond Choo asked about the effectiveness of the SOL in easing skills shortages. The list was designed to award bonus points on COMPASS to EP applicants filling acute occupational shortages in areas of strategic importance for the economy. As COMPASS was only implemented in September 2023, my update is therefore based on very preliminary data.
The proportion of EP holders in shortage occupations has increased since COMPASS was implemented, which shows that the list reflects real shortages in the industry, with 20% of new EP holders in these shortage occupations using the bonus points to pass COMPASS. Therefore, the SOL is very helpful in ensuring that COMPASS does not hinder business growth because of the shortage of skills locally.
As we transform our economy, some sectors in the green economy and agritech will inevitably have shortages. This is especially so as these sectors are still nascent and we are pivoting to anchor them here along with the talents needed. While we partner agencies in recruiting them here, we are also contemporaneously investing in developing our local talents for these jobs.
To Mr Singh's question on how MOM works with agencies to develop the local pipeline in areas of skills shortages, we are doing this systematically. As part of the process for evaluating occupations for the SOL, MOM considers sector agencies' commitments to develop the local pipeline to address shortages in the medium-term in addition to the extent of the skills shortage. We evaluate the progress on these commitments when we refresh the list every three years.
Work Permit holders are also a critical part of our labour force. Many support essential services that local workers do not want to do. Mr Mark Lee suggested re-evaluating the foreign worker quotas for foreign manpower for services sub-sectors facing manpower challenges, for specific job roles. Mr Edward Chia supported granting additional foreign worker quotas to firms upon commitments to human capital improvements and training for local workers.
On the other hand, our fellow MP, Mr Sharael Taha, asked about how the Government intends to manage the inflow of Work Permit holders, given our resource constraints.
This is therefore the tension that we grapple with constantly. To Mr Lee and Mr Chia's concerns on whether employers have sufficient manpower, the overall numbers speak for themselves. The number of Work Permit holders today has surpassed the COVID-19 levels in 2019 by 12.2%. But nevertheless, let me still respond to their specific suggestions.
On Mr Lee's suggestion, we already provide targeted flexibility for some essential job roles with limited automation and localisation potential. We will continue to review the areas where more flexibility may be required. However, there is a limit as to how much further we can differentiate to more granular job areas within the services sub-sectors. There are also practical challenges as job roles today can be very fluid and firms can circumvent our rules by declaring a business activity or job role in an area with more generous quota.
On Mr Chia's suggestion, training can take many different forms. For example, workplace learning, such as on-the-job training, can help employers better manage the challenges around sending staff for external courses. It would not be viable for us to give additional quota to every single company that invests in training of their local workforce. It can also be counter-productive, as the availability of cheaper foreign labour reduces the incentive for employers to re-design jobs and reskill their workers for greater productivity gains. Instead, we support firms in developing their local workforce. I will provide greater clarity in the next segment.
As Deputy Prime Minister Wong has emphasised, transformation is the only way that Singapore can achieve productivity-driven growth. Our Work Permit framework will therefore need to evolve to spur business. The overall direction is clear; we need to improve the quality of our Work Permit holders and manage overall numbers. To this end, as announced at MTI’s COS on Friday, we will be making changes to the foreign workforce policies in the marine shipyard sector as a first step.
The Dependency Ratio Ceiling (DRC) for the marine shipyard sector will be gradually reduced. As a first step, the DRC will be reduced from 77.8% to 75%. In addition, the levies will be increased. For basic-skilled R2 Marine Shipyard Work Permit holders, the levy will be increased by $100, from $400 to $500. For the higher-skilled R1 Work Permit holders, the levy will be increased by a smaller amount of $50, from $300 to $350. Changes to the DRC and levies will take effect from 1 January 2026 to give businesses lead time to adjust.
Mr Mark Lee also asked for an update on the Manpower for Strategic Economic Priorities Scheme (M-SEP). M-SEP provides additional time-bound Work Permit and S Pass quota to firms that contribute to Singapore's economic strategic priorities. Firms from sectors, such as construction, manufacturing and retail, have benefited from M-SEP since its inception a year ago. We will take in Mr Lee's suggestion as we finetune the scheme, alongside industry feedback.
Let me now turn to strengthening our local workers.
The Forward SG Report has identified career agility and resilience as an important focus in our refreshed social compact. We encourage workers to take charge of their own career health because in this age of change and disruptions, they should have better awareness of what their career prospects are, keep their skills relevant, stay on top of the competition and seize new opportunities.
Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Liang Eng Hwa have asked about how the Government will work with employers, workers and intermediaries to adopt a collective mindset of building career health. Mr Xie Yao Quan also asked about our plans to develop a future-ready workforce. The Government cannot do this alone. We will need a whole-of-society effort involving workers, employers and labour market intermediaries.
I will start with how we are supporting employers. Employers that support the career health of their workers will be able to better attract and retain talent, tapping on adjacent talent pools to grow. With an agile workforce, employers will be able to quickly pivot to new opportunities in a more complex and a more uncertain economic environment.
To help employers respond and plan for business transformation, the Government has launched the Jobs Transformation Maps (JTMs). A total of 16 JTMs have been completed, covering some 1.5 million resident workers. We will progressively launch four more in new growth areas, such as generative AI and sustainable finance. These JTMs will help employers better understand how to redesign jobs and how to reskill workers for new jobs.
However, reskilling workers for new roles can be costly upfront, and employers bear the risk that some workers may not adjust well to the demands of the new jobs. Hence, WSG offers the CCPs, to co-share costs with employers who reskill new hires or existing workers for new or enhanced job roles.
Between 2017 and 2023, over 7,300 employers and 47,000 workers have benefitted from the CCPs. One such worker who benefitted was Mr Poh Teck Hian. With the support of WSG, he secured a senior project manager position with MDesign Solutions Pte Ltd, which is a precision engineering firm. His employer enrolled him in the CCP for Advanced Manufacturing Engineer to enhance his skills in robotics and electronic firmware. He is performing well in his new role, leveraging on his past engineering experience and the new skills he has picked up from the CCP.
To Mr Patrick Tay's suggestion, I am happy to announce that we will be enhancing our CCP to provide greater support to employers.
First, we will increase the salary support caps. For mature or long-term unemployed workers, the maximum salary support will be raised from $6,000 to $7,500 per month. For other CCP participants, we will increase the cap from $4,000 to $5,000 per month. This means that employers can receive up to $45,000 of salary support for each worker for a six-month conversion programme.
We will similarly increase the monthly training allowance cap for attachments under the CCPs, from $4,000 to $5,000. We will also expand CCP for existing workers within the company. Today, CCPs can only be used to reskill existing workers in jobs that are at risk of redundancy. Going forward, we will support employers who are proactively reskilling existing workers to take on new growth job roles.
On Mr Tay's suggestion to expand the range of CCPs, WSG will continue to review the programme offerings in consultation with the industry. I would urge and encourage all employers to get in touch with WSG to explore how they can tap on the CCP to meet their talent needs.
The Government is not doing this alone. We are supporting NTUC to set up more CTCs to work hand-in-hand with company management to drive business and workforce transformation. We are working with NTUC, SNEF and other TACs in the financial services, ICT, retail and precision engineering sectors to implement structured career guidance workshops. This will equip line managers and HR with capabilities to support their workers in developing career development plans.
Finally, MOM and SNEF has set up the Alliance for Action (AfA) on Widening Access to Talent last year. This AfA, led by Dr Bicky Bhangu from SNEF and Ms Aileen Tan, a HR master professional, is working with progressive businesses and TAC leaders to develop practical solutions to support skills-based hiring and workforce agility.
As employers transform their businesses and raise productivity, workers will benefit from more meaningful jobs and improved wages. Workers must also be motivated to better plan for their own careers, pick up relevant skills and venture beyond their comfort zone.
Business leaders have consistently told me that overseas experience is valuable for career progression and, in particular, for corporate leadership positions. We will do more to help. To support Singaporeans to venture overseas and progress in their careers, the Government will work with businesses to expand overseas opportunities for PMETs.
The Minister for Trade and Industry announced that the Government will introduce the Global Business Leaders Programme (GBLP) to support businesses that send their Singaporean workers with leadership potential on overseas postings. The GBLP adds to the existing range of leadership development programmes.
To complement these leadership development programmes, WSG will launch a new Overseas Markets Immersion Programme (OMIP). The OMIP aims to encourage businesses with overseas expansion plans to send employees with little to no overseas market experience for overseas postings. Employees will benefit from reskilling through on-the-job, in-market training in global or regional roles offering good prospects, whether in technology, business development or beyond. Our businesses will also be better positioned to expand and to compete in overseas markets, with a strong globally oriented team. The OMIP will provide financial support to the companies. More details on the GBLP and OMIP will be announced in the next few months.
To take advantage of programmes like the CCPs, GBLP or OMIP, workers will need to be better equipped to make informed training and career decisions and longer-term career plans. This is why we launched the CareersFinder feature on the MyCareersFuture portal last year. CareersFinder harnesses data and AI to help Singaporeans explore pathways to acquiring new skills and reach their career goals.
In the first six months, more than 15,000 individuals have used CareersFinder. The early signs are encouraging as we find these workers do go on to broaden their horizons by applying for jobs across a wider range of occupations.
As Taylor Swift aptly puts it from her hit song titled, \"You belong with me\", \"Tell me about your dreams, I think I know where you belong\". I hope it is with Forward SG. We will empower Singaporeans to seize their dream career opportunities by helping them take charge of their career health.
We are looking at ways to enable workers to better signal their skills to employers or potential hirers, so that they are better recognised and rewarded. This will strengthen the linkage between skills acquisition and career progression. We also want to make career guidance, both in-person and through AI-enabled digital platforms, more accessible to even more Singaporeans.
Mr Pritam Singh asked about how we intend to report on the success of our initiatives to improve employment outcomes for Singaporeans. I would like to assure the Member that our broad indicators have shown that our efforts thus far have been quite successful.
Resident employment is expanded annually, even through the recent pandemic, and our labour force participation remains high at 68.6%. In 2023, the resident unemployment rate was stable and low at 2.7%. The resident long-term unemployment rate also remains low at 0.7%. Real wages have grown over the longer-term, underpinned by sustained productivity growth.
Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Liang Eng Hwa have asked for an update on the financial support scheme for involuntarily unemployed jobseekers. As the Deputy Prime Minister said, we will announce the scheme later this year.
We have considered feedback and suggestions from tripartite partners and the public, including recommendations from the NTUC-SNEF PME Taskforce in 2021 and the Citizens' Panel on Employment Resilience in 2023. We are close to finalising the scheme parameters, and I want to assure the House that we have, indeed, looked at best practices around the world. For example, our payouts will be conditional on jobseekers making the effort to actively search for a job. This will avoid the unintended consequences faced by other countries in implementing similar schemes.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling, Mr Pritam Singh and Mr Gerald Giam asked if we could better recognise the contributions of tradespeople and make skilled trades more attractive for Singaporeans.
As mentioned again in the Forward SG report, the Government will work with the Labour Movement, industry and communities of tradespeople to develop and testbed initiatives to professionalise skilled trades, such as developing structured training and career pathways. We will study interventions for electricians first, with a view to scaling to more occupations.
On Mr Pritam Singh's proposal to legislate retrenchment benefit, including for those in \"hands\" and \"heart\" roles, we have no plans to do so. This is consistent with our stance on retrenchment benefit for all employees. Legally mandating retrenchment benefit will affect the viability of businesses which are already in financial difficulty and put existing employees at risk. Additionally, the businesses that can afford to pay more will default to the legislated minimum.
I am going to move to the next section on \"uplifting you\" and how we ensure that no one is left behind.
Securing better jobs during an individual's working years empowers and enables you to be financially secure when you retire. We want to assure Singaporeans that as long as you work and contribute consistently to CPF, you will be able to meet your basic retirement needs.
Over the last decade, the proportion of active CPF members setting aside their Full Retirement Sum (FRS) at age 55, either fully in cash or a mixture of property and cash, has improved from five in 10, to seven in 10 today. Therefore, it is not as alarming as what the Leader of the Opposition characterised retirement adequacy to be: a \"serious and ongoing concern\". Even then, the Government is committed to uplifting Singaporeans who need more help as part of our refreshed social compact.
At Budget 2024, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced a significant suite of retirement adequacy measures.
First, the $8.2 billion Majulah Package. The Government has enhanced the Majulah Package, after it was announced at the National Day Rally last year, to support all Singaporeans born in 1973 or earlier. This includes the Pioneer and Merdeka Generations. The Majulah Package is now expected to benefit 1.6 million Singaporeans, up from around 1.4 million Singaporeans previously estimated.
Second, enhancements to the WIS, SSS and the MRSS.
Third, moves to rationalise the CPF system, in particular the closure of the Special Account (SA) and the raising of the Enhanced Retirement Sum (ERS).
With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute an infographic? This infographic illustrates how every older Singaporean will benefit from our comprehensive suite of measures for retirement adequacy. Members may also access the infographic through the SG Parl MP mobile app.
The Chairman: Yes. Please proceed. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Dr Tan See Leng: Since Budget 2024, there has been much discussion on the closure of the SA for CPF members aged 55 and above. Many, including Mr Desmond Choo, have asked why the Government is making this move now.
The core principle behind closing the SA is to \"right-site\" CPF monies, such that only CPF savings committed for long-term retirement earn the higher long-term interest rate. The closure of the SA, together with the significant suite of measures for retirement adequacy that we will be rolling out, is part of the evolution of the CPF system.
Fundamentally, the CPF system is designed to provide for members' basic retirement needs, as well as support their housing and healthcare needs. These are our core priorities.
With rising incomes and savings of fellow Singaporeans, stable CPF returns and trust in the CPF system, many of us would like to save more than the FRS. Some hope for higher investment returns; others hope to leave a bequest.
We will work hard at providing stable returns appropriate for savings that can be withdrawn in the shorter term, as well as those set aside for longer term retirement needs. And, as the CPF system evolves, the fundamental objectives of addressing retirement, housing and healthcare needs remain, for all Singaporeans.
Let me explain why this evolution is necessary.
When CPF was first introduced in 1955, Singaporeans had little retirement savings. As our economy grew, subsequent cohorts benefited from high employment rates and strong wage growth. As a result, Singaporeans today can set aside more in their CPF accounts. The number of members voluntarily topping up their CPF accounts has more than doubled from 2020 to 2022, demonstrating strong trust in the CPF system.
The number and proportion of CPF members with withdrawable SA balances has also increased and will continue to do so. This is not consistent with the principle that only long-term savings should earn the higher long-term interest rate.
During the Budget Debate, Ms Foo Mee Har said that closing the SA \"affects many middle-income seniors\" and suggested for a \"fairer option\" of grandfathering the SA for existing members aged 55 and above. Ms Foo Mee Har's suggestion will inadvertently create a generational divide, benefiting the current generation of older Singaporeans, while disadvantaging younger Singaporeans.
Those affected by the move are generally the more well-off. Only 8,400 members, who are relatively high-income earners, representing less than 1% of members aged 55 and above, will not be able to fully transfer their SA savings to their RA, as we raise the ERS to four times that of BRS.
In other words, more than 99% of CPF members aged 55 and above today will be able to transfer all their SA savings to their RA, to continue earning the higher long-term interest rate and receive higher retirement payouts, should they wish to do so.
I hope Ms Hazel Poa and Mr Leong Mun Wai can see that closing the SA is not a move to save interest payments. These remaining 8,400 members, the less than 1% with higher balances, can transfer their CPF savings to the RA of their family members or grow them outside the CPF system.
Nonetheless, I note Ms Foo Mee Har's support for the raising of the ERS, from three times to four times of the BRS, from 2025. This move is, indeed, intended to help the broad middle. To Ms Hazel Poa, the ERS cap on RA balances is necessary to ensure that the CPF system continues to serve the broad majority.
With the raised ERS, a member turning 55 years old in 2025 can receive about $3,300 per month of CPF LIFE payouts at age 65, if he chooses to top up to the raised ERS, up from about $2,500 today.
We recognise that close to 720,000 members with withdrawable SA balances, with a median balance of about $2,000, may experience some loss in liquidity. These members have a few options to choose from when the SA is closed next year.
First, these members with the median balance of about $2,000 in the SA can retain these balances in the OA for liquidity. Compared to the SA, there will be lower interest earned, with a difference of about $3 per month, or about $30 per year at the median.
Second, they can choose to invest in safe instruments, such as the Singapore Government Securities through the CPF Investment Scheme.
Third, they can top up their RA, up to the raised ERS, to receive higher retirement payouts.
Finally, they can also choose to withdraw their monies to invest outside the CPF system.
Mr Louis Chua said that interest committed to CPF LIFE \"will not accrue to the CPF holder\" but is pooled together for all members. Let me explain why this risk-pooling is necessary.
CPF LIFE is an insurance scheme that addresses the risk of outliving one's savings by providing members with lifelong monthly payouts. This risk-pooling allows CPF members to get monthly payouts for as long as they live. Upon a member's passing, any unused premium is refunded to the member's beneficiaries.
Hence, members need to be clear about what they are getting with their RA savings. CPF LIFE is a form of insurance. It is not an investment vehicle. Each member will need to assess for themselves what level of retirement payouts they desire. I would also like to highlight that CPF LIFE premium continues to earn interest, which is factored into members' CPF LIFE monthly payouts that will last as long as they live.
The Business Times published an article, about a week ago, that called CPF LIFE \"the best annuity in the market\". Members today are allowed to opt out if they have a pension or an annuity that pays the same or higher monthly payouts for life. If Mr Louis Chua knows of any similar or better products, he, too, can apply to opt out of CPF LIFE.
The Government is also not locking up members' savings. By age 70, members are required to start drawing down on their CPF savings through retirement payouts, and this is in line with CPF's core objective of providing a lifelong retirement income. In fact, some members have written to me requesting to defer their payout start age to beyond 70 years old. But it is not possible. We want members to enjoy their hard-earned monies by that age.
With all these clarifications, I trust that Members of this House and Singaporeans will better appreciate why we are closing the SA for those aged 55 and above. As Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong said, the changes announced are \"very much in line with the purpose and intent of the CPF\", which is for retirement, for housing and for healthcare.
It is a matter of principle. It is not about saving costs for the Government. Nearly all CPF members can continue to earn the higher interest rate if they choose to transfer their SA savings to their RA. Furthermore, the SA closure should also be seen alongside the other significant measures that we are making to boost the retirement adequacy of Singaporeans.
We must evolve our CPF system while retaining its focus on serving the broad majority and providing more support to those with less. I am heartened that MPs, like Mr Neil Parekh, have expressed support for this as a step in the right direction.
Ultimately, we want to assure Singaporeans that the Government remains committed to uplifting those who need more support. The Government is therefore rolling out the Majulah Package to support our \"young seniors\" who are currently in their 50s and early 60s. Our young seniors face unique challenges. Compared to younger Singaporeans, they have generally earned less during their working years, and they have a shorter runway to benefit from recent improvements to the CPF system. Many of them are sandwiched between caring for both the young and the old in their families.
The Majulah Package has three components. First, the Earn and Save Bonus of up to $1,000 per year. The Earn and Save Bonus will cover around seven in 10 older employed Singaporean workers, who are lower- to middle-income, earning up to $6,000 per month, with more support going to those earning less. The first Earn and Save Bonus will be credited into your CPF account in 2025, based on the work done last year. Second, a one-time Retirement Savings Bonus of up to $1,500 for those with lower CPF retirement savings. This bonus will be credited into your CPF account by the end of this year. Third, a one-time MediSave Bonus of up to $1,500. We recognise that healthcare cost is a concern for all. Hence, all older Singaporeans will receive this by the end of this year.
Beyond the Majulah Package, the Government is also enhancing existing schemes to help those who may need more support. We will further enhance the WIS scheme to help our lower-wage workers build up their retirement savings. We will spend around $300 million more, spending a total of around $1.4 billion in 2025. This will benefit around half a million lower-wage workers. Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad will provide more details.
We will update SSS to better support seniors who have less for retirement. We will spend an additional $260 million, spending a total of around $860 million in 2025. About 290,000 Singaporeans will benefit.
We will enhance the Matched Retirement Savings Scheme (MRSS) by increasing the annual matching cap from $600 to $2,000 per year and extending the scheme to those who are older than 70 years old. This will double the number of eligible Singaporeans to about 800,000 per year. In addition, we will proceed with the next step of the increase in senior workers' CPF contribution rates. Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will elaborate on these schemes to support older Singaporeans in his speech.
To address the concerns raised by Mr Desmond Choo and other Members, caregivers and homemakers who are unable to work and are, thus, ineligible to receive the Earn and Save Bonus, still benefit from the MediSave Bonus, Retirement Savings Bonus, enhanced Silver Support Scheme and the MRSS.
A \"young senior\" who will benefit from the Majulah Package is Ms Caroline Ng. She is 54 years old this year, and lives with her husband and son in a 4-room flat. Together with her sister-in-law, Ms Ng is also supporting her elderly mother-in-law. Ms Ng and her husband are in a sandwiched phase of life: 上有老，下有小.
Ms Ng started her career in HR but stopped working to take care of her young son then and the elderly in her family. As her son grew more independent, Ms Ng rejoined the workforce in 2020, with the guidance of a career coach from WSG. She subsequently took a temporary career break and she is now looking forward to return to the workforce again.
Ms Ng is excited about the Majulah Package because the Earn and Save Bonus and Retirement Savings Bonus can help her set aside more CPF savings as they translate into higher retirement payouts. In addition, Ms Ng, her husband and elderly mother-in-law will also receive the MediSave Bonus to pay for their own healthcare needs. I am happy to hear that in her free time, Ms Ng volunteers as a Silver Generation Ambassador, engaging seniors in her community through home visits and encouraging them to stay active.
Speaking of active ageing, another young senior who is looking forward to the Majulah Package is Mdm Norizan. She is 59 years old this year and works in the F&B industry. Mdm Norizan enjoys working at her F&B outlet and interacting with customers from all walks of life. Mdm Norizan believes in the value of keeping her mind and body engaged, and that is why she is keen to continue working for as long as she is able to.
Mdm Norizan said that she is very appreciative of the Earn and Save Bonus, which gives an added boost as she carries on working. I hope that the Earn and Save Bonus will encourage many more older Singaporeans, like Mdm Norizan to continue working, if they can and if they wish to.
Let me now address Members' queries on other aspects of the CPF system. Ms Hazel Poa suggested to improve flexibility and returns on CPF savings. I would like to remind the Member again that the primary purpose of the CPF system is to help CPF members save for long-term retirement needs. CPF balances earn returns pegged to market instruments of comparable risk and duration, but the investment risk is entirely borne by the Government.
CPF members who have the appetite to take on more investment risk for potentially higher returns can participate in the CPF Investment Scheme. However, I would like to remind members that higher returns come with higher risk. Ms Hazel Poa and Mr Louis Chua called on the Government to implement the Lifetime Retirement Investment Scheme (LRIS).
With the benefit of hindsight on historical returns these few years, it is easy to comment on what should have been done. Although the current outlook for 2024 has improved, there is still considerable uncertainty, with risks tilted to the downside. No one can be sure how the markets will move.
Hence, as per Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong's and my previous explanations to Mr Louis Chua, it is not straightforward to introduce the LRIS. The LRIS will introduce a new element of risk for retirees. Regardless, we will continue to study the LRIS proposal, and we will work on making the CPF system even better for Singaporeans.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Louis Chua talked about the interest rate peg for the OA. The Government is aware that the OA interest rate has remained relatively stable, while yields of market instruments of comparable risk and duration have increased.
But let us take a long-term view. Over the past two decades of low-interest rate environment, we have paid 2.5% interest, as well as extra interest, while the market was paying well below that. On average, the annual OA interest rate was 1.7 percentage points higher than the 12-month fixed deposit rates, from 1999 to 2021. Nevertheless, we are still monitoring the situation. We will continue to review our CPF interest rates periodically to ensure their relevance in the prevailing operating environment.
Mr Ong Hua Han suggested expanding the Home Protection Scheme (HPS) to cover more members with pre-existing conditions. Let me explain. The HPS today already covers members with pre-existing health conditions, including PwDs, if they are assessed to be generally in good health. Nearly all HPS applications are issued covers. In the last three years, about 1.2% of HPS applications were not approved due to serious pre-existing medical conditions.
Nevertheless, we are reviewing ways to further expand the coverage of the HPS, but we also have to take into consideration the affordability of premiums across the wider group. Hence, taken together, the significant suite of measures that I have talked about will ensure that the CPF system retains its focus on serving the broad majority, while uplifting those who need more support. We want to assure Singaporeans that you can retire with peace of mind in your golden years.
Moving on to my final point on \"caring for you\".
We want to provide all Singaporeans with opportunities to participate in our transformation journey. The Government will work hand-in-hand with employers and workers to build more inclusive and progressive workplaces.
For seniors who wish to continue working, our tripartite partners have agreed in 2019 to increase the retirement and re-employment ages to 65 and 70 by 2030. We successfully made one round of increase in July 2022. Today, I am pleased to announce that we have reached a tripartite agreement to implement the next round of increase to the retirement and re-employment ages. In 2026, the retirement age will be increased from 63 to 64, while the re-employment age will be increased from 68 to 69. Minister of State Gan Siow Huang will share more.
MOM will also introduce two important Bills in Parliament this year.
First, we recognise the importance of fair workplaces. This is why the Government accepted the recommendation by the Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness to introduce a new Workplace Fairness Legislation. This will further strengthen protections against discrimination and provide greater assurance to workers who wish to report grievances. We note Ms He Ting Ru's views and we look forward to discussing this Bill robustly in the House in time to come.
Second, we will update our regulatory frameworks to strengthen protections for our platform workers. This will include areas, such as housing, retirement adequacy, work injury compensation and representation.
Let me now conclude. Whether you are a youth starting your career, a mid-career worker looking at the next steps or a senior in your golden years, the Government will walk every step with you.
For youths, we will empower you to plan out your careers and seize new opportunities. For mid-career workers, we will equip you with the means to stay relevant and competitive. This includes replenishing your skills to stay ahead and reskilling support if you want a career change. For seniors approaching retirement, you will be able to meet your basic retirement needs as long as you have contributed consistently to your CPF. We will continue to strengthen support for those who may need more help along the way.
Workers can also look forward to more inclusive and progressive workplaces. These measures support a refreshed social compact to take us forward together.
We are aware that some of our policy measures announced today will have an impact on business costs. However, I must emphasise – and I want to seek everyone's support, understanding and indulgence – that a significant part of the cost increase is going towards uplifting our local lower-wage workers and improving the livelihoods of our fellow Singaporeans.
At the same time, when we also look at the profitability of our businesses, we still remain competitive compared to other economies. Therefore, I hope that our employers can support us and carry the shared burden and responsibility of our refreshed social compact. With the Labour Movement, employers, workers and Government working hand-in-hand, I am confident that we will build a better future together!
Mr Chairman, let me now say a few words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Over the past year, I have participated in many conversations under the Forward SG exercise and heard the aspirations of Singaporeans regarding employment and retirement. MOM deeply understands and pays close attention to the anxieties and aspirations of Singaporeans for the future. Regardless of your age group and challenges you face, we will walk with you.
If you are currently employed, the Government will launch a new OMIP to support you in taking on overseas roles and expanding your horizons. If you are looking to switch jobs, the CareersFinder feature on the MyCareersFuture website can recommend suitable jobs and training courses to help you better plan your career. Employers can also tap on the CCPs to hire new talent.
For lower-wage workers, the PWM can provide you with better income security and career progression. This year, we will raise the LQS and enhance WIS to provide additional support. If you are currently over 50 years old, we will provide greater support through the Majulah Package. This $8.2 billion package consists of the following three components:
First, if you continue working and earn a monthly salary of $6,000 or less, you will receive an Earn and Save Bonus of up to $1,000 per year. Second, Singaporeans who have not yet attained the Basic Retirement Sum in their CPF accounts can receive a one-time Retirement Savings Bonus of up to $1,500. Third, all Singaporeans above 50 years old this year can receive a one-time MediSave Bonus of up to $1,500 to help you with medical and insurance expenses. In addition, the Government will gradually raise the retirement and re-employment ages and increase the CPF contribution rates for senior workers to help you accumulate more CPF savings.
For vulnerable groups and retirees who need more support, we will enhance the Silver Support Scheme and the MRSS to strengthen your financial security in retirement.
At different stages in life, we all have different pursuits. In our youth, we are full of ambition, believing that we have innate talents and hoping to build a grand career. In our prime, we continue to improve and challenge ourselves, aiming to reach new heights in our careers. In our golden years, we hope to enjoy a peaceful retirement and, at the same time, contribute our wisdom to guide the next generation. As the saying goes, the younger generation will surpass the older generation. We hope that our next generation can make greater contributions to society.
As we journey towards our goals, setbacks are inevitable. During the lows of our lives, we all hope to have close friends by our side, sharing our joys and sorrows and helping us through the difficult times. This reminds me of a well-known song by Wakin Chau, \"Friends\": \"Friends never feel lonely, a true friend will understand.\"
The Government and our tripartite partners will stand shoulder to shoulder with employers, workers and Singaporeans. This is our social compact. As long as we can unite and support each other, we can certainly progress towards a brighter future.
The Chairman: We will take the clarifications at the end. Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.
The Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Chairman, earlier, the Minister for Manpower outlined how MOM will strengthen efforts to uplift our lower-wage workers. In my speech, I will elaborate on the positive impact of our tripartite approach to uplifting lower-wage workers and how we will build on our efforts; secondly, how we have strengthened our HR capabilities; and third, our progress in improving WSH.
With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout detailing our efforts to support our lower-wage workers? Members may also access the handout through the SG PARL MP Mobile App.
The Chairman: Please proceed. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Chairman, tripartism is at the centre of Singapore's approach to uplifting lower-wage workers. Over the years, the Government has worked closely together with employers and unions to support the advancement of lower-wage workers in a sustainable manner so that everyone can enjoy the fruits of Singapore's growth. Progressive Wages and Workfare are a big part of our collective efforts.
Progressive Wages are implemented in two ways.
First, the PWM provides for career and training progression pathways for lower-wage workers in sectors and occupations with many of such workers, ensuring that wages rise sustainably. Members may refer to the info sheet for PWM for the ladders and trajectories and their salaries.
Second, for the remaining sectors and occupations, local workers must still be paid at least the LQS, if their employers hire foreign manpower. The Government provides employers with transitional co-funding of wage increases for lower-wage workers, through the PWCS. Through Workfare, the Government further supplements the incomes of lower-wage workers to help them to save more for retirement and support them for upskilling through training.
This year is a momentous milestone in Singapore's journey of uplifting lower-wage workers, as it marks the 10th anniversary of our first PWM. Together with other tripartite efforts, PWMs have supported lower-wage workers in seeing sustained and meaningful wage growth over the past decade.
Real incomes of lower-wage workers at the 20th percentile have risen cumulatively by 30% from 2013 to 2023, faster than the median worker at 22%. Over the past two years, we have expanded Progressive Wages to cover even more lower-wage workers, and this follows the release of recommendations by the Tripartite Workgroup on Lower-Wage Workers in 2021.
Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Fahmi Aliman asked about the progress of our efforts. Today, more than 155,000 lower-wage workers across nine sectors and occupations are covered by the PWM. This is more than five times the coverage in 2020. So, we have expanded quite significantly since 2020.
In addition, over 105,000 lower-wage workers are covered by the LQS requirement. Our suite of Progressive Wage moves – comprising PWMs, LQS and the Progressive Wage Mark accreditation scheme – now benefit up to nine in 10 of full-time lower-wage workers today. In a tight labour market, lower-wage workers who are not directly covered by Progressive Wages should also see increases in their wages.
Mr Fahimi Aliman and Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about how we will build upon existing efforts to uplift lower-wage workers. A key step that we will take is to raise the LQS threshold. The LQS threshold ensures that locals are employed meaningfully, rather than on token salaries for firms to access foreign workers. We regularly review the LQS threshold to keep pace with rising local wages and maintain the effectiveness of our foreign workforce controls.
The Government last updated the LQS threshold in 2020 before the pandemic. We recognised that firms needed time to comply with the new LQS requirement, which came into effect in September 2022. So, local wages have increased with our recovery from the pandemic and we are thus adjusting the LQS threshold.
As announced by the Deputy Prime Minister at Budget, the LQS threshold will be raised from $1,400 to $1,600 for full-time local employees to better support our lower-wage workers. We will also raise the LQS threshold for part-time local employees, from $9 per hour to $10.50 per hour.
Correspondingly, foreign worker quota computation will be adjusted.
To be counted as one local workforce count (LWC) for the purpose of foreign worker quota for firms – or one LWC – the local worker will need to be paid at least $1,600. This is up from $1,400 today. For firms hiring part-time workers, locals who earn at least half the LQS are counted as half an LWC. With the LQS increase, such locals have to be paid at least $800, up from $700 today. These changes will be implemented on 1 July 2024.
On the Government’s part, we will continue providing lower-wage workers with additional support through Workfare, to complement our Progressive Wage efforts. Workfare comprises two key pillars: WIS, and the Workfare Skills Support Scheme (WSS). Over the years, the Government has steadily strengthened our Workfare support for lower-wage workers.
As announced by the Deputy Prime Minister at Budget, the Government will further enhance Workfare. From 2025, we will raise the qualifying monthly income cap further, from $2,500 to $3,000, for both WIS and WSS. Mr Sharael Taha would be pleased to note that this ensures Workfare continues to help workers in the bottom 20th income percentiles, with some support for those slightly above.
We will also raise WIS payments. We will increase the maximum payment to $4,900 per year, up from $4,200. Those aged 60 and above will benefit from this highest payment tier for Workfare, as well as all PwDs regardless of age.
Payments for all other qualifying age groups will also be increased. Those aged 30 to 34 will receive a maximum payment of $2,450 per year; those aged 35 to 44 will receive a maximum payment of $3,500 per year; and those aged 45 to 59 will receive a maximum payment of $4,200 per year. These enhancements will benefit around half a million lower-wage workers. In total, WIS payments will increase to $1.4 billion in 2025, up from $1.1 billion last year.
Another key step that the Government will take is ensuring employees are aware of the Progressive Wages they are eligible for. We thus launched the Progressive Wage Portal (PW Portal), earlier in January.
Even as we support our lower-wage workers, we also understand and are aware that employers face uncertain economic conditions. Many employers have done their part. They have continued paying their lower-wage workers good wages and upskilled them, even for those not on PWM, and despite challenging economic conditions.
We need to be mindful of the impact of Progressive Wages on employers in the short run. We should ensure that as we uplift lower-wage workers, we do not inadvertently harm workers’ prospects or risk widespread job losses.
Hence, in 2022, the Government introduced PWCS to co-fund wage increases that employers give their lower-earning employees. PWCS provides transitional support for employers to adjust to new PWM and LQS requirements, and encourages voluntary wage increases for lower-wage workers.
Through PWCS, the Government has supported meaningful wage increases for lower-wage workers. For wage increases given in 2022, the Government disbursed about $1 billion of PWCS to employers. This co-funded the wage increases given to more than 345,000 employees by over 70,000 employers. The median monthly wage increase supported by PWCS was about $300.
To Mr Sharael Taha’s query, the Government will indeed continue providing transitional support to employers through PWCS over the next few years. As outlined by the Deputy Prime Minister at the Budget, the Government will further enhance PWCS this year to help employers cope with PWM and LQS increases amid a more challenging economic environment.
First, we will increase the Government’s co-funding for wage increases given in 2024. This builds on earlier enhancements in 2022 and 2023 at 75% co-funding. With this year’s enhancement, the Government will co-fund up to 50% of wage increases given by employers to eligible lower-wage workers in 2024, up from the original 30%. This includes workers who are not covered by any PWM.
Second, we will raise the wage ceiling in 2025 and 2026 to $3,000, up from $2,500 per month. With this enhancement, PWCS will continue to support increases of wages up to $3,000 beyond 2024. Full details are at the PWCS website.
Collectively, both enhancements will offset a significant proportion of immediate cost pressures on employers arising from our efforts to uplift lower-wage workers and mitigate cost transfer to consumers.
To provide for these enhancements, the Deputy Prime Minister has announced a top-up of $1 billion to the PWCS Fund. This brings the total PWCS budget to $6.2 billion. Together with the increased Workfare payments of up to $1.4 billion per year – $6.2 billion for PWCS and $1.4 billion per year in Workfare payments – I think that is quite significant. I hope Members can see that the Government has committed and invested significant resources into strengthening and supporting our lower-wage workers.
However, the Government cannot single-handedly drive the growth of lower-wage workers’ incomes, nor can we co-fund wage increases given to lower-wage workers indefinitely. This is not a sustainable approach. As Mr Edward Chia, Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Mr Sharael Taha said, uplifting lower-wage workers is a whole-of-society effort. Workers need to improve their skills, so they can be as productive as they can be in their jobs, as their wages rises. Firms and industries must also transform.
Lower-wage workers tend to be in frontline roles, where their productivity growth is heavily dependent on how the firms and industries that they work in operate. This means that transformation must also take place at the firm- and industry-level, as Mr Edward Chia said, so that we can narrow the wage gap in a sustainable way.
Industries must therefore accelerate the pace of their transformation journeys, taking guidance from ITMs. Employers must accelerate their individual business transformation plans and drive productivity gains within their firms, through better technology and processes. Employers can find support through Government schemes, such as the Productivity Solutions Grant. Employers can also consider working with NTUC to set up CTCs and tap on the NTUC CTC grant to transform businesses, redesign jobs and improve work prospects for their employees.
Service buyers have a role to play too. Where there is a need to renegotiate existing contracts for compliance with Progressive Wages, service buyers and service providers should work together to come to a mutually agreeable solution. Above all, service buyers should embrace outcome-based contracting, which focuses on specifying clear and deliverable outcomes, rather than the exact number of workers for individual tasks. This allows service providers to deliver quality services using less manpower and enables employers to pay higher wages to their lower-wage workers using productivity as a tool.
Last but not least, consumers can make their choices count, by purchasing from businesses accredited with the PW Mark. Today, over 4,400 businesses are PW Mark-accredited, and more are coming onboard each day. Supporting PW Mark businesses means supporting lower-wage workers. Both you and I can make our purchase matter and help uplift lower-wage workers more sustainably.
Chairman, I move on to HR and strengthening HR capabilities. HR is a key enabler for workforce and business success, and MOM remains committed to strengthening employers’ HR capabilities.
Mr Edward Chia asked how MOM is empowering employers to adopt job redesign. WSG, in collaboration with IHRP, launched the Job Redesign Centre of Excellence (JRCoE) last November. JRCoE serves as a one-stop centre to equip enterprises with capabilities to transform their business and workforce through job redesign. Around 20 TACs have pledged support for the JRCoE and will be encouraging their member companies to incorporate job redesign in HR practices.
Moving on to WSH.\tI would like to assure Mr Melvin Yong that fostering safer and healthier workplaces remains a key priority for the Government. In 2023, our workplace fatal injury rate fell to 0.99 per 100,000 workers. This is the first time it has fallen below one per 100,000 workers, aside from 2020 when COVID-19 disrupted work. Only four OECD countries have achieved this consistently – the UK, the Netherlands, Sweden and Germany. If we can sustain this, this puts us among the top performers of WSH in the world.
We have achieved this milestone five years ahead of target year 2028 because of the Government’s close partnership with employers and workers, and certainly with the help of the labour movement as well. I thank the Member and my colleagues in the Multi-Agency Workplace Safety and Health Taskforce (MAST) for their commitment to improving safety in our workplaces.
The key challenge moving forward – and our goal has to be this – is to sustain the rate at below one. It has to be sustained. This requires all stakeholders to press on with our collective efforts.
Business leaders must continue to reinforce a strong and pervasive culture of workplace safety excellence, and invest in WSH technologies. Unions must advocate for safe, healthy workplaces and working conditions. On the ground, proper risk assessment and management must be done. Workers must continue to follow safety protocols, speak up to improve WSH practices, and call out safety risks.
On our part, the Government will continue to push out the Safety Accountability, Focus and Empowerment (SAFE) measures announced last May, and strengthen WSH ownership of employers and workers through programmes and resources. We will continue to closely monitor sectoral WSH performance. Key findings for 2023 will be shared in the WSH National Statistics Report scheduled for release by this April. Through our collective efforts and vigilance, I believe we can sustain our achievement in 2023 for the long term.
Ms He Ting Ru asked about the compensation under WICA. Insurers have to adhere to claims, processing standards and guidelines, including how compensation is computed. The median time for designated insurers to process a WIC claim is about six months, and processing time varies depending on the complexity of the case. The Government reviews the WICA system regularly.
In fact, just this February, MOM announced increases to the WICA compensation limits to keep pace with wage growth and rising healthcare costs. These changes will be implemented from November 2025. We will continue reviewing WICA regularly to ensure that workers have access to expeditious and fair compensation in case of work injury.
The Government is committed to working hand-in-hand with employers, service buyers, consumers and workers themselves, to build a safer and more inclusive workplace. We must continue to progress together as one people to ensure that no worker is left behind and that all workers have the opportunity to achieve their fullest potential. Mr Chairman, allow me to recap some of MOM’s efforts in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Over the years, the Government has worked closely together with employers and NTUC unions to support the advancement of lower-wage workers in a sustainable manner. Together with other tripartite efforts, PWMs have supported lower-wage workers in seeing meaningful wage growth. Real incomes of lower-wage workers have risen cumulatively by 30% from 2013 to 2023, faster than the median worker at 22%. PWM workers, in particular, have seen strong wage outcomes.
Here, I recall the situation of workers, like Ms Sivamani Taigrajan. As a new auxiliary security officer when she started working in 2005, Ms Sivamani earned a monthly salary of $800. Throughout her nearly 20-year career in the security industry, Ms Sivamani has continued to upskill and take on greater and new responsibilities, guided by the PWM framework for the security industry.
Now as a security supervisor, Ms Sivamani earns a monthly salary of $3,250, which is a significant progress from her initial monthly salary of $800. This demonstrates the effectiveness of the PWM in supporting meaningful wage increases for our workers, as they enhance their skills and productivity.
Today, 155,000 lower-wage workers across nine sectors and occupations are covered by a PWM. This is more than five times the previous PWM coverage in 2020. Under the PWM, workers can receive annual wage increases and expect to earn at least the relevant PWM salary. For example, cleaners will see their pay rise to at least $2,420 per month by 2028. In addition, over 105,000 lower-wage workers are covered by the LQS requirement, where firms employing foreign manpower must pay all their local workers at least the LQS.
Together with the PW Mark accreditation scheme, our suite of Progressive Wage measures, comprising the PWMs, LQS and the PW Mark, now benefit nine in 10 of full-time lower-wage workers today.
The Government is strengthening our efforts to raise the salaries and well-being of our lower-wage workers. First, we will raise the LQS threshold from $1,400 to $1,600 for full-time local employees from 1 July 2024. We will also raise the LQS threshold for part-time local employees, from $9 per hour to $10.50 per hour. Second, we will enhance Workfare to further strengthen our support for lower-wage workers to help them to save more for their retirement.
In the years to come, I would like to give my assurance to Members in this Chamber that the Government will continue to work together with employers and NTUC to ensure that everyone advances and enjoy the fruits of Singapore’s growth together, as one, through the good times and the bad times.
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Dr Koh Poh Koon.
The Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon): Mr Chairman, I will now speak more about MOM's measures to uplift Singaporeans and workers who may be more vulnerable. This includes our efforts to boost retirement adequacy of our seniors and improve protections for our workers. I will also cover our ongoing efforts to support the well-being of our migrant workers.
To boost the retirement adequacy of our seniors, the Government will introduce the Majulah Package to provide more support for our \"young seniors\", as well as seniors in the Pioneer and Merdeka generations. These generations have generally earned less over their lifetime and had a shorter runway to benefit from the improvements to our CPF system. We want to assure Singaporeans that as long as one works and contributes consistently to CPF, you will be able to meet your retirement needs through CPF payouts.
But what about those who are not able to work and contribute consistently to their CPF accounts? Some may accumulate less CPF savings due to low wages during their working years. Others may not work consistently due to caregiving responsibilities or disabilities.
As Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Yip Hon Weng and other MPs at the Budget Debate have rightly pointed out, we will also need to boost the retirement adequacy of these groups. Families, employers and the community play a key role in supporting our seniors. This is an important part of our social compact and the Government will continue to encourage and support this. The Government will enhance our support in the following ways.
First, to allow senior workers to accumulate more in their CPF accounts, we will continue with the planned increase in senior workers' CPF contribution rates.
Second, we will continue to encourage family, employers and the community to support our seniors with lower retirement savings by enhancing the MRSS.
Third, we will also enhance the Silver Support Scheme for seniors who had low incomes during their working years and have less family support.
As Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced at Budget, we are committed to raising the CPF contribution rates for senior workers. We have implemented the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers' recommendation to increase the CPF contribution rates for senior workers since 2022 and will continue to do so in 2025. The Government will continue to support employers with the CPF Transition Offset for the first year of implementation of this increase. I want to also thank our tripartite partners for their continued support. These recommendations are necessary so that our senior workers can enter retirement with more confidence.
Even with the increase in senior workers' CPF contribution rates, some seniors may still face challenges in accumulating their CPF savings for retirement. We want to supplement efforts by families, employers and the community to help these seniors to save more.
In 2021, the Government introduced MRSS as a pilot. Under MRSS, the Government provides a dollar-for-dollar matching grant on cash top-ups made to the Retirement Account of eligible senior Singapore Citizens aged between 55 and 70 with lower retirement savings. The matching grant is capped at $600 per year. Anyone can make these top-ups – individuals themselves, family members, employers and the community. In the first three years, about 172,000 Singaporeans have benefited from the scheme. The Government has provided matching grants of about $200 million thus far.
The positive response for MRSS showed that financially savvy members have chosen to make top-ups to loved ones' CPF accounts as a way of growing their retirement savings. Thus, as Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong announced in his Budget speech, we will continue the scheme beyond the pilot and enhance the scheme in two ways from 2025 onwards.
First, the MRSS will be extended beyond the current age cap of 70. I am glad that Ms Hazel Poa agrees with this move. The number of Singaporeans eligible for the enhanced MRSS will thus double to about 800,000 per year.
Second, Mr Desmond Choo would be glad to hear that the maximum matching grant quantum will be increased from $600 to $2,000 per year. A $20,000 cap will apply over an eligible member's lifetime. So, an eligible senior who receives annual cash top-ups of $2,000 for 10 years can see his retirement savings increase by about $48,000, which translates to about a $260 increase in his lifelong monthly CPF payouts.
As our seniors enter their golden years, many of us want to better support them in old age. In fact, many of us regularly give them cash allowances to cover their daily expenses. So, I would urge more Singaporeans to consider topping up their parents' CPF, too. This can be done in regular, small amounts.
Take, for example, 35-year-old Ms Tay. She has been giving her parents monthly cash allowance since she started working. On top of that, Ms Tay has a GIRO arrangement with the CPF Board since 2018 to make monthly cash top-ups into her parents' Retirement Accounts. Her mother is also eligible for the MRSS. So, when the MRSS was introduced in 2021, her mother benefited from the dollar-for-dollar matching of her GIRO top-ups. Ms Tay said that MRSS is a good initiative to get Singaporeans to top up their parents' Retirement Account and earn the risk-free CPF interest rates.
With the upcoming enhancements to the MRSS to increase the annual matching grant quantum, Ms Tay intends to also increase her cash top-ups so that she can help to increase her parents' monthly retirement payouts. For those who choose to follow in Ms Tay's footsteps, the Government will augment your efforts by providing the MRSS matching grant to eligible seniors.
The community can also use the MRSS to support those who need more help. A good example is Fei Yue Community Services. In 2021 and 2022, they identified seniors living alone in rental flats in their community and worked with members of the public to raise over S$300,000. The donations were credited as cash top-ups into the Retirement Accounts of over 500 senior beneficiaries.
Another community partner of MRSS is Tsao Foundation. Since 2021, Tsao Foundation has been encouraging seniors to save more for their retirement. Tsao Foundation provided additional cash top-ups so that the seniors under their programme receive the maximum annual matching grant from the Government when they top-up their Retirement Account. Tsao Foundation intends to further extend its campaign so that more seniors can benefit from MRSS.
In addition to the increase in senior workers' contribution rates and MRSS enhancements, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong and the Minister have also shared that the Government will be enhancing the SSS. The increase in SSS quarterly payments by 20% to keep pace with inflation should address Mr Yip Hon Weng's concerns. We will continue to review the SSS regularly to target support at seniors who need it the most while ensuring that the scheme remains fiscally sustainable.
All in all, the enhancements to the CPF system enable a whole-of-society effort to support the retirement adequacy of our seniors. Individuals, employers, family members and the community, all of us can do our part to fortify our social compact and build a community that is kind and cares for one another. This is the essence of the Forward SG Exercise led by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong.
Mr Chairman, allow me now to say a few words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Through conversations with the people, we have come to understand that many Singaporeans approaching retirement age are very concerned about their retirement adequacy.
The Government has introduced the Majulah Package and other new measures to enhance retrenchment adequacy to meet the basic retirement needs of elderly Singaporeans. We will collaborate with families, community groups and employers to provide more assistance to vulnerable elderly Singaporeans.
The Government will enhance the MRSS starting from 2025. The annual matching limit for eligible elderly Singaporeans' Retirement Accounts will be raised to $2,000, with a lifetime limit of $20,000. Anyone can make contributions to the Retirement Accounts of elderly Singaporeans, including CPF members themselves, family members, employers or even the community groups. I encourage children to regularly contribute to their elderly parents' CPF accounts.
The Government will also provide dollar-for-dollar matching to help increase their retirement savings. If eligible elderly Singaporeans receive $2,000 in cash top-up annually, their retirement savings will increase by about $48,000 over 10 years. As a result, their monthly payout from their CPF LIFE will increase by about $260.
The Government will also assist elderly Singaporeans with lower CPF savings and less family support through the SSS. Starting from 2025, the SSS quarterly payment will increase by 20% to help cope with inflation. The per capita monthly income ceiling for eligible households will also be raised, benefitting about 290,000 elderly Singaporeans. To achieve this, the Government will allocate an additional $260 million in 2025 with total annual expenditure reaching $860 million.
The Government is committed to helping elderly Singaporeans with their retirement security, allowing them to enjoy their golden years. To achieve this goal, we also need the collective effort of the whole society. Therefore, I encourage families, employers and community groups to reach out and lend a helping hand to those in need around them, so that elderly Singaporeans can have a sense of security in old age and enjoy a “springtime” retirement.
(In English): Sir, let me move on to the issue of employment protection for our workers.
Ms Jean See asked how freelancers can be protected for workplace safety and health risks. Under the Workplace Safety and Health Act, service buyers have a duty to ensure the safety of contracted freelancers who work under their direction or at their work premises. If a freelancer is injured at work, he or she can pursue a civil claim against the service buyer. Compensation will depend on the facts of the case. For certainty of coverage, freelancers should consider personal accident insurance for their own financial protection in case of injury. As their own boss, freelancers have control over their business model and pricing to negotiate key service terms with service buyers, such as fees and whether to include the cost of their insurance coverage within their contract pricing. The Government will continue to work with associations to provide guidance on what businesses should do when contracting with freelancers.
Ms Jean See also raised various suggestions at the Budget Debate on how to better support freelancers. We will take these suggestions from the Labour Movement into account as we review how to better protect workers.
Beyond work injury compensation, the Government is also committed to ensuring that our employment regulations remain relevant and provide sufficient protection for employees, while maintaining a competitive business environment that continues to generate good jobs.
Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Raj Joshua Thomas suggested several areas within the Employment Act for review. The Government reviews the Employment Act regularly together with our tripartite partners, taking into account changes in the nature of work, workplace arrangements and workforce profiles. I thank Members for their suggestions, which we will take into consideration when we next review the Employment Act.
In the meantime, I would like to assure Members, such as Mr Louis Chua and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, that the Government will continue to work closely with our tripartite partners to ensure that exploitative employment practices do not become the norm in our workplaces.
To Assoc Prof Jamus Lim's suggestion to legislate against restraint of trade clauses for employees who are of a certain pay grade, theoretically, this sounds like an easy thing to do. But in practice, the specific types of jobs that interact substantively with an employer's legitimate business interests will depend on each employer's business considerations and structures as well as other case-specific factors, such as the nature of work that the employee is engaged in at that time and the position of the employee within the organisation. It will not be appropriate nor feasible for tripartite partners to take a one-size-fits-all approach and prescribe exhaustively the specific circumstances in which restraint of trade clauses are reasonable. Employers should assess if there is a genuine need for restraint of trade clauses to protect legitimate business interests based on principles that the Courts have already previously set out.
In the meantime, I urge employees who believe that they have been subject to such practices to seek assistance from their unions or TAFEP. Members would be aware that tripartite partners are releasing guidelines on the use of such clauses in the second half of this year. These guidelines will shape the norms of behaviour to strengthen fairness in the use of such clauses in employment contracts.
As the Minister mentioned, we are strongly committed to strengthening Singaporeans' job prospects and career health. At the same time, we need to transform the migrant worker ecosystem and improve their well-being. Through collaborations with more than 160 partners, including stakeholders like dormitory operators and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), we have made significant improvements in migrant workers' well-being in a holistic way, from their workplace concerns to housing, healthcare and their social needs.
MOM has made significant moves in migrant worker housing in 2023. We expanded the scope of the Foreign Employee Dormitories Act to cover all dormitories housing more than six workers to ensure dormitories are well-managed with good health and safety standards in place. We also announced the Dormitory Transition Scheme to transition almost 1,000 existing dormitories to improve standards by the year 2030. And, by 2040, all regulated dormitories, including new and existing ones, will meet even higher dormitory standards. These measures will strengthen public health resilience and better prepare us for future disease outbreaks.
Mr Louis Chua mentioned the need to ensure that companies are able to access adequate accommodation at reasonable standards and prices. Pre-COVID-19, the number of dormitory beds available was sized to adequately meet the demand, with a healthy 90% occupancy rate. When the economy reopened after COVID-19, employers were desperate to catch up on projects that were delayed by COVID-19 and have been hiring more migrant workers. Today, the number of Work Permit holders in the construction, marine and process sectors is 20% higher than pre-COVID-19 days. This led to a market-induced relative shortage of dormitory beds.
MOM has been working closely with key stakeholders to make more dormitory beds available to accommodate this growth while ensuring they meet MOM's dormitory standards. Since December 2022, 17,000 more dormitory beds have been added through various measures. About 47,000 more will be available over the next few years, as seven more purpose-built dormitories come into operation.
These measures have helped to alleviate pressure on the broader housing market and rental prices. However, the growth in the migrant worker population has outpaced the increase in dormitory supply. It is not sustainable to keep building migrant worker dormitories or adding more beds to house new workers, because when the catch-up projects are eventually completed and the excess workers return to their home countries, we may end up swinging to the other extreme and end up with an excess of dormitory beds.
Thus, the more sustainable way forward is for employers to reduce their reliance on migrant workers by adopting productivity measures. I am glad Mr Louis Chua agrees with us that this is the right thing to do. This is why we have the Skills Recognition Framework in place, which encourages employers to retain experienced and skilled Work Permit holders through lower levies.
Ms He Ting Ru suggested that employers should be required to wait one month before repatriating migrant workers. Her concern is that repatriation may arise from retaliation by the employer. Should this be the case, they should approach MOM. When migrant workers are onboarded, we inform them of their rights and avenues to seek help if they are unfairly treated. Upon notification, MOM will investigate and issue a special pass to allow the worker to remain in Singapore until investigations are completed.
If employers have been found to be victimising their employees, enforcement action will be taken against the relevant employers. I hope Ms He Ting Ru does not forget that, at times, migrant workers themselves are at fault, leading to the end of the employment relationship. For example, if a migrant domestic worker has been mistreating children in a household, I think it would not be reasonable to expect the employer to continue keeping the migrant domestic worker in the household and providing for her upkeep instead of repatriating her immediately.
Mr Louis Ng asked how we will safeguard the well-being of migrant workers and ensure that they receive fair treatment. As the Member has previously raised similar questions in Parliament, I will just provide a brief overview. In setting the minimum living space per resident for dormitories, we have to balance liveability against costs and land-take considerations. The new dormitory standards are in line with the standards set by the International Labour Organization for workers' housing.
On food hygiene, employers and dormitory operators must only procure food from licensed food establishments. MOM also conducts regular inspections on dormitories to check that food delivered to the dormitories is protected from contamination until it is collected by the residents.
Mr Louis Ng suggested to increase the penalties for employment kickbacks. Currently, offenders may be sentenced to imprisonment of up to two years, fines of up to $30,000, or both, for each worker affected. Thus far, the penalties imposed by the Courts have not reached the maximum fine or the imprisonment term. This indicates that the current caps remain sufficient. We have also strengthened protections for workers to encourage them to come forward early without fear of reprisal, as we will facilitate a change of employer if necessary. Workers can also report kickbacks through multiple avenues, such as our MOM hotline or to our Forward Assurance and Support Teams (FAST) team officers deployed on the ground or through the FWMOMCare app.
Since 2022, we have implemented the Primary Care Plan to improve access to healthcare for migrant workers and established the Friends of ACE network to expand our outreach efforts. We will continue working with partners to enhance programmes and events in the recreation centres to better meet migrant workers' social needs.
Mr Chairman, to uplift Singaporeans, the Government has put in place measures to boost the retirement adequacy of our seniors and improve protection of our workers. At the same time, we have continued to transform the migrant worker ecosystem by improving existing housing and healthcare needs and increasing engagements with our migrant workers.
We will continue to work closely with stakeholders, including our tripartite partners to implement the initiatives I have shared about. With the support of the whole-of-society, I am confident that we can uplift those who are more vulnerable among us as we build a shared future together.
The Chairman: Minister of State Gan Siow Huang.
The Minister of State for Manpower (Ms Gan Siow Huang): Mr Chairman, I thank Members who have given suggestions on upholding inclusivity and fairness at the workplace.
In our refreshed social compact, we want to ensure that all members of our society can participate in the workforce. One key group are our senior workers. Given our ageing population and slowing workforce growth, it is important that we help every worker contribute as much as they are able to, for as long as they wish.
Let me share how we will continue to support our senior workers. Several Members, including Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How, Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Yip Hon Weng, Miss Rachel Ong, Ms Rahayu Mahzam and Mr Keith Chua, have spoken on this subject. The Retirement and Re-employment Act protects seniors from age-related dismissal before reaching the statutory retirement age. Employers must offer re-employment to eligible senior workers up until the statutory re-employment age.
In 2022, we raised the retirement and re-employment ages to 63 and 68 respectively. As announced by Minister Tan See Leng, the tripartite partners have agreed to raise the retirement and re-employment ages further to 64 and 69, respectively, in 2026. This will bring us another step closer to our eventual goal of setting retirement and re-employment ages at 65 and 70, respectively, by 2030.
I would like to thank SNEF and NTUC for their strong support to make this possible. Credit goes to employers and our union leaders on the ground as well. Over nine in 10 senior workers who were eligible and wished to continue working were offered re-employment in 2023. To ensure that the next increase is implemented just as smoothly, I encourage employers to start planning early.
Some will need to adjust their manpower and upskilling plans to retain their senior workers. This is why we are taking a stepped approach and announcing the increase early. Come 2026, employers who have prepared well will be better placed to tap on their senior workforce to meet their business needs.
Our employment rate for seniors aged 65 to 69 is now ranked third compared to OECD countries, increasing by almost five percentage points, from 43.8% in 2018 to 48.3% in 2023.
Among our younger seniors aged 55 to 64, the employment rate also rose, from 66.8% to 70.0% over the same period. But we can do more to support our seniors. As Miss Rachel Ong has highlighted, senior workers have much expertise to contribute, but some may prefer to reduce their work intensity as they age. Workplaces with FWA provisions will be better able to tap on our growing pool of senior workers. Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about plans to harness the potential of our senior workers. The Government will provide support to employers who want to improve their HR capabilities to manage an ageing workforce.
Employers can tap on the Part-Time Re-employment Grant (PTRG), which we extended last year to support more flexible work options for senior workers. Employers can enjoy up to $125,000 in grant support under the scheme. As of December 2023, with the support of PTRG, more than 6,300 employers committed to provide part-time re-employment under their HR policy. This is expected to benefit around 50,000 senior workers.
The PTRG also supports employers in implementing structured career planning (SCP). SCP is a process where employers systematically engage their employees and plan out their training and career development goals to align with business needs. This is particularly useful for employees who are approaching retirement. Through PTRG, employers can access free training to learn how to conduct SCP with their employees.
Employers can also receive support through the Senior Employment Credit (SEC). The SEC provides wage offsets to employers who hire Singaporean workers aged 60 and above. The support given is significant. In 2023, we disbursed $315 million, benefiting about 90,000 employers that hire more than 400,000 senior workers.
However, supporting seniors to remain in the workforce is not just a matter of creating job opportunities. Employees must also do their part. Most senior workers today are re-employed in the same job role. But with longer lifespans and careers and a faster pace of economic change, we should not expect to perform the same job role year after year. Senior workers must also keep pace with changes in the labour market and be open to learning new skills or trying out new roles.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
I highlighted earlier how FWAs are useful in helping seniors stay in the workforce longer. The benefits go beyond senior workers. Miss Rachel Ong, Mr Sharael Taha, Mr Xie Yao Quan and Ms Yeo Wan Ling have pointed out that more workers will be caregivers in the future, given our ageing population. The working caregivers will need to manage work responsibilities while taking care of elderly family members at home. FWAs will be useful in supporting such caregivers. Of course, other workers can also benefit from FWAs. With more flexibility, they can better manage their time so that they can attend courses and pick up new skills. Some may be senior workers themselves and prefer a more flexible workload.
In 2007, a Tripartite Workgroup recommended greater provision of FWAs to bring more women back to work. Since then, the tripartite partners have launched various initiatives to increase FWA adoption, including providing grants and incentives. The Tripartite Standard on FWAs was introduced in 2017. Since then, over 12,000 employers have adopted the Tripartite Standard. Beyond our tripartite partners, I would also like to acknowledge the many individuals who participated in our Citizens' Panel and AfA on Work-Life Harmony in 2019 and 2021 respectively. Diverse stakeholders, including employers, employees and HR practitioners, came up with ideas and even co-developed resources to improve work-life harmony, including on FWAs.
The experience has taught us three lessons so far.
First, there is no one-size-fits-all approach in implementing FWAs. There are different types of FWAs – flexi-place, flexi-time, flexi-load. Each company needs to find an equilibrium that helps them stay productive while meeting their employees' needs.
Second, trust between employers and employees is critical for FWAs to work well. Employees should be reasonable in their requests, deliver work outcomes as they work more flexibly, and not see FWAs as an entitlement. Employers, on the other hand, should have a process to evaluate FWAs objectively and communicate their decisions to their employees.
Third, FWAs are sustainable only if they make business sense. Ms Yeo Wan Ling had earlier asked if the workgroup could consider asking companies to prove they have started on job redesign if they wished to reject FWA requests. Actually, from our public consultations, many employers already recognise that FWA provision can help their companies better attract and retain talent. It would be in their interest to support their employees' requests for FWAs. However, employers have also to consider the impact on the team, the business and the clients besides the needs of the individual employees. FWAs will not be sustainable if they lead to higher business costs and lower productivity at the company level.
Based on these principles, we convened a Tripartite Workgroup in September last year with two objectives in mind.
First, the Workgroup will develop a set of Tripartite Guidelines on FWA Requests. To do so, we consulted with employees, employers and HR professionals and studied other countries' approaches to encouraging FWA adoption.
We found that in countries with legislation on FWAs, such as the UK, Australia and New Zealand, such legislation typically mandates requirement around the process of requesting FWAs, but do not mandate that businesses provide the FWAs requested. Employers retain their prerogative to decide whether to grant the request, given their business context and the employees' needs. These findings are consistent with what we heard during our local consultations, where both employers and employees agreed it was important to have a clear process for employees to request for FWAs and for employers to assess if the arrangements could work for their businesses.
As Mr Sharael Taha had raised earlier, employers will need to manage FWA requests while ensuring their workplaces remain harmonious and productive.
In designing such a process, tripartite partners, too, felt that it was important to avoid creating a litigious workplace culture that could cause more disputes. So, instead of taking a legislative approach, we will use Tripartite Guidelines to set out how employees could request FWAs, as well as how employers should consider these requests and communicate the outcome to their employees. And these Guidelines will be mandatory. Most importantly, we must maintain workplace trust and harmony during the process. The Workgroup has been consulting with stakeholders on the scope of the Guidelines and will finalise our recommendations soon.
Shaping stronger norms around flexible workplaces will complement our existing leave policies to better support working caregivers. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, Mr Desmond Choo and Ms Yeo Wan Ling have called for additional caregiver leave. However, FWAs are a more sustainable way to support caregivers than providing additional leave of one or two more days, which could negatively affect the employment of the very group that we are trying to help.
Second, the Workgroup is looking at how to support employers to implement FWAs across different industries and job roles productively, recognising that some job roles may be suitable for some types of FWAs but not others. For instance, it may not make sense for restaurants to have frontline staff telecommute. However, firms can still allow for individual flexibility while sustaining their operations, such as by implementing flexible shift systems.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked about providing support to ensure win-win outcomes for FWAs, while Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about catering FWAs for diverse roles and responsibilities. TAFEP and IHRP will curate training and resources to help supervisors and HR practitioners implement FWAs, redesign jobs for FWAs and manage workers on flexible work, so that they can achieve their full productive potential at work.
Employers can also leverage existing grants, such as the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG), to offset financial costs of adopting FWAs. Ms Yeo Wan Ling would be happy to know that under the PSG, firms can receive support to improve their productivity by engaging a consultant to redesign jobs or upgrade their HR systems. Firms can also work with NTUC to form a CTC and access funding support through the CTC Grant to redesign jobs for better business and worker outcomes.
Service buyers can also do their part by implementing outcome-based contracting and specifying service rather than headcount level requirements, as per the Tripartite advisory on best sourcing practices. This gives service providers more flexibility in deployment, making it easier to provide the employees with FWAs.
Next, I will share more on our efforts to support the employment of caregivers returning to work, especially women. We have made good progress in this area. Our employment rate for women aged 25 to 64 has increased from 72.3% in 2018 to 76.6% in 2023. Nevertheless, we recognise that women continue to take on more of the caregiving load at home. As Mr Desmond Choo highlighted, this indirectly widens the gender pay gap.
One of the key factors driving Singapore's gender pay gap is occupational segregation. In other words, there tends to be fewer women in higher paying occupations. This could be because women are more likely to take time-off to focus on caregiving and may not be able to fully realise their career potential. FWAs can help to address this partially by enabling both men and women to contribute more equally to caregiving duties.
Employers should also adopt merit-based appraisal systems that evaluate each employee, including working parents, fairly and objectively.
Ms He Ting Ru's call for employers to be mandated to report their gender pay gap regularly may not be the best way to address this issue. It may hurt women's employability if employers choose to hire fewer women to boost their gender pay gap numbers. Countries, such as Canada, which require such reporting have an adjusted pay gap of about 8%, higher than Singapore's 6%. We should and will continue to focus on helping more women take on good jobs and fulfil their career potential.
Miss Rachel Ong asked about what kind of employment support will be available for caregivers to seniors and persons with disabilities, many of whom may also be single and the sole caregiver and breadwinner.
Some of these caregivers may wish to return to work after having taken a break from their career. Such caregivers usually need more support as the job landscape may have changed while they were away. And WSG and NTUC's e2i provide career-matching services and reskilling support to help such individuals return to work.
WSG launched the HerCareer initiative in June 2022 to bring together employment facilitation programmes, supporting female jobseekers. Since then, WSG has engaged nearly 16,000 women at its career events. WSG also runs workshops in collaboration with its partners to support women in returning to work.
We encourage women who are looking to return to work to tap on these resources. One example is Ms Nurhani Binte Zailani Shatifan, a 51-year-old mother of five, who used to work in the travel industry but became a caregiver to her parents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Like many caregivers who had left the workforce for some time, she faced challenges when seeking to return to work in 2022.
However, Nurhani did not give up. She signed up for WSG career coaching, which helped her with interview preparations, giving her a confidence boost before each interview. In a post-COVID-19 world, virtual meetings have become more common. Nurhani enrolled in Yayasan Mendaki's Women@Work programme, where she learnt how to facilitate Zoom meetings. She also had the support of a mentor through NTUC's Women Supporting Women programme, who encouraged her and other women on the same journey. Armed with these resources and a positive attitude, she secured a position with INSEAD Business School as an events coordinator. It is a job that she enjoys and continues to learn and grow in.
Thanks to these many efforts, more women are participating in the workforce. Since 2018, the number of women who were successfully placed in jobs through WSG's programmes has nearly doubled, increasing from 13,000 to more than 26,000 women placed annually.
Mr Gerald Giam has called for greater workplace support for women undergoing menopause.
Menopause is a natural phase in life that all women experience as we get older. While some may experience some discomfort, most women continue to live normally and contribute actively at work. Women who experience severe menopausal symptoms can seek subsidised medical treatment at public healthcare institutions, including physiotherapy, and take sick leave to rest properly, just as we do for any other medical need. It is useful to increase awareness among women on how we can take charge of our health as we get older and be better prepared for menopause.
To Mr Gerald Giam, while it sounds good to advocate for workplace support for women undergoing menopause, we need to be careful not to stereotype women of a certain age group as it could hurt their employability unintentionally.
Building inclusive workplaces allows everyone to thrive at work regardless of background. This includes creating opportunities for PwDs to take on jobs aligned with their skillsets and aspirations. The Enabling Masterplan 2030 sets out a clear roadmap to support the employment of PwDs.
Last year, we enhanced the Enabling Employment Credit (EEC), which provides wage offsets to employers hiring PwDs. The enhancement supports those who have not been in work for at least six months and benefitted more than 10,000 PwDs last year. SG Enable also launched the first Enabling Business Hub in December 2023, bringing employment opportunities and support closer to where PwDs live.
Through the collective efforts of the Government, employers and the wider community, the employment rate for PwDs has increased steadily to 33% in 2022 to 2023. This moves us closer to the target of 40% by 2030 under the Enabling Masterplan 2030.
As Miss Rachel Ong and Ms He Ting Ru highlighted, it is also important to enable PwDs to undertake meaningful jobs that make good use of their skills.
One way is by providing them with reasonable accommodation at the workplace. MOM will work with NTUC and SNEF to develop a Tripartite Advisory to guide employers on modifying jobs and workplaces to support PwDs. We encourage employers to embark on such efforts, including tapping on existing support, such as SG Enable's Open Door Programme Job Redesign Grant to do so. More details on the Tripartite Advisory will be released when ready.
Next, on migrant domestic workers (MDWs). MDWs remain an important avenue of support for many of our households. While the vast majority of MDWs and employers enjoy harmonious employment relationships, there may be occasional allegations of wrongdoing made against the MDW or the employer.
Ms Sylvia Lim asked how allegations of ill-treatment are investigated. MOM will look into all cases that are brought to our attention. Allegations are investigated thoroughly, impartially and fairly. If there is evidence of abuse, we will refer the case to Police for investigation. If there are allegations of breaches under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act, such as denial of rest day or late payment of salary, MOM will speak to both the MDW and the employer, without taking sides. We will also review other objective evidence if available, such as CCTV recordings or accounts from other witnesses, sometimes neighbours, as part of our investigation. If the allegation is substantiated, enforcement action will be taken.
On Ms Sylvia Lim's question on whether advisories are taken into account when the Ministry determines employer suitability to employ other MDWs in the future. An advisory serves to remind the employer of their rights and responsibilities, it will not affect their eligibility to hire MDWs in the future.
While these processes may cause some inconvenience to the parties involved, they are necessary to safeguard the well-being of MDWs, especially those who are working in Singapore for the first time. It also provides an opportunity to help employers and their MDWs to resolve issues and improve their working relationship.
Mr Chairman, the Government is committed to enabling more progressive and inclusive workplaces where everyone can contribute meaningfully according to their unique strengths and interests. We will work hand-in-hand with our tripartite partners, employers and workers to secure a brighter future for all.
The Chairman: We have time for clarifications. Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo: Chairman, I have two clarifications. The first is for Minister. It is very good news that we are adjusting the EP qualifying salary. It will help our younger Singaporeans to get jobs. But we also have the SOL. Does making access to EPs easier via the SOL undermine our efforts to localise or bring in more of our Singaporeans into these jobs?
The second one is for Dr Koh. Dr Koh, it is very good news to adjust the $600 matching to $2,000, I think it will help a lot of the lower-wage Singaporeans. My point is on the $20,000 lifetime care. Firstly, are there many of our Singaporeans reaching that cap or already exceeded, so that is why we have a $20,000 lifetime matching limit? And under what circumstances will MOM look to lifting or adjusting this cap?
Dr Tan See Leng: I thank Mr Desmond Choo for the clarification. First, as I have shared earlier on, the COMPASS framework was only implemented on 1 September 2023. So, our statistics have been based out of five months. Hence, in my earlier reply to the Leader of the Opposition, I had qualified that this is very preliminary. But we are seeing very early, promising signs that it is a mechanism that did not, in any way, hinder firms, particularly firms wanting to grow their talent and particularly in sectors where there is a shortage of workers today.
The measures that we put in place include working with the industry and tripartite partners to constantly curating that list. We review that list every three years. In fact, we can add on or remove on a yearly basis. So, it is actually quite responsive.
To that end, there are also newer areas where the sectors are fairly nascent. I mentioned two: one is in the green economy, and the other is agri-tech. In those areas, while we allow bonus points for these companies or businesses to bring in foreign talents, we are also simultaneously ramping up our investments to train, upskill and ensure that the skillsets are being transferred to our locals as well.
It is a multi-system moving along to ensure that whatever we lean forward on, that shortage would be alleviated because our locals would then step in to replace that virtuous ecosystem. I hope that gives you the reassurance.
Dr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, I thank Mr Desmond Choo for that clarification. Let me explain that the MRSS is targeted at seniors with lesser means and lower retirement savings. The enhancements to provide the $2,000 per year matching grant annually and $20,000 matching grant over a lifetime as a cap are, in fact, a significant increase from the current scheme and can help to increase eligible seniors' CPF savings, as I had explained in my main speech, by about $48,000 over 10 years. This is already going to give them about $260 of extra payout per month.
I understand that it may not help all eligible seniors meet their BRS. The fact is that it is not meant to do that. It is actually part of a whole suite of measures, including other schemes, that support retirement. For example, the Majulah Package, as well as the SSS\t, will also help to boost the retirement adequacy.
For those who may already have a certain quantum in their CPF and they are not eligible, for example, for the MRSS, what certain family members can do is to continue to top up the senior's account and enjoy tax benefits of up to $16,000 a year for those kind of top-ups that do not attract any matching grants from the MRSS.
So, I think we are just encouraging everyone to look at this as a means which can catalyse more support for our seniors. It is not meant to bridge the gap with the BRS.
The Chairman: Minister Tan, you wish to add some more points?
Dr Tan See Leng: Apologies, I just wanted to remind Members of the House and, in particular, Mr Desmond Choo, that notwithstanding the SOL, all companies, when they bring in an EP, have to fulfil the minimum qualifying salary. That qualifying salary, as I have just shared, would be raised for an entry-level EP and the EP qualifying salary would also rise accordingly with age. So, that is the base and after they have fulfilled the base, the SOL, the bonus points would kick in.
So, in that sense, we continue to ensure that companies do not use it to circumvent whatever framework and principles that we have.
The Chairman: There are at least nine Members who have raised your hands. I will be fair to every Member. Anyone who attempts to make a speech, I will cut you off. Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh: Thank you, Chair. I will be brief. Thank you to Minister for responding to my cut on retrenchment. Just a quick question, for the companies that currently pay retrenchment benefit, how many of them pay more than the recommended retrenchment benefits as listed by the tripartite partners?
Secondly, I understand that every four years, MOM carries out a survey on retrenchment and in the last report – I understand that it is publicly available – is Retrenchment Benefit 2017, published by the MOM Manpower Research and Statistics Department in September 2018. Can I confirm with the Minister that the Ministry is going to continue publishing surveys on retrenchment benefit every four years?
Dr Tan See Leng: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his clarification. I do not have all the numbers with me currently. I will revert with regards to his question on whether they pay over the recommended retrenchment benefits. From the survey, nine in 10, or 90%, of them pay the retrenchment benefits, typically ranging from about two weeks to a month per year of service.
For the ongoing surveys, we hope to sharpen the survey each time we conduct it, using the insights that we have from previous surveys to make it even more precise, because it allows us to better plan our policies. As I said, we will constantly work hard at improving the livelihoods for all of our workers. I hope that gives you the reassurance.
The Chairman: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye: Thank you, Chairman. I have two questions for Senior Minister of State Zaqy.
One, can MOM provide an update on the MAST safe measures that were implemented and what is their effectiveness since implementation?
Second, what are the other measures that MOM has put in place to improve workplace safety outcomes and shape the behaviour of both employers and workers?
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I thank the Member for his question. Indeed, last year we had a challenging period when we had to implement the heightened safety period (HSP) because of the high spate of fatalities during that period.
As I shared, in 2023, we improved the situation. Our workplace fatality injury rate fell to 0.99 per 100,000, which puts us among the top four around the world. I think that this, in itself, hopefully, gives us the first step in terms of our measures. What is key is to sustain this, to keep below one per 100,000 workers. Because after you get there, you do not want to be called a one-hit wonder. You hope to be like Taylor Swift, with 20 years of success.
What is more important is that we have to engage all stakeholders to press on with the efforts. This has to start from the top. Therefore, for many of our leaders, especially in critical, high-risk industries, we have already made it mandatory for all leaders and CEOs to be put through the top leaders' leadership training.
Another Member spoke about how we need to put in WSH representatives, but I think that itself may not be sufficient. I have been on enforcements with some of our MOM officers as well on the ground. When you speak to some of the leaders who have contravened our regulations, some of the comments that come back from business owners or even directors are that of, \"Hey, I had my safety audit done, this was done by someone,\" and it cannot be that way.
If you want to create a safety culture, it has to come from the top. Because leaders decide on the resources, leaders invest in the kind of equipment, processes, how the workers work and what kind of construction methods you use, for example, are all determined at the top. The top has to be accountable too. Therefore, among the things that we have done, following HSP, was to up the accountability, not just at the worker level, but also at the leader level.
If you look at construction, for example, we made it so that there is accountability down to all the subcontracting levels, and not just at the first- or second-layer subcontractors. I think there are shifts in enforcement and regulations. And this has to continue. On top of that, I think we are moving towards more use of technology.
For sectors, such as construction, for example, we have put in place video surveillance, which is mandatory now. And very soon, we are also putting in analytics to layer on top of this with the use of AI, because we want to make it more effective and more productive, so that our workforce and our workplaces can be safer. So, I hope that assures Members.
But certainly, I would welcome if NTUC would like to enforce and encourage, or strongly mandate, its employers to also put in WSH representatives, especially from the Labour Movement, to push forward the agenda to make sure that all our workplaces, especially unionised companies, take the lead and set shining examples for industries.
The Chairman: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim: Thank you, Chairman. Two questions from me.
One for Senior Minister of State Koh. I appreciate that there are practical considerations that lead to the need for flexibility on whether non-compete clauses should be allowed for mid-level employees. But surely, he would agree with me that the default should be that these clauses do not apply. After all, the Government routinely imposes hard thresholds for all manners of policies and relaxes them through an appeals system. It strikes me as much more efficient and consistent with worker rights if these were discouraged by default, with special cases allowed into tailored employment contracts.
For Minister of State Gan, would the Ministry be able to explain why childcare leave is a legal entitlement, but eldercare leave is not? Again, I am not speaking up against childcare leave, but is the Ministry implicitly sending some signal that childcare is privileged relative to elderly care? Work from home arrangements, while an important complement to family care leave, should not be a substitute for those days where flexible work, as useful as it is, does not quite offer the same freedom as actual paid leave.
Dr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, to answer Assoc Prof Jamus Lim's question, we need to understand that there is no default job description in any job. So, there is no way to have a default restriction against a restriction of trade clauses for a particular job. Unless there is a standard job that is available for which we know what a worker does from one company to the next, it is very hard to prescribe in law what the default position is. Which is why the Court takes a case-by-case approach but lays out principles in which why some of these clauses are non-enforceable. And that is why it is so difficult to have a one-size-fits-all approach. The job title of a clerk in one company can mean one thing in one company and mean another thing in another company. So, it is very hard for us a priori to determine what is the default baseline for a job requirement.
Ms Gan Siow Huang: First of all, the Government recognises that caregiving of parents is an important responsibility, especially with Singapore's ageing population. We are committed to providing caregivers with the necessary support so that they can fulfil both their work and caregiving responsibilities. I think we need to get this straight. And I am sure the House agrees with this position.
Even without any legislated mandatory requirement, many progressive employers have already stepped up to introduce caregiving-related leave provisions beyond what is currently mandated, as part of the HR strategy to attract and retain talent. In 2022, about 59% of employers voluntarily provided additional paid caregiving leave, such as family care leave. More than 4,000 employers have also adopted the Tripartite Standard on Unpaid Leave for Unexpected Care Needs.
We know that in a survey, a recent one by NTUC, 85% of working caregivers indicated that FWAs were their most preferred mode of support compared to paid caregiving leave, which was favoured by 64% of caregivers. I think this is likely because FWAs are sustainable and provide flexibility in meeting diverse caregiving needs.
For instance, if a family member requires assistance with daily activities, such as medication and meals, FWAs will be more useful than leave in enabling caregivers to meet those needs. The Government has also strengthened other areas of support for caregivers of seniors, including those who have to juggle between work and caregiving roles.
Caregivers can tap on a range of care services, such as home and day care, to support the care and social needs of their elderly loved ones. There are also various respite care options in senior care centres and nursing homes to help caregivers look after their seniors for short periods of time, including over the weekends.
The Chairman: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng: Thank you, Chairman. My clarifications are around the topic of retirement adequacy. One, with the closure of the SA, could MOM clarify what happens to CPF members who have made CPF investments using their SA? Two, the Majulah Package should not be limited to those born in 1973 or earlier. Can I ask the Ministry whether they would consider extending this to the younger cohorts when they reach 50 years old in the future?
Dr Tan See Leng: I thank Mr Yip Hon Weng for his clarifications. Members can continue to hold their existing CPF Investment Scheme (CPFIS) SA investments until they decide to sell or when the investment matures, upon which the proceeds will then be paid to the member's RA, up to the Full Retirement Sum. Any remaining balance will be paid to the OA. Members may, of course, continue to invest their OA savings under the CPFIS (OA) if they are eligible.
Can I request the Member to repeat his second clarification?
Mr Yip Hon Weng: Second clarification revolves around the Majulah Package. I do not think that it should be limited to those born in 1973 or earlier. So, will the Ministry consider extending this to younger cohorts when they reach 50 in the future?
Dr Tan See Leng: Thank you. To Mr Yip's point, successive generations of Singapore Citizens have seen improvements in their lives. This is in tandem with Singapore's economic growth and also significant investments made by our Government in education, healthcare and social security.
Those born in the generation between 1960 and 1973 and earlier had lower incomes over their lifetimes. They also have less time to benefit from the more recent improvements to the CPF system, and they have less runway to build up their retirement savings. So, younger cohorts would have a longer runway to benefit from the more recent enhancements to the CPF system. For example, the extra interest on CPF accounts, the WIS scheme and all the CCPs that we put up.
But we do not rest here. We constantly and will continually review the need to provide additional support for Singapore Citizens with greater needs, especially when they draw near to retirement.
If we look at it today, even for those generations, for instance, the Pioneer or Merdeka Generations, and for the low-wage workers, we continue to enhance the WIS scheme. For the Pioneer and Merdeka Generations, we continue to enhance the SSS and the MRSS. Earlier on, I gave a list for each one of the schemes, how many hundreds of thousands of Singaporeans will benefit. So, existing eligible Singapore Citizens will benefit, even if they do not meet the age criterion for the Majulah Package.
The Chairman: Ms Jean See.
Ms See Jinli Jean: Chairman, my question is actually to Senior Minister of State Koh. I understand that some of the measures that will be introduced will strengthen vulnerable workers. So, I would like to ask if one of the measures would include actually reviewing the 2018 Tripartite Workgroup Recommendations for Self-Employed Persons, because I feel that there is a need to be more affirmative in how we address these vulnerabilities.
Dr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, the simple answer to Ms Jean See is yes, we will continue to work with our tripartite partners to look at these guidelines from time to time, and this will take a tripartite approach to see what is relevant at this point in time.
The Chairman: Ms Yeo Wan Ling.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling: My clarification is for Minister of State Gan. Can the Tripartite Guidelines for Flexible Work Arrangement Requests take into account jobs for which FWAs are deemed not appropriate due to business reasons and require employers to explore and provide alternatives to workers in these job roles, such as more time off or more caregiving leave? And also, how does MOM intend to enforce the Tripartite Guidelines given that some errant employers might not choose to comply with these guidelines, given that it is not legislation?
Ms Gan Siow Huang: The tripartite partners have recognised that there is no one-size-fits-all approach towards FWAs. I have spoken repeatedly that what works for one company may not work for another. There are different forms of flexible arrangements: flexi-time, flexi-load, flexi-place.
That said, in designing the Tripartite Guidelines, we are mindful to not take an overly rigid approach that risks creating an adversarial workplace culture. The Tripartite Guidelines will focus on requiring proper consideration of FWA requests and not mandating the employers to provide FWAs.
Preserving this mutual trust and understanding between employers and employees is important for the FWAs to be sustainable. Employers will need to see that FWAs make business sense, that it helps them to attract and retain workers or lead to a productive workforce for them to sustain the practice of providing FWAs. As such, we will continue to educate and equip employers on the implementation of various types of FWAs so that they can identify and provide the appropriate flexibilities that are feasible, taking into consideration business operations while also supporting the employees' needs.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling also asked about employers that do not comply with the Tripartite Guidelines. We will apply a calibrated and enabling approach, at least, in the initial implementation of the Tripartite Guidelines, which will include providing employers with templates, guides and training to equip them to comply with the Guidelines. In the event of breaches, employees may seek help from TAFEP, and TAFEP will then reach out and guide these employers to put in place proper processes as well as to reassess the requests for flexible work arrangements by their employees.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: Chairman, two clarifications. The first is that it is hard not for some to see it as a form of carry trade whereby the Government is borrowing at 2.5%, 4% from Singaporeans while the GIC makes 7%, both of which in the long-term. So, the question is: if we already have the CPFIS, can we not allow Singaporeans to co-invest part of their savings?
Second, on LRIS, I recognise the Minister's point about risk and that was what the Deputy Prime Minister mentioned as well. But in the advisory panel report, they have also noted that this can be overcome via the use of the glide path of the Lifecycle Fund. So, would the Minister not agree that with the implementation of LRIS, at least based on the numbers they suggested, this would be beneficial for Singaporeans in the long-term?
Dr Tan See Leng: I assume the Member has directed that question at myself. On the first part, in terms of the difference between GIC returns and CPF interest rates that both Mr Louis Chua and Ms Hazel Poa talked about, this has been discussed earlier at the debate on the Motion on Public Finances on 7 February 2024. I do not want to go too much into details. But it is always very easy from the point of investment to look at hindsight because hindsight is perfect. I have done a lot of investments in my past life. There are a lot of \"I should have done this\" and \"I should have done that\". We need to understand that while GIC's historical 20-year returns have exceeded CPF interest rates, this is really looking at it backwards.
Above all, I think Mr Louis Chua, as a financial analyst, it is always very good to look at past historical records. But to make a projection in the future, I seriously wonder how many people can be that spot-on and precise in terms of projecting future returns and on a guaranteed basis. For the 20 years of historical returns, even though GIC has exceeded CPF interest rates, there is no guarantee that GIC's future returns will always exceed CPF interest rates in every year.
So, if we pass some of these returns directly to members, there will be significant year-to-year fluctuations in the interest rate that members receive. I wanted to set that basic principle. So, what the Government has done is that it has used our buffer of net assets to ensure that CPF members receive fair and stable interest rates to grow CPF balances for retirement adequacy.
That is the underlying principle. And I have said before that since CPF started in 1955, the three core priorities are: (a) to fund retirement adequacy for our members; (b) to provide housing; and (c) healthcare.
To the Member's LRIS point, we said we are not putting it in abeyance. We have considered and we continue to consider in terms of making sure that the returns are stable. For the last three to four years, the Member, as an analyst, would also agree with me, does he not, that we have gone through an extremely uncertain and volatile period? I take the Member's nodding of the head as a yes, right? Many investors in equities have been burnt.
For us, it is making sure that the hard-earned monies of every single one of our CPF members, we try to go to the n-th degree to try to make sure that it is stable. We try to make sure that we reduce as much of the volatility and the risk as possible. Maybe, if the Member wants to put it as a fault – I do not think it is a fault – it is that we are very, very cautious because these are our members' hard-earned monies. I hope that the Member acknowledges and understands that.
The Chairman: We have five minutes to our guillotine time. I will try to squeeze in two more clarifications. Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa: Sir, in his reply to my cut on career health, the Minister made a brief reference to the Citizens' Panel on Employment Resilience, quite a brief one. Can I ask the Minister if he can share the main findings and also, is MOM incorporating the findings into the policies?
The Chairman: Minister, I hope your reply will not be too long. Key findings.
Dr Tan See Leng: I thank you, Mr Chairman, for that reminder. Two key findings. One, the Citizens' Panel proposed a career gym where our local citizens can go on to first understand what their career prospects are, given their qualifications and how they can continue to work at it to improve their career prospects. Second, a skills passport, both of which, in terms of the suggestions that the Citizens' Panel raised, we have taken on board to design career health and also the CareersFinder.
The Chairman: There are seven of you who raised your hands but, unfortunately, I am going to give the last clarification to Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Sir, I thank the Minister for sharing that the Ministry is starting to test-bed initiatives to professionalise skilled tradesperson for all trades, starting with electricians. Besides electricians, there are many other skilled trades and many of them are having an ageing workforce as well. Can I ask what is the Ministry's timeline to uplift all the trades?
And a broader point of clarification is: is the Ministry tackling the problem of an ageing workforce, low wages, heavy reliance on foreign workers and lower interest in skilled trades among our young with sufficient urgency, or is the Ministry confident that we will continue to have a constant stream of young foreign workers to meet the manpower needs of industry?
Dr Tan See Leng: Mr Chairman, the Member's two clarifications will take some time. I will keep the first one very short because I want to dedicate more time to the second one.
We chose electricians because it is one where we have scoped out what is required with the different agencies. We are quite confident that we can implement it with a very clear set of deliverables, and there is scalability, meaning that we can extend it to more job roles, given our aspirations for sustainability and the green economy pivot to a greener future for Singapore. So, it is a short answer to the Member's question. We will apply the same principles to some of the other trades. In time to come, I will update Members of this House.
To the point about how we scale up our local workforce to continue to make sure that they are well-prepared and well-skilled, we will continue to invest in them.
If I may, I will tell the Member a story because I want to articulate this in a clearer fashion and connect the dots together for the Member. So, from time to time, and at different stages, we rely on the foreign workforce that comes in here to supplement and to complement our Singapore Core. How do we walk every step with our fellow Singapore Citizens?
If you are a youth and if you have started your career, we empower you to make informed career decisions so that you have a good start. Through working closely with our IHLs, we have developed meaningful internships. We have educational and career guidance as they start out in the workforce.
Then, when you are a mid-career worker looking at next steps, we will help you to pick up and we will invest in you. We provide greater support for you to pick up relevant skills. You have the WSG Career Matching Services, the CareersFinder, Career Health and there is a whole slew of CCPs to help our workers, where we subsidise up to 90% of salary and course fee support. We also have the OMIP. We are going to be introducing a jobseeker support scheme to empower those that are involuntarily unemployed to bounce back into employment, which the Deputy Prime Minister will announce later this year.
If you are a senior at the end of your work-life cycle, if you want to continue to work, we are raising the retirement age. We also have the SEC and the PTRG, and we are also making sure that our Majulah Package continues to support them.
So, you can see that it is really an end-to-end, very comprehensive, integrated continuum of uplifting, supporting, strengthening and caring for our entire Singapore Core. I hope that gives you that reassurance. With that, I thank Members of the House for your patience and your support.
The Chairman: Mr Choo, can I invite you to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Chairman, I would like to thank Minister Tan See Leng, Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad, Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon and Minister of State Gan Siow Huang for the very thoughtful and comprehensive responses. Of course, to Permanent Secretary Ng Chee Khern and his team of MOM officers for their tireless work. With this, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $3,056,864,300 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $131,871,700 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head L (Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment)","subTitle":"A vibrant and sustainable home","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head L of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
When I stand up to speak in this House, I am often raising questions or asking the Ministry for things. This time, I am standing to thank the Ministry for the phenomenal job it has done on our climate policies. Of course, I still have questions and many more things to ask for, but those will come later.
We have shown tremendous leadership on the global stage at the 28th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP28) on climate change. We co-facilitated ministerial consultations on climate mitigation and co-chaired the First Global Stocktake of the Paris Agreement. At home, we are transiting to a low-carbon future by raising the carbon tax to $25 per tonne, tracking the public sector's performance on sustainability through the GreenGov.SG Report and enhancing the Energy Efficiency Fund (E2F). We are also taking steps to strengthen our climate resilience by looking into coastal protection, heat stress and updating our climate projects through the Third National Climate Change Study (V3).
We have also taken concrete steps towards becoming a zero-waste nation. We introduced the disposable bag charge, the food waste reporting framework and will introduce the beverage container return scheme soon. We are taking care of our lower-income workers by extending the PWM to the waste collection and materials recovery sectors. We have made our living environment safer and more livable. We introduced the statutory presumption for littering from flats, looked into preventing disease outbreaks and made our hawker centres more vibrant. We have also made sure that our food and water supplies are resilient to safeguard against future crises.
Sir, 2023 has been a busy and productive year for the Ministry. I thank the Ministry and the many public servants and civil society groups behind the scenes who have made all these progress possible.
In 2024, we are one more year closer to the 2030 deadline in the Singapore Green Plan 2030 and the 2050 deadline to reach net-zero emissions here in Singapore. Every day, our planet is warming. I am glad we are acting fast and taking bold steps. I am glad the voices of many in this House and outside of this House have been heard and the Government has been taking concrete steps to look into what we have called for. Well, with the exception of secondhand smoke, for which we must do so much more.
I know my Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) colleagues, fellow MPs and I will be asking lots more questions about the Ministry's plans for 2024. I look forward to a robust and lively debate.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang): Mr Chairman, the Singapore Green Plan 2030 has set concrete targets to reduce our carbon emissions. It is a whole-of-nation effort involving all stakeholders – Government agencies, enterprises, communities and individuals.
Some of these targets are shorter-term, such as the plans to quadruple solar energy deployment by 2025 and to develop over 130 hectares of new parks by 2026. Other targets, such as producing 30% of Singapore's nutritional needs locally and completing the formulation of coastal protection plans by 2030, are for the longer term.
Would the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) share an update on the progress made by Government agencies towards their 2030 Green Plan targets? What had been the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and supply and logistics challenges caused by global political tensions and conflicts? What about the progress among multinational corporations (MNCs) and small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in terms of their environment, social and governance (ESG) performance?
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Mr Chairman, three years ago on 10 February 2021, we embarked on a bold journey with the Singapore Green Plan 2030, aiming to transform our nation into a sustainable and climate resilient future. Since then, the world has witnessed unprecedented climate challenges, and the urgency of our actions has only intensified.
The Green Plan is a whole-of-nation movement that seeks to chart Singapore's green target over the next decade. It strengthens Singapore's commitment under the United Nations (UN) 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda and the Paris Agreement. The ultimate goal is to position Singapore to achieve its long-term net-zero emission aspiration by 2050. Now, 1,110 days or 36 months on after the announcement of the Green Plan, what have we achieved?
There were five key targets listed in the Green Plan.
First one is to plant one million more trees, enhance our urban greenery as well as promoting biodiversity. How many trees have we planted out of our one million target? Did the Government take into account how many trees were cut down to make way for development during the last three years as well? For the trees that were removed, how many were matured trees that are more than a decade old? I am concerned that the replacement of these matured trees with young saplings may be contrary to our first target. Biodiversity conservation needs further focus, ensuring our ecological wealth thrives along with urbanisation.
Target number two is to quadruple solar energy deployment by 2025, accelerating the adoption of renewable energy. Solar energy deployment has seen commendable upward trajectory with more solar panels deployed on Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats, commercial as well as industrial buildings, including our airport. More floating solar farms were deployed. Last year during the Budget, I suggested to make solar panel deployment mandatory for all new buildings so that we can hardwire this requirement into our building code. So, this will speed up our solar energy deployment as well. We are only one year away from 2025. May I ask how much solar energy deployment have we achieved so far? Once we have achieved this target, what is the next target? More Government incentives in subsidy, grants and tax benefit can be considered to encourage solar power adoption.
Number three is the reduction of waste sent to landfill by 30% by 2030, focusing on waste reduction as well as recycling. With more economic activities resuming to pre-COVID-19 levels, more waste will be generated. How many more tonnes of waste were sent to landfills annually over the last three years? Are we able to achieve this target? Will there be a review and a revision of this target in view of renewed economic activity?
Target number four is to make at least 20% of schools carbon neutral by 2030, encouraging sustainable practices in educational institutions and educating our young. Currently, how many schools are carbon-neutral? What are the challenges to achieve this target? The weather is getting warmer and the schools are using more air-conditioning to provide a good, conducive and comfortable learning environment. Schools are also using more computer, AI as well as electronic devices that consumes more electricity. Is this target achievable and realistic?
Target number five is to ensure that all newly-registered cars are cleaner energy models from 2030 onwards, transiting to green transport. What percentage of newly-registered cars now are classified as cleaner energy models today? With more Certificates of Entitlement (COEs) released recently, there is certainly an increased number of cars on our roads. More cars mean more carbon emissions, as a majority of the cars do not belong to the cleaner energy models. How many EV chargers were installed in public car parks to cater for this transition over the last three years? Are we bringing in new clean car models, including swappable batteries as well as cars running on hydrogen?
The strength of the Green Plan is the holistic approach involving multiple Ministries, and there are clear targets providing a roadmap for actions as well as the emphasis on renewable energy and waste reduction that aligns with global sustainability goals. There are areas of improvement. While the targets are ambitious, we could even aim higher.
For instance, exploring more aggressive renewable energy goals beyond quadrupling solar power deployment and other forms of renewable energy. There should be more community engagement involving citizens, more actively through education, incentives and community-led initiatives. Invest in comprehensive public awareness campaigns to foster a culture of sustainability.
The Government should also establish robust mechanisms to track progress and hold stakeholders accountable and do timely reporting. More can be done to encourage collaborations with private sectors, research institutions, international partners to drive innovation and share best practices. The Green Plan should remain flexible to adapt to changing circumstances and emerging technologies.
In summary, the Singapore Green Plan 2030 is a commendable step towards a greener and more sustainable future. By addressing the suggested areas for improvement, we can enhance its impact and ensure a resilient and thriving Singapore for generations to come.
Ms Poh Li San: Mr Chairman, with global warming, Singapore will not be spared. Our days will become hotter, and we expect to have very hot days with temperatures exceeding 35 degrees Celsius. It has been projected that we will have more warm nights too, when temperatures exceed 26 degrees.
Will MSE share its plans to help build our people's heat resilience and increase urban liveability in view of these rising temperatures? Will there be specific studies designed to better understand the impact of heat on vulnerable groups in our population and the appropriate measures to assist them? How will the Government utilise findings from our Third National Climate Change Study (V3) to strengthen our city's heat resilience and also to contribute to international climate science efforts?
The Chairman: Ms Nadia Samdin. You can take your three cuts together.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Much obliged. Ocean conservation and coastal protection are issues close to my heart. Last year, MSE's GPC Chair Mr Louis Ng and I spoke up on an Adjournment Motion to emphasise the importance of safeguarding our oceans. Today, I want to ask about rising sea levels, as our coasts are vulnerable to floods and erosion.
It was recently reported that Singapore's annual total rainfall was 13.1% above the long-term average in 2023 and the mean temperature for the last decade reached a new high of 28.06. It is important that we continue fortifying our coasts to mitigate the impact of climate change. I would like to ask how findings from Singapore's Third National Climate Change Study (V3) will help to inform and bolster our coastal resilience strategies, including the possibility of incorporating nature-based solutions?
What plans does the Ministry have to enhance local technical capabilities and citizen participation in this domain? For example, are there initiatives to collaborate with IHLs to share data, analyse and further develop our expertise in coastal protection?
Increasing local agriculture and aquaculture production are key objectives in reaching our \"30 by 30\" goal. We must be cognisant of the environmental and natural wildlife as we tackle our food security challenges, as we are reshaping natural environments with development and technology. For example, a study found that aquaculture activity in close proximity to coral reefs limits survivorship and growth rates.
I would like to ask what is the progress of the \"30 by 30\" plan and, in particular, of our local aquaculture sector, through the Singapore Aquaculture Plan? How does the Government intend to safeguard natural habitats around open ocean aquaculture Bills, and what processes or checks are there when issuing new licences?
It has also been reported that 70 farms in Lim Chu Kang have had to move out for developmental purposes. I understand we are transforming the area into a high-tech agri-food zone. It is also important to support the livelihood of people impacted by this transition.
Can the Ministry provide an update on the progress of the Lim Chu Kang Master Plan, including whether the Government will explore integrating offshore aquaculture sites and agriculture systems for more sustainable production and optimising the farming production zone? And could the Minister also share the measures implemented by MSE to support local farmers who have been impacted by this transition?
Sir, food security is an essential pillar of national security, and both environmental and geopolitical events pose a threat to local supply. Due to disruptions, El Niño risks and food export bans, various crops have risen in prices. Take, for example, regional rice exports. Thai 5% broken rice reached US$660 per metric tonne in end-January 2024, a record high.
We must increase our food resilience through minimising external disruptions and maximising internal production. I would like to ask what is the take-up rate of the Farm-to-Table Programme and how many more businesses have been procuring locally farmed produce since the scheme's inception? Can the Government consider giving recognition to wet market stallholders who supply Singapore-grown produce in the heartlands, including potential incentives, such as rental subsidies?
What is the progress of the Alliance for Action (AfA) for Local Produce Demand Offtake and Consumer Education and the SG Fresh Produce (SGFP) logo?
Finally, can the Ministry share how the Government intends to better manage the increasing frequency of food supply chain disruptions?
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Chairman, I wish to request that MSE share with us a progress update on the Lim Chu Kang Masterplan. The Lim Chu Kang Agri-Food Production Hub has been positioned as a key initiative to support Singapore's \"30 by 30\" ambition. The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) had earlier said that a detailed Masterplan will be published by 2023. Care needs to be taken to create the conditions to help Lim Chu Kang become a successful agri-food cluster.
One question to consider is whether a clustering concept is suitable for agriculture in Singapore. Clustering works if there are true economies of scale, which may not exist if different farms at Lim Chu Kang choose to grow different produce. Indeed, vertical farms survive by differentiating their products for niche markets where prices are higher, but demand is also limited. It would be difficult for vertical farms to compete on a large scale in Singapore, where most households would prefer cheaper produce imported from Malaysia and elsewhere, for example.
Another stated objective of the Lim Chu Kang Masterplan is to create good jobs for Singaporeans, but finding locals who want to commute there may be a far greater challenge than we anticipate. Has SFA considered a decentralised model instead? For example, we could consider siting indoor farms in under-utilised buildings or residential areas. Singapore's growing population of plant hobbyists is potentially a good source of farmhands, but long commutes could be a deal breaker for them.
Returning to our food security goals, food security is about how we feed the masses during times of crisis. So, to what extent will calorific efficiency be considered when SFA makes decisions about which crops should be grown under the Lim Chu Kang Masterplan? This is an important question because the high-end kale that a vertical farm needs to sell to be commercially viable is not nearly as valuable as sweet potatoes during a crisis. In essence, it is not clear to me how future tenants at Lim Chu Kang will balance commercial viability with food security objectives.
Perhaps, we need to have a larger conversation about how serious we are about ensuring food security by farming locally and what amounts of financial resources would be required to achieve this.
Ms Poh Li San: The Government has set the goal of producing 30% of Singapore's nutritional needs by 2030. What has been the progress of our \"30 by 30\" plan? Our agri-food producers face various issues, including lease durations, rising costs, lack of economies of scale and a challenging business environment. What measures are in place to ease these pressures and attract more producers and investors to this sector? Could the Minister provide an update on the $60 million Agri-Food Cluster Transformation Fund?
And for a sustainable agri-food sector, we need strong support and demand from our consumers, too. The AfA on Demand Offtake and Consumer Education was formed last February to look into demand and supply aggregation of local produce. One of its main objectives is to increase public awareness and also to build greater support for local produce through consumer education. What has been the progress on this?
Also, how is the Government ensuring food security in view of the increasing frequency of food supply chain disruptions? What can Singapore consumers do to support our food resiliency?
Lastly, given the announcement today by cultivated meat producer, Eat Just, that operations in Singapore will be paused, can the Minister shed light on how will this latest development affect Singapore's \"30 by 30\" food security goals?
Mr Chairman: Mr Don Wee, you can take your two cuts together.
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, I welcome MSE's inaugural GreenGov.SG report, which was released last December. It shows how the public sector is progressing in its green transition journey, including its use of electricity and water, as well as in reducing its emissions. I am sure all Singaporeans appreciate that the Ministry is being transparent and accountable to the public on its efforts to reduce its carbon footprint.
Decisions like prioritising the reduction of single-use items, such as bottled water for meetings and disposables for meals, as well as measures to replace potable water with non-potable water for irrigation, general washing and cooling, will have an impact beyond the public sector. These actions are a positive influence for businesses and families who have yet to fully incorporate similar practices into their companies and lifestyles.
The sources of emissions in the report refer to Scope 1 and 2 emissions. Direct emissions, such as those from waste burning as well as vehicles powered by internal combustion engines, fall under Scope 1. The use of electricity is categorised under Scope 2 emissions. In Singapore, over 90% of our electricity is generated from natural gas.
Scope 3 emissions, which refer to the indirect greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions incurred as part of an organisation's value chain, like the emissions from purchased goods and services or business travel by employees, were not included in the report. Scope 3 emissions may form a significant part of total emissions and may even exceed Scope 1 and 2 emissions combined.
Would the Government consider including Scope 3 emissions and other additional information, like waste data, in its next report?
As one of the biggest purchasers of goods and services, the public sector plays an important role in setting an example and leading the country to develop green habits, develop and use greener products, as well as adopt greener practices.
Since 2007, the Government had put in sustainability requirements for selected goods and services, such as information and communications technology (ICT) equipment, electrical appliances, paper, water fittings, buildings and vehicles. I support the Government's efforts to do even more to green its supply chain.
Last year, the Government announced that it would set aside up to 5% of evaluation points for environmental sustainability in public sector tenders, starting with large construction and ICT projects. The reason for these two sectors is because, together, they make up more than 60% of the value of Government procurement contracts awarded.
I would like to ask the Government what has been the response and feedback from these two sectors? May I also ask how the Government decided on the green procurement criteria for the construction and ICT sectors?
The Government will gradually introduce sustainability practices or requirements into procurement into more sectors. What is the timeline to expand the adoption of these sustainability criteria to more public sector procurement sectors?
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (East Coast): Chairman, let me begin by declaring that I am a senior executive with a large local enterprise and I manage the sustainability business and practices for the company, among other roles.
Sir, it is heartening that the Government has published the first GreenGov.SG report for FY2022. In the FY2022 report, it mentioned that post-pandemic, an increase in activities is expected during the recovery, thus the GHG emissions in the near term will also increase. I understand that we have been measuring and disclosing these emissions on Scope 1 and Scope 2. When do we expect GHGs for Singapore to peak, so that efforts can be further focused on reduction towards net-zero?
Today, the Government is the largest procurement party for the public sector. Can I ask what will the Government plan to include in the next GreenGov.SG report? Will the disclosure begin to include Scope 3 emissions, as that is a critical aspect of the products or services procured? Furthermore, any GHGs reduction targets without Scope 3 may not be meaningful, since we do not have the visibility on the full supply chain, nor its materials at source or manufacturing processes to produce the products or services.
While I recognise it is difficult to grapple with Scope 3, the position that the Government takes in this respect will be a signal of what the industry, especially the corporates, should endeavour to achieve. In our next phase of urbanisation and economic growth, many projects that we are undertaking from public housing, transport infrastructures to connectivity service provisions, the criteria that the Government sets for these sectors will imply the need for early planning and ability to comply by all parties, particularly the construction and ICT sectors. Can the Minister share what and how are the green procurement criteria decided for these sectors?
Finally, I want to reiterate my previous call for support towards SMEs on this sustainability journey. Inevitably, there are many requests and requirements when new frameworks are introduced that will effect changes to the traditional industrial practices and processes. SMEs throughout the world face the same challenges in learning the state of things for sustainability, how to comply with new regulations and where to find essential information that enables necessary compliance, and how to build their business processes and models around sustainability.
The issue here is beyond carbon tax or GHGs emissions for any SME. The crux of managing the issue is knowing where to begin. Apart from cost, SMEs struggle to implement needful processes and require handholding from understanding the current gaps in their company, and the next steps that are critical for them to becoming a sustainable supplier.
SMEs need more than just advice or grants, but actually, a 101 guidebook. Many corporates in Singapore rely on local SMEs to fulfil their procurement needs. We want to help them and support their transition towards sustainability. But corporates alone will not make the cut for levelling their capabilities. What will the Government do to assist them in reaching the first milestone of understanding their current position and assess the needs to improve upon?
Is it possible to categorise the assessment of SMEs and their needs by nature of businesses, ranging from trading, manufacturing, consumer sales or others. These would then allow impactful first steps that can give a sense of the state of things in the SMEs and, subsequently, the Government can consider to provide useful targeted support accordingly to them as they transition over time.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 must be a whole-of-nation effort that must involve businesses. In Budget 2023, Minister Grace Fu said that \"businesses should do more with less\". The Minister also said that while some upfront costs may be incurred, lower energy and resource used will lower costs over the long run.
In a 2023 survey of businesses that have adopted technology to make the green transition, only 16% were confident of achieving their sustainability target. Businesses are optimistic about the green economy, but may lack the guidance needed to take concrete steps to transition.
The $5 billion Future Energy Fund is a huge boost for the transition to cleaner fuels. I am also heartened by the extension and expansion of funds by SMEs, including through the Enterprise Financing Scheme and the Energy Efficiency Grant.
Beyond making funds available, can the Government proactively reach out to SMEs on accessing and utilising these funds? I hope we can provide more support to SMEs to cross the barrier and translate funding into concrete actions on the ground.
Ms Poh Li San: Mr Chairman, Singapore's green transition requires all stakeholders to play their part in reducing their carbon footprint. Enterprises can contribute in many ways, such as by becoming more energy-efficient and reducing waste.
What is the Ministry doing to incentivise businesses to use renewable energy and to reduce energy consumption?
In view of current and new regulations to reduce waste and boost recycling, how is the Ministry supporting companies to build their capabilities to do so? In addition, are there industry guidelines and targets to encourage business-client cooperation in reducing waste, particularly packaging waste for consumer products?
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh, take your two cuts together.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, as part of Singapore's efforts to mitigate climate change, our carbon tax was increased from the previous $5 per tonne of emissions to $25 per tonne. It will rise to $45 per tonne between 2026 and 2027.
The higher carbon tax rates will prompt businesses to consider and search for ways to be more energy efficient. However, reasons such as sunk investment cost in current equipment and tools and manpower constraints, especially for SMEs, are some of obstacles for enterprises. What are the help and supporting measures available for businesses seeking to be more energy efficient?
Singapore's carbon tax has jumped fivefold from $5 per tonne of emissions to $25 per tonne. In the next three years, it will rise to $45 per tonne. What plans does MSE have to educate, encourage and assist our households to switch to more energy-efficient appliances and adopt green lifestyle habits to obtain savings on their electricity bills? With more hot days and warm nights due to global warming, how can households keep cool without turning to air-conditioning, which is one of the major appliances that consume more electricity?
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Chairman, in view of the raised carbon tax and our residents' cost of living concerns, how has MSE been helping households to improve their energy and water usage efficiency in order to enhance their cost savings? How has MSE been working to raise public awareness on tips to conserve these precious resources? How else can MSE incentivise households that keep water and electricity consumption below national average or certain benchmark consumption per pax to encourage conservation of these resources? I hope MSE can share its ongoing and prospective efforts for the points I have raised above.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Singapore's green transition should be a just and inclusive one. I am glad that the Climate Friendly Households Programme helps 1-, 2- and 3-room HDB households reduce their energy and water consumption. The programme gives eligible households vouchers to purchase refrigerators, shower fittings and LED lights. If all eligible households make the switch, this is the equivalent of taking 10,000 cars off the road. The water savings amount to 400 million gallons of water annually.
The programme will expire on 20 March 2024. Can the Ministry share if there are plans to extend the programme? Additionally, will the Ministry consider expanding the scope of the programme to include more households and more appliances? In particular, can we consider expanding the programme to encourage passive cooling measures for households, such as installing heat-reflecting windows and adding insulation to windows and doors?
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Sir, post COVID-19, there is a much better awareness on the impact of indoor air quality on the health of occupants in a building. The National Environment Agency (NEA) currently requires building owners to comply with a set of guidelines to ensure a reasonable standard of indoor air quality and improving ventilation.
The question that arises is: how will NEA be able to regulate this requirement? We should not wait until the occupants get sick before any investigation is launched on the adequacy of the measures put in place by building owners. Hence, from a regulatory perspective, how does NEA proactively monitor the owners' compliance of air quality standards in public and commercial buildings? Would the compulsory installation of monitors, such as carbon dioxide monitors, in these buildings help in the task?
Finally, what has been NEA's experience in supervising the Code of Practice for the control of Legionella bacteria in cooling towers of the buildings?
The Chairman: Ms Carrie Tan, take your two cuts together.
Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Mr Chairman, Singapore's Zero Waste Masterplan aims to increase the overall national recycling rate to 70% and reduce waste sent to the landfill by 30% by 2030. This goal seems reasonable.
Singapore has had Clean and Green Campaigns since 1990 and most of us recognise the \"3Rs\" – reduce, reuse and recycle. But our actions do not mirror this awareness. Even though more than half of Singaporean households said they were recycling, the actual domestic recycling rate based on recyclables collected was only 13%. People are still discarding far more non-recyclables. Despite much effort, there has been limited success after many years. In fact, the domestic recycling rate even dropped slightly in 2022. It is time to shift focus to \"reducing\" and \"reusing\" instead, while \"recycling\" happens in parallel.
Research shows it is the effort required and not the lack of desire that is the obstacle to an action. When we do not know how to repair, repurpose or reshare an item, discarding it is far easier. Convenient opportunities to swap and repair items should be permanent features in our neighbourhoods.
In Nee Soon South, we have successfully run \"Shwap for Sustainability\" events where residents can exchange clothes with one another to reduce fast fashion waste. The community group, Repair Kopitiam, organises regular community events in different neighbourhoods where residents can learn how to repair items from trained volunteers.
These are two examples of local initiatives that I hope MSE can give resourcing and legs to, to propagate into all neighbourhoods in Singapore through the SG Partnerships Office. Let us discard the \"throw away\" mindset and embrace a \"treasuring\" mindset – using less, sharing more and wasting not. Let us make reducing and reusing a national movement.
Singapore is ageing. There are more people dying each day, each year. From 20,933 deaths in 2020, the number grew to 25,600 in 2022. This may sound morbid, but it is the harsh reality and trend going forward.
What is MSE's long-term strategy and innovations, given that competing land needs and climate change concerns are rendering traditional ways of afterlife arrangements increasingly difficult? Do we cut down more trees to make way for more columbariums? Or can MSE work with the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), for example, on research and development to treat ashes to make them beneficial for trees instead?
What are other options to having an urn, a niche and more columbariums for memorialising our loved ones who passed? I urge MSE to do more to increase Singaporeans' awareness and willingness towards alternatives, such as inland or sea scattering of ashes. These conversations need to start now with my generation of millennials, who are more open-minded than our parents and may well opt for alternatives.
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Sir, our hawker culture is our national treasure, providing Singaporeans with affordable and well-loved hawker fare. With an ageing population, rising costs and manpower shortages, there has been concerns over its sustainability.
NEA has implemented programmes and initiatives to support and encourage hawkerprenuers to join the trade. But, anecdotally, the failure rates of new stalls in some hawker centres and coffee shops has been quite high, with a number of stalls shutting down in less than one year. Further, many younger hawkerpreneurs aspire to serve more upmarket fare or \"atas\" fares, such as gourmet pastas, gourmet burgers that start north of $8 in our hawker centres that cater to the taste of more affluent broader population. Hawkerpreneurs who have the ambition to expand express frustration in the lack of manpower and the inability to hire foreigners as their number one challenge.
What more can the Government do to ensure that the hawker trade can attract and retain Singaporeans, while ensuring the continued availability of good low-cost options in our hawker centres and coffee shops?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Sir, many of our residents depend on hawker centres to provide their main meals several times a week. Hawker centres are an integral part of our community lives, providing a wide range of good food. However, with rising costs of ingredients, manpower and utilities, our hawkers are finding it harder to keep their food prices as affordable as in the past. On the other hand, fewer Singaporeans are becoming hawkers, even as many of the current hawkers are getting older and gradually retiring.
What is the Ministry's strategy to maintain the balance between keeping hawker food prices affordable while ensuring the earnings of our hawkers are attractive enough to continue working and to bring in new talent into this sector?
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis: Last year, my Sengkang colleague, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, elucidated that pricey coffee shop rents form part of the recipe for expensive hawker food. Likewise, hawkers operating from hawker centres face significant pressures from high and rising rents, causing them much financial strain and, inevitably, many may have to raise their food prices, albeit grudgingly, for many well-meaning hawkers.
As of 2021, the median monthly rent was $1,250 for non-subsidised stalls in NEA-operated hawker centres and $2,000 for stalls in privately-operated hawker centres under the Socially Conscious Enterprise Hawker Centre scheme. These pricier rents could likely be due to the operator passing through the high-bids placed during a tender, such as a successful bid of over $6 million for the operation of the recently opened Buangkok Hawker Centre, onto stallholders.
Hence, by bringing all centres under NEA control, the costs for our stallholders could be better managed or even reduced, whilst keeping menu prices affordable. Good food stalls in NEA-operated hawker centres also face elevated rents, with tender documents revealing that the median winning bid for January to November 2023 was approximately $1,700, with some stalls even fetching over $6,000 in rent, such as the case for the highest-ever $6,810 per month rental for Newton Food Centre hawker stall.
With the introduction of a rental cap for this year's Geylang Serai Ramadan Bazaar, perhaps a similar idea could be implemented for stalls in NEA-operated hawker centres or even other Government-leased properties, such as HDB eating houses as well, instead of a purely price-based tender where hawker stalls are simply awarded to the highest bidder. With the rising costs of living hitting Singaporeans hard, measures ought to be in place to ameliorate the financial pressures experienced by hawkers whilst ensuring the affordability of hawker food for all.
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Chairman, we proudly commemorate Singapore's hawker culture as the nation's inclusion on the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's (UNESCO's) Representative List of Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity in 2020. The dedication of our hawkerpreneurs, who tirelessly work over hot stoves and woks, ensures the preservation of this invaluable cultural heritage.
Moreover, our hawkerpreneurs fulfill a crucial social need by providing affordable and delicious meals to all Singaporeans, particularly those from resource-low families. They also offer convenience to dual-income households, who often lack the time to prepare meals.
Despite their invaluable contributions, our hawkerpreneurs face escalating challenges, including: one, higher manpower costs, driven by the need to uplift lower-wage workers and the tightness of the labour market. It is worth noting that hawkerpreneurs are restricted from hiring foreign workers, limiting their pool of available stall assistants; two, increased ingredient costs due to global inflation; and three, hawkerpreneurs plying their trade in some coffee shops have also experienced escalating rental prices.
In light of the Government's comprehensive efforts to enhance the livelihoods of lower-wage workers through initiatives like the PWM and increasing local qualifying salaries, it is imperative to consider the well-being and livelihoods of our hawkerpreneurs too.
Therefore, I would like to inquire whether the Ministry has conducted a study on the average earnings of our hawkers, comparing them with the latest salary benchmarks, including overall pay and hourly earning rates? Specifically, a study focusing on younger hawkerpreneurs who face higher living expenses, such as housing mortgages and children's education, would be beneficial. What plans does the Ministry have to ensure that our hawkerpreneurs can maintain a decent livelihood?
Additionally, while the Government has emphasised the necessity for consumers to pay more to support the uplifting of lower-wage workers and strengthen social inclusivity, hawkerpreneurs often face criticism when revising meal prices upward. How does the Government intend to assist hawkerpreneurs in implementing price increases that are fair to both them and consumers?
Mr Murali Pillai: Sir, in November 2023, the Singapore Management University (SMU) published a study on the cleanliness of public toilets in hawker centres and coffee shops entitled, \"Public Toilets as Dirty as in 2020\".
The study concluded that whilst there have been improvements at the hawker centres compared to 2020, Singaporeans conveyed that more should be done to improve toilet sanitation at coffee shops. In HDB housing estates, we often see irresponsible cases of littering and dumping among residents. They expect the poor Town Council cleaners, who already have heavy workloads, to clean after them. This is unfair. For a first-world country like Singapore, we can certainly do better.
How do we ingrain in Singaporeans the message that cleanliness is a joint responsibility among all of us? How can we improve the cleanliness outcomes in our estates and public toilets?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, cleanliness, or the lack of, in the toilets of our coffee shops and hawker centres has been a perennial issue. For a brief period during the COVID-19 pandemic, they improved greatly and Singaporeans were hopeful that finally, clean toilets in our beloved hawker centres will become the new norm. Unfortunately, this turned out not to be the case, and the state of wet and dirty toilets resumed.
As a developed country, this is an area in which we must make more effort to improve upon. What are the plans by the Ministry to address the issue of dirty toilets in public places, including those in the wet markets and coffee shops? In addition, how can we involve more Singaporeans to keep other public spaces clean?
Ms Poh Li San: Recent surveys have shown that the standard of cleanliness in our public toilets at hawker centres and coffeeshops remains disappointing. What plans does the Ministry have to address the longstanding issue of dirty toilets in these public places? What measures will the Government implement to educate and involve our community to keep our public spaces clean?
Ms Hany Soh: Mr Chairman, in an islandwide study conducted by SMU last year, more than 66% of 9,411 Singaporeans interviewed were of the view that public toilets in hawker centres and coffee shops either remain as dirty as they were three years ago, or “have become much dirtier”. Additionally, about 60% of the respondents also said that efforts in cleaning up toilets in hawker centres and coffee shops ranged from mostly ineffective to completely ineffective; only 6% of Singaporeans were optimistic about the efficacy of clean toilet campaigns.
Why are public toilets in Singapore in such bad condition, or at least perceived to be? Could it be because, one, public toilets are not well designed for robust public use, operations and maintenance? Two, public toilet operators or their contractors are not maintaining toilets to attain and maintain good functional and hygiene standards? Three, users of public toilets lack graciousness in keeping toilets clean? Or four, there is a sense of a lack of ownership among all stakeholders to ensure that toilets are functional, safe and clean in Singapore?
Mr Chairman, in the SMU study, in 2023, the top three cleanest public toilets in hawker centres and coffee shops were those located in Marina South, Outram and Boon Lay. Clean public toilets is certainly not a myth. With an ageing population and risks of disease outbreaks in the future, it is crucial for us to ensure that Singapore has clean and hygienic toilets. Thus, I ask: what plans does MSE have to address the issue of dirty toilets in these public spaces? What were the learning points from campaigns that were rolled out in the past? Do the relevant authorities plan to step up monitoring and enforcement to ensure public toilets are well maintained?
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin: Chairman, one of the things we are most known for is being one of the cleanest cities in the world. It is a blessing to be able to walk down litter-free roads built through public culture and awareness and the hard work of many. I would like to ask, how have new policies, like the Tray and Crockery Return Scheme since June 2023 or the High-rise Littering Statutory Presumption clause, improved cleanliness in our heartlands? And what resources have been deployed to manage errant dumping and high-rise littering, which are sometimes caused by well-meaning elderly who throw food out the window for birds? What are the Government's strategies to manage to improper waste disposal, particularly at residential HDB units and in our housing estates? Could MSE also share its strategies working together with other agencies to tackle urban bird issues which persist in several hawker centres and estates?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: “Killer litter” is a term coined decades ago and, today, it continues to be relevant to every one of us. Most of us live in high-rise apartments, whether they are HDB flats or private condominiums. As we have experienced, killer litter can occur anywhere, posing a grave danger to all. Sometimes, high-rise littering are not deliberate acts of throwing items down the building block. Rather, these are items placed on ledges or open terraces or hung on balconies. With more extreme weather conditions nowadays, more items are at risk of injuring someone when there are strong winds. How will the Government deter potential high-rise littering and ensure that residents take precautions with their items in open areas?
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Despite numerous efforts by agencies like NEA, Town Councils and others, the state of public cleanliness and hygiene remains much to be desired. Irresponsible waste dumping, high-rise littering and cigarette butt littering remain a common scene in our neighbourhoods and heartland centres. While the majority of the public are socially responsible, there are still a recalcitrant minority that continues to be inconsiderate and behave irresponsibly. It seems that the effect of deterrence has no impact on them.
Can I ask if surveillance and the enforcements can be significantly beefed up to deter more of such inconsiderate behaviours? May I ask what are the Ministry’s plans to further enhance efforts to keep Singapore clean, especially at the littering hotspots around the island?
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Chairman, foreigners and tourists often speak of Singapore as a clean city-state. This is a reputation we want to maintain. We also want to ensure our residents live well in a clean and healthy environment. We have been able to achieve this so far due to the hard work of our cleaners. There are also meaningful initiatives, like the ones led by our Public Hygiene Council. However, as locals, we know there are some challenges.
According to a study conducted by SMU, also quoted by other Members, more than 66% of Singaporeans said public toilets in hawker centres and coffee shops either remain as dirty as they were three years ago or \"have become much dirtier\". In April 2023, in SMU’s Public Cleanliness Satisfaction Survey, 90% of respondents acknowledged that Singapore is clean only because of the efficiency of its cleaning services and 77% of respondents believe that it is the Government’s responsibility to keep Singapore clean.
Indeed, it can be difficult to keep certain places, like public toilets in hawker centres, clean. We need to create a culture where people take responsibility and participate in the efforts of maintaining hygiene and cleanliness, so that we can truly be a clean city and not a \"cleaned\" one. We need a whole-of-society approach in tackling this matter. How is MSE working with different agencies and community partners in this endeavour?
I also note that NUS and JTC Corporation are supporting trials with autonomous cleaning bots in toilets at industrial parks, hospitals, malls and the airport. How can the Government leverage technological advancements in managing hotspots where cleanliness is an issue?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Designated smoking areas are created to confine smokers and their smoke within a space and protect non-smokers from the harmful effects of second-hand tobacco smoke. Without these clearly designated zones, smokers are more likely to break the law and smoke in a prohibited area. Therefore, I would like to ask the Minister what is the progress of designating smoking areas in buildings, F&B outlets and various other spaces, and if there are plans to expand their set-ups.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng. Your two cuts together, please.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: I have been pushing the issue of second-hand smoke repeatedly for the past few years. We cannot end the MSE Committee of Supply (COS) without including this important issue. I know Senior Minister of State Amy Khor has reluctantly handed over this issue to Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng. I hope with a fresh pair of eyes and his healthy lungs – he exercises a lot – we can finally move forward on this issue of second-hand smoke.
It is ironic that we are doing so much to protect public health, implement measures to reduce pollution levels and improve air quality but we do so little when it comes to protecting people from second-hand smoke in their own homes. Our homes should be our sanctuary. But for so many people, second-hand smoke is a deadly intruder. This should not be treated as a neighbourly dispute but instead, treated as a public health concern. A serious public health concern. I have given many suggestions to tackle second-hand smoke in homes. Beyond issuing advisories, can the Government share what it is doing to protect people from second-hand smoke in their own homes?
Next, since 2019, Orchard Road has been designated a \"No Smoking Zone\". This means that smoking is only allowed in designated smoking areas. The Orchard Road \"No Smoking Zone\" was recently expanded to the Somerset Skate Park.
It has been five years since we introduced the Orchard Road \"No Smoking Zone\". In 2021, Minister Grace Fu shared that MSE will monitor and assess the effectiveness of the Orchard Road \"No Smoking Zone\" before considering whether to designate other areas as \"No Smoking Zones\". Can the Ministry provide an update on its assessment? Will the Ministry consider expanding the \"No Smoking Zone\" to other busy streets and areas, such as the Central Business District and the Civic District?
The Chairman: Minister Grace Fu.
The Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Thank you, Mr Chairman. In our early days of Independence, Singapore stood at critical crossroads, with limited resources, an uncertain economic future and pressing public health concerns. Back then, our forefathers recognised the importance of safeguarding a clean and green environment to protect the health of our people, fuel economic growth and pave the way for a brighter future.
A public cleaning regime was put in place, where our cleaning workforce swept the streets and removed refuse daily. We cleaned up the Singapore River, which was heavily polluted from human and economic activities. Street hawkers were rehoused into hawker centres, equipped with proper facilities to ensure food safety and hygiene standards.
Today, we again stand at crossroads of political, economic, social and environmental changes. This is why the Government launched the Forward Singapore exercise last year, to re-examine our values and aspirations, and to forge a new social compact for the road ahead.
Forward SG underscored the crucial role of collective responsibility in shaping our shared future. It also highlighted the importance of ensuring that the basic needs of all Singaporeans continue to be met. This includes a clean and liveable environment, with reliable access to safe food and water.
My Ministry will work with all segments of our society to build a clean, green and resilient home for our current and future generations. In this COS debate,\tI will provide an overview of our efforts to enhance public hygiene and update on the Singapore Green Plan; Senior Minister of State Amy Khor will talk about our efforts in green procurement, energy efficiency and waste management; Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon will speak about how we are enhancing our food security, protecting our coasts and strengthening the resilience of our hawkers; and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng will delve into the operational and technological aspects of our environmental cleanliness initiatives, as well as our community engagement efforts.
First, public hygiene. What comes to mind is environmental cleanliness, keeping our surroundings free from litter and clutter and the iconic “Keep Singapore Clean” campaign. Public hygiene is more than that. It forms the very foundation of our well-being – safe food, clean air and clean water. Collectively, all facets of public hygiene come together to create a thriving urban environment and protect our physical and mental health.
Sustaining high levels of public hygiene requires the active participation of all of us. The Government, businesses, communities and individuals must all work together to contribute to a clean environment, safe food, clean air and clean water. This is the social compact that will strengthen our sense of collective responsibility to one another.
MSE will designate 2024 as the Year of Public Hygiene. The Year of Public Hygiene will see greater emphasis on delivery of public environmental services, resourcing the environmental industry with capability building and technology adoption, and augmenting our enforcement efforts.
Complementing enforcement are our efforts to harness the spirit of collective responsibility as part of Forward SG, for all stakeholders to play a role in upkeeping good public hygiene practices for the betterment of our society. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey will elaborate on this.
Let me first touch on environmental cleanliness.
The Government has been working closely with our businesses to keep our public spaces clean. In 2021, we launched the Environmental Sanitation (ES) regime under our Environmental Public Health Act (EPHA) to promote higher cleanliness standards and place greater accountability on businesses to keep their premises clean. The ES regime sets out mandatory baseline cleaning and disinfection standards for premises with high footfall and vulnerable occupants, such as coffee shops, food courts, schools and eldercare facilities. It also requires premises to appoint a trained and registered individual to develop and implement an ES programme in accordance with prescribed standards. Our agencies have been working diligently with business owners to ensure that minimum cleanliness standards set out under the ES regime and others under the EPHA are met.
Several Members – Ms Poh Li San, Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Ms Hany Soh and Mr Murali Pillai – have raised questions on toilets in coffeeshops and other public spaces.
NEA and SFA have been conducting enforcement blitzes on public toilets, including those in coffee shops and hawker centres, to ensure that they are properly maintained and cleaned according to requirements under the EPHA.
NEA and SFA have also been conducting checks to ensure proper disposal of food waste by food establishments, to provide clean, pest-free dining environments for Singaporeans. This includes making sure that establishments have sufficient and properly maintained bins, and that any waste generated is properly bagged, conveyed to the bin centre in a timely manner, and not left overnight.
We will step up on enforcement where necessary. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey will speak more on our approach.
Mr Chairman, our cleaning industry has been a cornerstone of our environmental cleanliness efforts, forming the backbone of our clean-up initiatives.
With an ageing population and a shrinking workforce, the industry faces shortages and reductions in manpower. It is important for us to uplift our cleaning industry, to ensure that they are adequately equipped and resourced to uphold high standards of environmental cleanliness.
We have seen several efforts, led by the industry, in supporting our cleaning workforce. Temasek Polytechnic launched their Enviro Tech Innovation Hub (ETIH) last year, with the support of NEA, together with the Environmental Management Association of Singapore and industry players, such as cleaning companies and tech partners. The ETIH will develop training programmes to upskill our cleaning industry and testbed cutting-edge technology solutions to increase productivity, such as the usage of IoT sensors and devices to manage cleanliness performance.
We are actively upskilling our cleaners, so that their capabilities and skillsets evolve in tandem with the industry’s needs.
Mr Louis Ng mentioned the PWM earlier. We introduced enhanced training requirements under the PWM for the cleaning industry in December 2022, which has allowed cleaners to acquire new and relevant skills, such as how to operate emerging technologies and digitalisation tools used in cleaning operations.
The PWM also entails a cumulative wage increase of up to 85% from 2022 to 2028, ensuring that our cleaners’ wages continue to rise alongside improvements in their competencies and skillsets. Base salaries of local cleaners have risen to between $1,570 and $2,210 in 2023, and will increase each year until 2028.
Next, on safe food. SFA takes a risk-based approach in regulating food safety, where licensing requirements and food safety grading criteria are calibrated based on food establishments’ risk profiles. This focuses our inspection resources on where risks are higher and encourages businesses to implement sufficient measures to ensure food safety, while keeping compliance costs low.
Let me provide an update on our food safety grading system.
Under the existing grading system, food establishments are graded between A and D, based on an annual audit. This provides a snapshot of an establishment’s food safety standards at the point of inspection. However, it does not adequately reflect whether these standards are consistently maintained.
For better food safety assurance, we are moving towards a new Safety Assurance for Food Establishments (SAFE) framework, where establishments will be graded based on their food safety track record and prevailing food safety management systems. It will also harmonise the grading systems for both retail and non-retail food establishments, which are currently regulated by two different frameworks.
In line with our risk-based approach, establishments involved in significant food handling with a large scale of distribution, such as food manufacturers and caterers, will need to meet additional requirements to attain higher grades compared to those of smaller scale. Establishments with poor food safety performance and lower grades will face more frequent inspection. Poor performance during these inspections could lead to downgrading.
This new SAFE Framework is a better version from the one we announced in 2021. SFA incorporated the feedback it has received from the industry and kept the intent of recognising food establishments with a consistent record of good food safety performance, and spurring others to achieve and maintaining high grades of food safety. More details will be released later this year.
With a risk-based approach, we are also removing licensing requirements and fees on food establishments with minimal food safety risk. This helps to reduce regulatory compliance and increase operational efficiency.
I announce that by 1 January 2025, all market stalls and vending machines selling non-food items or low-risk food items, such as canned food and packet biscuits, will not need to be licensed. More than half of existing market stall licensees and around two in five existing vending machine licensees will benefit from this new policy.
The safety of food from these stalls and vending machines will continue to be regulated through standards imposed by SFA on the importers and suppliers of these food items.
Another aspect of public hygiene is the quality of indoor air which Mr Pillai spoke about. Formaldehyde is a chemical that can be found in some building products, such as paints. Prolonged exposure to formaldehyde can lead to negative health effects, such as respiratory discomfort and an increased risk of certain cancers.
To protect our people from such exposure, we will be progressively introducing limits on formaldehyde in building products, starting with interior paints. From 2025 onwards, interior paints with formaldehyde will not be allowed for sale in Singapore. [Please refer to clarification later in the debate.] Further details will be released.
To Mr Pillai’s question on how we are safeguarding indoor air quality in buildings, NEA currently does not mandate minimum indoor air quality standards for buildings. Instead, NEA takes the approach of promoting greater business responsibility in maintaining high levels of indoor air quality and providing guidance on best practices.
NEA, the Building Construction Authority (BCA) and the Ministry of Health (MOH) have jointly issued a set of guidelines on improving ventilation and indoor air quality in buildings, which Mr Pillai had mentioned earlier. These guidelines encourage premises managers to install carbon dioxide monitors to assess the adequacy of ventilation in their premises. NEA has also published a detailed guide for premises managers on how to implement carbon dioxide monitoring.
Mr Pillai also asked for an update on the implementation of the Code of Practice (COP) for the Control of Legionella Bacteria in Cooling Towers. The COP was replaced by the Code of Practice for Environmental Health (COPEH) and related Guidelines in 2021. Under the EPHA, we require all cooling towers to be registered with NEA to enhance the traceability and control of potential outbreaks. As Legionella is primarily spread via inhalation of contaminated water aerosols, the EPHA requires building owners to regularly submit water sampling results to NEA to ensure that the water quality in their cooling towers complies with stipulated regulatory limits.
Last but not least, clean water. Ensuring a supply of clean water is a collective responsibility shared by both the Government and businesses. Businesses must play an active role by implementing adequate earth control measures to prevent silt from being washed into our waterways and reservoirs, and refrain from disposing hazardous substances into our public sewerage system. On the Government’s part, the Public Utilities Board (PUB) will look to introduce additional measures to safeguard our waterways, reservoirs and sewerage system. This includes tightening controls on silt discharges into our waterways and reservoirs, and illegal discharges of dangerous and hazardous substances into our public sewerage system. More details will be released later.
Chairman, even as we draw focus on the \"hygiene\" factors in the year ahead, we are not taking our eyes off longer-term challenges, such as climate change. Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Ms Poh Li San asked for an update on the Singapore Green Plan.
We are making good progress to achieve our targets. Dr Lim asked about the progress of specific initiatives and targets. I will not go into details of each target under the Green Plan but focus on providing an overview of our key achievements. I invite Dr Lim to separately file questions on specific initiatives and targets to the respective Green Plan Ministries.
On \"City in Nature\", the Ministry of National Development (MND) and the National Parks Board (NParks) are pressing on with conserving and extending our natural capital throughout the island. Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How will provide further details during MND’s COS.
On \"Sustainable Living\", my Ministry rolled out the Disposable Carrier Bag Charge last year, requiring large supermarket operators to charge for disposable carrier bags. Since its implementation, supermarket operators have observed a 50% to 80% reduction in the use of disposable carrier bags. More Singaporeans are observed to use reusable carrier bags for their grocery shopping.
The Ministry of Education (MOE) has also been instilling sustainable living habits in our students through the Eco Stewardship Programme, where schools have implemented the \"4Cs\" approach of curriculum, campus, culture and community to allow students to learn about sustainability in a more integrated and applied manner.
We are also powering on with our \"Energy Reset\". Thanks to the Ministry of Transport (MOT) and the Land Transport Authority's (LTA’s) efforts, about two in three new car registrations in 2023 were cleaner energy cars, and one in three HDB carparks are now equipped with electrical vehicle charging points. The Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) and the Energy Market Authority (EMA) are making good progress in greening our national grid, issuing the first Conditional Approvals for low-carbon electricity imports from Cambodia, Indonesia and Vietnam.
To foster an inclusive transition to a green economy, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) announced Greenprint, a digital solution to help businesses simplify and standardise the reporting of sustainability data. Greenprint will launch in phases in 2024 and focus initially on automating basic climate reporting for SMEs, before scaling its automation capabilities to support larger corporates.
To secure our \"Resilient Future\", my Ministry is pressing on with our efforts to ensure that our environment remains liveable, our food supply remains reliable and our coastlines remain well-protected in the face of extreme weather patterns. Senior Minister of State Khor recently updated this House on the measures we are taking to increase Singapore’s heat resilience, which should address Ms Poh’s queries on the topic. Senior Minister of State Koh will update on our food security and coastal protection efforts later.
As Dr Lim alluded to, the Green Plan is a living plan that will evolve over time with more ambitious targets and aspirations. In 2022, we announced that the public sector will commit to achieve net zero emissions around 2045. Last year, we raised our target for restoration and enhancement of forest, coastal and marine habitats from 30 hectares to 80 hectares by 2030. We are closely monitoring the progress of our initiatives to ensure that they remain relevant to our long-term sustainability goals.
Mr Chairman, as the world grapples with daunting, long-term challenges like climate change, let us not lose sight of the fundamental necessities for a good and healthy life – a clean environment, safe food, clean air and clean water.
As committed under Forward SG, the Government will continue to spearhead efforts towards our shared vision of a clean, green and resilient Singapore. But we can do so only through collective action with our businesses and our people.
My hope is for Singapore to be a clean country and not just a cleaned country, and I echo the comment made by Ms Rahayu Mahzam. I hope to see businesses operate with pride, offering not only clean spaces for Singaporeans, but also implementing responsible practices that safeguard the food we eat, the air we breathe, and the water we drink. I hope to see communities become engines of positive change, fostering a culture of shared ownership and partnering the Government in building a new social compact. I hope to see Singaporeans treat our streets, our parks and our public spaces like extensions of our own homes, going the extra mile to keep our surroundings clean as Singapore is our home.
This is the Singapore we deserve, the Singapore we can build, and the Singapore we must leave for generations to come. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor.
The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan): Chairman, while we push hard on public hygiene, which is the foundation for healthy, resilient communities, we must also press on with our efforts to confront climate change. Climate change has profound impacts on public hygiene and public health.
Singapore is committed to peaking emissions before 2030 and achieving net zero by 2050. We have taken concrete steps to reduce our carbon footprint. These include gradually increasing our carbon tax rate, facilitating renewable energy imports and promoting energy efficiency. Everyone needs to fight climate change – the Government, businesses and households.
Let me start with the Government. In 2021, we launched GreenGov.SG, the public sector's sustainability movement, where we committed to ambitious carbon and resource efficiency targets. Last December, we published the inaugural GreenGov.SG report, which documented our sustainability efforts, progress and plans.
Miss Cheryl Chan and Mr Don Wee asked about our plans for the next GreenGov.SG report and whether Scope 3 emissions would be included.
The second report will be released this year and will include data on waste and waste reduction efforts. As there are wide-ranging sources of Scope 3 emissions from the Government's extensive activities and the sources that are deemed material vary across agencies, we are still studying the appropriate approach.
Under GreenGov.SG, we are pursuing green Government procurement to spur more environmentally sustainable business practices and accelerate the supply of more environmentally friendly goods and services. We want to encourage companies to green their processes and products. As announced at COS last year, we will consider the sustainability practices of companies that tender for Government projects, starting with large construction and ICT projects. This is on top of the sustainability requirements that we have imposed for the goods we procure.
Miss Chan and Mr Wee also asked how we decided on the green Government procurement criteria for the construction and ICT sectors.
Over the past year, we have consulted the industry and incorporated their feedback on the environmental sustainability-related evaluation criteria. Subsequently, we piloted the criteria by setting aside up to 5% of evaluation points for five construction tenders and one ICT bulk tender.
For the pilot construction tenders, companies were assessed on whether they have carried out climate-related disclosures; adopted decarbonisation technologies, such as electric generators; incorporated low-carbon construction materials; and achieved relevant sustainability certifications.
For the ICT sector, hardware suppliers were assessed based on criteria, such as sustainable packaging options and sustainability-related certifications. We also plan to include criteria for data centre operators and cloud service providers, such as whether companies have embarked on sustainability reporting and the power usage effectiveness of their data centres.
We will continue to refine our environmental sustainability evaluation criteria for large construction and ICT tenders with minimum estimated procurement value of $50 million and $10 million respectively. To Mr Wee's query on the expansion timeline, we plan to expand this initiative to include companies that tender for meetings, incentives, conferences, and exhibitions (MICE) and other events organised by the public sector from FY2025. We will conduct industry consultations with key players, before finalising the details.
Beyond the public sector, we will continue to facilitate the greening of businesses. We hope to encourage companies, particularly SMEs who are less well-resourced, to adopt sustainability practices while improving their bottom line.
Miss Chan, Mr Louis Ng and Ms Poh Li San asked how the Government is supporting SMEs to implement green measures in the supply chain. The Government is providing local enterprises with more tools and resources to become sustainable. Companies can tap on capability-building programmes, such as courses and playbooks on decarbonisation, or funding support to do sustainability reporting and invest in energy-efficient equipment.
As shared by Senior Minister Teo Chee Hean, we have increased the carbon tax rate to $25 per tonne this year. We will progressively raise it to between $50 to $80 per tonne by 2030. This better prices the externality of carbon emissions, and nudges businesses and individuals to reduce their carbon footprint.
Enhancing energy efficiency will help businesses cut energy costs. Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Ms Poh would be happy to know that NEA's E2F has been supporting SMEs in the manufacturing sector since 2017. Enhancements to the E2F from 2022 onwards, such as increasing the grant support cap from 50% to 70%, has increased take-up rate by four-fold to 48 projects. The amount of committed funding also increased from around $700,000 to around $2.1 million post-enhancement.
The Government has reviewed existing energy efficiency grants by various agencies and will subsume the E2F under the expanded Energy Efficiency Grant (EEG), as announced at Budget 2024. The expanded EEG will benefit more sectors, including construction, maritime and the data centres industry. It will adopt a two-tier structure, with higher support of up to 70% provided to companies that wish to make larger investments to drive greater energy efficiency.
I would like to reassure Mr Ng that the Government is streamlining the application process by consolidating EEG applications across sectors on the Business Grants Portal. The Government will continue to work closely with the industry, including TACs, to proactively reach out to SMEs to promote awareness of the EEG.
Adopting energy-efficient equipment will translate to significant cost savings for businesses and households. NEA’s energy efficiency labels and standards have helped companies and consumers make informed decisions since 2008. For instance, the average energy efficiency of air-conditioners and refrigerators improved by 59% and 42% respectively. This is equivalent to the annual energy consumption of about 405,000 4-room housing units and translates to annual overall household energy savings of more than $500 million.
From 1 April 2025, we will be implementing labels and standards for two more equipment types, namely household water heaters and commercial storage refrigerators. Water heaters are the third-highest energy consuming household appliance. There are more energy-efficient options, such as instantaneous water heaters, which on average consume about 50% less electricity than electric storage water heaters. This enables homeowners to save on energy bills.
Commercial storage refrigerators are prevalent in food and beverage establishments, like hawker centres, food courts and restaurants, and can account for about one-third of hawkers' electricity usage. As refrigerators consume energy throughout the day, we encourage businesses to purchase energy-efficient models to enjoy long-term savings, such as inverter technology refrigerators that are on average 40% more energy-efficient. This will result in annual energy cost savings of about $700, with payback on capital expenditure within a year. Overall, the lifecycle cost of such efficient models are up to 60% lower than that of standard models. Furthermore, businesses can apply for the EEG to offset up to 70% of the upfront costs.
In 2019, to optimise energy consumption at the systems-level, we introduced Minimum Energy Efficiency Standards (MEES) for water-cooled chilled water systems to encourage adoption of energy-efficient chilled water operations by industrial facilities. Mandatory MEES requirements were introduced for new industrial facilities in 2020. This has helped new facilities each save an average of $300,000 annually in electricity costs, recouping their initial outlay just after three years.
We will amend the Energy Conservation Act this year to effect similar requirements for existing industrial facilities from December 2025. Existing industrial facilities can expect average energy savings of about $1.25 million per year per facility across the system's 15-year lifespan and to recover retrofitting and operating costs within five and a half years.
Besides improving energy efficiency, pursuing sustainable waste management practices should also be a priority for organisations. By following the \"3Rs\" to reduce, reuse and recycle waste, businesses can increase efficiency and lower costs.
Ms Poh asked how we are supporting businesses in building up capabilities to better manage their waste. Businesses have suggested that it would be useful to appoint staff with formal training to champion the shift towards circular and zero-waste business models. In response, NEA has worked with training providers to introduce Zero Waste Manager (ZWM) courses to train participants to implement \"3R\" efforts and integrate them into their companies' organisational culture.
The courses will also guide companies in fulfilling regulatory requirements, such as Mandatory Waste Reporting (MWR). Not only will the courses benefit some 750 companies covered under the MWR scheme, they can also equip other companies with the necessary knowledge to kickstart their waste reduction and recycling journeys.
Additionally, the ZWM course will benefit employees and companies in the waste management sector looking to provide value-added services, such as waste consultancy and audit services. We encourage all companies to appoint and train staff to lead their waste management and \"3R\" efforts. These two- to three- day courses are developed and conducted in partnership with three training providers, the Waste Management and Recycling Association of Singapore, Republic Polytechnic and NTUC Learning Hub.
To ensure these courses are accessible and affordable, they will be subsidised by SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) and whitelisted under Workforce Singapore's (WSG) Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs) for Sustainability Professionals.
Mr Gan and Ms Hany Soh asked if there will be support for households which will face higher utility bills from the carbon tax increase. We remain committed to helping households cope with cost of living. As announced by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, additional U-Save rebates will be disbursed to HDB households as part of the enhanced Assurance Package, cushioning increases in utility bills. We will enhance support for households wishing to be more energy- and water-efficient, which will also help lower their utility bills.
Launched in 2020, the existing Climate Friendly Households Programme (CFHP) provides $225 worth of vouchers to 1- to 3-room HDB households, consisting of a $150 refrigerator voucher, $50 shower fittings voucher and $25 LED lighting voucher.
As of January 2024, more than 141,000 households have registered for their Climate Vouchers and about 54,000 vouchers have been utilised. To give households more time to utilise their current set of Climate Vouchers, we have extended the qualifying redemption period to 20 March 2024. Mr Ng asked if we will be expanding the programme to include more households and appliances. As announced by Senior Minister Teo, we will enhance the CFHP.
From 15 April 2024, we will expand the programme to all 1.1 million HDB households in Singapore, a more than three-fold increase in coverage. This is to encourage wider adoption of energy- and water-efficient products. Every HDB household will receive $300 worth of Climate Vouchers and the number of eligible product types will be expanded from three to 10, including four-tick washing machines. To Mr Gan's and Mr Ng's queries, other additions, like direct current fans, will help households keep cool in a more energy-efficient manner.
The 10 eligible products contribute to around 60% of an average household's electricity consumption and around 90% of water consumption. To make it more convenient for households to use the Climate Vouchers, more retailers will come onboard the programme, taking the total number of participating retailers to 14, with about 300 stores islandwide. With these enhancements, we hope to incentivise more households to choose resource-efficient options from the outset or when their appliances and fittings are due for replacement.
HDB households who have used the $225 vouchers under the current CFHP can also claim the new $300 vouchers under the enhanced CFHP following its commencement. Unlike the current CFHP where the voucher amount is fixed for each eligible product type, the enhanced CFHP will allow households to have more flexibility in using their vouchers and select different denominations when purchasing eligible appliances.
The enhanced Climate Vouchers will be available from 15 April 2024 via the RedeemSG platform and remain valid until 31 December 2027. Members of the public who need support in claiming the Climate Vouchers online may call NEA's hotline for assistance. Chairman, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] NEA will enhance the Climate Friendly Households Programme to encourage more households to adopt more environmentally friendly and sustainable lifestyles. In the long run, using more energy-efficient and water-saving appliances and fittings can help households save on utility expenses.
Through the enhanced programme, more households will benefit. The total amount of vouchers and the variety of eligible electrical appliances and fittings will also increase. All HDB households will receive $300 worth of Climate Vouchers. They can use the vouchers to purchase 10 types of energy-efficient and water-saving appliances and fittings, including direct current fans and washing machines, from participating retailers.
Starting from 15 April 2024, one member of each household can go to redeem.gov.sg to claim the vouchers. Elderly residents and those who face difficulties with Internet access can seek assistance via NEA's hotline.
(In English): Reducing waste will also reduce emissions and cut costs. We should thus seek to reduce wasteful consumption, which Ms Carrie Tan has spoken about.
Sustainable consumption involves the responsible management of packaging and products at their end-of-life. Let me provide an update on two of our priority waste streams, namely, electrical and electronic waste, or e-waste, and packaging waste.
On the e-waste Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme, we are in our third year of implementation and have since collected over 16,000 tonnes of e-waste from over 800 collection points islandwide as of December 2023. This is a significant increase from the 9,000 tonnes collected as of December 2022.
Overall, collection rates have improved, thanks to the close collaboration with ALBA, retailers and Town Councils to publicise the scheme and encourage participation. However, we must continue to double down on efforts to achieve our target collection rates of 60% of large household appliances and 20% of other regulated consumer products' put-to-market weight.
Collection rates for lamps and household batteries have tripled to 4% and 10% respectively whilst the collection rate for ICT equipment increased slightly to 5%. However, the collection rate for large household appliances has declined from 18% to 15%.
To improve this, we will strengthen collaboration with retailers to further publicise their obligatory one-for-one takeback services to customers and continue to work with Town Councils through the quarterly collection drives. We seek everyone's continued support to deposit their e-waste via the various channels available.
Last year, we amended the Resource Sustainability Act to put in place the legislative framework for the Beverage Container Return Scheme (BCRS). We are working with stakeholders on scheme implementation and will share more details when ready.
Beyond BCRS, we are exploring other initiatives to manage packaging waste. In 2021, we implemented the Mandatory Packaging Reporting scheme. This raises awareness amongst companies on the amount of packaging they generate and spurs them to reduce packaging use.
Building on our current initiatives, we are exploring the feasibility of expanding the EPR approach to broader packaging waste types. We have awarded a consultancy study to review overseas best practices and recommend a suitable scheme for Singapore. We will consult stakeholders at an appropriate juncture. This study is expected to be completed by 2025.
Chairman, to reach net-zero, everyone must pitch in. The Government will play its part in greening the Public Service and supporting businesses and households to contribute. Let us all embrace going green, which is not just environmentally friendly, but certainly can also be wallet friendly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Business Motion","subTitle":"Extension of a Sitting in Committee of Supply","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Order. Pursuant to Standing Order No 91(3)(d), I propose to extend the time of this day’s Committee sitting for a period of up to 30 minutes. Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head L (Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment)","subTitle":"A vibrant and sustainable home","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Koh Poh Koon): Mr Chairman, the effects of climate change are already upon us. I will speak on our approach in enhancing coastal protection and food security.
The Third National Climate Change Study (V3) by the Centre for Climate Research Singapore released in January this year showed that extreme rainfall is projected to increase, mean sea levels around Singapore are projected to rise higher than previously projected under the V2 study, up to 1.15 metres by 2100 and up to around two metres by 2150.
Ms Nadia Samdin and Ms Poh Li San asked how the V3 study will be used. We will progressively share V3 data with regional and local partners. We will also incorporate V3 data into our research, such as the Climate Impact Science Research and the work of the Coastal Protection and Flood Resilience Institute (CFI) Singapore.
We have begun preparations for coastal protection with site-specific studies of Singapore's coastlines since 2021. With the commencement of the latest study along the coastlines of Lim Chu Kang and Sungei Kadut in August 2023, our site-specific studies now cover the entire north-west coast from Tuas to Woodlands, as well as Jurong Island and the City-East Coast.
Mr Louis Chua, Ms Nadia Samdin and Ms Poh Li San asked about the progress of the Lim Chu Kang Master Plan (LCKMP). The comprehensive master planning effort is now underway. We aim to harness synergies between land and sea farms in the Western Johor Strait so that farms can grow with greater resource efficiency. The detailed plan will optimise land use and put in place the necessary transport infrastructure.
To Mr Louis Chua's suggestion that clustering will not give economies of scale and decentralisation is better, I would like to share that the key feedback from our engagement with stakeholders, including farmers and industry players, since 2021, is that it will not be commercially viable nor an effective use of space and resources if farms were to build individual smaller-scale infrastructure for their own needs alone. Following his suggestion would mean that we are back to status quo and would miss the opportunity for Lim Chu Kang Master Plan to create better efficiencies and new opportunities to take our agri-food sector to a new high level.
We are, in fact, studying the viability of shared facilities, such as centralised processing facilities, for better economies of scale. We are also exploring innovative solutions that could intensify land use while guarding against sea level rise, such as growing in a \"stacked farm approach\". Farms affected by the redevelopment have been given time to transit and can bid in land tenders launched by SFA.
The Public Utilities Board (PUB) will be extending Our Coastal Conversation in the first half of 2025 to discuss the possibilities for the north-west coast and this will include development plans for the Lim Chu Kang Master Plan.
To ensure effective implementation of our coastal protection plans along the more than 300 kilometres of our varied coastline, we are working towards enacting coastal protection legislation. This would delineate the roles and responsibilities of various stakeholders, safeguard land for coastal protection measures and future upgrades to cater for uncertainties in climate projections, and regulate and enforce against activities that could pose a risk to coastal protection measures and ensure that PUB's coastal protection standards are met. We intend to kickstart consultations with stakeholders later this year.
Concurrently, PUB has started on a two-year study, from November 2023, to develop a new Code of Practice. This will guide and standardise the design, implementation as well as the operation and maintenance of coastal protection measures.
Let me now talk about strengthening our food security. As we import more than 90% of our food, Singapore is particularly vulnerable to global food supply chain disruptions. Recent examples include disease outbreaks, policy decisions by foreign governments and, of course, geopolitical tensions.
To Ms Nadia Samdin's and Ms Poh Li San's questions on ensuring food resilience, import source diversification will remain the cornerstone of our food security strategy. We will continue to facilitate food imports from new sources by working closely with industry and governments globally. For example, we approved the export of eggs and live chickens from Indonesia to Singapore in April and May 2023 respectively, and Türkiye for eggs in September 2023. SFA also works closely with industry players to put in place robust business continuity plans.
Ms Poh Li San asked about the progress of our \"30 by 30\" vision and support for the agri-food industry. The volatility of global food supply chains underscores the importance of having a buffer, a form of insurance by being able to grow some of our own food locally.
This is the driving force behind our aspirational \"30 by 30\" vision to build our agri-food industry's capability and capacity to sustainably produce 30% of our nutritional needs locally by 2030. This goal is very ambitious but it signifies our determination to make progress. It has not been easy for our farms, especially due to developmental delays during the COVID-19 pandemic and strong headwinds due to inflationary pressures and higher costs. Global agri-tech companies have also not been spared from the near-term investment headwinds. Even as we deal with these challenges, we will still forge ahead to strengthen our food supply resilience.
To help our farms cope with the higher energy costs, SFA, in April last year, enhanced the Agri-Food Cluster Transformation (ACT) Fund and introduced the Energy Efficiency Programme (EEP), providing farms with co-funding to adopt energy-efficient technologies. As at the end of last year, SFA has committed over S$23 million to fund 60 ACT Fund projects. We will also continue to upskill and build the pipeline of agri-workforce to meet the sector's needs.
Ms Nadia Samdin and Ms Poh Li San asked about the progress of the Singapore Aquaculture Plan (SAP). We have been working with agencies to increase and optimise aquaculture spaces to encourage better farming practices and invest in R&D through our AquaPolis programme. Optimising our limited sea spaces for aquaculture will require us to balance competing priorities, including maritime activities and biodiversity.
How can we come to a consensus on the right balance to strike? How can we achieve win-win outcomes to help Singapore responsibly manage our sea space for our present and future needs while preserving biodiversity? In October 2023, we brought together key stakeholders from industry, academia, nature groups and Government agencies to envision the answers to these key questions and to guide the development of productive and sustainable aquaculture for Singapore.
We are midway into our discussion, but we have started to converge on some key principles to develop the sector in a manner that is suited for our local context.
First, we will support industry to scale up through enabling regulation, technology and infrastructure. Agencies will proactively review legislation and regulations to guide resilient and sustainable aquaculture production. Before new sites are tendered, SFA works with agencies to conduct environmental studies to assess the potential impact of aquaculture developments and identify proper mitigating measures. We will help farmers to adopt more sustainable farming practices and technologies, including closed containment aquaculture systems. We will also facilitate the necessary supporting infrastructure.
Second, we will consider competing sea space uses and ecological sensitivity upfront when identifying aquaculture sites.
Third, we will be outcome-based and science-based in ensuring sustainable production. Farming need not be at the expense of the health of our waters.
Lastly, we will also take a collaborative approach with various stakeholders to co-create solutions for sustainability and growth.
These principles will be consolidated in an updated version of the SAP by the second half of this year and will embody our collective vision and serve as a roadmap for aquaculture development here in Singapore.
Ultimately, for the agri-tech sector and the agri-food sector to thrive, our farmers will need sufficient consumer demand to be commercially viable. Some farms are, in fact, ready to ramp up production, but our farmers need to know that it will be met with a corresponding increase in demand.
Food security is, therefore, a joint responsibility. As consumers, we all have a part to play in strengthening Singapore's Food Story.
Last year, as part of the Forward SG exercise, we launched the AfA that brought together various industry stakeholders to encourage increased offtake of local produce. I am happy to update that the AfA’s efforts has led to the formation of an industry-level supply and demand aggregator, spearheaded by the Singapore Agro-Food Enterprises Federation (SAFEF).
SAFEF will partner traders and food processing companies via longer-term commercial aggregator contracts to better match supply and demand. This gives certainty to both producers and buyers and also allows better price negotiations.
For example, SAFEF aggregated locally farmed marine tilapia from several fish farmers at the Western Johor Strait and marketed it as “The Straits Fish”. With additional support from Hai Sia Seafood, a food processing and distributor company, as well as Chang Cheng Group, a food services company, “The Straits Fish” dishes were officially launched on 17 February 2024 across the Group's \"zi char\" chain, Ming Kitchen Seafood. Initially, they were uncertain about how consumers would respond, so the partnership commenced with a modest launch of 200 kilogrammes of fish. The dishes were well received and sold out within the day.
SAFEF now plans to sell approximately 50 tonnes of “The Straits Fish” within the next six months and further develop it into value-added processed food products for sale at retail outlets and potentially for export. SAFEF, Hai Sia Seafood as well as retailers, such as FairPrice supermarket, are also intending to pilot dedicated retail shelves for local produce by the second half of this year, so it will be easier for consumers to purchase and support local produce.
The AfA also supported the Farm-to-Table Recognition Programme (FTTRP), launched in March last year, which recognises food businesses that procure locally produced ingredients. To Ms Nadia Samdin’s question, I am pleased to share that there are 50 businesses onboard to date. SFA plans to onboard at least a total of 100 food establishments over the next year.
The Government has also taken the lead to support the FTTRP. Since October 2023, Government procurement has incorporated a weighted criterion for sustainability into our catering contract. This allows FTTRP-recognised food caterers, which uses sustainably sourced local produce, to receive additional points that increase their chances of securing Government catering contracts. As of 1 February 2024, there are 11 FTTRP caterers, up from two previously.
I believe that more caterers will start using local produce if more Singaporeans, businesses and community groups support our local farms by asking for catering to use local ingredients and local produce. At today’s tea break, Members would have sampled an array of local dishes using locally sourced food ingredients. From the savoury delights of Nyonya laksa prepared from local prawn, eggs and beansprouts, to tandoori fish made with our local harvest, and sweets, such as peach croissant with basil cream, made with locally farmed basil. I would like to urge Members to support our local farms and to incorporate local produce from our farms in the events that you organise or host.
Ms Nadia Samdin also asked about the SG Fresh Produce (SGFP) logo and if wet market stallholders that supply local produce could be better recognised. To date, over 100 farmers, distributors and retailers have used the logo on produce packaging and in marketing channels. SFA has also developed marketing materials featuring the SGFP logo for wet market stallholders to help generate higher sales. SFA will also work with partners, like the Singapore Chefs’ Association, on programmes, such as cooking classes, to promote SGFP and the FTTRP.
Ms Poh Li San asked how the public can do their part to support Singapore’s food resiliency. Consumers like you and I must recognise our vulnerability to food supply disruptions and be flexible in our food choices in the event of a disruption. This awareness should be inculcated from young. Hence, as part of Total Defence 40th Anniversary, SFA in collaboration with MOE and SATS, conducted a pilot Food Resilience Preparedness Project (FRPP) involving an estimated 50,000 students from 40 secondary schools. This involved the distribution of retort meal packs made with locally sourced ingredients and educated students on the importance of food security, the benefits of local produce and how we can all jointly strengthen Singapore’s food supply resilience.
To better protect consumers and safeguard Singapore's food supply resilience, we will strengthen SFA’s legislative powers through the introduction of a new Food Safety and Security Bill (FSSB). FSSB will consolidate all food safety and security legislation from eight existing Acts into one Act and provide an overarching framework to ensure coherence across the entire food value chain.
Since August last year, SFA has been engaging with industry associations and key stakeholders on the proposed enhancements. Relevant feedback has been incorporated into the draft Bill. We will begin public consultation this month.
Let me now address questions from Mr Edward Chia, Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Louis Chua and Ms Mariam Jaafar on measures to help our hawkers.
NEA provides a conducive environment for hawkers to operate, enabling them to strike a balance between pricing their food affordably and sustaining their livelihood. NEA lets out hawker stalls through monthly tender exercises, which are transparent and fair. There is no minimum bid and subletting is not allowed. Individuals can bid for a stall at a monthly rental as low as $1, while others may choose to submit higher bids to secure stalls at popular locations, as they factor in considerations such as footfall and expected patronage. Some popular hawker centres, such as Newton Food Centre, attract additional clientele, such as tourists, and enjoy better footfall over longer business hours. Rent will be adjusted towards the assessed market rent after the first three years.
In fact, only about 4% of cooked food stalls in hawker centres today are paying rent at above the assessed market rent. These stalls would be in their initial three years of tenancy, and their rental would be based on their tender bid. When they renew their tenancy at the end of the three years, it will be adjusted to the assessed market rent. Median rental across non-subsidised cooked food stalls has remained constant at about $1,225 since 2015. [Please refer to clarification later in the debate.]
For Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centres (SEHCs), NEA will consider proposals from prospective operators with lower rental and operating costs to hawkers. Operators are not allowed to vary the charges to hawkers over the term of tenancy and they are to stagger stall rental prices for the first three years. To help hawkers enhance their operations and productivity, NEA has also implemented measures, such as the Productive Hawker Centre (PHC) programme and Hawkers’ Productivity Grant (HPG).
On hawker food affordability, NEA does not regulate hawker food prices to avoid distorting the true cost of hawker food. Our hawkers should be given the autonomy to price their food based on multiple considerations, such as operating costs and market conditions.
Mr Edward Chia asked if the Ministry had conducted a survey on hawkers’ average earnings. While we do not collect this data from hawkers, NEA does conduct regular surveys on hawker food prices and their cost components and will continue to ensure a conducive business environment for our hawkers. Today, patrons can continue to find affordable options in all hawker centres, including at the SEHCs, where operators have committed that all stalls will provide at least one budget meal option. The public can also utilise Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers provided under the Assurance Package at hawker centres and coffee shops.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh would be glad to know that NEA has implemented various programmes to encourage aspiring hawkers to enter the trade. NEA's Hawkers' Development Programme and Incubation Stall Programme provide holistic training to equip aspiring hawkers with skills needed to run a successful hawker business. Over 60 hawkers have joined the trade through these programmes.
NEA will also continue to build new hawker centres to ensure that Singaporeans will continue to have access to affordable and tasty hawker food. I am pleased to share that three new SEHC hawker centres will be opening this year, namely Woodleigh Village, Anchorvale Village and Punggol Coast Hawker Centres. The three new hawker centres, each with about 40 cooked food stalls and 700 seats, will be connected to local amenities and transport nodes, ensuring ease of access for residents. They have also been designed to offer a pleasant dining environment, with spacious, family-friendly and inclusive seating, centralised dishwashing and high ceilings for improved ventilation. Patrons will also, of course, be able to find affordable food options at these new centres.
Mr Chairman, as a small nation constrained by land and resources, the road ahead to strengthen our coastal resilience and food security may seem challenging and daunting, but it is a path that we will navigate together, to transform our limitations into opportunities for growth. Through our collective efforts, we will pave the way for a thriving and secure future for generations to come.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Mr Baey Yam Keng): Mr Chairman, creating a Clean, Green and Resilient Shared Future for Singapore is a collective effort. During our Forward SG engagements, Singaporeans acknowledged that the whole society needs to work together to ensure that Singapore remains a clean, green and safe home. Our education efforts and campaigns over the years have paid off and Singaporeans are generally civic-minded. However, we continue to observe some persistent issues that require us to go beyond just public education.
Public hygiene remains a top priority for MSE. Ms Rahayu Mahzam, Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Mr Murali Pillai have asked about MSE’s efforts to enhance cleanliness. Minister Grace Fu announced earlier that MSE will designate 2024 as the Year of Public Hygiene. This year, we will be working more closely with the community and ramping up our efforts to address persistent pain points, such as littering hotspots and dirty public toilets. The pandemic may be over, but Singapore needs a clean environment to be well-prepared to tackle future public health threats.
Based on our cleanliness surveys, many still believe that the responsibility to keep Singapore clean lies with the Government and our “army of cleaners”. Our cleaners are already busy cleaning up natural litter, such as fallen leaves, and accidental litter, such as spillages. Let us not add to their heavy workload with intentional litter by leaving or throwing our litter for them to clean up after us.
To tackle ongoing and persistent issues, we adopt a multi-pronged approach. Legislation and enforcement are critical to help us tackle the inconsiderate behaviour of a small number of people who are not as socially responsible and to shape social norms for the wider population.
Ms Nadia Samdin asked about the Tray Return Initiative. This was launched in 2013 to encourage diners to return their trays after their meals. However, the Tray and Crockery Return Rate remained low despite public education efforts. By commencing enforcement in September 2021, we managed to cement new social norms and increase the return rate from 35% to over 90% today.
To Ms Nadia’s query, tray return is a key measure that helps tackle bird nuisance issues at hawker centres. NEA currently works with stakeholders, such as Hawkers’ Associations and cleaning contractors, to clear used crockery promptly and implement proper food waste management. NEA, together with the Town Councils, has also implemented anti-bird measures, such as netting at tray return racks. Bird control efforts are also carried out where necessary.
To Mr Gan Thiam Poh’s query, we similarly use both public education and enforcement to curb high-rise littering. While we continue to educate the public on the dangers of high-rise littering, offenders, including first timers, are sent to Court and receive stiffer financial penalties and Corrective Work Orders (CWOs). In July 2023, we introduced the statutory presumption provision for littering from residential flats to hold the registered owners or tenants responsible. We also encourage residents to follow guidelines by HDB or Town Councils on proper placement of objects in open spaces. Any cases of potential killer litter will be referred to the Police for investigation.
The number of feedback on ground littering from 2022 to 2023 has increased about 15%, compared to the two years before the pandemic. To tackle littering hotspots, we will adopt a more targeted approach. NEA will increase the frequency and scale of anti-littering enforcement blitzes, targeting hotspots that have higher offence rates and public feedback reports.
This year, we plan to conduct around five times as many blitzes compared to 2023. These blitzes will be more visible by deploying uniformed officers to patrol these hotspots and putting up standees on the number of enforcement actions taken. We will also deploy non-uniformed officers to catch litterbugs.
Recalcitrant littering offenders will carry out CWO at high footfall areas, like transport nodes, town centres and city locations. An average of around 500 CWOs are issued to offenders each year. They wear pink and yellow vests that clearly state \"Corrective Work Order\" while picking up litter.
Furthermore, we will quadruple the deployment of CCTVs at hotspots, which include HDB estates. This will improve NEA’s remote surveillance capabilities, facilitate efficient deployment of resources by enabling investigations into public hygiene offences, as well as deter would-be offenders.
However, even if someone is caught on camera, we are unable to follow up with enforcement action if we cannot identify the person. NEA will work with community stakeholders to identify these offenders. If there are still no leads, NEA will explore putting up images of these offenders at the places where they had littered to seek the wider community’s assistance in identifying them. We hope that this will invoke collective community ownership to keep the common spaces clean and also deter potential litterbugs.
Public toilets remain a bugbear of many Singaporeans. We have stepped up our enforcement efforts on unhygienic public toilets, including at food establishments. Since April 2020, first time offenders who fail to keep public toilets in their premises clean and in good working condition, are fined up to $400 instead of getting a warning letter. Implicated retail food businesses would also incur demerit points, and some have resulted in the suspension of licences.
Enforcement can only go so far. So, I agree with Ms Poh Li San and Ms Rahayu Mahzam that users and the community need to be involved as well. We will continue to collaborate closely with our partners from the people and private sectors to address the problem of dirty public toilets holistically.
We will form a Public Toilets Taskforce to study and recommend solutions to improve the cleanliness of public toilets. Mr Andrew Khng, Chairman of the Public Hygiene Council (PHC), and I will co-chair this taskforce.
The taskforce will tap on the expertise of public sector agencies, Town Councils, premises managers, academia and trade and industry associations. The taskforce will: one, examine measures for adoption of good public toilet designs; two, promote responsible use of public toilets; three, advocate responsibility among premises owners for toilet cleanliness and maintenance; and four, strengthen community partnership to promote cleanliness.
The focus will be on toilets that consistently fare poorly in cleanliness surveys, such as those at coffeeshops and hawker centres. We will incorporate new technology to improve the efficiency of our cleaning and vector control operations.
First, we will trial the use of thermal imaging cameras for rat surveillance. NEA will share relevant footage and data with premises operators so that they can conduct targeted interventions to eliminate potential rat nesting grounds.
Second, we will explore the use of AI-powered video analytics to supplement performance audits of contracted cleaning companies. This will be productive than manual inspections in detecting cleaning lapses.
Many Singaporeans we engaged during the Forward SG conversations agreed that we cannot just rely on cleaners and cleaning technology to keep Singapore clean. Hence, MSE will further strengthen our partnerships with the community.
The PHC will launch the latest edition of the \"Keep Singapore Clean\" campaign next month to galvanise Singaporeans to do our part to uphold higher standards of hygiene and cleanliness. Last year, the PHC organised a workshop with residents and other community partners to brainstorm anti-littering interventions. As a follow-up to realise one of the ideas PHC partnered with Nanyang Polytechnic to develop a Smart Bin prototype, which was subsequently tested within the neighbourhood and now will be scaled up.
NEA is also working together with residents of 21 private estates, such as Jalan Wajek in Bukit Timah, in an interesting initiative. Residents park their vehicles on just one side of the road on specified days to facilitate mechanical road sweepers cleaning the other side of the road. This achieved 50% to 80% of time savings compared to manual labour. NEA will like to double the number of private estates involved in this initiative. We look forward to more of such support from residents as we transition to using cleaning technology.
To reduce the public’s exposure to second-hand smoke, we currently prohibit smoking at more than 49,000 premises. Last month, NEA adjusted the Orchard Road No-Smoking Zone (ORNSZ) to include additional areas where smokers congregate. To Mr Louis Ng’s question, NEA will continue to monitor the situation and consult relevant stakeholders, before considering extension of non-smoking areas. To Mr Gan’s query, indeed, as smoking is prohibited at all covered areas, including buildings and retail food establishments, smokers may congregate in adjacent spaces where smoking is not prohibited. Stakeholders interested in setting up designated smoking points (DSPs) can refer to guidelines on NEA’s website and seek NEA's advice, if needed. These should be at least five metres away from the premises boundary and direct smokers away from the general public. The proliferation of DSPs needs to be carefully considered and balanced against the risk of inadvertently normalising smoking.
Mr Ng also asked about second-hand smoke within homes. In addition to working with other Government agencies and the community to issue joint advisories, we will continue to encourage smokers to practise greater social responsibility and facilitate conversations between neighbours. Based on NEA’s data from 2018 to 2022, about 95% of feedback providers did not give further feedback on smoking in homes within a year after advisories were issued. We remain open to innovative and practical solutions to reduce public exposure to second-hand smoke. Mr Chairman, I will now continue my speech in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As announced by Minister Fu, MSE has designated this year to be the Year of Public Hygiene. This signifies the importance of safeguarding public health and providing a green and thriving home for all. I will speak more about our efforts to maintain a clean environment.
During our ForwardSG engagements, Singaporeans acknowledged that keeping Singapore clean and green is a whole-of-society effort, and that we cannot rely only on cleaners and cleaning technology.
As part of our multi-pronged approach to keep the environment clean, we will intensify our efforts in managing hotspots. We will conduct larger-scale blitzes at hotspots more frequently. We will arrange for recalcitrant litterers to undergo CWO at hotspots with high footfall.
We will also quadruple the number of CCTVs deployed at these hotspots to catch litterers. If we are unable to identify the offenders, we will work with community stakeholders to publicise the images of offenders at the neighbourhoods where they littered to get information of these offenders from members of the public.
(In English): Mr Chairman, public engagement is also one of the main levers to shape social norms and individual behaviours. Hence, MSE launched the inaugural Go Green SG campaign in 2023. More than 70,000 participants took part in over 300 activities organised by more than 160 partners from across the people, private and public sectors. There was a diverse slate of activities, including behind-the-scenes tours, workshops and other community events to help participants develop a deeper appreciation of Singapore’s sustainability efforts. Go Green SG will return this year, with a focus on public hygiene, with an expanded range of activities, to welcome more participants to build a cleaner and greener Singapore.
Our youths are deeply passionate about the environment and sustainability. It is essential to provide them with a better understanding of the relevant issues so that they can contribute meaningfully to national policy discussions and efforts. Hence, the Government has several initiatives to strengthen our partnership with the youth community by raising awareness on climate issues and galvanising action among our youths.
Together with National Climate Change Secretariat and National Youth Council, MSE conducted an inaugural run of the Climate Youth Development Programme with 40 youths from July 2023 to January 2024. They had a fireside chat with Minister Fu and gained a deeper understanding of Singapore’s climate and sustainability considerations. Last year, they also participated in platforms, such as the Earthshot Prize Awards, Singapore International Energy Week and COP28. This allowed youths to engage climate change negotiators, policymakers, businesses and non-profit organisations, and develop a more nuanced understanding of climate and sustainability issues.
To continue growing this community of young environmental advocates, we will be co-creating the second run together with participants from the inaugural cohort. We recognise the importance of co-creating policies with our youths, who will be most impacted by climate change. We have been supporting a group of passionate youths with a keen interest to make a positive impact through their involvement in the #GreenHacks Youth Panel. The Panel is targeting to share its preliminary findings and recommendations with regard to sustainable consumption in the second half of this year.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey, I hope you are finishing your speech. The time is actually exceeded.
Mr Baey Yam Keng: Yes, two more minutes. So, we are heartened by the enthusiasm and contributions by our youths to shape a more sustainable future.
In conclusion, Mr Chairman, we hope to see the same level of enthusiasm, sense of ownership and shared responsibility to create a clean, green and sustainable home among Singaporeans of all ages.
The Government does not have a monopoly over the best ideas. To better navigate the changing environment and social context, MSE will continue to enable and empower Singaporeans to be stewards of a clean, green and sustainable future.
The Chairman: Minister Fu, you have a clarification to make.
The Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Chairman, may I have your permission to make a correction, please?
The Chairman: Please go ahead.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Earlier, I said that from 2025 onwards, interior paint with formaldehyde will not be allowed for sale in Singapore. It should be from 2026 onwards. Thank you very much.
The Chairman: Our Guillotine time is 8.30 pm. So, Members, those who want to raise clarifications, keep it short. I want to give everyone an opportunity. Mr Louis Ng. Oh, wait. Senior Minister of State Koh.
Dr Koh Poh Koon: Sorry, Mr Chairman, I do have a correction to make for my speech.
The Chairman: Go ahead.
Dr Koh Poh Koon: In my speech, I said that the median rental across non-subsidised hawker stalls remains at $1,225. It should be $1,250.
The Chairman: Thank you. Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, I thank Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey for the reply on the second-hand smoke issue. I think he mentioned 95% of the feedback providers do not get back to us. I think one of the reasons they do not get back is because they realise there is not much we can do other than issue advisories. So, could I ask again that the Ministry study what else we can do other than just issuing advisories?
Second, maybe we could set up a taskforce, like the Public Toilet Taskforce. We could set up one taskforce to study this issue of second-hand smoke as well.
Mr Baey Yam Keng: Sir, I thank Mr Louis Ng for his enthusiasm on tackling second-hand smoke at homes.
As discussed, many times in this Chamber, there are practical challenges on legislating against smoking at homes. The cost involved in enforcing and the practicality of being able to enforcing such acts within the private spaces of homes is a big challenge that we have not had the solution yet.
Yes, I do encourage, if residents are still bothered by second-hand smoke, to continue giving feedback because based on data, indeed, 95% did not come back to us. I am not sure whether is it that all of them do not think that it is useful to continue giving us feedback. With data, we are better usable to assess and for us to see how else we can work on addressing this issue. So, I beg the Member's patience and understanding.
The Chairman: Ms Hany Soh
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Chairman, I have two clarifications. One is to Senior Minister of State Amy Khor in relation to the climate-friendly vouchers. I understand that she has shared some figures. I would like to find out what are some of the possible reasons for its current low take-up rates and how will the Ministry intend to ensure higher public awareness, moving forward, and, in turn, as a result, higher take-up rate for the enhanced scheme.
The second clarification is to Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey, in relation to the Public Toilet Taskforce. I wonder how does that differ from the past campaigns and collaborations, for example, that NEA already had with Public Hygiene Councils? What is the key takeaway from the past collaborations that we really want to implement from this new public toilet taskforce?
Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: I thank the Member for the clarification. First, I think households are more likely to utilise the vouchers if they need to replace their old or faulty fittings and appliances. And, of course, many of these appliances would last a few years.
Under the current CFHB, the vouchers are limited to three different types of products. Firstly, the refrigerators, and then shower fittings as well as lamps. Each of them has a fixed quantum.
So, I think that does not allow a lot of flexibility. Although, when we sized it, it was based on how we can offset some of the differential upfront costs and the higher upfront costs for the more energy-efficient types, and these are the essential household appliances and fittings.
What we have done now is to expand this from three to 10 products. So, a wider variety of household appliances and fittings, including 5-tick air condition, as well as a direct current fan and so on. We are expanding it to beyond the 1- to 3-room-HDB households to all HDB households, as well as the fact that, now, the $300 is not assigned to fixed products. There is more flexibility. They can use different denominations to purchase these products.
We hope that with the expansion in scope in terms of coverage of products as well as households and with, more flexibility, we hope that utilisation rate will be higher. We are working with HDB, People's Association as well as with grassroots organisations and the retailers to reach out and raise awareness.
Mr Baey Yam Keng: For past campaigns over the years, we look at general cleanliness of public toilets. And I would say that there have been improvements. In fact, based on surveys, the public does find that, for example, toilets at public transport nodes and shopping malls, especially at Changi Airport, these are places where we actually have very high standards of cleanliness.
This taskforce will look at, specifically, toilets in coffee shops and hawker centres which have been found through surveys to be consistently at a very low level and, in fact, some find it even dirtier than before. So, we will take a more targeted focus on these premises, and we will also have a better understanding with the involvement of the coffee shop associations to understand the challenges of coffee shop operators in maintaining the public toilets. Is it a matter of resources or is it the design of the toilet? So, we will look at all these aspects and, hopefully, we will be able to come up with some recommendations and solutions to make our public toilets in coffee shops and hawker centres cleaner.
The Chairman: Ms Carrie Tan.
Ms Carrie Tan: I would like to ask Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey, because I do not believe he has addressed my cut on the after-life arrangements. Specifically, my clarification is whether MSE will consider setting some proactive goals to convert Singaporeans to alternative ways of treating the remains, such as inland ash scattering, instead of waiting for the numbers to grow organically? And whether MSE will channel some resources, or more resources to accelerating public conversations to ensure that the take-up rate will be at an accelerated rate?
Mr Baey Yam Keng: Sir, as discussed with Member Ms Carrie Tan just a couple of weeks ago, the take-up of inland ash scattering is still quite low, in the single-digit percentage, although it has risen slightly over the past year. We hope that there will be steady growth, and, indeed, we agree with Ms Carrie Tan that better awareness, public engagement will be useful to raise people's acceptance of this method of managing cremated ashes. I am very happy to work with Ms Carrie Tan if she would like to hold such conversations with residents. And from the experience, we can see how we can scale up in areas, so that people can look at this alternative option.
The Chairman: Any other Members have clarifications? If not, could I invite Mr Louis Ng to indicate if you would like to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, I thank all Members for joining us in this debate for fresh air, fresh food and fresh water, and a healthy planet we can call home. I thank all the staff members at MSE, SFA, NEA and PUB for all their hard work and their commitment towards ensuring a liveable and sustainable Singapore. And I thank Minister Grace Fu, Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon, Senior Minister of State Amy Khor and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Baey Yam Keng for their commitment and leadership towards our economic resilience, resource resilience and climate resilience. But we cannot be resilient towards second-hand smoke, so I hope we are equally committed towards tackling this problem. With that, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
The Chairman: I thank all for your patience.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $$2,834,278,600 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $592,239,100 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply Reporting Progress","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Deputy Leader of the House (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Chairman, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again on tomorrow?
The Chairman: I give my consent.
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That progress be reported and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow.\" [Mr Zaqy Mohamad]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Mr Speaker, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the FY2024/2025 and ask leave to sit again tomorrow, please.
Mr Speaker: So be it. Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" – [Mr Zaqy Mohamad]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 8.21 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Guidelines to Ensure Development on Southern Islands Preserves Cultural Significance of The Islands","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"7 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for National Development what guidelines are in place to ensure that any developments on the Southern Islands are done in a sensitive manner that preserves the cultural significance of the islands.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Government is committed to safeguard the heritage and biodiversity of the Southern Islands, so that the rustic island charm can be enjoyed by many generations to come. Therefore, developments are planned taking into consideration the idyllic setting of the islands and to minimise environmental and heritage impact. Agencies will continue to work closely with stakeholders to ensure that developments on the Southern Islands are carried out sensitively.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Inclusion of Inflation-adjusted Metric to Payouts in Scheme to Retain Nurses","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"8 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health in relation to the new long-term retention scheme for nurses, whether the Ministry will consider an inflation-adjusted metric for the payouts over the course of their careers with the public healthcare service.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: My response will also cover the matters raised in the Oral Question filed by Mr Xie Yao Quan for a subsequent Sitting. [Please refer to \"Savings Scheme to Pool Undisbursed Payouts from Nurses Retention Scheme\", Official Report, 5 March 2024, Vol 95, Issue 130, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
The Award for Nurses' Grace, Excellence and Loyalty (ANGEL) scheme will be funded through employers’ contributions for each year that a nurse remains in service. However, unlike that for uniformed SAF officers, ANGEL is not designed as a long-term savings scheme where payout is awarded only when the officer retires. Instead, it is a retention scheme, where typically $100,000 will be awarded to nurses over four regular payout milestones across a 20-year service period up to prevailing retirement age. Hence, while the funds are centrally managed through the Ministry of Health (MOH), there is a limit to which the deposits can be deployed for investments for a long horizon.
MOH will continue to regularly monitor and review the competitiveness of nursing salaries in the public healthcare system, including the quantum of annual ANGEL deposits, to ensure that the package as a whole remains competitive.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Government Expenditure to Develop Local Music Industry in Last Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"9 Ms Usha Chandradas asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) how much has been spent by the Government on the development of the local music industry over the last five years; (b) what is the nature of such spending; and (c) what have been the outcomes of the spending.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: The local music industry comprises a diverse ecosystem of practitioners, non-profit collectives and registered arts companies across different genres, languages and music styles. This reflects the cultural diversity and open nature of the Singapore society today.
The National Arts Council (NAC) supports various aspects of a musician’s work, such as in content production, international export, capability development, and audience development. This is done through a suite of grants and initiatives for both individuals and organisations.
The Presentation and Participation Grant supports both live showcases and production of albums, while the Capability Development Grant supports musicians to continually upskill through courses, workshops and masterclasses. NAC's Market and Audience Development Grant also supports musicians to tour overseas and showcase at international platforms.
Annually, NAC supports around 100 music projects through its grant schemes, along with 10 major companies and two national orchestras which are funded at an organisational level.
Additionally, NAC awards the NAC Arts Scholarship to outstanding art practitioners for undergraduate and postgraduate studies locally and overseas. This includes music-related disciplines, such as composing, conducting and music psychology.
Developing our local music industry goes beyond just funding or grants. NAC actively spearheads strategic initiatives to foster collaboration, showcase local talent, and cultivate audiences for Singaporean music. A prime example is NAC's Hear65 platform, produced by independent music media company Bandwagon. Hear65 elevates the visibility and profile of Singaporean musicians through strategic partnerships with various events and companies. It serves as a digital hub and repository for discovery of Singaporean music through platforms, such as its website, Instagram and YouTube. Notably, to raise public exposure to Singapore music, Hear65 and SMRT collaborated to launch the \"I Play SG Music\" campaign last August. Commuters across 125 MRT and LRT stations and bus interchanges can enjoy Singapore-made music, significantly boosting not just the commuting experience, but also enhancing public support for local music.
NAC’s efforts are further complemented by our various cultural institutions in Singapore, which also play a role in promoting and showcasing our homegrown musicians. For example, (a) since 2001, the Esplanade has organised Baybeats, Singapore’s largest annual alternative music festival; and (b) as a celebration of Singapore's Mandopop artists and music, the Singapore Chinese Cultural Centre organises the annual crowd favourite Sing•浪(Singlang).
We are proud of the achievements and accolades garnered by our homegrown artists, ensemble, and music professionals.
At the national level, our national orchestras, the Singapore Symphony Orchestra (SSO) and the Singapore Chinese Orchestra (SCO), broke into the top 20 of the UK's Specialist Classical Charts in July 2023, at fifth place and 16th place respectively. SSO also clinched third place in the prestigious Orchestra of the Year Award by Gramophone in 2021, the only Asian orchestra to be nominated that year.
At the industry level, since 2017, the Composers and Authors Society of Singapore (COMPASS) and music company Ocean Butterflies have staged the mandarin pop song writing competition SG:SW1. This platform helps to build a supportive community of homegrown talents and develop the careers of our songwriters, for example, by placing their works in Mediacorp drama serials. SG:SW also contributed to the body of cross-cultural work in the local music scene. For instance, one of the past prize-winning entries is Ku Mahu 在乎2 (Ku Mahu Zai Hu), a bilingual song featuring both Malay and Mandarin lyrics co-written by Jamiel Said and Lim Wei Bin (林维彬).
Our individual artists have also achieved success at various levels. Flautist Rit Xu was conferred NAC's Young Artist Award for his outstanding artistic achievements and recently emerged as a winner of the 2023 London International Concerto Competition. Another of our talented young singers, Shazza, whom NAC had supported through its EP/Album Grants, also recently went viral on TikTok, with over 20 million views of her video with Canadian pop duo Crash Adams. Shazza was featured on a billboard at the iconic Times Square in New York City last year as part of Spotify's EQUAL campaign, which spotlights women in music from around the world.
Our music artists have come quite some way in the last few years, and we remain committed to nurturing their progress. NAC will continue to support our artists and work closely with industry stakeholders to forge strategic partnerships that will further develop the music scene in alignment with the strategic thrusts3 of NAC’s Our SG Arts Plan 2023 to 2027.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Partners for the SG:SW include SCCC and MediaCorp.","2 : Written by Jamiel Said, who himself is also a singer, composer and lyricist, and 林维彬. This was in the 2019 SG:SW competition.","3 : The three strategic thrusts of the SG Arts Plan 2.0 are: A Connected Society, A Distinctive City, and A Creative Economy."],"footNoteQuestions":["9"],"questionNo":"9"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Accidents Caused by Use of Handphones while Driving","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"11 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the number of road accident cases related to the use of handphones when driving on the road; (b) whether there are plans to increase enforcement and penalties for the use of handphones while driving on the road; and (c) whether the Ministry can provide details on its plans to increase surveillance on the roads through having more cameras.
Mr K Shanmugam: Between 2019 and 2023, there were no road traffic accidents where there was evidence to directly attribute the accidents to the use of a mobile phone while operating a vehicle. We assess that our penalties for such offences are sufficient for now.
The Traffic Police (TP) will continue to enforce against the offence.
TP will be activating the speeding enforcement function in the existing Red Light Cameras from the second quarter of this year. These cameras, however, are not able to detect the use of mobile phones while driving.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Agency In-charge of Defining Boundaries and Naming of Precincts within Residential Towns","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"12 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for National Development (a) which Singapore public sector agency is the authority for (i) the definition of precinct boundaries within a residential town and (ii) the naming of precincts; (b) where are the precinct boundaries and names being published; and (c) which other groups or organisations are involved in the definition of precinct boundaries and their names.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) and relevant planning agencies work together to plan HDB precincts based on land-use considerations as well as the design and layout of the site, taking into consideration the various amenities and infrastructure that need to be in the precinct to support residents’ needs.
To ensure that names for buildings and estates are locationally and culturally appropriate, government agencies, building owners and developers are required to submit naming applications to the Street and Building Names Board (SBNB) for approval. The Urban Redevelopment Authority takes on the secretariat role for the SBNB.
HDB applies SBNB’s naming guidelines and principles to ensure that the proposed names reflect the location and unique characteristics of each HDB precinct, including the cultural context and heritage of the area. Approved precinct names are available on SBNB’s website and the Singapore Land Authority’s OneMap service.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of Civil List Used in Respect of President's Attendance at International Appointment Meetings","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Prime Minister, in respect of the President's international appointments, (a) what is the estimated proportion of the Civil List that will be used to pay for the travel costs of the President and his delegation to attend international meetings; and (b) what is the estimated number of man-hours spent by civil servants to support the President in this regard.
Mr Lawrence Wong (for the Prime Minister): The Government supports the international appointments taken up by the President as they are assessed to further our national interests and bring benefits to Singapore. Depending on the issues being discussed, a relevant agency will be assigned to support the President in these international engagements. Accordingly, the airfare, transport and accommodation costs of the overseas trips are borne by the relevant agencies as part of their international work. The Civil List is generally not used to fund such trips. We also do not separately compute the number of man-hours spent by Civil Servants to support the President. It would, in any event, be very difficult to do so as their goals and work on international matters, for example, is not unique to their support for the President.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Local SMEs as a Percentage of Tender Applicants and Awardees in Government Procurement Opportunities on GeBIZ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) in 2023, what percentage of tender applicants and awardees, respectively, for Government procurement opportunities on Government Electronic Business are local small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); and (b) whether there has been an increase in the number of SME tender applicants since the Government introduced the Tender Lite procurement category in 2023.
Mr Lawrence Wong: In CY2023, the proportion of bidders for Government tenders and the proportion of awarded suppliers which are locally based SMEs, are both at about 80%. Tender Lite will commence from April 2024.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"GST Collection from Fees and Charges","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance what will be done with the Goods and Services Tax (GST) that was wrongly collected on the 18 fees that were regulatory in nature, if the affected taxpayers can no longer be contacted or traced.
4 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) from 2010 to 2023, how much GST was generated each year from the over 5,000 fees and charges collected by Government agencies; and (b) given the difficulty in determining whether these fees are regulatory or administrative in nature, whether the Government can consider waiving GST on all Government fees and charges and, if not, why not.
Mr Lawrence Wong: These questions were addressed in the reply to Parliamentary Question Nos 2 and 3 on the Order Paper for 26 February 2024. [Please refer to \"Reasons for Wrong Charging of GST by Government Agencies and Review of Processes to Prevent Recurrence\", Official Report, 26 February 2024, Vol 95, Issue 124, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Time Taken for Payment of Invoices for Contracted Goods and Services Provided to Government","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Leong Mun Wai asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance for each year of the last three years, what percentage of invoices for contracted goods and services provided to the Government, above and below $5,000 respectively, were paid within (i) five days (ii) 10 days and (iii) 30 days.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Most credit terms for Government procurement contracts are set at 30 days. About 98% of invoices for Ministries and Organs of State have been paid within credit terms for the last three years. For small-value invoices below $5,000, we have prioritised efforts to pay earlier than the usual 30-day credit terms.
For invoices below $5,000, for Ministries and Organs of State, about 13%, 49% and 99% were paid within five days, 10 days and 30 days respectively for the last three years.
For invoices $5,000 and above, for Ministries and Organs of State, about 17%, 28% and 98% were paid within five days, 10 days and 30 days respectively for the last three years.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Address Presence of Microplastics in Food","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether he can provide an update on the measures that the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) is studying to address the presence of microplastics in food; and (b) whether SFA has any plans to implement measures to address this issue currently and, if not, what is the threshold level of microplastics in food before the SFA will consider implementing measures.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The World Health Organisation and Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations have indicated in their reports in 2022 that there is insufficient data to fully understand the impact of microplastics on human health.
From 2022 to 2023, the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) collected data on microplastics levels in drinking water and food products that have been previously reported to contain microplastics. Thus far, the levels of microplastics in the surveys have not raised any cause of concern and were in line with findings published by other countries, such as the US, Germany and the UK.
SFA will continue to monitor microplastics levels and international scientific developments on the topic.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Annual Median and Average Monthly Income of Single Unwed Parents","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development in each of the past three years, what has been the annual median and average monthly income of single unwed parents (i) below 35 years old, (ii) between 35 and 36 years old, and (iii) 36 years old and above, respectively.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The average monthly income for working citizen mothers with non-marital births has increased over the years. For those below 35 years old, the average monthly salaries rose from $2,500 in 2020 to $2,600 in 2022. For those aged 35 and older, it rose from $5,900 in 2020 to $6,800 in 2022. Similarly, the median for those below 35 years old rose from $700 in 2020 to $1,100 in 2022 and rose from $3,400 in 2020 to $5,400 in 2022 for those 35 years old and above. The 2023 data is not yet available.
Incomes for those below 35 years old is lower as they also include young mothers who may work in part-time jobs or only for a few months of the year. As explained in the reply to a similar question in November 2022, wage information for the single age band of 35 to 36 years is not available due to small population size. [Please refer to \"Annual Median and Average Monthly Income of Single Unwed Parents in Past Four Years\", Official Report, 8 November 2022, Vol 95, Issue 74, Written Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Trend of Couples Seeking Assisted Reproductive Technology Treatment at Private Clinics","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health (a) whether there is an increasing trend of couples seeking Assisted Reproductive Technology treatment at private clinics; (b) if the Ministry does not have this data, whether it intends to collect the data; and (c) if not, why not. \n\n
Mr Ong Ye Kung: From 2018 to 2022, the proportion of women who sought Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) treatment choosing private AR centres had increased. Majority continues to seek treatment at public clinics.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Sufficient Number of Digital Infrastructure Engineers and Designers in Design and Development of Digitally Ready HDB New Towns","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether HDB is equipped with a sufficient number of digital infrastructure engineers and designers in the design and development of digitally ready new towns; (b) how is HDB preparing itself to be relevant in a dynamic digital built environment; and (c) how does HDB review and implement digital infrastructure upgrades for older flats and estates.
Mr Desmond Lee: Guided by the Housing and Development Board's (HDB's) Digital Master Plan and in line with the Built Environment Industry Transformation Map, HDB has been building up its digital capabilities, particularly in the design and development of new towns over the years. Since 2019, all new Build-To-Order (BTO) projects further adopt Virtual Design and Construction (VDC) with Building Information Modelling (BIM). Consultants and contractors are required to create and make use of data-rich BIM models to carry out design coordination and construction simulation prior to the commencement of actual works on site. As part of its Integrated Digital Delivery (IDD) efforts, HDB pilots new digital technologies in selected BTO projects to enhance construction management, for instance, in tracking the fabrication, transport and installation of prefabricated components, and intends to roll these out to more projects progressively.
Within HDB, officers involved in the design and construction of new BTO projects are given both formal and on-the-job training to support IDD implementation, including in BIM modelling and IDD applications. HDB also requires consultants and contractors to deploy experienced, digitally competent personnel to implement IDD in new BTO projects.
HDB is committed to develop smart and sustainable HDB towns through the strategic integration of digital solutions. This approach is guided by HDB's Smart HDB Town Framework and the Smart Urban Habitat Masterplan, which provide a detailed roadmap for the roll-out of smart initiatives.
To ensure that such digital enhancements are both technically feasible as well as cost effective at scale, HDB deploys small-scale pilot tests first in designated “Living Labs”, such as Punggol town and Yuhua. Punggol Northshore District is HDB's first smart and sustainable district, where smart technologies were piloted in a new BTO project. Since November 2021, HDB has introduced these technologies in new BTO projects islandwide.
After conducting a comprehensive assessment, HDB selects initiatives which are proven effective for roll-out to older flats and estates. An example is the Smart LED Lighting under the HDB Green Towns Programme, aimed at reducing energy consumption across all HDB towns. These smart lighting systems, equipped with predictive lighting and automated fault detection, will be installed in all new BTO projects. For existing estates, smart lighting will be introduced at the common areas in line with the Town Council's Repair and Redecoration (R&R) cycles, with HDB providing technical support.
In addition to the specific programmes, HDB has developed a centralised data platform that can collect and analyse data from sensors that are progressively deployed in HDB towns. The data collected allows HDB to monitor the performance of systems, measure sustainability targets and refine HDB's plans over time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Development of HDB New Towns with Digitally Ready and 5G-Capable Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for National Development (a) what are the technological or infrastructural challenges in the development of new towns that are digitally ready to enable 5G capabilities in the design of new HDB flats; (b) what are the plans of the Ministry to ensure these flats can be retrofitted to support 5G technology in the future; and (c) whether the Ministry collaborates with telecommunication companies to address shortfall in 5G capabilities in new HDB flats and, if so, what are the outcomes of these collaborations.\n
Mr Desmond Lee: A comprehensive 5G mobile network will require denser deployment of mobile infrastructure compared to the 3G and 4G networks, due to the shorter propagation characteristics of high bandwidth 5G spectrum. Hence, more space in building premises will be required for 5G mobile infrastructure. To support the timely rollout of 5G mobile networks for Singapore, the Ministry of National Development/Housing and Development Board (HDB) and the Ministry of Communication and Information/Info-comm Media Development Authority have been working together to coordinate and facilitate 5G infrastructure deployments by telecoms companies in HDB towns.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Applications from Single Unwed Parents to Purchase or Rent HDB Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development (a) for each year in the past two years, how many single unwed parents have applied to (i) purchase or (ii) rent a HDB flat from HDB, respectively; (b) how many of such applications have been rejected respectively; and (c) what are the reasons for the rejections.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) assesses all requests from single unwed parents holistically, based on their individual circumstances. Those who are aged 21 and above and can afford to buy a flat will be allowed to buy up to a 3-room flat in a non-mature estate from HDB or a resale flat. Those who cannot afford to buy a flat may be offered public rental housing if it is assessed to be in their child's best interests, taking into account input from social workers as necessary.
Over the past two years, HDB supported an average of 72% of requests from single unwed parents each year to purchase a flat from HDB. See Table 1 below for details.
For the remaining requests, these included applicants who did not follow through with their applications or did not have sufficient budget at that point in time to buy a flat.
Over the past two years, HDB assisted an average of 46% of requests from single unwed parents each year to rent a public rental flat. See Table 2 below for details.
For the remaining requests, these included applicants who did not follow through with their applications, had the means to purchase a flat or had family members who could house them.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The 14 requests received in late 2023 are currently being processed.","2 : Single unwed parents who made multiple requests in different years have been reflected in the figures based on the date of their latest request."],"footNoteQuestions":["11"],"questionNo":"11"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Trees with Girth of More Than a Metre Cut Down Since February 2021","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many trees with a girth of more than one metre have been cut down since February 2021; and (b) whether the Singapore Green Plan 2030 goal of planting one million trees by 2030 takes into account the number of trees cut down.
Mr Desmond Lee: We do not have data on the number of trees with a girth of more than one metre that have been cut down island-wide since February 2021. That said, the planting of one million trees between 2020 and 2030 will more than make up for the trees lost during that period. This is in addition to existing greenery replacement measures within development sites.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Risks and Benefits from Widespread Adoption of Facial Recognition Technology and Oversight Mechanisms to Ensure Responsible and Ethical Use","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) what are the risks and benefits associated with widespread adoption of facial recognition technology (FRT) in Singapore; (b) what are the frameworks and oversight mechanisms currently in place to ensure the responsible and ethical use of FRT in Singapore; and (c) what steps are being taken to engage with the public and relevant stakeholders about the responsible development and application of AI technologies to FRT.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Facial images as a form of biometric data can be considered personal data when associated with other information about an individual. When private sector organisations in Singapore collect and use such data, including for identification through Facial Recognition Technologies (FRT), they must comply with the Personal Data Protection Act.
In Singapore, a key use of facial biometric data and FRTs is for security purposes. In 2022, the Personal Data Protection Commission (PDPC) and the Security Association Singapore jointly published a Guide on the Responsible Use of Biometric Data in Security Applications, to guide organisations on the key considerations and safeguards for using biometric data responsibly and ethically. The Infocomm Media Development Authority and PDPC's Model AI Governance Framework (2020) also provides general guidance in addressing key ethical and governance issues when deploying artificial intelligence (AI) solutions, which can be relevant for FRTs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Response to Calls for More Proactive Initiatives to Safeguard Employment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower how will the Ministry address calls for more proactive Government initiatives to safeguard employment in Singapore, including inter-Ministerial collaborations to promote effective skills development, financial assistance for businesses and workers as well as retraining and upskilling support for retrenched workers.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Government's strategy to safeguard employment in Singapore is to create good jobs and to equip our workers with the skills to take on these jobs. This will meet the needs of our businesses as well as the aspirations of our workers. We adopt a two-pronged approach in our efforts.
First, we keep our economy competitive and seek to capitalise on new opportunities in and beyond our region. We do this by pursuing sustained, productivity-driven growth across our economy. The Government has launched the ITMs to drive transformation across 23 industries. To help employers respond and plan for business transformation, the Government has also launched the Jobs Transformation Maps to provide job-level insights on the impact of technology on the industry and workforce. With these insights, businesses can then redesign more productive jobs.
Second, we invest heavily in equipping Singaporeans with the skills to take on the jobs that we are creating. The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) works with the Ministry of Education, and the Ministry of Trade and Industry to identify the current and future skillsets required and curate programmes to equip Singaporeans with these skills. This includes programmes, like WSG's CCPs, which provide course fee and salary support of up to 90% for workers to move into new job roles or sectors that have good prospects and opportunities for progression, as well as SkillsFuture Singapore's SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme, which supports mid-career individuals in acquiring industry-relevant skills to improve employability, with funding subsidy of up to 90% of course fees.
As indicated in the Forward Singapore report, the Government will also do more to strengthen the career health of Singaporeans by improving job matching and helping them better plan for long-term careers through access to better data and information about jobs and skills.
Third, we provide targeted support for retrenched workers who face difficulties finding a new job. These support measures have been addressed in the reply to the Member's Parliamentary Question on 29 February 2024 on support for retrenched workers. [Please refer to \"Addressing Public Anxiety over Job Security and Re-employment Challenges\", Official Report, 29 February 2024, Vol 95, Issue 127, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
MOM's statistics show that our efforts to safeguard employment have been successful. Resident employment has expanded annually, even through the recent pandemic, and our labour force participation rate remains high at 68.6%. In 2023, the resident unemployment rate was stable and low at 2.7%. The resident long-term unemployment rate also remained low at 0.7%. Real wages have grown over the longer-term, underpinned by sustained productivity growth. The Government will continue to work with the tripartite partners to press on with business and workforce transformation that will lead to better outcomes for our workers, employers and the overall economy.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness and Adequacy of Road Safety Measures Around Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether he can detail the current road safety measures around schools and how these have been effective in reducing traffic-related incidents involving students; (b) what plans are there to enhance existing road safety measures near schools, especially in light of any recent incidents or feedback from school communities; (c) how is the Ministry ensuring the adequacy and safety of pedestrian crossings near schools; and (d) whether there are plans to introduce more raised zebra crossings in such areas.
16 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether the Ministry is considering implementing additional speed reduction measures, such as speed bumps or lower speed limits, around school zones to further protect students; (b) what strategies are being employed or developed to manage high traffic volumes during school start and end times to minimise risks to students; and (c) how does the Ministry collaborate with schools and local communities to identify and address specific road safety concerns in school zones.
17 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether there are ongoing or planned public awareness campaigns aimed at drivers to promote safer driving habits around schools; (b) whether the Ministry is exploring the use of technology, such as traffic cameras or digital speed signs, to enhance road safety in school zones; and (c) what initiatives are in place to promote and support safe walking and cycling routes for students commuting to and from school.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The road safety of students has been and will always be a key priority. The Land Transport Authority (LTA) started the School Zone scheme in 1996 to enhance road safety for school children. Today, all schools have a School Zone in its vicinity. School Zones have road safety features, which include additional signalised pedestrian crossings where necessary, lower speed limit and special signs and textured red coloured road surfaces, to alert motorists that they are entering a School Zone.
We also prioritise the installation of red-amber-green arrows at traffic light junctions near schools, replacing discretionary right-turn movements. To promote safe walking and cycling near some schools, footpaths are marked and have speed regulating strips before crossing points. Since 2014, we have put in place a School Zone Demerit Point (SZDP) scheme to deter errant motorists and encourage safer driving behaviour at School Zones. In 2021, Traffic Police (TP) increased demerit points and composition sums for offenders who contravene road traffic rules at School Zones.
Everyone has a part to play to keep the roads safe for all. In addition to infrastructure improvements, LTA and TP work closely with schools, the community and the Singapore Road Safety Council (SRSC) to develop road safety campaigns and programmes to promote good road safety habits. Road safety booklets are distributed to all Primary 1 students and educational banners are displayed at schools' frontages as a visual safety reminder to students. LTA also shares digital materials on road safety, including videos, with schools to disseminate via their communication channels. With the new Electronic Road Pricing system (ERP 2.0), the vehicles' new On-Board Unit (OBU) will also alert motorists when they are approaching and driving within School Zones.
LTA has also initiated a Safe Route to School programme, in collaboration with primary schools and communities, where students' artworks are displayed onto road signs. In the process of creating the artwork, road safety messages are emphasised by students. These unique artworks are then displayed along the road to raise awareness among motorists and students, especially in the areas around the school where the students frequently commute. There are currently 40 schools on this programme, and we will expand the programme to more schools. LTA also embarks on the Path Safety Programme, which educates students on the various mobility devices and safe path-sharing habits through talks and school activities.
To manage the traffic surge during school arrival and dismissal timings, schools have protocols in place to manage vehicular movement within the campus. For example, schools have designated places for drivers to pick up or drop off students. LTA advises and works with schools on traffic management measures, such as improving the traffic flow of vehicles entering and exiting the school. Marshals would usually be deployed to guide and facilitate drop-off activities to facilitate traffic flow and to enhance students' safety. Some schools would also stagger their operating times to ease traffic congestion in the area.
LTA will continue to work with our schools and the community to enhance road safety of our students.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[{"annexureID":2631,"sittingDate":null,"annexureTitle":"Annex 1","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240304/annex-Annex 1.pdf","fileName":"Annex 1.pdf","sectionType":"OS","file":null}],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":5979,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240304/vernacular-4 Mar 2024 - Min Maliki Osman - Reply to MOE Cuts.pdf","fileName":"4 Mar 2024 - Min Maliki Osman - Reply to MOE Cuts.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5980,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Tan See Leng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240304/vernacular-Tan See Leng MOM 4Mar2024 -Chinese (mom).pdf","fileName":"Tan See Leng MOM 4Mar2024 -Chinese (mom).pdf"},{"vernacularID":5981,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Zaqy Mohamad","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240304/vernacular-4 Mar 2024 - SMS Zaqy Mohd - Reply to MOM Cuts.pdf","fileName":"4 Mar 2024 - SMS Zaqy Mohd - Reply to MOM Cuts.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5982,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Koh Poh Koon","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240304/vernacular-Koh Poh Koon MOM 4Mar2023-Chinese (mom).pdf","fileName":"Koh Poh Koon MOM 4Mar2023-Chinese (mom).pdf"},{"vernacularID":5983,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240304/vernacular-Amy Khor MSE 4Mar2024-Chinese .pdf","fileName":"Amy Khor MSE 4Mar2024-Chinese .pdf"},{"vernacularID":5984,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Baey Yam Keng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20240304/vernacular-Baey Yam Keng MSE 4Mar 2024 -Chinese(mse).pdf","fileName":"Baey Yam Keng MSE 4Mar 2024 -Chinese(mse).pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}