[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [4th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
Mr Speaker: Order. The Clerk will read the orders of the day.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [4 March 2019], (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates to be reduced by $100.\" − [Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Low Yen Ling.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling): Chairman, my colleagues have spoken about the changes we are making in our education landscape to give all our students the best chance to reach their fullest potential and to support Singaporeans in lifelong learning.
Even as we make these bold moves, MOE will continue to invest in our strong fundamentals that have been critical to our success.
Bilingualism is an integral part of our national identity, and our mother tongue languages (MTLs) are a cornerstone of the education system. A strong grounding in our MTLs will enable us to engage with the region more effectively. At the same time, we want to help our students stay connected to their heritage, and gain a deeper sense of rootedness.
Chairman, please allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] We are progressively refreshing the MTL curriculum to cater to students with different studying needs, thus giving them the confidence to use the language effectively and encouraging them to use their Mother Tongues in real-life situations.
As Ms Tin Pei Ling mentioned yesterday, we cannot do this alone. Support from the parents and family is extremely important.
To this end, we have built in a daily life element into our primary school Chinese curriculum to involve family members in the activities and use Mandarin in their daily lives. For example, by preparing a \"sunshine breakfast\" together, students and their family members can learn how to describe the cooking steps and the ingredients needed in Chinese.
This new curriculum has been well received and we will continue to make improvements as we go along.
MOE will continue to work with the various MTL promotion committees, as well as our media and community partners to reinforce MTL learning and use of our MTLs, both in schools and the community.
One example is the National Schools Xinyao Singing and Song-writing Competition. The competition aims to ignite students’ interests in learning Chinese through Xinyao music. Students are encouraged to draw inspiration from their Chinese lessons and incorporate them into their song-writing.
The programme benefitted 10,000 students last year, building up students’ passion for the Chinese language and confidence in using it well.
(In English): We appreciate Mr Chen Show Mao and Mr Faisal Manap’s suggestions for our students to learn more languages, whether Malay or other ASEAN languages. However, mandating the study of the Malay language as Mr Chen suggests, would mean taking a compulsory third language for some, and that means additional learning load. MOE's approach has always been a balanced one, which is to make taking a third language optional. We thus introduced Conversational Malay and Chinese in 2005, to allow interested students to learn these languages at an enjoyable pace. Today, about 25,000 students are enrolled in this programme.
For students who wish to gain a deeper understanding of Malay or Bahasa Indonesia, we have also introduced the Regional Studies Programme (RSP) for them. We note Mr Faisal’s suggestion to extend the RSP to include more languages, but we should take a calibrated approach as there are resource challenges in opening up more third languages. Notwithstanding this, there is definitely value in having students gain a deeper understanding of the culture and language of other ASEAN countries. Students can do so through student exchange or immersion programmes, which are also available to students who are not enrolled in the RSP.
Chairman, in today's fast-changing world, MOE is committed to developing our students holistically to enable them to navigate the future. Participation in co-curricular activities (CCAs) help our students grow in their character and develop their lifelong skills. CCAs provide our students opportunities to discover their interests and talents, while picking up the ability to adapt, be resilient and overcome challenges.
Mr Louis Ng and Miss Cheng Li Hui asked about the allocation of CCA places. All CCAs are designed to provide students opportunities for growth and self-discovery. When allocating CCA places, all schools carefully consider the students’ interests and options within their available resources and facilities, as well as the CCAs’ optimal size for meaningful engagement between the teachers, instructors and the participants. With these considerations and limitations, some CCAs are allocated based on the students’ strengths, besides their interests. We understand the concerns behind the CCA selections and MOE is studying the current school-based CCA selection process for ways to improve and better support the potential of our students.
To support students in CCAs with few members, some schools have come together to pool resources through combined CCA sessions. For example, Greenridge Secondary, Fajar Secondary and Zhenghua Secondary have made arrangements for their Scouts to train together, as a combined inter-school troop. And starting this year, MOE will also be working with Sports Singapore (SportSG) and the National Arts Council (NAC) to offer Athletics and Ethnic Dance to Secondary school students whose schools do not offer these CCAs. Now, depending on the outcome of this pilot, we will explore offering this in other CCA areas.
Miss Cheng Li Hui also asked about environmental education in schools, which is key in our larger effort to develop students holistically so that they can become engaged citizens with a passion for the world around them. Lessons on the environment are integrated into various subjects and students engage these issues through problem-solving and inquiry, as well as discussing real world case studies. For example, in their Science lessons, Primary school students discuss what causes pollution, deforestation and global warming, and reflect on how their actions can impact the environment. Beyond the classroom, students have the opportunity to reinforce their learning through excursions, field work as well as through their CCAs. Many schools have environment clubs where students take part in various projects and activities, and partner the community to promote sustainability.
Chairman, as we continually seek to enhance our education pathways to build up the next generation, we hope that their learning journey will prepare them well for the future.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Mr Chairman, our schools remain committed to preparing our children to learn for life, but we cannot do it alone. We call on parents, industry and community partners to complement our efforts.
To address Mr Gan Thiam Poh’s question, I will begin by speaking about MOE’s partnership efforts. Launched in February, the Guidelines for School-Home Partnership clarifies how schools and parents can work together to develop the child in various domains, such as values, physical, mental, social and academic. MOE launched these guidelines as, over time, the partnership between schools and parents has evolved into a broad range of practices and expectations. Some of these, such as helicopter parenting and over-servicing by schools, can be detrimental to building critical 21st century skills and competencies, in particular the resilience and confidence of our children. The guidelines serve to provide greater consistency of practice within and across schools, and many parents are supportive of them.
Besides schools and parents, our community and industry partners also play a part in preparing our children for life. Project Mi was a values-in-action project organised by student leaders in Bukit Batok Secondary School that involved the collection and distribution of rice to low-income households. While student leaders from NTU mentored them in the project, the Bukit Batok Citizens Consultative Committee assisted in identifying the low-income households and parents provided the manpower and transport required for the delivery of rice. Through this partnership, students had the opportunity to meet community needs and become more confident, self-directed and responsible citizens.
Beyond being sound in values, our students will also need to be mentally strong and resilient to be well prepared for the future. In response to Ms Anthea Ong, mental health and wellness education is important work that we have been doing in schools. From Primary school, we teach social and emotional skills to equip our students to overcome challenges and handle the demands of life, educate them on common mental health conditions and clarify inaccurate perceptions of mental issues. In addition, we have introduced a training programme in schools which equips students to be peer supporters to help identify distress among their friends and be supportive. Through co-curricular activities, outdoor camps and community service, opportunities are also provided to develop resilience and confidence.
Nonetheless, mental health is a complex and multi-faceted issue that is of global concern. There is no single solution and hence a many-hands approach to addressing this is needed. Such an approach benefited Haisan, a Secondary 3 student from Northbrooks Secondary School. Haisan was facing family challenges which affected him mentally and emotionally and this led him to skip school frequently. Haisan’s teachers and the school counsellor conducted home visits and referred him to the Enhanced Step-Up Programme (ESU), a programme by MSF that provides support for at-risk students. Together, the school and the youth worker from the programme helped Haisan to process and manage his social and emotional stress, helping him become more confident, emotionally stronger and resilient. Haisan has since developed positive relationships with his family, teachers and peers, and is now contributing actively in his school’s Dance CCA and Special Interest Group, Music Circle.
Mr Chairman, we need to recognise that the complexities of the world today means that we cannot educate our children in silos. It is when we work together with mutual trust and respect that our children benefit most.
Let me share a personal anecdote. When my son was in Primary school, my wife and I encouraged him in his initial interest in debate. Along the way, we had the pleasure of meeting his teachers who guided the teams, staying till late in school to train them. As parents, my wife and I would bring him out to dinner after training and competitions, or the occasional pep talk for motivation. We even celebrated losses. It was never about the winning or losing of his debates but about the process of learning and the camaraderie built with his teammates. Neither did we nor he expect this journey to span eight years of debating, but the close support from teachers, coaches and the debating community, as well as family helped him to tide the tough times and relish in ones of joy. Today, he continues to share this joy by coming back to spar with his juniors.
Mr Chairman, developing our children's passions requires support and commitment from parents, schools and the community. It may not be for us to say where they shall find their passion but that is something solely for them to discover.
The Chairman: Minister Ong Ye Kung.
The Minister for Education (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mr Chairman, I thank the Members for their cuts and I thank my colleagues for answering most of the questions. I will now address the last set of questions. After my speech, there will be a joint segment. Some Members of the House asked me yesterday why are issues concerning housing and Workfare being posed to MOE. That is because we have a joint segment where MOE, MND, MOM and MSF will address the issues on UPLIFT and inequality.
We have been implementing significant changes to the education system over the past several years. This is despite our system being very highly regarded around the world and producing good student outcomes.
In our current position, it is easy to feel complacent and tell ourselves: “Let us tinker at the edges;” that would be a mistake. We must keep evolving, adapting, to ensure the system is fit for the future and, where necessary, take bold steps.
Where we can build new pathways, we will. Where appropriate, we will invest resources to improve our infrastructure for education. But at our advanced stage of development, the defining changes are about processes. This is the most complex because we dive into the source codes of the system, recognise trade-offs, optimise them and even find ways to break out of them.
For example, we have to balance between the joy of learning and the rigour of education. Our students need proper paper qualifications to open doors to jobs – but they also need to pick up skills which they need to progress in life and in their careers, and these are not so easily credentialed. So, we are recalibrating the balance wherever necessary.
In this context, I will talk about the following today:
First, a programme to further improve our education infrastructure.
Second, an update on the SkillsFuture movement – Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat has spoken about this, and I will focus on how SkillsFuture has led to building of new pathways in our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs).
And finally, I will talk about how we will introduce greater flexibility in our secondary school system to help develop every student's strengths.
First, infrastructure developments, specifically for Junior Colleges (JCs). Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Murali Pillai asked about this.
Four pairs of JCs were merged this year. The transition relatively smoothly, thanks to the tremendous effort from all stakeholders – teachers, students, parents, alumni members and advisors on the ground.
They designed new uniforms and school crests, composed new school anthems, and held numerous activities to get students from the merged JCs to get to know each other better. Great effort was made to preserve the heritage of the component JCs that merged, including the adoption of merged names.
I congratulate the four merged JCs for starting a new chapter and wish them greater achievements ahead. But more changes are to come, MOE will need to trouble them a bit more, and I seek their understanding. Because a few of the merged JCs were amongst the oldest Government JCs, with campuses that have gotten somewhat outdated. We have been progressively improving the building infrastructure of our ITEs and Polytechnics, and our old JCs deserve new campuses too.
So, we will start a multi-year, multi-phase JC Rejuvenation Programme. When choosing which JCs to start with, we considered several factors: the age of the JC, the state of its existing facilities and also the availability of holding sites while we build new campuses. We also considered whether MOE would need time to engage stakeholders for co-funding arrangements, because that would apply to the Government-aided JCs.
The first phase, starting in 2022, will involve rebuilding three JCs, and upgrading one. So, three SERS, one MUP; for those of us who remember what MUP is. They are as follows:
First, in the East, Temasek JC. It has the oldest campus among the Government JCs, 43 years old. We will temporarily house the JC at the former Tampines JC site, which is now vacant, and rebuild Temasek JC’s existing campus. Once complete, it will move back to the existing site.
Second, in the West, and maybe this will address some of Mr Ang Wei Neng's questions yesterday, Jurong Pioneer JC, which is now located at the former Pioneer JC site. Prior to the merger, Jurong JC was one of our oldest Government JCs, 35 years old. We will build a new campus at the site of the former Jurong JC. Once completed, Jurong Pioneer JC will move there. We chose this permanent site for the merged JC because of its convenience and accessibility. As Mr Ang Wei Neng mentioned, it is near the Jurong Lake District and will be served by the future Jurong Region MRT Line.
Third, in the North, Anderson Serangoon JC, currently located at the former Anderson JC site. Prior to the merger, both were old JCs, Anderson JC at 36 years old, Serangoon JC at 31 years old. After merger, we decided to locate the merged JC at the former Anderson JC site because it is next to Yio Chu Kang MRT station and its facilities can better accommodate the merged JCs. The same consideration is still valid in deciding the future permanent site of Anderson Serangoon JC. This means that at some point in the next few years, we will need Anderson Serangoon JC to move temporarily back to the former Serangoon JC site, and move back to the current site when the new campus is completed. This is not ideal because it involves two moves instead of one. We may also have to make additional provisions at the former Serangoon JC site to accommodate the merged JCs temporarily. But we will plan the transition so as to minimise hassle to students and staff.
Finally, Yishun Innova JC, now located at the former Yishun JC site. Prior to the merger, Yishun was also one of our oldest Government JCs, 34 years old. We will give the former Innova JC site a significant upgrade, since it is not old enough to be rebuilt. Once completed, we will move Yishun Innova there. We chose this as the permanent site because it will be served by the new Thomson-East Coast MRT Line.
Phase One will be completed by around 2025. We are already planning for Phases Two and Three, involving upgrading the fourth of the merged JCs, Tampines Meridian, and also Victoria JC and the older Government-aided JCs.
The new premises will support the evolution of JC education, where lessons are now a lot more interactive and learning is more holistic. So, instead of just the classrooms we have today, we will have seminar rooms which are modular and flexible, to support more interactive pedagogies. We will make the campuses more digitally-enabled. We will have facilities that encourage sports and CCAs, such as indoor sports halls which will be designed so that they can be also be open for community use too. The JCs will have campuses that are fit for the future.
Next, I will give an update on new pathways in our IHLs, as part of the SkillsFuture movement. Our objective is to have a more flexible system of education upgrading that is not overly dependent on past academic results, but takes into account the varied strengths of our people, to help develop and fulfil their potential in many different varied paths.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about the progress of aptitude-based admissions. Indeed, admission systems are moving away from an over-emphasis on past academic grades. NUS, for example, has recently announced that they are looking out for Polytechnic students with entrepreneurial experiences. Starting this year, NTU will expand aptitude-based admissions for 40 of its 111 degree programmes. It will involve interviews and the showing of portfolios.
In a similar vein, we introduced aptitude-based admissions at ITE and the Polytechnics, through what we call EAE, the Early Admission Exercise. EAE, since it was implemented, has sparked a host of education and career guidance activities in secondary schools. Students now go through personality assessments, speak to industry practitioners and counsellors, and visit companies for their learning journeys, in order to discover their interests and strengths. This is a good thing because self-discovery is actually a very worthwhile investment of time and effort in Secondary school.
EAE will be rigorously run. The IHLs will require candidates to not just declare their interests and passions but demonstrate them, through portfolios, activities outside of school, or showing that they have knowledge of a particular subject that is outside of the education curriculum. Interviews will have to be skilfully conducted.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about appeals. It is inevitable that with EAE, the Polytechnics will receive more appeals from applicants, which the Polytechnics will have to evaluate objectively and independently. The rise in appeals is inevitable, because EAE involves qualitative judgement and assessment. This is essential, and we must learn how to adapt to this and do this well, if we want to shift away from an over-emphasis on academic grades, and inject more flexibility into our IHL posting system.
This year, admission to Polytechnics saw a record number of EAE applicants at almost 14,000 – 10% more than last year. We expect the final enrolment through EAE to stabilise at around 20% of total Polytechnic intake.
So, in response to Mr Zainal Sapari, with EAE well-established, this year, it will be expanded to working adults for the first time, with consideration given to their current and relevant work experience, and not just their previous school examination results.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked if current procedures for application to Polytechnics disadvantages ITE students. The answer is no, because although ITE students apply after \"O\" level students, they belong to separate queues, and each group has separate places set aside for them.
The way we deliver higher education has also shifted, with new work-learn pathways that champion \"learning by doing\".
In 2017, we launched the ITE Work-Learn Technical Diploma. These courses provide ITE graduates with a skills-based apprenticeship pathway to attain a diploma. Last year, ITE launched four inaugural programmes, and enrolled more than 100 students. So, in response to Mr Ang Wei Neng’s question, yes, ITE will expand the programme. This year, ITE intends to launch another 10 programmes, and it is already planning even more programmes next year. The ITE Work-Learn Technical Diploma will become a major programme in ITE.
\"Learning by doing\" is also championed by our Polytechnics and Universities. Today, we have more than 100 SkillsFuture Earn-and-Learn Programmes, and these have collectively placed 3,300 trainees into various industries.
Our Universities have launched a total of 16 SkillsFuture Work-Study Degree Programmes, admitting over 150 students. One of the work-learn programmes that I found especially meaningful was the one for social work, at the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS).
Those in the social work industry are very proud of their profession, and so they require Social Workers to be degree holders. However, that impedes the career prospects of students who went to NYP to do a Diploma in Social Work. Many of them go to NYP to do this diploma out of passion but, ironically, cannot be certified as social workers. They should be given the opportunity to also pursue a career in this field.
Hence, MSF and SUSS developed a pathway for this group of diploma graduates. Now, they can start work in the sector as Associate Social Workers. With good performance, they can be admitted into a Bachelor's programme in Social Work at SUSS, delivered in work-learn format. The students' prior education and working experience will be recognised, which means they can complete the degree programme in one and a half years, upon which they will then become certified Social Workers.
SUSS can do this because of its unique role, as a University catering to working adults. Some years ago, I informed the former President of Singapore, the late Mr SR Nathan, that a few AUs were keen to name one of their faculty after him. He said that if this was to be done, he would like it to be a faculty of UniSIM, the precursor to SUSS. When I asked him why, he said: “Because it is a university for someone like me.” Today, we have the S R Nathan School of Human Development at SUSS.
To Assoc Prof Walter Theseira’s question, MOE will certainly support all AUs and encourage sharing of resources, where practical. When MOE says: “Every school is a good school,” we do not mean that every school is the same, but that each has its own unique strengths, and is good in its own way. And whether a school is good or not depends on how well it fits the student, not whether it is popular or branded or highly ranked. The same logic applies to our AUs.
Finally, I will talk about how we will introduce greater flexibility in our secondary school system, by further expanding Subject-Based Banding (SBB).
Mr Leon Perera talked about the importance of cultivating resilience, and a \"can-do\" spirit in our young. Ms Denise Phua and Dr Intan talked about moving away from an unhealthy tuition culture.
How students, parents and teachers behave, what they focus on in education, are result of deeply ingrained incentive structures in our labour market, our education system, and the way that our society recognises success. I think we cannot tackle these cultural issues with another promotional campaign, adding new stories into our syllabus, or adding more to our curriculum. We could do all that, but it would not fundamentally shift the underlying culture, which is deeply ingrained.
Having said that, we are not helpless either. With the evolution of our education system, and the broadening and rebalancing of how we measure success, we can shift the current culture. And indeed, we are starting to see changes. This is why we launched the Learn for Life Movement last year.
The Movement is a holistic, comprehensive, multi-year plan to evolve our education system for the future. So we have two movements today – Learn for Life for school education; SkillsFuture for lifelong learning. There are a few major thrusts under the Learn for Life Movement, and MOE has launched two of them.
The first is to balance rigour and joy. If learning is just stress and no joy, there will be little chance of sparking passion and self-motivation that drives lifelong learning. This is why we are revamping the PSLE scoring system, introducing applied learning into schools, and cutting down on the examination load.
The second thrust is UPLIFT, or the Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce. MOE has established an inter-agency taskforce called UPLIFT led by Second Minister Indranee Rajah, to tackle the challenge of inequality. She will talk about the work of UPLIFT later.
Today, I will explain the third thrust – \"One secondary education, many subject bands\".
As Members know, our Secondary school system comprises three streams – Express, Normal (Academic) or N(A), and Normal (Technical) or N(T). Ms Denise Phua, Mr Ang Wei Neng, Mr Charles Chong, Mr Louis Ng and Dr Intan have raised concerns about the streaming system. In fact, I want to acknowledge Ms Denise Phua and Dr Intan, who have actually raised this concern for many years now. This year, Mr Louis Ng joined the call.
Let me first explain the background of streaming.
Streaming was implemented during the \"efficiency-driven\" phase of the education system in the 1980s and 1990s. We were concerned about the huge number of dropouts who could not read or write at the end of Primary school. We had to move away from a one-size-fits-all education system because if students sat in class, could not catch up, and did not understand their lessons, they would lose interest and drop out.
Through streaming, we customised education according to the learning rates of our students. It has successfully reduced school attrition rates from about one-third of every cohort to less than 1% now. The introduction of the N(T) stream contributed significantly to this outcome. Till today, we are benefiting from the legacy of the \"efficiency-driven\" education system.
I urge Members not to casually juxtapost social stratification with streaming because without reducing attrition rates through streaming, social stratification would have been far, far worse.
Over time, parents and students also began to see the benefit of learning at a pace and rigour suited to their academic abilities. Today, for students whose PSLE scores allow them a choice between two streams, there are many who in fact prefer a stream where they can study at a more comfortable pace, and gain confidence as they feel that they are a \"bigger fish in a smaller pond\".
However, there are downsides to streaming, too. There is always some margin of error, especially if streaming is done at a young age. Further, in its original form, streaming assumed that students needed a certain pace of learning in all their subjects, whereas many students, in fact, have uneven strengths across different subjects.
Finally, more importantly, and raised by many Members, entering a stream that is considered \"lower\" can carry a certain stigma that becomes self-fulfilling and self-limiting. Students can develop a mindset where they tell themselves, “I am only a Normal stream student and this is as good as I can be.” It becomes self-fulfilling. I thank Mr Ang Wei Neng and Dr Intan for sharing their personal experiences with this.
We have been grappling with this trade-off – between customisation of education and the downside of stigmatisation. That is why, over the years, we have made significant changes to the streaming system.
A major transition took place in the mid-2000s, when MOE phased out streaming in Primary school over a period of four years. As Members would recall, we used to have three streams in Primary school – EM1, EM2, and EM3.
The first step was to merge EM1 and EM2, since the only difference between the two streams was the standard of Mother Tongue Language (MTL).
Later, MOE shifted to customising learning not at the stream level, but at the subject level. We introduced different standards for the subjects – Standard and Foundation for English, Mathematics and Science; Higher, Standard, and Foundation for MTL. We called this Subject-Based Banding (SBB), and started it since the mid-2000s.
Hence, by 2008, instead of having three streams, we had a single Primary school course. Within the course, students could learn subjects at different standards, based on SBB.
There were skeptics at that time who asked, “What is the difference between streaming and SBB? Itis old wine in a new bottle. 换汤不换药 – you merely changed the labels of EM1, 2, 3 to new subject labels called Foundation, Standard and Higher, that is all. It is the same!\"
There is a big difference. Streaming separates education into different courses and we put students into each course. Each course is like a big jar. You put all kinds of cookies into the jar and then you close it, and you label it \"pineapple tarts\". So, all the goodies inside, whatever they are, get labelled as \"pineapple tarts\", accurately or inaccurately.
SBB changes this fundamentally. Essentially, we break the jar, students come out of it, take subjects of varying difficulty, based on their academic ability. Taking one or two subjects at the Foundation level is not tantamount to labelling the child. And equally important, it encourages students to find their strengths.
Since we introduced SBB, many students who would previously have been in the EM3 stream ended up taking one or more subjects at a higher level. So, this way, we continued to reap the benefits of customisation of education, but minimised the downsides of labelling.
This is much harder to do for Secondary school, because there are so many more subjects involved. More than a decade ago, we started a form of SBB in Secondary schools, by allowing students in the N(A) and N(T) streams to take up to two subjects at a higher level starting from Secondary 3, if they had done well in those subjects when they were in lower Secondary. It worked well.
In 2014, we formalised a bolder form of SBB in 12 Secondary schools as pilot schools. N(A) and N(T) students in lower Secondary could take English, MTL, Mathematics and Science at a more rigorous standard, if their PSLE scores or school examination results for these subjects justified it.
The results of this new pilot have been encouraging. About half of the N(A) students in the pilot schools took up subjects at the Express-level. If we break down this number, 25% of N(A) students took one Express level subject; another 11% took two subjects, and over 10% took three subjects or were laterally transferred to Express stream. So, 25% plus 11% plus 10%, adding up to roughly half of the N(A) students. If we had included MTL, the numbers would be even higher. The numbers for N(T) students taking N(A) subjects are also largely similar.
As of now, the two batches of students who have participated in SBB in the prototype schools have completed their Secondary school national examinations. How did they do? Their results show that Normal and Express stream students, taking the same \"O\" level examinations, perform comparably.
To illustrate, for the national examinations in 2018 last year, 25% of Secondary 4 N(A) students who took \"O\" level English got A1 or A2. How about Express students? It was 24%, one percent less. For \"O\" level Mathematics, 26% of N(A) students got A1 or A2; Express students, 50%. For \"O\" level Combined Science, it was N(A) students, 33%; Express students, 34%.
I think the Normal stream students have held their own. Our surveys also showed that students, parents and teachers overwhelmingly welcome this. Given the positive outcomes, last year, we expanded SBB nationwide.
We are now ready to take a further, major move. It will involve a few significant policy steps over the next few years, let me explain the process.
There will be two important milestones – 2020 and 2024. Beginning in 2020, about 25 pilot Secondary schools will implement Full Subject-Based Banding, Full SBB, with more schools joining in subsequent years. How is Full SBB different from vanilla SBB today? There are three main differences.
First, we will allow lower Secondary school students to study more subjects at a higher level – not just English, MTL, Maths and Science today, but also Geography, History and Literature. Chemistry and Biology will only be available in upper Secondary. As it may be difficult to ascertain the level suitable for students using just their PSLE results, MOE and schools will develop guidelines and assessment mechanisms, including using Secondary 1 year-end examinations.
The second difference is: we will also allow students of Express and N(A) streams the flexibility to take a subject offered in N(A) and N(T) streams respectively, to broaden their learning and experiences, or in instances where customisation will help the student. Express students today are already exposed to technical subjects, such as Design and Technology. In time, Express students may take subjects offered in the Normal stream, such as Mobile Robotics.
The third big difference, beyond the academic aspects, Full SBB will also give pilot schools an opportunity to reshape the social environment in schools to benefit their students. Day-to-day practices in schools play a big part in shaping a child’s self-confidence, sometimes more than the academic curriculum.
I learnt this from Mr Tan Chor Pang, the principal of Boon Lay Secondary. Mr Patrick Tay knows him very well. The late-coming and absenteeism rates amongst Normal stream students in Boon Lay Secondary had not been healthy. However, Chor Pang observed that when it came to CCA, all the students were very engaged. So, in an unprecedented move, he figured, let us just change the way we organise clases. After all, Boon Lay Secondary has a smaller school enrolment. He re-organised form classes according to CCAs rather than academic streams. Almost immediately, absenteeism and late-coming rates fell drastically.
I was fascinated by this unorthodox practice and decided to visit the school and speak to teachers and students. I found out that, every morning, students would gather in their CCA groups – which is their form class – for morning assembly. They also underwent Character and Citizenship Education classes, and learning journeys, together as a form class based on CCA. For academic lessons, they then break out into different classes based on SBB.
So, I asked the students: “Why the big reduction in late-coming and absenteeism rates when the principal changed the class organisation?” The students were frank. They told me that many of them had personal and other family problems. Teachers and counsellors could help, but they also needed peer support, especially from their seniors and friends in their CCA. Now, they look forward to attending morning assembly, because this is when they meet their friends and seniors from their CCA groups.
One student told me: “Now I can pour my heart out to my seniors every morning before assembly, even if it is for 10 minutes. But to do so, I must come to school, and come on time. In fact, 10 minutes earlier!”
Another Normal stream student told me something quite profound. He said that in the past, during morning assembly, a teacher might admonish a noisy class and say: “4N(T), keep quiet!” Immediately, all the N(T) students felt that they were singled out. Today, the teacher would say: “NCC, keep quiet!” and the Normal stream students feel: \"Okay lah.\"
The students who have gone through almost two years of the new form classes in Boon Lay Secondary have recently completed their national examinations. Across the school, results had shown improvement. MOE will need to study their results further, but there is now a genuine belief that the social environment of the school can positively influence a student’s academic behaviour and performance.
I also visited another school, Edgefield Secondary, which had decided to re-organise form classes to include students from all three streams starting this year – not by CCA, but mixed form classes with students from all three streams. Each Secondary One form class goes through about half of their lessons together, for subjects like Character and Citizenship Education (CCE), Design and Technology, Art, Music and Physical Education, where there is little need to customise lessons based on academic abilities. The other half, comprising academic subjects – English, MTL, Maths and Science – are grouped according to SBB.
It has only been a couple of months, but feedback has been generally good. The students I spoke to have no basis for comparison, so they all say it is very good, and they are very happy, as expected. The teachers noticed that students were helping each other more frequently in class, and students from the Normal stream were stepping forward to take up leadership roles during group work or project/team work.
I chatted with several students at the canteen. I asked them: \"You all think this is great. But how about your parents?\" They said their parents felt it was okay. One student said \"My father thought 'This is Awesome'.\"
The principal, Mr Lee Peck Ping, told me that, a handful of parents were concerned that this might slow down learning in class. Peck Ping painstakingly explained how SBB worked, what students are learning together as a form class, and how classes for academic subjects are still banded based on the learning abilities of the students. Through this explanation, he managed to address the concerns of most parents.
He told me that a small number of parents were still worried, and felt that had they known, they would not have sent their children to Edgefield Secondary. And I understand the concerns of these parents. But Edgefield Secondary was making the right trade-off, to develop students both academically and socially. It was, in its own way, taking the lead in reshaping our existing culture for the better.
Schools, such as Boon Lay and Edgefield, are important trailblazers and I thank them. After several years of progressively implementing SBB, and with good outcomes both academically and socially, the time is right for us to move to Full SBB.
Implementing Full SBB will be a multi-year transition. We should not underestimate the challenge of this move. There are major operational challenges, such as time-tabling. Schools will need time to learn, adapt and innovate.
By the start of 2024, we will be ready to take the next step, which is the most crucial. Two things will happen then.
One, we would have rolled out Full SBB and the new ways of organising form classes across the education system. The pioneering practices in Boon Lay and Edgefield will become the norm.
Two, to reflect the reality of Full SBB as a more flexible, single course, we will enrol the first batch of Secondary 1 students, who will graduate with a common Secondary school certificate. This common certificate will combine the current \"O\"-\"level, N(A) and, N(T) certificates. It will list the subjects completed and the standard band of each subject – very much like what Dr Intan described yesterday. And we are not unfamiliar with this concept. It is actually similar to the A-level certificate for JCs, where the certificate states the subjects and the standards they are completed in – whether it is H1, H2 or H3.
For Secondary schools, we will use G1, G2 or G3. \"G\" stands for \"General\". G1 will roughly correspond to today’s N(T) standard, G2 to N(A) standard, and G3 to Express standard.
Singapore and Cambridge will co-brand this new certificate. We are both strong international brand names in education and, by working together, we will enhance the recognition and value of the certificate.
With Full SBB implemented, form classes re-organised across the board, and a combined Secondary school education certificate, we would have effectively merged Express, N(A) and N(T) into a single course. [Applause.] The Express, N(A) and N(T) streams, together with their labels, will be phased out. [Applause.]
So, from three education streams, we will now have \"One Secondary education, many subject bands.\" We will no longer have fishes swimming down three separate streams. We will have one broad river, with each fish negotiating its own journey.
I am sure that there are many questions on how all this will work. Some of them will need to be addressed as we implement the changes, but let me answer a few key ones.
An immediate question is whether we will still keep Secondary 5. It is a key concern amongst students and parents, because for N(A) students today, attaining the “O” level through Secondary 5 helps them to access Polytechnics and JCs.
Our plan is that by 2024, all students will enrol into Secondary 1 and go through a four-year curriculum for all subject bands. At the end of Secondary 4, these students will attain the common certificate with various subject permutations. Some will have six G3 subjects and one G2 subject; some will have five G3s and two G2s; others, maybe two G3s, three G2s and one G1 and so on.
This will require us to undertake a review of our post-Secondary posting system, so that students taking a combination of G1, G2 and G3 subjects can be fairly considered for ITE, Polytechnics and JCs. Our review will recognise students’ particular strengths that make them suitable for specific post-Secondary courses.
The year 2024 is a few years away, and we will use this time to undertake this review. We will also explore other alternatives to a fifth year in Secondary schools, like the current Polytechnic Foundation Programme (PFP), to help students bridge over to Polytechnics or JCs.
Another question is “Currently, the great majority of Secondary schools admit students from the Express, N(A) and N(T) streams. Now it is one course. How will the Secondary school posting system change?”
MOE has thought this through and concluded that it is better not to disrupt the current posting system. This means that secondary schools should continue to admit students across three PSLE scoring bands, even though the streams have been merged.
Educationally, this approach is both practical, reasonable, and sound, because the transition from Primary 6 to Secondary 1 is a fairly major one, and a significant one for all students. We need students to start off right. PSLE still serves as a useful initial gauge of the subject bands that each student is most suited for at the beginning of Secondary 1.
So, students admitted in the first PSLE scoring band will initially take mostly G1 subjects, those in the second PSLE scoring band will take mostly G2 subjects, and those in the third PSLE scoring band will take mostly G3 subjects. Admitting students across three PSLE score bands will allow schools to offer subjects of all bands.
But once in Secondary school, students can discover and further develop their strengths and interests, and Full SBB will enable them to diverge into various paths, taking a combination of subjects across different bands.
This leads to the third question, which is then what will happen to Spectra and Crest, which currently take in only Normal (Technical) students, or schools with specialised programmes, such as NUS High School, the School of Science and Technology, and Integrated Programme schools that take in only Express stream students today? Will MOE mandate that they take in students across all three PSLE bands?
There is value in having certain schools take a whole-school approach in implementing specialised programmes. Every education system in the world will have schools that cater specifically to different segments of students, such as those with high academic ability, strengths in specific areas, or who much prefer a more hands-on, vocational, and technical training.
Such a diverse education system can complement the plan to move beyond streaming. We should maintain and balance diversity across schools and within a school, to allow us to better cater to the educational needs and strengths of different groups of students.
The downside is the lack of mixing in these more specialised schools. These schools have to make a special effort to recruit students from all backgrounds, wisely using their Direct School Admissions (DSA) mechanism. They will have to ensure that students participate actively in inter-school mixing opportunities, such as combining school CCAs, Outward Bound School camps, or Values-in-Action projects, where week-in, week-out, students from different schools get to mingle together. I can see many of the principals from the specialised schools working very hard to do better in this aspect.
There is also scope for these specialised schools to offer more subject options. Spectra and Crest should offer more Normal (Academic) subjects compared to today, and could possibly also offer a few Express-level subjects. Similarly, in time, it will also make sense for the schools that take in only Express students to offer some subjects at the Normal (Academic) or Normal (Technical) level. After all, customisation of education, and catering more flexibly to the varied interests and abilities of students, will benefit them.
Mr Chairman, let me conclude. The emphasis of our education system has evolved over the years. Four decades ago, we made major progress in customising education to reduce student attrition. From two decades ago, we have been redesigning the system to develop the varied abilities of our students.
What is the focus now? In the digital era, knowledge has become very accessible. One smart phone and you can access all kinds of knowledge. But skills carry a premium. Skills – both technical and soft – are what make us human, and inoculate us from being replaced by computers and robots. But skills take a lifetime to acquire and hone, and one must be driven by passion to do so.
Skills. Passion. Growth. In this phase, more than ever, we are centred on the need to learn for life, to prepare our students for the future.
The third thrust of our \"Learn for Life\" movement: \"One education system, many subject bands\", is another step in this direction.
We are able to take these steps now because of the work done in the past. So, in a way, whatever I have announced could have been anticipated. In fact, many Members of Parliament who urged for the phasing out of streaming, made reference to the SBB, and saw this as a natural extension of all the work that we have done.
And this has to be our attitude when it comes to education – never complacent, always anticipating the future, figuring out what needs to change next, planning it out, and implementing at a pace that takes into account the trade-offs, complexities, and the immense impact any changes will have on our students. We should never stay frozen for long periods, only to make sudden changes years later. So, any change that can be compared to the slaughtering of any animal is probably a bad idea.
I am confident that \"One Secondary education, many subject bands\" will benefit many students. Let me share a personal story.
I grew up in a Chinese-speaking family. When I was young, the only books I read were Chinese comics. I entered Primary 1 not being able to understand English very well, much less reading and writing. My late mother, a Chinese teacher, tried to teach me, but her English was also very limited.
Then sometime in Primary 3, I had a eureka moment. I still remember it vividly. I figured out that if \"b-a-r\" reads \"bar\", \"b-e-r\" reads \"ber\", then \"b-a-r-b-e-r\" – I can put them two together and it becomes \"barber\" – the guy who cuts my hair! So, I had figured out phonics – in Primary 3.
From then on, I could start to read some English books. My first book was \"The Three Musketeers\". I could read the words and sentences, but I had a problem because I did not know what they meant. So, in Secondary school, my English standard was what my classmates would describe as \"cannot swim\". This affected other language-dependent subjects such as History and Geography. How did I pass? I memorised large chunks of text. And in the exam, I kept my fingers crossed. If I had spotted the exam questions correctly, then I would regurgitate what I had memorised. If the exam questions came out wrong, I regurgitated anyway.
But if I were in Primary school today, I would probably have been put into a Learning Support Programme (LSP), which would have done me a lot of good. In Secondary school, it would also have been better for me to be placed in a less demanding band for English, which would give me time to pick up the basics, and then upgrade to more demanding band if I could meet the standard. I should have done G2 or G1 English.
There are some students who are very strong in every academic subject. But most, like myself, have uneven strengths, and specific weaknesses. It is just the way humans are. The challenge of our education system is to cater to that.
That is the central purpose of this change. Put to rest the mistaken notion that there is a single, dominant path to success that starts from a very young age. The school system will become far more flexible than today, so that we can customise learning to the student, to give them time to blossom at different points in their lives, while anchoring the belief that we can grow and get better. Beyond schools, the IHL landscape offers even more varied pathways for the student to develop and grow based on his talents and his strengths.
In making this change, we are developing a child with the knowledge that the pace of his or her learning changes with time, all the way to adulthood. We are acting on our conviction that our students benefit most when there is diversity across schools and within schools. Above all, we are guided by our belief that no child's fate is fixed, and in an environment that encourages growth and development, and holistic education, they will fulfil their potential to be sons and daughters of Singapore that we can be proud of. [Applause]
The Chairman: Second Minister Indranee Rajah.
The Second Minister for Education (Ms Indranee Rajah): Mr Chairman, several Members have raised the issues of inequality and social mobility. As these cuts span the work of several Ministries, they will be addressed in a collective response by myself, Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling and Minister Desmond Lee.
The Government is committed to tackling income inequality and ensuring social mobility. We will do so by building a society of opportunities for all. We will ensure that education continues to be a key lifelong enabler for all to progress, irrespective of starting point or background. We will help those in the working world upgrade their skills and learn new ones, so they can access employment opportunities at all stages of life and have good incomes. We will support lower income families in their aspirations towards home ownership and provide extra support for Singaporeans from disadvantaged backgrounds.
This cannot be achieved by the Government alone. It requires a whole-of-society effort, with government agencies, employers, community, families and individuals working together as one.
In education, we have built a system where opportunities are available to all. We have many schemes to assist disadvantaged students and their families at every stage of education. However, some still struggle. For those who do, the difficulties are real, as highlighted by Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar, Mr Charles Chong, Mr Murali Pillai and Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap.
The question then is: how we can help them overcome their challenges, so that they can benefit from the help that is available and realise their full potential. With this in mind, MOE set up UPLIFT – the \"Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce\". The Taskforce's aim is to deep-dive into problems and issues faced by underperforming students from disadvantaged families, understand what exactly is preventing them from doing better, identify gaps to be filled and devise practical solutions.
To get to grips with the real issues and causes, the Taskforce has engaged people at the frontline – those who work directly with and are most familiar with the problems faced by disadvantaged families. To date, we have engaged over 200 contributors, including school leaders and staff, students, parents, social workers, Self-Help Groups (SHGs), community partners and volunteers. Their insights, have been extremely valuable in crystallising the issues and shaping our recommendations.
We have identified four key issues that need to be addressed.
First, long term absenteeism, as mentioned by Miss Cheng Li Hui and Mr Leon Perera. In 2017, about 1.1 per 1,000 students in Primary schools and 7.5 per 1,000 students in Secondary schools were absent for 60 days or more without valid reason. The overall proportion of each Primary 1 cohort who did not complete Secondary education has remained low, at less than 1% in the last five years. However, the numbers, while small, represent a discernible group that needs help. The reasons for absenteeism are varied, but most often, it is tied up with complex family issues. There are existing efforts to address this issue. For the pre-school sector, ECDA engages some of these families through the KidSTART pilot and Pre-school Outreach programme, where the professionals conduct home visits and work with families, including to improve pre-school attendance for the children.
In our schools, we monitor students' attendance closely and actively engage parents when students are absent without reason. Student Welfare Officers (SWOs) and school counsellors are trained to identify early warning signs, and reach out to students who show signs of disengagement from school to provide timely interventions and support. However, as the root causes often lie in the family situation, we will have to direct more efforts in that area.
Second, the lack of a structured and supervised environment outside of school. Typically, when a child comes home after school, there is a proper routine – lunch, some rest, a quiet environment and time set aside for homework, and thereafter play. However, many disadvantaged children do not have such an environment at home.
Third, children who under-perform due to lack of self-confidence, motivation and resilience. These students feel disconnected and isolated from their peers. Their perception of what they can achieve is constrained by difficult circumstances, and they struggle with self-esteem or other underlying emotional issues that hinder them from doing well. In the UPLIFT engagements, my team met Santhya, a student from ITE College Central.
Santhya was disengaged when she first started ITE. She became depressed, lacked self-confidence and began having an anxiety disorder. Her teachers engaged and encouraged her, to build up her self-confidence. With family support, she sought professional help. Fortunately, Santhya had the motivation and resilience to overcome her depression and anxiety disorder. She did well in her Nitec course and is now pursuing a Higher Nitec in Engineering with Business. She is also part of the Student Council in ITE College Central. The question is: how we can help others like her find the resilience and motivation to overcome their challenges.
Fourth, parental support. Many parents in the target profile struggle to balance work and caring for their children. They love their children but they feel inadequate in their parenting skills and do not know how to establish control or strike the necessary balance. They typically also face multiple issues – financial difficulties, split families, unstable housing arrangements and in some cases, domestic violence, or a lack of caregiving for younger and elderly family members, resulting in the older children becoming substitute care-givers and hence unable to focus on their education.
To address these four key issues, UPLIFT has identified the following six strategic areas of focus:
(a) strengthen after-school care and support for students;
(b) build the students’ mental and emotional resilience;
(c) strengthen parental engagement and support;
(d) implement practical solutions to absenteeism;
(e) enhance collaboration between schools and the community; and
strengthen coordination across these initiatives.
As there are many different aspects to UPLIFT, some initiatives can be done earlier, while others will take more time to develop. We will progressively announce the various initiatives as and when they are ready. One has already been launched, that was the UPLIFT Scholarship announced by Minister Ong Ye Kung in December 2018.
Today, I would like to announce two more initiatives.
MOE will strengthen after-school care and support for disadvantaged students through our school-based student care centres (SCCs) in Primary schools and after-school programmes in Secondary schools.
During my recent visit to the SCC in Lian Hua Primary, I met Syed Al-Hafiz, currently in Primary 5. He lives with his elderly grandmother, and his neighbour, Uncle Tan accompanies him and his siblings to school every day because his grandmother is occupied with looking after his younger siblings. Hafiz initially had trouble adjusting to school and used to misbehave. Under the care of his teachers, Uncle Tan – the neighbour – and the SCC staff, Hafiz responded positively. The SCC provided Hafiz with a structured after-school environment for him to develop good habits and daily routines. He is now doing well and is happy to come to school. Hafiz’s experience shows that community support coupled with the right care environment and encouragement, can make a big difference.
Given the positive outcomes of MOE’s after-school care, we will adopt a three-E approach – we will expand current provisions, increase enrolment, and enhance programmes to strengthen motivational support, resilience and holistic development.
Expansion. There are currently 170 SCCs in Primary schools. Enrolment in school-based SCCs has increased from 3,000 in 2012 to about 25,000 this year. MOE is on track to having a SCC in all 184 Primary schools by next year.
Enrolment. With increased SCC capacity, we can take in more children.
Schools will therefore make a more concerted effort to reach out to parents whose children would benefit from attending SCCs, especially those with no alternative care arrangements, and facilitate their enrolment.
We are studying the difficulties that disadvantaged families may face in enrolling their children into SCCs. One issue highlighted in our engagement is the affordability of student care for low-income families. Today, children from low-income families attending registered SCCs receive subsidies for their SCC fees, through the Student Care Fee Assistance scheme (SCFA). Nonetheless, some students on MOE’s Financial Assistance Scheme could still have to pay more than $100 per month.
MOE and MSF will therefore be reviewing the affordability of SCCs for low-income families.
Enhancement. Many Primary schools work with their SCC vendors to take full advantage of the after-school hours to develop their SCC students holistically, for example, through enrichment and character-building activities. Parents and students have given positive feedback about such programmes. We will continue to build on these efforts and will introduce additional programmes aimed at strengthening students’ resilience and improving their socio-emotional well-being.
Next, Secondary schools. As Miss Cheng Li Hui mentioned, the transition from Primary to Secondary school has to be smooth, especially for disadvantaged students. Currently, Primary school counsellors or Allied Educators share transition support strategies with parents, as well as information of students with higher needs with their Secondary school counterparts. The Secondary schools then ensure continuity of financial support, provide academic bridging and extend other forms of additional support to those who need it.
Since 2014, Secondary schools have piloted after-school programmes for students who need more support and supervision. The schools provide a room for the students, which they can use for self-study and various activities after school. The activities and programmes could be run by teachers, community partners or volunteers. Students are also mentored by teachers and external youth workers. These programmes have strengthened social-emotional support to students and improved their connectedness to their learning, peers and school.
Greendale Secondary School was among the 60 Secondary schools that piloted after-school programmes, with very encouraging results. They adopted The Scaffold Programme (TSP) in 2016, in partnership with SHINE Children and Youth Services.
One Greendale student who benefited from TSP was Fida’iy. Fida’iy displayed anger management issues at first and was disruptive in class. His family was also going through difficult times. His teacher recommended he join TSP. After attending TSP’s programmes, and with guidance and counselling from his youth worker, Jie Xi, Fida’iy learnt to manage his emotions better. He developed a good relationship with Jie Xi, who was also in regular contact with his family to help create a supportive and conducive home environment. Fida’iy is now a positive influence in class.
MOE will expand and enhance the after-school programmes from the existing 60 secondary schools to 120 schools by 2020. The consolidated after-school programmes will be known as GEAR-UP. Through GEAR-UP, schools will work with community partners to provide customised support and after-school engagement, and strengthen our students’ social-emotional competencies and social skills. These programmes will be especially helpful to students from disadvantaged families, who will benefit from customised support and care.
The issues faced by disadvantaged students are multi-faceted, and not all the interventions or assistance can or should be school-based. Many other Government agencies also provide assistance, as do community based organisations such as the Self-Help Groups, grassroots organisations, VWOs and individual volunteers.
Community partners play a crucial role in uplifting our students. One example is Care Corner. They offer a range of services to support children and youth from disadvantaged families such as after-school care and support within the community and programmes to build students’ motivation and resilience. Ulu Pandan Stars Programme is another volunteer-driven initiative which mobilises more than 100 Secondary to tertiary student volunteers to provide academic coaching and mentorship to over 70 students from disadvantaged families in Ghim Moh. The programme engages and involves parents in the learning process and collaborates with schools to support students’ learning needs.
One clear theme that has emerged from all the engagement sessions is the need for better coordination to tap community efforts and resources more systematically.
Ms Tan Bee Keow and Ms Joy Lim of the Singapore Children’s Society said that the locale-based engagement sessions gave them a clearer sense of local needs, and a more complete picture of the programmes by other community partners in the same neighbourhood. They expressed a wish for a more coordinated approach among agencies to ensure that the children’s needs are well-met and there is no duplication of services.
We agree. MSF is taking steps to strengthen social service delivery and coordination amongst agencies and community partners. MOE is also supporting MSF’s efforts to tighten local coordination among schools, Social Service Offices (SSOs), Family Service Centres (FSCs), other community organisations and VWOs. This involves strengthening outreach and case management for families who need it, for example, by improving data sharing and coordination of complex cases.
To further close the gap, MOE will set up the UPLIFT Programme Office (UPO) within MOE. The UPO will be a dedicated team to support and strengthen the interface and partnership between school and community partners. It will help in a number of ways.
First, it will work with schools to identify disadvantaged students and map their needs, to facilitate community-based outreach to the families, and matching to suitable community programmes or assistance.
Second, to help schools better leverage community assets and volunteer networks to support after-school activities or holiday programmes for these students, UPO will match trusted partners and volunteers to schools, working with the SSOs and SG Cares Community Network, as well as tap on retired educators who wish to volunteer.
Third, UPO will set targets, monitor feedback and track the outcomes of the various UPLIFT initiatives over time, to establish accountability and evaluate which pilots should be scaled up.
In the first instance, UPO will focus on supporting school-community coordination in selected pilot sites which have higher numbers of students and families fitting the target profile.
UPLIFT has other initiatives in the pipeline, but this will get us off to a good start.
Let me end with a story about the power of strengthening resilience and motivation. Zhi Xian struggled with low self-esteem when he joined Assumption Pathway School (APS). Compounded with family and financial issues, he became rebellious and disruptive. Zhi Xian’s teachers supported him through counselling and constant encouragement. He was paired to cook with his teacher during certain culinary classes. This allowed the teacher to directly mentor and encourage him. He slowly built up his motivation and self-esteem, and became more confident. He was part of the school team that won the bronze medal in a culinary competition. He also started counselling and mentoring his peers. Zhi Xian went on to clinch the 2018 Award for Best Culinary Skills student in APS. He is currently enrolled in ITE’s Nitec in Asian Culinary Skills, and continues to strive hard and give his best.
For us, every child is precious and we want each and every one of them to achieve his or her fullest potential. This is especially so in the case of those from disadvantaged backgrounds, since they face more challenges than others.
Together, we can build a society of opportunities where every Singaporean can do well, succeed and progress, irrespective of background.
The Chairman: Minister of State Mr Zaqy Mohamad.
The Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Earlier, Minister Indranee has shared about MOE's effort to ensure that every child has a start in life to fulfil his or her aspirations. I shall now touch on how we uplift Singaporean workers.
With your permission, Mr Chairman, I have asked the Clerk to place a handout on the Members' seats. The outcomes, if we look at the handout, show that we are moving in the right direction.
Between 2012 and 2017, lower-income workers have had higher income growth than the median workers. Wages of workers at the 20th percentile grew by 24% cumulatively in real terms, while incomes at the median grew by 21%. Individual income growth also translated into increased household incomes. For low-income Singaporean households, this grew by about 26% cumulatively in real terms, higher than the 24% for median households.
Significantly, the employment rate for residents remained high at about 80% even as income grew.
But these outcomes did not happen by chance. They arose from multiple layers of support to upskill our workers, uplift their wages, while keeping unemployment low and employment high.
What this means is that we must stay focused on three key strategies.
First, we must maintain a thriving economy with a tight labour market, and constantly look out for opportunities to create better jobs. Full employment is the best way to ensure the welfare of our workers.
Next, we must strive for quality growth based on productivity improvements that all Singaporeans can benefit from, including our lower income workers.
Third, we support our lower income workers at both broad-based level and within specific sectors so that they can progress with the rest of the workforce.
My speech today will focus on this third thrust. MOM will elaborate on the first two thrusts during our COS debate later.
The Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme is a broad-based measure that tops up the salaries of our lower income workers and helps them save for retirement.
As announced by the Minister for Finance in his Budget speech, from January 2020, we will enhance Workfare by raising the qualifying income cap from $2,000 to $2,300 per month; and increase the maximum annual payouts by up to $400. With these enhancements, we will disburse almost $1 billion of annual Workfare payouts in 2020, benefiting close to 440,000 Singaporeans, including self-employed persons.
Sixty-four-year-old Mdm Goh Geok Kee will be one such beneficiary. Auntie Geok shared with me that she has been cleaning our MOM Service Centre and receiving Workfare for the past seven years. Many of her co-workers also receive Workfare. With this year’s Workfare enhancements, Auntie Geok’s Workfare payouts will boost her income by about 25%. Auntie Geok told me that as long as she remains fit, she would like to continue working.
Mr Zainal Sapari suggested removing the age differentiation for WIS. We designed Workfare for more payouts to go to older workers like Auntie Geok who have less runway to upgrade their skills and save for retirement. We hope to encourage more older workers like Auntie Geok to be more economically active.
Our younger workers have greater potential for income growth, and can be better supported through upskilling efforts to improve their human capital.
Workfare also helps workers save more for retirement. Mr Zainal proposed increasing the cash component from 40% to 80%, and decreasing the CPF component from 60% to 20%. The cash component today is in fact higher than when Workfare first started. In addition, whenever the Government provides extra Workfare bonuses, such as this year’s Workfare Bicentennial Bonus, these bonuses are generally paid fully in cash.
I understand Members' desire to look after the workers' immediate needs. From 2020, the enhanced Workfare payouts will give all workers higher cash payments for daily needs. But their needs in retirement still matter. We worry about how they will cope when they eventually stop work.
We also want our lower income workers to benefit from the higher interest earned in CPF. Compounded over time, the savings will help them have more in retirement. We will also help the Workers who need financial assistance, through ComCare and other schemes.
We will continue to review Workfare regularly to help target groups like Auntie Geok and her co-workers.
Most Workfare recipients, including Auntie Geok, also receive other Government support to help meet their living needs. Over 90% of our Workfare recipients receive U-Save rebates and additional cash assistance under the GST Voucher scheme. Four in 10 receive medical and dental subsidies under the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS). Those with children also receive childcare and student care subsidies, if eligible. Nearly half receive three or more types of Government transfers each year. Notably, 75% of our Workfare recipients own their homes. I think this is a very laudable statistic to remember.
Forty-nine-year-old Mr Gunasegaran s/o Sellayya is another good example. Mr Guna works as a supervisor, managing eight other cleaners. Mr Guna has been receiving Workfare monthly. GST Vouchers and U-Save rebates help to offset his daily household expenses. Mr Guna owns a three-room flat that he lives with his family. His two elder daughters receive MOE Financial Assistance. Each gets a waiver of standard miscellaneous fees, free textbooks and school attire, and public transport credit. His youngest son receives the Kindergarten Financial Assistance (KiFAS). Mr Guna enjoys 99% of kindergarten fee assistance, paying only $1 monthly for kindergarten. Mr Guna’s retired mother also has a CHAS Orange card and receives subsidised care at CHAS clinics.
So, Mr Chairman, our approach of providing multi-layered support is more responsive to the varied needs of our lower income individuals than any single minimum wage or living wage. The cost of wage supplement is fully borne by the Government, with no cost being passed on to employers or consumers. Importantly we achieve significantly faster real median income growth, and ranked high on employment rates compared to other developed countries.
Beyond transfers, we also support skills upgrading to help lower-income workers achieve sustainable wage growth, and progress along with the workforce. The Workfare Training Support (WTS) Scheme encourages lower-income workers to upskill to access better jobs with higher wages as the economy transforms.
The tripartite partners have introduced the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) in the Security, Landscape and Cleaning sectors as a targeted intervention to address the market failure of “cheap sourcing” and support sustainable wage increases.
Since implementation, workers in these three sectors have seen positive real wage growth. Between 2012 and 2017, full-time resident security guards, landscape maintenance workers and cleaners benefitted from larger real wage increases of 23%, 36% and 44% respectively, compared to 21% for the median resident worker. Over 70,000 resident workers have benefitted so far.
Dr Intan asked whether the PWM can be extended to more sectors. Ultimately, improving productivity is key to sustainable wage growth. PWM helps to mitigate effects of market failure from “cheap sourcing”. We will hence be extending the PWM to the lift maintenance sector that similarly experiences depressed wages due to outsourcing. We also encourage employers in other sectors to adopt the principles of progressive wages and skills and provide clear progression pathways for their workers. On a voluntary basis, employers and unions have also established PWMs in public transport and healthcare. We will explore facilitating more of such voluntary PWMs.
Mr Zainal suggested reviewing the PWM training requirements to specify compulsory modules. As Chairman of the three Tripartite clusters, the Member would be aware that the tripartite partners have agreed on the training requirements in the PWMs, including specifying mandatory modules and giving employers flexibility to send their workers for other relevant training. We have also been enhancing these three PWMs with wage enhancements and bonuses. Together, the tripartite partners are fully committed to improving the lives of our lower-income workers.
Beyond improving wages, MOM also works closely with our tripartite partners to improve our workers’ well-being. I will cover this in MOM's COS debate.
Mr Chairman, we have had a decade of Workfare. The handout highlights key outcomes of Workfare, and how Workfare and the multiple layers of support have uplifted families like Mr Guna’s and Auntie Geok's. Over the last 10 years, 830,000 Singaporeans have benefited from $5.5 billion of Workfare payouts. We achieved good income growth while keeping employment high. Our lower-income workers continue to upskill, and as I mentioned earlier on, looking at home ownership, they also continue to grow their assets.
Let us build on what is working well for Singapore and stay on the task of uplifting Singaporean workers like Auntie Geok and Mr Guna.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Chairman, I will speak on home ownership which is central to providing stability and progress for families in the long-run.
Home ownership gives Singaporeans a stake in our country, and gives each family a permanent place to call their own. Also, households can use their CPF to pay for their mortgage, giving them a home and an asset, instead of using cash to pay rent.
That said, some families run into difficulties such as job losses, and are unable to own a home for some time. We work closely with MSF to ensure that they are not left without a roof over their heads. Those who lack family support and alternative housing options will be assisted with public rental housing.
Members have asked how we help tenants to attain home ownership. We agree that public rental should only be temporary for tenants who are work-capable, and are therefore increasing support to help tenants progress towards home ownership.
As highlighted by Mr Saktiandi Supaat, the Fresh Start Housing Scheme was designed for this purpose.
We introduced Fresh Start in 2016 to assist second-timer rental families with children to buy a 2-room flat. Families on the scheme can get a grant of up to $35,000. Beyond direct financial assistance, we seek to ensure that the families can sustain home ownership independently. We also work with MSF to check-in with the families regularly to ensure that the family situation remains stable.
To provide Mr Ong Teng Koon with an update, as of last month, 74 families have joined Fresh Start, of which five families have collected their keys. These numbers may seem small, but for those who benefit from the scheme, the help provided means a lot and we want them to succeed in their home ownership journey.
This is why we regularly review ways to enhance Fresh Start, and to intensify support for those who are already on the scheme. I will share more details on these enhancements at MND's COS.
Through Fresh Start, we have gained a better understanding of how best to support our tenants in their journey towards home ownership. For example, some needed advice on budgeting for a flat purchase. Others shared that they appreciated the face-to-face support from the Fresh Start team.
As Members can imagine, it is a manpower-intensive effort, but such individualised efforts are well worth it. We are heartened by this, and want to scale up our efforts. I am pleased to share that we will set up the Home ownership Support Team (HST), a dedicated team in HDB to help our rental households towards home ownership. We want to provide stronger, personalised hand-holding for families who are ready for home ownership. The HST will help tenants navigate home ownership policies and processes – from discussing the options that would best meet their needs and budget, guiding them through the purchase, and checking in to ensure that the family remains on track for key collection. We have learnt that having someone to consult, and more importantly, to provide the human touch, is important for our tenants. The HST will be set up later this year, and will start reaching out to families with potential for home ownership.
Home ownership may not be an immediate goal for some tenants who may first need to address more complex challenges such as family conflict. Our priority is to help these families stabilise. Hence, we will be providing spaces for MSF to establish social service hubs near rental flats to offer localised programmes and services. Once these families have stabilised, we look forward to engaging them, for HDB to work with them on their journey towards home ownership.
I have met many rental tenants who aspire towards home ownership. Some shared with me that they are working hard, and saving up diligently to buy a flat for themselves and to give their families a better future. We are heartened that last year about 1,300 households moved into home ownership. These numbers have increased steadily in the last few years. We want to keep this up, and will work hard to partner our tenants in their efforts.
Mr Chairman, in Chinese, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Home ownership allows every Singaporean to live and work with peace of mind and to grow with the nation. In spite of this, there are families that face difficulties in life such as unemployment, and are unable to afford their own flat.
MPs have asked how we can help households living in rental flats to buy their own homes. I would like to share with you that as of last year, 1,300 families have bought their own flats and moved out of rental flats. We will continue these efforts and do more to help rental flat tenants own their homes.
We noticed that some tenants in rental flats require budgeting advice when buying their own flat, some are grateful for the face-to-face counselling and assistance provided.
I am glad to announce that HDB will establish a Home ownership Support Team or HST, which is a dedicated team to help tenants in rental flats kick start the process for home ownership.
First of all, the HST will help tenants understand the policies and processes of buying a flat, and discuss suitable options for them after considering their needs and budget. The HST will provide guidance through the process of the flat purchase and ensure that everything proceeds smoothly, up to the collection of keys.
We realised that having someone to provide information and advice, and more importantly, the human touch, is very important for these residents. Before buying the flat, some families would need to resolve complex challenges, such as family disputes. Therefore, our priority is to help these families stabilise.
Hence, we will be providing spaces for MSF to establish social service hubs near rental flats to offer localised programmes and services. Once these families have stabilised, we will help them embark on the journey of home ownership.
The Chairman: Minister Desmond Lee.
The Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Chairman, may I have your permission to present two slides in the course of my presentation and also a little bit more time to complete this joint statement.
The Chairman: Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]
Mr Desmond Lee: Thank you, Sir. Mr Chairman, my colleagues have described some of the further measures that we will take, to give our children a good start, uplift our workers and support families living in rental housing.
I will update Members on our efforts to provide stronger and more integrated support for Singaporeans with complex challenges. These include enhancements to ComCare, setting up of Community Link or ComLink for families in rental flats and Localised Community Networks to support youth at-risk.
ComCare is a key component of our social safety net. It complements the support provided by family, community, and other Government assistance. We regularly review our ComCare schemes at MSF with inputs from our stakeholders.
ComCare Long-Term Assistance (LTA) supports those who are permanently unable to work due to old age, illness or disability and have little or no income and family support. Most of our beneficiaries are elderly Singaporeans and they receive monthly cash assistance for living expenses and household bills; assistance with medical bills, medical consumables and one-off essentials; and access to Government-funded social services such as Senior Activity Centres and befriending services to stay engaged and connected.
Over the last 10 years, MSF has reviewed and adjusted these rates every two or three years. The last was in 2016. Minister Heng Swee Keat has announced that we have completed our latest review. So, from 1 July, we will increase the cash assistance that beneficiaries on ComCare Long-Term Assistance will receive to meet their basic living expenses. For example, single-person households will receive $600 in cash assistance each month, an increase of $100, and larger households will receive higher amounts.
In addition to ComCare Long-Term Assistance, the Government has enhanced wraparound support for seniors in recent years, so that our seniors can age with better assurance.
You will see a picture of Mdm Jaya, pictured here together with Priya from SSO@Hougang and Moses from Fei Yue Cluster Support. Mdm Jaya suffers from polio, and lives with her sister in a HDB studio apartment. Since 2016, she has been receiving ComCare Long-Term Assistance cash assistance. Sunlove Home Help delivers meals to her every day, as part of MOH’s Meals-on-Wheels programme. She receives cash supplements through the Silver Support Scheme and we assist her with her medical bills and medical consumables. She further benefits from the Pioneer Generation Package, which provides additional help with her healthcare costs. Mdm Jaya spends time at the Fei Yue Senior Activity Centre (Hougang) every day. Fei Yue Cluster Support officers also visits her every year to check on her well-being and we hope such wraparound support will help Madam Jaya and seniors like her live and age well in their golden years.
Sir, apart from ComCare Long-Term Assistance, we provide ComCare Short-to-Medium-Term Assistance, or SMTA, to help families tide over difficult times and regain stability. For example, those whose breadwinners are temporarily unable to work, looking for jobs or earning a low income may receive temporary support through SMTA. We have similarly reviewed ComCare SMTA to keep pace with living expenses and changes in expenditure patterns. So, from 1 July this year, new SMTA beneficiaries as well as those who have their assistance renewed should expect an increase in their cash assistance. Amounts will vary depending on their needs and financial circumstances.
These are part of our efforts to strengthen social assistance for the vulnerable, which Dr Lily Neo and Mr Seah Kian Peng asked about.
Beyond enhancing our social assistance schemes, we must continue to strengthen the ways in which families receive help. Families facing complex situations often require support beyond financial assistance. And it can be challenging for them to navigate the system and interface with multiple agencies and VWOs. To achieve better sustained outcomes, we are working to provide more Comprehensive, Convenient, and Coordinated assistance, and I will share more at MSF’s COS.
I will move on to the second significant area of strengthened support which concerns rental families. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Sun Xueling had earlier described some of MND’s efforts to help families living in rental flats.
We will also do more to enhance support holistically for these families and, in particular, work with a network of partners to help them and their children overcome early disadvantages and do better as they grow up. In July last year I sketched out plans to set up social service hubs at or near rental flats. Dr Lily Neo and Mr Seah Kian Peng have asked about our plans and over the past few months, we have been consulting our partners.
MSF, together with MND, will be launching Community Link, or ComLink for short, at or near rental flats to offer more integrated and coordinated support, and customised programmes and services for families living there. ComLink will provide an accessible focal point in each community. The SSO and officers from other social services will work together and proactively support those in need. Community partners can also come together to assist these families more holistically through the ComLink. For example, we may bring in parenting workshops and night-time student care or childcare, if such needs are identified in the community. Most importantly, ComLink will develop a sense of community and mutual help, with neighbours supporting one another in their journeys.
We will start with four sites – Jalan Kukoh, Marsiling, Kembangan-Chai Chee and Boon Lay – over the next two years. We chose these sites because of their profile of rental families with children. ComLink is expected to benefit around 1,000 families in these estates. At each of these sites, dedicated spaces will be available for community partners to run programmes catering to the needs of the families. This is a photo of one of the programmes provided at the existing space in Jalan Kukoh which we are using. ComLink will provide proactive, collaborative and community-driven support to these families. The SSOs have brought community partners like the grassroots, Government agencies on the ground and VWOs together in local implementation workgroups to better understand each community’s specific needs. These implementation workgroups will be engaging the families and the local community to better understand their aspirations and their needs. We want to design programmes and services alongside them. And we look forward to working with partners to serve the community.
Apart from families living in rental housing, we also look into the needs of children and young people who may be derailed because of family issues, such as financial difficulties or family conflict. Their parents may also be absent or unable to care for them. These are stressful situations that can affect the children, including the level of motivation and learning in school, which Minister Indranee has been looking into under UPLIFT.
Without proactive early support and intervention, some of these students may underperform or start to skip school and yet, these are young people with potential and promise; and we want to ensure that they have the best chances in life.
Today, there are many organisations doing good work on the ground, but there is room for us to do more and work closer together. We will therefore embark on a Localised Community Network pilot, to see how we can better support these young people. We want to intervene more proactively upstream, and partner the community and grassroots more closely to support youths with complex family circumstances. This is part of the work of the National Committee on Prevention, Rehabilitation and Recidivism (NCPR) formed by Minister Josephine Teo and myself last year, to develop and implement a coordinated and integrated approach to prevent offending and re-offending, and strengthen rehabilitation, including for children and young people.
For this pilot, we will work with schools and the MOE UPLIFT Programme Office (UPO) which Minister Indranee announced earlier, to identify these children and youths early, and provide timely social service support and intervention.
By facilitating fuller data sharing between the relevant Government agencies, we hope to gain a better understanding of the challenges they face at home, in school or elsewhere. And in doing so, we hope to help them resolve or cope with the issues they are facing. The pilot also complements UPLIFT’s efforts to support students who exhibit long-term absenteeism or emerging attendance issues, arising from challenging family circumstances. For these students, we will strengthen and coordinate support, by bringing together relevant Government agencies, schools, VWOs, community organisations and volunteers to help their families holistically, so that family members receive support in relevant areas and do not have to approach multiple agencies on their own.
We will pilot this Localised Community Network model at Boon Lay and the broader Jurong West, starting this July. This is also one of the four sites for ComLink, thus allowing families involved in the pilot to also be supported under ComLink if they live in rental housing.
ComLink and the Localised Community Network pilot are part of our efforts to strengthen the way in which families receive help, and strengthen the overall social service network. The Government will continue to invest in and strengthen our system of social support. But with the needs of families becoming more complex, it is encouraging to see more community organisations and volunteers joining us in our efforts to uplift families. To ensure that such goodwill and resources translate into a more impactful and sustainable improvement, we must work together to organise and integrate our community efforts better.
Mr Chairman, over the past year, public consciousness about the challenges of income inequality and social mobility has been raised through a series of thoughtful books, articles, forums and programmes. These include Channel News Asia’s documentary entitled, “Regardless of Class” narrated by Dr Janil Puthucheary; books by academics such as Assoc Prof Teo You Yenn’s \"This is what Inequality Looks Like”; and the volume edited by Prof David Chan on “How Working Together Matters”; the dialogue with Prof Tommy Koh and Deputy Prime Minister Tharman at last year’s Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) Conference; and subsequent dialogues involving Prof Koh and Mr Lim Boon Heng on minimum wage; op-eds by practitioners, policymakers and academics such as Dr Sudha Nair, Senior Minister of State Maliki Osman, and Assoc Prof Walter Theseira – to name a few – and forum letters by members of the public.
Mr Mohamed Irshad asked for the Government’s views on the positions taken in Prof Chan’s and Prof Teo’s books, and I presume by extension, the views on inequality articulated by other academics and commentators in the media.
This is not quite the right platform for a full exposition and assessment of the broad range of issues raised. The Government has in fact set out its views and approach on inequality and social mobility earlier, in particular, in Prime Minister's Parliamentary reply, Deputy Prime Minister Tharman's interview with the Straits Times and MSF's Occasional Paper entitled “Improving the Lives of Low-Income and Vulnerable Families in Singapore”.
So, let me make a few broad points to close this joint segment.
First, we welcome the diversity of views and ideas on inequality and social mobility. It gives us the opportunity to see fresh perspectives, step back and challenge our own assumptions, so that we can continue to make our system better. It also focuses and asks on how each of us can play our part to help uplift Singaporeans in need.
Second, we are encouraged that many more people are volunteering and giving generously. More companies are asking how their giving can be made more impactful; we can achieve greater impact if we better harness our collective resources and complement each other's efforts.
Third, there are many causes of inequality, not just a single cause: from differences at birth in people's abilities, to differences in resources that parents can invest in their children; from differences in educational outcomes, to the way technology and market forces shape wages of different groups of Singaporeans; from the difficulties and derailers that life's circumstances present, to issues of individual motivation and mindset; from lack of awareness about help schemes and support services, to challenges in navigating the system and accessing these opportunities and schemes.
Because there are multiple causes, our solutions must be multi-faceted. We must tackle inequality practically, rather than ideologically.
So, where inequality is caused by differences in how much resources families can invest in their children, we put in significant investments to narrow the gap and give children from lower income households a good start in life, for example, through pre-school.
Where there is structural income inequality, we put in place structural measures to mitigate this. For example, the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) in specific sectors, the Workfare Income Supplement which has just been enhanced, the Silver Support Scheme and permanent GST Vouchers and Transfers.
Where mindset and motivation are an issue, our social workers seek to counsel, nudge and inspire.
Where life circumstances derail and anchor people down, we try to intervene where possible upstream, to help to solve these difficulties and challenges in their way.
And where complex and interlocking problems consume a family's attention and ability to access opportunities, or respond positively to social interventions, we find ways to strengthen and integrate our social support for them.
Fourth, we are committed to tackling the ''unfinished business\" of inequality, to borrow the words from my colleague, Minister Ong Ye Kung.
We will keep studying fresh ideas and approaches, both here and abroad. We do not assume we have all the answers. We do not. We will try out pilots, experiment and partner community groups working hard on the ground. This is what committees and working groups set up by Government, like UPLIFT and M3 and others, seek to do – to examine issues closely, to identify gaps and close them, and work with our community partners to identify workable solutions we can implement on the ground.
No system or solution is perfect. And few if any policies come without trade-offs or unintended consequences. When new ideas or philosophies are offered, we need to see how they have worked in other societies and carefully consider the fuller implications and trade-offs, so that good intentions do not lead to counter-productive results.
Mr Chairman, the important work of building a society of opportunities for all extends well beyond our four Ministries, to the whole of society and to all Singaporeans. In fact, if you listen throughout COS, you find in many Ministries, there will be schemes and programmes, thoughts and ideas that they will implement that address the issue of inequality and social mobility.
None of us got to where we are today on our own efforts alone. Along the way, we were offered opportunities, second chances or a helping hand. Similarly, we should pay it forward. Our society is stronger and more resilient when all Singaporeans come together and we look out not only for ourselves, but for our families, neighbours and fellow Singaporeans in need. And as we do this, we ensure that all Singaporeans have the chance to pursue their dreams, regardless of their background and starting points. And this is the society of opportunities that we aspire towards.
The Chairman: Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Thank you. Chairman, I want to direct my questions to MOE. I want to thank Minister Ong Ye Kung. Thank you for finally slaying sacred cow of streaming, and of course, not without very good prior examination. He might not want to call it \"cow\" but I would just call it that. Slaying it is a very bold and wise move and I want to congratulate and commend the work of you and your team. So, thank you very much for that.
I want to ask if the Minister can consider also the other features that I have mentioned, for example, the Gifted Education Programme (GEP), which has been around for a while. I wonder if the Minister can comment if that is also a feature that can be examined and then relooked at. I think there is just merit to having students who are gifted academically to also mix with students who are taking subjects at G1 or the former Normal level. I believe it makes for very good social mixing. I wonder if Minister can consider that as well.
My second supplementary question is to Minister Indranee on the special education needs support in mainstream schools and IHLs. I truly appreciate what the Minister has shared. I know that in MOE, from Director down to the Allied Educators (AEDs), they have done a lot of work, and I want to honour what they do as well. But there are, indeed, real genuine capacity and capability issues that are felt on the ground. I wonder if we can study the issues first, and seriously look at how we can increase the number of AEDs and special needs officers, and overall support in both mainstream schools and IHLs. Also, to look at a proper skills-based training roadmap for them, because to deal with so many types of disabilities and that kind of numbers is really not easy. And at the IHLs level, because they are all quite autonomous, for the Ministry to consider resourcing and supporting them through a common platform where they can get together to share best processes and practices in order to make the efforts more effective and impactful. For your consideration, please.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I thank Ms Denise Phua for her view which is a valid one. In a way, the GEP is a similar but smaller issue compared to the SBB issue that we were considering. So, this year, there are GEP centre schools – Nanyang, Nan Hua, Rosyth – that have already started mixed form classes for GEP students. So, just like SBB that I mentioned earlier, they spend 50% of the curriculum time together for various subjects. Only when it comes to Mathematics, Science, English and Social Studies, they then break out into their GEP classes. So, I think changes are already happening. We note her point. This is exactly the same balance that we are trying to optimise and we will continue to work on that.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Mr Chairman, I thank Ms Denise Phua for her clarification. Indeed, the numbers are large. What I can say to Ms Phua is that we will continue to do more to see how we can support the students with SEN in our schools. It is not just a question obviously of the AEDs but also the teachers, the peers and building up an environment that is generally supportive. So, we have made quite a lot of headway in the last few years and we will continue to do so, and we will certainly take her suggestions into consideration.
The Chairman: Dr Intan.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have two clarifications, one for each Minister.
First, for Minister Ong. I also spoke about SOTA and Sports School. Since we will eventually abolish academic streams by 2024, will there be plans to eventually take students beyond just the Express stream for both SOTA and the Sports School? And the second question is Crest and Spectra. Eventually, is there still relevance for Crest and Spectra to just have Normal (Technical) students? Will they be absorbed as a mainstream school, where they can admit students from across all abilities?
For Minister Indranee, just a couple of questions on special education needs. Are there plans to let all pre-service teaching programmes in NIE to also include at least one module on teaching students with special needs? Because at this moment, I think only specific groups of pre-service teachers are trained to teach students with special needs, so will there be plans to let all pre-service teachers be trained to manage students with special needs? And beyond just resources that are under teaching or schools, what about increasing awareness amongst students themselves? Are there plans, for example, to include awareness about students with special needs in common subjects for all students, for example, in Character and Citizenship Education lessons so that they know how to manage classmates who have special needs?
Mr Ong Ye Kung: First on Singapore Sports School and SOTA. Sports School already takes in students from all three streams, actually, and they also have tied up with Republic Polytechnic so that some of the students, when they finish, they go to Republic Polytechnic and continue sports-related education.
SOTA takes in Express stream students plus those in the Option Band where they can opt for both Express as well as Normal (Academic) (NA). And the reason is because SOTA offers an International Baccalaureate (IB) programme. So, there is also a responsibility for the school and the system to recognise that IB is quite an academically rigorous programme and you want to make sure that the students can keep up and not end up not being able to cope and losing confidence totally. And so, for the time being, so long as SOTA continues to offer an IB programme, I think it will take in Express students. However, in time to come, when the three streams are merged, I think it will naturally have to relook at what kind of students it takes.
As for Spectra and Crest, as I mentioned in my speech, speaking to Spectra's and Crest's students, they feel so much better being in a school where there is a whole school approach to recognise that they are probably better at doing technical jobs, hands-on jobs and develop them in that direction. So, there is value to have diversity across schools, having schools that focus on certain segments of students but, at the same time, the bulk in the middle have diversity within the school, which is what we are trying to achieve.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Dr Intan asked about what we are doing to equip teachers to deal with students with special needs. There is training for basic awareness for SEN. MOE has equipped all beginning teachers with the basic understanding of SEN since 2005 through a compulsory module in the NIE pre-service training. This enables the teachers to understand and manage the learning demands for students with SEN. And we also have teachers who are trained in special needs. A core group of teachers in every school is equipped with the deeper understanding of SEN through 108 hours certificate level training that is known as the Teachers Trained in Special Needs or the TSN course. And as of July 2018, 512 teachers have been trained under the revised TSN programme, and some of these TSNs go on to acquire deeper knowledge in SEN support by attending disability-specific training modules.
With regard to peers, the Member is correct. You do want the other students to be empathetic to students with SEN and generally know how to relate to them. When I visited some of the IHLs and spoke to some of the students with SEN, they mentioned that when they were younger, they were often misunderstood. Their peers did not talk to them, would not sit down and interact with them. And I think that really did have an impact on them. But helping students to understand what it is to be a friend to someone with SEN makes a huge difference. And it is not a one-way thing; it is two ways because the child without SEN is also learning what it is like and receives knowledge that way as well. So, we will continue to work on that to make sure that their peers interact well with them.
The Chairman: Mr Seah Kian Peng.
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Thank you, Mr Chairman. My questions are directed to the Minister for Social and Family Development, Mr Desmond Lee.
First, I welcome the changes to the ComCare Assistance Scheme, for the short-term, medium-term as well as the long-term one. I note that this is part of regular reviews which the Ministry conducts. And, in this instance, it is quite a hefty jump, up to about 20%. So, my question to the Minister is whether these reviews, could they be undertaken more frequently and the adjustments be more incremental but do it more regularly.
My second supplementary question is, when the Minister spoke about how Government is helping Singaporeans in the area of social mobility and inequality, the Minister mentioned that they are starting some pilots together with MND, by launching community links at or near rental flats, to offer more integrated and coordinated support and customised programmes and services for families living there.
Two supplementary questions. First one is: how will community links support the families within the neighbourhood? And secondly, how can partners, whether they are corporates, they are community or residents, contribute to this initiative?
And, Mr Chairman, if I can speak on your behalf, I note one of them is in your constituency so I am sure you welcome that.
The Chairman: Totally.
Mr Desmond Lee: Mr Chairman, in terms of the ComCare reviews, we conduct them regularly. So, every two to three years, over the past 10 years, we have been making adjustments. But we will take on-board the Member's suggestion to see whether we can make incremental adjustments more frequently, as opposed to making jumps every two to three years.
He also asked about ComLink. I have articulated that ComLink as a social service hub embedded at or near rental housing, to be able to tackle and address the challenges that rental-housing families face. Look at each family's circumstances, starting with families with young children; understanding their needs holistically rather than looking at the issues they face. So, look at the individual, look at the family, understand what are the challenges that hold them back, that hold them down. What are the risks that poverty gets transmitted to the next generation, and the next generation? And work with relevant Government agencies, work with the families, understand what their dreams and aspirations are; work with community partners who will come in to the ComLink and integrate our support for these families. And, of course, work with the neighbours, because they are not beneficiaries and clients, they are people living there, who have abilities, leadership and initiative, and who themselves may have found ways to improve their lot in life. And then they can share examples, support each other.
Now, the ComLink is an example of how we want our future of social service integration to be – working together, looking at families holistically rather than individual needs, looking at the whole rather than silo and compartments. In a way, the ComLink is a microcosm of what we are hoping to achieve at the broader level, at the town level, at the community level. That is why we establish SG Care community networks in each and every town all across Singapore. I will speak more about that by way of an update during MSF COS, so please stick around for it.
In essence, Members asked how ComLink approach can benefit the wider neighbourhood. I think that integrated approach to tackling complex challenges in order to achieve maximum social uplift for these families, is the way we want to go.
In terms of corporates and partners, the ComLink white spaces or community spaces will be places which community partners, who wish to see their giving achieve maximum impact, they can go there. They can say, \"I would like to support these families and not just give generally. I want to see outcomes, I want to see upliftment in these households. I want my colleagues, my staff, my vendors to partner these families, walk the journey with them until some of them have a better life ahead of them to look forward to\".
So, ComLink is not just a Government initiative. It is a platform that allows the broader community to come in – companies, philanthropists, donors, volunteers, givers – but working together in an impactful way, in an integrated and coordinated manner to uplift people's lives.
The Chairman: A reminder to Members to direct more of the questions related to the Ministries subsequently during their COS. Dr Lily Neo.
Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar): Thank you, Mr Chairman. I would like to have two supplementary questions, one for Minister Indranee Rajah, the other one for Minister Desmond Lee.
For Minister Indranee Rajah, earlier on she mentioned on the expansion of after-school care. Can I ask her how many community or grassroots-initiated after-school care there are in community, and whether she could support or even take over CATCH Plus. CATCH Plus stands for Children and Teens Community Hub started since 2014 at Kreta Ayer precincts – that is at the Jalan Kukoh rental blocks – which is a holistic care programme for the disadvantaged children there, with 100 membership right now. So, whether MOE could help with that one and maybe take over the CATCH Plus Centre. That is my first question.
For Minister Desmond Lee, on ComLink, may I ask him what kind of outreach will there be, because that is most important as the core success for this project; and whether there will be enough social workers that can have a hand-holding approach to all these disadvantaged families with multi-faceted problems; and also whether we can have a long-term basis approach for the children of such families.
Ms Indranee Rajah: I thank Dr Lily Neo for her question. Maybe I can outline what the thinking of the philosophy behind UPLIFT is, and then I will address the question.
There are some things that should be done in the school within curriculum time by teachers. Then there is something that can be done in the school but not part of the curriculum, and not necessarily by teachers. And then, there are things which can be done in the community.
So, the Student Care Centres, which is after school, is really a facility that is provided outside of the school curriculum. For that, what the school does is the school provides the premises and the school works with others to provide the programmes. So, the Big Heart Centre, for example, was one of those; that is the three Self-Help Groups that have come together to provide services, and they work together with the school. So, that is what the expansion of student care centres is about.
Then, you have things which are in the community and for that, there is actually a value to having community-based programmes, because not everybody may want to send their children to a Student Care Centre. As you know, when you live in a rental block, sometimes the parents work shift hours, they prefer their children to be at home at a certain time; they cannot collect them from school. So, we would like to encourage VWOs, as well as grassroots organisations and other community projects, to continue. The question is how to link them up.
The CATCH Plus programme that the Member referred to is actually a very good programme. I visited your constituency and I was introduced to the ReadAble Programme. I was very impressed by the work that they are doing there, and there is value in that. So, it would not be so much a situation of MOE taking over community programmes like that, but what MOE and UPLIFT office can do, together with MSF, is see how we can link up, coordinate better. If programmes like that need assistance or support, we will see how we can connect you with the entities or persons who can better support such programmes.
Mr Desmond Lee: Chairman, I thank the Member for her question. If I may just venture an additional reply on the CATCH Plus programme. The Member had also described to me in detail how CATCH Plus works. CATCH Plus is in Jalan Kukoh. It is where the ComLink for Jalan Kukoh will operate. Certainly, we will work very closely with the people working in CATCH Plus, to ensure a more integrated support for young people living in rental housing, that particular group that we are very focused on.
I have spoken earlier about the Local Community Network (LCN). We are starting off a pilot in Boon Lay because we have ComLink there as well. But you begin to see how our structures that we will start to put on to the ground begin to relate to each other and work with each other.
So, UPLIFT, the programme office, the LCN support in the schools, we identify younger people who may have difficulties. Often, you find the challenges begin at home, or the derailers come from beyond them, from the family.
So, it is not something you can just tackle in school, you really need to work together with the social workers, the family members, siblings and the local community there, to provide that scaffolding and support, so that the young person can thrive and not have his promise snubbed out.
In terms of ComLink outreach, as I said earlier, rental housing should not just be a promise of infrastructure and shelter. It is shelter where you have no home and it comes with social support. That is why, initially, we call it a social hub; rental housing combined with social services, and social services being proactive, integrated, at your doorstep; a journey of social workers and community services with these families when they are at their lowest point in life.
So, the ComLink will build an understanding of the families living in the estate that they serve. It is a composite picture that we need to put together with all our partners. This also involves outreach to these families, starting with families with young children, understanding their situation, understanding, very importantly, what their dreams are for themselves and, in particular, for their children. That was what the Senior Minister of State Maliki found in Project 4650 when he paved and many other community groups worked together, conferenced monthly, to understand the challenges and dreams of each and every one of the families they serve, until they see light at the end of the tunnel. It may take months, years, or a very long time to happen. But that kind of support, integrated, interlocking, will make a difference.
So, in terms of outreach, it will be proactive, it will reach out to these families and seek their participation and partnership along this journey.
The Chairman: Any other clarifications? Assoc Prof Walter Theseira.
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Thank you, Chairman. I agree completely with the Minister for Education that a good AU is one that suits students and develop their full potential. So, to support that goal, I would like to ask the Ministry if we can have a commitment to at least study resource-sharing for library materials, as I had raised, because the disparity in access can have serious consequences for learning and for scholarship. It also may be cheaper for us to study sharing library resources across the AUs that may allow for economies of scale and bargaining, for example, with the publishers.
Just to share a personal anecdote. I do have colleagues who actually use their alumni library accounts from their PhD granting institutions in order to get access to certain library materials. They find this easier than trying to rely on their own institutions' resources, and I think we have to fix this problem.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Thank you for describing the practical problem you face, and, yes, we will be happy to study them.
The Chairman: Ms Anthea Ong.
Ms Anthea Ong: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I thank Senior Parliamentary Secretary Faishal for giving me a direct response to my cut. I appreciate it. I have two clarifications, one to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary and the other to Minister Ong, please.
The first is that I absolutely agree about the programmes that you have started to support the psycho-social well-being of our students. May I ask how widespread is the implementation of these initiatives like Peer Support Programmes in our schools and IHLs, and what sort of results are we seeing so far?
The second question to Minister Ong. We all agree that there is no health without mental health. I also agree that mental health is complex and multi-faceted and, therefore, there is not one clear solution. But I wonder if a good way to start is to reframe the way we see health education in schools. Right now, we know that health education is compulsory but it is confined to physical health education. Will we be looking at mandating mental health education as part of health education requirement in schools, so that our children know from a young age that both aspects of their well-being are equally important?
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: I thank the Member for the supplementary question. Indeed, we look at mental health as something that we want, to build the socio-emotional competency of our children, as well as build the resilience in the programmes that they undertake. So, in essence, we start at a very early stage of their education at Primary school level, whereby all these values, experiences and components where a child can develop himself or herself emotionally, socially and that resilience in all the programmes that we undertake.
We take on an approach of prevention, early detection and intervention. Of course, we also engage the parents along the way. Many of our schools have Peer Support Programmes. We see the benefits of having peers looking out for one another. I for one, have come across situations whereby peers supporting each other, peers informing the educators about some of the issues faced by their own classmates, and the issues are being resolved not only by one person but together as a community.
So, as I have said earlier, it takes a many-hands approach whereby we want to see how we can enhance the education journey of a child, regardless of where they come from and regardless of the experience that they have, so that they continue to be socially and emotionally resilient and able to have a fulfilling and meaningful educational journey here in Singapore.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I think there is no disagreement that mental health is part of health, together with physical health. In fact, when you speak with students today, teenage students, mental health is one of the top concerns in their mind, I have spoken to many of them. Definitely, this is something we have to look into and continue to improve. What I want to seek the understanding of Members is that the mode of delivery does not always have to be in a curriculum, and under \"lessons\" and under \" talks\", taking up curriculum time.
In fact, I think for mental health education to really work, it has to be delivered in a different way, such as through peer support groups that Senior Parliamentary Secretary Muhamad Faisal talked about, and also general public education which students now receive through their social media channels. So, I think let us explore different ways and not always channel through the formal MOE education curriculum. I think it is more effective that way.
Mr Saktiandi Supaat (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Chairman, my clarification question is with regards to my ITE cuts and I am glad that the Minister mentioned in his speech that all ITE students are not disadvantaged. In relation to my cut, it is with regard to the resources at ITE, in general, whether there will be more focus on providing enhanced resources to ITE, particularly for SEN students like what some of the other Members have mentioned as well.
The second question I have is in relation to my second cut on the ITE question which is about the Joint Admission process for Polytechnics and Junior Colleges. Currently, for ITE students, they apply for the Joint Polytechnic Admission Exercis (JPAE) after all the \"O\" level students have actually applied. In my cut, I actually highlighted whether there will be any tweaks to the process to ensure that ITE students are not disadvantaged in the sense that they only come in after the remaining seats have already been occupied by \"O\" level students. So, may I get the clarification from Minister please.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The first question is on ITE resources. ITE is well resourced. First, infrastructure. Look at the ITE Ang Mo Kio (Central) – very nice premises. There are many countries that look at it and think this looks like their Universities. Secondly, programmes and lab equipment. And also ITE students pay only 3% of the total costs of delivery. So, subsidies for ITE students are much higher compared to Polytechnics or Universities. Thirdly, we continue to build new pathways for ITE students and one of them, which I explained, was the Work-Learn Technical Diploma, which will be a major programme coming out of ITE. So, really, no worries about ITE not resourced enough.
As for the other question on JPAE, I addressed it in my speech, they do come after the \"O\" levels students but it is a separate queue with their separate places set aside for them. So, they will not be disadvantaged in any way.
The Chairman: Ms Denise Phua, would you like to withdraw your amendment?
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Chairman, it is a COS session that is substantive, and at times, game-changing especially in the removal, scrapping of streaming. So, thank you very much Minister. I thank the Minister and his Ministry for the significant work and the often very good work that is being done. It gives great pleasure to now beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $12,705,098,400 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $710,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head S (Ministry of Manpower)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head S, Ministry of Manpower. Mr Patrick Tay. You can just take the first cut alone.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast): Chairman, can I take all my five cuts together?
The Chairman: Just one, please, and then I will call on the subsequent four.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Mr Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
In my five cuts, I wish to highlight five groups of workers in Singapore whom I am concerned for and wish to speak up for. First, Professionals, Managers and Executives, PMEs for short. Second, those that have been discriminated against. Third, those that have been harassed. Fourth, those who have special needs and fifth, those who are ex-offenders.
First, PMEs, The workforce profile in Singapore is changing rapidly. Today, 57% of our resident workforce are Professionals, Managers, Executives and Technicians (PMETs). Although we have kept unemployment rates low and retrenchment declining the past three years, I am concerned with the fact that more than 70% of those retrenched the last three years were PMETs. This is coupled with the fact that the majority of those classified as long-term unemployed are PMETs especially the matured ones and this group also found it much harder to re-join the workforce after losing their jobs.
Unemployed and retrenched PMETs. Last year during the debate on the President’s address, Minister shared that MOM will step up support for mid-career jobseekers and the long-term unemployed. Till today, there are mature PMETs who have shared their difficulties and challenges in finding and landing in jobs. Have we been successful thus far in assisting these group of workers? MOM shared that the enhanced Place-and-Train schemes and Professional Conversion Programmes will help more workers reskill and move into new occupations or sectors with progression.
The new Career Trial will also to enable more jobseekers to try out short-term work stints, to facilitate their assessment of new jobs and careers. Can MOM provide an update on these programmes and its efficacy in minimising job mismatches? In addition, for those who have been successfully placed, how has the retention rates been the past one year?
Jobs portal. Minister also shared last year that MOM will also transform its employment services through technology. The “MyCareersFuture” portal will make job searches more personalised, smarter, and faster, to better help jobseekers and employers find suitable matches. Can MOM provide an update on how far this portal has been effective in reducing missed matches and getting more Singaporeans into quality jobs?
The Chairman: Mr Patrick Tay, I understand you have woven all the five cuts into one speech. Take it all at one go.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Thank you, Chairman. Young PMETs. I have also met young PMETs who themselves have faced challenges in securing a job. The Career Starter Programme was first announced in May 2018. Can MOM share how the programme benefits graduating students?
PMET Under-Employment. Then, there is the issue of under-employment of PMETs. MOM has data on time-based under-employment. However, I am more concerned about non-time based under-employment. This is where PMETs do \"smaller\" and \"lesser\" jobs than what they are equipped, trained or competent for. I have been speaking about this the past few years and recommend a comprehensive study to ascertain the severity of this amongst PMETs in Singapore.
PME Union Representation is something that the Labour Movement has been pushing for. The Industrial Relations Act was amended in 2015 to permit rank and file unions to collectively represent executive employees. To order to avoid conflicts of interest and undermining management effectiveness, executives with senior management functions were excluded from collective representation. These functions are set out in section 17(3) of the Act. The tripartite partners have also issued the Tripartite Guidelines on Extending the Scope of Union Representation for Executives.
In the years that have followed, unions which have sought to extend their scope of representation to include executives have met with some difficulties, mainly due to the overly general way in which the exclusions in section 17(3) have been worded.
On the ground, our unions have come across instances where employers cite section 17(3) to deny collective representation for executives who are not really in senior management grades or having access to information which would give rise to a genuine conflict of interest if they should be represented by the union.
The Chairman: Mr Tay, do not worry about the timing. We will add in another four minutes when you hit zero. In case you get too stressed.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Thank you, Chairman. Some examples are, first, employees, such as sales executives or engineers who help to prepare project bids. We have come across cases where employers have refused to allow union representation simply because these employees have access to confidential information on the company’s budget and finances. Second, executives who carry out the initial rounds of performance appraisals of employees whom they are supervising, though they do not make the final determination of the employee’s performance grade or promotion. Employers have sometimes argued that such executives are not entitled to collective representation because that they can influence decisions on other employees’ performance.
The unions’ experience, therefore, is that the exclusions set out in section 17(3) are too broadly worded, thereby giving employers the opportunity to claim that even mid-level executive employees fall within them, whereas the intent behind the law was only to exclude those who are at senior management levels and carrying out functions which genuinely give rise to a conflict of interest if they are represented by a union.
I would like to suggest that the wording of section 17(3) of the Industrial Relations Act and the Tripartite Guidelines be reviewed and amended to better reflect the true intent of the law. This will help employers and unions to reach consensus on the extension of scope smoothly and expeditiously.
Considering the above issues and challenges faced by PMETs in Singapore, I suggest the tripartite partners should work together to examine in detail the plight of PMETs in Singapore, the precarious and vulnerable PMETs, so that we can identify any blind spots and further strengthen our efforts to pre-emptively and pro-actively assist them.
Second, discriminated workers. Nationality discrimination. I have been lobbying on strengthening the Singaporean Core, Fair and Progressive Hiring and eradication of nationality bias since 2011. It has been an arduous but positive journey. We have seen the introduction of the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) and the National Jobs Bank in 2014. There is also greater focus and awareness of the move towards not just fair but progressive workplaces and employment practices.
Anecdotally, the situation has improved when I speak to fellow PMEs. However, in this regard, I do still hear complaints that employment agencies and placement companies are also where some of these malpractices and nationality discrimination happens. In some cases, the nationality discrimination results in job losses of local PMEs and hiring of foreign PMEs for jobs which local PMEs can fill.
In this regard, I wish to ask MOM to provide an update on how effective has the FCF been in the past three years since implementation in levelling the playing field for our local PMEs and in eradicating \"nationality\" discrimination in hiring practices, including by employment and placement agencies.
I know the Minister has shared that we have nailed more than 300 companies into what MOM calls the \"watchlist\" where we see the \"Triple Weak\". Has there been an improvement since the last time she shared about this \"watchlist\" and what kinds of companies ‒ whether MNCs or SMEs ‒ and from what sectors are these companies from?
MOM had also introduced the Capability Transfer Programme last year. This was to help and support the transfer of specialized knowledge to strengthen the Singaporean core of talents for the future. How has been the progress thus far?
Age discrimination. Another form of discrimination is with respect to age. Ageism as they call it. There is an unconscious bias against older workers in general although it is often difficult to detect such discrimination and gather evidence to prosecute and censure perpetrators. I hope the tripartite workgroup on older workers will also look into minimizing if not eradicating this in the selection, recruitment, appraisal, promotion and even during retrenchments.
Third, harassed workers. I have raised this at the Ministry of Law’s COS but am raising this again as anecdotally, harassment in the workplace whether sexual or non-sexual in nature is something that cannot be condoned or tolerated. Currently, we have a tripartite advisory and legislation such as the Protection from Harassment Act and Penal Code which already empower the Police and the Courts to deal with egregious cases of harassment. For cases of workplace harassment that do not cross the threshold to constitute a criminal offence, it is still important that they are managed well. How can we provide more support to employers and employees to do so? How can we ensure those who whistle-blow are not prejudiced against?
Fourth, special needs workers. Another group of workers and jobseekers I am concerned about are those with special needs. Beyond those with disabilities, there are those with special needs such as Autism, Attention Deficit Hybperactive Disorder (ADHA), Attention Deficit Disorder (ADD), Dyslexia and other medical and mental conditions such as depression. We know many countries in the West have strong support systems and eco-systems to provide meaningful work and jobs for such jobseekers. Can we study their successes so that we can build a similarly strong system and framework here in Singapore?
I am aware the Open Door Programme supports companies to hire, train and integrate persons with special needs. How can we build on these efforts to help more persons with special needs to join the workforce?
The final group are those who are ex-offenders. I am aware SCORE has been doing more to help their in-mates transit and re-integrate back into society when they are released. Ex-offenders may require more help to re-integrate back in society, including finding employment.
The career counselling, training, employment facilitation and re-integration should start whilst they are in prison so that they can seamlessly integrate back into the labour market and be gainfully employed. This includes those who are on tagging and day release. How are we helping ex-offenders re-enter and remain in employment? Mr Chairman, in Chinese.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I would like to call for more attention to be paid to five groups of vulnerable workers in Singapore. Firstly, more than 70% of workers retrenched in the past three years are senior PMETs. The re-employment rate and long-term unemployment rate of older PMETs are both higher than that of younger PMETs. I urge tripartite partners to strengthen collaboration, understand the various needs of vulnerable PMETs and provide timely and effective assistance to these workers.
The second group refers to workers who are being discriminated. First, in terms of discrimination by nationality. It has been three years since the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) was implemented and there is a need to assess its efficacy. Second is discrimination by age. I hope that the tripartite work group will pay attention to the issue of ageism when preparing their recommendation report.
Thirdly, workers who are being harassed. We aim to create workplaces that adopt ‘zero tolerance’ towards harassment.
Fourth, we should also pay attention to workers with special needs and give them opportunities to realise their potential.
The fifth group are workers who are ex-offenders. I urge employers not to view these ex-offenders with tinted glasses and give them opportunities to re-integrate into the work place.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Sir, workplace harassment can take various forms. It can range from insensitive comments from a colleague on a working mother's maternity leave to ageism to abusive remarks by customers. It can happen to any worker regardless of age, gender, race, industry, or job function. Whatever the form and whoever the target, it causes distress and exerts an undue toll on our workers. It poisons our work environment. It has no place in our modern workplace.
We must first improve the awareness among victims and provide channels for them to seek assistance. It is important that we educate both employers and employees on how to respond to workplace abuse and harassment. We must make unambiguous that there are clear lines that cannot be crossed. Can MOM update on the number of harassment cases that it addresses annually and what are the awareness efforts and measures to mitigate such cases?
In addition, for those who might be affected by workplace harassment, we can consider counselling, especially for our frontline workers. For example, counselling was introduced in National University Hospital. It is a free and confidential service that has been very useful for the healthcare professionals who work in high-stress environment amidst high service expectations by the public and patients. Such services can be useful to help employees cope with their workplace stresses better. Can the Ministry consider expanding such services to more companies as a form of Work Pro?
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, over the last year, I have received feedback from residents who have lost their jobs saying that it is difficult for them to find another job. They have sent out many job applications but receive minimal responses or just rejection letters.
I empathise with these residents. Being unemployed not only affects a person’s financial commitments and his ability to pay the bills for housing and food, it also affects their self-confidence because they are unable to earn a fair income to support or contribute to the family.
It is even more difficult if the person who has lost the job is above 50 or 55 years. Many times, they blame the HR departments of the hiring companies for not even considering them for an interview once their age is disclosed.
Some of these residents have put the blame on foreigners and assert that their job losses are caused by foreigners who have displaced them. I have the following questions for MOM.
First, it is about helping job seekers. May I ask MOM what else can MOM do to help Singaporeans who have been displaced from their jobs? How effective is e2i and My Careers Future in helping them find a job. I went into My Careers Future recently and found that there are 24,268 jobs available. But yet from the experience of my residents, it seems that it is really not so easy to find a job among that over 24,000 available jobs. Some of the residents have also said that they have already visited e2i they have done everything that they have been advised to do. But yet there is no positive outcome.
So, can MOM advise how has the Adapt and Grow initiative and growth sectors effort helped jobseekers take up new jobs? Has MOM carried out any survey to assess whether job seekers are aware of the role of the Government agencies in helping them to find alternative jobs? How else can we persuade job seekers that if they can make some adjustments to their expectations, it would be easier for them to find alternative employment.
Next, it is about the Fair Consideration Framework. Last year, I raised a concern about the many companies that are on the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) Watchlist. May I ask MOM for an update as to whether the situation has improved? How many companies still carry out discriminatory practices against Singaporeans and how many are still on the FCF watchlist? Does MOM still receive feedback about companies where almost every worker is a foreigner and what other actions can MOM take to signal our unhappiness with such companies and to discourage them from discriminating against employing Singaporeans?
Lastly, it is about seniors above 67 years old. Does MOM monitor the statistics about seniors who have retired after 65 to 67 years old but are still active and willing to work but were asked to retire because of their age? What else can we do about such seniors who are still healthy and capable of contributing to the workforce? I know of companies who say that they have to keep an eye on their headcount and hence, have to let these seniors retire even though they can still contribute to the company.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, in the last few years, we have heard this phrase \"Jobs-skills Mismatch\" being used to explain the discrepancies between the share of job seekers and job openings in the labour market. We have also heard this phrase being used to frame re-training and re-skilling policies and nudge workers to re-skill. As Industry 4.0 looms and new cyber-physical system threatens to replace workers, the phrase has taken on a greater sense of anxiety.
I am not suggesting that jobs-skills mismatch does not exist and the phrase has been misused. My concern is that without proper study the concept becomes the presumption rather than fact, an ideology rather the truth.
The consequences will be very negative. Our re-skilling programmes will miss their mark. Our workers will waste their time going down blind alleys. Our employers will waist resources seeking unreal matches, and the Government will not be spending effectively.
There has been one instructive study on jobs-skills mismatch by economists in MTI in last November. The study used data from MyCareers Future.sg (MCF) platform and looked at the link between seven types of mismatches and job application outcomes.
Education, salary expectation and experience mismatches do not appear to be significant. This means that our workers are not over-educated, demanding of high pay and lacking experience, rather generic skills mismatch and non-generic skills mismatch mattered, with the latter mattering three times more. Both combined provided for about 5.8% increase in probability of an unsuccessful application.
There are a few things that we can learn from this study. First, employers seem to be more concerned about specific skills than generic skills. This is a concern as employers should not be looking for narrowly specific skills.
Second, the MCF platform may be inadvertently promoting non-generic skills mismatches by allowing for fine grain skills-based job searches. One interesting finding of the study is that the persistence of workers in applying for jobs and the greater activity of employers on the MCF platform improved application outcomes.
The conclusion may be well that at this juncture the Government should do less in applying technological solutions and focus on nudging workers and employers to do more to close the gap between jobs and skills.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): Mr Chairman, with the technological shift, we see new opportunities but it also requires businesses and people to adapt and change in order to be able to take advantage of the opportunities and deal with the disruptions. What is most challenging is the speed of change we are experiencing.
Much of the disruption to jobs are being driven by technological changes. New opportunities are created with these disruptions but they do require new skills and mindsets to take on these new roles. Hence, it is no longer about providing quality jobs but also providing the support and development for employees so that they are ready for these new jobs.
With the trends I have just described, it means that people need to build capabilities throughout their lives and careers. Businesses too need to adapt to the changes of the market to effectively develop the capabilities of their people across different age groups and segments and to access talent. Across the several agencies – WorkForce Singapore (WSG), SkillsFuture Singapore, E2i, NTUC, IMDA, and many more, there are numerous programmes and initiatives to support individuals and organisations build capability for the new economy. How can these efforts be better leveraged effectively to match people to the right programmes and organisations to the capabilities they need?
How has Workforce Singapore (WSG) helped mature PMET job-seekers, and those who have been unemployed for long periods? Can MOM share how the Adapt and Grow initiative and growth sector efforts help jobseekers take up new jobs? How effective has the Adapt and Grow initiatives been and what are the new jobs that PMET job seekers and those who been unemployed for some time taken on with the initiative? What is MOM’s assessment of the success of the programme so far? Have our Singaporean PMETs whose jobs have been disrupted been able to adapt and take advantage of the new job opportunities?
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Chairman, underemployment basically refers to situations where a person is working but below capacity. According to the International Conference of Labour Statisticians, measuring underemployment is necessary for better policy-making, as it would improve the analysis of employment problems and contribute towards formulating and evaluating policies and initiatives to promote full, productive and freely chosen employment.
In a 2017 survey on Underemployment by the Ong Teng Cheong Institute, it was found that underemployed persons tend to face many challenges such as low morale, insecurity about their job and income, and difficulties in meeting daily expenses. While we are responding to job disruption by engaging in economic transformation and re-skilling workers, it would be wishful thinking to expect that displaced workers would find work in new industries in a seamless manner and without any discontinuity in income and benefits.
To this end, it would be most useful to know how well the professional conversion programmes such as Adapt and Grow did in terms of matching jobseekers with new jobs of comparable pay, or the extent of the pay cuts taken. Further, I understand that Adapt and Grow consists of two sub-schemes: Place and Train, where an employer has been found for the jobseeker, and Attach and Train, where training is done before an employer is found. For this latter group under Attach and Train, what was the success rate for placements?
Sir, it is good to note that MOM is tracking underemployment. Currently, MOM presents underemployment based solely on time, that is, those working part-time when they wished to work additional hours. While this is an internationally-accepted indicator, the International Labour Organisation has, over the years, highlighted the multi-faceted nature of underemployment that cannot be captured by time alone. For instance, in 1998, it passed a resolution stating that that there was a need to revise the existing standards on the measurement of underemployment and to broaden the scope to include also inadequate employment situations. Inadequate employment situations cover all those in employment who want to change their current work situation, for reasons such as inadequate use and mismatch of occupational skills; inadequate income; working excessive hours or in unstable jobs. Broadly speaking, inadequate employment could be skills-related, income-related, or working excessive hours.
To this end, the Ong Teng Cheong Institute (OTC Institute) survey mentioned earlier recognised that underemployment was too complex to be measured by a single factor alone, for example, time. The survey came up with a matrix of three factors to identify \"severely underemployed\", that is, university graduates working full-time who were earning less than $2,000 per month.
The OTC Institute suggested that it would be reasonable for the Government to target policies towards groups of severely underemployed persons. In view of all these, can MOM update the House on its tracking of, and policy towards underemployment?
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Chairman, according to the Third Report of the Estimates Committee of Parliament released in October last year, 18 out of the 23 industries under the Industry Transformation Roadmaps (ITMs) would see manpower growth up to 2030, while the remainder are not envisaged to experience any manpower growth up to the same period of time. These include food services, retail and real estate amongst others, while other sectors such as construction do not have any manpower targets as their manpower needs are seasonal and based on cyclical factors.
At the recent pre-Budget dialogue with the Institute of Chartered Accountants, some panelists stated that they only had a vague idea of how small-medium enterprises (SMEs) stand to benefit from the ITMs.
Apart from the special employment credit, going forward what are the Government's plans to prompt, support and encourage Singapore companies to accelerate the transformation of their business and HR processes to hire Singaporeans above the age of 65, provide higher salaries to attract Singaporean employees or successfully hire women, men or older workers who prefer part-time work as a result of needing time to look after children, or their dependents, or for some other reasons?
How do the ITMs support these objectives, and can they play a more facilitative role in this regard than is currently the case, particularly for smaller SMEs that may find it more challenging to take advantage of the ITM format to fulfil larger national objectives of creating a strong and united Singapore?
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo: Mr Chairman, technological advancements and disruptions together with the gig economy are changing the way organisations structure work. Today's gig economy does have experienced, talented people who possess deep skills and prefer independent work.
In Singapore, Self-Employed Persons (SEPs) make up around 10% of the workforce. These workers often choose to enter the gig economy rather than the traditional workforce in order to have more autonomy and ownership over their work, as well as flexibility over their schedules. More people may be choosing freelancing as their primary job because they have multiple skills, which allow them to fill up their time with different types of jobs.
Due to the relatively low barriers to entry, there are also individuals who may decide against seeking formal employment and choose to be self-employed as an alternative to generate income in order to be self-sufficient or in times when they have difficulties finding suitable employment. The profile of SEPs in Singapore is diverse with many different occupations.
While many chose flexible freelance work that fits their lifestyle, they sacrificing job security, perks and benefits. There is growing concern as to whether there is adequate support for their long-term financial, healthcare and retirement needs.
SEPs may not be able to raise their fees as it may make them uncompetitive when they bid for assignments. Hence it may make it hard to keep up with the cost of living. There are growing instances of SEPs that are not paid on time, accurately and in some cases not paid at all for work done. They lack protection against loss of income from prolonged illness or injury and do not have sick leave or health benefits. Some insurance policies do include such a rider, but there are no such standalone insurance products. SEPs are also challenged in developing their skills to stay current given the near-term demands of being self-employed.
The tripartite workgroup on SEPs released a set of recommendations last year recognising that most SEPs who are self-employed as their preferred choice. Can MOM share the progress on the implementation of the recommendations as well as the impact on SEPs?
Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Sir, self-employed persons account for around one in ten of working residents and with the rise of the gig economy, may well increase significantly in the future.
The Ministry has indicated that it is working on implementing the tripartite working group's recommendation of a contribute-as-you-earn model for MediSave, whereby contribution to the self-employed worker’s MediSave account of CPF is made as and when a service fee is earned. I compliment the Ministry on its efforts.
Could the Ministry also look into more ways to encourage gig workers to make further voluntary contributions to other accounts of their CPF by providing them with strong incentives to do so?
There is substantial evidence from public policy efforts that positive actions can be induced through non-compulsory incentive mechanisms. For instance, could a “default” be established where CPF deductions, beyond MediSave, initially match those of regular-economy workers with the same job profile, but being non-binding, would permit opting into a lower amount?
Alternatively, could gig workers receive information in their CPF statements about typical contributions by regular-economy workers in comparable employment circumstances, to encourage them to follow the “social norm”?
Self-employed persons typically face short-term cash flow needs, which may trump their longer term economic interest in saving for future retirement. Could the Ministry look into offering incentives for SEPs who voluntarily contribute to their Ordinary, Special or Retirement accounts of CPF, including favourable tax treatment when they do so?
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira (Nominated Member): Chairman, many were concerned when the Minister recently stated three-quarters of CPF payouts are less than $500 a month. But CPF payouts only form part of retirement income. The self-employed and care-givers and homemakers do not contribute to CPF, and rely on private savings for retirement. Older generations were especially likely to have low CPF savings, because self-employment and informal work were more common. As for women, in 1990, about half of working-age women were out of the labour force; and even today about one in four are out.
Going forward, can we ensure that CPF becomes the basic retirement system even for the self-employed, care-givers, and homemakers?
There are two emerging concerns.
First, technological disruption is likely to increase the extent of self-employment. While about one in ten today are self-employed, this may increase in the future. Even a few years spent out of regular employment will have significant impact on CPF savings.
Second, societal trends. Divorce rates have risen rapidly and this has affected older women. While in 1980, less than 2.5% of women aged 40-59 were divorced, in 2018 about 8% were divorced. Many women have spent substantial time out of work to take care of their family. There are also fewer children to provide support. In 1980, six in 10 ever-married women had four or more children; but by 2018, six in 10 had two or less.
Women have no statutory entitlements to retirement assets in divorce or widowhood. It depends on whether the court orders distribution of CPF in a divorce, and also whether the deceased names the widow as the nominee for CPF.
Statutory entitlements for divorcees and widows do exist elsewhere. In the United States, divorced spouses have entitlements to their ex-spouse’s social security; and in the United Kingdom, spouses who are caregivers earn credits towards their state pension.
What has the Ministry observed about the extent to which current and projected retirement gaps exist for own account workers and care-givers? What is the work done on policies that address these gaps, such as mandatory contributions to retirement accounts for own account workers, matching credits to CPF, and entitlements for care-givers and homemakers based on Government credits, or from spousal accounts?
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, the last move to the retirement age to 62 years old and the re-employment age to 67 years old, was made in 2017. Since then, there have been calls to review the next steps in promoting the employment of older workers. I understand that there is an on-going review of the retirement and re-employment ages. Can MOM share the progress of this review, and if any outcome has been arrived at?
In our Parliament sitting in February this year, we passed the combined Motions on the elderly and care-giving. In my speech in support of that motion, I urged MOM to consider raising the CPF contribution rates for Singaporeans aged 55 years old and above, something which I had spoken about in this Chamber before. As a Singaporean turns 55 years old, their CPF contribution rate is drastically reduced by 11% overall. I have asked for the CPF contribution rate to be restored to the current rate of 37% in total, for ages 55 to 60 years old. Even if the CPF contribution rate is to be cut, it should be done progressively over several years, rather than a drastic 11% cut as you cross your 55th birthday.
As more Singaporeans are marrying and having children later, at age 55 years old, many would still be servicing their housing mortgages, supporting school-going children as well as elderly parents. While I recognise that the lower CPF contribution rates for older workers help them to remain employable, the reality is that there is already a trade-off in terms of having saved up enough for retirement and in fulfilling their financial commitments towards housing, education and care-giving for elderly parents. At 55 years old, many Singaporeans would still be economically active. Restored CPF contribution rates will help in paying housing loans, education or tuition fees for their children, and additional medical expenses for elderly parents.
Is there scope to revise upwards the CPF contribution rates of older workers aged 55 years old and above, while at the same time maintaining their employability?
Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Sir, I would like to appeal for more support for senior employment and request the Ministry to review four areas, namely the retirement age, CPF contribution rates, job redesign and flexible work arrangements.
First, the retirement age. Last year, there was a call to review future steps for promoting senior employment after the move to raise the re-employment age to 67 was achieved in 2017. Increasingly, seniors are expressing an interest in continuing to work for a variety of reasons – to continue to earn an income, to keep their minds and bodies active, to stay engaged in the workplace and community or simply because they enjoy their vocations. There is no reason why they should be forced to retire just because they have reached a cut-off age. I understand that the relevance of the retirement and re-employment age concept has been relooked. Would MOM share if any conclusion has been reached?
Next, CPF rates. Older workers have lower CPF contribution rates today to keep their total remuneration competitive and help them remain employable. The trade-off is that they will have less to save up for their retirement. However, we are also seeing improvements in older workers' employability and longer life expectancies. Their wealth of experience, cumulative knowledge and skillsets are assets, enabling them to make valuable contributions to their work. I hope that we can help them to attract more contributions to their CPF, so that they can enjoy a more secure retirement. Is there scope to revise the CPF contribution rates of older workers while at the same time maintaining their employability?
Third, job redesign. Older workers have a lot to contribute but their physical decline with age is expected. Redesigning job environments and functions will allow our seniors to continue working smoothly. Under the WorkPro scheme, the Job Redesign Grant of up to $300,000 helps companies to make these changes so that workers aged above 50 can work more easily and safely. What is the Ministry’s assessment of how rapidly our businesses are redesigning jobs to make workplaces more age-friendly? I am especially concerned about senior workers in menial jobs. Does MOM have measures to get employers to expedite job redesign and create better work conditions so that the work is less strenuous for elder workers? Are there plans to update or refine the WorkPro scheme?
Finally, I would like to ask for an update on the adoption of flexible work arrangements (FWAs) in our workplaces. Does MOM have data on the number and profile of companies which offer FWA and the number of employees who take it up? How many companies have tapped on the Enhanced Work-Life Grant and how many employees have benefited? Would MOM provide a breakdown how many organisations have utilised the FWA Incentive and the Job Sharing Incentive? How can we encourage even more companies to offer FWAs?
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Chairman, life expectancy has risen from 76 years in 1995 to 83 years in 2017. If the retirement age remains stuck at 62 years, Singaporeans who wish to continue working would be forced into early retirement for over two decades.
Will the Government consider removing the artificial expiry date for productive senior workers, namely the current retirement and re-employment ages of 62 and 67 years. Removing the retirement age not only removes the first expiry date but also changes the current notion about the expiry of work abilities that is fixed by age. It will change the ageist mindset.
The re-employment age should also be re-defined so that it is not referring to another expiry date but to a transition at 70 years old. This transition obliges employers to put our senior workers on rolling contracts on the same terms that should go on without an expiry date as long as the workers are still able and productive and want to work. It is the transition that allows employer and employee to evaluate performance and productive levels together, work out flexible work contracts if the employee so wishes and collaborate on job and workplace redesign to keep up productivity.
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Mr Chairman, Sir, I wish to speak about the financial security of Singaporeans aged 65 and above. This generation worked hard to lay the foundation of the Singapore we enjoy today. During their time, wages were low and many worked in the informal sector.
A recent Parliamentary Question revealed that 75% of these seniors receive CPF monthly payouts of less than $500 per month. And for those seniors 70 years old and older, the average monthly payouts dropped to below $300. These payouts are clearly insufficient to provide for today’s cost of living.
Many of these seniors rely heavily on family support for financial security. Majority cited \"allowances from children' as their main source of income. However, I am concerned about this generation’s over-reliance on their children, what with the shrinking size of families and the consequent burden that will have on the shoulders of the younger generation.
I greatly appreciate the launch of the Silver Support Scheme to supplement seniors’ retirement incomes, but I always wonder if the amount they receive is sufficient to provide for a basic, dignified living. I would like to ask the Minister how many of these seniors would attain a retirement income of at least $8,400 a year or $700 a month, after combining their payouts from CPF and Silver Support Scheme. I would like to suggest to the Minister to review the retirement adequacy of seniors, those with little or no family support, and consider whether they may receive top-ups to their CPF, perhaps in the form of \"Retirement Income Supplement\", in order to attain a Basic Retirement Sum payout currently at $700 per month.
Mr Chairman, Sir, on a brighter note, we can take comfort in the fact that the same group of seniors, 65 years and above, 76% of them are property owners and the slew of HDB policies introduced in the recent years present many options open to these seniors who wish to unlock value in their homes, for a very comfortable retirement if they know how to do it.
However, these housing monetisation options are not widely known and understood by seniors. Many seniors aged 65 and above received very little education and tend to leave financial matters in the hands of other family members. They are ill-equipped to understand the options – too many and too complex – and even if they do, I am always worried whether they can manage those money released judiciously.
Let me illustrate this with the story of my resident Mdm Tan, not her real name. She is aged 83. She approached me for financial assistance after her husband passed away. Mdm Tan has an adult son, who lives with her in her fully paid-up 4-room flat and the son earns $4,000 per month but he refuses to support her with any allowances nor to help pay for living expenses. Although we were able to secure some short-term assistance from the Government for Mdm Tan, she did not qualify for long-term financial assistance because of her son’s income as well as the option to monetise her flat. She found it a challenge every month to pay for her food, medical and utility bills, until we helped her realise the significant value of the asset she owns – her 4-room flat.
It took us nine months, working together with HDB, to help her understand the option of monetising her flat. She chose the Lease Buyback Scheme. She now lives a very different lifestyle, with a healthy cash balance of over $80,000 in her bank account, whilst receiving a monthly payout of over $2,600 from CPF. She is now often seen out and about in the community, happily enjoying the company of friends and hobbies like painting, visiting her doctor confidently and never having to worry about overdue bills.
But I am still concerned about Mdm Tan – she recently told me that her niece has suddenly become very friendly and has asked her that she be made a joint account holder of Mdm Tan’s now very healthy bank account. Mdm Tan came to me and said she is \"embarrassed\" if she refused her niece’s request. Luckily, Mdm Tan listened to her Member of Parliament on the risks of doing so and she has held on tightly to her bank account, so far!
Sir, there are many more Mdm Tans out there. I would like to ask the Minister to step up the Government efforts to reach out to seniors, perhaps through the Silver Generation Office, to equip them with better financial literacy to safeguard their savings and to understand the many ways they can draw value from their property, from renting out a spare room to downgrading to a smaller flat so that they can fund a comfortable retirement.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, according to the MOM, \"triple weak\" companies are those that do not meet the minimum criteria in terms of nurturing and having a Singaporean Core in their workforce and having a tangential reference to Singapore's economy and society. The prospects of Singaporeans being hired into such companies and doing well or getting promoted are low.
In September last year, the Minister of Manpower confirmed that the Ministry was monitoring 250 companies labelled as \"triple weak\", up from the 100 in February. Out of the original 100 companies, about 20 were removed from the watch list as their HR practices had been raised to industry standards. Does the Minister have an update on MOM's investigation into the remaining companies?
Separately, has there been a reduction in the prevalence of such \"triple weak\" companies? What is the current number of companies that are under investigation and which industries do such companies predominate in? How does the Ministry identify such companies and is there scope for greater enforcement, including whistle-blowing channels to identify such companies early? What action does MOM take for companies that are uncooperative, show no improvement in their polices or slide back to their own ways of being \"triple weak\"? Finally, are the directors of such companies also barred from setting up new companies and the status of their directorships in other companies revealed?
The Minister of Manpower mentioned at the last Committee of Supply that some employers have the preconceived ideas that local PMETs are either or unwilling to work so such companies write off Singaporeans without even considering them fairly. Can I enquire what action TAFEP or the Ministry takes to deal with and how does it educate such employers?
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, in applying for Employment Passes (EPs), employers submit educational certificates for employees they want to hire. However for educational certificates other than from India and China, where additional information is needed, not all employers perform independent verification with universities. The case of Mikhy Farrera-Brochez, who forged his educational certificates, dramatically illustrates the limitations to this approach.
I would like to ask if MOM currently performs some degree of checks, be it in-house or external, on educational certificates submitted for EP applications, such as using a risk-based sample check approach, for example.
As there are practical limitations on MOM's ability to verify all certificates submitted, I would like to suggest MOM could advise employers to conduct verification via a panel of low-cost service providers. Verification need not be made a compulsory condition of granting the EP. But there is every reason to believe that voluntary use of such a verification process would be high, should it be cheap and accessible. After all, few employers would want to hire an employee who falsifies credentials. Through this, we could cut down cases of such credentials forgery.
Next, what are the current enforcement mechanisms against kick-back or false salary declaration schemes whereby foreigners on EPs are paid below the salary floor or pay a portion of their salaries back to the employer in some way? It is stated in press advisories that “MOM conducts proactive checks to detect and enforce against false applications.” However, this is a crime with a so-called “willing buyer and seller”, as both parties are incentivised to collude and conceal the facts.
Right now, there is an MOM hotline for people to report infringements. How many have used the hotline and how many successful prosecutions have resulted? If effective, can we consider investing more resources to publicise this hotline.
And are there are other means of proactive enforcement used? For example, can more be done with Artificial Intelligence and data analytics to flag out suspicious activity for enforcement?
Ms Sylvia Lim: Mr Chairman, under the CPF Act, CPF members are allowed to transfer their savings to their parents and grandparents, provided the members satisfies certain conditions. Members aged below 55 need to have the Full Retirement Sum of at least S$166,000 in their accounts, before they can do so. When the Act was amended in 2017, this provision was extended to members who had the required Basic Retirement Sum of about S$83,000, if they also had a sufficient property pledge or charge to make up the rest of the Full Retirement Sum.
These provisions are useful to enable CPF members to help provide for the retirement needs of their family members, giving them some peace of mind and reducing intra-family poverty.
These days, the formation of an immediate family nucleus should not be assumed to be the norm. Many Singaporeans are single or childless in their senior years. These persons will not have children or grandchildren who can top up their CPF balances.
I would like to suggest that the Government consider widening the categories of persons who can receive CPF transfers from family members, to include the members’ own siblings and the siblings of one’s parents, that is, uncles and aunts. These are already relationships recognised under our law for inheritance of estates, and will help boost retirement adequacy of single and childless seniors.
Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Sir, we will spend the most productive years of our lives building up our CPF savings by age 55. After that, we will probably have to confront ageism at work, health issues, and rising cost of living. The last thing we want to do at that point in time is to argue with the Government on when and how we can tap into our hard-earned CPF savings for retirement.
The recent public disquiet over the allegation that CPF Board had quietly moved the Payout Eligibility Age (PEA) to 70, though unfounded, goes to show how much we look forward to the day when we can finally see and touch our CPF money. So, any attempt to change that day, regardless of intention, will be met with disgust and anger, and rightly so.
Thus, the call to set the auto payout at PEA by default should be considered seriously because it sends a clear message that the Government does not intend to and will not keep the members’ hard-earned savings beyond what is mandated by law.
The question we should be asking ourselves is, by setting the auto payout at PEA, will it change the fundamental tenet of the CPF saving scheme in any way? The answer is no. There is not an iota of change at all. Members can still choose to delay their payouts to earn more interests, if preferred.
Sir, CPF is like a fixed deposit instrument to me. Upon maturity date, you can expect to see your money deposited into your account with interest, unless you have instructed the bank to roll over the deposit. I can assure the Minister that no members will quibble with the Government when they see their hard-earned money deposited into their accounts automatically on their PEA unless instructed otherwise.
Next, I wish to talk about balancing retirement and housing needs using CPF. I have residents who needed to tap into their Special Accounts or Retirement Accounts to help service their mortgage arrears but such requests were mostly rejected. The standard reply given was members must always strike a balance between retirement and housing needs.
Sir, most members would not even think about tapping into these accounts for housing needs, if not out of sheer desperation. Some of these members were hauled to court by the lenders, and each court appearance would only push these members deeper into debt. Some of them were staring at a very real possibility of losing their flats.
Some of these members have less than $10,000 standing in their SA or RA, and they are already in their late 40s or 50s. How is that amount even meaningful for retirement purpose? How long can these members stretch their payouts at PEA and how much would the payout be per month? Can the CPF Board not feel the gravity of the predicament these members are facing? It is not right to make these members beg to use their own money to save their flats.
Sir, the CPF Board must also strike a balance between retirement and housing needs. If there is no roof over a person's head, what is retirement? With his home intact, a member can still rent out a room or two to make ends meet.
The member can also explore the possibility of moving into a smaller flat when not under duress and use the proceeds for retirement. But all these options will vapourise if there is no flat left for the member to even plan his retirement.
Furthermore, any money used for property purchase would have to be returned to the member's CPF when the flat is sold with accrued interest. No one can siphon off any CPF money used for property purchase in any way. The money is going straight back into the CPF and nowhere else.
Sir, I certainly hope that the Ministry can exercise more flexibility in the use of CPF savings for housing needs in situations like this.
Finally, I wish to reiterate the call for more flexibility in allowing members to tap into their RA before their official retirement age of 62.
We certainly do not know when we will need to slow down or stop working completely before age 62. When that happens, our income will drop drastically. We should allow members to do their own sums to determine if they need to start their CPF payouts early before retirement age. CPF members should be given the option and flexibility to plan their retirement needs at their own comfort level. PEA should be lowered to age 60. Let us decide if we are comfortable to take the lower payout at age 60 or wait out for a higher payout later.
Singaporeans have continued to support this Government despite knowing that they can no longer withdraw their money completely at age 55. They have continued to give this Government the mandate knowing that they will not see their entire CPF savings until PEA and only in monthly payouts. Why is this Government so reluctant to even offer such flexibility to Singaporeans in return?
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (Fengshan): Sir, very often, we worry about creation of employment opportunities, redesigning jobs for the seniors and the current workforce, and how we can continuously upgrade their skills to ensure they remain relevant and employable. At times, we may have forgotten that there are people with disabilities that are left without a job. This is even more critical for them as chances of learning a skill that can be used for future employment is as uncertain as them worrying whether they have enough to care for themselves at old age. This is a multi-faceted issue that warrants more attention and support.
Special needs individuals can be wide ranging, from those with varying levels of physical disabilities, to those with autism and attention disorder, and the other extreme spectrum for those with severe mental health challenges. We need to first clearly define the scope of special needs people that we are able to assist for work employment in the short term, and eventually to build a structured framework of assistance that looks into education, training and job prospects for them. It is understandable that we cannot cater jobs for the entire spectrum of special needs people. But surely, there must be specific areas that we can champion together.
I recognise the awareness by employers of people with disabilities can also contribute economically has increased in Singapore. Apart from re-designing jobs and opening the employment doors of regular companies to those with special needs, I feel that a more pressing need and area that we have to focus on is the training of special needs individuals with specific skills for different industries when they are still schooling. General knowledge and broad skills may not help them to get more work opportunities as their curriculum is already different from those taught in the mainstream schools. Once they are past the schooling age, there are even fewer institutions or higher learning avenues that can enable them to continue their skills upgrade or to learn the relevant knowledge that is in tandem with industry requirements.
Looking at those with autism or attention deficit disorder, studies have shown that they exhibit strengths in many areas related to creative work – visual arts, music, self-contained direct tasks, have strong memory, good in Mathematics and computer amongst others. With the growing gig economy and digital workplace, we can design and engage them in these areas. We can consider providing platforms for them to further their studies and skills beyond their prescribed age where schools are currently able to keep them. Similar for those individuals with physical disabilities and wheelchair bound, some are mentally well to cope with work and can be trained for suitable jobs. While some random efforts are taking place in Singapore, we should continue to learn from some companies, like Microsoft and CVS Health, that are proactive in employment practices in these areas.
I know that SG Enable actively supports people with disabilities in job training, employment information and job referrals to employers. However, with an increasing number and wider spectrum of people with special needs emerging due to awareness and medical advancement, we need to put earlier intervention to assist more special needs people in having an active income. I would like to understand what other initiatives MOM intends to put in place to assist special needs people and increase their work opportunities so as to give them a peace of mind and have a sustainable social integration as they age.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar: Chairman, there are currently several Government-funded programmes to help companies employ, train and integrate vulnerable persons or persons with special needs or disabilities, such as the Open Door Programme, Special Employment Credit, Workfare Scheme, and Disability Management Programme. I support these programmes that help make our workplaces and companies a lot more inclusive towards those who tend to be marginalised and who face challenges beyond just equal opportunities.
How successful have these schemes been in hiring, training and integrating individuals with special needs or disabilities so as to help them be financially independent and attain self-dignity? How can we build on efforts to help more individuals with special needs or disabilities to join the workforce?
Could more support for employers be provided, such as corporate tax relief or wage support when they hire individuals with special needs or disabilities, or giving employer recognition to companies that do so?
Could MOM also provide more incentives to such employers to help them with job redesigns that can allow for flexible work arrangements so that individuals with special needs or disabilities can work from home or work from where it is convenient for them, and where they have more time and space to adjust to their new work environments and work responsibilities.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Chairman, working and holding a job is an important component of a good quality of life for everyone, regardless of abilities. Whether full or part-time, work helps pay for one's daily living and also leads to better mental health and a sense of fulfilment and dignity.
In recent years, developments, such as the SG Enable unit, the Open Door Fund and the Special Employment Credit have positively impacted the employment scene for persons with special needs or disabilities, or PWDs.
Employers, such as the United Overseas Bank, National Library Board, Starbucks, Uniqlo and others have tapped on structured employment support services by VWOs such as MINDS, SPD and ARC. Kudos to them, numerous PWDs have been gainfully employed.
However, the picture is not that rosy. It has been reported that in 2017, only five in 100 PWDs in Singapore are officially working, and this is quoted as one of the lowest in developed nations. Key barriers are several: one, an unwillingness of potential employers caused by stigmatisation and reluctance to re-design job processes; two, a lack of a large enough pipeline of trained PWDs upstream; and three, an inability to focus and scale by agencies such as SG Enable due to resource restrictions.
I have the following clarifications and recommendations MOM's consideration.
What is the accountability of MOM to this special needs workforce?
How can it increase the employment rate of PWDs in Singapore?
How will MOM tap on its vast infrastructure and network to help them identify more suitable job families in both blue and white-collared jobs?
Will MOM resource and support the hiring of inclusion managers to work with SG Enable and disability VWOs to customise skills frameworks for suitable job families identified?
Will MOM set targets to aspire major employers to up their hire rate for PWDs? Start with a minimum 1% target for large employers with staff strengths of more than 1,000. Start with the public service!
Will MOM provide more incentives for inclusive employers such as: one, making the Special Employment Credit (SEC) for PWDs a permanent feature so that employers are assured of on-going support; and two, increasing this amount or make it an inclusivity allowance to the employer so that beyond subsidising the CPF of its workers with special needs, the employer can also pay for job coaching services.
Sir, in taking a more leading active role in developing this special workforce, MOM will not only be a contributor to building a caring and inclusive society, it will also strategically enhance the employment rate of Singaporeans and help to solve the manpower crunch in our country.
Mr Yee Chia Hsing (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, every worker, whether local or foreign, deserves to work in a safe environment.
Can the Ministry share how does Singapore fare when compared against other developed countries, in terms of reducing our workplace fatality rate? Going forward, how can the adoption of technology help companies make further progress in workplace safety and health (WSH)? Can the Ministry share examples of companies that used technology to improve their WSH outcomes?
Some businesses have also given feedback that after every fatal incident, additional safety measures are added.
While we all understand the importance of workplace safety, how can we also take into consideration legitimate business concerns about the associated cost of implementation as well its impact on productivity?
I am not sure if it is true but a resident told me that to change a light bulb, a company needs to have three workers – one to climb up the ladder, one to hold the ladder and a third who is a safety supervisor. I hope this is not true as risk must be measured against the cost of avoiding the risk. Crossing the road also has risks but we understand intuitively that it does not make sense to have a safety supervisor at every zebra crossing.
I hope the Ministry can do a stock-take of the various WSH measures which have been implemented to see if any of these can be removed without compromising overall safety.
The Chairman: Mr Yee, you might want to know that fall from height is a very common cause of serious injuries and fatalities. So, holding the ladder is quite important.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Chairman, I touched on Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) in my Budget debate speech, and spoke about the need to continually invest in our WSH practices to ensure that our workers can return home safely to their families every day. I mentioned four areas that we could do more to safeguard our workers' safety and health. Let me now elaborate the context why we need to implement these four recommendations.
First, I called for our tripartite partners to place more emphasis on workplace health. Our workforce is ageing. This will cause a gradual shift in the types of WSH issues we will see in the workplace. For example, we will likely see more cases of chronic occupational diseases. Poor workplace health contributes to work-related injuries and fatalities. We need to place a greater emphasis on workplace health sooner, rather than later, to address such issues early.
Second, I called for differentiated insurance premiums to increase the cost to companies with poor WSH track record as a deterrence. Although workplace fatalities have dropped to an all-time low in 2018, the number of major and minor injuries has actually increased. This could mean one of two things. Either we were extremely lucky that the accidents did not lead to a fatality, or that today's better medical science has saved victims of serious accidents from possible death. Whatever the reason may be, we need to do more to encourage companies to reduce the number of accidents at our workplace. Having a tiered insurance framework, where companies will have to pay higher insurance premiums if there are many claims of the same incident nature, will go some way to achieving this.
The 2018 National WSH Statistics have shown that even low risk sectors were not spared from workplace accidents and injuries. There is no room for complacency in WSH, and therefore I urge our tripartite partners to support making it a mandatory requirement for every company to have a trained WSH representative, to make WSH more pervasive in our workplaces.
Making WSH more pervasive in every industry will be no easy feat, especially if you consider the diverse nature of our workforce. Every industry has its own unique balance of local to foreign workforce ratio, and the nationalities within the foreign workforce are diverse. The fact that we have too many training vendors that conduct the WSH Workforce Skills Qualification courses – about a dozen at my last count – and the significant variance in training resources provided by these vendors, makes implementing a standardised culture of WSH even more challenging.
The National WSH Training Academy can help ensure high and consistent WSH standards across sectors. A centralised WSH Academy can also serve as a Centre of Excellence in WSH. The Centre can establish a central registry of WSH practitioners, share industry best practices and showcase the use of new technologies to strengthen safety standards. Our SMEs would be the biggest beneficiaries from such a Centre of Excellence, as they have limited resources and will not be able to invest heavily in developing new WSH technologies.
All workers deserve to go home safe and in good health to their families and loved ones every day. The Labour Movement stands ready to work with our tripartite partners on suggestions and proposals to raise WSH standards across Singapore so that we can all benefit from safer and healthier workplaces.
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Chairman, there are many workers who are owed salary due to company closure, and many are not able to recover their salaries. They decided against Writ of Sale and Seizure due to the high cost of filing for WSS relative to the amount of salary owed.
In the United Kingdom, if a company is insolvent and the workers’ employment has been terminated, the workers can claim for part or all their outstanding salaries out of the National Insurance Fund (NIF) which is paid by employees, employers and the self-employed. There is still a claim limit since the intention is to help workers tide over while looking for alternative employment. In Singapore, we do not have an NIF.
I would like to propose to MOM to look at scheme to provide financial or subsistence relief to help more rank and file workers who are owed salaries due to company closure.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye: Mr Chairman, the announcement that the Foreign Worker Quota for the services sector would be reduced has once again put a spotlight on migrant workers in Singapore.
While the Dependency Ratio Ceilings for the other sectors remain unchanged for now, it is important that we continually take steps to focus on improving productivity at our workplaces. As at June 2018, we have more than 950,000 work permit holders working in Singapore, with more than 280,000 of them in the construction sector. With selected training, these migrant workers can contribute to productivity improvements. The Government should consider implementing a national training and skills recognition framework, similar to the Workforce Skills Qualifications (WSQ), for migrant workers. For foreign domestic workers (FDW), the Labour Movement hopes to obtain the MOM's support to expand the pilot skills certification programme offered by the Centre for Domestic Employees (CDE) to further improve the employment ecosystem for FDWs.
Having safe and conducive employment conditions is important to ensure that Singapore remains a choice employment destination for our migrant workers.
One area which the Migrant Workers’ Centre and CDE have been focusing on in recent years is to encourage employers to adopt electronic salary payments. We have seen some encouraging results thus far, and I hope that the Government can consider mandating electronic salary payments to migrant workers, to prevent cases of employer abuse.
As part of the work permit application process, we need to better educate employers on their responsibilities to the migrant workers they employ. Having a common understanding on the rights of migrant workers will serve to prevent potential disputes.
Today, distressed migrant workers are unwilling to come forward when they have disputes against their employers, for fear of repatriation. While MOM has made key changes to the employment transfer system for work permit holders to specifically address this, migrant workers often do not have the correct network or assistance to search for new jobs. To exacerbate matters, workers who have lodged complaints are seen in a negative light by recruiters. These factors contribute to a persistently low rate of successful job placement for this group of vulnerable workers. I hope that the Government can continue to work with the NTUC to improve the migrant worker employment system such that there is better end-to-end support for migrant workers involved in disputes with bad employers. Employers, too, need to recognise that employing such workers can be advantageous, as these migrant workers have already acclimatised to local culture and work habits.
Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, I have two cuts. Can I take both?
The Chairman: Yes, you do. Two cuts, yes please.
Ms Anthea Ong: Regulating foreign employment agents (EAs) remains a challenge. Some local employers purportedly take a cut of recruitment fees which incentivises them to hire new workers instead of retaining foreign workers already in Singapore. This means that workers who have gained skills and experience and better socialised to our society are sent home, thus lost to our economy in favour of a continuous influx of inexperienced and low skilled foreign labour. The problem is compounded by the short window period of 14 days to seek re-employment.
Has the Ministry considered giving unemployed foreign workers who are already in Singapore an advantage for re-employment? Further, does the Ministry plan to take more resolute action against employers taking kickbacks from workers, whether transacted in Singapore or abroad? Finally, will MOM’s extend its regulatory reach abroad by introducing preferential processing and approval of work permit applications made by local EAs who have foreign tie-ups operate abroad, and more importantly, can demonstrate \"clean\" recruitment?
A recent 2018 IMH study showed that one in seven Singaporeans experience a mental health condition in their lifetime. This means that an increasing segment of our workforce will have to grapple with mental health conditions while under employment. Ninety percent of psychological conditions in Singaporean adults have their root cause in workplace stress. Yet studies have shown that an overwhelming 86.5% of those employed do not seek help for their mental health difficulties. What is perhaps most striking is that even as 72% of employers in Singapore consider stress and mental health an issue which affects productivity, only 51% have emotional and psychosocial programmes in place.
Members have now heard me share the above in this House that the MOM’s intent to recognise and promote employee well-being can be further served by enacting clear and deliberate provisions that are upstream and preventive in nature. I would like to take this opportunity to flash out some recommendations I made previously, and make some additional recommendations.
First, that the definition of \"well-being\" in all statutes, regulations and policies pertaining to employment in Singapore must expressly include not only physical but also psychosocial well-being. Accordingly, the relevant provisions in the Workplace Health and Safety Act, as well as subsidiary legislation, must provide for the psychosocial health and safety of employees at the workplace.
Second, workplace well-being begins with destigmatising mental health conditions and conversations. In positive language, this means that we must foster inclusive employment practices. Such measures include prohibiting discriminatory employment practices such as compulsory declaration of medical history, especially for mental health conditions. That is, of course, until such information no longer prejudices a potential candidate. Ultimately, we are aiming for an employment climate that does not harbour misconceptions and pre-judgments about applicants with mental health experiences.
Finally, I wish to address segments of the employment market which are more exposed to mental health risks, namely our differently-abled employees, low-skilled workers and migrant workers. Each group is vulnerable to different work conditions connected to greater psychological hazards – these include discrimination, higher risk of physical injury and challenges in social integration.
Will the Ministry allocate budget and manpower to look into the increased mental health risks present in such segments of our job market?
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, the survey done by the Ministry in 2014 showed that two in three firms reported that they had implemented fair employment practices. The majority of those which did not were planning to do so. It has been five years since the last survey. I would like to know when we can expect to see the next survey results from MOM.
To get a more accurate picture of the situation, the survey should include interviews of employees and job applicants and not just employers, as the then Minister of State Teo Ser Luck said, would be the case for the next survey in employment exchange in 2016.
The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) sets an important framework for protecting workers. However, it still just a guideline. According to the Government's Report in December 2018, \"there are enforcement mechanisms that complement these guidelines. For instance, if employers are found to have discriminatory hiring practices, such posting discriminatory job advertisements, MOM restricts such employers' ability to hire foreign workers in Singapore\".
Sir, how far do these enforcement powers extend if the alleged discrimination does not violate existing laws like the Re-employment Act or Women's Charter, and where the company does not employ foreign workers?
Additionally, the Government should lead by example. MOM can consider ensuring Government agencies and Ministries avoid procuring services and goods from companies placed on the Fair Consideration Framework Watchlist.
Economics incentives can also be given to companies who consistently do well and are not on the Watchlist as a means of encouraging fair employment practices.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye: Mr Chairman, it is not uncommon to find restraint of trade clauses in employment contracts to protect the interest of the employer, by restricting a former employee from competing in the same industry and jumping to a competitor.
Such restrictions are currently not governed by legislation. As a result, we hear of instances of unreasonable restraint clauses built into contracts even for workers such as cleaners, construction workers, pre‐school teachers and even drivers. It often states that employee cannot work in the same or similar industry for one year after leaving the employment of the company.
Such unreasonable restriction of trade clauses jeopardise the livelihoods of our workers. I urge the Ministry to introduce measures to protect the interest of vulnerable segments of workers, including low-wage workers and junior PMEs.
The Chairman: Order. I propose to take a break now.
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 3.20 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 2.53 pm until 3.20 pm.
Sitting resumed at 3.20 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate in Committee of Supply resumed. (proc text)]
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Charles Chong) in the Chair]
Prof Lim Sun Sun (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, I declare my interest as a Professor in the Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD) and as a founding committee member of the Singapore Computer Society's Women in Technologies, Special Interest Group.
I greatly appreciate the various provisions that have been announced in this year's Budget to better recognise the needs and contributions of women. I would like to take this opportunity to offer suggestions on how we can better support women in the main-dominated technology sector so that it can be much more inclusive. Indeed, there are distinct benefits to greater gender diversity across all industries. but perhaps, especially so in the technology sector.
In Caroline Perez's book \"Invisible Women\", exposing data bias in a world designed for men, she provides compelling evidence to show how the silencing of women's needs and perspectives can be costly and downright fatal: crash test dummies that are based on the average male physique, ill-fitting armour that fails to protect police women and cancer research based principally on data on the male immune system. These are all sobering examples of how the omission of women's needs can cause lives.
As our society is technologising rapidly, the digital and physical infrastructures that shape much of our everyday lives must necessarily reflect the needs of all and not just half of humanity. We must thus ensure that the distinct strengths of women and our valuable insights are given every opportunity to shape technology and design. After all, research shows that women have tremendous socio-emotional intelligence. We are logical and rational thinkers and also possess the self-awareness and perceive and social skills that are crucial for understanding people, interpreting difficult situations and resolving conflicting needs.
Women also continue to bear most of the responsibilities as care-givers, caring not just for the next generation, but also for the elderly in our ageing society. Women's perspectives are thus especially illuminating for improving the innovations and services that facilitate the performance of such critical duties. To say it is difficult for women to balance the needs of home with the pressures of career is, therefore, a gross understatement.
While the number of women entering the technology sector is not sizeable to begin with, attrition rises sharply after pregnancy and childcare. In a fast-moving sector such as technology, the task of re-integrating is significantly more daunting as one's skills become quickly outdated. This attrition translates into a pipeline issue. Because there are fewer women to rise to the top, younger women do not see sufficient female role models in the technology sector. They are thus discouraged from joining the sector or they leave prematurely, uncertain of their future prospects. Upstream as well, we must try our best to boost the number of women in STEM so that we can nurture the next generation of women technological leaders.
At the Singapore University of Technology and Design, we make concerted efforts to maintain a 40% women enrolment in our engineering and architecture programmes. Indeed, our female students bring well-rounded perspectives and refreshing ideas when working in collaboration with their male counterparts. As professors, we can easily tell which projects have female team members because their innovations and designs invariably have that special touch.
So, what initiatives can we introduce to increase gender diversity in male-dominated sectors? Our SkillsFuture Credit programme can certainly help women to upskill. However, we also need to better support women who take leave for pregnancy, childcare or eldercare to help them sustain and broaden their professional networks. This will help smoothen their path as they return to the workforce.
Can we therefore introduce credit programmes that can help defray the cost of membership in professional societies? Can we also have special incentives for companies in sectors where women are under-represented, to introduce more flexible work arrangements and better childcare support? And can we also foster more incubation schemes that cater to the circumstances of female innovators and that offer more systematic mentoring?
More importantly, can we fund systematic longitudinal research that tracks the career trajectories of women through various industry sectors so that we can better understand their reasons for attrition as well as the factors that promote re-entry into the workforce? It is only with robust evidence that we can take a more proactive approach to ameliorating this problem of female under-representation. These are investments that Singapore can and should make not just for women but for our society as a whole.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo: Mr Chairman, flexible work arrangements when implemented effectively can save businesses money, reduce operating costs and boost productivity and bringing advantages across the economy for both businesses as well as the entire supply chains. Benefits include business and individual productivity, lower cost for work space for companies, and many hours saved from travelling to and from the workplace. With the competitive labour market, flexible work arrangements may be a staff attraction and retention tool for businesses.
Can MOM share the progress of companies in Singapore adopting flexible work arrangements? Has this resulted better employee outcomes, such as better employee well-being, greater worker productivity and hence, better business performance for employers?
We are witnessing the evolution of work arrangements changing beyond just flexible work arrangements. The gig economy and increasing number of start-ups is changing the corporate workplace and how we work. We are also seeing new models of industry spaces, for example, with JTC LaunchPad, dedicated or shared co-working spaces offered by players like WeWorks, CollectiveWorks, The Great Room, just to name a few.
Technology, like mobile computing, high bandwidth and connectivity, data analytics, automation, robotics and artificial intelligence are shaping how we work and where we work. This is impacting both large and small businesses. We are seeing a trend of work arrangements becoming more casual, less structured and less centrally controlled. With technological advancements and disruptions, many organisations are seeing flexible work spaces and arrangements as strategic tools to drive change and to get their employees to innovate.
So, it is no longer a matter of just providing flexible work arrangements to meet employee needs and demands or flexible work arrangements just for work-life balances that employees are demanding, but together with the redesign of work and work spaces, flexible work arrangements are becoming strategic tools for businesses to innovate, improve productivity, attract and retain talent. Co-working spaces also provide for the advantage of eco-systems of support, collaboration and sharing.
So, against this backdrop, people will require new skills and knowledge to work. The new skills required in this new landscape of work include critical thinking and problem-solving, ability to deal and make sense of data/information, ability to collaborate and influence others, effective communication skills, adaptability, learning and re-learning skills,being self-directed and creative. How and are we preparing our workers to thrive in this new world of work?
Mr Chong Kee Hiong: Sir, as we strive to build a more inclusive workplace, how will the Ministry encourage and help our companies to recruit, train and integrate more persons with special needs and ex-offenders?
To encourage more companies to accept and employ persons with special needs, we have to help them understand that there are many types of special needs, physical and mental, and the kind of jobs these different groups can do.
Public education and greater support from the Government is very important in this regard. Perhaps the Government would also consider setting annual employment targets to employ persons with special needs in the public sector. Employers have to take the plunge, start hiring and learn along the way how they could be more supportive and understanding. Fellow workers will also benefit as they learn more about empathy.
It is important that we help persons with special needs achieve as much independence as possible through work. Employment enables them to be engaged in society, learn and make meaningful contributions, just like able-bodied persons. They can help relieve their families' burdens and their parents can take comfort in the knowledge that they will be able to cope even after their parents are no longer around. Would the Ministry share an update on the Open Door Programme?
The other group of Singaporeans whom we should make greater effort to integrate into our workplace are ex-offenders. Employment plays an important role in keeping recidivism rates down. When ex-offenders receive the chance to be contributing and be valuable members of society again, they can regain their personal dignity and make a living to support themselves and their families. What are some of the latest initiatives MOM has with the Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises (SCORE) to help ex-offenders re-enter and remain in employment? Persuading companies to consider ex-offenders has its own set of challenges. What schemes does MOM have to attract more employers to consider providing them with a second chance?
The Chairman: Minister Josephine Teo.
The Minister for Manpower (Mrs Josephine Teo): Mr Chairman, I thank Members for all of your cuts. Let me start by updating you on the labour market.
Overall, it improved in 2018. Total employment went up; unemployment rate remains low, and there were fewer retrenched workers. On average, workers are earning higher incomes. However, I am always mindful that there are residents who would like to work but have not found jobs, and there are also those whose jobs and wages have not improved. MOM will try our best to help everyone. What are our challenges?
First, the global economic environment is more uncertain. In the fourth quarter of 2018, total employment still grew but more slowly. The unemployment rate inched up just slightly. There could be headwinds. As a result, MTI has moderated our growth forecast.
Second, we have more seniors. The employment rate for seniors has risen steadily over the years. Unemployment rate among seniors is also quite low, actually lower than average. Still, not all seniors who want to, have jobs.
Third, labour market performance across sectors is uneven. There has been some restructuring. But productivity growth actually slowed down in 2018 compared to 2017. The gaps in some sectors are worrying. They are not keeping up with the rest of our economy and their peers in other developed countries.
In the medium to longer term, what are the prospects to improve job quality and grow wages in these sectors?
That is why we are moderating foreign manpower growth in Services. It was not an easy decision. But we have to spur further efforts to restructure. This was a hot topic. Members of Parliament have given their view on this move during Budget debate and MIT’s COS debate. I will address them later.
But first, I will provide an overview of MOM’s responses to all of your cuts.
My response alone may take about an hour. I will speak on three areas, how we will walk the tech journey with our workers, provide better assurance and support senior employment.
Minister of State Mr Zaqy Mohamad had earlier spoken about how we uplift the wages and skills of our low-wage workers. He will elaborate on partnerships with industry and the broader community.
In addition to support for low-wage workers, we should also support persons with special needs and protect the safety and health of our workers. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Ms Low Yen Ling will speak on our additional efforts to support women, fresh graduates and ex-offenders in the workforce.
Let me start by sharing how we will walk the tech journey with our workers. By now, all of us expect technology to have far-reaching impact on industries and the future of work. In essence, our concerns are two-fold: whether there will be enough jobs, which is a question of quantity; and whether new and transformed jobs will be good jobs, which is a question of quality.
On quantity of jobs, fundamentally, Singapore is labour-constrained. Technology is an overall plus for Singapore as it helps us sustain more economic activities with fewer people. Bear in mind that our local workforce today is not large enough to support all our manpower needs. Technology may make us more manpower-lean and need fewer people, but for the foreseeable future, it is unlikely to eradicate our manpower shortfalls.
In fact, technology also creates new jobs that are potentially of better quality, which we should welcome. Take Ms Aryani Suhardi for example, whom I met recently. For 13 years, Aryani worked as an email correspondence consultant at Prudential’s call centre, handling queries from financial consultants. When Prudential started developing a mobile app chatbot for financial consultants, a new role was created – someone needed to \"train\" the chatbot to intelligently handle queries.
Aryani’s years of experience handling financial consultants’ queries made her an ideal candidate for the new role of \"chatbot trainer\". I have never heard of such a job before – chatbot trainer.
Seizing the opportunity, she learnt from a data scientist how to train the chatbot. She has been performing well as a chatbot trainer ever since, got promoted and even started training others how to do the same.
When I met her, I was given a demo and I was impressed – the chatbot that Aryani had trained even understands Singlish!
The chatbot technology has been a plus for other Prudential Call Centre staff as well. Call volumes at Prudential’s support centres have fallen by about 40%. As a result, customer service executives could get redeployed to new areas of growth. Those who remained no longer needed to answer routine questions. They told me it used to drive them nuts. So, now they do not have to answer the same questions over and over again – the machines can do that for them – and they could now spend more time helping callers with complex queries.
This development is not unique to call centres, and certainly not Prudential. Across many other industries, whether manufacturing or healthcare, you will hear similar feedback from businesses and their employees, that new jobs are being created and existing jobs are being improved with the use of technology.
Our goal in Singapore must be to enable all businesses to take full advantage of technology to create new jobs and improve job quality. Just as importantly, we must walk the tech journey with workers, help them adapt and take up new opportunities.
This is not the attitude everywhere in the world. Driven by fear, there is growing resistance in some places to workplace and industry transformation.
In Singapore, we are in a strong position to seize the opportunities that come with technological change. There are two main reasons for this. First, our strong fundamentals give us some leeway to shape the change. Second, we have strong tripartism at work.
Instead of fanning the fear, our Labour Movement is ready to embrace the change with Worker 4.0. All Labour Members led by Secretary-General Ng Chee Meng are fully on board – every Labour Member spoke about it in the Budget debate. I am deeply mindful that this is not a given. To keep the faith with our workers, we must do everything we can to walk the tech journey with them.
MOM is not alone in doing this. Other Ministries and sector agencies have in fact put jobs and skills at the front and centre of their workplans. This phrase \"putting jobs and skills at the front and centre of our workplans\" is no longer so uncommon. Just go and listen to all the sector agencies about their workplans. Their Chief Executive Officers and Managing Directors use this phrase.
For example, as Minister Ong Ye Kung and Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat had shared, our Institutes of Higher Learning are expanding the number of work-learn programmes.
MOE also support employers’ efforts to upskill and reskill their workers, through initiatives such as the Nanyang Polytechnic's National Centre of Excellence for Workplace Learning – because you need to build that capability and infrastructure.
For MCI, Minister S Iswaran spoke about efforts to maintain the skill relevancy of ICT professionals, as well as convert non-ICT professionals to take on entry-level ICT jobs through Tech Skills Accelerator (TeSA).
MOH, MND and MOT will also share their efforts to strengthen worker training in the healthcare, built environment and transport sectors.
In every one of the 23 Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs), sector agencies are taking the lead in driving initiatives to meet the jobs and skills needs of the sector. We have to take the sectoral approach, not one size fits all, because it really depends on the unique circumstances and what the profile of their workers are.
But, even then, realistically, not all workers will be like Aryani who is redeployed and upgraded as her employer adopts new technology. Some workers may find themselves having to move to new jobs. This may be in another company or industry.
The Government cares deeply that such workers get help. They deserve our utmost support. We will do so through the Adapt and Grow initiative.
Time and again, we see such workers adapt to unexpected situations with remarkable courage and resilience. They pick themselves up, often with the help of their families, and sometimes with the help of our career coaches, as well as the unions. And when they overcome their challenges, they manage to continue growing.
I have met many of them and salute every single one of them because their efforts were extraordinary. That is why I, and my colleagues at MOM and WSG are determined that they will not be alone in this journey.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Ms Jessica Tan asked how Adapt and Grow has helped. Last year, we helped over 30,000 jobseekers secure jobs, about 20% more than 2017. This include placements from Adapt and Grow programmes, as well as career matching services by WSG and NTUC's e2i. In particular, we worked closely with sector agencies to help place locals PMETs in sectors with good potential for PMET jobs, namely, Infocomm and Media, Manufacturing and Professional services, Finance and Insurance, Wholesale Trade and Healthcare.
Since August last year, we have also added \"Built Environment\" as the sixth growth sector. After all, we are not done building Singapore, so the \"Built Environment\" also offers good opportunities.
To better support retrenched workers, we set up a Taskforce for Responsible Retrenchment and Employment Facilitation led by WSG. Companies are required by law to notify the Taskforce about upcoming retrenchments. The Taskforce then steps in to provide employment assistance to affected workers.
We sometimes hear questions about whether our help has reached the right people. For example, are we really able to help PMETs? Among the 30,000 jobseekers placed, more than half are PMETs, similar to their share of our workforce. What about workers who are less qualified or older? More than 9,000 jobseekers successfully placed last year had Secondary-level qualifications or below. For those aged 50 and above, there were close to 9,000 jobseekers placed, a more than 20% increase compared to 2017.
What about those unemployed for a long time? Over 60% of jobseekers placed were unemployed. Among them, close to half had been unemployed for more than six months. We will not forget those who have yet to find a job. It is not for want of trying. For some jobseekers, the gap with what the employers want may still be quite wide, such as for experienced PMETs.
This is why we are ramping up Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs). There are now more than 100 PCPs in over 30 sectors. In 2018, close to 5,000 people were re-skilled and employed through PCPs, an increase of over 30% compared to the year before, 2017. Most of the PCP participants do well, and that includes those on Place-&-Train as well as Attach-&-Train. About nine in 10 of the PCP participants remained in employment 12 to 18 months after being placed. About two-thirds were recognised for their newly acquired skills and received higher wages than before – two-thirds.
We are also not waiting for workers to become unemployed or retrenched. We started moving upstream to identify progressive employers prepared to re-skill their workers and put them in new jobs instead of letting them go. Last year, about 1,300 workers benefited from such redeployment efforts.
I have previously highlighted the banks’ efforts to reskill and redeploy over a thousand of cashiers and tellers. Another progressive employer is Singtel. They have many desktop support staff and foresaw the arrival of chatbots. So, they worked with WSG to gradually reskill 14 staff to take on new roles in network and system engineering. This includes sending staff with no prior technical experience to get certified for their new roles.
As Singtel embarks on digitalisation across more business functions, it is working closely with WSG to reskill at least 70 more employees to higher-value added roles, such as Robotic Process Automation Specialists and Digital Sales and Marketing, all job titles that up to five years ago we probably would not have heard of.
Whether each PCP is for a thousand or just a few workers, they all add up. And as NTUC might put it, every redeployed worker matters. This is why we are troubled when we do not get the same sense of urgency in some companies. Troubles us a great deal. Sometimes, the management themselves have not figured out future directions for the business and so they cannot tell the workers how to align. At other times, the entire industry is not moving quickly enough. But WSG will keep trying to engage companies and be quick to act when they are ready.
Members may also come across feedback that some PCPs are over-subscribed while others could not get going. What are WSG’s observations? There are two. Sometimes, the work is not sufficiently attractive to our local jobseekers. The solution is to work with employers to improve job quality through job redesign and salary review. In other instances, there is interest from the jobseekers, but the employers have set too high a bar or may have relied too much on years of experience or academic qualifications to short-list the candidates. So, they find they have no shortlist.
How can WSG help? A great example is the Artificial Intelligence Software Developer Attach-and-Train PCP offered by DigiPen. DigiPen is our partner. So, this is Artificial Intelligence Software Developer Attach-and-Train. So, no job offered at the start, but attach-&-train, because we know there will be demand.
The take-up for the programme was initially low, very miserable. Companies were looking for almost-ready candidates, such as Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics (STEM) graduates already proficient in C++, a programming language. These hiring requirements immediately excluded mature jobseekers who were committed to reskill but had non-technical backgrounds. WSG and DigiPen did not give up. They convinced the hirers to adjust their hiring criteria and training. They tried out just three applicants. At the end of the six-month programme, two had picked up the required skills and were successfully placed as Software Developers.
This example shows us that, given the right support, mature PMETs can switch into new, technical and seemingly daunting roles. However, it also reminds us that the numbers are not always big. Each PCP takes much time and effort to get right and, even with the best efforts, not every jobseeker will get through.
So, we need different kinds of support. Sometimes, we need to help close the salary gap between what the jobseeker hopes to get because he has legitimate financial commitments at home. But there is still a gap with what the employer is prepared to give, especially at the start. We do this through the Career Support Programme (CSP). Last year, more than 1,200 jobseekers were placed with the help of CSP. Nearly 90% had been unemployed for more than six months. As the Minister for Finance had announced, we will extend CSP by two years.
Sometimes, jobseekers and employers are just unsure about each other. So, we have Career Trial, which Mr Patrick Tay and Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar asked about. Career Trial helps jobseekers and employers get to know each other better before signing on the dotted line. Last year, about 730 jobseekers obtained jobs through this Scheme. This is an increase of over 40% compared to 2017.
Senior Minister of State and Deputy Secretary General Heng Chee How called for more support for care-givers to re-enter the workforce through part-time work. I support his call. Although Career Trial was just enhanced last year, we will further enhance it to include part-time jobs. This means that unlike previously, the jobs available for Career Trial will include both full-time and part-time jobs. We hope that this will benefit more jobseekers with care-giving responsibilities. For employers, too, we hope it will help them become more comfortable with managing part-time work.
To help more jobseekers, WSG must itself leverage technology. Last year, we introduced MyCareersFuture.sg. It gives jobseekers a smarter and more efficient tool for skills-to-job matching. Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Lim Biow Chuan will be pleased to know that Jobs Bank and MyCareersFuture have been well utilised by both jobseekers and employers. Since its launch in April last year, the site received more than two million visits and over 1.7 million applications.
More than 20,000 employers placed job postings on the Jobs Bank last year. That is why when Mr Lim Biow Chuan went to search, he said over 24,000 jobs on offer, I think. Among these postings, less than 15% were to fulfil the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) advertising requirements. In other words, the vast majority of job postings are because the employers find it a useful channel. I would think so because why would employers waste time doing something that does not bear fruit?
So, we hope the portal becomes more attractive to employers later this year, as we roll out new features. For example, employers will be able to short-list candidates based on skills-to-job matching.\tThis will also help the jobseekers who may not have the right experience but have relevant skills to offer.
Overall, while we are encouraged by the good progress of Adapt and Grow (A&G), we still have concerns about those we have not been to help. There are three areas to work on.
First, the A&G initiative is relatively new and people may not be aware of the help available. So, WSG and e2i together operate five service centres for career matching. Last year, WSG decided to bring these services to the heartlands. Do not wait for Mohamad to come to the mountain, right? Take the mountain to Mohamad.
They call this programme Careers Connect On-The-Go (CCOTG) – a mobile truck that brings career matching services to different places. It helped to reach about 3,100 jobseekers from Jurong West to Tampines. We will do more to strengthen outreach. Nee Soon South – coming! I could not help it. Very sorry. In fact, I am not sure whether we have actually been to Nee Soon South already.
The second area of improvement is our programmes. Take PCPs, for example, which we will need more of. We will continue to launch new PCPs but we will also revamp existing ones to be more effective.
Finally, for every successful jobseeker, there is probably another who is still searching. The change in employment situation may have come too suddenly. They need time to come to terms with it. Adjusting expectations is very much a part of this process, and some adjust faster than others. Career coachers tell me this because I meet them regularly. Quite often, there are other difficulties, such as tensions at home that are distracting them from the process. Our career coaches are there to support, to handhold these jobseekers so that they know there is help and hope. But prevention is always going to be better than cure. We should help as many as we can stay relevant so that they need not be displaced at all. NTUC's Worker 4.0 and Training Council initiatives, therefore, deserve strong support.
Besides Adapt and Grow, another way in which we walk the tech journey with workers is to better support self-employed persons (SEPs), which Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Chen Show Mao raised concerns about. Up to now, the much-feared tsunami of gig work has not quite materialised, certainly not in Singapore. And even when I checked in with my counterparts abroad, not quite.
A proxy for gig workers are our SEPs, even though most of them are in traditional occupations like taxi-driving, real-estate marketing, insurance or financial advisory. In absolute numbers, there were actually fewer SEPs in 2018 compared to 2017. Their share of the resident workforce has also been consistent for well over a decade, at 8% to 10%. So, last year closer to the 8%.
Part of the reason is that the labour market has improved. Compared to a year ago, the share of SEPs who prefer regular employment has fallen sharply from about 20% to below 10%. Of those who are still SEPs, most did not try looking for regular work – because they might have found the jobs if they tried. The vast majority of the SEPs have told us it is their preference, and we respect it. We cannot predict how their numbers may grow in future. But it is better to be prepared. This is why we formed a Tripartite Workgroup to recommend ways to better support SEPs.
Ms Jessica Tan asked for an update on our implementation of the Workgroup’s recommendations, which I had shared at last year’s COS debate.
To reduce payment disputes, we launched the Tripartite Standard on Contracting with SEPs last year. Close to 500 businesses have adopted the Standard, covering 30,000 SEPs. We also make the Tripartite Standard Alliance for Dispute Management available to SEPs if they want mediation services and I can share with Members that actually the numbers have been quite modest. Maybe it is an awareness issue but maybe the problem is not as bad as is being described. So, we will keep monitoring this. The numbers have not been very large.
To shape contracting norms, because it is ultimately to mediate, it is better to have a contract. So, you must shape the contracting norms. We have just launched a new template. SEPs can make a request to their service-buyers to put in writing the key terms of engagement and this template shows them what kinds of things you put in the key terms of engagement, to safeguard your interests.
To support SEPs in adapting to technological changes – we worked with tripartite partners and sector agencies to give them access to technical skills training through the relevant Skills Frameworks. So, depending on which sector you are in, if there is a sector that has got the relevant skills framework, better make sure that your needs are also taken into account and reflected in the skills framework. We are also supporting SEP associations, such as the Singapore Coaches Association, to develop non-technical skills training, so that SEPs are equipped to start and maintain their businesses in a viable fashion.
Assoc Prof Dr Walter Theseira and Mr Chen Show Mao asked how our CPF system can better enable SEPs to save for their retirement and healthcare needs.
Currently, SEPs are required to contribute to their MediSave accounts on an annual basis. They can additionally make voluntary CPF top-ups to build up their retirement savings. They can do so any time. But some SEPs face difficulties even making their MediSave contributions. So, they default. This is why we will introduce a \"contribute-as-you-earn\" (CAYE) scheme. It will help SEPs make small regular contributions to MediSave instead of bigger lump-sums at year-end. Government, as the service buyer, is on track to pilot CAYE from Q1 2020. We will provide more details later this year.
The Workgroup had also highlighted the lack of options for SEPs to protect themselves from loss of income when they are unable to work due to illness or injury. To plug this gap, we worked with insurers to introduce Prolonged Medical Leave (PML) insurance products. NTUC Income and Gigacover have started to offer them as standalone products. Previously, there was none.
We also raised awareness among taxi and platform operators to address this concern. Grab and GoJek have been progressive by recently providing free PML insurance coverage for their regular drivers. ComfortDelGro Taxi is also considering options. These are promising developments.
Mr Patrick Tay and Ms Sylvia Lim raised concerns about underemployment. Mr Zainal Sapari wrote about it last year. Indeed, this is an area we should keep watch over.
Internationally, the only form of underemployment which has a recognised statistical definition is time-related, defined as part-time workers who are willing and able to engage in additional hours. In Singapore, the resident time-related underemployment has been declining over the past decade. At 3.3% today, it is lower than in many other developed countries.
MOM is interested in tracking other forms of underemployment, such as skills-related underemployment. But, today, there are no internationally recognised ways of doing so. We are, therefore, working closely with the International Labour Organisation to develop suitable methodologies.
One possibility is to use wage or qualification-based indicators, such as employed in the Ong Teng Cheong Labour Leadership Institute study that Ms Lim cited. However, we must be cautious about interpreting the study’s findings. It was based on a relatively small sample of 1,600, with only 70 respondents identified as “underemployed”.
In fact, generally, interpreting wage- or qualifications-based indicators is not straightforward. Some graduates may receive lower allowances while training for high-earning jobs, such as lawyers on training contracts. Others may have chosen to forgo a higher salary in order to invest their time and energy in their families, businesses or their passions. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling will speak about our efforts to provide support for graduating students, so that they can be meaningfully employed.
Ultimately, the best way to reduce the risk of underemployment is to keep the labour market tight. When the labour market is soft, most people will consider it better to have some job rather than no job. They may also become SEPs, but involuntarily. Therefore, every time we tweak labour market policies, we must always remember not to go overboard. We should avoid weakening the labour market inadvertently. This is why the decision to tighten foreign worker policy was very carefully considered.
In the end, we decided we need a stronger push to restructure and be more manpower-lean. This will sustain business growth for our companies for the longer term and help to improve job quality for our workers over time. In the longer term, with these measures, it will make our labour market more resilient. Many MPs spoke on this. The notable exception was Members from the Workers’ Party. I wonder why, given how important this is for workers? I am really interested to know. Do you support it?
In adjusting foreign worker policy, we tried to avoid sweeping changes. First, it is in the services sector where most restructuring is needed. Second, beyond moves already set in motion, we are not making further changes to quotas in other sectors and levies this year.
As Singapore Business Federation CEO Mr Ho Meng Kit pointed out, while there is pain, it is mostly felt by businesses already at the quota ceiling. Businesses that have found ways to rely less on foreign workers are not affected. Compared to previous rounds of tightening, we are also giving employers more time to adjust, with the changes spread out over two small steps and up to 2021.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked if MOM can allow an employer to retain an existing foreign worker if it exceeds the new quotas. I understand why employers might want to do so. In fact, employers will be able to retain an existing S Pass or Work Permit holder until the current pass expires. At the point of work pass renewal, we will have to be fair to all employers and require them to meet the new quotas. If this were not so, employers can avoid being impacted by “stocking up” to the current quota. If an employer really wishes to retain a specific foreign worker instead of another whose work pass expires later, he should terminate the latter’s work pass to free up the quota so he can renew the former’s work pass in good time.
Members have expressed concerns that some Services sub-sectors will not be able to cope, and are reliant on foreign manpower because locals are unwilling to join them. There is no question in my mind: we will continue to need foreign manpower in Services. But over-reliance carries risks and is not sustainable. As their home countries develop, will all foreign workers today always be willing to take up these jobs in Singapore? More critically, should we, as a society, accept that many jobs in Services are unattractive to locals? Should we, as a society, accept that? So many jobs. Every one of them not acceptable to locals? What does it say? Should we not invest effort to uplift some of these jobs to be more appealing to locals? I am glad some Members believe we should.
Some firms are already leading the way. They have re-examined where routine work can be reduced, for example, stock-taking in retail businesses. Nowadays, with RFID – a quick scan and stock is taken. They may also reduce headcounts in back-end functions but keep people deployed in front-end roles so as to maintain good customer service. As they need fewer staff, they may be able to pay each worker more.
On the Government’s part, we will continue to support firms in their transformation journey, for example, through the Lean Enterprise Development (LED) scheme. This includes the enhanced and extended Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) and Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) that Minister Chan Chun Sing talked about in his COS speech. Since 2015, we have helped more than 14,000 companies of all sizes and across sectors. If a firm commits to a transformation project that will make it more manpower-lean but needs extra workers in the transition period, we are prepared to help. We will also support firms in their efforts to build up their local pipeline through our Adapt and Grow Initiative that I spoke about earlier.
From time to time, we hear about employers hiring locals just to meet the quotas. The local workers are not asked to do very much. I hope most people will agree with me. It is up to the workers to decide if they wish to take up such jobs. Some may feel it is acceptable because we do not know their circumstances. They may not feel that they are up to other kinds of work. But for the purposes of meeting the quotas, MOM applies a simple test and that is whether the job pays above a certain level. We call this the local qualifying salary. As the wages of locals rise, the local qualifying salary must also be regularly adjusted. Given wage trends, the local qualifying salary will be raised from $1,200 currently to $1,300 in July 2019.
As in the past, when the Local Qualifying Salary was raised by a similar amount, the cost impact is expected to be small. As announced at last year's COS, the minimum qualifying salary for S Pass holders will also be increased to $2,400 from 1 January 2020.
Some Members have concerns whether our businesses can still compete globally. This is why, even as we update our foreign workforce rules, we must remain open. There will always be expertise or specialist skills that are in demand globally but in short supply in Singapore. Our policies must enable Singapore-based companies to assemble the best international teams to compete on the world stage and create more quality jobs for our people while we build the local pipeline.
This is why we piloted the Capability Transfer Programme (CTP), which Mr Patrick Tay asked about. It aims to help firms quickly develop and transfer new capabilities in growth areas to our local workforce. More than 100 companies are expected to benefit from CTP-supported projects. These include industry-level and company-specific projects in areas, such as precision engineering, logistics, lift maintenance, waste management and air transport.
An example is Royal Insignia. This is a traditional family-run business that creates medals and decorations for royal families. While their business was doing well, their customer base was small – not surprisingly, none in Singapore. Royal Insignia hoped to break into the luxury consumer market by producing new ornaments that require advanced enamelling techniques. Enamelling is the art of applying powdered glass to metal surfaces. As this was a rare technique, they had to consult with Russian universities and review many portfolios before they found the right expert, Daria.
Over the course of three months last year, Daria trained 15 of Royal Insignia's local employees in advanced enamelling techniques, such as the creation of 3D forms and colour gradients. As a result, the company’s product range has expanded and it is now more competitive.
As we keep our doors open, we must also find ways to raise quality. Members will recall that qualifying salaries for Employment Passes were raised in 2017. As a result, numbers have come down because of exits at the lower end. The effects of these changes will continue to be felt in 2019. We are not planning more moves for now, but will review the need to regularly.
In the meantime, we continue to be very serious about the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF). It is to ensure local PMETs are given fair treatment in terms of hiring.\tFrom July last year, we expanded the FCF requirement. More firms must advertise more jobs to locals before MOM will accept the Employment Pass application.
Mr Patrick Tay, Mr Lim Biow Chuan and Mr Pritam Singh asked for an update on the FCF Watchlist. There are currently 350 employers from across all sectors and firm sizes on the Watchlist. The top five sectors are: Administrative & Support Services, Education, Infocomm, Professional Services and Wholesale Trade. We identified these firms as their workforce profile suggested nationality bias. The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) also investigates feedback from the public about possible discrimination against Singaporeans.
For employers found wanting, their Employment Pass (EP) applications are closely scrutinised. Since 2016, a total of 2,300 EP applications have been rejected or withheld by MOM, or withdrawn by the employers – 2,300.
While we take a firm stance against these companies, TAFEP also works with them to improve their HR practices and support local hiring. These efforts have helped. So far, 260 firms have improved their HR practices and exited the FCF Watchlist. In addition, firms on the Watchlist have hired more than 3,800 Singaporean PMETs to date – 3,800.
One such firm operates in the Architecture and Engineering field. When it was placed on the FCF Watchlist in June 2017, the firm was not interested to work with TAFEP. So, repeated attempts to engage the company failed. What could we do? We curtailed its work pass privileges. This got their attention. The HR manager sent in multiple appeals to her MP to be taken off the Watchlist – in fact, called at the MP's Meet-the-People Session, which every one of us do. The company claimed that the EPs were critical because they were needed for a public project.
So, MOM looked into the case. We consulted with the agencies overseeing the project. The company had barely tried to improve local hiring when it could have. You look at the kind of jobs that they are hiring for, and you asked \"Are there Singaporeans who can do these jobs? Let us look at our jobs bank; let us look at our applicants.\" Yes, there are. Therefore, we had to reject their EP applications and also the MP's appeal.
In the end, the firm realised that there was no short-cut. It reached out to WSG on its training programmes and made plans to take on interns from local Polytechnics and Universities. As a result of its efforts, it hired an additional 14 locals over a period of one and a half years.
I know such actions by TAFEP are not popular but I hope Members will back us up even if these companies appeal to you. I can assure you that TAFEP is not vindictive. It only seeks to ensure that our PMETs' interests are properly safeguarded. Employers who are fair to locals need not worry. But if they are not, please understand why we do not accept it.
Members can also be assured that we deal firmly with employers who try to be funny. For example, we keep a lookout for employers on the Watchlist who use related entities to apply for EPs to bypass our controls. For such cases, we can and have curtailed the work pass privileges of all the related entities.
While we take unfair employers to task, we must also recognise fair and progressive employers. They make it a point to develop a strong local core, which is what we look for in the Human Capital Partnership (HCP) Programme. In 2018, we recognised about 130 new HCP firms. This brings the total number of HCPs to about 540, 40% of whom are Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs).
HCP firms' commitment to human capital development not only benefits their employees, but also allows them to better attract and retain local talent. Today, they employ more than 190,000 locals, which is about 8% of the total workforce. Local PMETs account for about 90% of HCP firms’ total PMET workforce. Even at the senior to top levels, more than 80% are locals.
BreadTalk is an example of such a progressive company. It invests heavily in human capital development through its in-house BreadTalk University. Its local training programmes include online tutorials on food and workplace safety, Coursera subscriptions for its staff, and even curated courses with local Universities. The company has also implemented role-specific career progression roadmaps for some of its frontline roles, which chart the skills they need at every level. Its progressive HR practices make it an attractive place to work in.
Mr Chairman, let me now turn to the very important topic of supporting senior employment.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked about the WorkPro Scheme which offers the Job Redesign Grant (JRG) and the Age Management Grant (AMG) to help employers make their workplaces more age-friendly. Over 1,750 companies and about 20,000 older workers have benefited from the Workpro, Job Redesign Programme since it was enhanced last year. Under the Workpro AMG, over 250 companies and 3,800 older workers have benefited.
Progressive employers are making it easier for seniors to work. Take for example, Mdm Lim Swee Choon, who is in her early 60s. She chooses to work flexi-hours on weekdays from 8.30am to 3.30pm at Sushi Express, a progressive employer that implemented job redesign and flexible work arrangements. A former housewife, Mdm Lim returned to work after her four kids grew up. This is her first job and she enjoys being with her colleagues, many of whom are seniors as well. As everyone is well-trained in all roles, they take turns covering each other's duties and rotating between stations every week. What does she do after work? She enjoys her free time with her friends, doing volunteer work at the temple, singing karaoke or line-dancing at community club!
The current WorkPro funding period will end by June 2019. We believe it remains useful. We are reviewing it and will share the results when ready.
Beyond WorkPro, there is scope to review policy. Our employment rate for seniors has, in fact, risen steadily over the years. We had raised the Retirement Age (RA) before. In 2012 , we introduced re-employment after Japan started the practice. On reaching the current Retirement Age of 62, a worker must be offered annual re-employment by his employer up to 67, even though the job and salary may change.\tIn practice, well over 90% of workers eligible for re-employment and who also wish to continue working are offered re-employment every year – well over 90%. These policy changes over the years to Retirement Age and Re-employment Age have helped our seniors work longer.\tThey have also helped our businesses tap a wider workforce.\tCompared to OECD countries, we now rank third for our employment rate for persons aged 65 and above.
Some people and even Assoc Prof Daniel Goh have called for the removal of the Retirement Age, but labour Members have not done so. Why is there a difference?
When a company removes the retirement age from its HR policy manual, it is good news for its workers. It means the company gives a commitment it will not retire any employee at any age for as long as the employee wishes to continue working. That is what it is, at the company level.
But if the retirement age is removed from the law, it is bad news. It means the employers no longer have any obligation to keep their workers up to any age. In other words, any employer can retire any worker at any age.
Labour Members have studied the law and understand this crucial difference. The statutory minimum Retirement Age of 62 is actually protection for the workers. Until 62, employers are not allowed to retire or, in other words, dismiss a worker on account of his age. This is why NTUC calls for the Retirement Age to be raised, not removed. This will give workers protection up to an older age.
Besides considering the wishes of workers, we should also understand what employers want. One reason Singapore has been able to keep employment high and unemployment low is labour market flexibility. This flexibility ultimately benefits workers, because it does not discourage employers from hiring them. This does not mean we do away with rules completely. When rules are inadequate, workers’ interests may be compromised. But when rules become too onerous, employment may suffer which is also not in workers’ interest. The Singapore way is therefore always to strike a balance, to be pro-worker and pro-business in all that we do.
On key issues which concern both workers and employers, we must build a tripartite consensus that is also sustainable for the future. This is why in May last year, I formed the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers. Among other things, the Workgroup has been reviewing the longer-term relevance of the Retirement Age (RA) and Re-employment age (REA). In many other countries, it has been very hard to move on these issues. Deep distrust and division prevent people from focusing on the future. They keep harping on the past. Why certain changes should not have been made. Why is it now compromising us? They are always still talking about what happened five years ago, 10 years ago, and they cannot get past that debate to move to the future. We must try and avoid that and do better.
The Workgroup therefore consulted widely. It heard the views of workers and unions. It has also been meeting with employers, particularly the Singapore National Employers’ Federation (SNEF). It tries to balance views from both sides. It must also consider what is right for our country. At many points in the process, there were differences. The key question was, should we only raise REA beyond 67 but not RA beyond 62? The answer was, in the beginning, not at all clear.
Recently, the Workgroup updated me on their thinking, they provided the same update to NTUC Secretary-General Brother Ng Chee Meng and SNEF President Brother Dr Robert Yap. All three of us are Advisers to the Workgroup. The Workgroup needs a few more months before putting up their detailed recommendations. But, we have a clear tripartite consensus. I am glad that the Workgroup believes we should raise both RA and REA. [Applause]
I agree with the Workgroup and I will try my best to make it happen.
Let me share now share their three-point agreement, which explains why. First, the Retirement Age (RA) remains relevant and should go up beyond 62. This is because our people enjoy more years of good health and remain productive at work well into their 60s. A higher retirement age will motivate both workers and employers to invest in skills upgrading and job redesign for their older workers.
Second, the Re-Employment Age (REA) remains useful and should also go up beyond 67. Although most workers who are eligible get re-employed in the same job at the same pay, the flexibility to reset jobs and terms help employers cope with business uncertainties. Employers are more willing to employ older workers because of it.
Third, the increases in RA and REA should be implemented in small steps over time. This is because employers will need to make considerable adjustments. They must plan ahead and step up efforts to make workplaces more age-friendly.
The Workgroup cautions that even as RA and REA are raised over time, it is critical to ensure flexibility of employment arrangements. Our economy is diverse, both in terms of business models and operational needs. Workers too have different preferences and health conditions. We must therefore avoid being overly prescriptive when setting new rules. I am heartened by the progress made by the Workgroup. I also agree that we should carefully consider the timing and pacing of these moves. In fact, countries looking to raise their retirement ages typically make their intentions known five to 10 years in advance. And each move is relatively modest.
For example, Denmark’s retirement age is set to go up from 65 to 68 by 2030, over 11 years. For Singapore, we started talking about re-employment in 2007 before it became law in 2012. Five years. In the next phase of its work, the Workgroup will build a tripartite consensus on how far and how fast the RA and REA should be raised. The CPF contribution rates for older workers will also be a topic of their consideration. They will balance the need to help improve retirement adequacy and sustain employability for our older workers.
However, one thing is clear, even when RA or REA are raised, the CPF payout eligibility age of 65 will remain unchanged at age 65. CPF members will be able to withdraw their payouts any time from age 65. Ms Foo Mee Har, Mr Png Eng Huat and Ms Sylvia Lim have asked about financial security, flexibility in use of CPF savings and CPF top-ups. Retirement adequacy is improving, for both older and younger Singaporeans.
In 2018, more than six in 10 active CPF members turning 55 have at least the Basic Retirement Sum (BRS); this proportion will grow with each successive cohort. In 2018, over 96,000 members received about $2 billion in top-ups to their CPF accounts.
We are also stepping up outreach. Since the start of this year, all members turning 65 can get a personalised one-on-one CPF Retirement Planning Service at our Service Centres. One-on-one, personalised, with an infographic that tells you what you have and what you can do with it. Not what other people have, what you have. So, Ms Foo, your residents, we hope will take advantage of this service and be more like Mdm Tan, who only got to know what she could do with your help. And we want to replicate what you have been able to do for Mdm Tan to everyone who wants it.
We will address the issue of retirement adequacy more holistically when we discuss the Workgroup’s recommendations on CPF contributions for older workers.
To sum up, I am very pleased that we have developed a tripartite consensus to raise the RA and REA. I hope Members realise what a significant milestone this is. The next phase of working out details is equally important. I look forward to receiving the Workgroup’s final recommendations later this year. Mr Chairman, please allow me to conclude in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Chairman, as our life expectancy increases, MOM will endeavour to provide more comprehensive support for senior workers.
As a matter of fact, in the past 10 years, the employment rate of seniors has increased substantially and is quite high compared to developed countries. In Singapore, two in three seniors aged between 55 to 64 years old continue to work. Amongst seniors above 65 years old, one in four is still working.
In my view, we can do more and do better. If we can fully develop the potential of our older workers and make good use of their potential, we can turn it into our advantage. This is why I set up the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers last May, to look into reviewing the statutory retirement age (RA), re-employment age (REA) and CPF contribution rate of older workers.
Before implementing any changes, the Government will consult various stakeholders such as unions and businesses, and endeavour to achieve a win-win outcome.
Last week, the Workgroup reported its progress to NTUC Sec-Gen Ng Chee Meng, Dr Robert Yap from SNEF and myself. It will take the Workgroup a few more months to conclude the review. Nevertheless, members of the Workgroup have reached consensus in three important areas.
Firstly, they agree that over the longer term, there is a need to raise the statutory RA. This will enhance job security for workers after the age of 62, and encourage employers and employees to upgrade skills more actively in order to maintain the efficiency of older workers.
At the same time, the current REA of 67 should be raised. This will ensure that employers have some flexibility in adjusting the job scopes and salaries of workers who have reached the retirement age, after taking into account the overall economic situation and the performance of their respective businesses. Employers could then have peace of mind when re-employing older workers.
Thirdly, the Workgroup also agrees that even after the RA and REA have been raised, we must continue to ensure that our workplaces remain flexible and are able the meet the various needs of employers and the work force.
I found the initial conclusions of the Workgroup to be fairly comprehensive and balanced. After all, some trade-offs are inevitable when we try to balance the needs and interests of both employers and employees.
The timing, pace and other details with regards to raising the RA and REA will have to be considered carefully, so that employers have enough time to make the necessary adjustments.
The Workgroup will also review the CPF contribution rate of older workers carefully, so as to ensure that the final recommendations will help older workers in building up retirement savings without impeding their employment prospects. I look forward to the final recommendations from the Workgroup.
We have strong tripartism at work in Singapore. This is why we can have constructive discussions on many labour issues and achieve a win-win outcome for workers and businesses. The close relationship between tripartite partners is rare worldwide, and has put Singapore in a good position to help workers and businesses seize the opportunities of global development.
When businesses try to seize these opportunities, one consideration is how to maintain sustainable growth. Many local SMEs, especially those in the services sector, have been relying on foreign workers to supplement the local workforce. There is a need to change this practice.
As other economies continue to develop rapidly, over-reliance on more and more foreign workers is not without risks.
The Finance Minister has announced that the dependency ratio ceiling (DRC) for services sector will be tightened from next year. The purpose is to reduce reliance on foreign workers in the services sector and spur companies in the sector to transform.
This time round, the tightening of DRC will only affect the services sector because some areas in this sector are still very labour-intensive.
The DRC for other sectors will remain the same. The Government also did not raise foreign worker levies nor amend the conditions for employment passes.
The Government has not taken this decision lightly. I fully understand that this decision will impact the services sector.
Some businesses may ask, \"Minister, transformation is easier said than done!\" I can understand their concerns but I am worried that if they do not transform now, would it not be harder to do so, when they face more challenges in the future?
Some other companies may say, \"Minister, the work is very tough in this industry. Which Singaporean would want to do it?\"
To be honest, as our country and society develop, it is only natural that people will have higher expectations.
My concern is that for those jobs which Singaporeans are unwilling to take up today, will there forever be foreign workers who are willing to do it? Will the day come when even foreign workers would not want to do these jobs? Where can our companies get their workers then? Hence, should we not redesign some of these jobs so that they become acceptable to local workers, and at the same time, spread out manpower risks?
Hence, if we consider this from a longer term perspective, we have had no choice but to accelerate the pace of transformation.
I have this to say to the SMEs: let the Government help you, and walk with you on this transformation journey. We will help you improve productivity, and assist you in redesigning some of the jobs to attract Singaporeans.
In fact, there are many solutions in the market which are applicable for the services sector, and can help businesses transform successfully.
I believe that as long as we combine the tenacity and fighting spirit of our companies and the multi-pronged assistance from the Government, our SMEs will be able to progress further and emerge stronger in the future.
(In English): With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute the handouts?
The Chairman: Sure.\t[Handouts were distributed to hon Members.] Minister of State Mr Zaqy Mohamad.
The Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Chairman, earlier, I spoke about how MOM uplifts the wages and skills of our lower-income workers through a mutually reinforcing system of different support measures, while maintaining a tight labour market.
We also want to nurture an inclusive and caring society that will enable all workers to thrive and have meaningful opportunities at work. And I will touch on four areas.
Firstly, supporting the integration of persons with special needs into the workforce, improving the well-being of lower-income workers, safeguarding the well-being of foreign workers, and lastly, making conditions safer and healthier for all our workers.
With your permission, Mr Chairman, I will have the Clerks place a handout on Members' seats.
The Chairman: Okay. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: We desire for a more inclusive society, where persons with special needs are given opportunities to make meaningful contributions as part of the workforce.
Mr Patrick Tay, Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Chong Kee Hiong, and Dr Intan Mokhtar have asked about initiatives to integrate persons with special needs into the workforce, and how successful they have been. Dr Intan and Ms Denise Phua also asked whether there could be more support for employers hiring persons with special needs, such as wage support, recognition or incentives to implement flexible work arrangements.
Members would be pleased to know that employers of Singaporeans with special needs receive the Special Employment Credit (SEC) that provides wage offsets of up to 16% of the employee's monthly income, regardless of age. With the Additional SEC (ASEC), employers of Singaporeans with special needs aged 67 and above receive wage offsets of up to 22% of the employee's monthly income. These rates are already two times the highest rates of the mainstream schemes. So, the SEC and ASEC for Singaporeans with special needs will also be extended for one more year until 2020 and reviewed for the longer term, alongside the mainstream schemes, as announced at Budget.
On recognition for employers, SG Enable has been organising the Enabling Employers Awards, which is a nationally recognised award that honours and recognises the efforts of employers in hiring and retaining employees with special needs. Since 2011, more than 100 employers have been recognised for their inclusive efforts and excellence.
Miss Chan asked about interventions to assist students with special needs to prepare for employment. Efforts include the School-to-Work Transition programme for Special Education school graduates to receive on-site job training from job coaches for up to a year, as well as internship and mentoring programmes for students from Institutes of Higher Learning.
Under Workforce Singapore's (WSG) Adapt and Grow initiative, there are services and programmes to integrate persons with special needs into the workforce, namely the Open Door Programme (ODP) and Career Trial. These programmes cater to both the PMET and rank-and-file jobs. In the past three years, more than 1,600 persons with special needs have been placed through these programmes.
I will now share about my visits to two companies that have benefited from the ODP. Administered by SG Enable, ODP gives employers access to recruitment and job support services for persons with special needs. Grants for job redesign and training are also available to better support their integration.
So, referring to the first image in our handout, Sassax Pte Ltd is a global energy and commodities SME founded and managed by Ms Cheang Tsu-fei.
When I met Tsu-fei, she shared with me how, through ODP, she hired Mr Erwayne Teo, who sustained spinal injuries after a motorbike accident, as an Operations Executive.
Tsu-fei tapped on ODP's Job Redesign Grant, which supports 90% of job redesign costs, of up to $20,000 per employee with special needs. And what she did was to make several thoughtful workplace modifications. I saw that office partitions were removed to make it easier for Erwayne to move around with his crutches. The manual-lock of the office door was also replaced with a digital-lock, as Erwayne had difficulty bending down to open the door.
So, Erwayne told me that he is grateful for the job opportunity and for what Sassax has done. And he shared that such an opportunity is very precious for those with special needs, and this motivates him to work harder, and to quote him, to \"excel just like, or do even better than a person without special needs\".
Tsu-fei shared that she was very pleased with Erwayne's performance, when he was just three months into the job. Hence, she entrusted Erwayne with more responsibilities, such as the power to make some commercial decisions involving shipping and cargo operations. She also gave him a pay raise after a year.
So, I would like to commend Tsu-fei for being an exemplary employer. She embraced the need to make changes at the workplace in order to support and bring out the best in her employee. She has also, by the way, hired a senior who is 62 years old, in addition to a person with special needs. So, there are just three of them in office. So, in her own words, Tsu-fei calls on fellow employers to give more opportunities to these \"hidden gems\".
Some of you may have gone to this other company called J.CO Donuts & Coffee. I buy donuts from there too. It is another company that has participated in ODP.
So, last year, J.CO hired Mr Chia Tuck Ming who has mild intellectual disabilities, as a part-time Baker Assistant to decorate donuts.
Tuck Ming enjoys this job, as his personal interest is painting. So as Members can see in the second image, Tuck Ming created the artwork for the tumbler that he is holding.
So, during my visit to J.CO, Tuck Ming gave me a demonstration and I was quite pleased to see his confidence and joy when he was decorating the donuts. However, this was not without initial challenges. His mentor said that he had difficulties mastering the donut piping techniques and memorising the various donut names. But to help him, what J.CO did was they broke down the job into smaller tasks, and they gave him time to learn. So, Tuck Ming persevered and eventually succeeded with the guidance and encouragement of his mentor and job coach.
It was, in fact, very heartwarming to hear from J.CO’s HR Manager, Ms Jocelyn Wong, that, \"It has been a journey discovering Tuck Ming's abilities, not disabilities\". I think that is really a spirit of it. It is really to discover his abilities and not disabilities and that is what I hope more employers will take time to do. And that Tuck Ming is adapting well and he has been given more responsibilities to guide new employees like him.
So, we want more employers to be inclusive, like Sassax and J.CO. However, not all employers have had interactions with persons with special needs. And some employers may be unsure if a person with special needs can perform on the job. Co-workers may be also unsure on how to work with them. So these are real concerns affecting companies' decisions to hire persons with special needs.
To address these, Career Trial provides opportunities for employers and persons with special needs to try out each other and make a better assessment of job fit. During the trial, which can be up to three months, job-seekers will receive a training allowance from the Government. And to encourage hiring and retention of persons with special needs, employers receive salary support after the trial, while persons with special needs who are hired and stay for at least three months receive retention incentives.
Ms Denise Phua and Mr Chong have also asked why hiring targets for persons with special needs have not been set for companies as well as Public Service. We have not done so for three reasons.
First, it introduces labour market inflexibility and may invite competing calls for targets for other workforce segments such as older workers. Second, companies may offer menial or low-paying jobs to meet the targets. Third, it may signal to companies that they only need to meet the targets when, in fact, they could have the capacity to take on more.
Hence, our goal is really to build a supportive system to get buy-in from employers to embrace and promote gainful and sustainable employment for persons with special needs. And I think creating a culture and an environment where companies willingly accept, adapt, and redesign jobs for persons with special needs is much better than one that is forced on them, which could lead to tokenism instead. So, in this respect, Mr Patrick Tay and Dr Intan asked if more can be done.
MOM and SG Enable will be releasing a Job Redesign Guide by the first half of this year. The Guide will provide companies with information on how to apply job redesign to better integrate persons with special needs, for instance, common workplace modifications, changes to working arrangements, and the use of assistive technology devices.
Ms Denise Phua also asked the Ministry to consider looking at resourcing and supporting inclusion managers. This is a new concept and something which we will have to study and consult with MSF, SG Enable and MOE.
MOM and WSG will continue to work closely with MSF and SG Enable to scale up efforts to build employers' capabilities in hiring and managing persons with special needs under the Third Enabling Masterplan. As Mr Patrick Tay has raised, we will also continue to study the successes of overseas models to build a strong framework in Singapore. But to achieve a more inclusive society, we will need the private and people sectors to partner us.
While there are existing Government-funded schemes to support hiring of persons with special needs, the awareness, unfortunately, may not be as high. So, therefore, I urge fellow Members to spread the word on our initiatives such as the ODP because we are happy to partner you. And certainly, if you are keen, let us know and we can go to your constituency for briefing sessions for those who are interested, including Nee Soon South – for once, I am poking fun.
Mr Patrick Tay and Miss Chan also spoke about employment support for persons with mental health conditions or special educational needs such as dyslexia or ADHD. In addition to our efforts for persons with special needs, there are several initiatives to support the employment of those with mental health conditions. For example, the Job Club by MOH and the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) assists job-seekers with employment needs, while managing their mental health conditions. The Job Club helps persons with mental health conditions assess their strengths, acquire job-seeking skills, arrange for vocational training, and network with employers for job placements. In the past three financial years, the Job Club achieved an average job placement rate of 60%. For persons with special educational needs, support is also provided in schools to help them transit into the workforce as elaborated by Second Minister Ms Indranee earlier.
As a society, it is also important to care for our workers’ well-being, especially vulnerable workers such as our lower income workers. In addition to enhancing our lower income workers’ wages and employability, I agree with Mr Zainal Sapari and Dr Intan that care should be extended to their working conditions and how they are treated at work.
Take, for example, access to proper rest areas which Dr Intan raised. Workers need safe and conducive environment for their rest breaks, such as their meals. Yet, we have encountered cases of cleaners having to use makeshift rest areas at stairwells and in open public areas. Such situations can be improved and going forward, MOM will look into companies’ practices in giving workers access to proper rest areas. We will start with the cleaning sector.
I am happy to share that NEA has made available proper rest areas such as the Cleaners’ Room in all of the seven new hawker centres. This is a place where cleaners can take breaks, have meals, and safe-keep their belongings. I strongly encourage all service buyers and employers to do the same.
Fellow Singaporeans, we need to do our part too and treat our lower income workers with dignity and respect. Some of the simple and practical ways to uplift them include returning our own trays at the hawker centres, thanking them for their work and giving them time to rest during their breaks. Ultimately, society must view our lower income workers also as persons of worth and deserving of our respect.
Mr Zainal also asked MOM to review whether a scheme could provide financial or subsistence relief to help rank and file workers who are owed salaries due to company closure. The Employment Claims Tribunals (ECT) can order employers to pay owed salaries to employees. If employers fail to do so because the company has closed down, employees can commence debt recovery by applying to the State Courts for a Writ of Seizure and Sale (WSS). MOM will assist lower income claimants through the WSS process, including providing financial aid.
If lower income workers are unable to recover their claims via WSS, they can receive financial assistance from the Short Term Relief Fund (STRF). The Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) will also refer them to MSF and their Social Service Offices for assistance on ComCare if needed.
Similarly, the same way we protect our lower income workers, we should also safeguard the well-being of our foreign workers. They share a common purpose in contributing to our society, through building our homes and schools, working in our hospitals and factories, and keeping our environment clean. As we moderate the intake of foreign workers, treating them with respect can help us retain skilled and experienced workers, as some Members have asked for. Ms Ong suggested to extend MOM’s regulatory reach to overseas employment agencies. She also asked if MOM can take a more resolute action against employers taking kickbacks from workers, whether transacted in Singapore or overseas.
Within Singapore, MOM prohibits employment agencies in Singapore from charging workers beyond the stipulated fee cap. We actively enforce against errant agencies. However, we do not have the jurisdiction to act against agents taking kickbacks in other countries. This is not a matter that we have a choice over. This includes foreign employment agencies that tie-up with local agents, or the overseas operations of local employment agencies.
Nonetheless, we will do what we can here. Since 2012, employers are prohibited from collecting kickbacks from foreign workers in consideration for employment. Employers who do so can be liable to a maximum fine of $30,000 or up to two years’ jail, or both. So, in 2018, 46 agencies and employers were taken to task for kickback-related offences. And Mr Leon Perera asked about MOM 's hotline. We received 102 calls last year, of which we followed up and investigated 49 calls. The rest were just enquiries and there was no follow-up required. But one thing I want to assure Members is that let us know, and we will investigate each of these cases seriously if there are credible leads. Additionally, whenever our investigations reveal suspicious or irregular practices by overseas agents, information is shared with our foreign embassies to enlist their help to combat any malpractices in their respective countries.
As Mr Melvin Yong rightfully pointed out, we need to educate employers on their obligations to foreign workers. For example, MOM regularly updates the work pass obligations of employers in employers’ copy of the In-Principle Approval letter. Employers are also kept informed of new and existing work pass requirements through direct mailers and on MOM’s website.
Ms Ong and Mr Melvin Yong suggested that we improve the employment system to retain skilled and experienced foreign workers.
Given the constraints on the number of foreign workers we can bring in, we want to ensure that each worker we bring in counts, and their skills and experience can be retained in Singapore. So, this reinforces the capability, productivity, and safety. For instance, more experienced construction workers were less likely to suffer work injuries.
MOM has supported the recruitment and retention of experienced foreign workers in the following ways: Traditional Source and North Asian Source Work Permit holders are not subject to a maximum period of employment. For Non-Traditional Source and PRC Work Permit holders, MOM has, over the years, extended the maximum period of employment to encourage companies to retain their trained and experienced workers, to raise overall workforce productivity. In response to industry feedback, MOM last increased the maximum period of employment by four years in all sectors in 2018. The period of employment can now extend up to 26 years for skilled Work Permit holders in selected sectors.
For foreign workers in the Construction and Process sectors, they can be transferred to another employer, upon the agreement of their existing employers, or the expiry of their work permits. They are given about a month to look for new employers. We also allow all foreign workers to find another employer if they have valid claims. While they are given two weeks to seek new employment, we have given short extensions on case-by-case basis.
Mr Yong hoped to see greater assistance for foreign workers involved in disputes with their employers. Majority of these foreign workers came from the Construction sector, about nine in 10. To improve their job facilitation outcomes, the Singapore Contractors Association Ltd (SCAL) has made available the Foreign Construction Worker Directory System (FCWDS) that facilitates their search for new employers. In 2018, about 34,000 workers in the Construction and Process sectors were successfully transferred to another employer. It is not a small number. They were able to use the system. Additionally, about 900 workers with valid claims also successfully found new employers, and continued to work in Singapore after their claims were resolved. I would like to assure Mr Melvin Yong that MOM will continue to work closely with the Labour Movement, Migrant Workers’ Centre (MWC), and SCAL to improve job facilitation outcomes for foreign workers involved in disputes.
Making workplace safer and healthier for all. Every life is precious. As a society, we must therefore strive to make work conditions safer and healthier for our workers.
Singapore has made good progress in our Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) performance. Our workplace fatality rate declined from 2.2 per 100,000 workers in 2010 to 1.2, or a record low of 41 fatal cases, in 2018, last year. Mr Yee Chia Hsing asked how our progress compares to other developed countries. Singapore’s three-year average fatality rate relative to OECD countries’, has improved from 18th place in 2010 and we are now seventh in 2018.
Such progress was made possible by a major shift in WSH culture, mindset, and practices, enabled by strong tripartism. Take last year for example: The WSH Council, comprising employer and union representatives, worked closely with Trade Associations and Chambers (TACs) to tackle the leading causes of workplace fatalities. This included the “Target Zero Falls” campaign, where SCAL encouraged industry partners to conduct senior management walkabouts for work-at-heights activities. For MOM, we continued to maintain a strong enforcement presence, especially in higher-risk industries.
But we must do better, so that our workers can return home safe and healthy. Our goal is to further reduce and sustain our workplace fatality rate at below one by 2028. This is an ambitious goal, but an achievable one. Only four countries, amongst the OECD countries, have achieved it so far. Four. We must also keep an eye on non-fatal injuries. Compared to 2017, we saw a 3% rise in numbers in 2018. One in three working residents have either diabetes, high blood pressure, or high cholesterol, which can affect safety as well if the condition is not managed well. We agree with Mr Melvin Yong that a greater emphasis on workplace health is indeed necessary to address its potential impact on safety.
I see three main ways to improve further.
First, we need company management to be committed to improving WSH within their companies. Top management, including at the Board level, is best-placed to influence the company’s WSH culture, as they control its resources, policies, and practices.
A good example is Lendlease, an international property and infrastructure company with operations here in Singapore. A Board member chairs its Sustainability Committee that is responsible for setting the WSH policy and strategic directions for Lendlease. In addition, WSH performance is discussed at all Board meetings, with the CEO and top management all held accountable. In the fourth image, members can see Lendlease’s Paya Lebar Quarter project. This is one example where the leadership has taken ownership to champion progressive WSH practices, such as a near-miss reporting regime, WSH data analytics, as well as Building Information Modelling (BIM) techniques. With WSH as a top business priority, Lendlease’s strong WSH track record has served as a competitive advantage in helping them to win repeat business. So, they see workplace safety and health as a competitive advantage against competitors.
Second, we need greater emphasis on workplace health. To address the potential impact of poorly managed health on workplace safety, the WSH Council partnered Health Promotion Board (HPB) to introduce Total WSH. Total WSH involves injury and occupational disease prevention, together with occupational health promotion, through health screening, physical activities, healthier diet initiatives, and adjustments in work processes so that those with chronic conditions can continue to work safely. We agree with Mr Melvin Yong that more can be done, and we encourage the Labour Movement to partner us to encourage more companies to adopt Total WSH.
Third, WSH is another aspect where we can win with technology. Companies can leverage on technology advancements such as sensors, predictive analytics, and the Internet of Things to more effectively manage WSH risks. Mr Yee Chia Hsing asked for examples.
Woodlands Transport and SIA Engineering Company have taken part in MOM’s WSH Tech Challenge to test-bed a fatigue detection and management device among their vehicle drivers. As Members can see in the fifth image, this device uses sensors and image processing technology to track the micro-movements of a driver’s head, eyes, and facial expressions to detect fatigue. Those who show signs of fatigue will be alerted by an alarm from a buzzer and seat vibration. 93% fewer fatigue episodes were detected among drivers whose vehicles were equipped with the device, when compared to the baseline.
Mr Melvin Yong also spoke about leveraging technology to make WSH training more productive and realistic and I agree. I recently tried virtual reality training that simulates working at height. As Members can see in the sixth image, I experienced a virtual fall from a height of 14 storeys. I can tell you it is quite realistic. You stand on the ledge and then fall off. This ingrained the importance of following safety procedures as they could make a difference between life and death. Mr Yong suggested forming a National Training Academy that consolidates training resources, and ensures high and consistent WSH standards. Skills Future Singapore has set a consistent standard for WSQ training providers in terms of curriculum and training methods. But we will consider how to improve training further, and will study this idea further with our tripartite partners.
Mr Melvin Yong had another suggestion to have a tiered insurance premium framework for work injury compensation, where companies with poor WSH records will have to pay higher premiums. We agree, and we are looking into ways to facilitate this.
Mr Yee Chia Hsing shared businesses’ concern that MOM would introduce safety requirements after every fatal accident. He used the example of three workers having to change a light bulb to highlight the need to balance requirements. I initially thought this was a riddle – some of you may know the riddle, \"How many people do you need to screw a light bulb?\" But then, the light bulb flashed and I suddenly got a certain insight.
If you look at the other end of the scale, Mr Melvin Yong also asked to introduce more WSH requirements for better worker protection. So, there is this balance that you have to manage between protecting workers and what businesses consider as too many requirements.
The contrasting views by both Members show the tension between having more regulations that could be overly prescriptive versus being too lax such that WSH is compromised.
This is why we have adopted a balanced approach under the Workplace Safety and Health Act's outcome-based regime. Companies and individuals are responsible for taking reasonably practicable measures to ensure workers’ safety and health. This gives stakeholders the flexibility to adopt cost-effective WSH measures.
Let me clarify the misconception in Mr Yee’s light bulb example. There is no need for a worker to hold a ladder if it is securely fixed and stable, such as a platform ladder with guard-rails. If the ladder is not securely fixed, I suggest have someone hold it, because as Speaker mentioned earlier, it is also for safety. There is also no need for the supervisor to be present all the time if the workers have been informed earlier on safety measures.
Therefore, with the right equipment, the ladder is not costly, and with the right measures, only one worker is needed to change the light bulb. Being safe need not hamper productivity. We welcome employers who need advice to consult MOM and the WSH Council.
Rather than mandating all workplaces to have a WSH representative, as Mr Yong suggested, our philosophy is to bring about WSH gains without adding rules willy-nilly. Better results can often be achieved through strengthening WSH ownership within company management. Uncommitted companies may hire a trained WSH representative to meet the letter of the law, but not follow through with internal systems to support the WSH representative in identifying and preventing hazards. Only with ownership, would companies be self-motivated to adopt WSH practices without us prescribing more requirements.
Mr Chairman, allow me to recap that the enhancements to the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]\tTo ensure that lower income workers can progress together with the other workers, we have improved their lives through the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme that tops up their salaries and helps them save for retirement.
More Singapore workers will benefit from Workfare from January 2020, when we raise the Workfare qualifying income cap from $2,000 to $2,300 per month; and increase the maximum annual payouts by up to $400. Close to 440,000 Singaporeans, including self-employed persons, will benefit from this enhancement.
Most Workfare recipients also receive other forms of government support to help meet their living needs, for example, Mr Gunasegaran, a 49-year old cleaning supervisor. He lives in a three-room flat with his wife and three children. Apart from Workfare, he also receives GST Vouchers and U-Save rebates to help offset his daily household expenses.
His two daughters receive financial assistance from the Ministry of Education – they receive free textbooks and school attire, and public transport credit. His youngest son in pre-school receives the Kindergarten Financial Assistance or KiFAS, and Mr Guna only needs to pay about $1 monthly.
Our approach of providing multi-layered support is more responsive to the varied needs of Singaporeans. Let us further strengthen these successful efforts, and continue to work hard to improve the lives of Singapore workers.
(In English): In conclusion, the Government is committed to fostering an inclusive and caring society. To this end, we will continue to integrate persons with special needs into the workforce, improve the well-being of lower income workers, safeguard the well-being of foreign workers, and make work conditions safer and healthier for all workers.
The Chairman: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Manpower (Ms Low Yen Ling): Chairman, Minister Josephine Teo and Minister of State Zaqy spoke about our efforts to provide better support and assurance for our workers, and how we can walk the tech journey together.
As we strive to improve our workers’ skills, wages and employability, workplaces should also be progressive and inclusive, so that each segment of the workforce is valued and can realise their potential. As Deputy Secretary-General Heng Chee How mentioned in his Budget speech, \"Every Worker Matters to the overall good of our economy, our society and our country.\" We agree. We will press on with our efforts to help young graduates get off to a good start in their careers. We will continue to support women so that they can fulfil both career and family aspirations. We will also do more to help ex-offenders find meaningful employment.
Young Singaporeans are the future of our nation, and we want to maximise their opportunities for them to take up meaningful jobs and careers. Among those graduating from our post-secondary educational institutions, more than eight in 10 who are actively seeking employment, are able to find employment within six months after graduation. However, some may need more help in improving their job search skills to find suitable employment, as for most young people, it is their first time applying for a job.
Mr Patrick Tay asked how graduating students can benefit from the Career Starter Programme, which I first announced last year.
The Career Starter Programme, which is part of Workforce Singapore’s (WSG) Adapt and Grow initiative, is supported by the ITE and Polytechnics. The Programme has three components:
First, a Career Starter Pack. This is a resource pack that equips graduating students with useful information for their job search. About 28,000 graduating ITE and Polytechnic students have received the Career Starter Pack since January this year. Within the pack are useful tips and advice on what graduates should consider when applying for a job, where to find work opportunities, how to ace job interviews, and how to manage their money when they start work, disseminated to 28,000 graduates this year.
Second, there are interactive Career Booster workshops to improve our young graduates’ job search strategies and skills. These workshops are designed to provide more hands-on help, such as good resume writing techniques, and approaches to the job search that can uncover different career opportunities.
Third, the Career Starter Programme offers personalised career coaching and other tailored support for graduating students who may require more in-depth assistance provided by career coaches from WSG’s Careers Connect.
I now move on to our efforts to equip and re-integrate ex-offenders.
The labour market is changing rapidly, with technology advancing and industries transforming. Those who have been out of the workforce for a significant period of time, like ex-offenders, are concerned about gaining relevant skills and re-integrating into society.
Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked how we are supporting ex-offenders in employment. I am pleased to inform them that WSG works closely with the Singapore Corporation of Rehabilitative Enterprises (or SCORE) to help ex-offenders find gainful employment. Research conducted by the Singapore Prison Service has shown that when ex-offenders are meaningfully engaged in their jobs. It eases their re-integration into the community which, in turn, helps to lower recidivism.
To arm ex-offenders with skills and improve their chances in employment, we have two programmes under the Adapt and Grow initiative – namely Project Phoenix and Career Trial. Since 2007, Project Phoenix has been providing training and employment assistance to ex-offenders to prepare them for re-integration into the workforce. More than 1,200 ex-offenders found jobs through this last year.
We hope that more employers will step forward to offer job opportunities to ex-offenders who can prove to be valuable workers when given a second chance. The tight labour market and slowing workforce growth also present compelling reasons for employers to tap on every available worker.
Chairman, as we look to better support young graduates and ex-offenders, we are also committed to making our workplaces more progressive and inclusive for women.
Today, we have a healthy employment situation for women in Singapore. Our female employment rate for those aged 25 to 64 has increased in the past decade. It rose from 65% in 2008 to 72% in 2018. In terms of women in full-time employment, we are now ranked 7th against 36 OECD countries. But our proportion of women in part-time employment is still below OECD average. We recognise that there is still much that we can do to better support women at workplaces. MOM’s Adapt and Grow initiative offers a suite of job matching services and other programmes to help jobseekers, including women who wish to return to the workforce. As Minister Josephine has announced, the Career Trial scheme will be enhanced to include part-time jobs as well, and this will expand the opportunities for those who are only able to work part-time.
We understand that most women juggle multiple roles, including the women parliamentarians in this Chamber – at home and at work and also our own aspirations. I completely agree with Prof Lim Sun Sun and Deputy Secretary-General Heng Chee How that women need not be forced to choose between career and family. It does not have to be binary. Career and family really need not be binary options. Instead, with the right workplace support, women can fulfil our career aspirations while meeting our family responsibilities.
This was the key thrust of my speech in this Chamber at the recent parliamentary motions on Ageing with Purpose and Support for Care-givers. Back then, I spoke about the Government’s resolve to develop a workplace culture that is supportive of Flexible Work Arrangements (or FWAs) and the promotion of greater adoption of FWAs. Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Chong Kee Hiong will be pleased to know that as compared to five years ago, more workplaces in Singapore are offering FWAs.
About seven in 10 of employees in Singapore now work in companies that offer at least one formal FWA, and about nine in 10 workers today are in companies that provide at least one ad-hoc FWA. What does ad-hoc FWA mean? It either means unplanned time-off or ad-hoc teleworking.
The trend of higher FWA adoption across the board is not only good news for employees, it is also positive for companies. Among workplace practices, the provision of FWA has the greatest impact on staff retention which benefit companies with experienced and engaged workers.
We want to keep the momentum of FWA adoption going. In Parliament last month, I mentioned that the Work-Life Grant has received healthy application numbers since its launch, and the Government is exploring increases to the Work-Life Grant budget to make FWA adoption more pervasive. I am pleased to announce that the Ministry of Manpower will increase the Work-Life Grant budget to a total of $100 million, from the current $30 million. This will allow more companies to benefit from the grant to sustain their employees’ FWA adoption, including job-sharing by PMETs.
As job-sharing is less well known and practised amongst employers today, MOM and Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) are developing a job-sharing implementation guide for employers. The guide aims to raise awareness on job-sharing, and educate employers on the nuts and bolts of implementing such a scheme. Job-sharing would not only expand the range of FWA options, it can enhance trust, commitment and work satisfaction between employees and employers. The job-sharing implementation guide will be launched by the first half of this year.
We are optimistic that more employers are recognising the value FWAs bring. Since the Tripartite Standard on FWAs was launched in October 2017, responses have grown. As of end January 2019, about 1,300 employers employing 400,000 employees have adopted the Standard. Key adopters of the Tripartite Standards include those in the public sector.
Our public service agencies are committed to creating a conducive work environment that allows officers to achieve good work and personal goals. This includes providing public officers with suitable FWA options. Take for example the Accountant-General's Department (or AGD) in the Ministry of Finance. Two of its employees, Ms Lim Yu May and Ms Emily Kao were given a job-sharing arrangement in cash management and payment processing. This suited the two mothers well as they appreciated the newfound flexibility to look after their family needs. Yu May took the morning shift so she could be home for two Primary school children. Emily, on the other hand, preferred to work in the afternoons while her toddler took his afternoon nap under her mother’s watch.
To ensure a smooth handover, Yu May and Emily would spend their overlapping hour at noon to exchange information and discuss what needed to be followed up. They kept abreast of each other’s progress via an excel spreadsheet that was constantly updated. Their successful job-sharing arrangement lasted for about one and a half years from December 2013 to June 2015. When Emily had her second child, she was granted extended maternity leave. Yu May took no pay leave for one and a half years to care for her children.
I am happy to learn that both Yu May and Emily continue to serve in the AGD today. They have kept pace with their careers and training opportunities that the organisation offers. We hope more employers will step up their FWAs and gain from the experience and loyalty of committed staff.
To spread the adoption of FWAs, we will work closely with our tripartite partners to reach out to trade associations, businesses, chambers and employers about the Work-Life Grant and the Tripartite Standard on FWAs.
Encouraging more FWAs will also support the employment of older workers, which the Minister for Manpower, Ms Josephine Teo, spoke about earlier. As our seniors age, there will be a growing need for greater flexibility in workplaces so as to meet their diverse needs and preferences. Many of them may wish to remain in the workforce but with reduced or differing work intensity.
As we move towards a more inclusive work culture and mindset, we will be better placed to make the best of our talents. With family-friendly workplaces, employees can contribute their fullest potential without compromising their responsibilities to their loved ones. And age-friendly work practices let our seniors pass on valuable experience and knowledge as they work at their preferred pace and intensity.
At this juncture, could I seek Mr Chairman's permission to spend a few more minutes to completely respond to the cuts of the Members?
The Chairman: As we are running a bit ahead of schedule, I will give you a few more minutes, provided you do not speak in more than four languages.
Ms Low Yen Ling: I will do my best, Chairman. Thank you so much for your indulgence. Chairman, as we try to harness the full capabilities of our workforce, I agree with Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Desmond Choo that workplace harassment is an area that deserves greater attention. A safe workplace allows employees to work optimally. For that to take place, both employers and employees must have an interest and responsibility in preventing and managing workplace harassment.
There are two broad categories of workplace harassment and they are dealt with differently.
One, egregious cases for example, like the outrage of modesty and stalking, belongs to the class of conduct which constitutes offences under the Penal Code and the Protection from Harassment Act (POHA). This kind of harassment will be addressed by the Courts or the Police and an affected employee may also seek civil remedies directly through the Courts, such as a Protection Order against the harasser.
The other type of harassment pertains to behaviour that may not fall under the legal threshold for criminal investigations or civil recourse under POHA, but nonetheless distresses and affects employees. For example, actions without the intention to cause, and are unlikely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to a specific employee, but which may still cause discomfort and affect other employees.
Now, for cases that may not come under POHA, we want to ensure that companies have a robust grievance handling process to deal with such claims of workplace harassment. We also encourage companies to take clear steps to prevent and manage workplace harassment. These include:
(a) being explicit about what is considered unacceptable behaviour at the workplace.
(b) making clear the disciplinary actions that would be taken against perpetuators of workplace harassment;
(c) having in place safe avenues for affected employees to surface their complaints to management for recourse; and
(d) providing adequate support for affected employees, for example, giving them time off or the flexibility to work from home during the investigation and/or recovery.
In this regard, I am pleased to announce that the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) will now be a help and resource centre for workplace harassment for both employers and employees.
First, TAFEP seeks to help companies put in place robust processes to manage workplace harassment complaints. Besides providing advice, TAFEP will provide a host of resources on its website that includes: a new introductory video on how to manage workplace harassment; a sample Workplace Harassment Prevention Policy that companies can incorporate in their HR policies; and a list of training providers employers may engage to train their supervisors in managing workplace harassment.
Second, TAFEP will also be an avenue for employees who face workplace harassment to seek advice and assistance. Affected employees can call this number: 6838 0969, or approach TAFEP, write to TAFEP – we will be there to follow up.
Should they wish to share their case in confidence, TAFEP will certainly respect their request and not alert their employers. TAFEP is also working with relevant Government agencies and partners, including the Police, the Courts, and AWARE to set up a referral process so that TAFEP can have sight of all workplace harassment cases. We will take a Whole-of-Government (WOG) approach to support affected employees.
As pointed out by Mr Desmond Choo, some affected employees may need counselling services, TAFEP will help advise employers on where to obtain such support services and put them in touch with relevant agencies. Companies that put in place programmes such as peer support or counselling will help their staff cope better with the stress and effects of harassment.
Chairman, preventing and addressing discriminatory and unfair employment practices are key to making workplaces more inclusive and progressive. I wish to assure Ms Anthea Ong, Mr Faisal Manap and Mr Melvin Yong that MOM takes a serious view of any form of workplace discrimination or unfair employment practices. Employers should abide by the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices, which set out principles for fair and merit-based employment practices. Employers should not ask job applicants for information unrelated to the employee’s ability for the position, such as pre-existing medical history, including mental health conditions. Even as we constantly reach out to employers to educate them about the Guidelines, I want to ensure the Members that we will, and we have taken actions against employers who are found to have engaged in discriminatory employment practices.
I would also like to assure Mr Melvin Yong that there have been instances where we have asked employers to remove or refrain from enforcing unreasonable contractual terms. Employers have generally responded with their cooperation.
We want employees to know that there is help available for those with unreasonable clauses in their employment contracts, or are unfairly discriminated against. They can approach their unions, TAFEP or MOM for assistance.
Chairman, please allow me to take one minute to just say a few words in Mandarin. It will be one minute.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.]\tToday, the global competition for talents is stiff and technology is developing rapidly. For our workers to be future-ready, MOM is committed to uplift our workers' skills and employability, and will ensure that our employment practices are fair, inclusive and progressive. On the one hand, it will help all workers, including young graduates, women, older workers and ex-offenders find suitable employment; on the other hand, it will help companies’ grow competitively and tap on a wider pool of capabilities.
For many years, MOM has been promoting FWAs so that employees can fulfil both career and non-work responsibilities . To make FWA adoption more pervasive, MOM will increase the Work-Life Grant budget from the current $30 million to $100 million.
In addition, the application period for the Grant will also be extended by three years until June 2022. I hope more companies can benefit from the Grant and support their employees’ FWAs adoption including women, older workers, care-givers, and PMETs on job-sharing.
(In English): Chairman, with for nation with no natural resources, every Singaporean is an important asset.
With increasing competition for scarce talent having progressive and inclusive workplace will enable companies to tap on a wider pool of capabilities. To do so, we need a whole-of-society effort where workers, young and old, employers from all sector, and the community at large play their parts. Only then, can we realise our collective potential together as a nation.
The Chairman: Clarifications? Mr Patrick Tay.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Chairman, there is point of clarification for the Minister. Earlier in my cut, I mentioned about PME union representation, in particular, the review of section 17(3) of the Industrial Relations Act as well as the review of the Tripartite Guidelines. I wanted a response from the Minister if the tripartite partners can look into this.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The answer is yes. The tripartite partners will be looking into it.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Thank you, Chairman. I thank the Minister for the response. I wish to make a clarification and I have two clarifications to seek.
The clarification I want to make is this: I do believe in the statutory protections, to protect the workers from being summarily dismissed. But I think that the protection should be delinked from the retirement and have no age limit. But I guess that is an argument for another time.
So, I am going to seek two clarifications based on the Minister's response.
The first clarification is on the statutory protection, specifically on termination with notice, valid reasons for termination are misconduct, poor performance and redundancy. So, I want to confirm that employees terminated with notice can go to MOM to file a complaint for invalid dismissal and MOM will help to reinstate the employee. My concern is that employees might think that termination with notice is valid dismissal just because notice period is given, and therefore this becomes some kind of loophole and makes the current statutory protections until retirement age meaningless, as employers can then prematurely retire employees using the termination-with-notice clause.
The second clarification is the last time the re-employment age was raised to 67, the then Minister of Manpower, Mr Lim Swee Say, said that the tripartite partners hit a wall on raising the retirement age because employers objected to the further increase in business impact on the bottom line. And, more importantly, younger workers objected because they do not want their career progression to be stalled. So, without revealing the number of years you are going to increase for re-employment age, how have the work-group members overcome this particular objection, especially from the younger workers, in terms of career progression?
Mrs Josephine Teo: I thank the Member for his clarification questions. I will take the second one first. How did the work-group overcome the concerns of the younger workers? The Member is right in pointing out that the younger workers did have a concern about whether there would be impediments to their own progression. But I think what eventually was able to swing the thinking of all the workers is that all of us will get there. The younger workers today will eventually at some point in time, not be so young. And they would like the enhancements to apply to themselves too.
But there is still a very important consideration which is that in terms of how employers and businesses are going to manage their workforce, they are going to need flexibility in moving people around, meaning that employers are quite conscious of the importance of freeing up certain positions so that the younger ones have a chance to gain the experience and also have the opportunity to progress in their career. That is why it is still very important to give employers certain flexibility in managing their workforce and not try to impose too many rules on them. So, that is the second question.
On your first question, I am a little bit puzzled why the Member would consider that when a notice period is required and indeed, forms part of the termination, then it is considered meaningless protection. Employees too can serve notice and tell the employer, \"I am done\". It is reciprocal. So, it is not meaningless. But in any case, the short answer to the Member's question is yes, MOM will investigate. As to whether the outcome of the investigation and as to whether it will order a reinstatement, in most cases the worker does not want reinstatement either, because the relationship has soured and they would rather move on.
Er Dr Lee Bee Wah (Nee Soon): Chairman, I have two clarifications for the Minister. First, is there any plan to rebrand the Services sector to make it more sexy and more attractive to local workers, especially the younger workers? The second clarification, will the Minister reconsider my suggestion of letting SMEs, especially the smaller SMEs to retain their S Pass holders so that they do not need to send back their workers who are already well trained and know the job well, and hence affect their operations. And this is not just for Nee Soon South. It is also for Bishan Toa Payoh GRC and Hong Kah GRC and the rest of Singapore.
Mrs Josephine Teo: I was afraid you were going to say Batam and Johor, too!
Mr Chairman, to the second question, if the company has a commitment, they want to find ways to become more lean and they are prepared to come under the Lean Enterprise Development (LED) Scheme, we will be very willing to see how to help.
To the first question on rebranding, absolutely yes. MOM is not alone in doing this. All the sector agencies that are involved in any of the services sector industry transformation, in fact, have it very much a priority. They are aware that, with this tightening, there would be some firms that will be affected and they would want to take advantage of this opportunity, not just to rebrand. It is not just the rebranding effort. The actual job quality, the content of the work, the way the work is carried out, the work conditions, the hours and also the terms – all these must improve. The Chinese say 换汤不换药. If the substance of it has not changed, I do not think job seekers are unable to tell the difference. Ultimately, everyone wants to progress in their careers and we should try our very best to ensure that, whichever sector they are in, they do have the opportunity to advance.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Chairman. I rise to reply to the question that was asked by the Minister for Manpower. A similar question, I believe, was asked by Minister of State Zaqy during the Budget debate and I rose at the end of that debate to say that the Workers' Party supports the Budget but subject to our opposition on the GST.
Let me be clear about the position on the Dependency Ratio Ceilings (DRC) once again. As a matter of principle, we support the lowering of the DRC for services, as we feel that we should reduce our over-reliance on foreign manpower where we can. This is so that we can look to raise and improve the job prospects of Singaporeans.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Chairman, I thank the Member Mr Pritam Singh for this clarification. It is important and it is appreciated.
What the Member has said is felt by all of us. Let us work together, let us make the workplace, let us make work, let us make job quality our priority, and let us make work satisfying to as many people as possible.
Assoc Prof Walter Theseira: Chairman, thank you. Minister, I was heartened to hear that retirement adequacy is improving rapidly for the current generation of workers, and for women in particular. But I think we are both still concerned about the retirement adequacy of women who spend significant amounts of time out of the labour force. So, can we study ways to more formally recognise the contributions that they are making towards strengthening our families, for example, through CPF credits for care-giving?
This year's Budget has already given top-ups which are targeted more or less at such women, and we already spend considerable amounts of money on tax relief for working women. So, we can possibly do more for women who are out of the labour force and who are doing important work at home.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Chairman, I believe that there was a Motion on Care-givers and I am not sure whether this subject was discussed then. It is certainly an area that will continuously be reviewed. But, perhaps, to address the Member's question on the retirement adequacy for women in general, not just those who are involved in care-giving roles, in fact, over the last 10 years, the average CPF balance for women has been growing slightly faster than for men. For women, it was 8.3%. This is per year. So, if you compound it over time, compared to the men's 7.6%, the gap is closing.
We, of course, already have tax incentives to encourage cash top-ups and made it easier for members to transfer their CPF savings to their spouses, parents and grandparents, many of whom are women. So, in this way, we hope to help the women build up their retirement adequacy.
There is one data point that is quite useful. We looked at the members who received top-ups, and after they received the top-ups, they reached the Basic Retirement Sum. Actually, 60% of them were women. So, it is a good thing. Thank you.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): First of all, I would like to thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for sharing on the progress of the flexible work arrangements.
I would like to ask a follow-on question. Beyond just offering flexible work arrangements, from the employee’s point of view, from the businesses’ as well, what efforts are being done to help them better leverage flexible work arrangements in the totality of the new work arrangements that we are seeing, beyond just offering flexbile work, but really in the way work spaces are used, in the way technologies are used, because there are lots of effort in helping companies be productive, and also getting more productivity from the workers; and, in line with that, new skills that workers need to thrive in this new environment as well as the terms under which work then gets measured and also protected.
Ms Low Yen Ling: Chairman, I want to thank the Member Ms Jessica Tan for her passion on this topic and her clarifications. Earlier on, I did mention that, currently, our female employment rate is high. We ranked seventh out of 36 OECD countries.
Currently, our female employment rate for those aged 25 to 64 is at 72%. Even though there are now more women in the workforce, MOM will not let up in our efforts to enhance the support system. Actually, you really need a whole eco-system to work, to help women better balance our work and also family responsibilities.
We do so in a few ways. The first one, I spoke extensively about flexible work arrangement (FWA), and it is not just about Work-Life Grant. It is also about sharing with employers how it is also win-win.
There are actually three ways to look at FWA. It can be flexi-time, flexi-place and flexi-load. I think Ms Tan is quite familiar with that. For example, flexi-time. Some mothers will say that they have to whip up lunch for their kids. So, they work out an arrangement with their boss for them to come in at 10.00 am. But they will stay back till about seven o'clock. That is flexi-time. Flexi-place is telecommuting, a bit more common. An example of flexi-load is job-sharing where we want to focus a bit more effort because it involves job redesign, sometimes also workplace redesign. This is where Ms Tan is absolutely correct. We can now leverage on technology as an enabler to help us redesign jobs for both rank-and-file and PMET jobs. This was why the Work-Life Grant was enhanced last year to provide better support for job-sharing at PMET-levels.
Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio): I have a clarification for the Minister. We heard very good updates on self-employed persons (SEPs), especially the fact that it is not growing and that many are still in the traditional sector. I would like to ask the Minister for her opinion about a visibly growing number of PMD users, cyclists, motorcyclists serving as food delivery as a vocation. Is that a concern for MOM and is this a growing trend? Is it an indication there is under-employment or is this an interim transitional thing?
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Chairman, my observation is that I have seen some of these Deliveroo, Grab Eats service people. Some of them look very young. They look like they are students. And when I have asked, they are taking this on to earn some pocket money. I have also seen some other people do this on weekends. When I have asked them, not all of them are doing it on a full-time basis; some of them are earning something extra.
In terms of boosting a person's income, in terms of giving him options, if that is what our individual wishes to do, they certainly should be entitled to decide for themselves.
We will have to continue to monitor the trends. As it is, as the Member pointed out again that the SEP numbers went down, I would be very concerned if the numbers grew very quickly. As it looks right now, over all, the numbers have not changed.
One other thing that we have noticed, and I shared with the House last year, is that SEPs are quite flexible. Their self-employment can take various forms. There were occasions where we noticed that people had chosen to switch into driving private hire cars because the incomes that they got was better than, for example, selling real estate, because the real estate market is quieter. So, there is some movement amongst the different occupations within self-employment.
Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Thank you, Chairman. Just a question for the Minister. I am happy to know that the PEA is not going up. But would the Minister consider lowering the PEA and let the member decide, because the trade-off, if you have an early withdrawal, you are going to get less, and if you delay your withdrawal, you are going to get more? Let the member decide. It means having the PEA at 60.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Actually, this is not new. Workers' Party has called for it previously and the Government has also taken pains to explain what the considerations are. Essentially, it is to do with extended longevity, and also being mindful of what other countries are doing.
So, I happened to have addressed this question quite recently in Parliament, and my answer has not changed. So, with your permission, Mr Chairman, I suggest we move on.
But Mr Png actually also made some other references to CPF in his earlier cut. Mr Chairman, I wonder if you would allow me to address them since I did not have time to address them earlier?
The Chairman: Very briefly, please.
Mrs Josephine Teo: I will try my best. Actually, Mr Png, you compared CPF savings to something like a fixed deposit, meaning whenever you want, you should be able to take it out. Am I right?
Mr Png Eng Huat: At the end of your maturity date, you should be able to take out with interest—
Mrs Josephine Teo: At the end of the maturity date, you should be able to take it out with interest? Thank you. That is exactly what the practice is. Members can withdraw their payouts anytime from 65. When the member is about to reach 65, we remind him. If he does not instruct us, we roll over his FD because it earns him more money. Then we write to him again and we remind him, year after year. If we do not do that but, instead, the moment he turns 65, I terminate his FD and let his savings go into the Current Account, which earns much less interest, it will cause him to earn less money.
So, Mr Png, which bank will you be more happy with? The one that rolls over for you automatically because it earns more, or the one that quickly terminates it and let it earn less?
The Chairman: Mr Zainal Sapari.
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Chairman, my question is for the Minister of State Zaqy. I am glad that MOM will encourage building owners to provide rest areas for outsourced workers. But the reality is that many building owners, they need to carve out existing areas to be rest areas, and this would involve increasing their gross floor area, and there will be a developmental charge. I am proposing, maybe in his capacity in MND, to consider waiving this developmental charge for areas, if it is being carved out, to be rest areas. For the Minister of State's consideration.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I believe that should be an MND cut though. But having said that, it is good that Members are concerned with this area. But as I have mentioned at the start, we will start with cleaners first because we know that it is the right thing to do. But it is not going to be easy for everyone. So, that is why even for hawker centres, we start with the new ones first. And the old ones, as they retrofit, they upgrade, we will work with NEA to see how we can provide those.
And, certainly, for buildings, I can also understand some of the difficulties. But, certainly, if the Member files a cut under MND, we will take a look at that.
The Chairman: We got time for two more. Ms Anthea Ong.
Ms Anthea Ong: Thank you, Chairman. Thank you, Minister. I am very heartened to see that more efforts are being made by MOM to promote more workplace well-being, like increasing the Work-Life Grant from S$30 million to S$100 million, and also the increased adoption of FWA. All these contribute to, obviously, employee well-being.
This may be more a question of updating our workplace health and safety to embrace total health and safety that includes psycho-social well-being because we are already doing it but the Workplace Safety and Health Act is still very much skewed towards the physical health and safety. Could Minister please give clarification on that?
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: At this moment, we do a lot of promotional work around mental well-being so I am not sure exactly which aspect of workplace safety and health do you want to include that in but a lot of the work we do today looks at safety issues, occupational diseases. At this moment, mental health injuries or injuries that result in mental health issues is something we will study in future. So, if the Member is specific in the areas that she thinks we could work on, we are happy to work with you and consult you on this one.
The Chairman: We have time for one more. Ms Foo Mee Har.
Ms Foo Mee Har: Thank you, Sir. I have two clarification questions for the Minister. The first is, I asked during my cut for the lower income seniors where they have little family support, they qualify for Silver Support, they do not own a property to unlock, and I know the previous answers were if the CPF is very low, they get Silver Support. So, I would like to ask – and I asked in my cut – if you combine those who qualify for Silver Support and their CPF, how far are they from the $700 of basic retirement sum per month. I asked that question because I take $700 as what is deemed sufficient – that is the aim at least. If you add up the CPF monthly payout plus the Silver Support, how much would they get?
The second clarification question is, the good thing about this group of seniors is 76% of them have property. And, therefore, it is very important when CPF talks with them about planning, they can speak about unlocking value in the property. I know probably it is not immediately in the remit of CPF so I would like to ask how would that be addressed in helping them to understand the value in their property if they want a much more comfortable retirement and they wanted to unlock that value.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Mr Chairman, on helping members understand what they can do to unlock the value of their property, I think it is not just CPF Board that can, through the retirement planning service, make this known to the members. In fact, HDB also provides quite wise counsel to HDB flat owners. So, there is room for these kinds of services to be improved. Usage levels, I think, can go up. But it appears to us that quite a lot of people also feel that they have the knowledge and they are quite confident about making decisions for themselves. The question is, are there people who would benefit from such services but are not aware that they are being offered. So, that is an area we need to work on.
Your other question is a question of data and I am afraid I do not know have that with me right now.
The Chairman: Mr Patrick Tay, would you like to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: I would like to thank Minister Josephine Teo, Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling for more than two hours of responses and a lot of clarity given. If I may just sum up in three tag lines. After hearing the last four-and-a-half hours of sharing. I think the first tag line is we want our workers to be not just employed, employable but also empowered, engaged and equally treated. And for employers to embrace transformation before transformation embraces them. And, finally, every worker matters and every tripartite partner matters too.
So, on that note, I would also like to place on record my thanks to Permanent Secretary Aubeck Kam, Deputy Secretaries Poon Hong Yuen and Augustin Lee, CPF Board Chief Executive Ng Chee Peng as well WSG Chief Executive Tan Choon Shian, and the entire MOM team powering this COS, and, of course, my fellow Members of this House who have contributed in all their cuts and all the clarifications. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $1,910,685,500 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $67,940,200 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head I (Ministry of Social and Family Development)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Head I, Ministry of Social and Family Development. Mr Seah Kian Peng.
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
The Government has put in place many schemes and services to support Singaporeans in building strong families. The danger is that many may not know about these schemes – we tend to think that if people need help, the burden is on them to find out about the avenues available and whether they qualify. They could of course come to see the Member of Parliament to seek advice and help.
But people who need help often are stressed for time – even if they had the ability, they would not have very much time to go through all the different schemes, let alone see the Member of Parliament. How can the Government make these services more accessible and streamlined, so that families are better supported, and can strengthen the bonding with their families?
To this end, I have three related questions:
First, for Singaporeans who for various reasons have no home to go to, what help can we render to such individuals or families? How do we ensure homelessness is not an issue in Singapore?
Second, at COS last year, the Ministry announced initiatives to strengthen social service delivery and provide more holistic support to those in need. What is the progress of this effort? I must say I always find odd that our Social Service Office are closed on weekends. Would the operating hours of SSO be reviewed?
Third, social needs are growing in scale and complexity, and the social service sector provides many support programmes to help vulnerable individuals and families overcome their challenges. How will the Ministry continue to ensure there is funding available to run these critical programmes?
In answering these three questions, I want to say upfront that I know the Government has many schemes in place already. The deeper question I want to ask is – do people find the scheme easy to understand? Can they generally understand the rules?
Let me ask this specifically: one of the most important actions we can think when building a strong social compact in my mind, comes from all Singaporeans sharing a universal dream – a dream of fresh possibilities – that if we are down and out, we have a chance to climb up and do better. If we are doing well and strong, we lend a hand to those who need it.
And one of the most inspiring and practical ways in which we strive to do this, is the relatively new Fresh Start programme which allows families to buy a two-room Flexi Flat on a shorter lease and they can get their housing loans of up to $35,000 and HDB Concessionary Loans. But there are strings attached – as there should be.
Strings that means test – to ensure that the rich do not benefit from a scheme meant for the lower income. Strings on stable employment, to ensure financial sustainability as well as to incentivise people to look for jobs.
That is already complicated enough. But the scheme itself has 11 key features – including the fact that there is a minimum occupation period of 20 years. The 11th key feature says that 10% of the flats will be allocated to people who fall under a priority scheme. What are these priorities? There is a link to the seven schemes – the PPS, MGPS, PCPS, TCPS, ASSIST, TPS and SPS. Parenthood, multi-generation, married child, third child, divorce or widowed parents, tenants and seniors. And these seven then are multiplied across three different flat types.
I think I shall stop here. Because I think I have shown that the schemes are useful but also very complicated. Not easy to navigate for anyone.
I make the point about the complexity of HDB rules not to ask for them to be made fewer, but for their application to be simpler. I suggest the MSF and MND to set up a joint scheme and produce a magic mix – someone who is part social welfare officer, part housing agent, part financial consultant, and above all, an expert in navigating through the rules.
This someone, let us call him or her, Officer X, could be sited in the community relations department of MSF or HDB. Their home ministry could be the MSF or MND. They should take as their model the IOs of MCI (information officers of the Ministry of Communications and Information), where they develop domain expertise in housing matters, but also speak to the specific needs of the ministries and agency where they are sent. I shall say more about this in my cut on MND. If anything, Minister for Social and Family Development who is also the Second Minister for National Development is best placed to make this happen.
Another area which I hope Officer X can help in relates to rough sleepers and homelessness.
This is yet another example of complex needs – people who sleep in public places such as void decks or pavilions. Some of them are not known to any social service agencies, or had declined Government assistance. We cannot force people to do what they do not want. But prolonged sleeping in the public not only jeopardises their health and overall well-being, it could also affect their ability to reintegrate and return to stable housing.
What does the Ministry feel about this group of people, and what are we doing about the root causes of their resorting to sleeping in public places? What is the Ministry going to strengthen support for homeless people who declined assistance?
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Ms Tin Pei Ling (MacPherson): At a recent post-Budget dinner, a gentleman approached me to lament how he thought the middle class, like him, was unfairly treated. He said that he is the sole breadwinner in his family comprising him, his wife and two children. He lives in a condominium. His household per capita income is $2,500. Comparing to his friend who lives in a HDB flat but with a higher capita income, his friend receives Government payouts whilst he receives none. It is not uncommon to hear similar lamentations, even HDB residents sometimes asked us why certain neighbours received financial assistance or more Government benefits when the said neighbours are cash rich or already were supported by extended family members. These anecdotes called into the question the concept of fairness and social equity. How can we redistribute wealth more fairly and justly? How do we ensure that those who genuinely need help get help?
As Singapore evolves, as our population ages, as we become more educated and increasingly data-driven, how might our Public Financial Assistance system evolve too? With the increasing availability of data, how would the Government use data to deliver public assistance in a more precise and personal matter? Is a more precise and personalised public assistance an idea that the Ministry will consider?
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): As the local Member of Parliament, I hold regular daily phone discussions in a WhatsApp group chat comprising myself, my grassroots ComCare lead, the Social Service Office General Manager, the Family Service Centre social workers and heads of the local Senior Activity Centres. Almost daily, we discussed families in need and nudged each other to join efforts to solve the problems of families presented to us.
Sir, the demand for social services in our increasingly ageing, stressful and at times complicated society is on the rise – challenges of the elderly lonely; the single-parent family; the widows; the orphans; families of parents who are incarcerated; abandoned parents; disabled parents; disabled children – there is just that much bandwidth that each well-meaning volunteer, Member of Parliament or social service staff can cover.
There is a strong need to strengthen our current social services delivery system in anticipation of these rapidly increasing needs. The current Social Services Network delivery system needs to be extended and resourced further.
I would like to ask the Ministry to consider adopting features of the Municipal Services Office (MSO) model which might be relevant. The MSO was started to improve Government’s overall coordination and delivery of municipal services relating to estate management which involves currently more than 10 agencies. It is led by a Minister-level leader no less, and uses technology apps and data analytics to drive proactive problem solving. Annual resources are invested each year into the MSO to drive productivity and template solutions for recurring problems.
I feel strongly that there is potential of a similar, albeit modified, MSO model in the social services landscape. Create a mother of all Social Services Offices (SSOs) with mini SSOs in the network to lead and coordinate partners, such as the Family Service Centres (FSCs), Senior Activity Centres, HDB, MOE, PUB, Town Councils and the CDCs, using technology, data analytics and the like.
Will MSF study the MSO model and adopt the relevant principles and features for a similar SSO model led by the Minister himself? Will MOF allocate more funds to resource a stronger social services delivery system for the MSF?
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Sir, over the years, we have made headway in supporting our mothers and children from single-parent homes. Now, all mothers are given the 16-week maternity leave, as well as a Child Development Account. These enhancements show that the Government is prepared to make changes to support our young families.
But because our single mothers also have less resources compared to a two-parent family, they would need more help. Many would have to work full-time. They face higher cost pressures in the child’s early years because infant care and childcare costs are higher than Primary school fees. This is when the Baby Bonus cash gift is timely to provide better care for our children. Can MSF consider also extending the cash gift to our single mothers?
In addition, even though many of our single mothers work, they do not enjoy parenthood tax rebates. These tax rebates can go a long way in meeting current needs and saving for future purposes. By providing the Baby Bonus cash gift and parenthood tax rebates, we are closer to being child-centric and more complete in our support to young families, regardless family structures or circumstances.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, I would like to touch on the issue of two groups of elderly Singaporeans which have been receiving much attention among many Singaporeans and many have also expressed concerns about them, particularly in the last 10 years. The first group of elderly who are doing strenuous jobs, such as conservancy work, collecting of eating utensils and cups at hawker centres, and trolley attendants. The second group, elderly who go around collecting empty aluminium cans, discarded cardboards or any other recyclable items which can be exchanged for cash.
Sir, anecdotally, it seems that the number of elderly for these two groups has risen in the last 10 years. The questions that many Singaporeans have in mind in relation to this issue are:
(a) Why are our elderly who are supposed to be enjoying retirement in their golden age still doing such strenuous jobs and collecting recyclable items?
(b) Are our elderly doing such jobs because they need to do so or is it just a matter of choice?
Different views and perspectives have been shared on these issues, in particular, on social media. Some are of the view that these elderly want to have additional pocket money. Some mentioned that these elderly are doing so basically to occupy their time as well as to keep themselves fit and healthy, while many others opined that these elderly are in need of cash for their day-to-day sustenance. The discussion on this issue has been surfacing from time to time in the past years, with some turned into an emotive one.
Sir, I would like to ask whether the Ministry has conducted any studies to find out, first, whether there has been an increase or decrease in the number of elderly engaging in such strenuous work and collecting activities; and, secondly, what are the reasons for them to do so? Is it due to needs or wants?
Sir, findings from such studies will allow Singaporeans to have a better and more realistic understanding of the matter. More importantly, Sir, recognising the root cause will enable policymakers to formulate more accurate and effective remedial actions in addressing this issue, assuming there is a need to do so.
The Chairman: Mr Darryl David, you can take your two cuts.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Mr Chairman. First cut is on families facing multiple challenges. Challenges and issues experienced by families in need are never one-dimensional and often encompass a set of intertwining problems that cannot be solved in a piecemeal manner.
An example of this would be a family with school-going children whose sole breadwinner has had to quit his job to look after a bedridden dependent. Under such a situation, the policy approach is to support the family with short- to mid-term ComCare assistance and to try and place the breadwinner in employment. We need to question, however, if this is the right approach because the breadwinner will not be able to hold on to a stable permanent full-time role due to the need to look after his dependents. The children of the family are likely to perform less well than their peers in school due to the need to juggle school with care-giving duties when they are at home.
We should adopt a more holistic approach to resolve complex social challenges individuals and families face so that we can help them get back on to their feet and to live a life of dignity. Does the Ministry have a holistic intervention plan to help individuals and families that are facing a complex set of challenges? How can the Ministry help improve their life circumstances beyond just giving short to medium term financial assistance?
Mr Darryl David: Next cut. Social workers have come a long way since its early beginnings in Singapore. With a more complex operating environment, changes in the demographics in our population, evolving family structure, income disparity and rapidly changing social environments, the training given to social workers needs to be strengthened.
The National Social Work Competency Framework (NSWCF) lays out the competencies at various levels of specialist knowledge. It serves to define the knowledge, skills and attitudes required by social work professionals to deliver quality social work practice. The competencies will also help to increase awareness among service users, policymakers and those who fund our social services and the effort of social workers. The Framework will also help chart professional development and career progression.
MSF recently launched the Skills Framework for the Social Service, to help social service professionals plan their careers. Can MSF further leverage on this framework to drive and enhance skills development in the sector?
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Chairman, over the years, I have encountered families who find life a struggle. Major causes of instability include divorce, lack of finances, and mental health issues that affect one’s parenting capacity and the ability to work. Children and youth in such families are subject to crisis, sometimes on a daily basis. They do not eat well and grow up with a maturity well beyond their years. It is thus very encouraging that the Government commenced the KidSTART programme three years ago, targeted at children from low-income families. The three-year pilot was expected to benefit about 1,000 children living in the pilot regions of Kreta Ayer, Bukit Merah, Taman Jurong, Boon Lay and Geylang Serai. We are told that, under KidSTART, the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) coordinates holistic services for families, and monitors and supports child development from birth onwards.
Last month, the Minister for Finance mentioned in his Budget Speech that more than 900 families had received support from KidSTART since 2016. Could the Ministry elaborate on whether the Government is encouraged by the outcomes and whether KidSTART will be rolled out progressively nationwide?
On the topic of youths, I welcome the Ministry’s announcement last month that it is proposing amending the Children & Young Persons Act (CYPA) to increase the cut-off age for protection from 16 to 18 years. This will put us in line with the Convention on the Rights of the Child which Singapore has signed. I would like to ask for elaboration on how this will be implemented.
First, when is the amendment to the CYPA expected to be tabled before Parliament?
Secondly, what are the changes needed by MSF, MHA, the Courts and the media to operationalise the changes regarding the crime cases involving such youths?
Lastly, will there be any changes to the scope and resources for young offenders’ rehabilitation?
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Tanjong Pagar): Mr Chairman, the digital age has revolutionised the way we live, work and play. However, it is not without its dark side. Young and impressionable youths are easily influenced by social media, sometimes going to extreme lengths to get more \"likes\" and \"follows\". The presence of the dark web is also concerning if there is a lack of adult supervision and, sometimes, even with adult supervision.
Managing our youths’ exposure to social media and the Internet is important, as they are the most susceptible to undue online influences. Statistics recently released by MSF have also shown that cases of children beyond parental control have reached a 10-year high. This is a worrying trend. I hope that MSF can look at how to better protect this vulnerable group, in particular, those that belong to at-risk groups.
While latest figures have shown a drop in the percentage of youths that re-offend within three years of their incarceration, from 20.3% to the current 16.7%, this is still a high figure. I would like to ask what plans does MSF have to better help youth offenders reintegrate into society.
To help at-risk youths break away from the vicious cycle of crime, the National Committee on Prevention, Rehabilitation and Recidivism was set up in April last year to look into how we can intervene upstream and adopt a more preventive and integrative approach towards at-risk youths, young offenders, as well as their families. Can MSF provide an update on the committee’s work thus far?
The Chairman: Assoc Prof Daniel Goh, you can take both your cuts.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, there may be emerging new types of homelessness in Singapore that are not about destitution and need for shelter. The Destitute and Shelter Support Branch (DSSB) oversees 10 welfare homes that care for and rehabilitate destitute persons. The aim is to provide a temporary place for the destitute persons to stay where they are trained to become self-reliant so that they can return to their families.
But the problem is that there are homeless persons who can care for themselves, who are practically self-reliant. In a survey done by volunteer group, SW101 and a VWO Montford Care, a little over a year ago, of the 180 people found living on the streets one night in Singapore, two-thirds have a job, more than a quarter own a flat and a quarter were married. Further investigations by TODAY's journalist found that many slept on the streets not out of destitution. They were homeless because they had personal relationship issues and were estranged from their families but because they were unable to purchase HDB flats or adapt to sharing HDB public rental flats with strangers.
These homeless persons will not be amenable to being sheltered and rehabilitated in DSSB-managed welfare homes. Their sense of independence would be too strong and, in many ways, they are already self-reliant in the very struggle of keeping a job whilst sleeping on the streets. Reuniting them with their families is a noble aim, but it will be necessary to provide dedicated counselling and mediation resources to achieve this. There is a need for MSF to study the homeless Singaporeans found on the streets today to understand these new types of homelessness. Beyond understanding the homelessness, the aim should also be to re-design the DSSB's work to help return these homeless persons to their homes and families.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Second cut, adoption support. Chairman, compared to the decade before, the number of children adopted in Singapore has halved in this decade. For example, 352 children were adopted in 2014 compared to 731 children in 2004. Restrictions on international adoptions by some countries, such as China, explained part of the drop. But fewer unwanted pregnancies and higher abortion numbers have also been cited as reasons. I believe many Singaporean couples wishing to adopt would like to adopt babies born locally rather than engage in overseas adoption due to the risks, legal problems and medical issues involved in an overseas adoption.
I believe many are also willing to pay for the medical, delivery and post-natal care costs for birth mothers as a gesture of gratitude and honour. But there is an information gap that separates would-be birth mothers and adopting parents. Single women with unwanted pregnancies do not have the full information available to make the proper decision to abort or to carry the foetus to full term for adoption. Some may be aborting due to financial concerns related to full-term pregnancy and delivery. All these reasons reduce opportunities for prospective adopters to adopt Singaporean babies.
The promise of state support for medical, delivery and post-natal care costs will help bridge the gap. Actually, to call the support \"subsidies\" may be wrong, as the costs can be clawed back through an adoption fee charged to prospective adopters who are willing to pay in the first place. Needless to say, this will help boost our country's birth rates. I recognise there may be psychological implications and other issues for would-be birth mothers and prospective adopters. So, this suggestion should be thoroughly studied with the well-being of the child as the central concern of policy.
Mr Christopher de Souza (Holland-Bukit Timah): Sir, there are couples who are childless who would love to adopt children, raise them and care for them. There are also would-be mothers who, due to very difficult and stressful situations, contemplate aborting their pregnancies. Would MSF please take up my suggestion of actively informing pregnant mothers, who are considering terminations, of the loving and nurturing option of giving their baby up for adoption? This is a win-win-win formula because, one, it would give the baby a shot at life in a loving and nurturing family environment; two, the pregnant mother benefits from a wider and longer list of options for her to consider; and, three, the adoptive parents benefit from fulfilling their wish to raise a child in a loving environment. Our organic Total Fertility Rate (TFR) will also increase. So, the economy stands to gain, too.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Sir, the Enabling Masterplans of Singapore are five-year plans developed by representatives from the people, public and private sectors to improve the lives of persons with disabilities or special needs in Singapore. Important changes had been introduced as a result of these Masterplans.
Although much publicity has gone into releasing, especially the latest Third Enabling Masterplan (EMP3), not many people within or outside the special needs community know about it. Of those who are aware of it, many have no idea what is going on mostly, save the adhoc good news that is coming out from the Ministry.
There are good reasons why the Enabling Masterplans have to be living documents, with regular reviews, reports and communications with all its key stakeholders, including the rest of Singapore society.
First, there is a need for the MasterPlan to incorporate the latest developments impacting the special needs community. Such changes may cover healthcare, housing and transport measures, for example, which provide more benefits or challenges to persons with special needs.
Second, there is a need to update the Plan to take in new relevant ideas. Caring for the care-givers of persons with special needs is a good example. At the recent parliamentary motion on strengthening support for care-givers, I had proposed a five-step approach to support care-givers on the ground. The five steps are to identify, individualise, integrate, implement and inspect the care-giver support system. The response from the ground was favourable but how it is being considered in the EMP3 is unclear.
Third, there is also a need to co-opt more people and organisations to co-shape and implement much needed solutions listed in the MasterPlan. It is much easier and sometimes more enjoyable to comment and criticise the system. But inputs are more realistic and balanced when the critics themselves also lend a hand at implementation, to experience and to help address the challenges of execution.
Sir, there is also a need to coordinate efforts under the MasterPlan to give more impact. Take disability awareness, for instance. We have The Purple Parade under our CDC; we have the See The True Me by the National Council for Social Services; and other awareness efforts by DPA and many other worthy VWOs. Surely, there is a way to stitch an alliance so that the overall and sub-messages on supporting inclusion and giving can reach out to more people more impactfully?
Finally, Sir, I believe there is a need to encourage specific disability groups to similarly develop their own enabling masterplans. The overarching EMP3 may be a tad too general and there are some who cannot identify nor feel a sense of ownership in these macro strategies and plans. But the overall MasterPlan is a good launch pad to have different disability groups think about their own vision, gaps, strategies, solutions and seek more partners for their efforts.
Sir, the Enabling Master Plan is significant. I hence seek not only an update on the latest EMP3 in this House. I also ask for a more comprehensive plan, both online and face-to-face, by the Ministry to regularly review and report to the special needs community and to the rest of Singapore.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Earlier this year, MSF announced enhanced early intervention for children with developmental needs. This was a welcomed move. Indeed, early intervention for children with developmental or special needs is crucial and support that is customised to specific needs can make a whole world of a difference. It is sometimes easy to put all children with developmental needs in one category. But there are many different types of developmental delays – physical, cognitive, sensory and many different needs.
If an issue is identified early and targeted intervention is given, there is great potential for the child to overcome his or her challenges and live and function normally. My son Ayden has Down’s Syndrome and, as I was looking up for information about the ways to support him, I found many examples of people overseas with the condition who have excelled in different fields. There are those who are undergraduates, those who have given TedTalks, those who are sportsmen – many who are contributing members of the communities they live in. I want the best for my son but I will love him regardless of his abilities and achievements. It is nice though to know that the possibilities for him and people like him are endless. It all comes down to early support and intervention. It is, therefore, important that we put in effort to curate the best support and curriculum for our children with needs, to ensure the best possible outcome.
I would, therefore, like to find out more details about how the customised early intervention would be implemented. How can we ensure that our children will receive the specific support that they need for different developmental needs? In addition, how can MSF ensure that the quality of the early intervention is kept on par with international standards?
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Trade and Industry (Dr Tan Wu Meng): Mr Chairman, in my maiden Adjournment Motion as a back-bencher, I spoke about how important it is that we always \"see through the eyes of our people\". If I may, please allow me to share three stories of my Clementi residents' journeys – three stories, three journeys, three questions that speak to policy and what the Government and society can look at.
First, how do we, as a society, ensure continuity of support for our special needs students who transition into mainstream schools? One of my Clementi residents, Ms N, not her real name, is a young lady with cerebral palsy. She gets around with a wheelchair. We have met N and her mother. When N was younger, she went to a school for special needs students with cerebral palsy. But more recently, N has moved to a mainstream school. This was an achievement for N. She and her mum are proud of her achievement.
But as N's mother shared with me, it also brought unexpected challenges. Previously, N's special needs school provided the transport arrangements. But in the mainstream school, N discovered there was difficulty finding these specialised transport arrangements. Her mum looked around and found out that private transport for N and her wheelchair would cost $750 to $1,000 a month. N can take public transport, but it takes two different buses. She has to change bus in between. During rush hour, some drivers will not wait for her and it can take multiple buses before N can find a bus to board. And when the weather is rainy, when it rains, it is even more of a worry for N and her mother.
Mr Chairman, as more of our students with special needs make the transition to mainstream schools, we should look at how to maintain that continuity of support, so that the transition is not unnecessarily jarring. I know our MOE and MSF colleagues have been looking into this, and I am sure they will continue finding ways to make things even better. So, can the Minister share about what progress has been made, what support is available, and how we can help parents of special needs children learn more about these programmes and how to access them when the children transition to mainstream schools?
Sir, the second question is: How do we help adult Singaporeans with special needs, especially when the parents grow old and pass on? Mr L, not his real name, is my Clementi resident. He has been ill the past few years and recently lost his battle with cancer. I met his widow. She herself is not in good health and needs a wheelchair to get around. They have a son who is nearing 50 years old, with special needs and a limited ability to take care of himself. Mrs L spoke to us. She says she hopes her health will hold up. But she is understandably worried about what will happen to her special needs son, once she herself passes on.
Mr Chairman, as our population grows older, there will be more seniors in our community who have grown-up special needs children still needing that extra care and support. So, can the Minister share about how we are coordinating across agencies and community partners to better support our seniors who are worried about their special needs children and how we can support the adult children when the parents become too ill to act as care-givers, or when the parents pass on?
Sir, the third question is on how we can strengthen respite care support for care-givers of special needs children. During my home visits in Clementi, I have met Mdm T, not her real name. Mdm T has a grown-up daughter with special needs who had been very ill, a while back spent some months in the hospital. Mdm T's family has a domestic helper who has been with the family for nearly 20 years. Mdm T wants her domestic helper to have a vacation once a year. But at the same time, the family has been worried about how to arrange care-giver support when the domestic helper is away. Mdm T shared with us about how it is not straightforward at all to arrange a temporary domestic helper for short durations, such as for a period of two weeks. But, Sir, these arrangements can be crucial to help prevent care-giver burnout, whether it is a domestic helper or a family member providing the care.
So, can the Minister tell us what efforts are being made to make respite care more accessible to parents with special needs children – whether young children with special needs, or grown-up adult children with special needs?
Mr Chairman, these 3 stories are of Clementi families whom I have met in the constituency which I look after. But we know these stories are not unique to Clementi. And as we see through the eyes of our people, each story speaks to a broader policy question or a wider theme, a wider principle. So, I look forward to hearing from our Minister on what we can do together – Government, community, society – to help parents with special needs children, as the children grow up, and as the parents grow older.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Chairman, according to projections, our population is expected to reach 6.34 million by the year 2030, out of which 28% would be senior citizens above the age of 65. These numbers are expected to grow and, by the year 2050, almost half of our population would be above 65.
One of the key challenges of growing old is deteriorating mental capacity. Based on a longitudinal ageing study conducted by NUS Yong Loo Lin School of Medicine, one in five elderly above the age of 75 shows signs of depression, and a Well-being of Singapore Elderly (WiSE) study led by IMH revealed that one in 10 elderly above the age of 60 may have dementia.
Coping with mental wellness issues during old age is thus a growing concern. What support measures has MSF put in place to help those without mental capacity, particularly those with little or no family support?
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Mr Chairman. I declare my interest as a practising lawyer. In recent years, the Government has been encouraging people to sign Lasting Power of Attorneys, in short, LPAs. LPAs are to be executed before an LPA certificate issuer who can come from three categories of professionals: one, medical professionals who are accredited by the Public Guardian; two, registered psychiatrists; and three, practising lawyers.
I would like to suggest that there should be a clause in the LPA Form 1 where both the donor and donee declare to their best knowledge, at the time of the execution of the LPA Form 1 by the donor: one, whether the donor has any known prior medical condition; and two, whether they are aware of any medical reports issued in respect of the donor, which relates to the issue of whether the donor has the mental capacity to execute the LPA.
This will encourage donors and donees to be more forthright and make any relevant declaration before they sign the LPAs.
It will also help to protect the LPA issuers in cases where donees may deliberately withhold such information when the LPA issuer is approached to witness the execution of the LPA. Failure to make the relevant disclosure should provide the LPA issuer with some protection in cases where the LPA is disputed by another relative or by way of adverse inferences drawn against say any donee with questionable intentions.
The qualifications and training of the three types of professionals who are authorised to be LPA certificate issuers are different. Having such a clause will also provide further assistance to the LPA issuers in their assessment whether a donor is in a position to execute the LPA.
Dr Lily Neo (Jalan Besar): Brain development is highest during the first four years of life. The brain is forming important neural paths to help develop the child's ability to perform and function and learn well. One US study showed that the quality of children’s early childhood experiences affects how well they learn; and the early years set the stage for the rest of their lives.
Singaporeans have to adapt in this globalised and fast-changing world to stay ahead. Our Government emphasises the importance of entrepreneurial spirit, resilient workforce and lifelong learning to succeed as a country. Our pre-school is a good place to start to equip our next generation for this reality.
Can we ensure that we develop our young’s curiosity and avoid rote learning in our school education? In the pre-school curricula, can we emphasise on unlocking creativity, inspiring curiosity, building character and igniting a true love for learning. The aim is to meet today’s realities with tomorrow’s possibilities.
Could our Government facilitate more co-working places with childcare facility to help young parents balance their working and care-giving roles; this is especially helpful for parents with infants and toddlers.
Can Government ensure that early education is accessible and affordable to all children and especially children from disadvantaged background? Government provides generous subsidies for early childhood services, but the application process can be difficult to navigate. How can MSF smoothen the subsidy application process and make it simpler?
MSF mentioned better integration of social services and holistic support for residents. What does it mean for residents? How will MSF ensure that children with developmental needs can receive the support they require?
The Early Childhood Industry Transformation Map (ITM) was launched last year by MSF. What initiatives will MSF implement under the ITM to improve the productivity and working environments of operators and early childhood professionals?
Ms Anthea Ong (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, children from low-income families, like all other children, deserve access to high-quality formal childcare services and early childhood education. Though their parents could pay as low as $5 a month in childcare fees, they face multiple hurdles in accessing the maximum level of subsidies, including having to meet certain requirements for work. Also, those in informal or ad hoc jobs may have difficulty meeting and/or producing proof of work due to the sporadic nature of their jobs.
The current subsidy system incurs a high administrative cost. A significant amount of paperwork and back-and-forth between childcare operators, MSF, parents, and social workers is involved in appealing for the maximum level of further subsidies. The extra paperwork involved is often a disincentive for operators to enrol low-income children.
Whether these children from low-income families can access such child care services should not be dependent on the employment status of their parents. Can the Ministry allow all parents who earn less than $2,500 or per capita income of less than $650 access subsidised childcare for free, regardless of the mother’s employment status?
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, during our Motion on Education for Our Future, the Speaker asked who is the best teacher and where is the best school. We parents are the best teachers for our children and our home is the best school. And the most important time for us to be teachers and for our homes to be a school is during our child’s formative years.
As such our policies should not penalise parents who are not working so that they can be there for their child.
Why do we provide less subsidies to families with non-working mothers and more subsidies to families with working mothers? The Government previously said that non-working mothers need less childcare but we need to remember that the fees for half-day childcare is not half of the fees for full-day childcare.
I am not asking for families with non-working mothers to have more subsidies. I am asking for it to be fair, for all childcare subsidies to be dependent on the household income and not whether the mother is working or not.
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, during the Debate on the Early Childhood Education Centres Bill, I opined that when forming and enforcing regulations, we should recognise the diversity in early childhood education as one desirable objective.
Regulations should be enforced flexibly so as not to erode the viability of smaller centres that are providing good quality care. We are still learning things about early childhood education. There should be sufficient space for innovation research and experimentation within reasonable limited to ensure minimum standards.
These are the contexts for my questions and suggestions which are as follows:
Firstly, I would like to ask for an update on the pace of licensing by the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) under the Bill passed in 2017, anecdotally it appears that the pace is slow.
Secondly, I would like to ask how many centres have been unable to secure licensing?
Thirdly, how many pre-schools have closed down or been acquired or merged since the Act was passed?
Next, will children with high functioning or borderline special needs have their needs met in the remaining schools. My assumption is that many boutique or niche schools have had to change their operations significantly to cope with the requirements of the new Act. Is the Government monitoring outcomes on this front and what are the results so far?
Next, what is the situation for insurance for pre-school centres catering to children with special needs? Some insurers do not cover children with special needs, so pre-schools may seek to reduce their liabilities by not accepting children with special needs. This should be looked into.
And lastly, Sir, it has been over six years since the Starting Well study by the Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) commissioned by the Lien Foundation ranked Singapore 29th out of 45 countries studied in terms of early education sector quality. How has Singapore fared in such international benchmarks recently? And is this something that the Government monitors to obtain regular independent assessments of early education outcomes? It should be.
Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio): One of the key strategies identified by the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) is to raise productivity for the pre-school sector. Improved and streamlined work processes should be able to help pre-school educators devote more time to care for children.
An idea in 2017 was the Smart Solutions rolled out by ECDA together with industry partners. Comprising an integrated package of IT solutions, I understand it is supposed to help with productivity at the childcare centres. Have there been many operators who tapped on the available Government grants to defray part of the costs for adopting IT solutions? Have these solutions been helped to ease administrative duties such as children’s attendance and temperature taking, parent-teacher communications and other work at the childcare centres?
Another was centralised meal catering by the Association of Early Childhood and Training Services, ECDA and industry partners to provide healthy meals to pre-schoolers. Has the intended outcome been achieved?
More recently, there was also an e-procurement system to help pre-school operators order commonly-used items from a curated catalogue of approved vendors selected. Smaller operators can also enjoy cost savings through volume aggregation. More importantly, it allows centres to free up time and manpower to focus on delivering quality care and development of the children.
We have good tools to support our pre-school sector to become more productive, and in turn, improve the working environment for the early childhood educators. Does the Ministry have detailed plans and timeline on assisting more pre-school operators to leverage technology and tools such that the adoption rate of these improvement solutions become more pervasive across the sector? Finally, will there be training support given to pre-school educators to enable them to find the time and permission from the owner to attend relevant training?
Mr Darryl David: Mr Chairman, the rise of dual-income families has resulted in many initiatives to ensure the provision of quality early childhood education. This indeed helps to cater to needs of young families. It ensures that our children start out on the right footing in their education journey, guided with the expertise from competent early childhood education professionals and committed operators. Early childhood teachers are instrumental in spotting developmental issues in children. Above all, high standards in early childhood education allow for social mobility so that every child has a fair chance to succeed.
At the 2018 Committee of Supply debates, the Ministry of Social and Family Development announced the launch of the Early Childhood Industry Transformation Map (ITM) to improve the early childhood sector. This will help provide more innovative services and productive processes. Measures have also taken to ensure that early childhood is affordable and accessible to everyone. Effort is also being made to ensure the recruitment of quality early childhood educators. By 2020, the number of early childhood educators is projected to reach 20,000.
What initiatives will MSF implement under the ITM to improve the productivity and working environments of operators? What other initiatives will be launched to ensure the career progression opportunities for early childhood professionals to reflect the evolving complexity of their roles?
Ms Rahayu Mahzam: Recently, the Straits Times published an opinion piece from Katherine Mangu-Ward in the New York Times. She argues that in the quest for women’s rights, a fixation on numerical goals can lead to a false sense of clarity and certainty. There may be different views about the importance of numbers and setting quotas but I think the point she makes about how we should not lose focus of the more substantive work of changing perceptions is important. I feel that beyond setting numerical goals, it is important to get the whole community, men and women, on board to change cultural mind-sets and progress together.
The struggle by women for equal opportunities and due recognition has gone on for very long time in human history. Although there has been progress, there is still some way to go in addressing many issues. In Singapore, boys and girls have equal access to education, husband and wife are treated as equal partners in a marriage and in principle, men and women have access to opportunities to work in various fields. However, we still see fewer women in certain professions and positions, we still see women leaving the workforce or struggling to juggle different roles and there is some way to go to close the wage gap between men and women.
There have been various efforts to look at how to support and empower women, as well as to increase women representation in various fields. How can we meaningfully build on these efforts and encourage a change of mind-sets within the community. For example, the Diversity Action Committee has made good progress in increasing women representation on corporate boards. How will the newly formed Council for Board Diversity build on these efforts? What other initiatives are there to champion women and empower them to progress?
Prof Fatimah Lateef (Marine Parade): Sir, the proportion of women in top corporate appointments and board of directors still lags behind their representation amongst professional groups and other leadership roles. Women provide critical contributions and a diversity of views. There is sufficient evidence-based data today to show that positive value that women bring on. Even as we are an Asian Society, meritocratic performance of women must be upheld, acknowledged and celebrated.
Having more women on board can help companies entrench a stronger and more well-rounded HR policy and can help attract potential women leaders boost their development and performance. Diversity in corporate leadership has also been shown to promote better governance and sustained business performance.
Can the Ministry provide an update on: the work of the Diversity Action Committee (DAC) and the BoardAgender, and also an update on the code of corporate governance for SGX-listed companies to disclose their board diversity policies? Are there local data to support and show the improvements that have been made over the years?
The Chairman: Minister Desmond Lee, would you like to adjourn the debate?
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply Reporting Progress","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Desmond Lee): Mr Chairman, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow?
The Chairman: I give my consent.
Resolved, \"That progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow.\" – [Mr Desmond Lee]
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Desmond Lee: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2019/2020, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.
Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" — [Mr Chan Chun Sing].
Adjourned accordingly at 7.01 pm
1 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health (a) what is the total cost of providing long-term care in Singapore in FY2017/18 or the latest year available including nursing homes, daycare centres and formal homecare services; and (b) what percentage of this cost has been borne by (i) individuals (ii) the Government (iii) insurance (ElderShield) and (iv) charities respectively.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The 2017 data will only be available later in 2019, as the data collection and compilation process spans across many government and non-government data sources.
Based on the latest available data in 2016, Singapore's National Health Expenditure on long-term care, including both formal care and informal care-giving, was about $1.3 billion. About two-thirds of this was borne by the Government, and the remaining one-third was paid by private financing sources, which include insurance, charities and individual out-of-pocket payments. Due to constraints in the data, we are unable to provide further breakdown of these sources.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Recurrent Costs of Government's Healthcare and Long-term Care Expenditure","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health (a) what percentage of the Government's healthcare expenditure and long-term care expenditure are recurrent costs respectively; and (b) what percentage of the Government's healthcare expenditure and long-term care expenditure are capital costs respectively.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: Based on latest available data in 2016, the Government's Healthcare Expenditure was $9.3 billion, of which about 80% and 20% were on recurrent cost and capital costs respectively. Government expenditure in long term care was $830 million, of which about 70% and 30% were on recurrent and capital costs respectively.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans for Unused Former Primary School, Ex-Neighbourhood Police Centre and Decommissioned Petrol Station in Woodlands Town","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Ong Teng Koon asked the Minister for National Development (a) why are the former Marsiling Primary School next to 149 Woodlands Street 13, former Woodlands West Neighbourhood Police Centre next to 202 Marsiling Drive and the decommissioned Shell petrol station next to 215 Woodlands Lane vacant for such a long time; (b) whether there are any short-term plans for them; and (c) whether these buildings will be demolished and redeveloped as part of the Woodlands Town Masterplan.
Mr Lawrence Wong: Former school sites and other Government buildings that are no longer needed to serve their original purposes will be returned to the State for interim uses that are compatible with the surrounding uses until the land is required for other longer-term developments.
The site next to 202 Marsiling Drive was only recently vacated in end 2018, while the other two sites next to 149 Woodlands Street 13 and 215 Woodlands Lane were returned to the State in 2017. URA is working with other government agencies to explore suitable interim uses for these sites.
Agencies are also reviewing the longer-term development plans for the area, including all three sites. They will be reflected in URA's Draft Master Plan 2019 for the area, which will be exhibited to seek public comments soon.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Workers in Cleaning Sector on R1 (Higher Skilled) Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower in the last three years, what percentage of workers in the cleaning sector are on the R1 (higher skilled) scheme and what is the breakdown in terms of the nationalities of these workers.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Over the last three years, about 20% of the Work Permit Holders (WPHs) in the Cleaning sector were higher-skilled (R1) workers.
The Ministry does not provide data on foreign workers with breakdown by nationality.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":2781,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular by Ms Low Yen Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190305/vernacular-Low Yen Ling MOE 5 March 2019-Chinese(26 Mar)(MOE).pdf","fileName":"Low Yen Ling MOE 5 March 2019-Chinese(26 Mar)(MOE).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2782,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular by Ms Sun Xueling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190305/vernacular-Sun Xueling Joint Statement 5 Mar 2019 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Sun Xueling Joint Statement 5 Mar 2019 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":2783,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular by Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190305/vernacular-Patrick Tay MOM 5 March 2019-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Patrick Tay MOM 5 March 2019-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":2784,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular by Mrs Josephine Teo","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190305/vernacular-Josephine Teo MOM 5 March 2019-Chinese (without track changes).pdf","fileName":"Josephine Teo MOM 5 March 2019-Chinese (without track changes).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2785,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular by Mr Zaqy Mohamad","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190305/vernacular-5 Mar 2019 - MOS Zaqy Mohd - (vetted MOM) Reply to MOM cuts.pdf","fileName":"5 Mar 2019 - MOS Zaqy Mohd - (vetted MOM) Reply to MOM cuts.pdf"},{"vernacularID":2786,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular by Ms Low Yen Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20190305/vernacular-Low Yen Ling MOM 5 March 2019-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Low Yen Ling MOM 5 March 2019-Chinese.pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}