Mr Speaker: Order. I wish to inform hon Members that, pursuant to paragraphs (2) and (3) of Standing Order 100, I have appointed Ms Foo Mee Har to be the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee and Mr Ang Wei Neng to be the Chairman of the Estimates Committee for this Parliament.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Developments on Fair Consideration Framework and Measures on Discriminatory Hiring Practices","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"1 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower in light of more companies being put on the Fair Consideration Framework watchlist, whether the Ministry will consider naming the errant companies to serve as a deterrent to others.
2 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry will name the companies that have been placed on the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) watchlist for potentially discriminatory hiring practices; (b) whether any of the companies previously placed on FCF watchlist have been removed from the watchlist; and (c) if so, what are the criteria used.
3 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Manpower whether she can provide an update on the latest tripartite discussions relating to fair employment practices, in particular discriminatory hiring and human resource practices, including nationality, race, age and religious-based discrimination.
The Minister for Manpower (Mrs Josephine Teo): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 1 to 3 together?
Mr Speaker: Please do.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Thank you. Members have filed a number of Parliamentary Questions on the topic of fair employment practices – some are for the next Sitting and others are for Written Answers.
I appreciate that these questions are of concern to Singaporeans and seek Members' understanding to take these related questions together, so that we can deal with them more holistically.
Ms Foo Mee Har asked how employers’ employment practices are monitored and employers held accountable. Ms He Ting Ru asked about tripartite discussions on discriminatory practices.
Sir, the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices spell out the principles and practices that all employers are expected to abide by. In practice, MOM works closely with the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices or TAFEP to follow up on all complaints of potential malpractices at workplaces. All forms of discrimination are covered, including for age, gender, ethnicity and family circumstances. We also monitor the workforce profiles of firms for potential unfair hiring practices against Singaporeans.
For example, MOM has regularly taken employers to task for pre-selecting a foreign candidate and disregarding qualified local candidates. This year alone, 90 employers have had their work pass privileges suspended because of infringements under the Fair Consideration Framework or FCF, including for age and gender discrimination. This means that the company cannot renew existing work passes or have new applications approved – some for as long as two years. These penalties are serious and the employers know it. To stay in business, it will be necessary for them to boost local employment.
To questions by Mr Louis Chua and Mr Seah Kian Peng, there are currently about 400 firms placed on the FCF Watchlist for having a higher share of foreign PMETs compared to their industry peers, or high concentrations of a single foreign nationality source. Employment Pass or EP applications from these firms are held back, while TAFEP engages these firms to help them improve their human resource practices.
Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Louis Chua suggested publicly naming firms placed on the FCF Watchlist. Mr Chua further asked for these firms’ access to Government grants and tax incentives schemes to be withdrawn. As I explained in Parliament on 1 September 2020, unlike firms whom we have taken to task for infringements, firms on the FCF Watchlist have not flouted any rules. Instead, we identified them through proactive surveillance. We are watching them.
Members may recall that on Tuesday, I shared a few examples. Upon investigation, we found some employers to be genuinely unfamiliar with local recruitment channels or whose recruitment had been limited by directives imposed by overseas headquarters. Measures we take for these firms must therefore be proportional and also consider the impact on their existing local workforce.
In most instances, employers on the FCF Watchlist have been responsive to TAFEP’s engagement efforts and expanded their employment of local PMETs with help from Workforce Singapore. Naming these firms would likely have frustrated their local hiring efforts and is ultimately counter-productive. Instead, following TAFEP’s intervention, many firms exit the FCF Watchlist within a year. For the minority who are uncooperative, refusing to make adjustments even after options have been suggested to them, their work pass privileges remain suspended.
This approach has served us well. Since 2016, more than 1,200 employers have been scrutinised under the FCF. In all, 3,200 EP applications by these employers have been rejected or withheld by MOM, or withdrawn subsequently by the firms themselves. On the other hand, firms on the FCF Watchlist have hired more than 4,800 Singaporean PMETs in total. So, we withheld 3,200 or rejected them, or they got withdrawn. And then, these firms collectively hired more than 4,800 Singaporean PMETs in total. That is a net gain.
This comes on top of all the local employees that these firms originally employed and continued to retain.
We plan to proactively engage even more companies under the FCF, such as those whose Singaporean Core has been weakening, or whose EP and S Pass workforce are concentrated with a single foreign nationality source. We will work with economic agencies like EDB and MAS to engage these firms to improve their workforce profiles. We will also engage the HR community to do more.
Whether or not the firms are on the FCF Watchlist, where MOM has found evidence of discriminatory hiring practices, we have taken the companies to task and publicised the names of these firms. In January 2020, MOM released the names of four employers penalised for pre-selection of foreigners or not adhering to the spirit of the FCF job advertising requirement, and one employer for gender-related discriminatory hiring. In March 2020, MOM released the names of five employers penalised for age-related discriminatory hiring.
This is no different than if the company had been charged in Court for employment offences.
On Ms He Ting Ru’s question, tripartite consultations in recent months have focused on ensuring fairness when companies implement cost-saving measures or have to retrench workers.
First, on cost-saving measures, the National Wages Council or NWC was convened in March this year and was re-convened in August. It is expected to update guidelines on managing excess manpower within this month.
Since March this year, MOM has introduced a new requirement for employers to notify MOM of their cost-saving measures. To Ms Foo Mee Har’s question, we identify companies whose notifications are concerning and TAFEP engages them to assess whether their measures are fair and reasonable. Of the 850 employers engaged, close to 40% reviewed their cost-saving measures to give more wage support to their employees. Similarly, we mediated another 1,000 or so complaints by employees.
Second, on retrenchments, MOM, NTUC and the Singapore National Employers Federation jointly updated the Tripartite Advisory on Managing Excess Manpower and Responsible Retrenchment or TAMEM in March.
In addition, MOM requires employers with 10 or more employees that have retrenched at least five employees within any six-month period to submit a retrenchment notification. This covers close to 90% of the workforce in Singapore. In other words, this retrenchment requirement would already have covered about 90% of the workforce.
Through the notification regime, we actively monitor retrenchment practices. Vast majority of the retrenchments have been conducted fairly and responsibly. Firms that have not done so fairly will be investigated and MOM may take strong enforcement actions such as suspending their work pass privileges.
To Mr Patrick Tay’s suggestion to expand the notification to more employers, we are mindful not to impose excessive reporting requirements on SMEs and micro-SMEs where the effort may not be commensurate with impact. Nonetheless, we encourage these firms to still notify MOM, so that Workforce Singapore, the tripartite partners and other relevant agencies can step in promptly to provide job assistance to affected employees. We have also expanded outreach efforts to jobseekers, so that retrenched workers may get help even if their employers did not notify MOM.
Sir, in conclusion, in the current economic climate, MOM understands Singaporeans need greater assurance that they have a fair chance for job opportunities and are treated fairly at their workplaces. MOM and our tripartite partners will continue to guard against unfair hiring or retrenchment practices and take appropriate action against errant employers.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Sir. Two clarifications for the Minister. First, I think she mentioned there are 1,200 companies on the FCF Watchlist. Could I ask how many of these companies are there because of discrimination against women and on family responsibilities?
Second, on the earlier suggestion that I made this week, on whether we can legislate these guidelines on fair employment practices. I think it makes a bit of sense. If you discriminate against Singaporeans and hire foreigners, we will restrict or curtail your work pass privileges; we do not allow you to hire foreigners. That sort of makes sense. But if you discriminate against women and mothers, and the penalty is that you cannot hire foreigners, then I hope the Minister agrees with me that that does not really make sense. So, the question is whether we can legislate these guidelines, have proper penalties in place that will serve as a better deterrence against discrimination against women and mothers.
Mr Speaker: This conversation seems very intimate, with both of you standing there, across each other. [Laughter.] Please procced.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Sir, in terms of thinking and alignment of values, I feel very close to Mr Louis Ng. First, a point of clarification that the Member sought, which are the 1,200 companies that we had scrutinised over the years under FCF, what kinds of concerns did we have. As I explained, they had not made any infringements. We were doing proactive surveillance. We looked at their workforce profiles. In general, we found that there was a heavier proportion of foreigners in their PMET workforce, compared to their industry peers. So, we picked them up and tried to undersand why their workforce profiles were the way they were, and helped them to improve.
The Member has asked whether for other forms of discrimination – not nationality discrimination but for other forms of discrimination – whether legislation is the right tool and we could consider that. Perhaps, two things to point out. First, the Government is not so averse to using legislation, provided it can achieve a good effect. If I can cite the example of concerns about age discrimination. We do have the Retirement and Re-employment Act which stipulates the minimum age below which employers cannot say, \"You're too old and you must retire.\" We also have the re-employment age legislation which compels the employers, even after his employee has reached the minimum statutory retirement age, to offer re-employment. So that we safeguard the opportunities for them to continue working – not necessarily in the same job and not necessarily holding the same pay.
Using legislative tools in order to protect the interest of workers is not so unthinkable and have been used on many different occasions.
\t
I understand where the Member is coming from, that in terms of legislating against discrimination for gender, should we perhaps take the next step forward. I have also responded to – I am sorry, I should have done this another way – I texted Mr Vikram Nair after he gave his speech yesterday. So, I will share with Members what I texted him. He gave the suggestion that perhaps you can provide legislative levers to allow individuals who had been aggrieved by nationality bias to seek redress from the employer. And I had texted him to say that this is not unthinkable, it is something that we can discuss, whether we want to move forward.
So, my answer to Mr Louis Ng is, yes, we always keep the options open, but we must ask ourselves what is the crux here. The crux here really is that if you speak to all the women, yes, on occasions, we have identified cases where the employers, either the questions that they asked were very biased, in terms of suggesting that their family circumstances were not welcome at the workplace, or that the very fact that they were women prevented them from doing certain roles. We know of some employers like that, but they are very much in the minority. You will also see that there are many women who have gotten into good positions because their employers are quite enlightened.
So, legislation is quite a blunt tool. It basically can be quite prescriptive in nature.
What else it is that we have done to promote women in employment and make sure that they get a fair deal? We have, for example, through many years of investment in their education, helped them to acquire the skills no different from men, and they can advance. I think the other one that we have always been very mindful of, and women Members of Parliament have spoken on this extensively, it has to do with how you can improve the support that they have from the family, so that does not prevent them from making progress in their careers.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast): Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply. I have three clarifications. The first one is, I hear from the Minister that some companies have directives from their HQ out of Singapore to ask them to practise unfair recruitment. Why can we not nip the problem at source where we inform the companies before they set up shop in Singapore? We can tell them about the guidelines.
And number two, we have also heard the Minister said they do surveillance and identify companies that have a high concentration of Employment and S Pass holders, all from certain a nationality. Can MOM be even more proactive even before they have this number that is of concern? Can you stop them from hiring anymore workers based on S Pass and E Pass, which means it is more proactive than after the fact itself?
The third one is that I would like the Minister to consider what I said in my speech on Monday, to set up a National Human Resource Committee, so that you have regular engagement with the head of human resources and personnel in the various large companies, to share with them the best practices on how to form a Singaporean Core. For example, DBS is one good example.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: I thank the Member. Mr Speaker, to address the Member's of questions, I should clarify that in the instance that I described, the foreign headquarters, the overseas headquarters of the firm in concern did not direct the local office in Singapore to hire unfairly. I think no company does that. What they did, however, not recognise or did not understand our employment landscape, was that actually many of the positions that they were seeking do not necessarily require degree qualifications. For example, if they are seeking an IT role, actually our Polytechnic graduates are just as qualified, and with the right training can also do the job.
So, what the local office previously did was blindly implement the directive from the headquarters that every single one of their recruits must meet degree qualifications. When we pointed out to them that for the positions that they are hiring, Polytechnic diploma holders are equally qualified, what they then did was to take it up with headquarters and persuaded the headquarters to change the recruitment criteria. So, I hope that clarification will help.
To the Member Mr Ang's suggestion on the National Human Resource Committee, it already exists. It is called the Institute of Human Resource Professionals. They have certification programmes. They have communities of practice. We engage them regularly and we intend to do more.
Then there are other similar organisations, the Singapore Human Resource Institute. They are also very active in trying to level up HR practices in Singapore. We applaud them for the efforts. MOM works very closely with them. I think they do really want to help and raise the bar, and we very much encourage their proactive efforts.
Mr Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.
\tMs He Ting Ru (Sengkang): I thank the Minister for her detailed explanation. I would like to post three clarifications or further questions.
The first is, the Minister mentioned that most of the companies exit this watchlist after a year. But I would like to know how many persistent offenders have we seen amongst the companies who have been on the watchlist. Because this will inform us as to whether the sanctions are enough. I think this is helpful information for us to know. And second is the balance of complaints and active surveillance that has been conducted by MOM. The third is whether there are any GLCs who are currently on the watchlist.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her question. The third question first. I think the Member wanted to know whether we have put any Temasek-linked companies on the watchlist. The answer is no, not because they were given any special concession or treatment, but the proactive surveillance that we carried out did not pick them up.
The second question, is the balance between complaints and proactive surveillance. Actually, the proactive surveillance has brought us into more direct engagements with the companies. None of these companies would have been surfaced to our attention if not for proactive surveillance. Their employees actually did not raise the concerns with us. If you look at the complaints that were raised to MOM and the number of companies that we have scrutinised, I do not have the exact figure with me, but based on my impression also getting emails and reading all the complaints that were filed with our Labour Relations Department, I stand corrected, but actually I think our proactive surveillance has reached out to more companies.
The last question is on how many companies that have not yet exited. They are in the minority; I will put it at less than 10%. The reason why I do not give you a very specific number is because even if the company has exited from the watchlist, it does not mean we stop watching them. We continue to watch them. If they revert to the old patterns of hiring and we are concerned about their workforce profile again, then they can get put back into the watchlist.
And, Sir, if I may, I should also answer Mr Ang's earlier question. He said why not take an even more proactive approach. The FCF watchlist is the proactive approach. And I also said in my reply that we intend to engage an even wider group of companies to reshape their workforce profiles.
Mr Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.
\tMr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): I thank the Minister for answering this Parliamentary Question and also the subsequent Parliamentary Questions. I have two supplementary questions in two areas. Firstly, on the FCF watchlist. The second question, on the mandatory reporting of retrenchments.
In the area of FCF, I have suggested of us publishing and, of course, many Members of this House as well. If there are companies that have been recalcitrant, meaning after one year of rehabilitation or assistance, they have not improved, is there a problem publicising this list of recalcitrant employers? The other one is, among these 400 firms that are on the watchlist, what proportion are MNCs, what are LLEs, SMEs and micro-SMEs?
On the mandatory retrenchment reporting, I am a bit concerned that MOM is taking the position that we do not require micro-SMEs and SMEs to do mandatory reporting. Why is that so? Because, if you see many of the malpractices, the lay-offs that are happening in the past couple of months, mostly are from micro-SMEs and SMEs. From two perspectives: one, we want to ensure fair retrenchment practices; two, we want to ensure we provide the necessary interventions from Workforce Singapore as well e2i, to assist some of these micro-SMEs and SMEs, so that we have advanced and proactive or pre-emptive steps that we can take to help these companies. So, from that perspective, I hope MOM can look at both these areas.
\tMr Speaker: Just a gentle reminder to Members, please keep to your side of the Chamber. That is for Mr Patrick Tay. Please keep to your side of the Chamber. Thank you.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Sir, on Mr Tay's question on mandatory reporting, there are, as far as I know, more than 100,000 SMEs. To ask every single one of them to make a report, even if most of them have not done anything bad prima facie, we are saying that we are not very sure, and it does not matter whether we can really pick it up much from it or not.
So, I think we have to balance between whether we assume that every single one of them have retrenched in a very unfair manner and that is why the reporting will allow us to go after every single one of them, or do we ask whether there are complementary avenues.
It does not prevent the worker himself from raising the issue with MOM. I mentioned that apart from those that we have investigated after they submitted the mandatory retrenchment notification, on top of that, we also investigated an even larger number of those where individuals complained to us. So, the two are complementary to each other. It is not that we only need to depend on one tool.
On his other question about the FCF watchlist, whether the recalcitrant ones can be named, ultimately, it goes back to what our objective is. If our objective is still to try and get them to improve their HR practices, what is a more effective way of doing so? Naming them or continuing to suspend their work pass privileges? I can share with Mr Tay that in some instances, the companies have decided that it is not possible for them to meet up to these requirements and they have decided to exit Singapore altogether. And you do not even need to name them. They find that this set of conditions is not what they would like to deal with; we accept that. Whether you name them or not would not have made much of a difference. But the fact that you have curtailed their work pass privileges, that is what has really made the difference.
\t
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask a clarification from the Minister. She mentioned in her speech that of the companies in the FCF framework, some were unfamiliar with MOM regulations. I would like to ask her, how many, or the proportion that were really unfamiliar with the regulations.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, I do not have the breakdown here, neither do I have the breakdown that Mr Tay asked for on what is the profile of the companies on the FCF watchlist. They are a good spread, across different industries, some large, some small.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Tan Wu Meng.
\tDr Tan Wu Meng (Jurong): Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for her answers. I have three supplementary questions to raise. The first is, on the firms that had been taken to task, following being on the FCF watchlist. At the whole-of-Government level, has there been any correlation to see if these firms previously had been awarded tenders or contracts for Government or Government-related projects, and subsequent to being taken to task, whether any such firms subsequently were awarded Government tenders.
The second question is, whether as part of the paradigm of environmental, social and governance responsibility, which is increasingly being considered these days, whether some Government tenders can consider the role of HR practices either as a clear criterion or as a tie-breaker in the event of two companies having very similar value prepositions otherwise.
The third question, Mr Speaker, is to ask, whether or not, the Ministry has used or is considering using the \"Mystery Shopper\" methodology to look for companies with discriminatory hiring practices. Just to briefly elaborate, the Mystery Shopper approach involves sending CVs with otherwise identical qualifications, but varying the age, the ethnicity as suggested by the name, to the company. The idea is to, by doing this \"A/B\" testing to see whether there are companies that have a clear pattern of rejecting certain applications at the CV or resume stage. This may help identify soft discrimination before it becomes a bigger issue.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Sir, I thank the Member for his questions. The proactive surveillance under FCF watchlist, is in fact, the \"Mystery Shopper\" programme that he has talked about. These companies did not surface to our attention because their employees said that something was wrong. And how did we identify them? Very similar to how Dr Tan has described it – a mixture of looking at their workforce profiles, a mixture of looking at how they have responded to advertisements that were put on MyCareersFuture.gov.sg. You put the two together, we see that these companies in terms of their hiring patterns, something does not look quite right. So, then, we put them on the watchlist and we engage them. We asked what is going on, why is it that your pattern of recruitment has been like that? It is in substance, nearly identical, I think, to what Dr Tan has asked.
His first two questions. I think it goes back to what our objective really is. What do you want as an outcome to for these companies that we have put on the watchlist? Is our objective that they improve their hiring so that more local PMETs can be added to their workforce? Or is our objective to frustrate them and to somehow get them to exit Singapore or to exit the business, whatever it is that they are carrying on in Singapore? Keep in mind that although we have identified these companies for proactive surveillance, for engagement, they also do have a sizable local PMET workforce. They are already hirers, employers of Singaporeans holding PMET positions.
The actions that we take must be proportional and it must also not create so much difficulties for the existing PMETs in their workforce who are local and who would very much like to keep their jobs. So, these are the things that we must keep in mind when we decide on what measures to take it. I am not saying that these measures will always be static. We will continue to look at better ways of identifying companies, more that can be picked up accurately, swiftly and at the same time, what further measures will get the companies to reshape their workforce profiles more quickly.
I mentioned on Tuesday that we are evaluating EP and S Pass applications, going to look back at whether the company has kept up its support for local PMETs in their employment. That would include their retrenchment behaviour; it will have a bearing. That will also include whether they have been responsive to efforts by Government agencies to help them recruit and train local PMETs; that will also have a bearing on their EP and S Pass applications.
So, we have a number of tools that we can use but all designed for one objective in mind, which is to reshape the workforce profiles of the companies and to ensure that they treat local candidates fairly, give them a chance to make progress in the companies. And if these individuals have not been known to them, have not been on their radar for possible recruitment and training, then we would want them to make a special effort.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
\tMr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Minister, just two quick clarifications. The first, is on the size of the TAFEP team that surveys, educates and takes action against companies that engage in unfair hiring practices. What is the size of that team? Is the Minister of the view that that team needs to be enlarged?
The second question takes off from comments made by the Second Minister for Manpower in the course of the debate over the last few days. Is MOM looking to beef up resources on unfair hiring practices. Could Minister share some details on what those measures specifically are?
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Sir, I would have to come back to Mr Singh on the exact size of the TAFEP team. We have been beefing up, so the latest number I do not have it offhand.
Would we want to strengthen the resources? The answer is yes, but I would also say that at the same time, it is important for us to reach out to employers and to ensure that they do their part to upkeep fair hiring practices.
Why do I say so? If all of our efforts are directed purely towards enforcement, I think what you do create as an environment is one where you are always pitted against each other. You are always assuming that the employers are not trying to do their part, you are always assuming that the employers have something to hide and you are always assuming that the employers have no real difficulties that they are facing of their own.
If you interact with enough employers, they will tell you that, \"We have very serious challenges also in reaching out to potential jobseekers\". So, we have to take a balanced approach and ask ourselves, what is the combination of actions that will be most helpful to the employers and to the businesses, which in turn will be more helpful to expanding opportunities for our own people. That balance is one that we are always constantly trying to strike.
I was very cheered when Ms He Ting Ru asked the question of what are the tripartite discussions, the tripartite discussions are precisely this – how can each one of us do our part? The unions are reaching out to the jobseekers, encouraging them to understand where the opportunities are and to be willing to be trained for those opportunities. The employers, being cognisant of the slack in the job market, in the availability of jobseekers, possibly redesigning their jobs so that more locals will be attracted to them and also making a real effort to participate in programmes that can help them to strengthen their local workforce.
You need a combination of factors. You cannot overly rely on just one and also create an environment where there is so much distrust and no one believes that it is actually important each one does their part, to strengthen the workforce profiles within businesses and striking the right balance is what we must strive to do.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Don Wee.
\tMr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): There are jobs with fixed monthly salary of $20,000 or above which are exempted from advertising on the MyCareersFuture. I wonder what are the measures in place to deter employers from embedding the rental allowance or the kids education allowance into their salary to circumvent this regulation.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, to Mr Wee's question, would it make a difference if we set it at $25,000 or $30,000? I think the answer is that, if the company was so inclined they can package the salary in any number of ways. That is not the spirit of what we are trying to pursue.
I should also just add this as an important caveat – we are not depending only on the FCF's advertising requirement. This question of the $20,000 is only relevant for whether the job is being advertised. But, as I explained earlier, even if the job is not advertised, just using the \"Mystery Shopper\" approach that Dr Tan had advocated, we can still identify companies whose workforce profiles give us cause for concern.
And there are people who write to the MOM, they write in to me personally too. We take their feedback seriously, we follow up, we engage the company, we let them know that this has come to our attention, can you help us to understand what went on. If, in that process of engagement, we have reason to suspect that the companies are trying to do all kinds of things to avoid their obligations, to try to avoid good practices, then we will know what to do. It will have a bearing on their future applications. But we must wield this in a very smart way and not in a way that is detrimental to our own interests.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Ng Ling Ling, next question.
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Updates on Unemployment and Retrenchment Numbers and Adoption of Schemes such as SGUnited Traineeships","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Ms Ng Ling Ling asked the Minister for Manpower in the past six months (a) how many workers aged 50 years and above have become unemployed; (b) what is the average length of time for them to be employed again; and (c) whether such data can be reported by the Ministry to the public periodically.
5 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Manpower how many Singaporeans have (i) been retrenched this year (ii) been placed on unpaid leave due to the COVID-19 situation and (iii) had their pay reduced by more than 50% since the start of the circuit breaker period.
6 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is being done to ensure that companies do not misuse the SGUnited Traineeships Programme and SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways Programme to fulfil their manpower requirements; and (b) whether companies that have recently retrenched their workers are allowed to hire under the these traineeship programmes.
\t
The Minister for Manpower (Mrs Josephine Teo): Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 4 to 6?
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please. Just a reminder to Members to just mention the question number. That will do. Thank you.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Thank you, Sir. As for the first set of questions for this next set, I will also address questions that are for the next Sitting or for Written Answers that are related. The reason is that, this approach allows us to deal with them more holistically. So, I seek Members' understanding.
To Ms Ng's question, MOM publishes the Labour Market Report on a quarterly basis and the Report on Labour Force in Singapore on an annual basis. The Advance Release for the second quarter of 2020 estimated that there were 90,500 unemployed residents in June 2020, compared to 73,900 in December 2019. So, it is 90,500 in June 2020, as compared to 73,900 in December 2019. That is a difference of 16,600 over six months.
\t
Of those unemployed, one in three were aged 50 and over, and this proportion has been and continues to be stable.
In comparison, about one in four persons in our resident workforce is aged 50 and over. This is consistent with the longer time they have taken to return to the workforce if they exit. Based on latest available data on the duration of unemployment, the median period for residents aged 50 and over was 12 weeks. This duration has been broadly stable for a number of years. But we should expect it to rise in times of economic downturn, as it is likely to for all age groups, although the extent really remains to be seen.
To Ms He Ting Ru’s question, preliminary figures from the survey data indicate that 5,280 Singapore Citizens were retrenched in the first half of 2020. In our labour statistics compilation, being placed on unpaid leave is captured as “temporary layoffs”. In the first half of 2020, an estimated 11,050 Singapore Citizens were affected by temporary layoffs, compared to 33,000 non-citizens.
Since the start of the circuit breaker on 6 April 2020, employers with more than 10 employees are required to notify MOM within one week of implementing cost-saving measures, such as shorter work hours or no-pay leave, that result in more than 25% reduction in gross monthly salary for local employees or 25% reduction in basic monthly salary for foreign employees.
Based on the notifications received between the start of the circuit breaker period and 20 August 2020, salary reductions of more than 50% are a small minority. We are not able to provide the breakdown between Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents as the distinction was not made in the notification by employers.
The Government continues to monitor the job market closely and adjust its measures to support workers and help businesses maintain or expand their local employment. The National Jobs Council is coordinating efforts to provide 100,000 jobs and skills opportunities for jobseekers under the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package.
Miss Cheng Li Hui asked about the take-up of these programmes. MOM has started providing weekly updates on the jobs and skills situation to highlight the opportunities available for jobseekers and how they can access them. By now, more than 95,000 opportunities have been made available. These include: (a) 65,000 job opportunities, (b) close to 20,000 company-hosted traineeships, attachments or training places, and (c) over 10,000 opportunities under the SGUnited Skills Programme.
We have helped to place over 25,000 individuals into jobs, traineeships and training places. Of these, 24,000 across various age groups were placed into new jobs. About half are in the public sector, with another quarter in the Modern Services and Lifestyle sectors. The salary range of jobs can vary, depending on the sector and the specific job roles that an individual takes up.
Over 1,000 fresh graduate trainees have taken up traineeships under the SGUnited Traineeships programme. The majority of the traineeship positions filled are in growth sectors, such as Information Communications Technology and Media, Professional Services, and Financial Services. As the process of shortlisting and selecting suitable trainees by host organisations takes time, we can expect to see more placements into traineeships and company attachments subsequently. Lastly, close to 700 trainees have enrolled in 40 courses under the SGUnited Skills Programme.
We have expanded outreach to increase awareness of these opportunities. To reach out to fresh graduates on opportunities under the SGUnited Traineeships programme, WSG works closely with MOE, the Institutes of Higher Learning, NTUC and the People’s Association. To reach out to mid-career individuals on attachments under the SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways Programme, WSG organises SGUnited Jobs and Skills Fairs to allow them to apply for opportunities onsite. Twenty-four SGUnited Jobs & Skills Centres have also been set up across all HDB towns. We also reach out to both groups through digital media channels.
From January to July 2020, 36,400 jobseekers received basic career advisory or job search assistance through WSG and NTUC-e2i’s career matching services. This is 30% more than the same period in 2019, despite Circuit Breaker measures.
The traineeships and attachments do not automatically convert into a permanent job. However, we are hopeful that companies will find a good number of trainees to be a good fit and make them part of their permanent staff. This will depend largely on the fit of each trainee to the job, and the business situation and hiring needs of the host organisation when the traineeships or attachments are completed. Workforce Singapore’s experience with the Attach-and-Train programmes so far has been that host organisations that are impressed with trainees will place them in full-time positions in the companies to make the most of the time and money that they have invested in the attachment. The new Jobs Growth Incentive scheme will give greater support to businesses to expand and grow their local headcounts over the next six months. This will also help spur the hiring of trainees.
I should add that in designing the Jobs Growth Incentive, we made sure to double the support for more mature jobseekers. New local hires aged 40 and above attract twice as much wage subsidies.
For cases where the traineeship does not result in a permanent job, the experience will equip the trainee with industry-relevant knowledge and skills, and help to burnish their credentials and value proposition to other employers. The Government will also continue to support them in their job search journey, through career matching services offered by WSG and NTUC’s Employability and Employment Institute, and other partner organisations.
Ms He Ting Ru asked about the safeguards against misuse. The Singapore Business Federation or SBF, our programme partner for these programmes, scrutinises each application to ensure that host companies structure their traineeships and attachments appropriately with clear development plans, so that participants can have a meaningful experience. SBF also scrutinises the applications to make sure that the companies are not using these programmes to hire workers for permanent jobs at low cost.
Host organisations are required to declare in their applications if they had undertaken retrenchment exercises or adopted various cost-cutting measures. If there are grounds to believe that companies are replacing existing employees with trainees in similar roles, such applications will be rejected. Some host organisations have asked if they can pay more than the stipulated allowances for very attractive candidates. Instead of traineeships or attachments, they are advised to offer paid employment to these very attractive candidates, which will also enjoy significant support under the Jobs Growth Incentive.
In addition to the rigorous screening process that I have described above, SBF also assists companies to review and improve their proposals, especially for applications that are incomplete or lacking in detail. These measures are necessary so that the traineeship or attachment experience is a positive and meaningful one. This is why it has taken four to six weeks, on average, to approve the applications, to ensure that the trainees’ interests are safeguarded. SBF has stepped up resources in response to the strong interest in these programmes to process these applications as quickly as possible.
\tMr Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.
Ms He Ting Ru (Sengkang): I thank the Minister for the reply. I have some supplementary questions. The first relates to retrenchment. Would the Ministry consider publishing monthly, more granular updates available, especially during crisis periods like what we are going through at the moment? This is for us to be able to monitor and see whether the many, many schemes that have been introduced are working and how effective they are, whether there are areas that need extra support.
The second is whether we will consider also publishing – because I notice the Minister answered the question about the number of Singaporeans who were retrenched, but that figure sometimes seems to also include residents – so, whether we can have a bit more granularity as well between Singaporeans and PRs? Ultimately, Singaporeans do not have the back-up option of returning to their home countries. So, I think there is some value in knowing the data about whether Singaporeans are more affected.
Thirdly, have there been any public sector retrenchments so far this year?
I have some more questions on traineeships. I thank the Minister as well on traineeships. It is good that SBF has agreed to partner with MOM. However, I am just wondering whether we can have a bit more structure in this sort of on-going assessment reports of employers who have taken part in the schemes. For example, whether there will be monitoring visits being undertaken, whether we can publish regular achievement rates and information on how successful these companies are in converting traineeships into permanent job placements. And, finally, whether the trainees themselves will be given a chance to provide feedback on the schemes and also on the specific employers. These, all together, will help everyone make sure that these schemes are not abused and are maximally effective.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, I thank Ms He for her questions. The host companies for the traineeships have to submit monthly updates to SBF as to what is happening to the traineeship. This submission has to be signed off by the trainee himself or herself. SBF has also made available their staff to handle incidents where the trainee feels that the programme is not well structured or they are not learning as much as they would like. SBF commits its resources to intervening in these cases. So, this aspect of the work that Ms He thinks is important, we agree. And it is being done.
As to whether they convert into placements subsequently, we are also interested to know and we will keep track of it as best as we can. Because even if a person does not stay in employment with the host company, it does not necessarily mean that the traineeship was not useful. Quite often, individuals, having completed the training, move on to other better options for employment. So, I think we will keep track of it, but we must know that we have to interpret that data quite carefully.
As to whether the public sector has retrenched, the public sector has actually leaned forward to bring hiring in advance of our needs. Quite a large number of the positions that are made available to jobseekers are because the public sector, having looked at their developmental plans and deciding that instead of hiring six months or nine months later, bring these forward so that the jobseekers can have a wider range of options and they can also have meaningful employment during this much more difficult time.
To the question on the data, the data I described was exactly what you wanted – citizens. So, I am not sure whether that got carried across clearly enough. It was not a combination of citizens and PRs. The Member asked for citizens; we have provided the Member with the citizen data. In fact, I also contrasted it to what was happening for the non-citizens, if the Member can go back and take a look at that.
\t
Can we report employment statistics on a more regular basis? That has been the plan. That has also been the reason why Minister Chan Chun Sing and I, almost on a weekly basis now, have been visiting companies, different sectors to showcase the job, the opportunities available. During those occasions, we always publish a job situation report, different dimensions of it.
We are looking at one of the statistics that we can provide at a more regular interval – today, it is available on a quarterly basis. We are looking at whether unemployment data can be reliably provided on, perhaps, a monthly basis. So, it is not a question of whether we can provide the statistics more regularly. It has to do with whether it is reliable and you can count on it for decision-making. And if it is not reliable because the data-set is not going to be large enough, then by providing even more granular data at even closer intervals does not necessarily help in decision-making.
Mr Speaker: Ms Carrie Tan.
Ms Carrie Tan (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, firstly, I would like to the thank Minister for Manpower for a very —
\tMr Speaker: You may want to take off your mask.
\tMs Carrie Tan: I would like to thank the Minister for clarifying a lot of the questions previously. I am very heartened to know that the MOM exercises compassion in the way they approach the various challenges in hiring practices that micro-enterprises and SMEs encounter to support them to adopt the correct and desired hiring practices.
My supplementary question is related to the overarching issue of unfair hiring or workplace practices. I understand that so far proactive surveillance has surfaced more of these companies than complaints by job seekers or employees. In my encounter with my residents, I do see that there is a lot of hesitance and uncertainty by employees or jobseekers when they encounter unfair hiring or workplace practices. They are not sure or not confident of raising these issues to the correct authorities.
My question is, will the Minister consider increasing efforts in jobseeker or employee education efforts to reassure people and empower them that if they are aggrieved in any of their experiences while seeking jobs or within their workplace environment, they can safely blow the whistle. And what is the recourse that they have? Because I think they have concerns and on repercussions on the employability in the future.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her question. I can appreciate that in some instances if the persons, for example, are still employed by the company, they are very careful and want to make sure that they do not get identified as the whistle blower. We are very mindful of that and we will make all effort to protect their identity. We have to approach the companies in a smart way, so as not to reveal their identity.
To expanding the outreach to encourage, individuals to step forward, I agree with her, entirely, especially for workers who are likely to be more vulnerable and less able to appreciate how best they can advance their interests. We have a programme called WorkRight. Our officers proactively reach out to these workers who we believe are in slightly more vulnerable positions – less likely to know their rights, less likely to know what the employers are supposed to do for them and meet statutory obligations. We educate them, not just on the ground, but also through the use of the vernacular media. We will have to continue to step up these efforts and ensure that people feel the sense that they can raise these issues safely.
\tMr Speaker: Leader of the House.
The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Speaker, just a short point of order. I appreciate that Members, especially new Members are keen and enthusiastic. I would just like to remind Members that for supplementary questions, they are subject to the same Standing Orders as ordinary questions. And ordinary questions shall not contain more than one issue and shall be concise. So, I would urge the Members to be concise in their questioning.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Amount Disbursed under Self-employed Relief Scheme and Further Measures to Help Self-employed","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Manpower whether there will be further assistance for the self-employed beyond the Self-employed Income Relief Scheme (SIRS).
8 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the current amount disbursed under the Self-employed Relief Scheme as compared to its budgetary allocation; (b) whether there are plans for more allocations should the economic outlook remain bleak beyond the next one year; and (c) what are the various reasons for the rejection of appeals under this scheme.
\tThe Minister for Manpower (Mrs Josephine Teo): Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 7 and 8 together?
\tMr Speaker: Please do.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: The Self-employed Person Income Relief Scheme (SIRS) is a means-tested scheme to help Singaporean self-employed persons or SEPs with less means and family support to tide over this period of economic uncertainty. Eligible SEPs receive three tranches of $3,000 each in May, July and October 2020.
The income eligibility criteria for SIRS covered over 80% of Singaporeans with taxable income. The annual value (AV) of the housing criteria covered about nine in 10 owner-occupied residential public and private properties. As a proxy for family support, the spouse's income is also considered.
Over $1.1 billion has been disbursed in the first two tranches. With the third and final tranche, SIRS is expected to cost $2 billion in total, almost double the original $1.2 billion set aside. This is a significant expansion of an already sizeable programme. Altogether, about 190,000 individuals have received SIRS, with about 100,000 qualifying automatically, and 90,000 through application.
We have been exercising flexibility in the qualifying criteria to support more SEPs. About two in three applications have been approved. In the remaining one-third, applicants may have been earning much higher incomes, residing in high value properties or own two or more property with their spouses. As SIRS was intended to support SEPs, persons who were previously unemployed or had regular employment, were redirected to the COVID-19 Support Grant. Where there were other areas of need, we have referred unsuccessful applicants to the appropriate agencies for follow-up assistance.
As announced by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat in his Ministerial Statement on 17 August 2020, the Government is studying appropriate ways to support employees and SEPs who are most vulnerable, beyond the existing schemes.
\t\tMr Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan. Well, I would like to add, before Mr Dennis Tan begins, given the level of enthusiasm, I would like supplementary questions or SQs to just go direct to the questions and cut out the preamble. I would like to limit every speaker to just at most two clarifications. Do not load on your SQs with tonnes of clarifications, please, so that more Members can ask questions. Mr Dennis Tan.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just have one supplementary question. With the expanded COVID-19 Support Grant, there are some feedback that SIRS could be extended, at least at a lower payout level. Many self-employed still have income issues in meeting their financial obligations. Will MOM study this possibility?
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Sir, the short answer is yes, we will study this together with MOF.
Mr Speaker: Miss Cheng Li Hui.
\tMiss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to inquire if MOM tracks the sectors that self-employed persons are from and how are these sectors doing now and will fare going forward – so that we can see what help will be needed.
\tMrs Josephine Teo: Sir, the profile of the SIRS recipients mirror the profile of our self-employed persons in Singapore. Large number of them were in the taxi driving profession, some in private hire car driving, a good number of them are hawkers – people whom we are very familiar with in our work as Members of Parliament. So, the performance of these sectors, of course, vary. We will have to take these factors into consideration when we look at what to do next.
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singaporeans Employed in Financial Services Sector ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Prime Minister (a) what is the current number and percentage of Singaporeans in senior management roles at non-retail banks; (b) how has the number and percentage of Singaporeans across the entire finance sector changed over the last 10 years; and (c) what is the monthly salary of the 25th percentile, median and 75th percentile of Singaporeans, permanent residents and foreigners respectively across the sector's workforce.
\tThe Minister for Transport (Mr Ong Ye Kung) (for the Prime Minister): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have provided most of the data Mr Chua asked for in my speech on the financial sector on 1 September 2020, but let me do a recap here.
The Monetary Authority of Singapore or MAS started compiling detailed manpower data in the sector in the last few years. Total employment in the sector grew from 149,000 in 2014 to 171,000 in 2019. So, about 22,000 financial sector jobs were created over the past five years, with 15,000 going to Singaporeans. Based on MAS' estimates, about 70% of the workforce are Singaporeans, 14% Permanent Residents or PRs, and 16% foreigners.
If we zoom in on senior roles, Singaporeans account for 44%, PRs 20% and foreigners 36%.
The proportions vary across activities. In 2019, for senior roles in retail banks' local functions, Singaporeans accounted for about 70%. In non-retail banks, where there is a higher concentration of regional and global functions, the proportion is lower. Singaporeans accounted for about 40%.
But as I have explained, while the share remains stable, the absolute number of Singaporeans holding senior level positions has been growing at a healthy pace as the base has expanded. Two thousand six hundred Singaporeans now hold such positions, 900 more than five years ago. That means an increase of 50% by absolute numbers.
The Member has asked for a comparison of 25th, 50th and 75th percentile salaries of Singaporeans, PRs and foreigners in the financial services sector. However, such a breakdown would not be meaningful, as we are not comparing like for like. A foreigner at the 50th percentile of foreigner's wage level in the financial sector could be hired for a very different role, from a Singaporean at the 50th percentile of the Singaporean wage level.
Notwithstanding, let me try to address the Member's queries by taking a broader view of the data, while taking care of the interpretation.
Across the financial sector, the median wage band of Singaporeans – because we collect the data by wage bands – the median wage band of Singaporeans is $6,000 to $8,000 monthly wage. While that for PRs and foreigners, they are similar, at the band of $8,000 to $10,000. In the senior level positions, about half of Singaporeans earn above $30,000 per month. It is the same for foreigners, while almost two thirds of PRs in the senior positions do.
Both sets of data are as one would expect. Financial institutions very often bring in higher earning foreigners to perform specialised, or regional and global roles, and our rules constrain the flow of those who come in at the lower level. One would also expect those with stronger profiles and track records in Singapore to become more successful in attaining PR status.
In other words, these data show outcomes which reflect the fact that we regulate the inflow of foreigners and apply selective criteria in granting PR from those who were previously foreign PMEs. If there was no regulation to control the inflow of Employment Pass holders and no criteria and conditions for PRs based on their track records, these earning differentials will naturally narrow or disappear.
\t
We should focus our minds instead on the essential issue, which is how we can provide the best opportunities for Singaporeans. As I explained in my speech earlier this week, we do this by staying open to the expertise that we need to grow as a global financial centre, investing in Singaporeans’ capabilities at every level and by ensuring fair employment practices amongst financial institutions.
MAS has been building our local talent pipeline for the financial sector and grooming more Singaporeans to be leaders and specialists, including giving them international exposure. Our local talent pool has been expanding and we will continue to collaborate and work with the industry to continue this effort.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
\t\tMr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Mr Speaker, I declare my interest as an employee of a financial institution here in Singapore. I would like to ask a clarification to the Minister. In terms of the proportion of Singaporeans, I think it was 70% of the financial services workforce, 44% in senior roles and this has been relatively stable over the past years. I would like to ask if the Government or MAS has undertaken a study to assess why is it that, given the history of Singapore's status as a financial centre, why is it that more Singaporeans are not moving up to the senior roles and in terms of where do we want to be in terms of the strong Singaporean Core? Would MAS or the Government have a specific level they have in mind?
In relation to that, I also understand from the Minister's speech that there is the Finance Associate Management Scheme to groom young undergraduates and Singaporeans. How about in terms of supporting the middle management across the various spectrum, to support them into these senior roles?
\tMr Ong Ye Kung: Mr Speaker, Mr Chua may not have heard my speech properly earlier this week and may not have heard my reply properly. He asked why is it that not more Singaporeans are moving up to senior position roles. That was exactly what I was trying to explain that, indeed, more Singaporeans have been moving up. The percentage has not been moving – maybe that is why the Member misunderstood. The percentage stayed at about 44%. But the base has grown. As a result, the absolute number of Singaporeans that moved up to senior roles have increased.
In my reply just now, I should have mentioned, it is not just Singaporeans taking up these senior roles here. They are now also going out, taking up senior roles overseas. I gave some examples during my speech.
We are able to do all this only because we continued to bring in expertise; at the same time, work with financial institutions, invest in our local expertise, grow our own timber. That is the way that we grow the sector and when the sector grows, there will be more opportunities. Singaporeans are holding our own and taking and seizing some of these opportunities.
So, the Member's second question, how do we support middle management in moving up, is exactly what we need to do. Grow the sector. If we keep saying, \"Let's just be a pond. Shut ourselves out from the lagoon and the lagoon shuts itself out from the sea\", then we will always be a small pond. You can develop your middle management to take up senior positions, but your market will be small.
Let us take a different approach. Be open to the world, make ourselves that global financial centre, work with the financial institutions, invest in our people. Then, I think middle management can move up to take up senior positions.
\tMr Speaker: Next question, Mr Chua.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Employees who have been Supported by Jobs Support Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) to date, what is the total number of employees supported by the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) with breakdowns according to (i) SMEs and non-SMEs respectively and (ii) employers' aggregate revenues of less than $10 million, between $10-100 million, between $100-$250 million and more than $250 million respectively; (b) what is the total dollar quantum of JSS payouts granted to companies with breakdowns according to (i) SMEs and non-SMEs respectively; and (ii) employers' aggregate revenues of less than $10 million, between $10-100 million, between $100-$250 million and more than $250 million respectively; and (c) what is the total number of employees supported by JSS and total dollar quantum of JSS payouts granted to companies that do not experience a fall in aggregate revenues in the first half of 2020.
\tThe Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (Mr Heng Swee Keat): Since the introduction of the Jobs Support Scheme or JSS at the Unity Budget in February, over $16 billion of payouts have been disbursed to more than 150,000 employers. This has helped to support the wages of over two million local workers. $15.5 billion of the JSS payouts went to SMEs. This accounts for 73% of the local workers supported by the JSS. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance\", Official Report, 4 September 2020, Vol 95, Issue No 6, Correction by Written Statement section.]
As labour cost share of business costs tend to be larger for SMEs compared to larger firms, the JSS, as a wage support scheme, provides greater support for SMEs.
As for the breakdown by revenue bands – below $10 million, between $10 million and $100 million, between $100 million and $250 million, and above $250 million – the dollar payouts are: $5.8 billion, $4.0 billion, $1.6 billion, and $4.9 billion respectively. The corresponding proportion of local workers supported by the JSS is: 46%, 24%, 9% and 21% respectively.
We do not have data on which companies had no drop in revenue in the first half of 2020. We do not collect such data at such short intervals, so as to ease the administrative burden on firms. As an alternative, we have made use of other sources of data, reports and industry feedback to provide different levels of JSS support to different sectors, based on the impact of COVID-19. This ensures that we strike a balance between being more targeted in our assistance and the speed in disbursing support.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Louis Chua.
\tMr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for the answer. Just few clarifications. In terms of the revenue requirement, may I ask if the Ministry would consider granting additional support to companies who may have suffered a sharper decline in revenues as opposed to some of the companies which is right now classified under Tier 3B, for example, which potentially may even have their revenues increased during this period, put more resources to companies which may have suffered a greater fall in revenues rather than from an overall sectoral approach.
\tMr Heng Swee Keat: I think, as I mentioned in my reply, we do not collect the data in order to ease the administrative burden of firms in terms of the level of revenues to which they may have suffered. But the tiered approach provides a fairly quick, fairly good approximation of the sectors and these measures are being reviewed, even as we speak.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Ministerial Statement on Fifth Set of COVID-19 Measures","subTitle":"Statement made on 17 August 2020","sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Ministerial Statement made by the Deputy Prime Minister on 17 August 2020 in respect of the fifth set of COVID-19 support measures will be considered and debated in Parliament; and (b) whether the revised spending plan will need to be approved by Parliament.
12 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance what is the basis for announcing the additional $8 billion financial measures on 17 August 2020 and whether Parliament will be able to seek clarification on the financial measures.
13 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) what is the reason for the recent Ministerial Statement on further support measures being delivered via a broadcast and not in Parliament; (b) whether this is permissible under parliamentary procedures; and (c) whether and when MPs will have the opportunity to debate the measures in the Ministerial Statement in Parliament.
\tThe Deputy Prime Minister (Mr Heng Swee Keat): Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I will answer the next three questions together.
\tMr Speaker: Yes, please.
\tMr Heng Swee Keat: The COVID-19 pandemic continues to evolve at an unprecedented pace. It has demanded swift and robust responses from the Government. From February to June, we committed close to $100 billion in COVID-19 support, over four Budget packages, to support our people and businesses.
The Government has been monitoring the economic conditions and having regular interactions and dialogues with citizens and business leaders. The coverage of some key schemes, including the Jobs Support Scheme, was going to end in August. Businesses were concerned if the support would be extended. Many jobs and businesses may be at stake if we did not announce our policy measures in time.
To ensure that we gave businesses and workers clarity on the Government’s continued support, on 17 August, I laid out further COVID-19 support measures via a television broadcast. Our businesses and workers have found this reassurance useful in their decision making.
The COVID-19 situation has affected the projected spending of some Ministries and projects. For example, delays in major construction projects such as new MRT lines have decreased development expenditure. To meet changing needs, MOF reallocated unutilised funds from these areas to fund the extension of these measures. As I stated in my 17 August statement, the measures will be fully funded by re-allocation, with no further increase in the Government’s overall expenditure. We do not plan to draw further on Past Reserves for this set of measures.
MOF briefed President and Members of the Council of Presidential Advisors. To ensure accountability to Parliament, we will present a Third Supplementary Estimates and Third Supplementary Supply Bill in the next Parliament Sitting in October. These will reflect how funds will be re-allocated across different Heads of Expenditure. The Supplementary Estimates will be considered in the Committee of Supply and the Bill will go through the First, Second and Third readings in Parliament.
The Government is responding swiftly to a fast-evolving situation and will share its plans with the public in a timely and clear fashion, while ensuring full accountability for the use of public monies.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Thank you, Sir. I noted in the latest Budget Estimates released on 17 August, the projection for revenue continues to come down. If I remember correctly, it is $5.1 billion compared to what was indicated in the Revised Estimates in the Fortitude Budget.
So, can I ask the Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister whether there are further scope to reallocate monies from the Development Expenditure to fund further spending for this current FY as well as the spending in the next few years.
Also, constitutionally, we need to balance our Budget in each term of Government. So, I would like to ask how would the Government weigh the consideration of reallocating funds set aside for expenditures for Development Expenditures which is investment for the future as well, versus further draw down on the reserves.
\tMr Heng Swee Keat: Well, I thank Mr Liang Eng Hwa for pointing out our revenues are continuing to come down. For this financial year, the main underutilisation comes from development spending caused by delays in construction, as workers were in the dormitories and were unable to continue their work. For this financial year, there is still some scope – albeit very limited – for us to consider reallocation across the various Heads of Expenditure.
But for future years we are now carefully revewing the timeline for many of the development projects. So, we must continue to budget very carefully, in reallocating revenues, monies from the Development Expenditure. And the reason why we are first using the Development route first instead of tapping on these reserves, is that we have underutilisation this year because of construction.
But going forward, as Mr Liang Eng Hwa has pointed out, our fiscal position will be challenging – revenues are coming down while some expenditures are continuing to go up and the situation continues to be very fluid. We do not know how the COVID-19 pandemic situation will continue to play out, a point which I emphasised in my speech earlier on in the Debate.
MOF will have to examine the various options very carefully but with the clear goal of enabling us to navigate through this very major crisis and to emerge stronger.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 14-25, 27-28, 30-34, 36-40, 42-53, 55 and 57-61 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. Question Nos 26, 29, 35, 41, 54, 56 and 62 have been postponed to the next available sitting of Parliament.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Debate on President's Address","subTitle":"Fifth allotted day","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Order read for the Resumption of Debate on Question [31 August 2020]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to: (proc text)]
[(proc text) 'We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which she delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.'.\" – [Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan] (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Senior Minister of State Sim Ann.
The Senior Minister of State for Communications and Information and National Development (Ms Sim Ann): Mr Speaker, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] \tThank you, Mr Speaker, for allowing me to participate in this debate.
A month ago, a young girl emailed me to inform me that she had seen me and my grassroots leaders working together to resolve school traffic problems in her neighbourhood. She also wanted to do her part for the community and had worked out a plan with her two sisters. They had pooled together her prize money from sports tournaments and their combined Edusave awards money. Their parents matched the sum dollar-for-dollar. They wanted to donate the entire sum to the community and asked me what use it could be put to.
It just so happened that my team has been distributing free meals to vulnerable residents at Clementi Avenue 4 since the start of the Circuit Breaker. The number of beneficiaries under this programme had increased from 30 to 90 people. I told the girls that their donations would help to cover the costs of five meals and invited their family to join us in the distribution. The residents were very moved to hear that such young girls had paid for their meals.
The mother told me that her father used to be a construction worker and they would have to go without meals at times because his job was unstable. Now that she has the opportunity of guiding her daughters to give back to the community, she has this special sense of satisfaction.
I was also very touched by the mother’s words. In fact, meal programmes are not new. Many charity organisations do this. However, this was a first in my community. Normally, we would issue cheques or grocery vouchers to residents who apply for financial assistance. During the Circuit Breaker period, we were worried that some of them would not be able to buy their own groceries and meals, which was why we decided to set up this meal programme. We observed that as many people walked past the distribution point, some who are in need would approach us and apply to join the programme. Those who are not in need also noticed and commended us for organising such an initiative. Some residents, like the three sisters, who are in a position to give, even offered to sponsor a few meals or some daily necessities to be distributed together with the meals, giving full play to the kampong spirit of looking out for one another. While the Circuit Breaker period has ended, some people still face financial difficulties and we plan to carry on with this programme for as long as we can.
This might be a small anecdote, but it does reflect that our community is undergoing changes because of COVID-19. The pandemic has hit the economy hard and affected the ability of some families to fend for themselves. However, it has also ignited the spirit of mutual help in our community. The Government has introduced many large-scale assistance programmes for Singaporeans, but there are finer areas where the grassroots can make themselves useful.
I have seen more residents engage in charitable work and even become volunteers. Our team of volunteers have become more like social workers, actively organising various assistance programmes. For us Members of Parliament, we also seem to have become a clearing house to match donations to needs. The items I have received and given out range from face masks and hand sanitisers to food, second-hand laptops and cash donations. We have been kept busy, but we also learn to adapt, transform and grow.
During the debate over the past few days, we have had in-depth discussions on economic issues. I would like to talk about the social aspect, especially the building of our society post-COVID-19.
While we will prevail against COVID-19 one day, life will probably not return to what it was. In her Address, President Halimah Yacob noted that the global and domestic situations have changed and there would be no going back to the status quo.
Rather than long for the past, we can seize the day and shape the future. Let me start with the ways in which we have surpassed ourselves in this pandemic.
While fighting the pandemic, Singaporeans have been surpassing ourselves in many ways. I am not only referring to the courage of healthcare staff or the dedication of frontline personnel. I am also referring to ways in which each and every one of us has been stretching ourselves.
First, many of us have acquired new DIY skills, especially during the Circuit Breaker – cooking, baking, growing vegetables and sewing masks, to name a few examples.
Baking is both a hobby and also a wage-earning skill. Sales of baked goods and desserts were suspended during the Circuit Breaker, but home baking also flourished. Now, when I make door-to-door visits, I sometimes am presented with cakes made by self-professed “Circuit Breaker Bakers”.
In the early weeks of the pandemic, face masks were in short supply. Those who could sew answered the call to make fabric masks for family, friends and strangers. I, too, joined in. In the process, I learned that my sewing machine was not as difficult to use as I had imagined – the key was whether I had the motivation to figure it out.
As for farming, we already have many enthusiastic hobbyists growing plants and vegetables in community gardens all over Singapore. But with the pandemic disrupting food supply chains, Singaporeans grew concerned about food security. When NParks offered free packets of vegetable seeds, the response was so overwhelming that they had to increase the number of packets from 150,000 to 400,000. Looks like we have hopes of grooming more urban farmers!
Second, we have become more caring towards the vulnerable in society. The meal programme I talked about at the start of my speech is only one among thousands of charity projects. From January to May 2020, Singaporeans gave about $90 million to the Community Chest, Community Foundation of Singapore’s Sayang Sayang Foundation and through Giving.sg. The amount received over this period is about equal to the overall donations received by the Community Chest and through the Giving.sg portal for the whole of 2019. Many also responded to the call to donate their $600 Solidarity Payment to help those who might need it more.
Third, we have become more appreciative of migrant workers and frontline personnel.
Most of the donated face masks and bottles of hand sanitiser that I had received were from donors who specified that these were meant for frontline personnel, such as cleaners, security guards and pre-school staff.
I have also had the privilege of participating in COVID-19 relief projects for migrant workers. Migrant Workers Centre, the Centre for Domestic Employees, the Textiles and Fashion Federation and many donors came together under project “MaskForce” to raise 870,000 mask kits for migrant workers and domestic helpers. Project Belanja, organised by several groups, including migrant worker advocacy group It’s Raining Raincoats, the Restaurant Association of Singapore and Blossom World Society, raised over $2 million to deliver more than 460,000 meals to migrant workers, of which more than $1.3 million was contributed by local bank DBS.
I hope these examples of extraordinary efforts would not be ephemeral, but set new benchmarks for ourselves in the post-COVID-19 society.
I hope that fellow Singaporeans who have acquired new DIY skills will continue to use them to the benefit of themselves and others. In a highly commoditised consumer market, just about anything can be bought ready-made. It hardly seems economically efficient to make anything on your own. But the pandemic has also brought about a “DIY renaissance”. If this leads to a more independent and sustainable approach to living, and greater appreciation for the labour of others, it is not a bad thing.
I also hope that our care and concern for the vulnerable, for frontline personnel and migrant workers will be sustained. The post-COVID-19 society should be one that is caring and cohesive. I hope those who stepped up to help will continue with long-term volunteering, and that donors continue to support those who need help. With times being hard, I can well imagine that cash donations will be harder to come by. But even so, I believe there are many who are willing to give their time, or give in kind. If we make a conscious effort to encourage, support and mobilise ground-up initiatives, then we would not lose this heightened desire to help one another as we transit into the post-COVID-19 society.
The pandemic is a grave threat but also a great force of transformation. The proliferation of work-from-home and flexible work arrangements demonstrates this. Digitalisation is also a good example.
The Government has been encouraging enterprises and individuals to go digital. Everyone understands the broad direction, but adoption remains uneven on the ground. When it comes to enterprise digitalisation, the most challenging segments are neighbourhood enterprises, such as stalls in hawker centres, wet markets and coffeeshops. Helping seniors go digital, such as learning to use smartphone features, was similarly challenging.
The two segments are closely linked. Neighbourhood enterprises count seniors among their most important customers, while many stallholders themselves are seniors. And the daily lives and consumption preferences of many seniors revolve around the neighbourhood. When encouraging stallholders to go digital, some will decline, saying that their customers would not go digital. When teaching seniors to use digital technology, some also decline, saying that they would not need it at hawker centres and markets.
These mindsets are changing with the pandemic. In particular, during the Circuit Breaker, many conventional F&B and retail businesses were affected, while e-commerce and food delivery boomed. Many neighbourhood enterprises began exploring going digital in earnest. More people also recognise the benefits of minimising the use of cash and using electronic methods of payment. These trends have created unprecedented conditions for us to help seniors and neighbourhood enterprises go digital at the same time.
For this reason, IMDA established the Singapore Digital Office to make a nationwide push for digitalisation.
We have recruited Digital Ambassadors who have reached out to over 16,000 stallholders from 112 hawker centres/markets and coffeeshops. The “Hawkers Go Digital” programme is progressing well. Five thousand four hundred 5,400 stallholders have already signed up for SGQR e-payment.
We have also launched Seniors Go Digital, to help seniors gain basic digital know-how. We know that many seniors have children and grandchildren who are digital natives. But they might not have the patience to teach the seniors how to go digital. Never fear – we have SG Digital community hubs where Digital Ambassadors are prepared to guide seniors one-on-one. We will also focus on cybersecurity awareness, so that seniors can remain vigilant against potential cyber-crimes and gain confidence in online transactions.
For those with financial difficulty, the Mobile Access for Seniors scheme can equip them with subsidised smartphones and accompanying data plans.
Our wish is for more seniors to be familiar with basic digital functions – that they can interact remotely with loved ones and friends, that they can make purchases electronically and to use digital forms of identification to transact online with the Government. I hope those who take up the challenge can become Digitally Savvy Seniors.
What would a day in the life of a digitally savvy senior look like? She could be any “ah ma” in the neighbourhood. In the morning, she gets on a bus to the market. At the bus stop, she checks the MyTransport.SG app to see when her bus will arrive. Since she has four or five minutes to spare, she takes a selfie and sends it to the family WhatsApp chatgroup to say good morning to everyone. At the market, she buys vegetables and groceries using PayNow on her mobile phone – no need to take out her wallet. On her way home, she swings by a parcel locker to collect prescription medication sent by the hospital, saving her a trip to the hospital pharmacy. She spots what looks like stagnant water in a drain and snaps a photo for the OneService app. After getting home, she checks her Healthy365 app to see how many steps she has managed and what rewards she can redeem under HPB’s National Steps Challenge. She browses YouTube for new recipes. Over lunch, she and her husband chat about new articles that they have read using e-Newspaper services on the NLB Mobile app. And, since her grandchildren are back home from school, she chats with them over videocall and asks them what they would like her to cook at the next family gathering. In the afternoon, her mobile screen lights up with the latest Gov.sg WhatsApp message on the COVID-19 situation. In the evening, after dinner, she sees a message saying that a pair of trainers she ordered online have now arrived and are ready for collection in-store at a nearby mall. She gets her husband to join her on a stroll to the mall, but not before checking spaceout.gov.sg to make sure it is not crowded. At the mall, she uses SingPass Mobile for SafeEntry. And, before going to bed that night, she browses all the well wishes sent by friends in her chat groups and wishes them good night.
Such is the daily life of some of our already digitally savvy seniors. We can and should redouble our efforts to help heartland enterprises go digital, so that more of the heartland shopping experience can be replicated online or in a mobile-friendly way. This is good for customers and also for business owners. With the on-going implementation of Pick!, the nationwide parcel locker network, we can also improve on last-mile delivery and collection for e-commerce. Add to that the efforts of SDO and our Digital Ambassadors, I believe even more seniors can enjoy the convenience and comfort of being digitally savvy.
Mr Speaker, times remain challenging. It is a tough road between now and the “post-COVID-19 society”. But, undeniably, we are seeing encouraging signs as we respond to the immediate challenges posed by the pandemic. The “post-COVID-19 society” is taking shape bit by bit.
I hope that the “DIY renaissance” will contribute to vibrancy and a sense of autonomy in the post-COVID-19 society. I hope our care and concern for the vulnerable will bring about a cohesive and heartwarming post-COVID-19 society. I also hope that by helping all to go digital, we can bring about more inclusivity, greater advancement, convenience and security in the post-COVID-19 society. Such a society would be better prepared for future challenges, including Disease X which Prime Minister Lee mentioned in his speech. Such a society would also be a Little Red Dot brimming with positive energy, always ready to forge ahead.
Mr Speaker, I support the Motion.
Mr Speaker: Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, I support the Motion of Thanks to the President for her Address. I would first like to express my gratitude to the voters of Aljunied GRC for giving me the opportunity to contribute in this House again. I cherish the trust that you have placed in my teammates and I, and we will do our very best to represent your concerns and work towards a better future for Singapore.
While we may be called the Opposition for historical reasons, we stand here not necessarily to oppose but to work with Parliamentary colleagues along and across the aisle to refine existing policies and propose new approaches to the challenges we face as a nation. Singapore's economic, social and security challenges have grown more complex over the years. The policy responses must rise to the challenge. To do so, we need earnest and robust discussions on substantive policy matters both in and out of Parliament.
Today, I would like to discuss ways in which we can improve how we care for some of the more vulnerable members of our society. I will touch on the concerns of people with disabilities, means testing, healthcare expenses and welfare of migrant workers.
First, on people with disabilities. People with disabilities, or PWDs, are not a homogeneous group but a diverse community. They include individuals with physical, sensory, intellectual and developmental challenges of varying degrees. I raised disability issues seven years ago, during my previous term in Parliament, specifically about improving public transport and pedestrian infrastructure accessibility for the visually impaired. I am glad to see some progress has been made since then, although some gaps still remain.
For example, most junctions with traffic lights still do not have audible pedestrian signals or APS and for those that do have them, the chirping sound is turned off at 9 pm or 10 pm to avoid disturbing nearby residents. This could pose a safety risk for visually impaired pedestrians who are out at night. I hope MOT will reconsider my proposal back then to add vibro-tactile walk indications at the crossings. These are special buttons positioned at the traffic signals which vibrate when it is safe to walk. These complement the APS and can continue to operate even late at night without disturbing the peace.
In my conversations with PWDs, the number one issue on their minds is jobs – not unlike many other Singaporeans. They are not asking for handouts but more equal opportunities in employment. However, PWDs face much higher hurdles and not just because of their disabilities.
One such hurdle is that it is common for employers to assume PWDs will not be able to perform on the job as well just because of their limitations. PWDs have shared with me their unpleasant job search experiences where they met all the job requirements, only to be rejected when the employer learned that they had a disability. In fact, with modern assistive technologies, PWDs can be as productive at work as their able-bodied colleagues.
The Government has done well to provide schemes like the Enabling Employment Credit and the Assistive Technology Fund. This needs to be complemented with better public education for both employers and the general public in order to clear misconceptions about PWDs in the workplace. We also need to ensure that employers do not discriminate on the basis of disability by introducing anti-discrimination legislation.
Another area that needs to move forward faster with the times is our approach to means testing for social assistance schemes. The process often requires too much paperwork and imposes an undue burden on the very people we are trying to help. Mr Leon Perera also raised this issue in a speech on Tuesday.
The application for public assistance, for example, requires applicants to submit at least 10 documents to prove their neediness. Some of these documents require applicants to log into Government websites with their SingPass and print out documents such as CPF statements, both of which can be an obstacle for those with no computers and printers at home. When they apply for assistance schemes with other Government agencies or need to renew their assistance, the same exercise has to be repeated.
The process for PWDs applying for disability support is not a walk in the park either. They need to get a doctor certification of their disability and pay the clinic for this service. Then, they need to repeat this process for every agency they are applying for support from.
All this is a painfully low-tech way of means testing. In fact, we already have the capability to integrate and automate such systems. For example, My Tax Portal from IRAS pulls data from multiple sources to fill in a taxpayer's income deductions and reliefs, and computes their taxable income after just a few clicks. The Government has also been building its capabilities and data analytics.
We clearly have the technical capabilities to collect taxes efficiently and seamlessly. Can we now develop the same capabilities for dispersing social assistance to deserving individuals and families? For PWDs, the Government could create a centralised system that keeps track of each individual's disability, which can be tapped into by various agencies to assess if they are qualified for disability benefits.
I am glad to learn from the Minister-in-charge of the Smart Nation initiative in his Addendum to the President's Address that all Government services will be digital from end-to-end by 2023. I hope our means testing process will be one of the first to go paperless and presence-less. By doing so, deserving citizens can receive the help they need more quickly and conveniently, and will not fall through the cracks just because they have difficulty gathering and submitting the necessary documents.
My third area of concern is helping Singaporeans cope with the burden of healthcare expenses. Chronic diseases are imposing an increasing burden on our ageing population. MOH has said in its Addendum to the President's Address that it will look into identifying best practices that can help us in our fight to better manage diabetes and other chronic diseases.
A key challenge in chronic disease management is ensuring that patients follow their treatment regimens and show up for their regular appointments with their family doctors. I have met residents who have lamented about the high cost of treatment for their chronic conditions. Some have shared about missing appointments because of cost concerns. In the long run, missed or delayed treatments will cost both the patients and the healthcare system more if their conditions worsen and they need to be hospitalised.
I welcome the introduction of the MediSave700 scheme, which allows patients with multiple conditions to draw up to $700 a year from their MediSave accounts. This is up from $500 a year currently. However, I remain concerned about the limitations of the scheme. Patients whose condition is not one of the 20 chronic conditions specified under the Chronic Disease Management Programme (CDMP) or whose treatment costs exceed $700 a year still have to fork out cash for their treatment.
I have two suggestions for MOH to consider. First, that MediSave withdrawals be allowed for the treatment of all chronic conditions, not just those on the CDMP list. This will ensure that no one is excluded just because they suffer from a less common chronic condition.
Second, the annual withdrawal limits for MediSave should be removed for patients with sufficient MediSave balances and are over the age of 60.
To reduce the risk of a buffet syndrome, these two changes can be rolled out first at polyclinics and restructured hospitals, where tight procedures are already in place to ensure that only medically necessary treatment is prescribed. Sir, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] \tMr Speaker, healthcare costs are a heavy burden for many Singaporeans, especially those who have been battling chronic diseases for a long time. Therefore, I hope the Government will further reduce the restrictions on the use of MediSave and help the elderly to reduce the medical expenses that have to be paid in cash.
Many residents have complained to us about the high medical costs. Some even forgo follow-up treatment because they cannot afford it. In the long run, if a patient's condition deteriorates to the point where he has to be hospitalised, the burden will increase, both for the patient and for our healthcare system.
In view of this, I would like to suggest that MOH include all chronic diseases in the list of allowed MediSave withdrawals, and remove the annual withdrawal limits for people over the age of 60. I believe this arrangement will reduce the mental stress on elderly persons caused by medical expenses and allow them to seek medical treatment with greater peace of mind.
(In English): Sir, my fourth area of concern is the welfare of migrant workers. These are some of the most disadvantaged yet invisible members of our society. They are neither voters nor Singaporeans, but they are part of the Singapore community and their interests must be protected too as is befitting a developed country like ours.
At the heart of the many issues that migrant workers in Singapore face is their lack of bargaining power vis-a-vis other parties like employers, the Government and employment agencies. This makes them susceptible to being taken advantage of. NGOs have reported that migrant workers often pay as much as $10,000 to secure jobs in Singapore. The costs include agent fees, course fees and sometimes kick-backs.
When their contracts end, some are asked to make cash payments of up to $4,000 to third-party agents to renew their contracts or find subsequent jobs. For both these fees, they take up huge loans and spend many months servicing them on the back of their salaries of about to $500 to $800 a month. This makes them almost like indentured labour for much of their time in Singapore.
A few unscrupulous employers are in on the act, working with illegal agents to profit off the workers they employ. Because such payments are usually made in cash, there is often no paper trail to prove the offences if they file a complaint with MOM. Furthermore, workers risk losing their jobs if they are being sent home when their employers find out they have filed a complaint. Hence, many violations go unreported.
I urge MOM to step up enforcement and intelligence-gathering, so that errant parties can be taken to task and made an example of.
We could also set up a jobs portal for employers to list available jobs so that workers do not have to go through intermediaries to find new companies to work for once their contracts end. This will reduce the opportunities for collecting kick-backs and correct some of the power imbalance that currently exists.
Mr Speaker, it has been said that the true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members. The President alluded to this in her Address to. We have come so far as a country, uplifting the standard of living of generations of our people. Let us take this progress to the next level as we further improve how we care for the vulnerable members of our society.
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Speaker, I rise to thank Mdm President and speak in support of Her Excellency’s Address.
On 24 August 2020, I was privileged to be sworn in at The Arts House, being the Old Parliament House where our Pioneer leaders themselves were sworn in during their time. Standing in the same Chamber as they had decades before, drove home the sacred duty of being a Member of Parliament (MP), and the importance of what we do here in Parliament.
Like our forefathers, we too are charged with safeguarding the interests of this country.
We now face new challenges, some of which they may not have foreseen. But I am confident that, by adopting the same spirit that our forefathers had, we can overcome these challenges with perseverance, unity and the conviction to do what is best for our Singapore.
I concur with Mdm President of the need to look out for our lower-wage workforce, many of whom, such as food delivery riders, are also essential workers keeping Singapore afloat throughout the COVID-19 crisis.
Many of the people in this House may have heard about or watched the video concerning Mr Abdul Rahman, a food delivery rider who found himself at the tail-end of a National Day mobile column on 9 August this year. Seizing the moment, Rahman spontaneously waved to some of the onlookers, who then responded with loud cheers in return. This heartwarming incident was fortunately captured on video and quickly went viral on social media networks that very same day.
I subsequently discovered that Rahman is actually a resident of my constituency and I paid him a visit at his residence in Woodgrove recently. Rahman revealed to me that he works up to nine hours a day, six days a week to provide for his family. He also shared with me that delivery riders like him typically earn about $6 per delivery, and that he would sometimes lose part of his income due to summons while rushing to complete deliveries and meeting customers’ expectations.
Mr Speaker, being a food delivery rider is not an easy job. They earn their wages by being constantly on the road and weathering the elements as they go. Because of the nature of their work and the tight deadlines imposed on them, they are often at risk of incurring such penalties – around $70 for fines imposed by LTA enforcement officers and about $300 for unclamping charges imposed by the Managements of shopping malls. More or often than not, these are due to the lack of designated parking facilities for delivery riders.
In this regard, I am seeking the community’s support and the Government’s backing in implementing transitional parking of about 15 minutes grace period for food delivery riders, and also hope that all commercial malls in Singapore can provide designated food delivery pick up points. This will provide a win-win situation that reduces the risk of fines and clamping charges for illegal parking, enabling a smoother food collection and delivery process.
In recent years, the threat of climate change has grown ever more urgent, with reports of forest fires and floods making the news more frequently than before. While Singapore has not seen major environmental disasters in recent years, the world’s rising sea levels may soon become a profound danger that poses a risk to our safety and way of life.
But the world is taking notice of the problem, with many developed countries making a push for \"green living\" and sustainability to mitigate the effects of climate change. In a recent survey conducted by Morgan Stanley Research with their summer interns, more than three-quarters of those surveyed plan to increase recycling efforts, while almost half are willing to change their diet to more sustainable food sources. A sizable portion of them are also reported to prefer the use of electric cars.
We must do the same here in Singapore with regard to increasing awareness and taking action as a society. For the past few years, I have been involved with green living initiatives at a grassroots level, organising recycling drives for the Bukit Panjang community, and I fully intend to do more as part of what I call my \"G.E.L.\" mission for Woodgrove, with the \"G\" representing \"Green Living\"; \"E\" meaning \"Embracing Parenthood\" and \"L\" being \"Law Awareness\".
On a national level, I agree with MOT that “transport is part of sustainable development of Singapore.” Apart from looking into improving and expanding the infrastructure of the public transport system, I would also like to suggest that MOT explore opening up carpooling rights to taxi operators so as to maximise the usage capacity of each vehicle. In so doing, hopefully, we can reduce the country’s overall carbon footprint.
Working towards a more inclusive transport system should involve more than just improving public transport per se. We need to look deeper to better support the less ambulant. Mr Speaker, kindly allow me to elaborate this point in Mandarin please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] \tMr Speaker, many elderly residents in Woodgrove have told me that overhead bridges without lifts are useless to them.
Most of them will opt to take public transport or walk whenever they go out to buy groceries, pick up their grandchildren or go for regular check-ups at the polyclinics as these save money.
But due to the deterioration of their knee joints, it is very strenuous for them to go up and down the stairs of the overhead bridges. Whenever it rains, they would rather get drenched than to use the overhead bridge. It is even more difficult for those who have mobility issues, let alone those using crutches or wheelchairs.
If we want to encourage more Singaporeans, especially the elderly and the disabled, to use public transport, we should not just focus on how to improve public transport amenities as that may not solve the root of the problem.
We should at the same time, also improve the environment around these public transport. For example, ensuring that covered walkways are extended to all HDB estates, we have to make sure that these walkways access are barrier-free and that lifts are installed at overhead bridges, especially in areas and along the trails towards where the elderly and mobility handicapped would like to go to, such as Community Clubs, town centres, polyclinics, hospitals and shopping centres.
(In English): During the term when I served as the School Advisory Committee Chairperson in Zhenghua Primary School, I would conduct motivational talks to the Primary 6 students prior to taking the PSLE, and I would hold intimate chit-chat sessions with their parents before they receive their PSLE results. On these occasions, I shared with them my unconventional journey in becoming a lawyer, including the fact that I actually did not do well for my own PSLE. With this revelation, I took the opportunity to encourage the parents not to choose schools purely based on their children’s PSLE scores, but where their child’s passion may lie instead.
The late E W Barker once said and I quote, “Education should always seek to find and nurture the best in every student, inspiring him to contribute confidently and fully in the area of his own capabilities, rather than made to feel useless and ashamed for not having made it to the top of the school.”
I wholeheartedly agree with his words, and I therefore applaud MOE’s decisions that the PSLE will soon have wider scoring bands and Streaming will eventually be phased out. This will offer students more opportunities to pursue subjects at a level suited to their strengths and interests.
While this is a great leap forward for the country’s education policies, many Singaporeans are far more concerned with the perceived quality of the schools themselves, with the reasoning that only some schools are good, and only the best teachers are in good schools.
Mr Speaker, I am a firm believer that every school in Singapore is a good school in its own way, able to bring out the best in every child. My alma mater, Bendemeer Secondary School, is one such example.
Back then, my parents chose Bendemeer primarily due to convenience’s sake; it was just a two-minute walk away from our HDB block. They would often walk past the school when returning home and see the school motto – \"From Each His Best\", eventually growing fond of it.
My time at Bendemeer was formative. Till to-date, I remain eternally grateful for the opportunities and encouragements that my teachers had given to me, believing that a Normal (Academic) student can become a lawyer one day if she worked hard for it.
Mr Speaker, while it is true that schools like Bendemeer have conducive learning environments and teachers capable of inspiring children to pursue their own goals, it will require more effort to convince parents likewise.
When I was expecting my daughter back in 2018, the first question one of my friends had asked me was not about the name I was planning to give to my daughter, but whether I had planned on which kindergarten and Primary school for my daughter to enter in future.
I was taken aback by that at first, but she shared with me that this is actually a common question discussed by many parents in the \"mummy\" chatgroups that she had joined, where the common consensus is that the school which the first child enters is important, as that will make the applications for their subsequent children a lot easier.
As a result of this mentality, many parents when registering their children for Primary 1, typically find themselves vexed by the whole process. In this regard, I humbly urge the MOE to introduce measures to break this trend and think of ways to boost parents’ confidence regarding sending their children to other, more accessible schools.
One suggestion that MOE can consider is to introduce a framework for all schools in Singapore to adopt and work towards, akin to the Business Excellence certification set forth by Enterprise Singapore to recognise schools that have attained a commendable level of performance to achieve world-class standards of excellence.
The whole objective of meeting the targets as set forth by this framework is not for schools to eventually be carbon copies of each other, but allow each of them to explore ways to excel with the manpower and resources available to them, enabling their students to feel motivated and inspired to pursue their passion.
Mr Speaker, today, 4 September 2020, is incidentally Teachers’ Day. At this juncture, I would like to take this opportunity to wish all teachers, a very Happy Teachers' Day. [Applause.] Thank you for your dedication and hardwork, in bringing out the best in our students and inspiring them to pursue meaningful lives.
In relation to the courses to introduce for lifelong learning, I am suggesting for the MOE and MinLaw to collaborate and introduce courses targeting our seniors to increase their awareness and knowledge on certain aspects of the law, such as consumer rights and the importance of estate planning.
I was appalled to learn recently that the top 10 most common scams active during the first half of 2020 had stolen an estimated $82 million in that period of time, with e-commerce scams being one of the most commonly reported.
Mr Speaker, I serve as the Co-chairperson in the Law Society Pro Bono Services’ Community Legal Clinics’ Committee and had been running a community legal clinic in a Residents’ Committee centre prior to becoming a MP. More often than not, residents come to see us when they encounter unfortunate situations, such as when they were scammed of their life savings, or when their spouses had become critically ill or passed on abruptly. They are invariably helpless and financially-strapped during these periods of time.
My experience had informed me that prevention is better than cure. I therefore think that upstream legal education is important, equipping them with knowledge of their rights in order to better prepare them for potential situations concerning legal matters.
During the course of the past few days of the President’s Motion of Thanks debate, I have observed that everyone in this House – both from the PAP and the Opposition parties – have affirmed the need for our country to stay united and at the same time, keep our economy and society open, and not turn inwards.
I believe that speaks well of the consensus we all share in shaping the overall character and tone of our society. Ours must always be a diverse, inclusive and multi-cultural Singapore – a nation where everyone has a place and where everyone belongs. We must uphold the interests of all Singaporeans regardless of their backgrounds and origins. At the same time, we continue to welcome and integrate new arrivals who identify with Singapore and our way of life.
As Minister Josephine Teo had said in her speech, many of our new citizens and PRs are the spouses and family members of Singaporeans. This is what I have observed in my constituency as well. During house visits, I often meet residents who share with me that they have worked in Singapore for many years and subsequently decided to establish their roots here. They purchased a HDB flat and set up a family in Singapore. One day, I met a Caucasian resident who had married a Singaporean and later became a naturalised citizen. He approached me, and instead of saying, \"Hi\", he greeted me with a uniquely Singaporean \"Ho seh boh?\"
Mr Speaker, it has been almost 55 years since the First Parliament session took place. Many of the Members who were sworn in at the Old Parliament House are no longer with us today, or have decided to serve in other roles, making way for the younger generations to contribute in Parliament and elevate the country to the next level.
But what has not changed in all these years, is the unanimity in the conviction of the members, past or present, who have taken the oath of allegiance – to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of Singapore. In Parliament, we raise issues that are vital to our people. Outside Parliament, we listen and serve our people; all of which, we have endeavoured to do, to the best of our abilities for Singaporeans.
The late EW Barker once shared and I quote, \"No Member will stray from the straight and narrow path if he always let his conscience be his guide.\" I will bear these words in mind as I assume the voice of Woodgrove constituents in Parliament and as a PAP backbencher Member of Parliament, speaking out on what is best for Singapore and Singaporeans. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Dr Tan See Leng.
The Minister, Prime Minister's Office and Second Minister for Manpower and Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to provide a clarification to Mr Gerald Giam on the issue of the migrant workers.
I want to reassure the House that with regard to the point that the hon Member made about the exploitation of migrant workers and so on, we have in place multiple mechanisms to ensure that their welfare is being taken care of.
While the system itself is not perfect, but we are doing the best we can. And we continue to improve and it continues to be a work-in-progress in terms of how we want to cater to more of taking care of their needs.
In terms of their coming onboard, employment agencies have access to them first. There are two sets of employment agencies. The ones that are based in Singapore – they are subject to very stringent regulation by our Act to make sure that there is a fair benchmark in terms of the payment of the commissions to them for bringing them here.
I understand from the High Commissions that there is a separate set of employment agencies that operate outside of Singapore, that is in the home countries of these migrants coming across. This group of employment agencies, we have no jurisdiction over them. So, it is one point that you need to consider. We have repeatedly engage Embassy officials to highlight to them that they need to work closer with us in terms of working with these employment agencies, to make sure that some of them can be blacklisted, so that we can also identify who they are and dissuade them from coming and using these employment agencies.
The other thing is, we have separately also, through the course of their employment here, allowed for them to transfer employers toward the end of their contract. At a certain length of time, they require to get the approval of their existing employers, and once that period has shortened, has come to the end, when they cannot get the approval towards the end, they can change an employer without getting prior approval. So, we have actually implemented all that to make sure that there is no need for the migrant workers to go back to re-apply in order to come here again.
On top of that, we are also very thankful, we are very grateful to the multiple Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in working with them and continually giving us feedback.
On top of that, our Ministry, we are now thinking about how to come up with an end-to-end eco-system built because we think that we need to have a more sustainable system, moving forward. If you look at the bulk of them, actually the majority of them stay here for more than two contracts. Quite a number of them have actually been here for more than eight years.
So, I thank the hon Member Gerald Giam for bringing this thing up. If he has more ideas, this is constructive feedback, we would welcome them as well. So, thank you very much.
Mr Speaker: Mr Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: Sir, I thank Minister Tan for making that clarification and I really appreciate the attention that is being paid to this issue.
One of the points I was trying to make was that it is important to be able to cut out this intermediary that workers have to go through. I understand that there are jurisdictional problems and being able to reach out to them when they are not in the country. But within the country itself, very often, when their contract ends and they need to find another job – I have heard what the Minister said about helping them to be able to find the next job – what I am arguing for is more transparency, not on the part of the Government but more transparency such that the workers will be able to find a job possibly on their own without seeing a need to pay somebody to find them another job.
We have to put ourselves in the shoes of these workers who are here; they do not understand the language here and they do not have the means to just hop on to MyCareersFuture and find a job. So, if there is a way that we can make it more transparent what jobs are available, then they can skip through this intermediary and they do not need to feel a need to pay this kick-back to the intermediary.
Mr Speaker: Minister Iswaran.
The Minister for Communications and Information and Information (Mr S Iswaran): Thank you, Mr Speaker. In the course of this week's debate, Members have discussed the geopolitical, technological, economic and social trends that have compelled a point of inflection upon us. These are forces that are beyond our control. Yet, we have to address the dislocations they will cause to our businesses, workers and vulnerable groups. And, also, we must position ourselves to reap longer term opportunities. So, the decisions we make now will have a lasting impact on our economy and our society.
This is not new. Last week, as I took my oath in the old Parliament House, I vividly recall the first time I did so in the same Chamber in 1997 as a newly elected Member of Parliament of the Ninth Parliament of Singapore. So, Ms Hany Soh would be perhaps surprised to know that there still are a few in this Chamber who took the oath and that includes, if I am not mistaken, the Prime Minister, Senior Minister Teo and, also, I think, Mr Shanmugam.
But what it reminded me of is the major challenges that successive Parliaments have navigated and the tenets that have helped us prevail against adversity, whilst we held steadfastly to what defined us as a nation – whether it was handling a crisis like the Asian Financial Crisis, SARS, the Global Financial Crisis, or making important shifts such as in population policy or the use of our reserves. The stakes were high and we had difficult choices to make. And each time, we were honest with Singaporeans on the choices and trade-offs. We sought to foster understanding of our fundamental challenges and forge a consensus on the way forward. And Parliament was the key forum for this, and this time is no different.
So, the question is, what will determine whether this arc of inflection in our history bends in our favour? Ultimately, it lies in how we choose to respond. In particular, I believe it depends crucially on how we balance two fundamental tenets – staying open and being inclusive. And I would like to give my take on that delicate equilibrium and the role that Parliament must play in maintaining it.
Staying open means a willingness to engage with the world, embrace novel ideas and seize new opportunities. And on the face of it, the need and benefits seem self-evident. Indeed, even in the course of this week's debate, across the aisle, we all agree that Singapore must remain open in order to create jobs and opportunities for our citizens. But this is easier said than done. Staying open means greater competition, disruption and constant adaptation to change. The outcomes are uneven. In other words, there are winners and there are losers. Societies around the world have fractured because of this.
So, being inclusive is a critical and vital complement to this. Our efforts to embrace openness must be matched by an equal, if not greater effort, to achieve an equitable distribution of the benefits and the access to opportunities, to preserve a sense of fairness.
Again, we all agree on this and that we must invest in the skills of our workers, capabilities of our enterprises, have rules of fair play and redistribute benefits. As Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat had said, we must redouble our efforts to develop everyone to their fullest potential, to take on new opportunities, flourish in their chosen pursuits.
So, where does the rubber hit the road? It is in the judgements that we have to make, in translating those principles into policies and putting them into practice; when the macro benefits do not necessarily square with the micro experience; when we have to persuade our workers and union leaders to support technological change that may threaten their jobs, but yet is in our long-term interests; when our economic agencies have to convince investors that they can rely on us to be consistent in our policies, including those that pertain to manpower, even as they make long-term commitments to Singapore.
Sustaining the dynamic economic and social balance between staying open and being inclusive is challenging in the best of times, what more at a time of economic uncertainty like the present? So, to do so, the foundation must be trust. Our citizens must know that their lives and livelihoods are always our priority, that we have their back.
As Prime Minister said on Wednesday, \"The Government will always be on the side of Singaporeans. What is the point of creating jobs for foreigners, if it does not benefit Singaporeans?\" Equally, our international partners must know that we are not just fair weather friends; that we have the political will to stay the course.
Building that trust is the duty of the Government, the Public Service, but, importantly, also of Parliament. It requires principled leadership. What we say, but also what we actively advocate in this House and ultimately what we do, must all be aligned – because they are all keenly watched.
We have painstakingly built an open and inclusive economy – that is able to create opportunities for Singaporeans by welcoming competitive enterprises and talent. It is a precious asset that we must not squander.
I was therefore reassured when the Leader of the Opposition recognised in his speech that the presence of foreign workers, and I quote, \"gives Singapore a vitality that keeps us economically relevant and also provides jobs and opportunities to our fellow Singaporeans\". I think this is an important signal and a good starting point.
In contrast, I was troubled when Non-Constituency Member of Parliament Leong Mun Wai lamented that we do not have a homegrown CEO for DBS. By all means, let us passionately argue the case to do more for Singaporeans. But, as Parliamentarians, let us also be careful about what our words convey; in this case, the message we send to those who – to paraphrase Mr S Rajaratnam – have chosen out of conviction to become citizens of Singapore.
How has our openness brought benefits for Singaporeans? Our portfolio of Free Trade Agreements or FTAs is a good example. As Minister Chan Chun Sing shared earlier this week, our network of FTAs is greater than the sum of its parts; each and every FTA adds to the network effect. Our network of 25 FTAs provides our companies preferential access to economies that together, represent more than 85% of global GDP. They also have rules that protect our companies' investments.
This combination of opportunity and stability, among other things has helped attract over 750 foreign companies to establish their regional headquarters in Singapore with nearly 30,000 employees. They also generate demand for local businesses and ancillary legal, financial and other services. We have also helped our SMEs to benefit from this market access; and invested in our people so that they can take on regional and global roles.
Digital Economy Agreements or DEAs are another way we are striving to keep Singapore open and connected. These agreements are the new frontier in the global economic architecture. To strengthen our hub status in the digital world, Singapore is actively developing an international network of DEAs.
Clear and harmonised rules, as well as interoperable standards and systems, will enhance cross border digital trade. With an open digital trade architecture and safeguards, data can flow more freely and securely across borders, between countries. This will help more businesses manage their global platforms and digital services out of Singapore.
These DEAs will give a further boost to our infocomm sector. It is one of our most promising growth areas, offering interesting and attractive jobs and careers for Singaporeans. From 2011 to 2018, our infocomm sector registered a 7.1% average annual growth rate in nominal value added to our economy. COVID-19 has given the sector, in an ironic way, a further boost, by accelerating the focus on the cloud, connectivity, collaboration because of remote working, and cybersecurity.
An estimated 22,000 jobs were created in the last three years alone with a median gross salary of about $6,000. More broadly, the total employment in the infocomm sector has grown over 11% from 2016 to 2019. Despite this rapid growth, the proportion of locals has held steady at 70%. This is no mean feat, especially when you consider that the fast growth has also resulted in an intense global competition for scarce talent in this sector.
We want to further increase opportunities for Singaporeans in the sector. But our talent policy must take into account the variegated landscape of the tech eco-system, with firms of varying sizes and business models, at different stages of growth, with diverse needs and thus, different staff profiles.
There are the digital giants like Google, Facebook and Amazon, who have anchored their regional headquarters in Singapore. These firms are at the forefront of global digital innovation and are critical to our ecosystem. They hire many Singaporeans, both here and overseas. But, because of the nature and scope of their business, they need a globally diverse talent pool; for example in product development and some of the regional headquarter's functions.
Therefore, the proportion of locals may not be as high as the national average, now or even in the steady state. For example, firms like Google and Twitter have APAC engineering teams here. The talent they require include highly skilled product managers and AI scientists, who are globally scarce.
In the long term, these companies can help Singapore become an innovation centre and catalyse the growth of our local tech ecosystem. Google has collaborated with us on the programme Skills Ignition SG, which will train up to 3,000 Singaporeans for roles in growth areas like digital marketing and cloud technology.
We also have local unicorns like Grab and SEA. They started with and maintained a Singaporean core, but with their rapid international expansion, they too need a strong complement of regional and global talent to be able to compete. At the same time, their increased reach allows Singaporeans in these firms to venture overseas and gain global experience.
Our Large Local Enterprises like Singtel start in the sense from the other end of the spectrum, with a high proportion of local because of where they began. As they grow internationally, and branching into new tech areas like cybersecurity and cloud based services, they increasingly are seeking out global talent to complement their Singaporean Core.
Then there are the IT services companies, which play an important role in supporting many other sectors such as finance. Here, as Minister Josephine Teo has explained in detail, there is more that we can and will do to reduce concentration and over-reliance on foreign manpower while strengthening the pipeline of jobs for Singaporeans.
Some had suggested that we could offshore some of their functions as a solution. I want to echo Minister Ong Ye Kung's caution. This is not straightforward, as often there are linkages across different functions. We should also recognised that with increasing digitalisation, that the scope to work remotely has increased and this, as Minister of State Alvin Tan talked about, earlier this week, can work in our favour or against us. Do they want to locate those services, the people providing them in Singapore, or would they rather do it remotely. And we want them to choose in our favour, when the jobs are the type of jobs that we want Singaporeans to have.
So, we need a differentiated approach for this diversity of companies in the infocomm sector. Our challenge is to work with these companies to continue creating career opportunities for Singaporeans, while recognising that we must allow them to have the necessary access to talents that are diverse, especially in emerging areas, in order to strengthen our overall position as a digital tech hub.
As with globalisation, the digital transformation of our economy must also be inclusive with opportunities for every worker, regardless of his or her background; and every business, regardless of its size or stage of growth. MCI's vision is for every business to be digitally-empowered, for every worker to be digitally-skilled and every citizen to be digitally-connected.
We are intensifying our efforts, working with the industry and unions to transform sectors, ease business transitions, create opportunities for jobseekers and reskill workers. Indeed, the digital economy is a bright spot, offering more than 18,000 jobs and skills opportunities under the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package.
Our goal is to have as many skilled Singaporeans as possible to take up these roles. That is why we are scaling up our efforts, both in pre-employment and continuing education. In the last three years, our Autonomous Universities (AUs) trained about 1,000 local ICT graduates annually. This has almost trebled and today, the undergraduates' enrollment collectively, is about 2,800. We also have around 4,500 Polytechnics and ITE graduates annually.
The Tech Skills Accelerator or TeSA progamme has successfully placed about 6,600 Singaporeans in tech jobs to date. Looking ahead, IMDA is working to place and train an additional 5,500 Singaporeans in good tech jobs over the next two to three years in functions like digital marketing, software engineering, cybersecurity and data analytics, including 2,500 mid-career professionals aged 40 and above.
At the enterprise level, we have enhanced the Productivity Solutions Grant and Enterprise Development Grant, to help our companies, adopt digital solutions and succeed. For SMEs in particular, we have the Start Digital, Go Digital and Grow Digital programmes to help them, as the names suggests, at different stages of growth, from when they are formed to as they scale, and eventually as they venture overseas.
We also want to ensure that our digitalisation journey includes every citizen. As such, as MCI has stated in our addendum to the President's address, we will ensure that all Singaporeans have a baseline level of affordable digital access and digital skills. We will help Singaporeans acquire the tools and skills necessary to participate meaningfully in our digital economy and society. These include affordable devices, mobile and broadband connectivity, e-payments tools and bank accounts, SingPass and a National Digital Identity to transact securely,
We will provide targeted support for our seniors and low-income households. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann has shared extensively about our digital inclusion efforts, including the Seniors Go Digital Programme and the SG Digital Office, a mobilisation of 1,000 Digital Ambassadors and many more volunteers to galvanise a national movement towards digital transformation.
In short, we will spare no effort in making sure that no one is left behind in our digital transformation efforts.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I have outlined in detail how we seek stay open and be inclusive in the ICT sector, in order to create opportunities for Singaporeans. We do this in every sector, through the work of the Future Economy Committee chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Heng, the National Jobs Council chaired Senior Minister Tharman and, indeed, a slew of other efforts.
Over the past few days, we have witnessed intense debates on a range of issues – our policy priorities, whether and what we should change, and specific measures to be considered. We have articulated the policy choices and the aspirations and concerns of Singaporeans. In this important and ongoing effort to strike a balance balance between staying open and being inclusive, and building a better future for our citizens, I believe Parliament can and should play a significant role in three ways.
The first is to be the Voice of the People. The Leader of the Opposition used the Latin term for it, I will stick to English. The aim is this: we must express the hopes, aspirations, concerns and fears of our citizens at highest forum in our country. But, we should not and must not stop there.
We must also be the Voice of Reason. To be candid about the challenges we face, honest about the choices and trade-offs, not just about what we want but also what we have to give up to get it. And ultimately, what we believe to be in the long-term interest of our citizens.
And finally, and perhaps most importantly, we must be the Voice of Hope. Now more than ever, as we deal with unprecedented challenges and seek solutions, we must work with Singaporeans to draw confidence from what we have built up over the past five-and-a-half decades, the challenges that we have faced and overcome, have deep conviction in our strengths and capabilities, and look to the future with belief.
If we do this, then I think we would have made a signal contribution to our nation building efforts, with a deep engagement of our citizens.
In that spirit of deep engagement, we have paid close attention to calls to broaden access to Parliamentary proceedings, for example through live broadcasts or streaming online. This is a point that has been made in the past by Mr Pritam Singh, Mr Leon Perera – I think in this Parliamentary session – Mr Faisal Manap. We had others who have articulated this and, in fact, in today's Forum page in The Straits Times, Mr Wong Weng Fai has also made this plaintive call.
The former Leader of the House and others have previously explained that we already provide timely and comprehensive access to Parliamentary proceedings. Anyone can watch these proceedings in person from the Strangers’ Gallery. Every speech and exchange in Parliament is recorded and made available online. Clips, categorised by topic and speaker, are uploaded within hours of each sitting. The Hansard is a full written record of Parliamentary proceedings and is available online. These already give us the full benefits of transparency, accountability and accessibility.
We have been reluctant to go further for both practical and policy reasons. Demand for such live broadcasts, even of major speeches, is generally low – only 10% of that of free-to-air television news, for example.
Parliament is a forum for serious debate on national issues. The debate in Parliament should be vigorous, but the tone should be sober. An element of cut-and-thrust is unavoidable, even necessary because Members want to show Singaporeans that their concerns are being expressed, and questions asked and answered in Parliament. However, it is equally important that Members come to grips with the issues and their complexities and not simply play to the gallery. Live broadcasts risk compromising this.
At this point, I am sure Members of the Opposition think this is same line as before. And I want to say that we still hold these reservations. Nevertheless, we also note the global and technological trends which have made online streaming commonplace and seen legislatures live streaming their proceedings in many countries. The Government therefore agrees in principle to the live streaming of Parliamentary proceedings. My Ministry will study the technical and implementation details. Our aim, as always, will be to achieve transparency, accountability and accessibility while preserving the integrity and dignity of Parliamentary proceedings. Mr Speaker, I know that you too are supportive of this move and we will announce details soon.
Mr Speaker, Sir, to conclude, at a time that is fraught with anxiety about our future, as we take on unprecedented challenges and seek out novel solutions, and as we draw on our strengths as a people, I look forward to the Fourteenth Parliament of Singapore serving with distinction as the Voice of the People, the Voice of Reason and the Voice of Hope. Sir, I support the Motion. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his speech and the point about live Parliamentary broadcasts. I welcome the Minister's comments that the Government is going to look into this matter.
Since the issue has been brought up every now and then, my colleagues and I have reflected on the Government's reasons for not proceeding with live broadcasts. I note Minister has shared that Government still has those reservations. I believe the Senior Minister of State in the previous session, Mr Chee Hong Tat, used the word \"theatrics\" – there was a concern about Parliament being turned into that sort of a forum.
I understand and my colleagues and I have tried to reflect on this. But it is our view that that element of theatre will be exposed and the public will conclude fairly quickly, if not immediately, fairly quickly who is here to turn Parliament into a theatre and who is here to be serious about Parliament as a forum where serious matters are discussed. So, I just wanted to make that point and hope it provides some assurance for the Minister in his deliberations on this matter.
Mr Speaker: Minister.
Mr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his assurance, which is given in earnest. And I think we all accept that all of us in this House are committed to ensuring that the dignity and integrity of Parliamentary proceedings is preserved, notwithstanding how it is conveyed to a larger audience.
However, I think it is important to also bear in mind the experience of other countries does not give us a lot of reason to be optimistic, in terms of the tone and nature of debates in Parliament and the impact such streaming or broadcasting will have. Is there a causal relationship? We do not know for sure. But there is reason to have concerns and that is why I articulated what I did. So, what it means is that at the end of the day it is not axiomatic one way or the other, and it depends on all of us as Parliamentarians to maintain the decorum, the dignity and the integrity of our proceedings through vigorous debate, based on facts and focused on the long-term interests of Singaporeans.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Speaker. In response to Minister Iswaran's point, I would like to reiterate and confirm that PSP is committed to an open and inclusive society and economy. However, we have differences with the Government, probably, with regard to the many issues on how we want to go about achieving that. And I think this Parliament has started the ball rolling to get us in that direction.
Over the last few days, I think we have debated on the issues of foreigners and jobs. There are differences there. PSP would like to see this population growth being slowed down, would to see a cap on the foreigners, at least for the immediate future, and to ensure there is skills transfer. The disappointment that I expressed —
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong, are you seeking clarification or are you making a new speech?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: I am seeking clarification on —
Mr Speaker: Come to the point, please.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: — on the point that our disappointment on DBS still not having the homegrown CEO now is because of the process. I want to ask the Minister whether the debate that we are conducting over the last few days when we are questioning certain issues, rebalancing certain issues that we are looking for is against the spirit that he is trying to explain to us just now.
Mr Speaker: Minister, can you attempt to respond to that?
Mr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, I thank the NCMP for his clarification. Let me start by saying this. The process of reviewing and evolving our policy predates the Fourteenth Parliament, predates the Thirteenth Parliament. It is, in fact, an on-going venture and if you look at any one of our policies – and the foreign worker policy, the manpower policy is no exception to this – it is an evolutionary effort because it has to respond to the economic environment, the population's needs and concerns; and we have to then adapt and move along.
Indeed, in this Parliament, if the Member had heard the detailed exposition by the Minister for Manpower, for example, we are taking even further measures. And the Prime Minister has already spelt out that the Government will look at various policies in detail, but never compromising on the fundamentals and always keeping our eye on the long-term interests of Singaporeans.
So, the issue is not about process. The process can continue. And, indeed, in my comment, I have made the point that we can always advocate the case for doing more for Singaporeans and I have no problems with that.
The issue is when we lament that a Singaporean occupying a certain position is somehow not homegrown. Then, I think we really have to ask ourselves the question: as Parliamentarians, as elected representatives, what is the message we are sending to our citizens? I am not sure what the Members means by homegrown, but all our citizens but also, in particular, to those who have, as I said, out of conviction, chosen to be Singaporeans, given up their home citizenship to take up Singapore Citizenship. And also, what does it say to those who are the spouses, the children of Singapore Citizens who have become naturalised Singaporeans?
So, the question I would put to Mr Leong is after this debate and all the information that has been shared, does he still lament that DBS does not have a homegrown CEO? Does he acknowledge that as one example – and I am only talking about DBS because he raised it – whether he acknowledges that, in fact, much has been done in the organisation. There are, in fact, a large number of Singaporeans at the senior levels. In fact, this is a clarification made by one of our colleagues Derrick Goh. Unfortunately, the Member was not in the Chamber when the clarification was made.
Mr Speaker: Mr Leong.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for the clarification. I still hold on to my disappointment. I still keep to that, although I do appreciate the clarification given by Member Derrick Goh on the senior management of DBS Bank. In terms of why I want to keep to my statement is because when I gave the speech, when people listened to the speech, including the new citizens and foreigners in Singapore, they would have appreciated that I said it was over a period of 22 years. Why did the Government not put in certain safeguards in the process or certain other rules to ensure that we have the skills transfer. Localisation is not the word anymore, but at least to ensure that Singaporeans will be groomed to take over the job.
In that context, I do not think that it will taken very, very negatively by the international community. Singapore is open enough. Foreigners know that we are very, very open. In fact, if we failed to do certain things to safeguard the interests of Singaporeans, I am afraid we may be laughed at.
Mr Speaker: Mr Ong Ye Kung.
The Minister for Transport (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think I have to reiterate some of the things that I have said on Tuesday, when I explained and traced back – and I went into some detail – how from the 1960s, Singapore started as a foreign exchange or FX trading centre. Then, from there, the first banks that came in and did FX trading, they were foreign banks. Bank of America was the first. Gradually, we brought in investment banking, wealth management, insurance, so on and so forth. Now, we are doing green finance and fintech.
That whole process started 40 to 50 years ago. That process started when we brought in foreign expertise and then put in a lot of effort to groom local talent. Grow our own timber, learn from the foreign expertise and from there, many of our own rose up to take senior positions.
I gave quite a lot of data requested by various Members to show that we are holding our own by being open to the world and I think that is the best way for us to grow, that is the best way for us to serve Singaporeans. Do not make ourselves a pond. A small pond. Live in the pond and feel that we are great because we are a big fish in the pond. But open out to the lagoon, open out to the sea. Have a much more exciting and diverse eco-system but also invest in our own people and hold our own. That is what we have been doing for decades. But we have never reached a stage where we say the only way to achieve this – set the quota. Set the rule. It must be a Singaporean CEO and born here, before we declare it a success. I think that would be the wrong approach.
Mr Speaker: Minister S Iswaran, would you like to add on.
Mr S Iswaran: Mr Speaker, I think Minister Ong has made the point very clear.
I just want to go back to a point I made in my speech. As Parliamentarians, we must be not just the Voice of the People. That is important, which I think the Member has been articulating – the concerns of the people that he has spoken to. But we must also be the Voice of Reason.
Do not take that lightly. Because what we say cannot be unsaid. It is there for the record, for the future and everyone. Singaporeans, new citizens or Singapore born. Others who are here will all be looking at this. I think we in this House as elected representatives must hold ourselves up to a higher standard. If we do not, then I think we fail our duties as Members of Parliament and I think we ultimately do a disservice to Singaporeans.
Mr Speaker: Mr Chee Hong Tat.
The Senior Minister of State for Foreign Affairs and Transport (Mr Chee Hong Tat): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, I would like to just clarify a factual point on something that Mr Pritam Singh mentioned earlier. He said I used the word \"theatrics\". I think we can check Hansard. I do not recall using this word in my response to Mr Pritam Singh when we were having a discussion on this issue when I was with the Ministry of Communications and Information.
If my memory serves me correctly, I think we were talking about whether we should have live broadcast of Parliament proceedings and I was explaining to Mr Singh that the demand for such broadcasts was not high. And then later, we had a discussion about whether instead of a broadcast, maybe it can be done through live-streaming. And again, if my memory serves me correctly, because this was several years ago, I did say that this is something that we can discuss and review. So, I just wanted to clarify that factual point. I do not think I used the word \"theatrics\" in my response to Mr Singh. Thank you, Sir.
Mr Speaker: Mr Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh: To the Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat, I do apologise if indeed my memory failed me. For some reason, that word \"theatrics\" was in my mind. But I think the larger point was about concern that Members of Parliament would play to the gallery. I believe that was the point but rest assured, I do not mean to misrepresent what the Senior Minister of State said at that point.
Mr Speaker: That is why the Hansard is even more effective than live-streaming. [Laughter.] Dr Tan See Leng.
Dr Tan See Leng: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to raise a point of clarification to Mr Leong. I think that this whole idea of talking about using DBS as an example, maybe I would like to share a perspective having come from the private sector and especially having run a public listed company.
Public listed companies have their own boards. They have independent directors on the board and there are committees, sub committees, under the ambit of the main board. Some of the committees are nominating and remuneration committees, and you have the audit and risk management committee.
All of the transactions, I would say, are done at arm's length basis and the process of selection of a CEO and managing director of a company is subject to a very rigorous process of going through an international search firm, by virtue of meritocratic principles and the best person for the job.
There are many listed companies, which I think many funds have invested in. I think Mr Leong himself as the CEO of Timbre Capital, a private equity firm, would have made significant investments in terms of wanting to secure returns for his limited partners (LPs) and people who have invested in his fund.
Perhaps, he can clarify that in companies where we clearly state quotas or perhaps, a certain percentage of the senior management has to be of a certain nationality, would it be something that his private equity firm would freely and happily invest in?
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Thank you, Speaker. I thank Minister Tan. When we do our investments, we actually look more at – of course, now, we are talking about private equity investment, venture capital investment. We are more concerned whether the company is – when we want to invest in a particular market – we are more concerned whether the company really has the local connections and so by implication, whether they have enough local talents, including the CEO on the company. That is what we are more concerned about in terms of making the investment decision.
Mr Speaker: Thank you. Mr Pritam Singh.
Mr Pritam Singh: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just a quick matter of propriety, in view of what Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat has said and he is indeed right. My memory on the matter was inaccurate and that attribution to him was also inaccurate. I refer to a letter sent by the press secretary of the former Leader of the House, Minister Grace Fu, and this is dated 15 May 2020. This is what was said in that letter to the press: \"Live broadcast of Parliament risks turning the House into a form of theatre and do not add to the transparency,\" the spokesman for the Leader of the House Grace Fu said on Friday, 15 May. This was in response to a letter from a TODAY reader. So, just to make the point clear to Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat. And to put on record, my incorrect attribution.
Mr Speaker: Thank you. Order. I would like to invest the next 20 minutes in a tea break. I propose to take a break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.00 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.40 pm until 4.00 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.00 pm.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
Debate on the President's Address
[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Miss Rachel Ong (West Coast): Mr Speaker, may I express my appreciation to the President for her thoughtful Address to our nation. May I also thank our residents in Telok Blangah Division for welcoming our team and I.
Mr Lim Hng Kiang has served our nation with distinction over the past 29 years, and our residents and I appreciate him so much and we propose to build on his work. What a privilege it has also been to work with a team of committed volunteers and leaders across the West Coast GRC. To the Public Service agencies and NGOs who often go the extra mile to support the needs of our people, we thank you.
The Singapore we have today is a nation by design. At the SUTD Ministerial Forum in 2018, our Prime Minister Lee noted that nothing we have in Singapore is by chance. Our racial harmony, economic growth, international standing are the products of deep deliberation of issues, leading to options that were proto-typed, tested and delivered.
Without using the term, our founding fathers employed design thinking approaches to overcome the many impossibilities to be the Singapore of today. The challenge of re-inventing Singapore continues. I believe we now have the opportunity to become a nation by design, not just through the collective efforts of our leaders, but also by the collective efforts of a people empowered to live a life by design.
What does it mean to live a life by design? And how might we empower our people to do so? These are the two questions that I would like to explore this afternoon.
The first – a life by design. In the past 25 years, serving in the corporate and social sector, I remain energised by two things: to see every youth succeed and to see adults flourish in all that they do. A life by design starts when a person's passion and skills intersect with the needs of the world – also known as \"finding your niche\". Here is what I notice when one is operating in their niche. You know who you are and who you are not. You are energised by what you do and you know the people group you are called to serve.
When a person finds his or her niche, learning is no longer out of necessity, but a desire. Discipline flows naturally. You can continually seek out new opportunities to grow so that you can give your best, whether it is at home front, school, work or the community. You make these places better than when you first found it.
The second question – how might we empower a life by design? Mr Speaker, may I propose three ways we can empower individuals to live a life by design. The first is to clarify possibilities of growth at every age and life stage. I have shared recently about a colleague of mine who, 10 years ago, then in her late 40s, joined our team. Her question during the interview was \"Am I too old to start a new career in a new sector?\" We assured her, \"Your age qualifies you. It is precisely your age and your experience that we value.\" Today, at 58, she is flourishing at work. Her experience, competence and who she is, are impacting lives, honouring both people and results. We continue to cheer her on, believing for even greater years ahead of her! We often hear this: \"You are too old to do this\" or \"You are too young to do that\". There never seemed to be a right age. But if we do not see age as a barrier but rather as a qualifier, then there is nothing stopping us in exploring new possibilities for our lives.
We do not have to be afraid. Your age qualifies you. Instead of focusing on limitations, what if we could help our family and our residents identify what they can do at every age and every season of their lives? This is not about having a positive mindset, but a mindset of possibilities. We do not have to be limited to traditional career paths. Entrepreneurship, volunteerism, participating in the gig economy are also productive options to discovering our niche. Whether a person is a young graduate, stay-at-home mum, working single, working parent or retiree, we can carry valuable skillsets that our community needs. We should support our people to build a holistic life portfolio instead of just a work-focused one.
They should include competencies beyond formal employment, such as transferable skills and experiences from care-giving, volunteering and personal interests we pursue. A familiar example is our stay-at-home mothers, who may aspire to work from home because of the recent work trends. Many are skilled in wide-ranging areas but may not be sure of their fit in the workforce.
If we continue to find ways to help our people to consider alternative pathways and identify their full range of skills at different life stages, we open up new possibilities for them and, in the process, strengthen our Singapore Core.
The second thing we can do is to provide opportunities to explore possibilities. A life by design requires deliberate exploration. Time and space must be given to explore. My friend Mag was in the real estate industry for 20 years before making a switch to become a speech therapist.
This was not an overnight choice. As she crossed her 10-year mark in the industry, she could not see herself doing this work for the rest of her life. In the journey of exploring possibilities, she was encouraged by friends to volunteer to help children. Mag discovered then that she really enjoyed being with children. She went on to take an early childhood education degree, which led to an advanced diploma in special education and, subsequently, a Masters in Speech Therapy.
Today, Mag is 50 years old and has been a speech therapist for the past five years and she loves her work. But her story will not end here. As a hobby, she has taken up photography, and I am inspired by what she said recently: \"Who knows what will happen post-speech therapy?\" Mag had time and space to explore possibilities and a boldness to design her life.
We recognise that not everyone will be able to make time and space for themselves like Mag. For many, this space has to be created for them. We must build school and work cultures that allow time, mental and physical space for our people to pilot-test their growing vocational interests in the same field or different ones. At the same time, we need to improve towards a work culture that respects the need for rest and recreation. For those who face social and economic barriers to access these resources, we will need to work towards a sustainable solution.
Mr Speaker, a life by design does not just explore current possibilities alone but creates new ones.
This brings us to the third point – nurture creativity that opens possibilities that are yet to exist. Singapore has a super resource still to be maximised – the creative capacities of our people. As oil is fuel to industry, so is creativity to the mind. The difference is this: creativity is renewable. The more it is used, the more of itself it generates.
But the opposite is also true, that if we do not tap into the creative capacities of our people, it will diminish and we will miss out on the multi-fold possibilities for our people and our nation. Together with our people, we can build a workforce that not only takes up jobs in the new economy, but also creates jobs in economies yet to exist.
We can and should be intentional to complement training critical thinking skills with creative thinking ones. These will have broad implications on not just the \"what\" of education and training, but the \"how\" of doing so, requiring intentional shifts in our PET and CET approaches.
Mr Speaker, may I summarise the three ways to empower our people to live a life by design.
First, we can support our people to identify possibilities at every age. Second, provide time, space and resource to explore them. And third, nurture creativity to form new possibilities for Singapore. I am fully persuaded that if our people live a life by design, we will uncover a new strength of Singapore yet to be seen before. Our workforce will be increasingly versatile, our families and communities will flourish. May we continue the legacy of our forefathers to be a nation by design, transform from the inside out. With this, Mr Speaker, I support the Motion. [Applause.]
Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong (Jurong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion of Thanks to the President. I would like to declare my interest as a Director of an investment company.
Being the final speaker on the list, you have given me the privilege to listen to my colleagues' full-hearted views on what Singapore needs to do going forward. We debated on Singapore's immediate concerns surrounding COVID-19, the Singaporean Core, support for SMEs and strengthening of social compact. We shared our hope for the future in emerging trends, sustainability and sci-fi.
In this speech, I wish to focus on relevance. This requires an exploration of our history, a deep reflection of who we are, a stoic acceptance of reality, and a call to stand united in our relevance in the year 3000 and beyond.
There is a Chinese saying: \"夫以铜为镜，可以正衣冠；以史为镜，可以知兴替；以人为镜，可以知得失.\" To better reflect on our future, it is not enough to dip our fingers into the changing of winds. To build our starship, we must weigh anchor, raise the sails and adventure to the past of Bugis pinisi, Chinese junk, Arab dhow and Chola kappal.
Singapore had a history steeped in uncertainty. We were tossed in the storms of relentless competition, and weathered storms of successes and failures. Please bear with me for a moment as I recount what is often forgotten.
Earliest known settlements arose in maritime Southeast Asia more than a thousand years ago. Temasek then was one of many ports. In the west, there was Lambri in present day Aceh between the 13th and 14th centuries. And in the east and north of Singapore, Langkasuka in today's Kedah and Tambralinga in south Thailand. Competition was fierce and there was a fight for relevance and survival.
Temasek grew in relevance at the end of the 13th century. It did well by being part of sub-regional systems of economic exchange between the peoples in the hills and coastal settlers, and by connecting these local and regional networks internationally – its true, unique competitive advantage to exist.
Wang Dayuan, a Yuan Dynasty traveller, documented his travels to South Asia and Temasek. In his book, he recollected that Temasek offered products that distinguished it from other ports. It was \"top-quality hornbill casques, lakawood and cotton\". I emphasise here – \"top quality\". Hornbill casques, a highly sought after substitute for ivory, were found only in the Malay Peninsula, Temasek, Borneo and the Riau Archipelago. Lakawood was used as an incense, a red dye and as a disinfectant. Interestingly, it was available in 19 other regional ports, but only five offered good-quality Lakawood, and Temasek was one of them.
Temasek's open and connected nature, coupled with its competitive edge, allowed it to thrive and prosper within a short span of 50 years. But Temasek's prosperity eventually waned. It reflected several factors.
For one, its success drew much interest from regional powers, including Ayuttaya to the north and the Majapahits based in Java. According to some records, without the ability to defend herself, Temasek was brought under the influence of Ayutthaya and its revenue was forwarded to the court. Temasek was also overly dependent on trade with the declining Yuan Dynasty in China.
To exacerbate the decline of Temasek, a new port settlement at the Melaka River, seized opportunities offered by the new Ming Court, fundamentally changing trading networks. This led the merchants who were previously based in Temasek to hollow out and move to the new port-settlement. Internal conflicts that led to a foreign invasion dealt the final blow.
Eventually, Temasek was ceded to Melaka in exchange for an annual payment of gold and was swapped away like a common chattel, with no control over its own destiny. For the next hundred years. Temasek, became nothing more than a feeder port.
Mr Speaker, Sir, it is now a brave new world. The age old threats have not disappeared but are supplanted by pandemics propagated by pathogens – created or evolved. Discord has moved online, anonymous and lethal, disrupting our hard-earned relationships. An interconnected world makes us vulnerable to the dictates of others. And to add to this conundrum, climate change poses a threat to our future generations.
Mr Speaker, Sir, we must be a nation that embrace the realities of this changing world. Only with this understanding, can we seek relevance. We are a city-state, competing with the most driven. Relevance is not a simplistic yes or no, one or zero. We must remember that competition is relative. Being relevant today does not equate relevance tomorrow. This is the perennial Darwinian test. Singapore's Future must be relevant to the world.
We must have strong and deep relationships. I agree with Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat that Singapore needs to find new ways to be a vital node, with rich and deep interconnections with the rest of the world. Our international and regional outreach must continue. This responsibility is not just of the state's but on every Singaporean. We must believe that all of us can be ambassadors of Singapore. We will develop friendships, advocate for opportunities, and explore areas of cooperation that makes Singapore relevant.
We must operate as an ecosystem of differentiated capabilities. We can no longer operate linearly, as a single company, a single domain or group. We must collaborate, and build one another's strength to be a formidable entity that is multi-faceted.
As an example, legal services have been expensive and time-consuming. The emergence of Machine Learning and AI have changed the legal landscape. We are now in a digital age of cross-disciplinary collaboration where lawyers and technologists will work hand in hand and new positions such as legal engineers are becoming part of the profession.
This next example struck a personal chord with me as I first published a peer reviewed journal research on Bi-jective Neural Networks just 15 years ago, building blocks of learning algorithms.
SmartLaw, a home-grown company, has developed an AI tool that leverages powerful natural language self-learning algorithms, which can sift the most relevant references and judgments, from an immense number of documents, within split seconds. SmartLaw is working closely with local law firms to create competitive solutions. According to market estimates, the APAC legal industry is a $100 plus billion market that is growing at 5% CAGR and Singapore legal industry is about $2 plus billion. There is a huge potential for this industry which will create more jobs for Singaporeans.
The most successful companies today are established because of their ability to develop an ecosystem of capabilities. Think Google and Alibaba. They are able to build layers of different capabilities and products, enabling their users to remain within their ecosystem, adding to their relevance and resilience. This must be of the future. A dynamic and resilient ecosystem that is differentiated in all levels, layers, and domains.
Mr Speaker, Sir, to remain relevant, we must strive to do exceptionally well in whatever we choose to do. The years volunteering in the grassroots and organisations such as Tasek Jurong, enforced my belief that we must continue to be open, and open the world for our young to a range of possibilities. We should encourage our children to learn how to learn, to have omni-directional capabilities. I am heartened by the emphasis in the Addendum to the President by MOE on broad based common core curricula.
At the same time, we must encourage expectation that, it is crucial to achieve mastery in the subject matter of choice. Mastery cannot be purchased or outsourced. It requires a culture of embracing its arduousness.
This discussion brings to mind Dr Mark Lim, a teacher with a passion for physics. He is a co-founder of Aliena, a homegrown space tech company, which literally believes that the sky is not the limit. The deep space plasma engines that Aliena is developing aims to bring Singapore's first satellite to the Moon and beyond. In addition, Aliena has commissioned the region's largest privately owned jet propulsion test facility and nanosatellite integration centre, promoting an eco-system for the co-development of critical satellite platforms.
A good example would be the collaboration between local IoT company NuSpace and Aliena. Together, they developed the world's smallest nanosatellite platform that is equipped with a fully functional Hall-Effect thruster or better known as an Ion thruster, with record breaking operational power. This satellite will be deployed out of a SpaceX Falcon 9 in second quarter of 2021.
I say this with great enthusiasm because I too was a plasma dynamics researcher 16 years ago. Then, we replaced mechanical flight control surfaces using plasma dynamics. Aliena and Dr Mark is a prime example of how through the pursuit of mastery, young Singapore companies and individuals can leverage on expertise within their domains to do well on a global stage and to break new ground in emerging frontiers such as space, And how an ecosystem fosters the translation of technology to the market in a domain that seem inaccessible.
Mr Speaker, Sir, to remain relevant, we must invest in the future of technology. Through history, technology has never failed to contribute toward the evolution of industries and our way of life. With rapid scientific discoveries and high tech engineering, cities and societies, if complacent, can become irrelevant and disconnected from the rest of the world.
We must be courageous to be the leader in emerging technologies. Technologies such as Quantum computing, AI and advanced materials will eventually shape the future.
Mainstream quantum computing may arrive sooner than anticipated and we must be ready. Its value extends beyond solving problems faster than conventional computers and holds untapped potential to address global challenges, including climate change, cyber-crime, discovery of drugs and vaccines.
Just last year, Google's quantum computer achieved a significant milestone when it solved a 10,000-year problem in just mere seconds. From a medical standpoint, this would enable researchers to crunch data on more than 40,000 genes from 17,000 genetic samples, approximately 2.5 billion genetic combinations. This effort may better allow us to better understand the COVID-19 virus strain and to synthesize a viable vaccine. In fact, this was what happened at Oak Ridge National Lab in Tennessee just recently.
When the first generation of computers became commercially available, it revolutionised the workforce and created new fields of jobs that never existed. We must be ready to ride on the next wave of opportunities.
Singapore leaders have had immense foresight. Twenty years ago, in the desire to remain relevant, we started our biomedical industry. Today, the world faces shortage in technology and equipment in the fight against COVID. My work involves addressing this gap, and I witnessed how Singapore is able to bring to bear capabilities in diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines. For diagnostics, we developed the Resolute test with Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Diagnostic Development (DxD) Hub and A-Star. C-Pass with Prof Linfa with Duke-NUS. In Therapeutics, we have Tychan, Hummingbird and DSO.
Years ago, had we not had the ambition, the foresight, the guts to make these investments, and put in the hard work, all these would just be a pipe dream, and Singapore would have been dependent on others for survival.
This courage must be coupled with sound strategies reflected in MTI's Addendum to the President's Address. I am heartened by the emphasis. I agree with many of our colleagues including the hon Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Melvin Yong, Mr Don Wee and Mr Edward Chia, that these decisions will need to support local SMEs, the bedrock of our economy. I agree as well with the hon Mr Patrick Tay, that economic incentives will need to result in proactive and sustained knowledge and skills transfer to Singaporeans.
Mr Speaker, Sir, to remain relevant, we must also have a deep understanding of our national identity. No empire, nation state or city state existed in the same form forever and the important factor is distilling the essence of being Singaporean, such that the very core of who we are, does not wane and flow with the tides of time. Deep trust and mutual respect will need to form the basis of the relationship between fellow Singaporeans, earned through the help and sacrifices that we give one another. We need to maintain a profound respect for plurality in Singapore and find shared layers above this diversity.
As I listen to matters highlighted in this debate, I want to acknowledge the tough decisions and hardiness of those who came before us, which under wise stewardship, brought Singapore peace and prosperity. As a nation, we were never endowed with the best cards, but we never used it as an excuse from what needs to be done. Singapore's progress is not build on mere rhetoric. Singaporeans are resilient people that have weathered numerous storms. Today, there is a new fight.
Mr Speaker, Sir, as you reminded us last week, \"All hands on deck, as we embark on this next lap of journey together\", and indeed I hold the same wishes of \"god speed, fair winds and following seas, as we seek safe habour from this almighty storm that we find ourselves in\".
Prime Minister Lee's statement struck a very deep chord in me, \"Jewel will shine again, Changi will thrive again and SIA will be a great way to fly once more. The economy will prosper anew and Singapore's children and grandchildren will continue marching forward to build a fairer, ever more just and equal society\". I am hopeful.
We will be relevant. We are constantly looking into the future but are well aware of our history. We are small, but courageous in our ambition. We are diverse but united in our cause.
Mr Speaker, Sir, We will not be relevant unless we make ourselves relevant. We will be ordinary unless we make ourselves extraordinary. We will, prevail. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Minister Desmond Lee.
The Minister for National Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Speaker, Sir, this House has spent the past week debating the Government's response to COVID-19 and sharing their views for Singapore under the auspices of this Debate on the President's Address.
It has been an engaging discussion, with many ideas and suggestions.
It is clear to us all that COVID-19 has completely transformed our reality. Externally, Singapore's position – economically, geopolitically – is under threat. We are disproportionately affected by the global nature of the crisis and tensions between bigger powers. Within Singapore, our lives have been significantly disrupted and businesses have had to adapt rapidly to survive.
Many of us hope for a quick recovery back to \"normal\". We are finding ways to live and work with the cloud of the pandemic over us, and stay physically and emotionally healthy. But I doubt that we will return to life as it used to be. We must adapt to the waves of change that are upon us.
I would like to make three points as we reflect on the debate and think about what the future holds for Singapore.
First, we have to focus our attention on our immediate challenges but also prepare ourselves for the longer term. Second, we must renew our compact as a society with justice and fairness as our pledge. Third, we must engage one another well, both in Parliament but also outside Parliament, and translate our conversations into action.
We are still in the midst of an unfolding crisis. The pandemic is still raging across the world without any clear end in sight. Globally, more than 25 million people have been infected and an estimated 860,000 people have died in just eight months.
To support economies and jobs that have been devastated, governments around the world have committed trillions of dollars, and debt levels are at record highs. Our Government's immediate focus is to navigate Singapore through this pandemic and the serious economic downturn because of the very significant risk to our people's lives and livelihoods. The Government has committed $100 billion in the last six months, drawing on our reserves to cushion the economic and social impact of COVID-19 on our people.
Two weeks ago, Deputy Prime Minister Heng further extended support to firms and workers. This week, we heard Minister Tan See Leng and Minister of State Gan Siow Huang share how tripartite partners are helping workers to retain their jobs or find new ones.
But Members have also rightly emphasised the need to think longer term and position ourselves for a strong recovery. We cannot simply hunker down and wait for things to get better. Instead, we must prepare ourselves now so that we can capture new opportunities when they come.
We are not starting from scratch, but are building on strong pillars and steady improvements over the years. In the last 10 years, we have invested heavily in early childhood and continuing adult education, enhanced our healthcare and social service architecture, implemented Industry Transformation Maps to strengthen different economic sectors. These fundamentals stand us in good stead to navigate the winds of change now confronting us.
Let me just share one sector and how it is dealing with its present circumstances while seeking to keep an eye on the future.
COVID-19 has dealt the construction sector a very heavy blow. Due to clusters in the dormitories and work sites, companies have had to put projects on hold for months. Even after workers were cleared, it has not been easy to restart. Many changes were needed to ensure that workers were safe and despite significant Government support, many construction firms and workers continue to suffer badly. But this experience has also strengthened our resolve collectively to transform the construction sector, when the situation stabilises.
We have to drive digitalisation and adopt more advanced building technologies to enhance productivity, and, through this transformation, try to attract more Singaporeans to join this sector. It will require the collective efforts of firms, workers and the Government.
This crisis is neither a \"pause\" nor a \"rewind\" for Singapore. Instead, if we face this with the right spirit, we can turn this to a \"fast-forward\". Re-imagine new industries and markets for Singapore, learn new skills and discover new careers for ourselves and our children. Even as we deal with present challenges, we must prepare ourselves for the longer term. We must keep our resolve and look forward to emerging as a stronger society.
The second area that Members discussed extensively is the social impact of COVID-19 and the challenges it has wrought in our society. COVID-19's impact is universal, but it is not equally felt. Some of us are fortunate to have jobs that allow us to work from home, or we are in sectors that have seen strong demand, like e-commerce. Others have suffered much more. In the hardest-hit industries, such as aviation, tourism, retail and F&B, workers face steep pay cuts and job losses. The road to recovery is rocky and uncertain.
Older workers are worried about rising retrenchment figures. Breadwinners will struggle to keep up with financial commitments if they lose their jobs. While essential workers, such as medical staff, cleaners and public transport operators, do not have the luxury of working from home. They face risks daily to keep our country running.
COVID-19's unequal effects on jobs and workers have thrown up difficult questions for all of us, as it has for many societies around the world: an increasing socio-economic divide between those who have more and those who have less; a re-evaluation of the value of different jobs and how much essential workers are paid; the kinds of financial assistance that might be needed to mitigate income and job losses in the medium to longer term; and deep-rooted assumptions and biases and how we interact with one another online and offline.
This virus has shown us, quite starkly, that \"none of us is safe until all of us are safe\".
The broader point is that our well-being very much depends on one another. President Halimah has called for this generation of leaders and Singaporeans to forge our new compact. If we want Singapore to stay united and strong, we must renew our shared understanding of who we aspire to be.
Minister Maliki said that we must strive to build a fairer and more just society, with equal opportunities and a sense of progress for all. Many Members, such as Mr Louis Ng, Ms Cheryl Chan and Mr Leon Perera, echoed similar sentiments of inclusiveness and unity. These values of justice, equality and unity are enshrined in our Pledge and underpin what Singapore stands for. We would do well to keep these as our North Star.
Our challenge is, therefore, to find relevant and timely ways of building on what we have.
Some Members, such as Mr Fahmi Aliman and Mr Dennis Tan, have called for us to strengthen social safety nets and even out inequalities. As the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister have explained, the Government has enhanced social safety nets significantly as our economy matures, introduced wage support for lower income workers, and supplemented retirement and healthcare support for seniors. At every point, these social programmes were designed with compassion for the vulnerable in our community and with care for those who need a leg up to grasp opportunities. With deeper economic uncertainty in the years ahead and an ageing society, we will commit to do more to help our people.
There have been different suggestions on how to do this, including introducing a minimum wage or unemployment insurance, in addition to existing approaches we have adopted, such as the Progressive Wage Model, Workfare and increased support for lifelong learning and job matching. We will study all these ideas seriously while ensuring that our overall system remains fair and sustainable for generations to come.
But we must also go beyond what the Government can do alone. It is far more impactful and powerful to have a community of care that provides an eco-system of support. What Mr Seah Kian Peng said in this debate struck a chord with me. He shared how a person's challenges can be incredibly complex, with interlocking stressors, such as poverty, domestic abuse, disabilities and mental health issues. And I am sure that many of our Members here, in your work on the ground, have seen how some lower income families struggle with these day-to-day issues. What we need is not just many helping hands but hands that help in a more coordinated and personal way to unlock specific shackles that constrain these individuals and families from progressing in their lives.
We must set aside organisational differences and better coordinate across social service agencies, community and self-help groups, charities, religious organisations and Government agencies. Harness technology to improve case management and processes. Preserve our human touch of building trust and empowering and respecting the individual and family. Not just meeting needs, as Ms Carrie Tan had put it, but partnering them to grow and progress with dignity and respect.
Singaporeans care. Many have demonstrated this spirit, especially during this tough period. One example is Candi and her daughter, Caitlyn. A mother-daughter team, they distributed masks with Team Nila and hand sanitisers with the Temasek Foundation. Caitlyn is seven years old, but Candy, her mother, believes that it is never too early for her to imbibe and learn to help others.
This leads me to my final point on engaging with one another well and turning from dialogue to concrete action.
Sir, our democracy is maturing. We have seen and will continue to see a greater contestation of views and ideas – here in Parliament, in civil society, in online discourse. We will differ on how best to take things forward for Singapore. But as the Prime Minister emphasised, we cannot afford to allow a diversity in views to lead to distrust or polarisation.
Our Fourteenth Parliament reflects Singapore's diversity. Across political affiliations. Members hail from different backgrounds. We have different genders, ethnicities and faiths, studied in different schools, worked in different fields. I am glad that Members have sought to represent Singaporeans' diverse concerns and spoken on a broad range of topics in the last few days.
Mr Derrick Goh, Mr Don Wee, Mr Edward Chia and Mr Christopher de Souza spoke on behalf of enterprises – their value, their challenges and how to seize more opportunities for growth. Ms Mariam Jaafar, Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Sharael Taha and many others voiced the deep concerns of workers – how to help them develop their skills all through their careers and protect them from unfair practices at the workplace.
Many Members also highlighted the importance of building a strong Singaporean Core while remaining open to complementary foreign talent. Prime Minister Lee and Ministers Josephine Teo and S Iswaran have addressed these. While Ms Poh Li San, Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Ms Raeesah Khan spoke up for youth and women. Mr Xie Yao Quan, Ms He Ting Ru and Mr Yip Hon Weng suggested ideas to improve senior care. Dr Wan Rizal spoke about education; Dr Tan Wu Meng, healthcare; Mr Chong Kee Hiong, housing; Mr Sitoh Yih Pin, culture and sports, and many more.
We thank Members for contributing your views and suggestions.
We have had a vigorous debate these five days and I am sure for many more parliamentary sessions to come. We may not agree on every issue but, as Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Lim Biow Chuan have pointed out, we can deal with disagreements constructively. With empathy and an open mind, using facts and reason, have frank discussions with one another.
We should acknowledge that there are no book answers or straightforward solutions for the challenges that we face. We will need to grapple honestly and openly with the difficulties that our society faces and will face in all their complexities – whether on our foreign manpower issues, raising the wages of lower income Singaporeans, tackling inequality and many more issues. So that through our debates, we not only share with Singaporeans more about the issues, trade-offs and possibilities, but also help find a better way forward for our country.
This may not always be our default way of engaging others in this House. Sometimes, emotions will run high and we will be tempted to push our point to the fullest. But as long as we commit to putting Singapore's interests before our own, it will be possible to find common ground and move forward together. This will enable us to retain and harness our diversity as a strength and avoid the partisan division and polarisation that we see in other countries taking root here.
Constructive dialogue and engagement extends beyond Parliament to all Singaporeans. Ms Tin Pei Ling, Mr Darryl David and Ms Nadia Samdin spoke about the need to engage all segments of the community to tackle issues together and build consensus across different generations and backgrounds. and Minister of State Tan Kiat How and Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam spoke about how we should encourage such constructive dialogue, especially online.
That is one reason why we launched the Emerging Stronger Conversations. Minister Edwin Tong has explained how we hope to harness these as platforms to engage Singaporeans from all walks of life in honest and respectful conversations about the kind of Singapore that we want to build together.
I have hosted several of these conversations where a myriad of topics were discussed – such as social mobility, racism, xenophobia, our treatment of migrant workers. Participants were candid and raised suggestions that are worth exploring further. For example, some suggested setting up forums where people can talk openly and safely about difficult issues like differences in race, religion, language or class; or reframing how charities work by using new funding models like social impact investing.
We invite all Singaporeans to participate in these conversations, reflect on our experience together during this pandemic and take part first-hand, in the important work of forging a shared consensus. But I hope that our conversations will ultimately lead to action and that we will solve problems together and pursue fresh ideas together. This is the heart of Singapore Together and we have some examples of this.
In the social sector, for instance, we formed SG Cares Community Networks within each town, bringing together public officers from different Government agencies who work together with the social service professionals, local community partners and grassroots organisations, to befriend and support more vulnerable households.
But another area we will need collective action is in building a greener and more environmentally sustainable Singapore. Minister of State Desmond Tan and Minister of State Alvin Tan spoke passionately about this. It is an existential challenge for us. There is no vaccine for climate change. And as an island city, we are especially vulnerable to its consequences, such as rising sea levels and increasing temperatures. That is why we are doubling down on efforts to build a low-carbon climate-resilient Singapore, for our grandchildren and their children.
In the coming years, we will transform Singapore into a city nature, plant One Million Trees together with Singaporeans. We will green our buildings, towns and transport network.
Our economy also needs to be more resilient. Our industries can be more energy-efficient, and we should use more renewable energy like solar power. In pursuing green growth, we can build expertise that opens up new opportunities – specialised financial or legal services and clean technology. We need everyone to be part of this effort to reduce the energy we use, reduce the waste we produce and care collectively for our environment.
We launched the Singapore Together Action Networks to help translate our conversations into real actions. In June, we shared that we have three such existing networks. One of them is the Youth Mental Well-being Network, which Minister Edwin Tong also spoke about earlier.
I want to highlight the markedly different approach that we took for this network. First, we made the network open – anyone could sign up. Second, we gave the network space to shape their own agenda.
Early on, one participant asked me what the Government aimed to achieve through this network, and I said that we did not want to predetermine where the network would go. It is not about the Government setting the agenda all the time, then seeking input from the public. Instead, the community comes up with ideas and decides what they want to work on, while the Government supports them.
Some participants have stepped up and volunteered to drive this process. They have crafted problem statements, eight areas of interest that they want to dive into, such as mental health at school, in the workplace and within families. We are excited to see where we will go and the fruits of such collaboration.
Since June, we have also identified a new Action Network – the Beyond COVID-19 Taskforce for our social sector. This Taskforce headed by Ms Anita Fam, President of National Council of Social Service (NCSS), has already gotten down to work. The genesis of this Taskforce emerged from engagements that NCSS had with many of our charities. There was a yearning desire to come together, work on common challenges they faced, magnified during COVID-19, in order to reimagine and develop a social sector that can effectively meet emerging social needs, post-crisis.
And as more themes emerge from our Emerging Stronger Conversations, more Action Networks can be formed in the months ahead.
In the economic domain too, we have set up the Alliances for Action, which are industry-led coalitions aimed at quickly developing and testing new ideas for growth. They too represent a wholly different way of doing things – again, not just industry providing feedback to Government, but industry actually taking the front seat, taking the lead, and Government as active partners.
For example, COVID-19 has shown the importance of keeping our supply chains running, especially for a small and open economy like Singapore. One of the challenges is that many players are involved along the entire supply chain – from shippers and carriers, to air and sea port operators, legal and financial service providers and government regulators. Along the chain, cargo details need to be tracked, verified and communicated accurately. But different players may have different standards, formats and platforms, which complicates the process – some things that are sometimes taken for granted, all this while.
Industry says if we can use digitalisation, make the supply chain more efficient, we can harness opportunities for growth, seize this opportunity during this crisis. The Alliance for Action on Supply Chain Digitalisation aims to achieve this. The Alliance has organised seven workshops to engage players across the supply chain, involving close to 50 organisations from MNCs to SMEs and many government agencies.
I joined one of these workshops and heard from participants that this was, to them, the first time something of this scale and nature and complexion was being attempted. There was great energy in the room as the participants exchanged many exciting ideas.
More than ever, in these times, we need all hands on deck to steady the ship. Every Singaporean can contribute in one way or other.
To young Singaporeans – we need your energy and your fresh ideas. The path ahead may be uncertain, but the best way to predict the future is to seek to create it. We will need your creativity in many exciting areas, your willingness to challenge the status quo.
Climate change, which I mentioned, is one area, but there are many others, such as new applications for digital technology and new ways of organising society to help the low-income and vulnerable.
To our older Singaporeans – we need your deep experience, your wisdom and your fighting spirit. You have seen Singapore through difficult times, from SARS to the Global Financial Crisis. At the same time, you may be called upon to learn new skills or trades. It will not be easy but we will support you all the way.
To our enterprises and workers – we need your nimbleness to keep up with the latest changes and your commitment to long-term transformation.
COVID-19 has shown us that our economic growth needs to be more sustainable and more resilient to shocks. We will help you prepare for the future, but we need you to do the same for your workers – to retrain and redeploy them instead of letting them go, groom and develop them, and bring them along your journey.
To our community partners, NGOs, civil society and volunteer organisations – we need your enthusiasm, your spirit, your understanding of the ground and your extensive networks. The Government cannot reach all the right people at the right times. You can be first responders, who can identify and befriend those facing challenges. We will partner you closely in these efforts.
Mr Speaker, we are entering a period of great stress and unpredictability. We do not know what the future holds ahead of us and Singaporeans are understandably concerned. But we are starting from a position of strength – learning from our past experiences in fighting disease outbreaks, drawing on fiscal reserves that we have built up over decades and generations and, most importantly, standing united in the face of challenges and adversity.
Singapore Together is one of the rallying cries and spirit that will guide us through this crisis, our commitment to leaving no one behind, making space for differing views and doing our part. So, as we lift our heads high, let us face our challenges head-on, dream of a brighter future for our children, and dare to make those dreams a reality. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Mr Patrick Tay.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): \"We will be together through thick and thin. As one country, we will fight this virus and win. We will fight with our hearts, our minds and our souls, protecting this island that we call Our Home.\"
Mr Speaker, Sir, over these past five days, 74 Members have spoken in support of the Motion including the Prime Minister. This includes new Members who have made their maiden speeches, and returning Members who have shared their concerns on the back of the uncertainty amidst the COVID-19 crisis.
I am encouraged by all our Members' conviction to improve the lives of all Singaporeans as one Singapore. And thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, for allowing me to round up this debate.
As many of the Members of this House had put forth, we are tackling a crisis of the generation and we are at an inflection point in our history. This is indeed an unprecedented crisis that has brought about significant impact to the lives of Singaporeans and businesses.
But it has been a crisis that has also brought out the best in us.
Many have and continue to step forward to volunteer their time, talent and treasures. Many ordinary people have done extraordinary things including showing appreciation to frontline workers or supporting a community need. Take, for example, Jacob Neo, a Primary 6 student from Fairfield Methodist Primary School, who penned the lyrics, as quoted in my opening, and melody to an inspiring song \"Singapore, Unite as One\", as a tribute to healthcare workers earlier this year.
There were also hawkers who delivered meals to the hungry, as well as generous organisations who returned their Job Support; and individuals who selflessly donated their Solidarity Payments to charity; and countless initiatives launched by many people to look after and support our migrant workers, as they continue to labour for us.
Mr Speaker, Sir, in her Address, the President highlighted five key aims that the Government hopes to fulfill to unify us as one, and take us forward. As I listened and read all the speeches delivered by Members of this House, I will endeavour in this closing of mine to string all the recurring themes together into five important areas.
First, sustainability in the midst of change. Change is necessary, moving forward, and this also requires us to change mindsets. In every crisis, there are also opportunities that we must tap on the COVID-19 crisis, to transform and to emerge stronger than before. Our ability to work effectively together to transform the economy will determine how we come out from this storm.
By identifying new opportunities for growth, we will ensure the survival and success of Singapore, improve the lives of Singaporeans and build a sustainable eco-system for many generations to come.
Different industries have been impacted differently with several facing structural disruption. Some sectors such as aviation, aerospace, marine and offshore, and tourism, will take a longer time to rebound. But if we stay true to the core capabilities, which we have built over the years, we will come out from this storm stronger.
Some promising ideas mentioned by Members include environmental sustainability, smart commerce, supply chain digitalisation and Industry 4.0 and we should take heart that Singapore has benefited from early investments in digital transformation and while we had a head start in the race, COVID-19 has forced us into a sprint while we were mentally preparing for a marathon. These new areas and business models will create new jobs and new ways of thinking. We need to stay positive and see these risks and challenges as opportunities to transform the way we do things.
In the past six months, I have seen firsthand for myself companies which have stagnated and went downhill. I have also seen how some companies stayed positive with a growth mindset and pivoted quickly and remained afloat and profitable.
Many Members have rightly pointed out equipping the workforce with the right skills and, more importantly, mindset is crucial in driving this transformation. SkillsFuture, especially the additional support for older workers to re-skill, upskill and the focus on skills over people's qualifications at a workplace is a step in the right direction for our society.
Last year, in support of SkillsFuture, I underwent a fintech foundation programme with our Singapore Fintech Association to get a better understanding of the fintech space and picked up useful knowledge to help me navigate in the fintech space. The learning has enabled me to gain an understanding of fintech and also open my eyes to new opportunities and possibilities in the fintech space and, of course, emphasising the importance of staying ready, relevant and resilient.
I would also like to thank Deputy Prime Minster Heng for his response to my opening speech on his support to further enhance our Industry Transformation Maps to further develop our people and create more jobs for Singaporeans. As we review and formulate strategies for industries to transform and diversify, we will need to create an even stronger linkage in the form of skills maps, job redesign, job retraining and re-scaling of our workers to take on these jobs. This will not be an easy task.
In the past five months alone, I have used more virtual conferencing than the past 25 years of my working career. I believe many of you would agree we had to learn the use an entire spectrum of virtual meeting and conference software, from Webex, MS Teams, Big Marker to Zoom, Skype and Google Meet. It is really quite a mouthful to swallow. In a short span of one month during the Circuit Breaker, I have to convert a storeroom of my home into a home office and had to move plans and furnishings in my home into the storeroom to improve my backdrop for live webinars and Facebook live sessions.
Second, securing jobs for Singaporeans. As highlighted by President and many Members, jobs remain a core priority for Singapore at this juncture and in the years ahead. The economic and social disruption brought about by COVID-19 coupled with geopolitics and trade tensions have only served to heighten insecurities and anxieties about jobs for many segments of society, including young fresh graduates from our ITEs, Polytechnics and Universities, low-wage workers as well as older workers.
I am encouraged that many Members have spoken passionately about the Singaporean Core. In fact, I was doing a count, as we progress through the speeches, and the phrase \"Singaporean Core\" has been mentioned over 40 times in the last four days alone.
Strengthening our Singapore Core is not and must not be something which divides us. I take heart that every call to strengthen our Singaporean Core made in these Chambers has not been a call to divide but one to unite. I take heart that the ideas put forth have been in the pursuit of our key tenets of fairness, equality and with the ultimate aim of progress and growth for our people and our country. I take heart that while each of us has marked our own journeys, we share the same destination, where we keep our economy strong and competitive so that in turn our workers can have good jobs, not just good jobs, but quality jobs and opportunities that meet their aspirations and improve their lives.
All around the world, anti-foreigner sentiments are on the rise because of the anxieties of job security, especially when they see that their jobs are overtaken by foreign manpower. When Singaporeans lose their jobs, but find that foreigners are still holding onto their PMET jobs, many become unhappy. We have heard multiple anecdotes from many Members the past week of jobs being filled by foreign manpower and who may not even be as academically qualified. Intense competition from the influx of foreign manpower and incidence of unfair employment practices by employers who display a clear preference for foreigners.
I am heartened by Minister Josephine Teo's announcement that MOM is reviewing and taking a close scrutiny of companies whose Singaporean Core has been weakening and that Minister Ong Ye Kung has shared that the Monetary Authority of Singapore will ensure fair hiring opportunities while grooming Singaporeans as leaders and specialists in the financial sector.
In these uncertain times, it is ever more important for all employers to play their part in building up their Singaporean Core and in circumstances where retrenchment is unavoidable and is the final option and employers have to choose between a foreigner and a Singaporean. I strongly urge the employers to lean towards keeping the Singaporean.
Mr Speaker, for a country to remain on a sustainable path, I agree with Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong that Singapore cannot look inwards. We will need to grow our economy to create good jobs for Singaporeans and raise the living standards. To do this, we need to continue to remain open to attract Investments. We cannot close our doors to foreigners and foreign investments. More Singaporeans will be able to take up the opportunities that these foreign investments create. There is a need to bring in foreign manpower to supplement the local workforce and ensure the transferability of niche skills. Local companies including SMEs will also need skillsets and expertise to grow their business. I do not think we just want to settle with having the cake and eat it but we want to grow and enlarge the cake, thereby giving Singapore and Singaporeans a bigger and better and also the best slice of it.
As some of the jobs support measures will ease in in the months ahead, there will be fewer job opportunities and, perhaps, even more retrenchments. More workers will be impacted and we need to enable them to adjust and bounce back through this crisis and beyond. It will be especially tough for some group of workers, including low-wage workers and older workers. To continue to uplift our low-wage workers, we will need to ensure they acquire the skills to progress, not to forget the Triple Uplift formula of the Progressive Wage Model plus Workfare Income Supplement and, of course, the National Wages Council recommendations.
At the same time, we must not forget our older workers who are generally more vulnerable and are at a higher risk of being retrenched. For this group, it will be harder for them to look for another equivalent job and more so at the same pay. Retraining and upskilling older workers will enable employers to continue finding value in them and be less likely to make them redundant. I appreciate the call to respond to older workers with a heart, H E A R T which stands for H \"holding on to jobs\"; E \"employment assistance\", A \"to act fairly\", R \"relief\", T \"to tough it out\", and to redesign jobs, shift workplace culture and HR policies to institutionalise new possibilities for a maturing workforce.
Government, businesses and citizens must work together and expand opportunities for our senior workforce. As mentioned Prime Minister, the best unemployment insurance is, in fact, the assurance of another job.
Third, President Halimah also called on all of us to build a fair and just society and to look after our low-wage workers, especially during this crisis. As we negotiate through these stormy seas, we must not leave anyone behind. The digital disruption and economic transformation in the next normal and low-touch economy, therefore, must be even more inclusive and further fortify social cohesion.
The new social compact must be practical, balancing the needs of Singaporeans in the areas of social security, affordable and quality housing, healthcare, education, public infrastructure and environment with their aspirations and dreams. To facilitate social mobility, I look forward to the Government's continuous investment in our people with the necessary training and opportunities. As we deal with the major changes in the economy and labour market, it is important to strengthen our social safety nets and keep inequality in check.
Our starting point in life should not dictate our ending point. With hard work, ability and ambition, we can succeed. We must strive as much as possible to level uneven starting blocks and to provide opportunities at every stage of life. It is also our hope that our education system will always remain a social enabler so that everyone, especially those who may have started with less, can have the hope and confidence that in Singapore, they have equal access to opportunities to do well, achieve their aspirations and find happiness.
There was also recognition of the trade-offs and sacrifices that women make in their careers to look after their children and to reduce the burden of care-giving. I was especially reminded by hon Member Mr Louis Ng's example of Oasis water park ladies' toilet in Nee Soon East which he used to illustrate the issue of gender stereotypes.
Related to gender and poverty is a larger conversation about discrimination in our society. We need to expand our empathy to our minority communities. It is essential that we rise above our differences and find common ground. Occasional setbacks need not trip us in our perseverance to continue to make progress.
Harmony in diversity will always be a work-in-progress. We may not always agree, but we cannot let our disagreement turn into division. Otherwise, change will cause a rupture in society as we have seen elsewhere.
Our first President Yusof Ishak did not see our diversity of race, language, religion as an obstacle to progress. He saw this as our strength. He saw the diversity as exactly what would make Singapore dynamic and progressive. Diversity and inclusion is an important area which we must hold dear and fast, too.
Fourth, strengthening our Singaporean identity. It is the heart and spirit of Singapore which is embodied by the Singapore Tapestry, woven out of diversity and adversity. Its colours brightened by the idealism and energy of our youth or as hon Member Mr Darryl David put it \"more like a quilt, nicely handcrafted patchwork\", close and dear to us. Its thread tightly bound by a shared sense of community, culture and, ultimately, destiny.
To our youths and young people – never stop dreaming or lose that sense of optimism. This is not a lost generation and you are definitely not a \"strawberry generation\". When I see youths and young people, I see vitality, vigour, tenacity, great courage and ideas. They are like arrows. There may be attention exerted to the string at the start but when we release the bowstring at the right pull and tension, it will hit the target and mark with perfection and accuracy. To our youths and young people, we want to support you for you to realise your dreams, to overcome the crisis of a generation by uniting fellow Singaporeans and leave behind a more beautiful and tightly knitted tapestry as a legacy for generations of Singaporeans to come.
Deep trust and mutual respect will need to form the basis of the relationship between fellow Singaporeans, earned through the help and sacrifices that we give one another. We need to maintain a profound respect and plurality in Singapore and find shared layers above this diversity. I hope we can continue to build a culture of openness and trust, and one in which the Government listens, consults and engages regularly and widely with all.
We need to continue to fight for a more caring, compassionate and inclusive society, one with a strong heartware. Given the upheaval caused by this pandemic, it is our hardware and software that will save lives and livelihoods, but it is about being inclusive in our heartware that will determine whether we will get through this pandemic as One People, One Nation and One Singapore.
Last, but not least, Mdm President shared that Singaporeans have new aspirations and expectations, including a desire for more diverse voices to be heard, and stronger checks and balances. At the same time, new leaders are emerging to take Singapore forward.
Moving forward, both the Government and the Opposition must share the common goal of working together to better Singapore for our people. We do this with dignity, respect, integrity, courage and grace – not forgetting the hon Member Mr Murali’s exposition of the rhino and lion, and also the indomitable neck-sticking giraffe.
Members in this House have also applauded the Government for recognising the Leader of the Opposition. It is crucial to have constructive rational debates to further the interests of Singapore and Singaporeans.
Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore may have its beginnings forged in the crucible of crisis, but time and again, we have proven our mettle and prevailed against the odds. For our forebears had fought to bring Singapore forward, for the many storms we have weathered since our independence, including the Asian Financial Crisis, SARS and the Global Financial Crisis, we have prevailed.
We will and we must prevail again today. We must continue to rise to the challenge, adapt and emerge stronger. We will need to prepare our lives to overcome this crisis and after this crisis. We will need to reset, refresh, review, reinvent and rethink our strategies to become successful in the next normal. We must unite so that our economy will again prosper anew. We must unite even more so as external forces seek to divide us. We must unite so that we can leave behind a better society for children and their children.
I urge all of us to come together to build a liveable and sustainable society and country founded on mutual trust with opportunities for all. Let us continue to have faith and be of good courage. Listen well, look out for one another, stay strong and communicate with grace and empathy. I now call upon all the Members of this House to join me in thanking the President for her Address. [Applause.]
[(proc text) Resolved, (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to: (proc text)]
[(proc text) 'We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the Opening of the First Session of this Parliament.'.\" (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) (Amendment No 2) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
The Second Minister for Law (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai): Sir, I beg to move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
Sir, when the Government first put the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act before this House, we explained that the sanctity of contract is fundamental for Singapore and a key aspect of the rule of law. We do not lightly intervene in contracts. But sanctity of contract is also not absolute, and intervention is needed when there is a need to safeguard the fundamental integrity of our economic structure for the common good.
The Act, which was passed for the first time in April this year, was a major intervention in certain types of contracts, in response to the economic shock caused by COVID-19. It recognised the reality of the situation: that almost nobody, no one, could have anticipated or prepared for the impact of COVID-19 in Singapore and in the world. The assumptions that one had made in entering into those contracts at the time they did, went out the window with COVID-19.
If we did not intervene and people insisted on strict contractual rights in respect of contracts made prior to the onset of COVID-19, many would suffer. Good businesses could go under; bankruptcies and insolvencies could rise dramatically. More jobs would be lost. So, we moved this Bill, first in April, and subsequently, in June, we made further refinements.
The fundamental idea underpinning the reliefs was that a fair sharing of obligations would be necessary given the exceptional times that we found ourselves in. Without such an arrangement, many SMEs would suffer and it would be detrimental to our economy as a whole.
The Bill today builds on the reliefs that we have already put in place by ensuring that they can be implemented more smoothly and more efficiently and to make sure that the reliefs get to the ground in the best possible way.
Sir, the Bill consists of two main parts. The first is to make a number of technical amendments to facilitate the implementation and the delivery of reliefs. Second, it introduces temporary measures for the Minister to extend certain collective sale deadlines on a case-by-case basis. I will explain both.
Sir, I will briefly recap the key reliefs before dealing with the amendments.
In April, we introduced temporary and targeted measures to alleviate the impact on parties who are unable to perform their contractual obligations because of COVID-19. This was the legal circuit breaker that we had implemented, to temporarily hold in abeyance the imposition of strict legal rights and strict enforcement of legal rights. It was intended to give businesses at that point in time some cash flow relief, some breathing space to find the possibility of negotiating a mutual and acceptable settlement.
We set up the Panel of Assessors for COVID-19 Temporary Relief, or PACT, to adjudicate disputes quickly and effectively between the parties, taking into account the particular circumstances that exist between the parties and having, ultimately, regard to the justice of the situation between the parties.
PACT Assessors were, therefore, empowered to make determinations which were just and equitable in the circumstances.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
We also introduced measures to facilitate alternative meeting arrangements. This ensured that organisations and entities could continue to fulfil their regulatory as well as corporate governance functions, even when personal attendance at meetings might not be viable or safe due to the safe distancing measures that we had put in place.
In June 2020, we introduced a rental relief framework for SMEs and specified non-profit organisations. This addressed the growing need to provide tenants with immediate rental relief from their accumulated rental obligations.
Let me just briefly summarise the framework that exists in place so that Members can appreciate the context in which we seek to make the amendments in this Bill.
The rental relief framework mandated an equitable co-sharing of rental obligations between the Government, landlords and tenants. It provided additional rental relief for tenants who are substantially impacted by COVID-19, and also facilitated the appointment of a panel of rental relief Assessors to consider the disputes between the parties in the manner I outlined earlier.
The relief measures have been a lifeline for many Singaporeans and local businesses. Let me just give Members a sense of the numbers of the cases that have gone through the system.
As at first September 2020, 7,046 Notifications for Relief, or NFRs, had been served through MinLaw’s electronic system. There are others which are done manually which we are unable to track in the system, and out of these, 1,272 applications for determinations by Assessors have been filed. So, out of the slightly more than 7,000, about 1,200 had sought assessments by Assessors. Out of this number, almost 60% of them has been disposed of in the space of about four months.
The reason we believe why there is a much smaller number of applications for assessments than there are Notifications for Relief is because we provided a framework in the legislation for parties to assess for themselves what might work for them and we encouraged them actively to look within that framework to find a solution without having to come to Assessors.
Most of the determinations have been issued quickly and from the day an application for an Assessor’s determination is filed, parties can generally expect the determination to be issued within four weeks, if they file the documents requested and also provide the substantiation for the claims that they make. Some cases take a little longer because the nature of the case is a bit more complicated and more complex. The process has worked well in most cases and I must say that we record our sincere thanks to the many volunteer Assessors, as well as the Registry staff who have come forward in the last few months to offer their services and who sat as Assessors in many of these cases.
These measures come on top of the various relief measures totalling approximately a 100 billion across four Budgets since May, including the Jobs Support Scheme, the Jobs Growth Incentive, as well as the COVID-19 Support Grant. So, the measures that we have put in place in April and in June ought to be looked at and seen in the context of the other measures that are also put in place to assist businesses and to assist employees as well.
Feedback from the businesses on the measures so far have been positive, and for what it is worth, there have been some surveys done by UOB, Accenture, and Dun and Bradstreet – these are not commissioned by the Government or MinLaw. Based on these surveys, we gathered that approximately 72% of the companies that were polled by these three agencies said they were satisfied and happy with the relief measures that had been rolled out.
On the rental relief front, we have been actively engaging landlords and SME tenants, both before the Bill was constructed, as well as after that, to continue the engagement process to explain how it works and to assist with ironing out problems on the ground.
This Bill today does not introduce major changes to the policy framework and to the intent that I have outlined, but makes a number of clarificatory and also technical amendments to facilitate a better delivery of the reliefs. We gleaned many of these from interacting with the Assessors, understanding how we can better deliver the services on the ground, and also appreciating the process which has taken place in the last few months.
Sir, I will now highlight the key amendments to this House.
Clause 8 expands the powers of the rental relief Assessors. At present, only three distinct matters may be determined by a rental relief Assessor.
First, whether the tenant satisfies the prescribed criteria to qualify for rental relief. Second, whether the tenant satisfies the prescribed additional criteria for the additional relief. So, there are two layers – basic and the additional. Thirdly, whether the landlord satisfies the criteria for the reduction of the additional rental relief – that is the landlord relief portion.
The Bill today expands the powers of the rental relief Assessors to allow them to make determinations on a wider range of matters in order to better assist landlords and tenants to implement the rental waivers in a fair manner.
The Bill will empower the Assessors to determine the amount of rent to be waived pursuant to lease agreements. This will address instances where service or maintenance charges are not broken down under the lease agreement. The reason for this, if I may explain to Members, is that the relief that has been given – two months from the Government and two months from the landlords – cover the base rent without the charges. The reason for not requiring the landlords to waive the charges is because these charges continue to be due to the service providers in the form of maintenance or utilities charges. Sometimes, the lease agreement itself might not stipulate which portion is the base rent and which portion are the service charges. These amendments seek to empower the Assessors to make a determination as to which portion ought to be waived.
In addition, the Rental Relief Regulations, which I am sure Members have studied carefully, also provide a series of formula which applies to the different scenarios for rental relief waivers to take place; sometimes, depending on when the tenant has moved in or moved out, or whether or not the business is of one nature or another, depending on the criteria.
This is to enlarge the power so that should an Assessor come across these cases, it will not lack the jurisdiction to address all of these disputes holistically.
Clauses 15 to 17 of the Bill reconcile the operation of Part 8 of the Act with the Building and Construction Industry Security of Payment Act, commonly known as SOPA. Sir, Part 8 has not yet come into force, and MinLaw is working to finalise the details of the relief under Part 8. When it comes into force, Part 8 will provide relief for prescribed contracts that have been affected by delays in construction, supply or related contracts.
This was introduced in light of the severe impact that COVID-19 had on the construction industry. The extent to which a tenant is able or unable in some cases to move in because of the landlord's inability to renovate or retrofit; these are scenarios that could be captured in Part 8.
Part 8 will, in turn, allow assessors limited prescribed powers to adjust the terms of a contract that has been impacted by COVID-19. So, in the scenario I outlined, should there be a reason for not being able to allow the tenant to move in in time, because you have not made good the premises, the assessors can make some adjustments to the contract. The overriding and overarching consideration is to achieve a just and equitable outcome for both parties.
To give one further example, a contractor may have rented equipment from a supplier and the equipment is un-used during the circuit breaker because the site was closed as would have been the case for much of the circuit breaker period. There can be significant unfairness in this situation if the contractor must continue to pay rental even though he was unable to use the equipment throughout the period because of COVID-19 restrictions.
Some suppliers that we spoke to, said that they would waive the rental for the period where the contractor cannot use the equipment due to COVID-19 restrictions. They felt that it was not right for them to continue charging rental at the expense of the contractor. For many of these, we applaud these suppliers for responding to COVID-19 in the right spirit and certainly in the context of assisting holistically, the entire industry.
At the same time, we have also come across many situations where suppliers continue to insists on the full rental throughout the period despite the conditions prevailing at that point in time. This is where Part 8 can come in, to play a part to resolve the matter in a just and equitable manner between the parties.
I would emphasise to Members that the powers of the Assessor in this context are narrowly defined. The categories of contracts that the Assessor can adjust under Part 8 are circumscribed by subsidiary legislation. Further, the applicants will also be required to show that the contract was affected in the first place by a delay in the performance of a construction or supply contract and was otherwise in breach, and this was materially caused by COVID-19 related restrictions.
Parties would also have an opportunity to be heard before the Assessor on any points of disagreement between the claimant and the respondent, before the Assessor makes a decision. The assessment process will also be subject to a rigorous review internally. And if I may share with Members, in the last few months, we have had many briefings with the Assessors so that there is alignment across the process. Both Minister Shanmugam and myself have also met with Assessors to go through the cases and we do that on a regular basis to achieve alignment and a fair degree of consistency across the cases.
In this Bill, we have provided for how proceedings and the determination under Part 8 will interact with other legal proceedings. For example, clause 15 of the Bill provides that an application for relief under Part 8 will trigger a temporary moratorium on the commencement of other legal proceedings. This is necessary as otherwise, there could be parallel proceedings, one under Part 8 of this Bill and another under either SOPA or as a case may be, in judicial proceedings.
The moratorium will therefore apply until the Part 8 application is rejected or withdrawn, or until a determination has been issued. This will, as I mentioned earlier, mitigate and reduce the risk of parallel proceedings.
In the construction industry, many contracting parties rely on SOPA adjudication proceedings. The amendments will also provide SOPA adjudicators with the same powers to adjust contract terms as an Assessor under Part 8 may have. This applies as long as the contract has not been previously gone through the Part 8 process. In other words, you cannot go through Part 8, get a result, perhaps not happy with it and then apply for a further adjustment go through the SOPA proceedings. That will not be allowed.
This amendment, in empowering the SOPA adjudicators the same bandwidth as the Assessors to make the same adjustments, will allow for SOPA adjudicators to also have the same ability to reach a just and equitable outcome in those cases. In many of these SOPA cases, the issues are similar, across whether or not the performance has been affected by an event like COVID-19 and whether or not the payments are due and how much is due and at what stage. Because of the twinning of these issues that arise in such typical SOPA claims, we felt that it was appropriate to clothe the SOPA adjudicator with the same level of discretion and also powers to make those adjudications.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the construction sector in Singapore is currently going through challenging times. The Government is committed to working closely with the industry to get through this difficult period. I must say that we will do all we can to continue to cushion the impact of COVID-19 on the industry and to help the industry emerge from this as best as we can and perhaps stronger from the crisis.
Sir, I move on now to touch on the provisions that cover the alternative meeting arrangements, which the Bill does by amending Part 4 of the Act. Part 4 provides for alternative arrangements to enable meetings to be held by electronic means, where personal attendance would otherwise have been required.
Members would know that many entities, whether large corporates or smaller societies or charities they do not have a constitutional document that would automatically allow them to hold virtual meetings without physical presence. These arrangements are therefore critical for those entities to allow them to carry on business and also to proceed with governance functions and obligations safely through this pandemic.
They can proceed with their meetings virtually and also, through that virtual platform, make important collective decisions while still complying with safe distancing regulations.
The alternative arrangements are currently linked to the duration of a control order. We have received feedback that this creates some uncertainty because some companies have their Financial Year end at the end of this year and they have until March or April to hold their meetings.
Many of these entities must plan for these meetings months in advance and make the appropriate arrangements. Clause 12 therefore amends section 27 to delink the alternative arrangements from the control orders. It enables alternative arrangements to be prescribed if the Minister for Law considers it necessary or expedient to limit or prevent the spread of COVID-19, even where there is no control order in force, for the purposes of these alternative arrangements for meetings.
With this amendment, we intend to extend the Meetings Order further, to 30 June 2021. This would cover the period of time that I mentioned earlier for all the meetings to take place, including in the context of some, the adjourned meetings as well, up till June 2021. The possibility of a further extension might be considered but we can take that assessment depending on the prevailing conditions subsequently. This extension will give entities the option to hold virtual meetings in place of physical meetings.
Lastly, Sir, the Bill also introduces further amendments to the Registrar's powers, in response to feedback from the PACT Registry in operationalising the Act. These amendments seek to facilitate the efficient and effective operation of the Act and will apply to both the PACT Registry and the Rental Relief Registry. The PACT Registry deals with the COVID-19 Bill as we passed in April and the Rental Relief Registry deals with the ones we passed in June this year.
Currently, the Registrars have the power to reject applications that do not comply with the form and manner prescribed by the regulations. But, this power is limited. What the Registrars and Assessors have seen has been certain defective applications which have come through, not falling within the original prescription, but nonetheless, defective or failed in some way. These applications still make their way through the system because there is no power to dismiss them ab initio, as of right. They, therefore, drain the time and resources of the Registry and also the volunteer Assessors.
Clauses 5, 8 and 14 therefore provide that the Registrar will have a power, a discretionary rejection power on certain grounds. One, where the contract is not a scheduled contract, so it does not come within the ambit of the Act altogether; two, if the application is incomplete; and three, if the application is materially false or misleading, or frivolous, or is an abuse of process. Members would know that this closely aligns with the kinds of standards that we prescribe for filing papers in judicial proceedings.
Sir, these amendments seek to achieve a balance between the optimum use of limited resources, and as I mentioned earlier, many of them are volunteer resources as well and also striking a balance with fairness to the parties.
The Bill also makes certain clarificatory amendments, in line with the Regulations which have been promulgated. Section 7A provides for a cap on late payment interest and charges. There was some doubt as to whether the time period when this cap would apply, so we made that clear.
Clause 3 makes clear that the cap on late payment interest applies to interest accruing from 1 February to the end of the prescribed period.
Sir, at this juncture, if I may just acknowledge two suggestions raised by Mr Edward Chia during the earlier debate, which pertain directly to the issues in this Bill.
Mr Chia proposed extending the statutory repayment schemes beyond rental arrears, to help businesses who want to restart. Currently, we have a statutory repayment scheme that applies only to rental arrears but Mr Chia is proposing that we go beyond this. We are aware of this suggestion, it has been raised with us. But, we wanted to proceed very carefully because this opens up a significant amount of outstandings that will be subject to the repayment schedule or that could be termed out in the repayment schedule, possibly to the detriment of creditors as well.
So, we want to balance the cash flow needs of these creditors against those businesses who have fallen into debt. We will study this further and determine if this is appropriate and if so, on what kind of scale.
Mr Chia also made reference to whether we could provide relief for Directors from liability for insolvent trading in this period. Mr Chia would be pleased to know that the Bill already covers that, in fact, the Act has been passes in April. It already covers that and a company is not treated as incurring liabilities without a reasonable prospect of meeting them in full during the prescribed period, and that is the threshold for insolvent trading liability for an individual director.
Sir, let me move on now to the amendments on collective sales very briefly.
Clause 19 of the Bill introduces a new Part 9, that expressly empowers the Minister for Law to extend collective sale deadlines on a case-by-case basis, by way of Ministerial Order. This will also cover deadlines that have already passed, provided that the other requirements for extension are met.
This measure is intended to address feedback from some Collective Sale Committees or \"CSCs\", that they require extensions to the deadlines specified in the Land Titles Strata Act. Ordinarily, these deadlines ensure that the CSC follows through with the collective sale process in a timely manner, minimising uncertainty for the owners in the development.
However, we have received feedback from CSCs that their ability to complete the collective sale process could have been genuinely and also materially impacted by COVID-19. For example, they may have been unable to secure a buyer due to travel restrictions for instance and also possibly the circuit breaker measures.
All applications for extension will be evaluated carefully, and only those cases where the CSC has been genuinely and materially impacted by COVID-19 will an extension be granted. The process and procedure for such an application will be set out in subsidiary legislation.
Sir, let me just quickly conclude. Over the past few months, as Members would appreciate, we had to respond very quickly to the pandemic. We have had to be agile, act quickly, provide effective relief to businesses and individuals, to help as far as possible, to cushion the impact of COVID-19. So far we have seen encouraging and tangible results from the reliefs that were introduced in the first two rounds. We have seen how the Act has provided breathing spaces and also provide for there to be a way in which the two parties, as I mentioned earlier, can use a framework that is published in the Legislation to work through their own difficulties. The numbers, I think, bear out that proposition.
Sir, this Bill builds on the amendments introduced earlier in April and June and effectively gave us more leeway in the way in which we administer the cases on the ground to deliver the reliefs in a way which the Act has contemplated it. With that, Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
[(proc text) Question Proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Murali Pillai.
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, before I start my speech, may I take this opportunity to congratulate your goodself as well as the hon Member Ms Jessica Tan on being elected as the Deputy Speakers of the First Session of the Fourteenth Parliament.
Sir, I stand in support of this amendment Bill as I hear from the hon Minister Mr Edwin Tong, the focus of this Amendment Bill is to facilitate the better delivery of reliefs and in particular to provide the Registrars and Assessors with flexibility to arrive at just outcomes in the cases that they have been assigned.
The rental relief measures introduced as an amendment to COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act in June 2020 represents one of the hallmarks of the Government's decisive response in mitigating the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on individuals and small businesses. The targeted relief has an impact of producing cost and improving cash flow, which we all know, is the lifeline of companies.
It would be good for us at this point in time, in this House, to appreciate and understand the positive impact of the Act in helping these individuals and companies. I recall the hon Minister, Minister Shanmugam mentioning 260,000 SMEs employing over two million workers potentially stood to benefit directly from the rental relief measures alone. Hon Minister, Minister Edwin Tong today mentioned about 7,000 notifications for leave has been filed.
May I please ask the hon Minister in dollar terms, what is the total value of rental rebate the commercial, industrial and office tenants have or will stand to receive arising from the property tax rebate offered by the Government? Similarly, in dollar terms, what is the estimated additional rental rebate that commercial, industrial and office tenants have or will receive from their landlords.
As I understand these are tenants who have suffered at least a 35% drop in revenue over the April-May 2020 period this year compared to the corresponding period last year.
Assessors appointed under this Act, in my respectful view, form the backbone of the implementation of this Act. We are fortunate that a good number of professionals drawn from law, accountancy and tax practices have stepped forward to help in this huge endeavour in the midst of the crisis that no doubt would have affected them too. They are paid a token honorarium but have and will continue to put in quite a lot of time and effort in the discharge of their important duties.
Being drawn from the professions, they bring with them credibility too. To each of them, we owe a debt of gratitude in answering the call for our nation, and I join the hon Minister in thanking them too. May I please ask how many Assessors have been appointed under the Act to date, and what steps have been taken to ensure that they will be able to execute their duties? In this regard, I note with interest that the hon Minister himself has been involved in briefing sessions with them.
I now move on to the impact of the Act on smaller landlords. The hon Minister Shanmugam recognised the potential plight of the smaller landlords who rely on rent for their livelihoods in his June 2020. The smaller landlords are individuals or sole proprietor landlords whose aggregate annual value of their properties are equal to or lower than $60,000 as at 13 April 2020 and the rental income form 75% of their gross income in Year of Assessment 2019.
For such landlords, they can apply for an assessment to provide half of the additional relief required. I have anecdotally received feedback on potential hardship that may be visited on these landlords arising from two general situations. The first is a timing mismatch between when IRAS provides the property tax rebate and the tenant's decision in not paying the rent equivalent to the rebate as provided for under the Act. Second, the decisions on the part of tenants not to pay rent amounting to the full extent of the additional rental relief available under the Act not taking into account the landlord's status as a small landlord.
I wonder if the hon Minister could please shed light on how these affected landlords may be assisted on the possibly unintended consequences of this Act.
Finally, given the gloomy economic conditions that now exist, which has led to the extension of the Job Support Scheme to March 2021, I wonder whether the hon Minister would consider extending the prescribed period of relief from making payment which is due to expire in October 2020, to be extended further, and if so, how can that be balanced against the plight of counterparties who would be more impacted by any extension of time?
In this regard, I note that the hon Minister, Minister Shanmugam acknowledged in the MinLaw's Addendum to the President's speech that in the coming months, some companies will face a real risk of insolvency and financial constraints may cause litigants to forgo pursuing their legal rights. He also intends to introduce in this House cost-effective measures for small businesses to restructure or wind-up.
All of us in this House must recognise that these are tough times. There are no easy solutions in this area of providing rental relief to individuals and organisations impacted by the pandemic. Failing which, their businesses will cease. There will be more muscular organisations which will not be happy with the relief measures under this Act. However, the pitching of the legislative policy must always be in favour of greater good of Singapore and Singaporeans. This amendment Bill continues to strike that appropriate balance. I support the Bill.
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Deputy Speaker, in the past few months the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Act imposed on landlords the obligation to pass on property tax rebates and waive rentals to benefit tenants who are SMEs. These measures rewrote the tenancy agreements they had entered causing income disruption to landlords. These interventions were meant to support business tenants and help them pull through the circuit breaker which disrupted their businesses.
Sir, I had an opportunity recently to interface with the rental relief scheme as a resident who was a small landlord saw me. In August, IRAS had sent her a notification of cash grant and rental waivers informing her of the grant she was to receive and the fact that she was to provide four months of rental waivers to her tenant. This lady was in her 90s and in an extremely poor health, who moved out of a landed house to receive rental income to repay a family debt and to fund her daily expenses and medical costs.
As the family found that the rental waivers required were too much for them to bear, they came to see me at my Meet-the-People Session for assistance. I advised them that she should apply for an assessment on account of financial hardship. If successful, she would only need to provide half of what was initially required that is two months rental waiver. To that end, clause 8 of this Bill updates section 19M on applying for an assessment.
Section 19M requires the landlord to apply to the Registrar of Assessors within the prescribed time and in the prescribed form in manner. This assessment would determine, among other things, whether a landlord was entitled to a reduction of the additional rental relief. Under the proposed changes to section 19M contained in this Bill, subsection 8 specifically enables the Registrar to reject an application if the application is incomplete or otherwise non-compliant, meaning if it is far later than the prescribed time or somehow does not conform to the manner specified.
Currently, the prescribed time for filing an application for assessment is 10 days after the landlord receives a notice of cash grant. Sir, given the newness of the scheme, I hope the Registrar will be accommodating of applications which may be filed out of time or perhaps not contain all the supporting documents the Registrar requires at the first instance.
Coming back to the example I gave, the resident had to wait a few days to see me, and in fact had only been recently discharged from a hospital. Her family was also more conversant in Chinese and found going through the requirements novel and onerous. The application needed to be filed via SingPass to the Singapore Land Authority as the managing agency. Such steps are not so straightforward for some small landlords and probably some tenants as well.
Sir, the avenue for assessment is a crucial one to redress any injustice between the landlord and tenant caused by the COVID-19 legislative interventions. As such, it is important that the process be user-friendly and that information be easily available in the four major languages. Furthermore, the Registrar should be open to accepting applications for assessments that may be slightly out of time or incomplete, so as not to exclude meritorious applications.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng. We will move on. Mr Vikram Nair.
Mr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): Mr Deputy Speaker, I declare my interest as a lawyer who practices both construction and corporate dispute resolution. I will be commenting on these two areas on the Bill.
The first section I would like to address is clauses 15 to 17 of the Bill, which modifies some of the procedures relating to the Security of Payment Act or SOPA. The construction industry has been one of those hard hit by the COVID-19 crisis. Generally, construction contracts are very prescriptive with parties having specific obligations to perform certain works within specific time frames. Two things are generally of critical importance: time and money.
One of the biggest problems contractors faced, is that if there are delays or issues in a construction project, payment may be withheld by the paying party. This can be between developer and main contractor or between contractors and their own sub-contractors. Dispute resolution through courts or arbitration may take time.
It was a deal with this process that the Security of Payments Act system was set up, which generally provided a fast way for claimants to recover payments due before full resolution of all disputes. These process requires both the claimants and respondents to adhere to strict timelines to file claims and responses and the adjudication would give a quick decision. This process has significantly reduced the time and costs of resolving construction disputes and many disputes would not proceed to full hearing after that.
The COVID-19 situation has hit this industry hard and works in many places had to be stopped. While the current legislation gives contractors moratorium for liabilities arising from delays caused by COVID-19, I expect that now works are gradually resuming, parties will want to be clear that they will be able to recover payment for works, as well as benefit from any necessary COVID-19 reliefs granted by the Act.
Clause 15 clarifies the moratorium would apply to claims brought under SOPA and clauses 16 and 17 would allow the contract to be modified in a manner that is \"just and equitable.\" And I acknowledge that this is the framework that has been used by Assessors dealing with all claims affected by COVID-19.
I think this also harmonises the two Acts by giving adjudicators the same powers as Assessors which makes eminent sense, so two processes are not needed, but this also gives a lot of flexibility to Assessors and adjudicators in modifying the contract, which is not very common in the construction industry, and this may create a lot of legal uncertainties, because there are many, many ways in which contracts may be affected by COVID-19.
The balance that Assessors and adjudicators would need to take is want to make sure that parties are able to perform or enforce bargains they believed they made, but not be penalised by the effect of the moratorium. The additional time and costs needed for performance of these contracts would also need to be carefully considered because it is not always easy to determine where these should fall, and this is almost always what construction contracts try to do too – place responsibility for losses or delays on one person or the other.
For example, if a project has been delayed for six months and has to be restarted, there will be costs to remobilised, there will be shortages of manpower, higher costs for hiring. I think in many ways, Assessors will have to exercise a lot of discretion on how they are going to allocate these additional costs. If there are any guidelines for Assessors or adjudicators where they should bear in mind, this may be helpful especially in a very prescriptive industry like construction.
The second area I would like to address is clause 12, which relates to Alternative Arrangements for Meetings. Generally, I have had very good feedback on the provision for these alternative arrangements. It basically allows AGMs and Board meetings to be held virtually. The feedback, of course I had, was that the hard deadline that was initially in place made it difficult for companies to plan for AGMs that may take place longer, especially where they need sometime in advance to call AGMs; and sometimes AGMs get adjourned. So, it was not clear the legislation would continue to apply to adjourned meetings. I think it was very helpful the Minister clarified that the legislation is now going to be in place until June next year which gives a good long window of time.
On this point, I have two suggestions. The legislation itself gives the Minister discretion to decide how long or short a time frame this legislation is going to be in place for; this amended proceedings. And I think at the very least three months advance notice would be helpful, a longer period would be even better.
In this regard, there is actually no harm in erring in the side of caution and giving a longer period because I think there is not much downside – even if the COVID situation is better – there is no harm if the virtual meeting provisions are still in place and meetings can go on virtually.
The second point that I would also like to make is, in fact, these provisions have been so well received that I have had feedback that perhaps the Companies Act should be amended to allow these alternative meeting arrangements to stay in place indefinitely. But this is for the Ministry's consideration.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, I stand in support of the Bill. I thank the Ministry for the rental relief afforded to many tenants and sub-tenants under the Act. It has, indeed, been a lifeline for many SMEs in these difficult economic times. I just have a few quick clarifications to seek.
On my recent market walkabouts, I found that some sub-tenants, especially coffeeshop stallholders, are not benefiting from the rental relief framework. They are not aware of the laws that have been passed and the rental relief they can get. It is good that eligible tenants and sub-tenants do not need to do anything and, instead, the landlords are obliged to notify their tenants of the rental relief. However, I understand that some landlords are not notifying their tenants and some tenants are also not notifying their sub-tenants.
In addition, some coffeeshop stallholders in Nee Soon East are aware of the rental relief but did not know that it was for four months. Some only got one month of relief. They also do not know where to seek recourse. Not requiring eligible tenants and sub-tenants again to take any further steps to obtain rental relief is a well-intentioned measure. However, it may be a double-edged sword if it is not accompanied by proactive communication and enforcement of the relief measures to tenants and sub-tenants.
We need to take a more proactive approach to ensure that the rental relief is reaching those who need this lifeline the most.
Sir, I have four clarifications.
First, can the Minister share how many complaints the Ministry has received with regard to landlords or tenants not providing the two months of rental relief that is supported by the Government to tenants and sub-tenants respectively?
Second, what percentage of these complaints are resolved with the rental relief being subsequently provided to the tenants and sub-tenants respectively?
Third, as some tenants and sub-tenants, especially again the coffeeshop stallholders, still appear to be unaware of their rental relief rights under this framework, can the Minister share if a more comprehensive communication mechanism could be put in place urgently to inform eligible tenants and sub-tenants of such reliefs? If not, can landlords and tenants be made responsible to show evidence that they have informed their tenants or sub-tenants respectively of their rental reliefs?
Fourth, given the additional rights of the assessor to vary the relief amounts pursuant to this new Bill, can the Minister share what safeguards will be put in place to ensure that tenants and sub-tenants have sufficient clarity from the outset of the rental relief and amounts that they should be entitled to? Similar to my earlier point, how will MinLaw be communicating this to the tenants and sub-tenants?
Sir, notwithstanding these clarifications, I stand in support of the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.
Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim (Chua Chu Kang): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of this amendment Bill.
I thank the Second Minister for Law for the explanations to the amendment Bill. I declare my interest as a corporate dispute lawyer and sitting on boards of several charities and companies. Members of my firm are also volunteers of the assessor team.
The amendments, as proposed in the Bill, are timely and, in particular, the amendments to section 27 of the Act in relation to the alternative meeting arrangements for organisations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Current alternative meeting arrangements expire on 30 September. With the extension to June 2021, this is greatly welcomed as it avoids several difficulties. The present amendment, which will pave the way forward for an extension of timeline, is also welcomed by organisations and charities as well.
However, I am proposing whether the Government can look into how we can incorporate such alternative meeting arrangements on a long-term basis, embedded as part of our companies' and charities' legislative and regulatory framework beyond this COVID-19 period, beyond a temporary basis.
The feedback I have received and my own experience are that these alternative meeting arrangements have proven to be not only cost-efficient but effective as it compels meetings to prioritise and focus on the business at hand. Indeed, COVID-19 has precipitated and necessitated the digital adoption and transformation of our organisations.
But having taken the first steps of the digitalisation journey, we should adopt a framework that would encourage organisations to continue to forge ahead with the digitalisation journey for our organisations.
Mr Deputy Speaker, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] \tIn my experience as a former Director of the Singapore Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry (DPPMS), an alternative platform for holding meetings was a most welcomed one. This is because most of the DPPMS members are businessmen or micro-SMEs and, by allowing AGMs to be held through alternative platforms, such as online communications, this can help lower their costs because many of our enterprises have spread their wings to either regional or international markets. In addition, when I was a Director at AMP, we have studied how digital transformation can be implemented in our Malay/Muslim welfare organisations. Through COVID-19 and the amendments to the Act, many more organisations can make use of this opportunity to undergo digital transformation. Therefore, I welcome this amendment.
(In English) Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, I support the amendments. I would like to ask the Minister whether alternative meeting arrangements can be considered in the long-term as part of our public and private companies' and charities' legislative and regulatory framework, just like Member Vikram Nair said earlier. This will be the start of our digitalisation movement towards alternative meeting arrangements as our organisations become more global in nature and members are situated anywhere around the world. Further, this will stand us in good stead to be prepared for future crises.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the amendments in the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Shawn Huang.
Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong (Jurong): Mr Deputy Speaker, I am in support of the amendment Bill. The changes to the Bill will help to provide clarity to Singapore's legal intervention. In particular, I note that under the new amendments, the assessor will be given enhanced powers to specify the amount of the rent to be waived. This will reduce the ambiguity and potential conflict between landlord and tenant, which will allow them to focus on their businesses.
Over the last few weeks, several tenants and landlords have approached me with regard to rental disputes. Many have longstanding relationships with one another but could not find an amicable way to resolve. This has been further amplified by the economic challenges faced across various industries. The amendment will help to better mediate and close issues with certainty and reason.
A number of residents have shared that the legal intervention thus far under the Act has helped their small businesses. They appreciate that it is not a broad brush attempt but seeks to differentiate between the needs of SMEs and provide targeted solutions. I commend the efforts of the MinLaw team, along with other Ministries and agencies, who continue to review the Act to ensure that it remains relevant to this ever-changing COVID-19 situation.
Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Minister Edwin Tong.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank the Members for their support of this Bill and I will just very quickly jump into the questions that have been raised and deal with them directly.
Mr Murali Pillai asked how many assessors have been appointed and what steps have been taken to ensure that they perform their duties well and how are they trained for that.
As of 4 September 2020, a total of 298 assessors have been appointed to the PACT Registry and the rental relief panel. As I have explained earlier, we do have regular discussions with them – myself, Minister Shanmugam and also the MinLaw officers. In that way, we keep a parity and we ensure that the decisions are also consistent with each other across the different panels.
There are 12 panels and each of them is headed by a senior District Judge from the State Courts. That is how the cases are administered.
The MinLaw team also conducts daily check-in sessions with the PACT Registry to provide guidance on the cases filed. So, not only on the cases that have been looked at or assessed, but the cases filed, to get a sense as to whether or not there needs to be improvement to the way in which we administer and operationalise the way in which the registry functions.
Mr Murali Pillai also asked whether there have been plans to extend the moratorium order under the current Act, which is due to expire on 19 October 2020 and how such a possible extension might be balanced against the interests of both parties.
In answering the second question, first, we have to bear in mind that, as I have said, it is intrusive to step in to intervene into parties' contracts. So, we do that judiciously and we always have to keep an eye on whether or not it is appropriate, what is the right level of intervention and whether, in the first place, the circumstances require that intervention.
So, we will monitor that carefully to make an assessment based on prevailing circumstances, whether that is still necessary. But I just want to cite, for the Member's information, that we have seen a general downward trend in the number of Notifications For Reliefs that have been filed. From July to August, compared to May and June, we have seen a downward trend. This suggests to us that either the number of cases has been coming down in terms of the disputes or, as I have postulated at the start, the cases have come down partly also because there is not even a need to file an NFR, given that the framework has become a little bit better socialised to the public and people know what the framework provides for and, therefore, can negotiate on their own accord outside of the NFR regime altogether.
So, we will monitor that, together with the prevailing circumstances, to assess whether or not we need to extend the moratorium.
Mr Murali Pillai also asked about the total value of the rental rebate that the commercial, industrial and office tenants have received and what is the estimated additional rental rebate.
The Government's assistance for the rental relief component comprises both the property tax rebate for 2020 and also the cash grant from the Government. The property tax rebate for the 2020 period amounts to about $1.8 billion and the cash grant component, as announced by Deputy Prime Minister Heng at the Fortitude Budget, is about $2 billion. So, in total, these are the two components which make up the grants given in respect of the rental relief framework.
It is worth noting that both components of the Government support are calculated based on the annual value of the property and that might not exactly be the same amount of the rental waivers that individual landlords provide. As I have mentioned earlier, the annual value is the approximated annual return that the property is expected to fetch. But what the market or what the landlord might get out of that particular property might well be different. So, there is that possibility of discrepancy. And the other, of course, is the waivers are only in respect of the base rent or contractual rent and not the service and utility charges.
Mr Louis Ng raised several concerns in his usual quickfire fashion and I will try and replicate a quickfire response.
First, on the construct of the scheme and whether tenants are aware or not aware, and whether it is easy to use. We did receive some feedback that in having to pass down the property tax rebate from the Government to landlord, landlord to tenants, there might be some friction in that process, which is why this scheme that we have designed that was passed in June does not rely on that \"passing the parcel\" as it were, but simply by way of notification from IRAS. Once that notification kicks in, then it applies by way of waivers. So, it is not so much what you have to pass down but rather what the tenants do not have to pay for the relevant period. So, it is deliberately designed in this way to ensure that, as far as possible, no active step needs to be taken by the tenant.
Second, Mr Louis Ng asked what if landlords are either slow or failed to inform their tenants. We have a framework that is set in place. Mr Louis Ng will know from the Act, it mandates the landlord to pass a copy of the notice to tenants within four working days. We have prescribed that but, obviously, there are also roughness at the edges – some might not know that they have received it, some might be unable to find their tenant for a period of time. They may not be operating their business and so on. So, we understand that and all that is taken into account.
But there is a default framework that applies absent anything else. So four days to pass down the notice. And after the notice of cash grant is received by the property owner, he is also required by law to pass a copy to his tenant and the framework is designed, as I mentioned earlier, in this case, once you receive the notice, then the waivers will kick in.
Finally, Mr Louis Ng also raised the point about information and education. I think it is a highly relevant point. The whole idea is for people to understand what the framework provides for and to be able to use the framework in a way which applies to them. We have put up the usual infographics, we have explained it as best as we can, we have also taken to having a dedicated website just to explain this and put all the materials at one place. Both Minister Shanmugam and myself have conducted several webinars and sessions, in some cases, face-to-face, some cases on online portals to explain this to people who then pass on the information. For example, we have sat down with several merchants associations and federations so that they in turn can pass down the information to their members and in that way disseminate it. So, we try as best as we can to plug into these networks and try and explain and give information.
We have also used community means, through organisations on the ground, using business associations, giving them the materials. And, ultimately, if they do have questions after all of this, we do have a team; it has been highly stretched but we do have a team that sits and takes calls and explains and also walks through the process. Later on, when I address Ms Lim's points about timing and about not being too strict, I will also explain further what else our officers do to assist in this programme.
Mr Murali Pillai asked about some landlords who may have financial difficulty and may face difficulties themselves. Let me first explain the operation of the waiver system.
The Government puts up the first one or two months, depending on whether it is industrial/office or commercial property. So, one month for industrial/office and two months for commercial. The tenants will enjoy a further additional rental relief of one or two months correspondingly, if they are able to demonstrate a 35% drop in revenue in the comparable period; and absent anything else it will be April and May 2019 against April and May 2020. You compare that and if you have a 35% drop, the additional relief kicks in. It is only the additional relief that the landlords are obliged to bear.
In the scenario where you might find a retiree landlord or a small landlord whose annual takings from rental income is a substantial portion of the annual income – 75% in this case – then that person can also apply for relief. The qualifier there is as long as you do not hold properties where the annual value is more than $60,000. We fix it at 60,000 because that is the median annual value of commercial properties in Singapore.
Based on these numbers, we expect that it does cover a fair number and if one is holding to the properties that exceeds the median annual value of commercial properties in Singapore, then you might not qualify or you would not qualify for the scheme.
I would not say it captures everyone, but by and large in hardship cases, you are likely to fall within this framework, you will get the relief from the Assessors and the landlords, those who think that they can qualify, should apply for assessment by the Assessors.
On top of that, as we have explained, and as Mr Shanmugam explained when this Bill was introduced in June, there are also other softer measures, such as the bank loans and forbearance and other measures that working through MAS, the banks have offered.
Ms Sylvia Lim asked about process timing and whether parties who filed appeals or filed applications out of time, whether or not that would be taken against them. The short answer is absolutely not. We look at the substance of the case and the merits of the case. The Registrar has a discretion to accept applications out of time and will do so as long as there is merit in the application, there is good reason and it is not a frivolous reason.
In addition our officers also often receive requests for clarification, either on the phone or in person or online. On occasion our officers also proactively assist the applicants in form filling or in explaining the process and procedure so that they will be able to have their applications either for rental relief or for landlords' additional relief to be heard by the Assessors.
So, I wish to assure Ms Sylvia Lim that this is being done already and if she is aware of any other cases which fall through the cracks, which require assistance, please do reach out to us and we will assist.
Mr Vikram Nair asked some questions about SOPA – about the timing and the cash flow. We understand that SOPA is really designed to ensure that there is security of payment and cash flow is critical in the industry. The provisions in this Bill do not affect the timeline in SOPA. All we are saying is as long as you have got an application for determination filed under Part 8 of this Act, then do not duplicate the process by also asking for relief in SOPA and I think that is a fair position to take. You do not get two bites at the cherry for relief.
As far as guidelines are concerned for Assessors and adjudicators, the same briefings, the same guidance we give to the current Assessors, we will also give to the SOPA adjudicators. Those who are given the same ambit of powers of discussion as the current PACT Assessors, they will also be given the same guidance.
Finally, on alternative meeting arrangements, I thank the various Members. Mr Vikram Nair spoke about it, Mr Zhulkarnain also spoke about it and I think the proof of the pudding is in the eating. I think if you are asking for this on a permanent basis, it cannot be quite a bad thing. So, I thank the Members for that. I just want to point out that actually under the Companies Act, as long as the constitutional documents or the memorandum and articles of the company or the relevant organisation, provides for it, then you can, in fact, already hold your meetings in a non-physical manner. There needs to be some compliance with the Companies Act and different companies or different societies may have slightly different obligations to fulfil. But by and large the scheme is there, the regime is there. If you are able to take advantage of it because your own constitution allows for it, then you can do so.
For the moment, our intention as I mentioned is to give certainty to companies who are planning for the year-end AGMs, some as far as six months down the road and we want them to know that they will be covered by the alternative arrangements. They can continue to make those arrangements and beyond that we will make an assessment. For the long term, we will study it and if this is something that is useful and workable, we will consider whether or not and to what extent we can incorporate that into a more permanent position.
Sir, I think I have touched on all the questions and I wish to end by thanking Members for speaking despite this being late in the day at the end of a long week of debate. I thank you very much for your support and I look forward also to your continued support as we continue to refine the COIVD-19 (Temporary Measures) Bill. These are steps that we gather as we encounter situations on the ground and we react to it by introducing amendments from time to time to this Bill. I thank you all very much and I beg to move, Mr Deputy Speaker.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai.] (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (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 Selection","subTitle":"Appointment of Members","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Leader of the House (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, \"that this Parliament, in accordance with paragraph (1) of Standing Order 100, appoints the following as Members of the Committee of Selection:
Ms Indranee Rajah
Dr Koh Poh Koon
Ms Denise Phua
Mr Pritam Singh
Dr Tan See Leng
Mr Edwin Tong
Mr Zaqy Mohamad\"
Sir, the appointment of the Committee of Selection will enable the Committee to begin its work of nominating Members to the six Standing Select Committees of this House and the Special Select Committee on Nominations for Appointment as Nominated Members of Parliament.
[(proc text) Resolved, (proc text)]
[(proc text) That this Parliament, in accordance with paragraph (1) of Standing Order 100, appoints the following as members of the Committee of Selection: (proc text)]
[(proc text) Ms Indranee Rajah (proc text)]
[(proc text) Dr Koh Poh Koon (proc text)]
[(proc text) Ms Denise Phua (proc text)]
[(proc text) Mr Pritam Singh (proc text)]
[(proc text) Dr Tan See Leng (proc text)]
[(proc text) Mr Edwin Tong (proc text)]
[(proc text) Mr Zaqy Mohamad (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed.\" – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 6.28 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics for COVID-19 Community Testing","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"14 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Health since 1 May 2020 (a) what percentage of patients have been tested for COVID-19 after presenting symptoms of acute respiratory infection at GP clinics or polyclinics; and (b) what percentage of contacts with prolonged exposure to patients diagnosed with COVID-19 have been tested for the disease.
15 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Health (a) since 1 June 2020, how many people have been (i) randomly tested for COVID-19 (ii) diagnosed with COVID-19 as a result of random testing; and (b) what are the plans to step up random testing for COVID-19 in the community.
16 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Health what is the current mean and median lead time between when COVID-19 swab testing is conducted and when the results of the test are made available to relevant parties.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: COVID-19 testing is a key enabler in our efforts to fight COVID-19. Our testing strategy is focused on active case finding, as well as targeted surveillance on identified groups. Such testing is based on a holistic and concerted strategy to detect and ring-fence active infections as early as possible to prevent further transmission.
The majority of linked cases are detected through active case finding around confirmed cases. Once a case is detected, the Ministry of Health (MOH) will quickly contact-trace all potential close contacts and place them under quarantine. As part of the quarantine process, all persons-under-quarantine (PUQs) will be subjected to a swab polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test for COVID-19 at the start and end of the quarantine period. The swab test at the start allows us to quickly identify infected persons under quarantine, provide the appropriate medical support and expand the ring-fence of close contacts if necessary. The swab PCR test at the end will pick up any remaining cases who could have been incubating the virus at the start of his quarantine, and gives us additional assurance that the PUQ is not infectious before releasing him from quarantine. If the PUQ presents with symptoms during his quarantine, he will be tested for COVID-19 immediately.
MOH has also conducted special operations to test selected groups of individuals where there is a higher risk of transmission of COVID-19. Examples include the testing of identified households and their visitors at Block 111 Tampines Street 11, and the testing of bus drivers and staff working in public bus depots and interchanges. While the individuals tested were not close contacts of the confirmed cases, targeted deployment of such special testing operations allows earlier detection of any underlying cases among the group even if they are asymptomatic.
Beyond active case finding, MOH has put in place targeted surveillance testing in the community. First, PCR testing is provided for all individuals aged 13 and above diagnosed with acute respiratory infection (ARI) at first presentation to a doctor. As clinical and scientific evidence shows that an infected person is most infectious right before and immediately after the start of symptoms, testing all individuals diagnosed with ARI early allows MOH to detect infected individuals quickly to contain further spread. From 1 July 2020 to 16 August 2020, 76% of the patients aged 13 and older diagnosed with ARI at the Polyclinics and Public Health Preparedness Clinics (PHPCs) were PCR tested for COVID-19. Of these, a small percentage – 0.03% - tested positive, indicating that the community prevalence of COVID-19 is low. We continue to encourage all individuals who are unwell to seek medical attention immediately and adhere to the medical advice received.
As we re-open our borders and facilitate travel, we are also testing incoming travellers either on-arrival or during their Stay-Home Notice period, to detect cases and reduce onward community transmission.
Second, surveillance testing is also done for identified groups who are more vulnerable or have higher risk of exposure to COVID-19. For example, we have been conducting rostered routine testing (RRT) on targeted groups such as workers living in the migrant worker dormitories; workers who returned to work in the construction, marine and process sectors; and workers supporting our frontline COVID-19 operations. Currently, over 200,000 such individuals are tested every two weeks. In the last two-week cycle, about 200 of such individuals tested positive for COVID-19. Majority of these cases are likely to be past infections.
Third, as we reopen our economy and resume social activities, MOH will be expanding testing to more community groups. For a start, we have identified community groups such as taxi and Private Hire Car drivers, food delivery personnel, key vendors servicing foreign worker dormitories, as well as stallholders at selected hawker centres, markets and F&B establishments such as coffeeshops. While there has been no local evidence that these community groups are of higher risks of getting infected, MOH will be offering tests to them as part of our expanded testing and surveillance efforts given the nature of their working environment, such as the high frequency of interactions with members of public. These one-time testing operations will help to provide a better picture of population prevalence.
Agencies and private providers supporting the testing operations endeavour to turn-around the test results as soon as possible. The current mean and median lead time between the conduct of the swab test and when the test results are made available from the laboratories are 30 hours and 22 hours respectively. Confirmed cases will be notified by the relevant parties expeditiously for the necessary public health actions to be taken.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"COVID-19 Vaccine Plans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"17 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Health what are the COVID-19 \tvaccine plans for Singapore.
18 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Health what is the Government's strategy for vaccinating Singaporeans and Singapore residents against COVID-19 once such vaccinations are available here.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Government is closely monitoring the global progress in the development of COVID-19 vaccines, and taking active steps to ensure that Singapore has timely access to an effective and safe vaccine when this becomes available.
Besides ongoing discussions with multiple pharmaceutical companies developing COVID-19 vaccines, Singapore is also actively engaged in international discussions to accelerate development and promote fair and equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines. In particular, Singapore has been working closely with the World Health Organisation, Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (Gavi), the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), and like-minded countries to establish a multilateral collaboration called the COVID-19 Vaccine Global Access (COVAX) Facility that will enable countries to pool risk and resources to gain access to a portfolio of vaccines from different vaccine developers. Ensuring equitable access to vaccines will help to better contain and eradicate the COVID-19 pandemic, not just in Singapore but also globally.
At the same time, we are supporting local efforts to develop a COVID-19 vaccine. Duke-NUS Medical School is collaborating with a United States biotechnology company, Arcturus Therapeutics, to develop an mRNA vaccine. Phase 1 human clinical trials for this vaccine candidate started in early August at the SingHealth Investigational Medicine Unit (IMU). Singapore is also building up vaccine manufacturing capacity, which can provide fill-and-finish contract manufacturing services to vaccine developers and ramp up production of vaccines when they are available.
Our vaccination approach aims to protect individuals who are more vulnerable or at higher risk from the disease, as well as those who may be more likely exposed to infection, while progressively expanding the coverage of vaccination to our population. The vaccination strategy and schedule would depend on several factors including the suitability of different vaccines for different population subgroups and the quantity of vaccines available at any point in time. We will continue to adapt our vaccination strategy as more information from the various vaccine candidates becomes available.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Strategy for Attracting Foreign Direct Investments in Post COVID-19 Era","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"19 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Trade and Industry how will the Government continue to attract foreign direct investments during these challenging times and moving ahead given that Singapore is one of the most expensive cities and companies are reviewing their investment plans, restructuring, and offshoring their businesses after experiencing the viability of remote work/ or work-from-home arrangements.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Attracting foreign investments will be much more difficult in this environment where supply chains will be reshuffled. Various countries are rolling out generous incentives to compete for investments, and businesses are considering relocating their supply chains closer to final demand markets.
Despite these challenges, there are opportunities to be captured. In the Asia-Pacific region, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is likely to accelerate regionalisation. Southeast Asia may also grow as a production base as countries and companies seek to diversify their footprint. To seize these new opportunities, we, i.e. the Government, our businesses and our people, must work together to adapt quickly and chart a new path.
First, we seek to be a critical node in the global system, by strengthening all dimensions of connectivity with the world – physical, financial, and digital. Singapore may be an island nation, but we cannot be cast away in a globally connected world. We must continue to keep our physical links open, so that companies can trade with the rest of the world. We must strengthen our financial hub, for capital is the lifeblood of the global economy. COVID-19 has also emphasised the importance of the digital economy and we must leverage this by establishing greater digital connectivity with like-minded partners to facilitate the exchange of data.
Second, we must be in a position to value-add to businesses who choose to work with us. Investors choose Singapore not because we have a large domestic market, abundant resources or that we are cheaper, but because we have an integrated eco-system of strengths that is hard to replicate elsewhere and add value to their businesses. These strengths include being trusted, open and consistent. We have also been restructuring our economy – focusing on productivity, innovation and skills upgrading – to build capabilities that are hard to replace.
Third, we must remain open to ideas, technology and talent. We seek to be the place where new business ideas, new technologies can find its roots to grow. At the same time, we must remain open to talent, especially in emerging industries and to supplement our labour force. The availability of foreign talent is a major consideration for multinational companies on whether to invest in Singapore. Many are concerned about the ongoing public debate on foreign talent in Singapore, and are asking us whether we are no longer as welcoming as before. As Prime Minister shared in Parliament on Wednesday, we must strike this new balance carefully – continue to stay open, but making sure that our own workers can compete fairly with the world’s best.
During this challenging time, we need to continue to be intentional and exceptional in our capabilities, connectivity and other eco-system value propositions, and remain open to compete for these investments so that we can build a future Singapore with opportunities for all.
20 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what are the reasons for the recent surge in dengue cases; and (b) what are the short- and medium- term measures to reduce overall dengue cases.
21 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the reduction in grass-cutting and tree-pruning activities due to the COVID-19 pandemic has caused the rise in dengue cases in housing estates.
22 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what is the number of dengue cases in the past six months; (b) what has been the progress of anti-dengue efforts; and (c) what has been the progress of Project Wolbachia.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: As of 29 August 2020, there were 27,281 dengue cases reported this year. Of these, about 24,000 cases were reported in the past six months, from March to August 2020.
A confluence of factors contributed to the surge in dengue cases. First, the less common DENV-3 was dominant in the first four months of this year and remains high. As this serotype had not been prevalent in the last three decades, our population has low herd immunity and this facilitates rapid disease transmission.
Second, NEA's Gravitrap surveillance system detected a 30 per cent increase in the Aedes aegypti mosquito population from May to June 2020, compared to the period February to March 2020. Coupled with the warmer and wetter weather as we entered the traditional peak dengue season from May onwards, the momentum of the high dengue case load sustained the high number of cases seen in June and till today.
Third, the spike in dengue cases coincided with the two-month Circuit Breaker (CB) period. The weekly number of dengue cases started to rise sharply from May 2020. With more people staying at home, there were more human targets for the female Aedes aegypti mosquitoes.
Finally, the scaling back of services for cleaning and facilities maintenance during the CB period, including stoppage of work at construction sites, could have also compounded the dengue situation. In some cases, overgrown grass may have concealed discarded receptables which could become potential breeding sites. However, this issue is being addressed as cleaning and associated services have resumed.
NEA has scaled up efforts on all fronts since the end of the CB, working with stakeholders.
First, NEA has an intensive inspection regime. Majority of breeding was found in homes. In May and June alone, it carried out 107,000 inspections of homes, and detected and destroyed about 2,600 mosquito breeding habitats. Another 2,700 mosquito breeding habitats were destroyed during inspections of condominium grounds, construction sites, common areas and other premises.
Second, to deter mosquito breeding, NEA has tightened the enforcement regime for Town Council managed areas, construction sites, and residential premises since 15 July 2020. For example, NEA has increased composition fine amounts in instances of repeated breeding offences, or multiple breeding habitats detected during a single inspection.
Third, on 24 July, NEA launched an intensive vector control exercise with Town Councils, Grassroots Advisers and leaders, and community volunteers. Town councils were called upon to step up housekeeping efforts to keep common areas litter-free, remove stagnant water, maintain drains, as well as work with NEA to conduct coordinated chemical treatment such as fogging, misting and applying larvicide in common areas. Most Town Councils have completed desilting and flushing of drains in the larger dengue clusters, and have moved on to also tackle other areas with high mosquito population. NEA has been auditing Town Councils to ensure that housekeeping efforts are satisfactory.
Fourth, NEA has stepped up collaboration with stakeholders on dengue prevention. For example, NEA is working with community partners, such as Grassroots Advisers and Leaders, as well as community volunteers, to reach out to residents with messages on how to prevent mosquito breeding and protect themselves against mosquito bites. Together with the People's Association and Ministry of Health, 700,000 bottles of repellent were distributed to residents in active dengue clusters and another 300,000 bottles were distributed by Polyclinics and General Practitioners to suspected dengue patients. Recently, NEA partnered the Ministry of Education to provide 46,000 bottles of repellent to students in 37 schools located in large dengue clusters, to protect the students and educate them and their families on how to protect themselves against dengue.
Fifth, NEA has launched successive public communications campaigns on both mainstream and online media. NEA has expanded the number of dengue alert banners displayed at neighbourhood precincts of dengue cluster areas, and brought the message closer to residents with dengue alert posters at the individual HDB blocks. Residents living in cluster areas are also receiving SMS reminders to check their homes for stagnant water and do the Mozzie Wipeout.
These efforts have borne some initial results. We have seen about a 20% decline in dengue cases in recent weeks. About 84 per cent of the 2,253 clusters reported in 2020 have closed as of 31 August 2020. This includes the large dengue clusters at Bartley Road, Tampines Avenue 7, Cassia Crescent, Dakota Crescent, Leicester Road, Potong Pasir Avenue 1 and Braddell Road. However, the overall number still remains high and we cannot let our guard down.
While NEA puts in concerted efforts on dengue control, we are continuing with the Project Wolbachia trials and expanding to new areas. The phased field studies at Yishun and Tampines have been promising, with the Aedes aegypti population being suppressed by 90 per cent. Preliminary analysis has shown that 65 to 80 per cent fewer dengue cases are observed at the study sites, compared to areas without releases. NEA has progressed to Phase 5 of Project Wolbachia in July 2020, which will involve releases for the whole towns of Tampines and Yishun, covering 1,455 blocks or about 15 per cent of all HDB blocks in Singapore. In addition, since May 2020, NEA has been testing a more targeted release strategy in areas with higher risk of dengue in Choa Chu Kang and Bukit Batok towns, to pre-emptively suppress the high Aedes aegypti population in these areas. These releases cover an additional 207 blocks.
Despite the success of the trials, Wolbachia is not a silver bullet; nor is it ready for immediate deployment. Constant efforts are still required to find innovations and engineering solutions to automate and sustain the mosquito production and release processes, before Wolbachia can be implemented on a larger scale. More importantly, Wolbachia technology cannot replace the community's efforts to ensure good housekeeping, which will always be needed to keep our homes and estates free from mosquitoes and dengue.
The current conditions are challenging. We are still in the peak dengue season and an all-out national effort is necessary to win the battle against dengue. NEA and partner agencies are committed to do our best to sustain the efforts. I urge all residents, especially those residing in dengue cluster areas, to do their part and take the three protective actions against dengue – spray insecticide in dark corners around the house, apply insect repellent regularly, and wear long sleeves and long pants. Residents should also continue to do the Mozzie Wipeout and ensure that their homes and surroundings are free of stagnant water.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures at Autonomous Universities to Reduce Risk of Assaults on Students","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"23 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Education in light of the recent assault case involving an NUS student (a) what are the values and behavioural standards that students are expected to uphold; and (b) what measures are in place to ensure the safety of all students.
24 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Education what measures are in place at the autonomous universities to assess the risk of assaults to their students and ensure the safety of other students, including women, in the event a student is accused or convicted of a crime involving violence.
25 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Education to what extent our medical and dental schools draw reference from the respective professional bodies' ethical code and guidelines for practitioners and past grounds of decisions or jurisprudence arising from the professional bodies' disciplinary tribunals, when assessing fitness to continue in the course for students who have been convicted of crimes involving violence.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Several members have asked about the Autonomous Universities' (AUs) efforts to safeguard campus safety in cases where their students have been accused or convicted of offences involving violence. Members are likely referring to the recent conviction of a student at the National University of Singapore (NUS), who assaulted his ex-girlfriend in an off-campus incident in 2019.
First, all the AUs have a Code of Conduct or equivalent, which students are expected to uphold at all times. These Codes stipulate the fundamental principles and ethos expected of students as members of the University community. They span a wide range of expected behaviours, including personal, professional and academic integrity, respect for others, respect for the rule of law and campus policies, to name a few. Students are educated on these, including the need to respect others, manage boundaries and engage in appropriate behaviours. They are each responsible for contributing to a safe and secure campus environment.
Second, when students commit a breach of their AUs’ Code of Conduct, they are subject to disciplinary sanctions. Such breaches include offences such as assault. AUs may impose a range of disciplinary sanctions, such as suspensions or expulsions, supervised community work and mandatory counselling. If the case involves a victim who is a student in the same university, a No-Contact Order can be put in place, where the student offender is prohibited from contacting or being in the vicinity of the victim throughout the remaining period of their studies in the university.
Any student under police investigation and who is assessed to pose a danger to any member of their campus community may also be required to stay away from campus temporarily. Such a sanction can be lifted when an assessment is made that this is no longer necessary, for instance when no charges are pressed against the student.
The universities also take action for student misconduct that takes place off-campus that they are made aware of, such as in this recent case of the NUS student. In such instances, they may rely on Police investigations as additional sources of information and subject the student to the disciplinary process and sanctions once sufficient details become available to them.
Third, campus security measures in place include round-the-clock security personnel who carry out regular campus-wide patrols, and increased CCTV surveillance. Students are able to call campus security should they feel at risk, at any time.
Finally, in response to the question from Dr Tan Wu Meng, the AUs do take reference from the professional bodies' ethical codes and guidelines for practitioners in deciding on the disciplinary sanctions or assessing the fitness of the student to continue with his studies. The approach taken is guided by the AU’s Code of Conduct, statutes and regulations, and Board of Discipline processes. The students’ disciplinary records may also be taken into consideration when they apply to be registered practitioners.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Essential Services Disrupted by Isolation Measures at Foreign Worker Dormitories","subTitle":"Plans to ramp up services in affected estates","sectionType":"WANA","content":"27 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for National Development (a) which estates currently remain more disproportionately affected, in terms of essential service provision by foreign workers, by COVID-19-related dormitory shutdowns; and (b) whether there is a plan to assist in the temporary redeployment of workers across different estates to facilitate the clearing of backlogs in the more affected estates.
Mr Desmond Lee: All foreign worker dormitories have been declared clear of COVID-19 as of 19 August 2020. The majority of foreign workers living in dormitories are now able to resume work.
The Ministry of Development (MND) understands from the Town Councils (TCs) that most of their contractors have resumed the provision of essential services to the TCs at full capacity. While a small number of contractors have yet to fully resume their essential services to the TCs for reasons such as workers being placed on quarantine, or having tested positive for COVID-19, there is currently no TC whose essential services have been significantly compromised by the non-availability of foreign workers.
Generally, if there is a need, TCs should be able to tap on their other contractors to cover the work of the affected contractors, which constitute a minority. Hence, there are currently no plans for the Government to step in to temporarily redeploy essential workers across TCs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Usage and Effectiveness of TraceTogether App","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"28 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Prime Minister (a) how many active users does the TraceTogether app currently have; (b) how many contacts of COVID-19 patients have been identified and contacted with the help of data retrieved from the TraceTogether app since its launch; and (c) how many of these contacts tested positive for COVID-19.
Mr Teo Chee Hean (for the Prime Minister): The TraceTogether (TT) Programme, comprising the TT App on smartphones and TT Tokens, utilise Bluetooth functionality to enhance and accelerate contact tracing of close contacts of COVID-19 positive patients.
The TT programme, SafeEntry and associated digital systems provide the initial list of close contacts of COVID-19 positive cases for our contact tracing teams to work on. This has enabled us to reduce the time to identify and quarantine a close contact from four days to less than two days currently.
Since we switched over to this concept of operations, 118,000 close contacts were identified, of which 4,500 subsequently tested positive during quarantine.
The effectiveness of TT and SafeEntry relies on broad based community participation. This is how we contribute collectively to keeping ourselves, our loved ones, and colleagues safe. The more people on the system, the more effective the protection. We are glad that the App has been downloaded by 2.4 million individuals since its launch. We estimate that about 1.4 million users had actively used the App in the month of August.
We will do more to encourage and facilitate active adoption, by improving the App’s features over time. We urge all who have downloaded the TT App to keep it active in the foreground. One practical way to do so is to use the App to perform more convenient SafeEntry check-ins. We have started distributing tokens to seniors and those without smart phones in order to provide protection for these vulnerable groups. In due course, we will also make tokens available for those who prefer not to use the App on their smart phones.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Progress of Development on Thomson-East Coast Line Given Delays Due to COVID-19","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Transport (a) what is the progress of the Thomson-East Coast line given the delays related to COVID-19; and (b) whether this spillover will lead to delays for other major planned MRT projects.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Circuit Breaker and phased re-opening since April this year have caused delays to the completion of the Thomson-East Coast Line Stage 2 (TEL2). Notwithstanding, we will be able to make up for some lost time, so TEL2 will open by 1Q 2021, a three-month delay from the original schedule of opening by this year.
However, unlike the TEL2 which is near completion and prioritised for resumption of work, we will only be able to better assess the length of delays on subsequent phases of TEL and other MRT projects when construction activities have more fully resumed.
The Government remains committed to significantly expand the MRT network, from around 230km today to 360km by the early 2030s. This includes opening the remaining stages of the Thomson-East Coast Line, completing the circle with Circle Line Stage 6, as well as building the North East Line Extension, Jurong Region Line and Cross Island Line.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Declaring Foreign Worker Dormitories to be Clear of COVID-19","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"31 Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked the Minister for Manpower whether there has been an error in declaring a dormitory to be cleared of the COVID-19 virus when a subsequent new cluster is found to have originated from that dormitory.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The Inter-Agency Taskforce (ITF) systematically tested all dormitory residents to clear the dormitories of COVID-19. This means that all dormitory residents have either recovered, have been tested to be free from the virus, or have moved to other government facilities to complete their isolation or quarantine depending on their health status.
As many of the dormitory residents have never been infected, they remain susceptible to COVID-19.
This is why clearing a dormitory does not mean that there will never be any new infections in future. What is key is for the workers, employers, and dormitory operators to remain vigilant and continue to comply with safe distancing measures to minimise the risk of another outbreak.
To detect new COVID-19 cases and contain the infections quickly and decisively, we have also put in place a multi-layered strategy.
First, to prevent potential infections, we have put in place Safe Living, Safe Working and Safe Rest Day measures. Before residents are allowed to return to work, dormitory operators have to implement a slew of physical distancing measures in the dormitory, such as: (i) limiting the inter-mixing of workers across rooms, levels and blocks; (ii) scheduling access to common facilities; (iii) putting in place staggered pick-up and drop-off times for workers; and (iv) ensuring safe distancing between workers. They must also monitor their workers’ health and take necessary precautions, so that workers who are unwell are quickly isolated and provided with medical treatment.
Second, to swiftly detect new cases of infection, a number of strategies are deployed. This include (i) self-monitoring by migrant workers and updating on their health status through the FWMOMCare App; (ii) close monitoring of workers who report sick at medical posts with acute respiratory illnesses; (iii) checking the wastewater from certain dormitories for traces of the COVID-19 virus; and (iv) rostered routine testing for dormitory residents every 14 days.
Finally, if a new case is detected, we have put in place measures to contain its spread. Close contacts will be quarantined and aggressive testing operations will be conducted to arrest a further spread of the virus. Workers must be tested negative at the end of their quarantine period before they are able to return to work. These measures continue to be adjusted in consultation with health experts, as new insights are gained about how the virus spreads.
COVID-19 remains a threat, as shown by the new infection cases in cleared dormitories. We look forward to the continued understanding, support and cooperation of all parties as we move together on the road to recovery.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Addressing Mental Health Challenges Faced by Foreign Workers Affected by Isolation at Dormitories","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"32 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what measures have been put in place to address mental health challenges faced by migrant workers during this period including those who are barred from leaving their living and work spaces; (b) when have these measures been put in place; (c) what is being done to help workers who develop mental health conditions when under confinement; and (d) what steps are taken to ascertain the effectiveness of such measures and to improve on them.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Since the dormitories were isolated in early April, the Inter-Agency Task Force has recognised that both the physical and mental health of the residents need to be well looked after. These efforts continue even after the dormitories were cleared under the new Assurance, Care & Engagement Group (ACE).
There are a few channels for workers to seek and get help if they are facing mental distress. The Migrant Workers' Centre (MWC) runs a 24 hour Helpline with staff experienced in supporting migrant workers. When necessary, they will escalate cases to professional counsellors. For serious cases, workers could be referred to mental health specialists in the hospitals for in-person consultations. During circuit breaker, the MWC Helpline received about 700 calls per week.
In April, HealthServe also launched a dedicated hotline for migrant workers to access medical information and submit requests for tele-counselling sessions. Since then, the service has received more than 15,000 enquiries. Their volunteer counsellors and psychiatrists have helped more than 1,100 workers.
To help prevent isolation-induced stress in the first place, being able to return to work is important. It will also address anxiety over job stability. On this, we have systematically tested every worker in the dormitories and segregated them so that those who are infected can be treated promptly, while those who are not infected or have recovered can be moved into COVID-cleared rooms or blocks. This is necessary to stop further transmission and to help workers return to their work faster. This process started in June and was completed in mid-August. As of 31 Aug, close to 90% of workers in the dormitories are able to resume work.
We have started trials to allow residents of selected cleared dorms to go to Recreation Centres on their rest days at staggered timings. We have also worked with NGOs to conduct activities that help improve the mental well-being of our migrant workers. For instance, the Alliance of Guest Workers' Outreach (AGWO) recently piloted an organised activity to the parks; and the COVID-19 Migrant Support Coalition (CMSC) has been providing free hair cuts and mental wellness engagement activities at temporary Government-provided accommodation.
Supporting these measures are the Forward Assurance & Support Teams (FAST). We have started to train and equip our FAST teams to identify and manage mental health issues. MWC’s network of 5,000 Foreign Worker Ambassadors will also proactively look out for distressed migrant workers and try to understand their key concerns so that the right help can be given quickly.
To address residents’ common concerns, we have assured the workers through our daily bulletins sent through the dormitory operators, MWC Ambassadors and the foreign worker mobile applications. As one prevalent worry is becoming infected, we have circulated videos of doctors advising workers on how to protect themselves, and of recovered workers sharing their experience, to ease the workers’ anxiety. We also facilitated the departure of workers who wanted to return home.
There are signs that these measures have helped. After calls to the MWC Helpline spiked to 700 calls per week during circuit breaker, call volume has reduced to around 500 a week now. This is not too far from the pre-Covid call volume of around 400 a week. We will continue to monitor and support the workers closely.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reports of Mental Health Cases Arising from Work-from-Home Arrangements during COVID-19 Pandemic","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Health in light of reports that Singaporeans are more stressed working from home during the COVID-19 pandemic (a) whether there is an increase in mental health cases over the last few months; (b) what current measures are in place to help affected Singaporeans; and (c) whether further measures are needed as work-from-home arrangements continue amidst the pandemic.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The COVID-19 pandemic has brought about shifts in the way we work and interact with others, with more Singaporeans working from home during the pandemic.
In the period of April to July 2020, there was a decrease of 36 percent in the number of attendances at the Specialist Outpatient Clinic and a decrease of eight percent in Emergency Department visits at the Institute of Mental Health, as compared to the same period last year, in part due to the Circuit Breaker (CB) measures.
However, for the same period, there was an increase of 60 percent in the number of calls to the IMH Mental Health Helpline as compared to last year. Similarly, the number of community referrals for mental health issues to the Agency for Integrated Care’s (AIC) Care-in-Mind online platform more than doubled during this period with demand returning to normal levels in July 2020 post CB. In summary, with the exception of IMH Mental Health Helpline, the utilization of mental healthcare services has returned to the level seen prior to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.
To further support the mental health needs of Singaporeans during the pandemic, the National CARE Hotline was launched in April 2020 to provide support to those facing mental health concerns such as anxiety and adjustment issues related to COVID-19. As of 20 August 2020, the hotline has handled approximately 27,900 calls. About 11,800 of these calls were directed to trained volunteers to provide psychological first aid, while the remaining calls which are specific to other needs such as finance and employment issues were directed to the appropriate hotlines. Individuals who needed more targeted and continued support were referred to help services such as counselling centres or specialised helplines. The number of calls has since decreased by about 42 percent post CB.
To provide information and self-help tools to improve mental well-being, Temasek Foundation, AIC, and the Ministry of Health Office for Healthcare Transformation have developed online mental health platforms such as the \"My Mental Health\" Microsite (www.stayprepared.sg/mymentalhealth/), and Mindline.sg. Users will also be able to find out more on the support services that are available to them through these platforms.
To address the challenges of working from home, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has issued an inter-agency Advisory in April this year to advise employers and workers on practical steps to take and to tap on counselling resources to support one’s mental well-being during the COVID-19 period. Recommendations for employers include regular checking in with staff, provide flexible work schedules for parents of young children; and provide employees with access to external counselling service. Employees are also encouraged to maintain a circle of social support; and stay active and healthy during this period.
The Ministry of Health will continue to work with its partner agencies to monitor the trends of utilisation of support services and provide timely intervention if necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Patients Accessing Subsidised Care at Public Hospitals and Specialist Centres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"34 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Health (a) over the past three years, how many Singaporeans at public hospitals and specialist centres have requested to change from a paying class to subsidised care; (b) how many of such patients have accessed paying class care through (i) employment-linked insurance or (ii) personal integrated shield plans; and (c) of these, what proportion subsequently received subsidised care at the same rates as de novo subsidised patients.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Upon admission, Singaporeans can choose to be admitted into private or subsidised ward classes regardless of their means and hospitals provide financial counselling to patients to help them select a ward class appropriate to their needs.
To receive subsidised specialist outpatient (SOC) treatment, a patient needs a referral from a subsidised inpatient ward class, emergency department or a polyclinic. Hence, patients who opt for private ward will be considered as private patients and charged unsubsidised rates should they require follow-ups at the SOCs after discharge.
Nonetheless, should they need to switch to subsidised care due to financial concerns, for both the inpatient and SOC settings, they can approach the staff at our public healthcare providers for assistance. The providers assess such requests on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration patient’s financial circumstances and ability to continue to pay unsubsidised rates. For patients facing genuine financial difficulties, the providers will exercise some flexibility and allow them to switch to subsidised service and pay subsidised rates.
In the past three years, on average, we have received about 2,400 requests a year to switch from private to subsidised inpatient or SOC care, out of a total of 80,000 admissions from private wards and 1,000,000 private SOC attendances a year. About 70% of these requests are approved.
Patients with Integrated Shield Plans make up about 35% of all requests in the inpatient setting. Our public healthcare providers’ administrative records do not capture whether a patient’s insurance scheme is employment-linked.
I would like to assure the Member that our public healthcare providers will consider, among other things, changes to a patient’s circumstances, such as loss of income or private insurance coverage, in assessing whether to accede to requests to switch to subsidised care. Patients facing financial difficulties should approach the medical social workers to discuss their options.
36 Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked the Minister for Defence (a) whether he can provide an update on the recruitment rate for the Cyber NSF Scheme and the Cyber Military Experts Scheme; and (b) what are the measures to attract more cyber talents to the Ministry to support digital defence.
Dr Ng Eng Hen: The Cyber NSF scheme was introduced in 2018, to attract and train Full-time National Service (NSF) personnel with the requisite interest, aptitude and skills to be Cyber Specialists. Successful applicants receive undergraduate work-learn programmes and on-the-job training which is sponsored, after which they are deployed in various roles to defend networks and systems within Mindef and the SAF. From inception, about 170 NSFs have been enrolled through the scheme over a period of two years. The proportion of successful applicants is about 23%.
As with other vocations, these cyber NSFs complement regulars who serve as SAF Command, Control, Communications and Computers Experts (C4X) or the non-uniformed Defence Cyber Expert (DCX). Over the past year, more than 150 personnel have been recruited to these two vocations.
Again, as with all science and technology based vocations, there are programs for upstream cultivation to promote awareness and interest in the realm of cyber defence. To this end, the Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA) has organized Cyberthon competitions and Cyber Defenders Discovery Camp. This year’s virtually-held Cyber Defenders Discovery Camp attracted a record participation of 3,200 youth, ranging from secondary school students to university undergraduates. It is our hope that some amongst them will be inspired to join MINDEF and the SAF as cyber vocationlists.
We will continue to enhance these initiatives and develop new ones so as to build up a cyber workforce to defend our digital borders.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adoption of Blockchain-based Multi-currency Payments Network","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"37 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Prime Minister (a) with the conclusion of Project Ubin, what are the steps towards live adoption of a blockchain-based multi-currency payments network prototype; and (b) how soon can a pilot launch in Singapore be expected.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): Project Ubin is a collaborative industry effort led by the Monetary Authority of Singapore, to explore the use of blockchain technology to clear and settle payments and securities more efficiently. The project will help us better understand the technology and its potential benefits. To date, more than 40 financial institutions, FinTechs and technology firms have participated in the project.
The findings, technical documentation, and source codes have been published openly, to to encourage commercial applications. One example is JPM-Coin by J.P. Morgan, which was largely developed out of Singapore, by the same team that worked on Project Ubin. Some industry players have also expressed interest in leveraging the project learnings to develop a live commercial offering for multi-currency payments.
In due course when the commercial endeavor materialises, the parties will make their announcements and share more about their roll-out plans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Broadband Service Subsidies for Seniors in Low-income Households","subTitle":"Subsidies provided under Digital Access Programme","sectionType":"WANA","content":"38 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) whether senior citizens from low-income households qualify for subsidies to access broadband services in their homes under the Digital Access Programme; and (b) whether the cost of installing a broadband point in their homes can be subsidised under the programme.
Mr S Iswaran: The Government is committed to building an inclusive digital society, where all Singaporeans, including our seniors, are empowered with digital skills and have the means to access digital platforms.
Under IMDA’s Home Access (HA) programme, eligible low-income households, including those with senior citizens, can enjoy two years of subsidised home broadband services, and the option to own one subsidised device per household. The fees for broadband installation, as well as fees for installing the first termination point, are waived for beneficiaries. The Home Access programme has benefitted many seniors, with 75% of current beneficiaries comprising households with seniors aged 60 and above. In this year alone, nearly 4,000 seniors have benefitted from the Home Access scheme.
IMDA also recently introduced subsidies for low-income seniors to obtain personal smartphones and mobile plans under the Mobile Access for Seniors (MAS) scheme. The scheme supports low-income seniors with on-the-go connectivity, and complements the SG Digital Office's efforts to raise the digital skills of seniors. 800 seniors have benefited from this scheme since its launch in July.
Our efforts at ensuring digital inclusion of seniors have been well-received. To-date, 16,000 seniors have taken part in the SG Digital Office's digital skilling initiatives. Many of the seniors, some of whom I recently met at Teck Ghee Community Centre, are eager to learn and possess a can-do spirit. With the support of our corporate and community partners, Digital Ambassadors and volunteers, we will continue our efforts to ensure that seniors are not left behind in Singapore's digitalisation journey.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancing and Securing Internet Connectivity Given Prevalence of Work-from-Home Arrangements","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked the Minister for Communications and Information how will the Ministry enhance Internet connectivity islandwide and ensure that our connections remain secure and robust especially when work-from-home becomes more prevalent.
Mr S Iswaran: Singapore’s digital infrastructure has been able to accommodate the rise in Internet traffic arising from COVID-19. Traffic volume remains well within each telecom operator’s network capacity, with a healthy buffer of at least 30%.
IMDA has also put in place measures to minimise the risk of network disruptions, and ensure a speedy recovery if such disruptions were to occur. For example, IMDA requires key telecom operators to conduct regular audits to ensure that the resilience of their networks is on par with international best practices. IMDA also requires telecom operators to comply with requirements in areas such as redundancy and diversity. The Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA) also requires telecom operators that own Critical Information Infrastructure to adhere to mandatory cybersecurity requirements prescribed under the Cybersecurity Act.
My Ministry and IMDA continue to enhance our digital infrastructure for the next bound of growth in our digital economy. For example, we are working with our telecom operators to deploy world-class nationwide 5G networks that are secure and resilient.
In parallel, the Government is also taking steps to better protect Singaporeans and our enterprises against cyber threats. CSA will launch the Safer Cyberspace Masterplan later this year, to secure our core digital infrastructure and safeguard our cyberspace. Earlier in March, CSA also released an advisory that provides tips for individuals to stay cyber-safe while telecommuting; for example, by using a secure Wi-Fi network, and sending important and sensitive information over a Virtual Private Network.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for Coding in Mainstream Curriculum at Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Education whether coding can be mandated as part of the mainstream curriculum instead of enrichment programmes for students.
Mr Lawrence Wong: We recognise the importance of coding in our young people, especially in this digital age. But programming languages can change and become outdated over time. So it is important to focus on the underlying skills such as computational thinking, problem solving, logical reasoning and data handling. These underlying skills are developed through the learning of subjects, particularly mathematics and science. At the same time, we have worked with IMDA to expose all students to basic coding and technology through the 'Code For Fun' programme.
With a broad base of exposure to basic coding, and with a strong foundation in the underlying skills, students will be able to easily pick up and learn new programming languages as they progress through different stages of their education.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cost Savings at Tertiary Institutions Arising from Online Learning","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"42 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Education whether there have been cost savings at tertiary institutions arising from the replacement of face-to-face lessons with online learning and, if so, whether these cost savings may be passed to the students in the form of tuition fee rebates.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The institutes of higher learning (IHLs) have been leveraging on technology to support students’ learning. During the Circuit Breaker period, they had to shift all learning online for all students. Post Circuit-Breaker, online learning has continued at varying levels, alongside the resumption of some in-person classes.
While the change in delivery mode over the past six months has brought about cost savings on some fronts, there are also many areas of increased costs. For example, institutions incurred costs to enhance existing IT systems and facilities, purchase new tools to support online learning, and develop new learning resources to cater to the significantly higher demands for online teaching. Additional costs were also incurred due to safe management measures and enhanced cleaning and disinfection, which will continue to be incurred in the new normal.
A significant portion of the IHLs’ running costs are due to manpower costs. The academic and non-academic staff in each institution are working even harder than usual, to review and adjust their curriculum and teaching, and mitigate the disruptions to practicals, overseas exchanges and internships in order to ensure that students continue to learn uninterrupted, in a different but meaningful way. IHL staff have also stepped up efforts to help graduates with career guidance and support for their job searches.
Notwithstanding all of these cost considerations, MOE and the IHLs have decided to freeze the tuition fees this year in light of the difficult economic situation. We will continue to review tuition fees annually with the IHLs, to ensure that fees reflect changes in the cost of delivering education, while keeping them affordable for Singaporeans.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Data Collection Duration for Graduate Employment Survey","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Ms Raeesah Khan asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Graduate Employment Survey (GES) can be extended to a five-year and 10-year period after graduation to enable longitudinal data analysis of wage outcomes for graduates of Private Education Institutions (PEIs) and Autonomous Universities (AUs); and (b) whether anonymised data from the GES for both AUs and PEIs can be shared with academics for research on the trends suggested by the data.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) have been conducting the Graduate Employment Survey (GES) annually to monitor the employment outcomes of their graduates six months after graduation. The Committee for Private Education (CPE) started coordinating a similar GES with the Private Education Institutions (PEIs) since 2014.
In general, the longer after graduation the survey is conducted, the more difficult it is to reach out to graduates who are already working and secure a sufficiently high response rate to ensure that the findings are robust. Nonetheless, MOE recognises the value of tracking longer-term employment outcomes beyond the initial six months, and therefore recently conducted a pilot with the Polytechnics last year to survey graduates who graduated five years ago. We will progressively extend this approach to the Autonomous Universities and ITE.
For the PEIs, they have found it challenging to obtain response rates for the existing GES conducted six months after graduation that are comparable to those for the IHLs, as some of their graduates have declined to participate or are uncontactable. We will continue to reach out to them.
Academics who are interested in diving deeper into the GES data can get in touch with MOE, and we will work with them on how the data can be used for research that can shed light on the trends and bring broader benefits to our society.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Address Over-subscription During Primary 1 Registration Exercise in Bukit Batok and Sengkang","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Education in light of the fact that 226 children were vying for 38 Primary one places in Princess Elizabeth Primary School during Phase 2C of the admission exercise, whether an additional primary school can be built within Bukit Batok HDB Town to cope with the increased demand for Primary one places.
45 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education (a) for each of the past five years, what are the statistics on the over-subscription of Primary one spaces in Sengkang primary schools and for the nation as a whole; (b) whether there is spare capacity in terms of classrooms for Primary one level in Sengkang primary schools compared to the nation as a whole; (c) what is the student-teacher ratio of primary schools for Primary one in Sengkang relative to the average for the nation as a whole; and (d) what are the factors considered in setting the number of Primary one spaces for schools in Sengkang, and Singapore as a whole.
Mr Lawrence Wong: MOE’s school planning objective is to ensure there are sufficient school places and school resourcing to support all Singaporean school-going children, at both the national and regional levels. We annually review to ensure that the number of Primary one places across the country and in each residential area are sufficient for the current and projected population. We also take into account planned future housing developments in each residential area, with the objective of ensuring that every eligible Singaporean and Singapore Permanent Resident (PR) child has access to a place in a primary school reasonably near to their home. Generally, around 98% of Singaporean and Singapore PR children are able to obtain a place in a primary school of their choice, or a primary school within two km of their residence. The proportion remains similar in this year's exercise. Even after Phase 2C (Supplementary), we will still have vacancies to facilitate all remaining children into a school generally not far from their home.
In Bukit Batok and Sengkang, for example, there have been new housing developments, some recently completed while others are in different stages of construction, to be completed over the next few years. MOE carefully reviews the demand and supply situation in these areas not just for the coming year but also projects this for the next several years. This is to enable us to make timely plans to build new schools should there be a sustained increase in demand over the medium to long-term, or consider making year-by-year intake adjustments for some of the schools in these areas to meet the projected demand.
In Bukit Batok, there are six primary schools, and as a whole, there are sufficient primary school places in the area. There are two schools with about 150 remaining vacancies at the end of Phase 2C (Supplementary) in this year’s P1 Registration Exercise. This represents around 12% of total planned Primary one places in Bukit Batok. For parents who could not register their children in the popular Princess Elizabeth Primary School, they can consider other nearby schools which still have vacancies.
To Mr Murali Pillai’s question on whether an additional primary school would be built to cope with the increase in demand for Primary one places in Bukit Batok HDB town, MOE is indeed carefully studying this as part of the development plans of the nearby Tengah New Town. I would like to assure the Member that we will make timely plans for any new school based on medium to long-term demand projections.
For Sengkang, there are 12 primary schools, with three schools having around a total of 120 remaining vacancies at the end of Phase 2C (Supplementary) in this year’s exercise. This represents about 4% of total planned Primary one places in Sengkang.
For growing areas like Sengkang and Bukit Batok, the primary schools may be fuller to provide as many places as possible to children living nearby. This is unlike more mature areas where there are fewer children to fill the schools. Nonetheless, even in Sengkang, each school has about two spare classrooms in this year’s P1 Registration Exercise. These classrooms could be used by schools to conduct small group lessons to support students’ learning.
Currently, the national pupil-teacher ratio (PTR) at the Primary level is about 15. The average PTR for primary schools in Sengkang is 16. We resource our schools based on their student profile and the programmes they run. Special attention is paid to deploy additional teachers to schools with more students with learning needs so these students can be supported through targeted interventions. Hence, PTRs will differ across schools given our needs-based resourcing approach.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria and Appeals for Early Graduation from Home Ownerhsip Plus Education Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"46 Ms Raeesah Khan asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the number of families and widowed or divorced mothers who have appealed for early graduation from the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme since its implementation in 2004; and (b) what is the approval rate of these appeals.
47 Ms Raeesah Khan asked the Minister for Social and Family Development what are the criteria that families and widowed or divorced mothers under the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) Scheme need to meet in order to graduate from the scheme.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) scheme supports young, low-income families who choose to keep their families small, so that they can focus their resources on giving their children a head start, and improve their financial and social situation. Families who join the scheme receive assistance in the form of housing subsidies, utilities grants, employment and training incentives, education bursaries, family planning and mentoring support.
Families can stay on the scheme until graduation, when the mother turns 45 years of age. They can also choose to withdraw from the scheme earlier at any time. The Ministry will help families to transit to other forms of assistance, if needed.
Families who have improved their circumstances over time and wish to have more than two children within the context of marriage may apply to graduate early from the scheme, if their monthly household income exceeds $4,000, and both husband and wife have been in sustained employment for at least five years. If a family's appeal for early graduation is supported, it can keep all benefits disbursed to them under the scheme. Since the scheme's inception in 2004, we have supported four out of the five clients who appealed for early graduation. One divorced client's appeal was turned down as she did not meet the criteria for early graduation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Application for Government Paid Childcare Leave Scheme Broken Down by Gender of Employees","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Social and Family Development for each year in the past five years under the Government-Paid Childcare Leave (GPCL) Scheme, what is the median number of days of childcare leave taken per year by (i) female employees and (ii) male employees respectively.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Employees with Singapore Citizen children below seven years of age are entitled to six days of paid childcare leave per year under the Government-Paid Childcare Leave Scheme. Employers are responsible for the first three days of leave, while the Government reimburses employers for the fourth to sixth day of leave taken.
Employers are not required to submit information on employees who take only one to three days of leave, to avoid burdening employers and employees with excessive data submission. Hence, we only have information when leave is consumed beyond the third day.
From 2016 to 2019, the median number of days of leave taken by male and female employees has been the same, and it is six days. This is based on employees who consumed more than three days of childcare leave and where employers submitted claims.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enforcement of Compliance with Maintenance Payments in Divorce Cases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"49 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Social and Family Development given the importance of having both parents involved in raising of a child despite a divorce, how will the Ministry ensure that a maintenance order is fully complied with especially if the parent ordered to pay maintenance has the financial means to do so.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: We agree that it is important for both parents to be involved in raising their children despite a divorce.
However, there will be cases where a parent deliberately neglects or refuses to provide maintenance. This is why MSF had worked with the Family Justice Courts to introduce the Maintenance Record Officer (MRO) scheme in 2016. One of the MRO's functions is to assist the Family Justice Courts to gather information and submit an assessment of why the parent has defaulted on providing maintenance – that is, whether the parent is unable to pay, or unwilling to pay. If the parent has the financial means to pay but is unwilling to do so, the Family Justice Courts can consider whether harsher penalties should be meted out for non-compliance.
Maintenance default may also occur where there is genuine financial hardship. In such instances, the families are referred to Social Service Offices for financial assistance.
MSF and the Family Justice Courts will continue to review the maintenance enforcement regime to enhance compliance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Recent Trends in High-rise Littering","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how many culprits of high-rise littering cases have been charged in the past five years; (b) whether there has been a rising trend over the past five years; and (c) whether new measures will be implemented to curb the problem.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The National Environment Agency (NEA) took 6,000 enforcement actions in total against 2,200 offenders for high-rise littering in the past five years. The number of enforcements per year hovered between 1,100 to 1,500 from 2016 to 2019.
The use of surveillance cameras with video analytics has contributed significantly to improving NEA's enforcement efforts. It has enabled NEA to increase the yearly enforcement actions from 11 in 2012, prior to the use of surveillance cameras, to over 1,000 in recent years.
To further improve effectiveness, NEA has implemented additional measures. Besides significantly increasing the number of surveillance camera deployments, NEA has also streamlined processes to reduce the time taken for investigation and partnered closely with Town Councils to enable more timely information-sharing and prompt reporting of the interventions conducted.
Going forward, NEA will explore better camera technology and strengthen partnerships with communities to develop localised solutions for the high-rise littering problem. For example, we worked with Grassroots Leaders, the Town Council and agencies such as the Municipal Services Office (MSO) last year to pilot a project for two blocks of flats in Yio Chu Kang that had persistent issues with high-rise littering and pigeon-feeding. The grassroots had formed a community watch group to conduct house visits and raise awareness about the issue among residents, while NEA deployed surveillance cameras and MSO developed new publicity materials and informed residents about the number of persons caught. The joint efforts saw a dip in the number of feedback on high-rise littering and pigeon feeding in the area. NEA will be looking into more of such community co-solutioning with active surveillance and enforcement in future.
High-rise littering is an anti-social and irresponsible act which affects public safety and environmental hygiene. Even as we step up our efforts to address the situation, we must also step up our efforts as a community to cultivate social graciousness, consideration for others and a sense of collective responsibility for the cleanliness of our common spaces.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Mitigate Disamenities from Second-hand Cigarette Smoke in Residential Areas","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"51 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what measures is the Ministry studying to assist individuals who are negatively affected by second-hand cigarette smoke from their neighbours smoking within their HDB flats; and (b) whether the Ministry has studied the effectiveness and receptiveness of bans on residents smoking at their balconies and windows implemented at some condominiums.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The issue of smoking is one that requires everyone to play their part. Smokers are encouraged to exercise social responsibility and be mindful of the health of others, and not light up where the smoke will affect others. Families and friends of smokers, as well as the general public, can help reinforce the right social norms.
To assist individuals who are affected by second-hand cigarette smoke arising from neighbours smoking in their HDB flats, the National Environment Agency (NEA) works with Town Councils and HDB to advise smokers to be considerate when smoking. Oftentimes, the smoker is unaware that his actions have affected his neighbour and such advisories are sufficient in encouraging the smoker to adjust his behaviour. Community leaders also help to mediate between neighbours, help them empathise with one another’s situation and discuss what adjustments can be made. Affected residents can also seek help from the Community Mediation Centre (CMC), which provides mediation service for disputes between neighbours. Trained mediators will facilitate discussions between parties in an effort to reach a mutually acceptable solution. For intractable cases where parties are unable to resolve their disputes, residents can raise the matter to the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunal as a last resort.
We do not have information on any condominiums that have implemented a ban on residents smoking at their balconies or windows. We are only aware of the case of a condominium that had issued a circular telling residents to refrain from smoking on their balconies and in window areas, which was reported in the press in August 2017. While some residents were supportive, there were also those who argued that the management should not dictate what one can or cannot do in their private spaces. We understand that subsequently, the management did not proceed to ban residents from smoking on their balconies and in window areas.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria for Setting Up Hawker Centres and Wet Markets","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"52 Mr Don Wee asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment what are the criteria, such as the number of dwelling units, to set up a hawker centre and wet market within a constituency.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: In 2011, the Government announced its intention to restart building hawker centres after a 26-year hiatus, focusing on new estates or existing ones that are relatively under-served in terms of a diversity of affordable dining options. This ensures Singaporeans will continue to have access to affordable food across Singapore. We announced in 2011 and 2015 that we would build twenty new hawker centres in total. Seven are already in operation while another ten are currently in the design development or construction stages and are expected to be completed by 2027. For the remaining three hawker centres, one has earlier been announced to be in Choa Chu Kang Town Centre while the locations of the remaining two will be announced in due course.
As we plan for the long term, the National Environment Agency (NEA) assesses the need for new hawker centres to serve towns with larger geographical areas and populations instead of individual constituencies. NEA works closely with planning agencies such as URA and HDB to identify appropriate locations for new hawker centres based on criteria such as residential catchment and availability of affordable and comparable F&B options in the vicinity. For residents’ convenience and to ensure a viable level of business for hawkers, sites with good accessibility and connectivity are also preferred, such as those co-located with other amenities or transport nodes.
New hawker centres will generally not come with a market section selling fresh produce given the availability of alternative options such as HDB market produce shops and supermarkets. From our experience, market sections in hawker centres require sufficient scale to succeed, and must attract customers from a broader regional level. Those which are unable to get this catchment generally do not fare well.
53 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what is the ratio of Singaporeans to foreigners working in the local food production sector; and (b) how will the Ministry attract more Singaporeans to the farming sector to work as employees or as owners and entrepreneurs.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: The local agri-food sector comprises over two hundred farms producing mainly eggs, fish and vegetables. As of June 2020, slightly more than half of the workers hired in the sector were locals, and most of the foreign workers were semi-skilled workers holding Work Permits. This is because the majority of these farms adopt conventional methods of food production, which are often low in productivity and labour-intensive, involving manual feeding or planting, harvesting and packing.
With new farming technologies, the agri-food sector presents fresh job opportunities. My Ministry has set the \"30 by 30\" goal to produce 30 percent of our nutritional needs locally by 2030, up from less than 10% today. To achieve it, we will need to uplift and transform our farms to embrace such new technologies to be highly productive, innovative and sustainable. The agri-food sector will generate more higher value-add jobs and demand for skilled workers. For instance, vegetable farming can shift from single-layer outdoor cultivation which is manpower-intensive, to multi-tiered, automated indoor farming where a few workers can manage the growing environment through sensors and a computer-controlled system.
We have introduced policies to support the industry in its transformation journey. Since 2014, the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) has been co-funding farmers’ investments in productivity-enhancing farming equipment through the $63 million Agriculture Productivity Fund. In April this year, SFA launched the \"30 by 30 Express\" Grant Call to crowdsource innovative proposals to accelerate local production in the near term amidst disruptions in global food supply chains due to COVID-19.
As the agri-food sector modernises, we can expect to see a shift in agri-food sector workforce towards one that is highly-skilled and manpower-efficient. There will be a growing demand for agriculture/aquaculture specialists, and we will build up a pipeline of local talents with multi-disciplinary skillsets.
To attract and emplace skilled workers in the agri-food sector, SFA has worked with various Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and local farms to develop relevant Pre-Employment Training (PET) and Continuing Education and Training (CET) courses. These programmes equip students and adult job seekers with skillsets that will lead to careers in the agri-food sector. For example, over the years, SFA has partnered polytechnics to curate diploma programmes in aquaculture and agriculture technology, including part-time diplomas targeted at career-switchers keen to join the high-tech farming sector and individuals in the sector looking to upgrade their skills. SFA also helps to match students in these programmes to local farms for structured internship opportunities, giving them a first-hand experience of working in farms while putting their knowledge and practical skills to use. More than 60 students have benefited from such structured internships over the past three years. Just a few months ago, SFA partnered Temasek Polytechnic to launch a SGUnited Skills programme, \"Up-Skill in Aquaculture Technology\", to provide essential knowledge for Singaporeans who are keen on a career in the aquaculture industry.
SFA will continue to introduce and expand initiatives that will transform the agri-food sector and upskill the agri-food workforce. These will be rolled out at the right time to meet industry needs without creating oversupply. We want to see more Singaporeans in the local agri-food sector, contributing towards a more food-secure Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cleaning of Debris Washed Ashore Due to Monsoon Season","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"55 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment with regard to the marine trash washing ashore Singapore during the monsoon season (a) which beaches are usually impacted by the monsoon season; (b) how has the schedule of the cleaning of recreational beaches been impacted during the COVID-19 period; (c) what is the schedule of cleaning of non-recreational beaches; and (d) how is the Ministry working with other countries to mitigate the issues of marine trash.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Singapore faces the Northeast monsoon from November to March and the Southwest monsoon from June to September. The monsoon brings along flotsam to our shores. During the Northeast monsoon, the recreational beaches of Changi Beach, Pasir Ris, Punggol, Coney Island and Sembawang are affected by flotsam, while East Coast Park is affected during the Southwest monsoon. In 2019, NEA collected over 1,000 tonnes of flotsam from East Coast Beach, of which about half were collected during the Southwest monsoon months. During those months, there was an increase of almost 90% in the amount of flotsam collected from the beach.
To keep our recreational beaches clean, NEA increases the frequency of cleaning at these beaches from four times a week to twice a day during the monsoon periods. Non-recreational beaches not accessible to the public are cleaned once a week or fortnightly, depending on the amount of flotsam washed to our shores. This frequency of cleaning has been maintained even during the COVID-19 period. Nevertheless, despite this high frequency cleaning regime, after each cleaning session, new waves of flotsam from the open sea are washed onto our shores during each high tide. We are gratified to see that Singaporeans have taken the initiative to help clean our beaches. Many ground-up groups are actively involved in cleaning regularly. One of them, \"East Coast Beach Plan\" with more than 2,500 members, has been facilitating clean-up since July and has collected about 9,600kg of litter in August alone.
Singapore is an active contributor to international and regional platforms that address the issue of marine litter, which is transboundary in nature. We have worked with the international community to craft and adopt resolutions on Marine Plastic Litter and Addressing Single-Use Plastic Products Pollution at the 4th UN Environment Assembly, and worked with G20 countries to establish the 2019 G20 Implementation Framework for Actions on Marine Plastic Litter. We are also a member of the Ad-Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group (AHEG) on Marine Litter and Microplastics under the United Nations Environment Programme.
At the regional level, Singapore, along with other ASEAN member states, adopted the Bangkok Declaration on Combating Marine Debris and the ASEAN Framework of Action on Marine Debris in June 2019. We are also active in marine litter initiatives organised by the Coordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA) and Partnerships in Environmental Management of the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA).
Last but not least, Singapore conducts capacity building programmes under the Singapore Cooperation Programme to support other developing countries in combating marine litter, and undertakes bilateral cooperation with countries to address the problem.
Even as we continue to tackle marine litter, all of us should do our part to keep our beaches clean. Littering not only spoils the beauty of our beaches, but also harms wildlife. I urge visitors to do their part and bin their rubbish when at the beaches, and advise others to practise similar good habits.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Designs for Future HDB Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"57 Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked the Minister for National Development whether the COVID-19 pandemic has an impact on the future designs of HDB flats such as provision for spaces to work from home and, if not, whether HDB will consider factoring such considerations into future flats.
Mr Desmond Lee: HDB flats are designed to provide a living environment that is functional and comfortable. For instance, bedrooms are built with large windows to optimise natural lighting and ventilation, while kitchens are designed to be open to increase the sense of spaciousness within the flat.
HDB flats are also designed to provide flexibility for residents to reconfigure spaces in their homes to meet their needs. For example, columns in new flats are pushed to the edges wherever possible, so that home owners can have more flexibility in reconfiguring their home layout.
These design principles came in useful during the circuit breaker when residents had to work from home and students had to undergo home-based learning.
Beyond flats, HDB has also over the years introduced more greenery, and play and fitness equipment to enhance the living environment in our precincts and neighbourhoods. These extended living spaces give our flat dwellers a respite from the confines of their homes while seeking to encourage a healthy lifestyle. Commercial amenities such as supermarkets and eating houses have also been planned to be within easy walking distance from homes.
We are studying how HDB flat designs can support developments in the future of work, including trends that may have been accelerated by the current pandemic, such as telecommuting. Today, broadband for Wi-Fi ready connections is already available in all public housing flats, facilitating working and studying from home. HDB is also trialing 'smart-enabled' homes in Punggol Northshore and Tengah so that residents can adopt more smart applications. If feasible, we will incorporate these features into future designs. We will also continue to gather views and ideas to improve the design of public housing to better meet residents’ needs, as part of the Emerging Stronger Conversations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal for New Committee to Study Enthanasia of Healthy Pet Dogs","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"58 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether it will set up an independent committee comprising stakeholders such as veterinarians, animal welfare groups, dog trainers, and dog owners to study the issue of euthanasia of physically healthy pet dogs; (b) if so, what is the Ministry's timeline for setting up this committee; and (c) if not, how will the Ministry ensure that the stakeholders are adequately engaged.
Mr Desmond Lee: All parties, including veterinarians, animal welfare groups, dog trainers, and dog owners, have a duty of care to the pets under their charge. In particular, owning a pet comes with important obligations and should not be entered into lightly.
There are safeguards in place regarding euthanasia of pet dogs. The Code of Ethics for Veterinarians states that veterinarians must consider other treatment options prior to considering euthanasia. It also allows for veterinarians to reject an owner’s request for euthanasia, should he or she deem it inappropriate. NParks works closely with the Singapore Veterinary Association to review the Code of Ethics and ensure that it remains up to date with developments in the veterinary industry and international best practices.
Nonetheless, NParks has received suggestions from various stakeholders and is studying them carefully. NParks will engage relevant stakeholders, as part of the ongoing pet sector review
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures to Tackle Illegal Bird-feeding","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"59 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development since January 2020 (a) how many enforcement notices have been issued for bird-feeding offences; (b) how many bird-feeding offenders have been fined; and (c) whether the Ministry will be introducing new measures to tackle illegal bird-feeding.
Mr Desmond Lee: Since January 2020, NParks has issued 31 enforcement notices for bird-feeding offences. Of these, 18 were issued composition notices. NParks adopts a suite of measures to deter illegal bird-feeding, including camera surveillance at identified feeding hotspots, and working with Town Councils to carry out enforcement operations.
NParks has strengthened its regulatory regime with the enhanced Wildlife Act, which came into force on 1 June 2020. The Act allows NParks to impose stiffer penalties for the illegal feeding of wildlife, including birds. Offenders can be fined up to $5,000 for the feeding of any wild bird, up from $500 for feeding pigeons before the Wildlife Act came into force.
Public education and engagement is key. NParks works with Town Councils, MSO, and PA to engage feeders. This enables NParks to find out their motivations, address misconceptions, and discourage them from continuing to feed birds.
In February 2020, NParks piloted the Pigeon Management Plan in partnership with four Town Councils of Tanjong Pagar, Pasir Ris-Punggol, Jalan Besar, and Bishan-Toa Payoh. This pilot adopts a multi-pronged approach comprising food source reduction, habitat modification measures such as nettings to prevent nesting, and population reduction. NParks will study the findings from the pilot, with a view of scaling the implementation to other areas.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Construction of Extended Cycling Path Network","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport whether he can provide an update on the progress of the construction of the extended cycling path network and the delay to be expected given the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 crisis.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Due to COVID-19, which affected the availability of cycling path construction materials and workers, there may be delays of up to 12 months for the completion of cycling path projects.
The Government remains committed to tripling our cycling paths from 460km now to around 1300km by 2030, under the Islandwide Cycling Network. This will support the uptake of active mobility in a way that is safe and convenient for all path users.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Spike in Households' Utility Bills in July and August 2020","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what are the reasons for a spike in households' utility bills in July and August 2020; (b) whether there are errors in the meter readings; and (c) whether there are any increases in the prices of utilities.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Electricity and town gas tariffs had decreased in the third quarter of 2020, and there had been no change in water prices during this period.
However, three reasons could have contributed to higher household utility bills in recent months, compared to earlier this year.
First, households’ utility consumption in Singapore is typically higher during the warmer months from April to August as households use more electricity for fans or air-conditioners. In the past five years, the average monthly electricity consumption during April to August is typically 8% higher than in other months.
Second, households’ utility consumption increased since April, as Singaporeans spent more time at home during the circuit breaker period and early stages of our phased reopening, as part of our national efforts to manage local community transmissions of COVID-19.
Third, physical meter readings by SP Group were suspended in April and May 2020 during the circuit breaker period. Households' utility consumption during this period were estimated using data from February and March 2020, which is an under-estimation. The higher consumption in April to May was reflected in households' utility bills in June and July 2020, after physical meter readings resumed in June 2020, which could have led to the higher utility bills.
We have provided Singaporean households with more support for their utility bills this year. Every household with at least one Singapore Citizen received a one-off $100 Solidarity Utilities Credit in their July or August SP Group utility bill. Eligible HDB households also received the GST Voucher – U-Save, which has been doubled this year through a one-off GST Voucher U-Save Special Payment. Eligible HDB households with five or more members will also receive a further GST Voucher – U-Save rebate.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Banks with Qualifying Full Banking Licences Currently Granting Loans to Local Corporations with Turnovers below $10 Million","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Don Wee asked the Prime Minister how many banks with Qualifying Full Banking Licences currently grant loans to local corporations with turnovers below S$10 million.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): Small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in Singapore are served by a variety of lending institutions and platforms in our financial sector. The three local banks, finance companies and, more recently, crowdfunding platforms, play an active role lending to SMEs and the smaller local enterprises with annual turnover below $10 million.
Mr Wee asked specifically about Qualifying Full Banks (QFBs). Five of the nine QFBs1 currently grant loans to SMEs and local enterprises with annual turnover below $10 million. The remaining QFBs serve other segments of the Singapore market, providing services such as retail banking, wealth management, Renminbi services, securities services, and credit and trade finance for larger corporates.
The Government has provided a 90% risk-share on the loans granted under Enterprise Singapore's (ESG) Temporary Bridging Loan Programme, which has increased the availability of credit to SMEs. More than 80% of these loans were taken up by local enterprises with annual turnover below $10 million.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The nine QFBs are Bank of China Limited, BNP Paribas, Citibank Singapore Limited, HSBC Bank (Singapore) Limited, ICICI Bank Limited, Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Limited, Maybank Singapore Limited, Standard Chartered Bank (Singapore) Limited, and State Bank of India."],"footNoteQuestions":["1"],"questionNo":"1"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Develop Responsible Financing Policies to Address Climate Risks Posed by High Climate-Risk Sectors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Prime Minister (a) what policies is MAS studying to address climate risks posed by the high climate-risk sectors that have been identified in the Guidelines to Responsible Financing Practices published by the Association of Banks in Singapore in 2018; and (b) whether the Ministry can share how the MAS will be working with banks to develop their responsible financing policies in relation to these high climate-risk sectors.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): The Monetary Authority of Singapore's (MAS) objective is to ensure that financial institutions manage their climate-related risks well, and support our economy's transition to a sustainable and low carbon future. To do so, MAS is issuing new supervisory guidance that incorporates best practices on environmental risk management developed by global regulators, including at the Network for Greening the Financial System. MAS' proposed Guidelines on Environmental Risk Management1, which has undergone public consultation, will be finalised in Q4 2020. It will set out clear expectations for banks to implement environmentally responsible financing policies and practices, and includes:
(a) Boards and senior management should maintain effective oversight of banks' management of environmental risk and address material environmental risk in their risk appetite framework;
(b) For sectors that pose higher environmental risk, develop sector-specific policies, setting out banks' expectations on customers, taking into account relevant sustainability standards and certification schemes. Banks should also engage these customers to support their transition towards sustainable business practices over time; and
(c) Disclose their approaches to managing environmental risk, and the impact of environmental risk on their financial performance, including quantitative metrics such as exposures to sectors with higher environmental risk. This will enable investors to better assess the banks' environmental risk exposures.
Our approach is therefore not to outrightly disallow financial institutions from serving industries that are subject to climate-related risks at this stage. Instead, MAS expects financial institutions to assess their exposures to these industries, mitigate risks, work with each higher-risk customer to improve its environmental risk profile, and ensure there is senior level oversight on these issues. This approach strikes a better balance between supporting sustainable development, and recognising that many of these industries still play a role in the broader economic and social development needs of the region.
MAS is engaging the banks on how they intend to implement the Guidelines. We are collaborating with fellow regulators to develop climate risk measurement methodologies and metrics. We will also continue to promote the best practices among banks on environmental risk analysis and management.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : These Guidelines were the result of collaborative work with the financial industry and non-governmental organisations, and were issued for public consultation in June 2020. "],"footNoteQuestions":["2"],"questionNo":"2"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Adult Singaporeans Not Having a Bank Account and Reasons for Not Having One","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Prime Minister (a) how many adult Singaporeans currently do not have a bank account; (b) what are the primary reasons for individuals not having a bank account; and (c) whether special bank accounts for Government transactions can be created through POSB for such individuals.
Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam (for the Prime Minister): It is estimated that over 98% of adult Singapore residents have bank accounts. In the recent Solidarity Payment payout, 98.7% of Singaporeans who received the payments had the amounts credited into their bank accounts. As for the remaining recipients, surveys showed that many also had bank accounts but preferred to collect the payouts in cash.
Notwithstanding this high level of banking access, to ensure that Singaporeans have access to affordable and convenient basic banking services, the three local banks, Citibank, HSBC, Maybank and Standard Chartered Bank already offer Basic Banking Accounts (BBAs) since 2002. Typically, such accounts come with ATM/debit card, internet banking and electronic payment services, and can be maintained at very low or even no cost. For instance, DBS/POSB does not set any initial deposit or minimum account balance and waives the $2 maintenance fee if the individual chooses to receive eStatements. The local banks also waive fall-below fees for specific customer segments such as children, the elderly and recipients of public assistance.
\tHowever, some Singaporeans remain unbanked. This may be due to low awareness of the availability of BBAs, or by choice. The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has made clear its expectation that banks should provide accounts to individuals who want them. In some cases, where specific safeguards may be required to mitigate money laundering or terrorism financing risks, banks may offer accounts with more limited functionalities. There is a small number of individuals who have committed serious crimes related to sanctions imposed by the United Nations1 who may not be able to open bank accounts. Banks have significant concerns in such cases, due to the difficulty of confirming the source of the customers’ funds or the legitimacy of transactions. MAS has been working with the banks to allow accounts to be opened for such individuals with enhanced due diligence and account restrictions.
MAS is working with banks on further ways to enhance financial inclusion, while ensuring that risks are adequately managed. It is collaborating with the Ministry of Education, to ensure that all Singaporean children have bank accounts.
4 Ms Ng Ling Ling asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Ministry has data on retiree landlords who are dependent on rental incomes of their small commercial units for their monthly living expenses; and (b) whether there are further grants that can cover them under the Rental Relief Framework for SMEs beyond the one-month waiver on grounds of financial hardship.
Mr Heng Swee Keat: The Rental Relief Framework provides for the Government, landlords and SME tenants to share in the rental obligations of SME businesses during this difficult period. This framework recognises that landlords, in partnership with the Government, have a shared interest in helping their SME tenants survive and succeed.
In designing the Framework, the Ministry of Law had carefully considered and consulted a range of stakeholders on the potential impact on landlords. Landlords who meet the criteria for financial hardship may apply to halve their rental waiver obligations under the Additional Rental Relief component.
Based on our records, about 3,000 landlords may qualify for a reduction in obligations under the financial hardship criteria1. Of these, more than 65% are aged 62 and above. As at 30 August 2020, the Registry of Rental Relief Assessors has received about 455 applications, and we expect more in the coming months.
Individual and SME landlords facing cash flow difficulties can also apply to banks and finance companies to defer principal payments on their mortgages up to 31 December 2020 and to extend the loan tenure by up to the corresponding deferment period. Individual landlords who are required to provide relief to their tenants can also apply to defer interest payments, in addition to principal payments, on their mortgages up to 31 December 2020, and to extend the loan tenure by up to the corresponding deferment period.
The provisions to help landlords in financial hardship strike a balance between the needs of landlords and tenants. The Government will continue to monitor the situation closely and make adjustments as necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : Total annual value of owned investment properties (excluding residential property) does not exceed $60,000 as of 13 April 2020; and rental income from owned investment properties forms 75% or more of landlord’s total declared income for Year of Assessment 2019."],"footNoteQuestions":["4"],"questionNo":"4"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Personal Income Tax Reliefs vis-a-vis Dependant's Income Threshold and Child's NS Allowances Since 2010","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether he will review the personal income tax reliefs in relation to a dependant's income threshold of $4,000 and the child's full-time national serviceman allowances that has increased since 2010.
Mr Heng Swee Keat: Tax reliefs such as Parent Relief, Spouse Relief and Qualifying Child Relief are given to taxpayers to recognise their efforts in supporting their family members.
These reliefs are intended for circumstances where the dependent is handicapped, or is not earning any income. Nevertheless, we recognise that some dependants may derive a small amount of incidental income. Hence our approach caters for that by setting the dependant's income threshold at $4,000 a year. This income condition applies to all dependants, including parents, spouses, and children.
We will continue to review our personal income tax system to ensure continued relevance and effectiveness.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Take-up and Split of Loan Capital SMEs and Large Firms, Interest Rates Paid by Banks and Expected Repayment Period for Banks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) to date, how many companies have taken up loans that are backed by the $22 billion loan capital set aside as part of the Government's COVID-19 package; (b) what is the split of loan capital taken up by SMEs and large firms; (c) what is the interest rate that is paid by the banks for tapping on this loan capital; and (d) what is the expected repayment period for banks tapping on the loan capital that is set aside.
Mr Heng Swee Keat: To help enterprises with credit and cash flow, the Government introduced and enhanced financing schemes, such as the Temporary Bridging Loan Programme (TBLP), as part of the COVID-19 support packages. The TBLP has supported $13.1 billion of loans and 16,349 companies as of 31 August 2020. 99.7% of these companies are SMEs, and 0.3% of them are larger firms.
Under the TBLP, Participating Financial Institutions (PFIs) can choose to tap on their own capital, Government's loan capital or the MAS SGD Facility for ESG Loans when issuing loans. For Government's loan capital, there is an interest rate of 1.9% per annum (p.a.) without collateral. The repayment period, for a PFI which borrows from the Government, is tied to the tenure of the loans offered by the PFI, i.e. up to five years. The MAS SGD Facility for ESG Loans provides funds to PFIs at 0.1% p.a. for up to two years, and requires PFIs to provide collateral.
For now, most of the loans supported under the TBLP are drawing capital from the MAS SGD Facility. Overall, we have lowered the interest rates charged by PFIs to borrowers for TBLP loans to a range of 1.5% to 3.0% p.a.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Number of Applications Received to Extend Social Visit Pass, Long Term Visit Pass or Long Term Pass Plus of Foreign Spouses of Singaporean","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) how many applications has ICA received to extend the social visit pass, Long Term Visit Pass (LTVP) or Long Term Visit Pass Plus (LTVP+) of foreign spouses of Singaporeans (i) between February and July 2019 and (ii) between February and July 2020, with a breakdown by social visit pass, LTVP and LTVP+; (b) what are the success rates for each category; and (c) what are the most frequent reasons for rejection.
Mr K Shanmugam: From February to July in 2019 and 2020, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority (ICA) received 6,419 and 8,395 applications respectively for extension of Short-Term Visit Pass (STVP) from foreign spouses of Singaporeans. 2.6% and 2.8% respectively were rejected.
From February to July in 2019 and 2020, ICA received 4,503 and 4,243 applications respectively for renewal of Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) from foreign spouses of Singaporeans. In both years, about 0.4% of applications were rejected. Over the same period, ICA received 987 and 1,554 applications respectively for renewal of Long-Term Visit Pass Plus (LTVP+) from foreign spouses of Singaporeans. 0.9% and 0.5% respectively were rejected.
Applications for STVP, LTVP and LTVP+ are considered holistically and there may be a number of reasons why a pass is not extended or renewed. STVP extension applications are rejected mostly because the sponsor or applicant was found to have adverse records, or the applicant was unable to substantiate the need for further extensions. For LTVP or LTVP+ renewal applications, reasons for rejection were mostly because the sponsor or the applicant was found to have adverse records, or was not able to demonstrate the ability to support the family financially.
To assist those with genuine difficulties during the current COVID-19 situation, ICA considers additional factors, such as the prevailing travel restrictions and flight connectivity, when assessing the extension or renewal of passes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Consideration to Allow Private Security Firms to Recruit and Employ Singporeans Aged Above 60 on a Temporary Basis as Private Security Officers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Singapore Police Force will allow private security firms to recruit and employ Singaporeans on a temporary basis for specified tasks as private security officers pending their (i) screening, training and passing the requisite tests and (ii) pending their medical screening for those aged above 60 years.
Mr K Shanmugam: Under the Private Security Industry Act (PSIA), a person must be licensed before carrying out the functions of a security officer. Security screening is part of the licensing procedures. This reduces the risk that persons abuse their positions as security officers to commit crimes against their clients or the public.
Security officers perform duties such as patrol, access control, and responding to incidents. They need to be properly trained and qualified, so that they can perform these important duties effectively. The process of licence application and training can be done concurrently. A person can obtain his licence and complete the requisite training in about two weeks if he meets the security screening and course requirements.
It is also a licensing condition that security officers above the age of 60 be certified medically fit for duty before being deployed. This is for their own welfare and safety, as the job of a security officer is physically demanding.
In short, there are important reasons for these requirements. The Police can allow security agencies to deploy as security officers, only persons who have been security cleared and are properly qualified.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Cases of Neighbour Disputes Arising from Second-hand Cigarette Smoke Mediated Successfully in Past Two Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Law in each of the past two years (a) how many cases of neighbour disputes arising from second-hand cigarette smoke have been mediated successfully by HDB; (b) how many cases have proceeded to the Community Mediation Centre and mediated successfully; (c) how many cases are filed with the Community Disputes Resolutions Tribunals; and (d) what is the extent of increase or decrease in the number of such cases after the start of the circuit breaker period.
Mr K Shanmugam: In a densely populated state such as Singapore, disagreements between neighbours may arise. These include instances where second-hand cigarette smoke from one neighbour affects another. In some cases, neighbours are able to discuss such issues directly and resolve them amicably. Finding mutually acceptable solutions in this way strengthens neighbourly relations in the long run.
In instances where neighbours are unable to resolve the dispute themselves, the Government has created avenues to help neighbours work out their disagreements. While Housing and Development Board (HDB) officers do not themselves conduct mediation, the Community Mediation Centre (CMC) provides trained, neutral, mediators who can help neighbours arrive at mutually acceptable solutions. Mediation at the CMC is generally voluntary.
Between January 2019 and July 2020, 71 cases concerning second-hand cigarette smoke were registered with the CMC. During and after the circuit breaker, there was an increase in the number of disputes over cigarette smoke registered with the CMC, up from an average of two cases before, to eight cases monthly. 70 out of the 71 cases registered were voluntary. To date, nine cases have proceeded to mediation. Six of these cases were successful. About two-thirds of the 71 cases did not proceed to mediation because one party either declined mediation or did not respond.
As mediation is generally voluntary, it has its limitations. As can be seen, despite the relatively high success rate of CMC mediations, the take up rate remains low. In some cases, parties may presume that the relationship has deteriorated so much that there is no point attempting to negotiate. Mediators also cannot make binding decisions; they can only help parties reach a mutual agreement. Some parties believe that it is better to skip mediation and go straight to the courts, in order to obtain a permanent, binding order, in their favour.
The Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals (CDRT) was established in 2015 as an avenue of last resort. A CDRT judge can require parties to attend mediation. If mediation is not successful, the dispute can also be litigated before the CDRT. Between January 2019 and July 2020, 25 claims relating to excessive smoke, caused by activities such as the burning of incense and cigarette smoking, were filed at the CDRT. There was no discernible shift in the number of claims filed with the CDRT during and after the circuit breaker.
The Government is mindful that even with the CMC and CDRT in place, there continues to be difficult cases that are not resolved and differences not reconciled.
It has been about five years since the community dispute resolution framework was launched. It is timely to review how we can strengthen it and make it more effective.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Resources for Detection of Mental Health Issues and Provision of Preventive Care and Subsidies Available","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Ms Ng Ling Ling asked the Minister for Health (a) how are the primary care providers, including polyclinics and private GP clinics, equipped and resourced to detect early onset of mental health issues and to provide preventive care; (b) what are the subsidies for Singaporeans in seeking such preventive care; and (c) whether there are integration platforms with social services in such care provisions.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Under the Community Mental Health Masterplan (CMHMP), primary care providers receive support to improve early identification and access to mental health care for persons with mental health issues. Mental health services have been set up in the polyclinics. Family physicians, nurses, psychologists and medical social workers sited at these polyclinics are trained to recognise early signs of mental distress among patients so that they can provide timely mental health assessment and intervention. In addition, over 220 general practitioners (GP) have been trained under the Mental Health General Practitioner Partnership Programme (MHGPP) to identify, diagnose and manage persons with mental health issues in the community.
Government subsidies are available at polyclinics and Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) subsidies are available at CHAS GPs for Singaporeans who seek treatment for mental health issues in the primary care setting. In November 2019, CHAS Green was introduced to allow all chronic patients, regardless of income, to enjoy CHAS subsidies for mental illnesses under the Chronic Disease Management Programme (CDMP) (namely major depression, anxiety disorders, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia) at CHAS GPs clinics. Currently, patients can also withdraw up to $500 per year from their MediSave for the outpatient management of conditions under the CDMP. For patients with complex chronic conditions, this annual withdrawal limit will be raised to $700 from 1 January 2021. Lastly, those aged 60 and above may tap on Flexi-MediSave.
In addition to providing accessible and affordable care for persons with mental health condition(s), the Agency of Integrated Care (AIC) helps to coordinate care across the health and social sectors for persons with mental health issues. Primary care providers, community partners, ground agencies and members of the public can refer persons with/suspected to have mental health condition(s) to AIC, who will then work with relevant stakeholders to support clients with the appropriate medical and social services.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Estimated Operational Lifespan of Motorised Wheelchair or Scooter Issued under Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the estimated operational lifespan of a motorised wheelchair or scooter that is issued to a senior under the Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund (SMF); (b) what proportion of such SMF recipients have since requested a further replacement of their motorised mobility device; and (c) for such requests, what is the median duration after the first device was issued, before the further request arose.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Seniors' Mobility & Enabling Fund (SMF) supports seniors to age in place by providing eligible Singaporeans aged 60 years and above with means-tested subsidies to offset the cost of home healthcare items and assistive devices, including motorised wheelchairs/scooters (MWs).
SMF-subsidised MWs can typically be used for around up to five years or more with proper maintenance.
We recognise that there may be exceptional circumstances where seniors may need a replacement device but have no financial means. In such cases, AIC will approve a replacement on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the senior's circumstances.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extending Availability of Medication Delivery to Patients' Home for Patients Collecting Routine Medication for Chronic Conditions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider more widespread availability of medication delivery to patients' homes to reduce crowding and waiting time in polyclinics and hospitals especially for those patients collecting routine medication for chronic conditions.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Public healthcare institutions have been providing medication delivery services since 2003 to bring greater convenience to patients. The Agency for Logistics Procurement and Supply (ALPS) set up by the Ministry of Health, has partnered public healthcare institutions and worked with various providers to enhance the service quality and affordability of medication delivery services.
With the ongoing COVID-19 situation, delivery capacity has increased tenfold from 320 deliveries per day before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic to an average of 3,200 deliveries each day. There were over 400,000 medication deliveries made from 1 February to 25 August 2020.
In addition to medicine delivery services, selected polyclinics also provide the option for patients to collect their medicine at their convenience from Pilbox lockers, selected parcel deposit lockers or certain retail pharmacy outlets.
Patients may approach the pharmacy staff at the public healthcare institutions to arrange for medication delivery or collection.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Visitors and Their Family Members Allowed into Singapore for Medical Treatment since 27 March 2020","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) since 27 March 2020, how many visitors have been allowed into Singapore for medical treatment; (b) how many of their family members have been permitted to enter Singapore; and (c) what is the breakdown of the countries that these visitors come from.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: For the five months since 27 March 2020, 303 foreign patients on short-term visitor pass and 260 accompanying caregivers have been approved to enter Singapore for medical treatment. Of these, 183 foreign patients had entered Singapore and 147 brought along a caregiver.
These are mostly existing patients cared for by medical specialists in Singapore who need active follow up, such as cancer patients on chemotherapy and patients with renal diseases who require continuing care. Approved patients can bring along one accompanying caregiver if required. Foreign patients and accompanying caregivers need to test negative for COVID-19 in their home countries before departure. They will be tested again on arrival in Singapore and are subjected to the prevailing Stay-Home-Notice requirements.
The majority of foreign patients are from Indonesia, followed by Vietnam, Malaysia, Bangladesh and the Philippines.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Join COVID-19 Vaccine Trials and Developing a Framework for Administering COVID-19 Vaccine when Adopted","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Health (a) whether Singapore will be joining trials for COVID-19 vaccines developed by other nations and, if so, when will these trials commence; (b) whether there are plans to purchase vaccines currently under clinical trial around the world; and (c) whether a framework has been developed for the manner of administration of a COVID-19 vaccine in Singapore once one has been adopted.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Government is closely monitoring the global progress in the development of COVID-19 vaccines, and taking active steps to ensure that Singapore has timely access to an effective and safe vaccine when this becomes available.
Duke-NUS Medical School is collaborating with a United States biotechnology company, Arcturus Therapeutics, to co-develop a COVID-19 vaccine. The school supported the pre-clinical studies by conducting rapid screening of potential vaccine candidates for effectiveness and safety, and by conducting animal trials. Phase 1 human clinical trials for this vaccine started in early August at the SingHealth Investigational Medicine Unit (IMU). Singapore is also participating in the discussions led by the World Health Organisation (WHO) on the multi-country Solidarity Vaccine Trials.
Singapore is actively pursuing the procurement of COVID-19 vaccines with a number of pharmaceutical companies, while keeping abreast of the progress of the various vaccine candidates under development. These discussions are covered by confidentiality obligations and we will not be able to provide more information at this point in time. We are also actively engaged in international discussions, such as with the WHO, CEPI and the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (Gavi), as well as like-minded countries to look into early, fair and equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines through the COVID-19 Vaccine Global Access (COVAX) Facility.
MOH is working on plans for the administration of a COVID-19 vaccine when it is assessed to be safe and effective for use, and has received the appropriate approvals by the Health Sciences Authority. This will take into consideration the characteristics of the vaccine, suitability for different population subgroups, and availability of the supply and other factors. Our priority is to protect individuals who are most vulnerable or at high risk from the disease, as well as those who may be more likely exposed to infection, while working progressively towards a high level of vaccination in the population. We will need to refine and adapt our vaccination strategy as more clinical data from the various vaccine candidates become available in the coming months.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Total Number of Imported COVID-19 Cases Who are Non-Singaporeans and Top Three Countries of Embarkation of These Cases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Health (a) Between April and August 2020, what is the total number of imported COVID-19 cases who are non-Singapore citizens; and (b) of these cases, what are the top three countries of embarkation from where these persons came from and what are the respective figures for each of these countries.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: For the five months between 1 April 2020 to 31 August 2020, Singapore has seen a total of 292 imported COVID-19 cases who are non-Singaporeans. Of these, there were 56 Permanent Residents, 110 Work Pass holders, 99 Long-Term Visit and 27 Short-Term Visit Pass holders.
Their top three countries of last embarkation were India with 183 imported cases; the Philippines with 46 imported cases; and Indonesia with 15 imported cases.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Increase Awareness Among Merchants who Adopt Cashless Payments on Payment Verification and Possible Scams","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether the Ministry will increase awareness among merchants who adopt cashless payments on how to verify payments and what they can do to protect themselves from possible scams.
Mr S Iswaran: In recent years, the Government has made a concerted push to drive the adoption of cashless payment solutions by merchants. We have made significant strides in developing a single, interoperable e-payment solution which unifies different payment schemes under a single\tSingapore Quick Response (SGQR) label, making it easy, convenient and secure for users.
There are understandable concerns about fraud, errors and security threats behind cashless payment solutions, among merchants as well as consumers. Beyond existing verification measures and safeguards within payment systems, merchants and consumers are encouraged to exercise vigilance to combat such scams, keep devices secure with the latest security patches, and maintain their password secrecy.
Recently, concerns were raised that merchants unfamiliar with cashless payments may face greater risk of payment scams. In June 2020, IMDA launched the Hawkers Go Digital programme, as part of a nationwide effort to help micro-enterprises like stallholders at NEA hawker centres, HDB coffeeshops and wet markets and JTC industrial canteens, to accelerate the adoption of the unified SGQR solution. We also established the SG Digital Office (SDO), mobilising 1,000 Digital Ambassadors to work together with NETS to engage and guide stallholders. Along with the deployment of the SGQR code, NETS will also help stallholders install the NETSBiz App on their digital device and teach them how to verify successful payment transactions in real-time. This App provides real-time notifications of successful payment transactions in English or Mandarin, has a voice notification capability in English and Mandarin, and allows stallholders to view their transaction histories. Stallholders may also approach NETS personnel or SDO's Digital Ambassadors on the ground should they need further assistance.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Response to US Clean Network Initiative while Maintaining Access to Technologies from Different Providers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Communications and Information (a) how does the Government intend to respond to the US Clean Network Initiative while maintaining access to technologies from different providers; and (b) how does the Government intend to mitigate consequences or repercussions from any non-compliance with this initiative.
Mr S Iswaran: Singapore aims to leverage on the opportunities and benefits of digital technologies, while keeping our communications infrastructure and computer networks secure and resilient.
The Government is committed to working with partners, including overseas government counterparts, and technology and service providers in both bilateral and multilateral settings, to ensure that our infrastructure is reliable, safe and world-class. We closely monitor all initiatives, including the US Clean Networks programme. Our regulatory and security agencies will continue to work with trusted partners and in relevant multilateral platforms to enhance the security, diversity and resilience of our network systems.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Bring Forward Schedule for Building Hawker Centre in Bukit Batok HDB Town","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the schedule for the building of the hawker centre in Bukit Batok HDB Town by 2027 may be brought forward to deal with the increased number of dwelling units and to stabilise the food and beverage prices in the area.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: My Ministry announced during the Committee of Supply debates in 2019 that the Bukit Batok hawker centre will be co-located with the assisted living residential flats pilot in Bukit Batok Town. The National Environment Agency (NEA) is coordinating with HDB on the timeline of the co-located development. We will announce further details such as the expected date of completion when ready. We will also continue to engage the local adviser on the progress of the centre. Meanwhile, besides the existing coffee shops and other eating establishments already in the area, new coffee shops have also been added by HDB with the completion of new HDB flats in the area, to serve the dining needs of residents.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Incentivising Use of Environment-friendly Food and Drink Containers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the Ministry will consider incentivising the use of environment-friendly food and drink containers such as washable or reusable containers.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: My Ministry and the National Environment Agency (NEA) have been actively promoting the use of reusable containers in place of disposables. For example, NEA has disallowed the use of disposables for dine-in meals at all its new hawker centres and for cooked food stallholders who started their tenancies in any hawker centre from September 2018.
Through the nation-wide \"Say YES to Waste Less\" campaign launched in 2019, operators of over 1,600 premises have partnered NEA to encourage consumers to bring along reusables and decline disposables when ordering food for takeaway or delivery. Under this campaign, many Food & Beverage establishments have taken the lead to incentivise consumers who bring reusable containers. For example, Starbucks offers a $0.50 discount to customers who bring their own cups or tumblers, and SaladStop! offers a free topping for customers who bring their own bowls for takeaway orders. We are heartened by the initiatives and commitment of the private sector and encourage more companies to join in this effort.
Addressing the excessive consumption of disposables remains a priority of my Ministry and NEA. A Citizens' Workgroup to look into measures to check the excessive consumption of disposables will be convened this month. We look forward to hearing their ideas on how we can encourage everyone to play his or her part to reduce the use of disposables, including incentivising the use of environment-friendly food and drink containers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Banks Involved in Administration of Government-assisted Schemes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Mr Don Wee asked the Minister for Trade and Industry how many banks are currently involved in the administration of Government-assisted schemes such as the Temporary Bridging Loan.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Enterprise Singapore works with 18 Participating Financial Institutions (PFIs) to implement financing schemes such as the Temporary Bridging Loan Programme and the Enterprise Financing Scheme. The PFIs include banks, finance companies, and leasing companies. The full list of the PFIs that administer the various schemes can be found on Enterprise Singapore's website.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expanding Green Lane for Business Travel to China without Sponsors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the Ministry will consider expanding the Green Lane to allow for business travel to China without sponsors so that small businesses may continue travelling for business to China.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Singapore-China Fast Lane was launched on 8 June 2020 to facilitate essential cross-border travel between Singapore and six Chinese provinces and municipalities1. It was Singapore's first fast lane arrangement with a foreign partner, and China's first with a Southeast Asian country.
The Singapore Government has received feedback from the Singapore business community on the challenges our businesses face in obtaining approval from the Chinese authorities for Fast Lane travel to China. These include difficulties in securing Fast Lane Letters of Invitation (LOI)2, the restrictions under a controlled itinerary, and being subjected to a 14-day quarantine by some local authorities. Requirements such as the need for a controlled itinerary supervised by a sponsoring local government agency or host company are integral to the Fast Lane. They are intended to minimise the exposure of such Fast Lane travellers to the broader community, in lieu of a quarantine period. This applies to Fast Lane users of both Singapore and China.
MTI, together with MFA, has conveyed the feedback from our business community to the relevant Chinese authorities. We will continue working with the Chinese authorities to improve the Fast Lane to bring greater benefit to the business communities of both countries.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The six Chinese provinces and municipalities are Chongqing, Guangdong, Jiangsu, Shanghai, Tianjin and Zhejiang.","2 : Fast Lane LOIs are specifically granted for essential business or official travel to China. An applicant can only apply for a Fast Lane LOI through a Chinese sponsor. An approved applicant who receives a Fast Lane LOI may thereafter submit a visa application and health declaration to the PRC Embassy in Singapore, which will issue the applicant a visa."],"footNoteQuestions":["21"],"questionNo":"21"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cost of Living During COVID-19 and Measures to Monitor and Manage Situation","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the cost of living has increased during the current COVID-19 period; and (b) if so, what measures are being taken to monitor and manage the situation.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Between January 2020 when the first local COVID-19 case was confirmed and July 2020, the Consumer Price Index-All Items1 declined by 0.2 per cent on a year-on-year basis. This decline was largely driven by a fall in the cost of pre-primary education, electricity, outpatient services and petrol, which outweighed an increase in food prices.
Nonetheless, the Government recognises that cost of living may remain a cause for concern for Singaporeans, especially those who have suffered employment losses or wage cuts during the current economic downturn. To help Singaporeans tide over this difficult period, the Government has rolled out several support measures, including the Care and Support Package, COVID-19 Support Grant, and SG United Jobs and Skills Package. The Government will continue to monitor developments closely, and stands ready to provide more support to Singaporeans if necessary.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : The Consumer Price Index is a proxy for changes in the cost of living in Singapore."],"footNoteQuestions":["22"],"questionNo":"22"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Bursary Applications Received by Autonomous Universities and Percentage Rejected in Past Five Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Ms Raeesah Khan asked the Minister for Education (a) in the past five years, how many applications that local autonomous universities have received for the Higher Education Community Bursary and the Higher Education Bursary from full-time and part-time undergraduates; and (b) what is the percentage of rejected applications.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The number of Government bursaries awarded to Singaporean full-time undergraduates and part-time undergraduates from Academic Year (AY) 2015 to AY2019 is shown below. The numbers have increased due to better outreach by the universities and the expanding undergraduate enrolment.
The Government bursaries are available to Singaporean students who meet the income criterion – either gross household income of not more than $9,000, or per capita household income of not more than $2,250. This is estimated to cover up to the 66th percentile of households by household income. All Singaporean students who meet the eligibility criteria will be awarded the bursary, and we do not track the number of rejected applications.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Reported Cyberbullying Cases in Primary and Secondary Schools in Last Three Years and Measures to Protect Children against Cyberbullying","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong asked the Minister for Education (a) over the last three years, what is the number of cases of cyberbullying reported in primary and secondary schools respectively; (b) whether there are established guidelines of corrective actions to be taken against the perpetrators; and (c) whether the Ministry has plans to further develop cybersecurity infrastructure and legal frameworks to protect children against cyberbullying.
Mr Lawrence Wong: MOE and schools take a serious view of all bullying incidents, including cyberbullying. Schools put in place school rules and ICT policies to create safe and supportive learning environments, both physical and online. Through the Cyber Wellness lessons, students are taught to protect themselves online, as well as help their peers who have been bullied.
The number of reported cyberbullying incidents remains low and stable over the past three years. When cyberbullying incidents occur, our primary approach is to help students learn from their mistakes, restore relationships and refrain from future occurrences. When the cases are reported, they are promptly investigated, and appropriate disciplinary action is taken to guide perpetrators and restore relationships with those whom they have hurt. Counselling support is also provided to victims and perpetrators. Referrals may be made to Response, Early Intervention and Assessment in Community mental Health (REACH) as well as social and community agencies for specialised support.
Schools are also supported by ICT infrastructure with technologies such as network filtering of inappropriate content, network security and endpoint protection. Best practices in classroom management to encourage proper behaviours as well as security protocol against cybersecurity threats such as hijacking of online live lessons, phishing and ransomware are shared with schools. There are also resources available for parents, such as information on parental control and monitoring of students’ device usage to reduce the exposure to cyber risks.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Distribution of Balance in Special Needs Savings Scheme on Demise of Child","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether, under the Special Needs Savings Scheme, the Ministry will consider allowing parents of children with special needs to specify to whom the remaining money will be distributed in the unfortunate event of the passing on of the child.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Special Needs Savings Scheme (SNSS) enables parents to set aside their CPF savings for the long-term care of their children with special needs. Parents can nominate their children with special needs to receive a regular stream of fixed payouts upon the parents' demise.
If the SNSS nominee passes on before the parents, the CPF savings originally bequeathed to the SNSS nominee remain in the parents' CPF accounts. If the parents wish to, they can update their CPF nomination to specify how their CPF savings will be distributed upon their demise.
However, if the SNSS nominee passes on after the parents, any unused SNSS monies upon the demise of the nominee, will form part of the nominee’s estate, and be distributed either via a will or intestacy laws.
Parents who would like to decide how their bequeathed CPF savings will be distributed in the event that their SNSS nominees pass on after them can consider setting up a trust to specify how their bequeathed monies will be used. Parents of SNSS nominees who are assessed to lack mental capacity can also apply to the Court to make a will on their nominees' behalf.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics and Outcome of Applications for COVID-19 Support Grant","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) to date, what has been the total number of applications for the COVID-19 Support Grant; (b) what is the number of successful applications; (c) what is the breakdown of rejected applications based on eligibility criteria; and (d) of the rejected cases, what is the number of cases that are successful upon appeal or re-application.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The COVID-19 Support Grant (CSG) supports lower- to middle-income resident employees who, as a result of the economic impact of COVID-19, are presently i) Involuntarily unemployed due to retrenchment or contract termination; ii) Placed on involuntary no-pay leave for at least three consecutive months; or iii) Experiencing reduced monthly salary of at least 30% for at least three consecutive months.
As at 16 August 2020, around 115,000 individuals had applied for the CSG. Of these, MSF approved the CSG for around 65,000 recipients. About 41,000 applicants were unsuccessful, and around 9,000 applications were still being processed.
The unsuccessful CSG applications were mainly due to applicants not meeting the eligibility criteria for salary loss, job loss, or no-pay leave, or were not employees. This accounted for almost three quarters of unsuccessful applications. Other reasons included employment details not being verifiable, and the Annual Property Value and household income criteria not being met.
As at 16 August 2020, MSF had received around 8,000 appeals for the CSG. Around 7,500 of these appeals were approved. When considering these appeals, MSF would have taken into account any special circumstances that would warrant special consideration for individual cases.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Survey on Vulnerable Members of Society by Vulnerable-In-Community (VIC) Network and Release of Report","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"27 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) when will the Vulnerable-In-Community (VIC) Network conduct its planned survey on vulnerable members of society; (b) whether the planned survey will be done periodically; and (c) when will the Ministry release the full survey report to the public.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Vulnerable-In-Community (VIC) Network, comprising both government and community groups, was set up in November 2019 to reach out to, befriend and extend assistance to vulnerable individuals, such as cardboard collectors or tissue sellers.
As part of VIC work, we are planning for a survey to better understand the needs of the individuals we have connected with so that we can provide even more targeted support. We plan to conduct the survey towards the end of the year and will review the survey frequency thereafter. The survey will likely take a few months to complete. We will release the aggregated survey results when it is ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Study Feasibility of Introducing Sub-spoke Bus Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Mr Don Wee asked the Minister for Transport whether LTA will study the feasibility of introducing sub-spoke bus services that can ply along different routes as compared to the main bus service to better meet the needs of different resident groups connecting to key amenities, such as polyclinics and markets, in the adjacent towns, especially in new estates such as Brickland, without compromising operators' commercial viability.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: LTA regularly reviews the provision of public bus services to ensure that they are within 400 metres of developments, subject to a minimum level of ridership. This approach strikes a balance between providing connectivity while maintaining prudent use of public funds.
The developments in Brickland are currently within 400 metres of public bus services and residents are served by Services 172, 983 and 991 to amenities such as the mosque, polyclinic and Teck Whye market. Besides the option of walking about 250 metres to the polyclinic and Teck Whye market, residents can also transfer to Service 307 along Choa Chu Kang Avenue 1.
LTA will continue to monitor travel patterns and adjust the provision of bus services where necessary. This can come in the form of additional trips for existing bus services to cater to increased demand in new estates such as Brickland. We are also open to considering sub-spoke services, but these will have to be evaluated carefully as they could lead to increased waiting times, longer travel times and higher fares for some commuters.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Review and Extend Guidelines for Covered Linkways Beyond 400 Metres","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Don Wee asked the Minister for Transport whether LTA will review and extend the guidelines for covered linkways beyond 400 metres as they are an important part of our infrastructure to link people and amenities.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The key objective of LTA's covered linkway programme is to connect large numbers of commuters to major public transport nodes like MRT/LRT stations and bus interchanges in a manner that is fiscally prudent. Covered linkways are provided within a 400 metre radius of key transport nodes, which includes connecting to nearby bus stops within walking distance. This also helps to ensure that our limited financial resources can be stretched to cover more locations and benefit more commuters after taking into account community feedback, as well as the needs of our more vulnerable commuters.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Feasibility Study of Implementing Noise Mitigation Measures along Pan-Island Expressway Adjacent to HDB Blocks in Bukit Batok SMC","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Transport whether he can provide an update on LTA's decision announced on 6 January 2020 to study the feasibility of implementing noise mitigation measures along the stretch of the Pan-Island Expressway running adjacent to the HDB blocks in Bukit Batok SMC.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has been studying the feasibility of various noise mitigation measures for this stretch of the Pan-Island Expressway (PIE). Trials have shown that low-noise pavement mix for at-grade sections of expressways are more effective in reducing noise for residents than vertical noise barriers.
LTA will explore the feasibility of incorporating the low-noise pavement mix at a suitable juncture. We seek the Member and residents’ understanding and patience in the meantime. LTA remains committed to mitigating the impact of traffic noise and improving the quality of living for residents living near expressways.
31 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport (a) how many unprofitable bus services exist as of July 2020; and (b) what is the total subsidy level for unprofitable bus services each year.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Prior to COVID-19, and as a result of better frequencies and service standards, 345 out of 356 public bus services generate fare revenues that cannot cover their operating costs and require government subsidies. This amounts to a total of about $1 billion per year. With COVID-19, commuter numbers have dropped, and as of July 2020, all public bus services generate fare revenues that cannot cover their operating costs.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Firms under Fair Consideration Framework Watchlist","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the current number of firms under the Fair Consideration Framework watchlist; and (b) whether the Ministry will (i) disclose the names of firms that continue to be on the Fair Consideration Framework watchlist for more than six months and (ii) consider withdrawing these firms' access to Government grants and tax incentive schemes.
Mrs Josephine Teo: There are currently about 400 firms placed on the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) Watchlist for having a higher share of foreign PMETs compared to their industry peers, or high concentration of a single foreign nationality source. Employment Pass (EP) applications from these firms are held back, while the Tripartite Alliance for Fair & Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) engages these firms to help them improve their human resource practices.
Firms on the FCF Watchlist have not flouted any rules but have been identified through proactive surveillance. Measures must therefore be proportional and also consider the impact on their existing local workforce. In most instances, employers on the FCF Watchlist have been responsive to TAFEP’s engagement efforts and expanded their employment of local PMETs. Naming these firms and withdrawing their access to Government grants and tax incentive schemes would likely have frustrated their local hiring efforts and is ultimately counter-productive. Instead, following TAFEP’s intervention, many firms exit the FCF Watchlist within a year. For the minority who are uncooperative, their work pass privileges remain suspended.
We plan to proactively engage even more companies under the FCF, such as those whose Singaporean core has been weakening, or whose EP and S Pass workforce are concentrated with a single foreign nationality source. We will work with economic agencies like EDB and MAS to engage these firms to improve their workforce profile. We will also engage the HR community to do more.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Employed and Unemployed Singaporean, Permanent Resident and Foreign PMETS by Industries, Age and Gender","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower from January 2010 to June 2020, what is the annual breakdown of Singaporean, permanent resident and foreign Professionals, Managers and Executives in industries such as manufacturing, construction, services, banking and finance, IT and communications, and professional services.
34 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower from January 2010 to June 2020, what is the unemployment rate of Singaporeans and Singaporean permanent residents who are Professionals, Managers and Executives by age and gender.
Mrs Josephine Teo: A breakdown of Professionals, Managers, Executives & Technicians (PMETs) by industries and residential status, from 2010 to 2019, is provided in Table 1.
The unemployment rates of PMETs by residential status, age and sex, from 2010 to 2019, are provided in Table 2. The unemployment rates of Permanent Residents have generally been lower than that of Singapore Citizens. This is to be expected because employability and ability to contribute to our economy are often key considerations of granting Permanent Residency.
2020 data for resident PMETs will be released in the annual report on the Labour Force in Singapore in January 2021.
35 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Manpower (a) with the introduction of SG United Traineeships, what is the latest take-up rate across different sectors; (b) whether there is a need to further reach out to more Singaporeans to raise awareness of the Traineeship programme; and (c) whether the Ministry will work with companies to eventually convert a larger proportion of the traineeships into permanent positions post-COVID-19.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Over 1,000 fresh graduate trainees have taken up traineeships under the SGUnited Traineeships programme. The majority of traineeship positions filled are in growth sectors such as Information Communications Technology and Media, Professional Services, and Financial Services. As the process of shortlisting and selecting suitable trainees by host organisations takes time, we can expect to see more placements into traineeships subsequently.
We have expanded outreach to increase awareness of these opportunities. To reach out to fresh graduates on opportunities under the SGUnited Traineeships programme, WSG works closely with the Ministry of Education, the Institutes of Higher Learning, the National Trades Union Congress and People's Association. We also reach out to graduates through various digital media.
The traineeships do not automatically convert into a permanent job. However, we are hopeful that companies will find a good number of trainees a good fit and make them part of their permanent staff. This will depend largely on the fit of each trainee to the job, and the business situation and hiring needs of the host organisation when the traineeships are completed. Workforce Singapore's experience with Attach-and-Train programmes so far has been that host organisations that are impressed with trainees will place them in full-time positions in the companies to make the most of the time and money they have invested in the attachment. The newly-launched Jobs Growth Incentive scheme will give greater support to businesses to expand and grow their local headcounts over the next six months. This will also help spur hiring of trainees.
For cases where the traineeship does not result in a permanent job, the experience will equip the trainee with industry-relevant knowledge and skills, and help to burnish their credentials and value proposition to other employers. The Government will also continue to support them in their job search journey, through career matching services offered by WSG and NTUC's Employability and Employment Institute.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Employment Rate and Redundancy Rate of Jobs Support Scheme Recipient Firms in March 2020 versus Currently","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"36 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the employment rate for Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) recipient firms in March 2020 versus currently; (b) whether the redundancy rate of the JSS recipient firms has increased and, if so, by how much; and (c) what is the unemployment or redundancy rate among firms that are recipients of JSS versus those that have declined the JSS payouts.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Employment rate is measured at the population level, and not at the firm level.
JSS support has been tiered by the estimated impact of COVID-19 on different sectors. To date, over 150,000 employers have received JSS payouts. Of these, nearly 600 employers have declined or returned their JSS payouts. It stands to reason that these 600 employers have been less severely impacted by the COVID-19 situation, with less need to trim their workforce. The data on their employment reflects this.
Between March 2020 and June 2020, resident employment fell by an estimated 2.7% in firms that received Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) payouts, compared with 0.6% increase in firms that declined JSS payouts.
Data on retrenchment is based on private sector establishments with at least 25 employees. In 2Q 2020, the retrenchment rate among resident employees in firms that received JSS payouts is estimated to be 3.1 per 1,000, compared to 1.8 per 1,000 in firms that declined JSS payouts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number and Trend of Cases of Thefts and Vandalism of Community Gardens in Last Five Years and Measures and Public Education Programmes in Place","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"37 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many cases of thefts and vandalism of community gardens have been reported in the last five years, (b) whether there has been a rising trend; (c) whether there are measures to make it easier for the gardeners to make reports; and (d) what measures and public education programmes are in place to deter and reduce these crimes.
Mr Desmond Lee: NParks has only received infrequent feedback on theft and vandalism in community gardens over the last five years. As community gardens are shared gardening spaces set up and managed by the community, gardeners have the option of reporting such incidents to their Residents’ Committee (for public estates) or Neighbourhood Committee (for private estates), or making a police report.
To allow both gardeners and other residents to enjoy community gardens respectfully and amicably, some community gardens have signs to encourage residents to contact the gardeners should they wish to request for plants or their harvest. Some community gardeners also work with the People’s Association to install community refrigerators, to allow gardeners to freely share excess harvests with other residents.
NParks also encourages community gardeners to hold regular outreach events to allow other residents to appreciate the efforts and hard work that goes into these spaces, and to build stronger relationships within the community. Such events include garden open houses, gatherings to share harvests, and gatherings to grow common edible plants for the community to freely harvest. By working together, community gardening groups can ensure that their gardens continue to serve as shared spaces that beautify and add vibrancy to our neighbourhoods.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Requests for Assistance with Rent Payments under HDB Public Rental Scheme and Plans to Consider Temporary Rent Freeze","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"38 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for National Development (a) under the HDB Public Rental Scheme, how many requests for assistance with rent payments has been received so far for this year; and (b) whether HDB is considering a temporary rent freeze for tenants.
Mr Desmond Lee: HDB will help public rental households who need assistance with rent payments. From January to July 2020, HDB received an average of 370 requests per month for rent assistance. Over the same period, 325 households per month had their rents reduced. The reduced rent will apply for the rest of each household’s current tenancy term (up to three years). There were also 1,470 households per month emplaced on or renewed for ComCare rent assistance.
Public rental rates are highly subsidised. Rents are never raised within a tenancy term, but can be lowered at any time if the household income falls. Rents are reviewed only at tenancy renewal, which happens every two to three years.
Any tenants having difficulty affording their rent should approach their local HDB Branch for assistance. We will continue to monitor the situation, and ensure that public rental households in need will get the assistance that they require.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Local Species of Flora and Fauna Classified as Extinct and Endangered and Efforts to Raise Students and Young Singaporeans' Awareness of Biodiversity Conservation Issues","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many local species of flora and fauna have become extinct in the last five years; (b) how many local species are currently endangered; and (c) what efforts are being made to improve students and young Singaporeans' awareness of biodiversity and the risks and consequences of species extinction.
Mr Desmond Lee: There are an estimated 35,000 to 45,000 species of flora and fauna native to Singapore. No species of flora or fauna native to Singapore has been classified as presumed nationally extinct in the last five years. 857 species of native flora and fauna are currently classified as critically endangered, while 352 species are classified as endangered.
Youth engagement is a key component of NParks' biodiversity conservation efforts. NParks conducts programmes for students and young Singaporeans to raise awareness of biodiversity conservation issues, and to encourage them to participate in nature conservation-related projects. This includes the Greening Schools for Biodiversity programme, which equips students with the necessary knowledge and skills to carry out habitat enhancement within their campus. There is also the Biodiversity Friends Forum programme, which nurtures young Singaporeans to become future leaders in biodiversity conservation. In addition, NParks involves young Singaporeans in its biodiversity surveys.
NParks will continue to find new ways to improve awareness by involving students and young Singaporeans in biodiversity conservation efforts, as we transform into a City in Nature.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Initiatives to Promote Inter-generational Collaboration and Actions in Tackling Issues Facing Singaporeans","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"40 Ms Ng Ling Ling asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth what are the existing platforms or initiatives that the Ministry has created to promote inter-generational collaboration and actions in tackling the issues facing Singaporeans, including the ageing population and shift in workforce composition going forward.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: MCCY brings together Singaporeans from across generations to build consensus on issues that matter to them, and plan our future together. Some examples are as follows:
(a) We engage Singaporeans to forge our shared identity, and to think about the values and legacy we want to leave behind for future generations. More than 80,000 people of all ages contributed their ideas and views to the Founders' Memorial to date.
(b) This year, in spite of the on-going pandemic, 74 Singaporeans aged between 17 and 73 are working together to create content to update the Singapore Citizenship Journey for new citizens.
(c) In June 2020, DPM Heng Swee Keat launched the Singapore Together Emerging Stronger Conversations, for Singaporeans young and old to come together, reflect on the COVID-19 crisis, and contribute their views on how Singapore can emerge from it stronger and more resilient. The conversations will lead to Singapore Together Action Networks – collaborations formed around the salient issues that emerge from the conversations – these too will reflect inter-generational involvement.
There are other initiatives to encourage meaningful connections between the young and the old, and which recognise how our ageing population can still be a force for good when coupled with the strengths of our youth.
(a) Seniors have stepped up to be part of the Mentoring Alliance to mentor youths;
(b) Youth Corps Singapore's Eldercare Cluster has regular youth-led initiatives such as Cantonese classes taught by seniors to youths, as well as Senior Superheroes where seniors impart practical knowledge and skills including shopping at wet markets and cooking to youths;
(c) NYC supports youth-led initiatives such as Interlogue aimed at strengthening relationships between grandparents and children through a museum programme involving conversation starter kits and activities.
(d) Our Singapore Fund has also supported ground-up initiatives by groups such as the Cassia Resettlement Team, Empower Aging and ACE Seniors, which bring different generations of Singaporeans together to serve the community.
It will be increasingly important for different generations of Singaporeans to work together to overcome our challenges – such as the ones brought to the fore by the pandemic – and to seize the opportunities ahead of us. This ability to work together, empathise with the experiences of different generations, and recognise each others’ strengths, will also make us a more competitive workforce as our workplaces will better harness the energies of a more diverse profile of employees.
Therefore, MCCY will continue to work with other agencies to provide more platforms for Singaporeans of all ages to work together. However, fostering inter-generational collaboration is not something the Government can do alone. It ultimately requires all Singaporeans, young and old, to make the effort to listen and build relationships with one another. We encourage Singaporeans of all generations to step forward to be part of our democracy of deeds, and to work together to gift a stronger, better Singapore for future generations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Efforts and Upcoming Plans to Engage Youths on Views, Concerns and Aspirations for a post-COVID-19 World","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"41 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth what are the efforts and upcoming plans by the Government to engage youths during this pandemic so that their views, concerns and aspirations can be taken into account as Singapore plans for a post-COVID-19 world.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: MCCY and the National Youth Council (NYC) have been engaging our youths during the COVID-19 period, through our digital platforms, to better understand and respond to their sentiments and concerns.
During this period, our youths have been concerned about job prospect, finances, and their mental well-being. In response, NYC partnered youth sector organisations to create digital content and resources to help youths cope with the COVID-19 situation. For example, videos, articles and infographics addressing these concerns were published on Youth.sg. NYC also partnered CR8 Studio SG, a digital video channel that hired creative freelancers affected by COVID-19, to develop content to engage youths during the Circuit Breaker.
Our youths also care about how COVID-19 has impacted our wider society, such as vulnerable groups. They see an opportunity to restate what Singapore stands for, and re-shape our society to be more inclusive, and sustainable. Many have stepped forward to organise or participate in initiatives to help vulnerable groups, and re-create social connections during this time when it is difficult to gather as we would usually do pre-COVID.
Government and the National Youth Council will continue to enable and partner our youth, to address their concerns and also their aspirations to contribute during this time. These platforms include:
(i) Youth Action Challenge (YAC), where youths can come up with innovative solutions on issues they care about, supported with funding and mentorship. The first run of YAC, held in September 2019 involved about 250 youths forming teams and pitching 57 project ideas to a panel of judges. The second run of the YAC will start this October, with a focus on COVID-19;
(ii) Young ChangeMakers, a platform for youths to pitch ideas that benefit the community and receive grants to implement their ideas. NYC has made it easier and faster for Covid-19 related projects to access grants; and
(iii) Youth Corps Singapore, where youths can volunteer for community activities in areas such as mental health, vulnerable groups and environment.
COVID-19 has certainly not limited our youths' perspectives or ambitions for our country. We have heard their views as part of an ongoing journey that started with the Youth Conversations in 2018, followed by the SG Youth Action Plan, and we will further build on these through the ongoing SG Together Emerging Stronger Conversations. Our youths will have more opportunities to discuss national issues and policies, and be part of the implementation plans, so that Singapore society can emerge stronger from COVID-19.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statements were in the reply given by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (Mr Heng Swee Keat) during Question Time for the Parliamentary Question \"Data on Employees who have been Supported by Jobs Support Scheme\" at the Sitting on 4 September 2020: (proc text)]
The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (Mr Heng Swee Keat): Since the introduction of the Jobs Support Scheme or JSS at the Unity Budget in February, over $16 billion of payouts have been disbursed to more than 150,000 employers. This has helped to support the wages of over two million local workers. $15.5 billion of the JSS payouts went to SMEs. This accounts for 73% of the local workers supported by the JSS. [Please refer to \"Data on Employees who have been Supported by Jobs Support Scheme\", Official Report, 4 September 2020, Vol 95, Issue No 6, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Mr Heng Swee Keat circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29 (5): (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to the reply given during Question Time for the Parliamentary Question \"Data on Employees who have been Supported by Jobs Support Scheme\" at the Sitting on 4 September 2020. My reply should read as follows:
The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (Mr Heng Swee Keat): Since the introduction of the Jobs Support Scheme or JSS at the Unity Budget in February, over $16 billion of payouts have been disbursed to more than 150,000 employers. This has helped to support the wages of over two million local workers. $10.5 billion of the JSS payouts went to SMEs. This accounts for 73% of the local workers supported by the JSS.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":4045,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Sim Ann","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200904/vernacular-Sim Ann Pres Address 4Sep2020 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Sim Ann Pres Address 4Sep2020 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4046,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200904/vernacular-Gerald Giam Pres Address 4Sep2020 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Gerald Giam Pres Address 4Sep2020 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4047,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Hany Soh","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200904/vernacular-Hany Soh Pres Address 4Sep2020 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Hany Soh Pres Address 4Sep2020 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4048,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20200904/vernacular-4 Sep 2020 - Mr Zhul Rahim - COVID 19 (TM) Bill.pdf","fileName":"4 Sep 2020 - Mr Zhul Rahim - COVID 19 (TM) Bill.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}