Mr Speaker: Hon Members, under the prevailing Health Protocols, Members who are close contacts of COVID-19 cases but who are ART-negative can leave their homes and come to Parliament Sittings. Safe management measures remain in place here in Parliament House and the Chamber for Members and visitors to protect their well-being.
From today, as a further precaution to reduce the density of Members in the Chamber, such Members will be delivering their speeches on a separate floor, namely the additional Galleries on Level Three.
These are the same arrangements for Members whereby they participated in the Sitting from seats in the additional Galleries during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic. While the COVID-19 situation today is not the same, we will maintain vigilance out of an abundance of caution.
Members of the public who wish to follow the proceedings in Parliament House will now do so via a live screening at the Auditorium. The livestream of Parliamentary proceedings is also available for the public to watch at their own convenience anywhere.
Let us continue to exercise personal responsibility by monitoring our health closely and strictly adhering to the appropriate testing regimes. In doing so, everyone’s safety and well-being remain paramount as we proceed with our Parliamentary business.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Correlation between PSLE Results and Socio-economic Status in Past Two Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"1 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Education (a) in the past two years, whether it has been found that PSLE results are significantly correlated with social economic status; (b) if yes, how does the Ministry intend to reduce the correlation; and (c) if no analysis has been conducted on this issue, whether the Ministry intends to study this issue further.
\tThe Second Minister for Education (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, globally across education systems, students from higher socio-economic backgrounds tend to perform better. This is reflected in OECD’s study of 15-year-olds across more than 70 economies participating in the Programme for International Student Assessment or PISA. In Singapore, there is similarly some correlation between socio-economic background and PSLE results.
This is not unexpected, as parents with more resources are able to support their children’s learning and provide them with a head-start in life. However, we must work hard against the natural tendency of societies to stratify, so as to maintain social cohesion and to give our children a good start in life, regardless of their background.
In this regard, our education system plays a crucial role in levelling up opportunities and support for students from less advantaged backgrounds to develop their potential. MOE pays close attention to this issue and provides significantly more support to students with higher needs.
For example, we provide dedicated support for children needing support in basic numeracy and literacy skills through the Learning Support Programme for English and Mathematics in Primary 1 and 2 students. After Primary 2, higher-needs students who require more academic support are helped through programmes such as the Reading Remediation Programme and Improving Confidence and Achievement in Numeracy programme.
Some students also have needs that extend beyond academic support. This is why we have launched the Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce (UPLIFT), which I currently chair, to enhance our upstream wraparound support for such students. Our efforts comprise strengthening after-school engagement and care through school-based Student Care Centres in Primary schools and after-school programmes in Secondary schools, as well as partnering the community to support students’ families through the UPLIFT Community Network. Schools with a higher proportion of students in need also receive more manpower and funds to support whole-school interventions for their students.
Sir, encouragingly, our students from less advantaged backgrounds do well compared to their international counterparts. OECD’s PISA study, for example, has found that compared to other high-performing systems, Singapore’s students from the bottom-25% of socio-economic background not only outperform their international counterparts of similar socio-economic background, but also out-perform the OECD average in all core domains assessed in PISA.
We will continue to press on to further strengthen support for these students, such as with the expansion of UPLIFT initiatives. Through this approach of tilting more resources and help towards students with greater needs, we will lean against the entrenchment of socio-economic advantages and ensure that our education system continues to provide opportunities for Singaporeans in each generation to succeed and realise their potential.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Sir. And I thank the Second Minister for the reply and the good work that UPLIFT has been doing. Could I ask, over the last two years, whether the correlation between PSLE scores and socio-economic status has been increasing or decreasing. And two, are we tracking whether the children involved in the UPLIFT programme are actually doing better as compared to their peers who are not involved in the UPLIFT programme?
So, specifically, whether the Primary school students in the UPLIFT programme are going into Normal (Technical), Normal (Academic) or the Express streams after their PSLE?
\tDr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Sir, I thank Mr Louis Ng for his supplementary question. On the correlation, it has been stable over the last five years – it has not been going up, not going down. We will continue to do our best to ensure that we provide the resources to help our students from disadvantaged backgrounds to continue to do well.
On the outcomes of UPLIFT, I hope Mr Ng will give us some time. We just started in 2018 and the initial outcomes have been quite encouraging. We see more students' attendance improving. We are tracking and monitoring different components of the programme. And I will share a bit more during MOE's Committee of Supply (COS) later this afternoon.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Preschools Grappling with COVID-19 Rules and Manpower Shortage Given Rise in Cases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"2 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for Social and Family Development what support is available to assist preschools that are grappling with COVID-19 rules and manpower shortage issues as COVID-19 cases rise.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua) (for the Minister for Social and Family Development): Mr Speaker, since the start of the pandemic, the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has been regularly reviewing the COVID-19 measures for preschools, in line with changes to our national posture and in consultation with MOH. These regular reviews aim to safeguard the health and safety of preschool children and staff, while enabling preschools to manage their operations. The measures also consider the fact that the majority of preschool children are unvaccinated.
To keep our children and staff safe, and to enable preschools to keep up with changes to the health protocols, ECDA regularly updates the sector via email circulars and infographics. Preschools can also reach out directly to their ECDA licensing officer if they need help or guidance. ECDA also provided preschools with funding support in 2020 and 2021 to hire Safe Management Assistants to help implement safe management measures (SMMs). In turn, this gave operators time to review their operational processes and manpower planning to sustain evolving SMMs.
To help preschools manage COVID-19 cases ahead of the Omicron wave, ECDA and MOH have streamlined the contact tracing processes and empowered preschools with greater autonomy to manage their COVID-19 cases. For example, we have streamlined the process to allow preschools to submit details of close contacts directly to MOH so that Health Risk Notices can be issued faster, thereby reducing the period of uncertainty for parents and staff.
The surge in cases due to Omicron has affected many segments of society, and the preschool sector is no exception. We recognise that a high number of COVID-19 cases amongst staff can disrupt preschools’ operations. In earlier phases of the pandemic, cross-deployment of staff across preschools and across classes within the same preschool was restricted to minimise the risk of transmission.
As all preschool staff are now fully vaccinated and are placed on weekly Rostered Routine Testing (RRT), ECDA has provided operators with more flexibility in manpower deployment within each preschool. Where necessary, each preschool may deploy staff across classes or tap on relief staff. In areas where manpower is very tight, such as Mother Tongue Language (MTL) teachers, such staff may be deployed across preschools, subject to prevailing SMMs.
In situations where preschools are impacted by substantial staff absenteeism, ECDA works closely with the operators to initiate their business continuity plan, such as adjusting programme plans and allowing flexibility in staffing ratios.
Keeping our preschools safe and healthy is a collective effort. We advise parents to monitor their children’s health and consult a primary care doctor if their child is unwell. Children who are unwell should stay at home to rest and return to preschool only when they have fully recovered.
We also encourage parents, whose children are five years old and older and medically eligible, to register them for COVID-19 vaccination to give them better protection.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Hany Soh.
\tMs Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. I have two supplementary questions. One is on whether ECDA will provide more support in relations to provision of more ART kits to all the preschools to ease the operating expenses and encourage more people to get tested on a regular basis. The other question is my concern in relations to a disruption of manpower and whether that will compromise the preschools' adherence to the environmental sanitation regime, exposing the children to the possibility of gastroenteritis cases.
\tMr Eric Chua: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member Ms Hany Soh for her additional questions. On the first question on additional support in terms of ART kits, I think that is something we can take back and explore. Last year, sometime around September, we had done the same. We issued some kits to the preschools, children, to alleviate the stress on the families of having to test regularly for the children.
On the second question on disruption of manpower, as I had mentioned in my main reply, it is a balance we want to strike between maintaining the preschools' operations viz a viz getting the children tested. We understand that manpower can be a stretch, especially at this time when we have quite a number of preschool staff and teachers who might be down with COVID-19, who might be on medical leave. We want to be able to empower the preschools, give them some flexibility. So, as I had mentioned in my reply earlier, we do allow them some degree of flexibility as compared to before. In the earlier phases of fighting the pandemic, our SMMs and restrictions had been quite tight. Now, we have allowed for deployment across classes. We have also allowed for, in some cases, for example, where manpower is very scarce – as I mentioned, mother tongue language teachers – for them to be deployed across preschools, subject to SMMs.
So, we are striking a right balance and we are mindful of the constraints that preschools face, we are mindful of the stress that preschools have to handle and deal with as well. But as much as possible, at this phase of the pandemic, we want our preschools to remain open as much as possible so that social impact arising from preschool closures are kept to the minimum. At the same time, as we move to the endemic phase, we hope that we can also try to alleviate some of the stress that both the preschools as well as families are facing, and that is why we will take Member's first suggestion on board as well.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Guidelines and Autonomy Given on Disbursement Amounts for MediFund Applications","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"3 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Health (a) what are the recommended guidelines used to assess MediFund applications, including the quantum of assistance to be provided; (b) what degree of autonomy do MediFund Committees have to make decisions on such applications; and (c) what measures are in place to ensure consistency of interpretation of these guidelines by MediFund Committees across the MediFund-approved institutions.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Health): To apply for MediFund, applicants must be Singapore Citizens who are subsidised patients and are receiving treatment from a MediFund-approved institution. As long as patients meet these eligibility criteria, the MediFund Committees (MFCs) have flexibility and discretion over the assessment, approval and assistance quantum of MediFund applications. They work with the medical social workers (MSWs) to assess applications holistically, taking into account patients’ socio-economic and health circumstances, as well as bill sizes.
MOH provides operational guidelines to MediFund-approved institutions to facilitate their management of MediFund and to provide some consistency for decision making, although MFCs retain full discretion over assessment of applications.
Mr Speaker: Mr Perera.
\tMr Leon Perera (Aljunied): I thank the Senior Minister of State for his answer. Just one supplementary question, which is to confirm the understanding that MOH provides guidelines as to the quantum, the way in which you do the means testing for MediFund, but those guidelines, if I understand it correctly, are not binding on the different MediFund Committees, so they have the discretion to deviate from those guidelines, depending on their case-by-case assessment.
The second supplementary question is, if that is the case, then what process is in place to ensure that there is a basic degree of consistency? Because otherwise, you could get some MediFund Committees being more generous than others, depending on the hospital or the healthcare provider.
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, the Member is correct that the MediFund Committees do have discretion and MOH provides guidelines regarding means testing criteria, the amount of assistance as a benchmark so that they can have those as a reference. The full discretion is given to these committees to actually deviate from these suggested guidelines.
In terms of the outcomes, I think that is the fundamental and most important thing. Despite all the guidelines, are we able to assist most of these people and patients who are in need. In fiscal year 2020, 98.3% of the total number of MediFund and MediFund Silver applications that were received were approved and 87.6% of the approved applications received the full assistance. So, I think the outcome speak for itself that regardless of the guidelines, most of these applications actually receive the assistance they require and most of them in full, as well.
Let me also add that MediFund assistance is also automatically extended to needy patients under MSF's social assistance schemes, for example, the ComCare Long-Term Assistance recipients, who fulfil the MediFund eligibility criteria without requiring them to go through the application process. So, those who are already on our radar, who are in need, will receive the necessary support, without further application.
In terms of auditing some of these outcomes and making sure that the spirit of MediFund is complied with, the MediFund accounts and administration for each preceding financial year are audited annually, either by Auditor-General's Office (AGO) or an external auditor appointed by MOH in consultation with AGO.
So, I think there are robust processes in place to make sure that the MediFund Committees perform their roles well and the outcomes, in terms of the numbers that have been assisted, also validate this observation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Common Causes of Fire Along HDB Corridors and Proportion of HDB Flats with Home Fire Alarm Device Installed","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"4 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what are the common causes of fire along HDB common corridors; (b) what percentage of HDB flats built before June 2018 have Home Fire Alarm Device (HFAD) installed; (c) whether the take-up rate for the installation of HFADs is on the rise; and (d) what are the Ministry’s efforts to encourage more households to install HFADs.
\tThe Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, the common causes of fire along HDB common corridors are of electrical origin, which includes fires involving personal mobility devices and personal mobility aids, arising from naked light such as candle flame and flame from lighters, and the indiscriminate disposal of lighted materials such as cigarette butts.
Since June 2018, all new residential units and existing units that are undergoing fire safety works, such as renovation works involving a fire-rated door, are required under the Fire Code to install Home Fire Alarm Devices (HFADs) within the units. For residential units built before June 2018 and which have not undergone fire safety works since June 2018, the installation of HFADs is voluntary. We do not have data on the percentage of HDB flats built before June 2018 which have HFADs installed.
Members of the public can access the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF)'s website for useful information on fire safety and to download the recently revised edition of the Civil Defence Emergency Handbook. These materials contain information on HFADs, including a list of HFAD suppliers, in the four official languages. SCDF has also been working with the National Fire and Emergency Preparedness Council and HDB to educate new homeowners on fire safety and emergency preparedness through the digital MyNiceHome Roadshows.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Yip.
\t
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I have two supplementary questions. Can I find out the statistics for the number of common corridor fires in HDB flats in 2021? And two, how is MHA and SCDF working with agencies such as the Town Councils to prevent fires in common corridors of HDB flats, as this is a common concern amongst HDB flat dwellers?
\tAssoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. In 2021, there were 122 fires that occurred at HDB common corridors and passageways. If you look at the breakdown of the top three causes of fires: (a) we had 43 fires due to electrical origins, for example, fires involving PMD and electrical risers; (b) we had 42 fires due to naked light, for example, candle flame, flame from lighters; (c) we had 32 fires due to indiscriminate disposal of lighted materials, for example, cigarette butts; and (d) we had five fires due to other causes.
The number of fires at HDB common corridors and passageways has been decreasing over the years.
With regard to how we work with the agencies, we have been working with HDB, Town Councils, MCSTs and many other stakeholders to educate and raise the awareness of how we can play our part in minimising or responding to fires. What we used to do was, if you remember, we had the Emergency Preparedness Day, prior to COVID-19. When the COVID-19 situation stablises, we will launch the Community Resilience Day. It would be roadshows in the heartlands where we will teach residents emergency preparedness and fire safety skills.
The Member can also find more details on the SCDF website.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring of Manpower Policies in Hospitals with Respect To Rest and Leave Days of Nurses and Doctors","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry monitors manpower policies in hospitals with respect to nurses’ and doctors' rest days and off days for compliance with the Employment Act; (b) whether the present Omicron COVID-19 wave constitutes a situation under section 38(2) of the Employment Act which allows an employer to require an employee to exceed the limit of hours worked and to work on a rest day; and (c) how it ensures nurses and doctors have sufficient rest.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Health (Dr Koh Poh Koon) (for the Minister for Health): Sir, rest day provisions and work hour limits for public healthcare workers are governed by the Employment Act. For those healthcare workers that are not covered by the Employment Act, their rest day provisions and work hour limits are set out in public healthcare clusters’ employment contracts.
COVID-19 has stretched our healthcare resources and placed a heavy burden on healthcare staff. All our public healthcare workers have been working doubly hard in this time of crisis. Whenever there is essential and urgent need that requires overtime work, employers will accord overtime pay as required by section 38 of the Act.
We urge cooperation and understanding from everyone as the hospitals reduce non-urgent and non-life-threatening care treatments to manage workload, decant those who need less intensive care to Community Treatment Facilities and curtailed visitations to hospitals. Public healthcare clusters have allowed staff to rest and recharge by taking days off, including taking annual leave, whenever possible. MOH is supporting them by doing whatever we can and stepping up on vaccination. We hope to turn the corner soon from this current wave of COVID-19 infections.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Louis Ng.
\tMr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Thank you, Sir. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. Could I just check, specifically, whether MOH has studied this issue further? In terms of overtime hours, how much are the nurses working overtime, the doctors as well during the past few months or two years in this pandemic? Two, I think it is really a manpower crunch. So, is MOH also studying the resignation rate, especially among the experienced healthcare workers, whom I understand are, leaving more as compared to the junior staff? And also, what is MOH doing to try and retain these workers?
\tDr Koh Poh Koon: I thank the Member for his concern on the workload of our healthcare workers. As I have said, this is a crisis of a generation and it is the truth that many of our healthcare workers are going above and beyond their call of duty, extended hours, also in the primary care sector, our GPs as well. But this is their commitment to respond to the crisis and pulling their weight to make sure they become a strong last line of defence for our safety and our health.
In MOH's Committee of Supply (COS) in the next few days, we will be giving a fuller response on some of the strategies that MOH will look at to support our healthcare staff and also to look at boosting our manpower resources over the coming decade. So, I hope the Member will give us time and we will share more and details in the coming COS.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Occupancy Cap for HDB Jumbo Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for National Development whether the occupancy cap for HDB jumbo flats can be increased from the current six persons to between eight and 10 persons.
\tThe Minister of State for National Development (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for National Development): As HDB flats are intended to serve the housing needs of flat owners and their family members, there is no limit imposed on the number of family members who can live together in an HDB flat. Occupancy caps apply when the flat owners rent out their flat or bedrooms to unrelated persons. This is to minimise the disamenities caused by overcrowding in our public housing estates and maintain a conducive living environment for all residents.
The current occupancy cap for 4-room and larger flats, including jumbo flats, is six persons. This is aligned to the occupancy cap for private residential properties of all sizes. Increasing the occupancy cap would likely create more disamenities when the flat or bedrooms are rented out to unrelated persons.
Should flat owners need to exceed the occupancy cap when renting out their flats or bedrooms, HDB will consider the request and may exercise flexibility based on the circumstances of each case.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Usage Trend of Vaporisers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the statistics for 2021 shows an increasing trend in the number of people using vaporisers; and (b) amongst the users which consist of school-going youths and children, which age group and education level saw the highest number of vaporiser users.
\tThe Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Health): Currently, there is no available local data on the use of vaporisers as these are illegal products and reliable self-reported data is difficult to obtain. However, in 2021, there were 7,593 offenders, across all ages, caught for import of vaporisers, compared to 6,192 in 2020. Similarly, in 2021, there were a total of 4,697 offenders caught for purchase, use or possession of vaporisers, of which about one-third were under-18, compared to a total of 1,266 offenders in 2020.
While data on number of offenders may not represent the total number of users, the trend does suggest a general increase in use of vaporisers in Singapore.
This worrying trend of increased vaping is also observed internationally. In response, MOH will work together with relevant partners and stakeholders to strengthen enforcement measures, as well as enhance public education efforts. The Health Promotion Board will also roll out a vape-free campaign later in 2022 targeted at youths and younger adults through popular digital platforms.
Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix, unless Members had asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extradition (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BI","content":"[(proc text) \"to amend the Extradition Act 1968 and to make consequential and related amendments to certain other Acts\", (proc text)]
[(proc text) presented by the Second Minister for Law (Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai) read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Estimates of Expenditure for the Financial Year 1 April 2022 to 31 March 2023","subTitle":"Committee of Supply - Paper Cmd 12 of 2022","sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [4th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
[(proc text) Head S (cont) – (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [4 March 2022], (proc text)]
[(proc text) \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\" – [Mr Desmond Choo]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.
The Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Chairman, in his National Day Rally speech last year, Prime Minister Lee accepted the recommendations by the Tripartite Workgroup on Lower-Wage Workers. This refreshes the Government’s social compact with our lower-wage workers to better support them, provide stronger wage outcomes and for all of us to play a stronger role to create a more inclusive and cohesive society.
We have already made good progress in uplifting our lower-wage workers through efforts such as Workfare and the Progressive Wage Model (PWM).
In the last five years from 2016 to 2021, we have seen good wage growth across our workforce. Real median income of full-time employed residents has increased steadily at 2.1% per annum. In comparison, real income at the 20th percentile – our lower-wage workers – has risen faster than median at 2.7% per annum. This means that we are reducing the income gap even as we move up as a workforce.
Our moves to enhance wage growth in the PWM sectors and introduce the new Local Qualifying Salary, or LQS, provide us with further opportunities to narrow income inequality in the coming years.
In my speech, Mr Chairman, I will elaborate on the progress of the Tripartite Workgroup on Lower-Wage Workers recommendations, and how Progressive Wages and Workfare will continue to be the key thrusts in our efforts to uplift our lower-wage workers.
I will also elaborate on our efforts to strengthen HR capabilities, so that HR professionals are better able to support businesses.
With your permission, Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout detailing our efforts to support our lower-wage workers.
The Chairman: Please do. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Thank you. The Tripartite Workgroup on Lower-Wage Workers report was released in August 2021 and outlines our recommendations for a refreshed approach and ambition for an inclusive and uplifting society.
We have seen good progress since the release of the recommendations. New PWM sectors, such as Retail and F&B, have been identified and negotiations are underway. We can expect to see significant progress in wage outcomes in the coming years for our existing PWMs in the Cleaning, Security, Landscape and Lift and Escalator sectors.
For example, from 2022 to 2028, entry-level cleaners will see a cumulative wage increase of up to 84%, to receive baseline wages of about $2,400 in 2028. The other existing PWMs have also shown similarly strong momentum, and you can find them in our factsheet; you will see significant increases across the various PWMs. They reflect the Workgroup’s commitment to narrow income dispersion between workers at the lowest 20th percentile and median and this will strengthen our social compact.
At the same time, our overarching principle continues to be that wages and productivity should rise in tandem. Hence, we not only want wages to rise, but we also want to see productivity increase, through upskilling of workers and through the transformation of businesses.
We have seen more Singaporeans joining sectors with the PWM, such as Security and Landscape, as wages and working conditions improve. For example, the employment of locals in the Security sector grew by an average of 5% per year, compared to 2015, which was before PWM was introduced. This is different from some other countries where broad-based minimum wages caused unintended unemployment. It is this sustainable progress that gives the Tripartite Partners confidence and the impetus to expand the Progressive Wage Model to cover new sectors and new occupations.
Starting in September this year, we will implement the new Local Qualifying Salary requirement, as well as the Retail PWM and the extension of PWM to cover in-house cleaners, security officers and landscape workers. This will be followed closely by our second wave of moves in March 2023, just next year about this time, when we implement the Food Services PWM and Occupational Progressive Wages. Overall, by early 2023, 234,000, or more than eight in 10 full-time lower-wage workers will be covered by Progressive Wages.
Given the competitive labour market, we are confident that the PWMs will continue to set the pace for the wage growth of our lower-wage workers. Hence, even when lower-wage workers who are not covered directly by any PWM should still see good wage growth, as their employers will likely have to adjust their wages to keep pace with the market and to retain them.
Beyond uplifting wages, we also want to encourage our employers to pay more attention to other aspects of the well-being of our lower-wage workers. Therefore, following the recommendation of the Tripartite Workgroup, I am pleased to now launch a new Tripartite Standard on Advancing Well-being of Lower-Wage Workers.
The Tripartite Standards (TS) are a set of good employment practices that all employers should implement at their workplaces. The new Tripartite Standard on Advancing Well-Being of Lower-Wage Workers will encourage employers to provide better workplace support for our lower-wage workers, focusing on areas of training and career development, to provide rest areas as well as care for their mental well-being, as mentioned by Mr Melvin Yong.
We recognise that our workforce has experienced significant disruptions to their jobs during COVID-19. Therefore, it is important that employers cultivate a healthy working environment. Minister of State Gan Siow Huang will elaborate on these efforts in her speech.
To strengthen our social compact, the efforts of the Tripartite Partners and employers alone are not enough. We must recognise that all of us have a role to play – all of us as consumers. It is in this light that the Tripartite Workgroup recommended establishing a new Progressive Wage Mark, or PW Mark, accreditation. We want to help individual consumers and corporate buyers easily identify progressive employers that are supporting lower-wage workers, and support these employers through their purchases.
The PW Mark will be launched in the second half of this year. Employers that pay at least the relevant Sectoral or Occupational Progressive Wages to eligible workers, as well as the Local Qualifying Salary to all other local workers, will be accredited with the PW Mark. For employers that have gone one step further to adopt the new Tripartite Standard on Advancing Well-Being of Lower-Wage Workers, they will be recognised with the PW Mark Plus accreditation.
To rally the industry to adopt the PW Mark, the Singapore Business Federation has agreed to help administer the PW Mark. The Government will do our part to lend strong support to the PW Mark. From March 2023, we will require all suppliers awarded Government contracts to be accredited with the PW Mark, starting with contracts with larger value. More details will be announced in the coming months. We encourage potential suppliers to apply and obtain the PW Mark early once it is launched.
Chairman, putting our Progressive Wage measures together, this increases our coverage of Progressive Wages further up to 266,000, or 94% of full-time lower-wage workers – put together, 94%.
As we significantly widen the coverage of Progressive Wages and introduce the new Local Qualifying Salary requirement, we recognise that the employers would need some transitional support to adjust to the changes in the immediate term. The Government has thus committed its strong support through the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme, or PWCS, which was announced by the Minister for Finance earlier.
To recap, under the PWCS, there will be two tiers of funding. First, the Government will co-fund the first two most recent years of wage increases given to resident workers up to a wage ceiling of $2,500, for a five-year period from 2022 to 2026. Co-funding will be at 50% in the first two years, 30% in the next two years, before tapering off at 15% in 2026.
With economic conditions remaining uncertain in the immediate term, the PWCS will also provide a second tier of funding to cover those earning between $2,500 and $3,000, for a shorter period of three years.
With PWCS, the Government is providing direct support to the firms as they adjust to the Progressive Wage and LQS moves. We want to encourage all firms, including those not in the PWM sectors, to provide wage increases voluntarily in the immediate term when the Government’s support is the strongest. We urge employers to use this period of support to also accelerate the structural transformation of their business processes. Employers must take the lead in improving firm-level productivity, so that wage increases will be sustainable for businesses, even when the support ends.
I thus agree with Mr Sharael Taha that employers must press on to innovate and digitalise. The Government is expanding the range of solutions under schemes such as the Productivity Solutions Grant and Advanced Digital Solutions scheme to support such efforts. Working in tandem with these schemes, I encourage our trade associations and chambers to play a key role in promoting innovation and digitalisation efforts, and share best practices.
Workers should also continue to take the initiative in upgrading their skills and applying these skills at work, be it to increase productivity or to take on new roles. This will help them continue to support business transformation and ensure that wage improvements are sustainable in the long run. Therefore, I fully support Mr Sharael Taha’s suggestions for encouraging lower-wage workers to upskill.
Today, the Workfare Skills Support scheme provides incentives to encourage lower-wage workers to upskill, through training allowances and a training commitment award. In 2020, MOM expanded the income qualifying criteria, and increased the amount of allowance and award. I hope that our workers will take the opportunity to upskill and improve their career prospects.
Moving on to the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme, or what we know as Workfare for short. Workfare was introduced in 2007 to narrow income inequality; to help our lower-wage workers save more for their retirement; and to encourage our lower-wage workers to work regularly, whether it is for full-time or part-time work, depending on what best suits their circumstances. Fifteen years on, almost a million workers have benefited from over $8.6 billion dollars in Workfare payouts.
One worker who benefited from Workfare over the years is Mdm Timah Binte Mohamad Kasan. Being the sole breadwinner while raising two children was not easy for Mdm Timah. Workfare made it better for her and her family by topping up her income since 2007. In total, she has received over $34,000 cash and CPF top-ups from Workfare. This has helped her support her husband, who is unable to work and her children while paying off her mortgage for her 3-room HDB flat.
Mdm Timah is also supported by other Government schemes. For example, she currently receives Silver Support payouts of $720 per quarter. She also chose to boost her retirement income via the lease buyback scheme and received a $30,000 cash bonus on top of the proceeds from selling part of the flat's lease. The support from Workfare has not stopped, Workfare will continue to boost her income for as long as she wishes to continue working.
Uplifting our lower-wage workers is a collective responsibility. As businesses and consumers pay our lower-wage workers better, the Government, too, will do our part. As announced by the Minister for Finance, the Government will be making significant enhancements to Workfare from 2023. Let me briefly recap the enhancements here.
Workers earning up to $2,500 a month will now be able to qualify for Workfare, up from the current qualifying income cap of $2,300. Workers will also need to earn at least $500 a month to qualify for Workfare. Members have debated this extensively. We understand and share your concerns.
But allow me to first clarify a statement that I made at the Budget debate about the number of Workfare recipients that would be affected by the new criterion. The 20,000 figure, as cited by Minister Tan See Leng, had already taken into account the expected wage growth from the PWM expansion and new LQS requirement. Our objective, in line with Workfare's overall design, is to nudge all our workers, part-time and full-time, towards more gainful employment so that we give them a higher sense of achievement. We also want to better target Workfare at those who need it, our lower-wage workers, those with lower household incomes and not casual workers doing vacation jobs, for example.
At the same, we will ensure that those deserving and in need, will continue receiving Workfare, by providing concessions for them. For low-income part-time workers who qualify for ComCare, they will continue receiving Workfare, even if they earn less than $500 per month. There are some who want to work more but are unable to do so, due to various personal circumstances, such as persons with disabilities (PwDs). They too, will continue receiving Workfare. In fact, PwDs will receive the highest tier of Workfare.
I hope this assures Members of this House that those who are in need and who are deserving of Workfare will continue to receive it.
Here, I wish to reiterate a point that Minister Tan also made at the Budget Debate – Workfare is not the endgame for these workers earning less than $500 per month. We need to help these part-time workers find jobs of the appropriate quality and quantity of working hours to earn at least $500 or more if they can. And we have a whole suite of employment facilitation programmes and initiatives, ready to assist.
Finally, we will increase the payouts. Older workers, like Mdm Timah, will continue to receive the highest Workfare payouts, of up to $4,200 a year or $350 per month. Workfare has supported our persons with disabilities (PwDs) for more than a decade and certainly they can do with some extra support. From 2023, with the enhancements, we will provide a stronger helping hand by placing all PwDs on the highest payout tier of $4,200 a year.
We recognise that our younger and middle-aged workers are also dealing with greater family and financial obligations. Many of them are taking care of both their children and their elderly parents, while still paying off their housing loan. This is why we will also be increasing Workfare payouts for them.
Mr Abdul Samad Abdul Wahab suggested to exclude overtime pay when assessing a worker's eligibility for Workfare. Overtime pay, together with basic pay and bonuses make up a worker's total income that will help support the worker and his or her family. As Workfare helps lower-wage workers by supplementing their income, looking at the total income earned by the worker enables us to better assess the additional support to be provided via Workfare. If we had only used basic salaries to determine who will qualify for Workfare, some workers with low basic salary but high overall pay may displace another worker with higher basic salary but overall, he does not get much more, that is all he gets. The worker displaced would have needed Workfare more but does not get it. But the worker with high bonuses gets Workfare. Therefore, you can see the challenges of why we go towards gross wages.
Mr Chairman, Workfare has supported generations of workers and helped them save more for retirement. We will now extend this same support to younger workers, like Ms Lily. Ms Lily is an anonymised name as she prefers for us to not use her real name. Ms Lily is turning 30 years old next year. She works at a pest control company. She bought a flat four years ago and is living with her six children and her elderly mother. She is current receiving a suite of Government support to help her with her household expenses, including financial support such as the ComCare Short-to-Medium Term Assistance and the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme for her school-going children.
From 2023, workers aged 30 to 34 like Ms Lily, many of whom are just starting their families or supporting elderly parents, can expect to receive up to $2,100 Workfare payouts a year. She is looking forward to the boost in income, which will be an additional source of help with her household expenses. She says that the Workfare monies will be used to pay her HDB instalments and buy school supplies for her children.
Chairman, these enhancements will apply to all lower-wage employees and self-employed persons (SEPs), regardless of occupation. As pointed out by Dr Shahira Abdullah, to qualify for Workfare, SEPs need to declare their incomes and make the required MediSave contributions. The need to meet CPF obligations is part of Workfare's eligibility criteria and applies to both employees and SEPs. Nonetheless, CPF Board does exercise flexibilities to help SEPs facing difficulties make their CPF contributions.
Overall, the enhancements will benefit more workers, over half a million lower-wage workers from 2023 will benefit from Workfare, up from 460,000 today. Progressive Wages and Workfare will continue to form the foundation of the Government's multi-layer support for our lower-wage workers.
Even as we roll up our sleeves and implement these moves over the next two years and beyond, I am reminded of our workers like Mr Mohammed Ali. In 2017, Mr Ali was an entry-level Security Officer, earning about $1,700 per month. As a worker earning less, he received some support from Workfare. Guided by the PWM's career pathway and with training support from Workfare Skills Support, he upskilled and took on new responsibilities.
Today, he is a Senior Security Supervisor overseeing around forty officers. He earns about $3,100 per month, an increase of $1,400 compared to when he first started. He has since graduated from Workfare as his income exceeds the current Workfare qualifying income cap. This is a good and intended outcome. While Workfare provided Mr Ali with income and training support when he needed it, Progressive Wages also offered a progression pathway to higher wages and better skills for workers like him. Mr Ali, I am glad, made the most out of it and I am happy to share that he has graduated from the Workfare scheme, as Progressive Wages has enabled him to earn more.
With the new recommendations for the Security PWM, Mr Ali will earn $3,550 per month in 2024. And by 2028, Senior Security Supervisors like Mr Ali will earn at least $4,430, a significant progress compared to $1,700 when he first started. Members may also be pleased to know that under the PWM, entry-level Security Officers will earn at least $3,530 by 2028.
Mr Ali’s story is also situated within the larger story of progression for his company, APRO Asian Protection. Spurred by the PWM and industry transformation efforts, APRO has adopted various tech-based solutions to increase their productivity and their value-add to service buyers.
Moving onto a separate but pertinent topic, HR plays a vital role in supporting our workers and businesses. I thus echo Mr Edward Chia, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Patrick Tay's calls for companies to build up their HR competencies and capabilities.
The Institute for HR Professionals (IHRP) accredits and certifies HR professionals as well as guide their continuous professional development. To date, there are more than 5,000 certified aspiring and practising HR professionals who support one another developing and sharing HR best practices. IHRP also provides curated learning resources such as HR playbooks as well as facilitates peer-led Communities of Practice and networking opportunities. We encourage more employer and HR professionals to join this expanding network. MOM will also continue to work with NTUC, SNEF and the TACs to strongly encourage more HR professionals to be certified by IHRP.
Mr Patrick Tay also asked for an update on the Human Capital Partnership (HCP) programme. Since the launch of the HCP Programme in 2017, we have awarded the HCP mark to more than 600 employers, who employ over 210,000 locals, or about 10% of the total local workforce. We will continue to work with the Tripartite Partners to identify and recognise our progressive employers. Mr Chairman, allow me to recap some of MOM's efforts in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As Minister for Manpower has shared, MOM is committed to shape our manpower policies to enable greater opportunities for all and for us to progress as a vibrant nation.
Let me start by talking about our workforce policies.
Our foreign workforce policies are guided by our goals of a strong Singaporean core, complemented by a high-quality and diverse foreign workforce. First, we will ensure that Employment Pass (EP) and S Pass holders are comparable in quality to the top one-third of our local PMET and APT workforce respectively. The qualifying salaries and levies will be raised accordingly to meet this benchmark.
We will also introduce Complementarity Assessment Framework, or COMPASS, as part of the Employment Pass framework. COMPASS is a points-based system that holistically evaluates the complementarity of EP applicants. It will take into account; firstly, salaries of applicants relative to local PMET wages in their sector; second, the applicant’s qualification; third, the firm's nationality diversity; and fourth, the firms support for local employment.
We will also look at other factors like whether the candidate possesses skills that are in shortage or whether the firm supports our strategic economic priorities. In future, EP applicants must meet the EP qualifying salary, and also score sufficient points under COMPASS. Existing EP holders must also meet these criteria when their work passes come up for renewal.
So what does all these mean for our local workforce? COMPASS will take into account many more factors in the assessment of EP applications. Together with the requirement for a higher EP qualifying salary, locals can be assured that EP holders here are of good calibre, and not just because their salaries are lower than locals. With COMPASS, locals should also feel more assured that firms will be incentivised to improve their employee diversity and strengthen their support for local employment.
Chairman, we will also build on our existing efforts to uplift lower-wage workers. We will expand the PWM and implement a new Local Qualifying Salary (LQS) requirement. By early 2023, 234,000, or more than 8 in 10 full-time lower-wage workers will be covered by progressive wages. The Government is doing its part, through the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS) which funds the wage increases of our lower-wage workers. We will also enhance the Workfare Income Supplement scheme, to provide higher payouts to all our Workfare recipients. Overall, the Government will spend $9 billion over the next five years on these two schemes.
(In English): Mr Chairman, to conclude, our suite of measures will benefit both lower-wage workers and businesses, and allow us to renew and strengthen our social compact. The Government will spend $9 billion over the next five years for the Progressive Wage Credit scheme and enhance Workfare. And this reflects this Government's, the PAP Government's strong belief and commitment to uplift our lower-wage workers and to build a fair and inclusive society.
Our social compact must be one which everyone enjoys the fruits of growth and that no worker is left behind as Singapore progresses. We must be careful to not let our social compact be eroded by inequality, otherwise our society, including our businesses, will not function well and much less thrive. We have made significant progress over the last decade. And Mr Chairman, we will do even better in this decade in creating a more progressive and inclusive society. [Applause.]
Mr Chairman: Minister of State Gan Siow Huang.
The Minister of State for Manpower (Ms Gan Siow Huang): Mr Chairman, I would like to thank our Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) Chair, Mr Desmond Choo, for painting very clearly the challenges that businesses and workers are going through and that are lying ahead of us.
Our workplaces have seen major changes amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. In these unprecedented times, we have had to adapt and be flexible. Working from home, which was not so common pre-COVID-19, became the default mode of work for many of us for the past two years. As our workers navigate uncertainty and stresses during this period, the importance of supporting their well-being has come into even sharper focus.
My speech will focus on how the MOM team will uphold inclusive and progressive workplace practices, so that everyone has fair opportunities to contribute and thrive at work.
Women have made significant progress in Singapore. The employment rate for women aged 25 to 64 has been growing over the past two decades and continues to grow from 73.2% in 2020 to 75.1% in 2021, despite the pandemic. As we prepare to celebrate International Women’s Day tomorrow, we should take pride in the resilience of the female workforce in Singapore.
While there is progress made, there is room for more women to be active in the workforce. I participated in the nation-wide Conversations on Singapore Women’s Development last year. A key concern raised amongst women was the need to help caregivers remain in or re-enter the workforce. We recognise that women carry heavier caregiving responsibilities at home. To manage the caregiving roles, some women work part-time with reduced pay or even leave their careers early.
I agree with Ms Janet Ang and Ms Yeo Wan Ling that one of the ways to enable more women to continue their careers is having access to flexible work arrangements. This can be in the form of flexi-time, flexi-place, or flexi-load. Flexi-work arrangements apply to men too and allow more balanced sharing of caregiving responsibilities between women and men.
The pandemic has underscored how flexible work arrangements can strengthen business continuity and resilience. As pointed out by Mr Yip Hon Weng, flexible work arrangements help companies better attract and retain talent. Flexible work arrangements also allow businesses to tap on a larger pool of workers including seniors and differently-abled workers, as suggested by Mr Sharael Taha.
Businesses recognise these benefits. In 2021, 73% of companies that adopted flexible work arrangements said they were likely to continue offering them post-COVID-19.
We applaud the many employers who have made the shift towards flexible work arrangements. Some have shown their commitment by adopting the Tripartite Standard on flexible work arrangements. Adopters are recognised as progressive employers that put in place HR practices for effective communication and implementation of flexible work arrangements. Today, one in four employees work in companies that have adopted the Tripartite Standard. And this coverage is steadily growing.
The Public Service has taken the lead by adopting the Tripartite Standard and I urge more companies to come on board. I agree with Mr Edward Chia, Ms Janet Ang, Mr Sharael Taha, Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Mr Yip Hon Weng, that we have made much progress in flexible work arrangements in the last two years and we must not lose momentum. Similar to the trend in other parts of the world, flexible work arrangements will become the norm of future workplaces.
MOM will work with our Tripartite Partners to see how we can sustain flexible work arrangements, even as the safe management measures are relaxed. On the idea of legislating flexible work arrangements brought up by Mr Louis Chua and Mr Yip Hon Weng, we should be careful not to take an overly rigid approach that risks creating a litigious workplace culture with more disputes, or inadvertently affecting the employability of the people whom we seek to help.
For countries, such as the UK and Australia with legislation that provide employees and caregivers the right to request for flexible work arrangements, employers can still reject the request on business grounds. To create real change on the ground in the next few years, our priority is to help employers overcome barriers in implementing and continuing flexible work arrangements. For some, the nature of business operations makes it challenging to offer flexible work arrangements and they lack the know-how to overcome these barriers. These concerns and hesitations are understandable, as different sectors will have different needs and circumstances.
As Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Mr Louis Ng have raised, work from home is not as practical for frontline work. Employers could consider other forms of flexible work arrangements, like flexi-shift scheduling, staggered work hours and job sharing, which offer workers alternative flexibilities.
The Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) has started training HR professionals to implement hybrid work and after-hours communication policies.
Separately, the Institute for HR Professionals (IHRP) has developed a playbook on hybrid workplaces to help employers and HR professionals implement hybrid work, as well as update their HR processes, fair appraisal of employees on flexible work arrangements. I encourage companies to make use of these resources that are available. We will be sharing more details on how we will ramp up provision of flexible work arrangements in the coming White Paper on Singapore Women's Development.
It is important to build mutual understanding and trust between employers and employees. That is why instead of taking a legislative approach for various workplace practices such as flexible work arrangements, after-hours communication, mandatory breastfeeding breaks, we first focus on equipping employers to find the right balance between supporting employees needs and business needs. \"Take care of your employees and they will take care of your business\" – these wise words are from Mr Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin group. I believe many employers here feel the same way too and will support employees' requests, if they are reasonable.
At the same time, employees need to demonstrate that progressive workplace practices help to improve staff morale, productivity and loyalty. Those who feel aggrieved and are not able to address their grievances within their companies, may approach TAFEP for assistance and advice. Members have also asked for further review of leave provisions. Mr Louis Ng suggested raising minimum annual leave entitlements, introducing parent care leave and increasing parental leave provisions, while Mr Gerald Giam and Ms Mariam Jaafar spoke about sick leave.
We regularly review our leave provisions and acknowledge the real needs underpinning the Members' suggestions, but increasing leave provisions should not be the default solution. We have been advocating the adoption of flexible work arrangements precisely because they are flexible and able to cater to all forms of individual needs. We should also recognise that there is a cost to increasing leave provisions and we must balance this carefully against what businesses can sustain in order to avoid dampening jobs growth.
On Mr Louis Chua's suggestion on a four-day work week. Members may wish to refer to the TAFEP website for information on how companies can implement such flexible work arrangements, including policy templates on four-day work week and case studies of companies that have successfully done so. And Mr Louis Chua perhaps may want to consider implementing four-day work week in his company or department too and share the useful insights with the rest of us.
On the issue of sick leave for employees on short-term contracts, we encourage employers to exercise flexibility in granting medical leave before the three-month mark. To attract manpower in a tight labour market, it is in the interest of employers to be flexible.
Ms Mariam Jaafar suggested that we do away with the need for employees to produce a medical certificate in order to take sick leave. The Tripartite Partners' current position is the employees should produce a Medical Certificate (MC) when utilising sick leave, this helps to deter malingering and maintain a more disciplined workforce. Nonetheless, the Employment Act does not prohibit employers from providing sick leave without MC and companies are free to do so as part of their talent attraction and retention strategies.
This pandemic is, however, an exceptional time. Tripartite Partners agreed that employees should not request MCs from workers who test positive for COVID-19, so as to alleviate the stress on healthcare workers and avoid compromising the standard of care of other patients who genuinely require medical care during this period.
Given our ageing population, challenges faced by our workforce in meeting caregiving needs of elderly family members will increase. Mr Yip Hon Weng and Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked how we could better support household's needs for domestic services, including caregiving. In 2017, MOM introduced the commercial Household Services Scheme (HSS) which allows HSS companies to hire more migrant workers to provide part-time home cleaning services.
HSS workers are deployed to multiple households on a part-time basis to provide selected households services. This gives households, especially those that need domestic help for only a few hours a day or a week, more options. To better help Singaporeans balance their work and family commitments, we will broaden the scope of HSS to include basic child-minding and elder-minding services. Households will be able to engage services of HSS companies to look after their children at home or provide some basic assistance for their family members in activities of daily living.
Mr Yip Hon Weng and Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked about the safeguards that the Government will put in place to ensure HSS workers are qualified to provide child-and-elder-minding services. Today, there are already private companies that provide such services. We will study the industry best practices as we expand the scope of HSS companies. MOM will also be conducting engagements with the stakeholders, such as households and HSS companies to work out the implementation details over the next few months. We aim to implement the HSS expansion in the second half of this year. Mr Chairman, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] To give households more options to meet their needs for domestic services, the HSS allows eligible companies offering domestic services to hire more migrant workers to provide part-time home cleaning services.
Given the growing caregiving needs due to our ageing population, and to better help parents to balance their work and family commitments, we are looking to broaden the HSS scope to allow participating companies to provide the basic child-minding and elder-minding services.
Households will be able to engage HSS workers to look after their children at home or provide some basic assistance for the elderly in activities of daily living. We aim to implement the HSS expansion in the second half of this year.
(In English): I will now touch on our efforts to enhance mental health and well-being of our workforce, an issue that Miss Rachel Ong and Mr Melvin Yong had raised. The Government has been working with our partners to roll out tools and resources to encourage companies to adopt mental well-being initiatives, for instance, the Tripartite Advisory on mental well-being at workplaces was released in 2020. Last year, the Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Council expanded the code of practice on WSH Risk Management (RMCP) to explicitly cover mental well-being.
The expansion included examples on how employers can identify, evaluate and manage risk related to mental health at the workplace. This marks a significant step in recognising that workplace safety and health includes mental well-being, beyond physical injuries.
In 2021, we launched iWorkHealth, a free, company-administered survey to help employers identify workplace stressors and improvement areas. There is also an Institute for Human Resource Professionals (IHRP) playbook on \"Workplace Mental Well-Being” to guide HR professionals to support their colleagues as well as mental well-being talks and workshops by the WSH Council and the Health Promotion Board that employees can attend at little or no cost.
We still have some way to go ahead of us. Based on NTUC’s 2021 Special Report on Mental Wellness at the Workplace, 54% of employees were not satisfied with their companies' mental well-being initiatives. The Government will step up our support to help organisations become more progressive in adopting mental well-being initiatives. We are studying how Employee Assistance Programmes, which provide confidential counselling services to employees, can be made more accessible.
As raised by several Members of the House, there is growing demand for support for workers with mental health conditions. According to a recent Singapore mental health study, one in seven people in Singapore had experienced a mental health condition in their lifetime. We need to strengthen employment support for persons with mental health conditions so that they are not excluded from employment.
Persons with mental health conditions may need flexibility in their work schedules to continue with therapy or counselling while remaining in employment. For those who had to leave their previous jobs or even take an extended break from the workforce, they may need help with the job search process. Agencies, including the Institute of Mental Health, Singapore Association for Mental Health and Singapore Anglican Community Services, provide pre- and in-employment support to persons with mental health conditions and their employers.
Dawn is one of the individuals who has benefited from the support provided by the Singapore Anglican Community Services (SACS). Dawn’s bipolar condition started in her teens and she received counselling during her times in the University. A year into her job, she suffered a relapse. She found out about SACS’ Integrated Employment Services programme where she enrolled for training in conflict resolution, stress management and personal effectiveness. With support from SACS’ job-matching services, Dawn successfully gained employment in a full-time job and she has since remained in employment for more than two years.
Dawn’s story is a positive example of how some persons with mental health conditions manage to receive the right support. But we worry that some may not be referred to available employment support and some employers, through lack of awareness about mental health support and conditions, wrongly believe that it is too difficult for them to support employees like Dawn.
The National Council of Social Service (NCSS) is currently piloting an Employer Support Grant to incentivise employers to implement workplace adjustments for their employees with mental health conditions. We will study the effectiveness of the pilot and develop further plans to support employees with mental health conditions.
MOM will also work with other members of the Interagency Taskforce on Mental Health and Well-Being to strengthen the ecosystem. We will be engaging stakeholders and members of the public to get their views.
Finally, I wish to touch on workplace fairness, which Mr Sharael Taha, Mr Patrick Tay, Mr Heng Chee How, Ms Janet Ang and Mr Raj Joshua Thomas have raised. The pandemic has not stopped our efforts to foster fair workplaces. As announced recently, we have decided to take the very significant step of enshrining the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices in law. This move will help to manage longer-term anxieties over ageism and provide better protection for vulnerable groups. A wider range of penalties can also be imposed on errant employers, commensurate with their wrongdoing. To this end, we must put in place a robust system to deal with claims, while keeping it efficient for workers and employers. The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness is deliberating these important matters and continuing to consult widely. The committee will report on its recommendations in due course.
To conclude, the COVID-19 pandemic has brought about many challenges and given rise to new stresses at the workplace. At the same time, it has created opportunities and stronger impetus for us to push ahead for changes to make workplaces fairer and more inclusive.
In his speech, Minister Tan See Leng spoke about sailing our ship into an even brighter future. The MOM team will do our best to support employers and employees as they chart the path towards more progressive workplaces where everyone can thrive in. Together, we can sail our ship sustainably for many more years to come. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon.
The Senior Minister of State for Manpower (Dr Koh Poh Koon): Thank you, Mr Chairman. I would like to make a correction on my speech made last Friday at the COS and I quote:
\"As mentioned in my response to the Adjournment Motion put forth by Mr Louis Ng last month and in response to Mr Leon Perera's question on easing of restrictions on migrant workers, let me say that migrant workers can visit recreation centres, or RCs, daily since September 2021.\" It should be December 2021. [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head S (Ministry of Manpower)\" debate, Official Reports, 4 March 2022, Vol 95, Issue No 54, Budget section.]
The Chairman: Clarifications, please? Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Mr Chairman, I have two clarifications for the Minister for surfacing COMPASS as a framework to improve foreign worker complementarity. I would like to ask why is COMPASS limited to only workers who have a fixed monthly salary of below $20,000. How does it work hand-in-hand with the Fair Consideration Framework to prevent abuse for companies hiring workers above that pay range?
Second clarification: how can the HR community also play a role in supporting capability transfers and localisation efforts?
The Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): I want to thank the Member Mr Desmond Choo for checking with us on the $20,000 bar. We took a practical approach on this. The EP holders at the $20,000 mark are typically senior management. They include C-suite personnel and specialists at the top of their field. This is especially so in certain sectors, including even some of the SMEs. They would most likely have gone through even more selective hiring processes to be appointed in their company since these roles typically require very specific capabilities or skillsets. Regardless of these exemptions, firms are expected to practise fair hiring and also to develop their own local talent pipeline. More importantly, our focus is to continue to help Singaporeans rise to the top by enabling them to compete strongly.
Just like the qualifying salaries, this $20,000 exemption bar is also not carved in stone and we will review it from time to time. As an aside, we actually look at the number that would cover local PMETs and we find that this is the level at this particular point in time, that COMPASS would cover quite a high majority of individuals. Hence, the bar, at this point in time, is at $20,000.
In terms of the HR community playing a role in supporting capability transfer and localisation efforts, we work closely with the community, whether it is Singapore Human Resources Institute (SHRI) and IHRP, and beyond that, with companies, trade chambers and so on. We exhort them to encourage HR managers to undergo courses to continue to keep themselves updated with regard to our policies and the improvements towards our framework, whether it is the Fair Consideration Framework to now, the new COMPASS that we are going to roll out.
And we believe that for those companies that have a very progressive and forward-looking vision in terms of improving their workforce, we will not hesitate to roll out schemes to support them to transform because, at the end of the day, our focus is raising the quality of the EP holder, to the top one-third in the local PMET space. Of course, we believe that, with that, we will be able to uplift our entire workforce to compete globally and also not just develop and grow our own timber, but to be complemented by foreign talent in those areas that we have a need for.
The Chairman: Mr Yip Hon Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have two clarifications for the Minister. One, will the transparency of the COMPASS framework allow employers to game the new system and, two, would the new COMPASS framework allow for more EP holders into Singapore?
Dr Tan See Leng: Perhaps I can answer the Member's second question first. COMPASS is an additional stage in the entire EP application process. So, in no way will it loosen our current EP framework. The fact that the majority of our existing EP holders pass COMPASS is an encouraging one. And COMPASS affirms the value they bring. It instils the discipline on such firms to continue to select complementary candidates, uphold diversity and also support local employment.
So, COMPASS is an added framework on top of the first stage, which is the EP qualifying salary. There are and there will be some firms which do not pass COMPASS. These include firms that make a habit out of hiring EP holders not due to their high calibre or skills but based on the convenience of networks, such as an old boys' club, and without taking heed of our calls to develop the workforce. COMPASS ensures that these firms cannot simply carry on with their status quo and they must fundamentally relook their hiring practices.
As far as the gaming itself is concerned, we will strengthen our enforcement process. We will have in place strong governance measures to guard against any dishonest attempts to game COMPASS. Today, we already have processes to enforce against fraud for criteria considered in our current framework, such as salary and qualifications. Similarly, we will also develop processes around additional criteria, such as the shortage occupation list. And the necessary verification processes upon which we look at the educational qualifications criterion will also be put in place. And, of course, employers certainly will not be able to get away with changing the job title to claim bonus points.
We have spent many, many weeks and months deliberating this framework. Two of the criteria which concerns the firms are, I believe, a couple of firsts that we have achieved as a nation. My exhortation to all employers is to support us, strengthen and work with us collectively, as a country, as an economy, as a nation, to build this complementarity and to build our local workforce to compete globally.
Having said that, it is not our intention, but we will not hesitate to take employers to task if they are found to have falsely declared information to get the EP application approved. And we have embarked on a fairly seamless process in terms of data analytics and we will be able to pinpoint and triangulate this.
The Chairman: Mr Patrick Tay.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): Sir, I have two clarifications for the Minister. First, under the new COMPASS framework, what constitutes top-tier institution and at what level and if qualification needs to be relevant to the job that is going to be performed? And the second clarification is, besides qualifications, does MOM evaluate the quality of these candidates to determine if they are, indeed, high-quality talents that complement our local workforce?
Dr Tan See Leng: I thank Mr Patrick Tay for highlighting this point. Today, qualifications from the top-tier universities remain a fairly useful standardised measure of a candidate's quality and competency levels. Other factors such as relevant working experience are more subjective and are more difficult to assess at-scale.
Qualifications is one criterion under COMPASS. The description of the top-tier universities as available on the MOM's website. They do not just involve and include universities, they also include top-tier technical and vocational institutions as well.
A firm can still hire a candidate with no degree-equivalent qualifications if they perform well on other criteria. In fact, under COMPASS, there is greater flexibility. As a candidate without a degree-equivalent qualification can still qualify for the EP if the application scores well on the other criteria. As I have said earlier on, there are vocational institutions which are highly recognised in specific fields that can be included in the list of top-tier institutions. MOM will work with other sector agencies to recognise professional certifications that are well regarded by the industry. I hope that answers your question.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Chua.
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Thank you, Chairman. I have just got two clarifications.
The first is regarding the own account workers' welfare cut that I filed on the gig economy workers. I just wanted to ask if efforts can be done to ensure that they at least earn a fair wage in terms of reference to locals working part-time earning at least $9.00 per hour as per the LQS, given that these workers are not really in control in terms of their earnings power and are subject to all these incentives?
The second is in relation to the cut on the Lifetime Retirement Investment Scheme (LRIS). My question is whether or not the Expert Investment Council has completed its work and whether the Government still intends to roll out the LRIS. The reason being if you look at where the global markets have been since August 2016 when the recommendations were put forth, they have been up 67%, so this delay does have real cost and opportunity cost to our members in terms of their retirement adequacy.
Dr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, I will take the first clarification from Member Louis Chua about the equivalent of minimum wage for gig workers in the platform economy. The whole definition of a gig worker is that they have the flexibility to work as many hours as they want, whenever they want and with whichever platform they want.
So, it is very hard for us to then decide what would be the minimum wage that they can earn if they do not clock certain minimum number of hours. That is the flexibility that is inherent in the nature of the work. We must recognise that it is difficult for us to set that.
The market, of course, can decide at some point but in our work looking at the platform workers, we are specifically working at three areas, which are the housing and retirement adequacy, basic workplace protection against injuries, and some of these payment-related algorithms or wage-related outcomes could well be left to the third part of the work, which is on representation by either a body of platform workers; or the unions as a voice for the workers to seek better compensation and remuneration.
Mr Chairman: Mr Liang Eng Hwa. Yes, Minister.
Dr Tan See Leng: Mr Chairman, may I answer Mr Louis Chua's second point. Just to reassure the Member, we are indeed still evaluating. There has been a black swan event that has happened within the last two-and-a-half years and, given the current volatility and the crisis in Russia and Ukraine, if we had taken on certain positions just prior to this in, say, 2019 and so on, we would have been quite badly affected. So, I think that when it is ready, we certainly will come back and update everyone in Parliament. Thank you for your patience.
The Chairman: Mr Liang Eng Hwa.
Mr Liang Eng Hwa (Bukit Panjang): Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister for his assurance that MOM will be very watchful of companies who will game the system and I am referring COMPASS. So, can I further ask Minister, under this framework, if the employer were to meet all the requirements under COMPASS, is MOM obliged to give the EPs? And if that is the case, will that lead to a situation where the total number EPs issued would be even higher than before?
My second question is to Senior Minister of State Koh. I am really happy that Senior Minister of State is going to continue the Skills and Future Centre at the 24 HDB hubs. We have one in Bukit Panjang and the residents are really grateful for the convenience and advisory provided there. So, can I ask the Senior Minister of State whether would the centre go further to beef up capabilities to do more local job-matching and with the intent to bring back or facilitate stay-at-home mothers or the seniors to rejoin the workforce?
Dr Tan See Leng: I will take the first question and Senior Minister of State Koh will take the second point.
I thank Mr Liang for his thoughts on whether this will increase. We have not, in our considerations, decided on setting a quota or number for the EP framework because EP holders are meant to be the top-tier in terms of all our work pass holders. Our design of COMPASS is, as it has arisen as an acronym, the \"C-O-M-P\" part stands for \"complementarity\" and the \"A-S-S\" stands for \"assessment\". For us, the complementarity is what is most important.
We are trying to make this framework a very highly differentiated system. A set of criteria which allows us to titrate, to be able to right site and continually uplift our level of competitiveness vis-a-vis globally.
Our aspiration is to be a global city, brimming with opportunities for our Singaporean Core, continue to provide opportunities for our young. But we are also cognisant of the fact that with the multiple disruptions, the pace of the disruptions, the accelerated change and transformation that is happening around the world, it behoves us to now move into a system where every EP holder coming, every foreigner coming in, will have to pull his weight in working, complementing our locals, at the same time supporting and driving our economy.
The long answer to his question is that we do not have an aspirational target in terms of a fixed number of EP holders. As long as the economy continues to grow, as long as it continues to uplift all of our Singaporean Core in terms of their skillsets, their competencies and, most importantly, their take-home wages, I think the framework will be one which is going to help us to continue to do so.
Having said that, notwithstanding, the criteria being where they are today, as I have shared earlier to the Member of Parliament Mr Desmond Choo's point about setting this $20,000 exemption, it is not carved in stone. As long as the general economy and industry can accept and be able to stomach, we will continue to improve this framework.
So, I hope that the Member can take away that this is a very highly differentiated framework that we are trying to achieve for all of our Singaporeans.
Dr Koh Poh Koon: Sir, in response to Mr Liang Eng Hwa's question, as of end December 2021, the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Centre assisted more than 24,000 jobseekers. Let me explain that these 24 centres are an extension of the five main centres that are distributed around the island, run by WSG and NTUC's e2i. They are actually forward-deployed nodes, to be more embedded in the heartlands to allow easier access by many of our heartlanders who are jobseekers as well.
In that sense, the main career centres curate all the jobs that are available, including those on the MyCareersFuture portal but, at the same time, as the main centre looks at the jobs that are put onto the market, they do curate them according to the vicinity of each of the forward-deployed centres and push out these job lists to the centres as well. For jobseekers who are probably within one of the nearer centres when they look for jobs, the centres can also recommend jobs that are closer to where the jobseeker stays so that it helps to facilitate some of these part-time work, or for people who may have mobility issues who want to work closer to home. So, I want to assure Mr Liang Eng Hwa that this is already being done today.
The Chairman: Mr Gerald Giam.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Sir, I have clarifications on COMPASS and the low-wage workers.
Will the shortage occupation list factor in both occupation and industry? For example, we may have a shortage of software developers in general, but not necessarily software developers in the financial services industry. And if such a distinction by industry is not made, MOM might be making it easier for companies like banks to hire foreigners without necessarily improving the opportunities for talented Singaporeans?
Secondly, does MOM already use the COMPASS framework internally for evaluating EP applications? If so, does the Minister expect that the outcomes in terms of the foreign-local talent mix in companies to remain largely unchanged, moving forward?
On the national diversity attribute of COMPASS, can I understand if MOM sees some concentration risk in having too high a percentage of any one foreign nationality in a firm? If not, what is the policy intent of this criterion?
And lastly, on the wages of low-wage workers, I know that by 2023 about 6% of full-time, low-wage workers will still not be covered by the PWM. Who are most of the workers in this group and does MOM intend to eventually extend PWM to all of them so that every Singaporean would be able to receive a decent minimum wage on their work?
Dr Tan See Leng: Let me try to categorise Mr Gerald Giam's questions. I think to his first point in terms of whether COMPASS was from the FCF. COMPASS has actually taken into consideration the many months of data analytics, in terms of the hiring patterns, based on diversity, based on qualifications, salaries and also the concentration of PMETs within the firm, to come up with a fairly nuanced framework.
The fact that the vast majority of the companies actually passed when we put them through the COMPASS framework is actually a testimony to the fact that many companies for the past many years have been very progressive, very responsive and very nimble to the needs of our economy.
As far as the diversity itself is concerned, it is a function also of the ability of the company to access the skill sets based on the individual sector. So, let me put it across in a perhaps, in a more illustrative way. For those that are in IT, particularly when you deal with a lot of cybersecurity, artificial intelligence and very advanced deep machine learning, even with deep-tech itself, depending on the sources where this group of skill sets are developed, you are not able to completely assume that you are able to get these skill sets from all around the world. Hence, we designed it to be such that in those areas that we have shortage of, and the fact that when we decided to pivot into the Industry 4.0 roadmap, we therefore needed to complement these gaps. So, when we took all these into account, we felt that this is what is needed for our economy to get to the next step.
The exact details, going into the granularity of why we want to do the cut-off at the various benchmarks, I think I have already explained it before in my speech. I hope that sort of gives the Member some insights into the thinking behind it.
What was your third point?
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song: My third point was asking about the national diversity criteria inside COMPASS. What was the thinking behind that? Is it because MOM sees certain concentration risks in having too many people, too many employees from one nationality in the organisation? If not, what is the reason for including that?
Dr Tan See Leng: The nationality diversity consideration was also the result of making sure that we diversify our risk in terms of our dependency on the source of talent itself. To a certain extent, it is also guided by the current pandemic that is still ongoing. When certain restrictions came about, we were not able to let this group of EP holders travel freely back to their home countries to visit their relatives and come back. So, taking all of these into consideration, taking into account our various needs, we came up with a very nuanced approach in terms of the framework.
In fact, there are many foreign media articles out there that claim that we have become extremely unattractive because of the fact that many of these EP holders could not come back. And actually, it is not because of the fact that we did not allow them to come back. It was just because of public health border controls that we were not able to bring them back here to work. So, with that, this framework, to a certain extent, was also influenced by that.
The Chairman: Mr Zaqy Mohamad.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I thank the Member for his question on lower-wage workers and recognising that the Government has worked hard to cover 94% of our lower-wage workers with our progressive wage moves. On his question on the remaining 6% of lower-wage workers not covered, what their profiles are like. Actually, for the majority of them, they are already earning $1,400 and above. I think more than half are earning $1,400 and above, even though they are not covered by progressive wage moves, they are already earning that. But the question would more be, what are the exclusions and why did we exclude this group. But really, if you look at most minimum wage systems around the world, there are exclusions. In our case, we found that many of them are actually small businesses with less than 10 persons and most of these are actually micro-SMEs in your heartlands, typically your mom-and-pop shops.
What we can we all do? Well, in our estates, I think we probably know many of them, mom-and-pop shops who employ their own family members sometimes to help them out and one way we could do is to support in our Progressive Wage Mark. I hope that in Aljunied and Sengkang, you can also encourage many of these merchants, mom-and-pop shops to come on board the Progressive Wage Mark and say yes, please support and pay our workers more, and we will be happy to give you the Progressive Wage Mark if they do so.
These are ways in which I think there is moral suasion. But overall, if you look at where we are in terms of the kind of wage growth that you are expecting for the other PWMs shared here, ranging from fifty-plus percent to eighty-plus percent wage growth, for the vast majority of our lower-wage workers, that would also set the tone and drive competition in terms of the labour market at that level, and perhaps for such merchants, when they need to retain or pay their workers better, I think this is where their workers, too, will start comparing benchmarks in other sectors which are paying far better.
So, to that extent, rest assured, for this set of workers, they will still get Workfare and other benefits, whether it is Silver Support and so forth. Back to your question, what are their profiles, they are typically your micro-SMEs in the heartlands and typically family businesses too.
The Chairman: Mr Abdul Samad.
Mr Abdul Samad (Nominated Member): Chairman, I thank Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad for sharing regarding the Workfare Income Supplement. I would like to enquire more clarifications for Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad. My understanding of the $2,500 is actually basic salary plus allowances. Today, maybe it is my first time, or just maybe it is my ignorance, that it has to include bonuses. That means, every year, that worker cannot be earning more than $30,000. If he or she earns more than $30,000 annually, hence he or she does not qualify for the Workfare Income Supplement.
Next question. Why I ask to exclude overtime pay, I believe the Government and us as a society want to help those low-income, right? So these low-wage workers, why do they actually need to do the extra overtime work to actually supplement the cost of living daily? So, I hope while today the Government, as Senior Minister of State has explained, that they have to include, moving forward, can we really explore? Because someone that needs to do overtime, he wants to earn that extra income to meet the cost of living and also he is spending time away from his family. Do we actually want to take that into consideration by excluding overtime pay? Thank you.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I thank the Member for his question. In my speech earlier, I did explain why we do so. In fact, moving forward, that is why we are also moving all our PWMs towards gross wages to include the full package, not just overtime pay but also allowances. Why do we do so? We certainly want to ensure that we support our lower-wage workers well and really, these are the bottom 20%. So, for example, if you have a worker earning, say, $2,400 base, but his overtime pay adds up to $3,500 or even $4,000, then that does not qualify him as a low-income technically, because the real income that he gets home is much more than what lower-wage workers are getting.
So, our target is really the bottom 20%. If you look at Workfare, we push it slightly above that to cater for wage growth in the coming years and what we hope is to continue supporting lower-wage workers at that level. So, imagine this. A worker earning $2,400 for example, earns overtime pay and it goes much higher, compared to another worker who earns maybe $2,500 on the dot, looks more in terms of basic, but he does not earn any overtime pay because his sector, like administration, for example, that is all they have, hardly much overtime, but that is their base salary. So, is the guy earning $2,400 lower base with higher overtime pay, or the person earning $2,500 with no overtime pay, earning more? So, who is more deserving? In that sense, I think we also have to be very mindful that as we scope our schemes for lower-wage workers, we have to also be calibrated, at the same time also fair, to ensure that equity is maintained.
While I agree that many of our lower-wage workers do have the intention to earn more because some can do more overtime, for example. But in reality, we also have to take into account all their incomes as a whole, because I think we have to also be fair in terms of how we support our lower-wage workers.
The Chairman: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Thank you Chairman. Two clarification questions about the COMPASS framework. The first has to do with the scoring which currently gives 20 points default to firms smaller than 25 PMETs and I understand the premise behind that. The concern here is, of course, that it creates potentially a cliff edge effect for firms that are growing, such that it will be trickier for them to attain C3 and C4 to get up to 40 points, in the event that they want to grow and become a medium-sized firm. The concern here of course is that we create an artificial ceiling for firms, just like it is for small firms in Italy, where they intentionally just stay below the medium-size threshold.
My second question has to do with public data releases for the foundational criteria used to construct COMPASS. It would really help, I feel, if MOM will consider releasing data for sub-sectors to ensure firms and Singaporeans understand the reality of the given business environment. So, for example, for C1 in salary, we have data reported on gross monthly income from work at the median as well as the 20th percentile, but it will be useful to have it for the other sectors. Similarly, for C2 qualification, it would also be useful to understand the level of the highest qualification for our resident labour force and of those employed.
Dr Tan See Leng: I thank Assoc Prof Jamus Lim for his two points.
Well, I was an entrepreneur and I founded a firm and subsequently, I have also in due funded a couple of startups. I think that as a growing firm, the first thing that you would assess, for the founder or the entrepreneur, is to assess the market and to know what are the rules that they will operate under.
Having said that, I think the length of time that we have given for everyone to try to adjust to the framework itself, I think it is a fairly long runway. And the flexibility, the nimbleness, the responsiveness of the entrepreneur or the founder, is going to be quite paramount in ensuring that the firm will ultimately succeed. And I am pretty sure that there are many private equity affiliate professionals here amongst us, I think who would probably agree and testify to that.
So, on paper, it looks like as if it may cause a cliff effect, but I think in reality, given the nuanced approach, we believe that there will be enough time for people to adapt.
As far as the foundational criteria is concerned, we are going to start this on 1 September 2023. I think there is still time for us to see when it comes to the implementation, how we can actually get a set of nuanced data for everyone to be able to access and also to understand.
Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, the reassurance that I want to give to all startups, all SMEs, is that we are trying our best to support our own Singapore business ecosystem. We have the Singapore Global Enterprise Aspiration, earlier on, we have also shared the Enterprise 2030 vision and we do have multiple schemes available to support them.
However, as we support them, as we use funding to support this group, the moment they get to a certain size, I think it is also the social compact and their responsibility to ensure that our Singaporean Core continues to be supported, to be brought along with them as well. So, it is not just about caring for our fellow Singaporeans, it is also about carrying them alongside with us as well. That is the intent of this initiative. I hope to get your support and your concurrence on this.
The Chairman: Leader of the Opposition.
Mr Pritam Singh (Aljunied): Thank you, Chairman. Just two questions. One really builds on the point that the Minister spoke about with regard to the support to build a strong Singapore Core, which is I think the substance of this initiative to review the EP qualifying criteria, exemplified by COMPASS. My question really picks off from a point I raised in the previous Budget, in the Committee of Supply debates last year about the Capability Transfer Programme. Just to enquire whether MOM considers in the renewal of the EPs going forward, a contribution of EP or their companies as a bonus criterion, if there has been a real transfer of skills to the Singapore Core? Whether that could be a part of the system structure in renewing EP holders, getting more EP holders into Singapore in areas there clearly is a need?
Because I think this really will address a long-term bugbear that is a perception nonetheless that somehow the foreigners not playing their part in contributing to the growth of the Singapore Core. If there is some data set, some matrix that can show that that is not the case and that actually there is a skills transfer that can be objectively assessed, I think this will be helpful for the programme.
Just another question, dealing with the EP framework. I understand today there are probably about 160,000 to 170,000 EP holders. Under the new qualifying criteria, how many EP holders today would not have been issued with an EP, under the new criteria? So, today, we have got a fixed number. I think it is about 166,000 based on last year's data. If the new scheme applied today, how many of these individuals would not actually be given their EP? I am just wondering if the Minister has that information.
My final point is a very short one. In his speech this morning, Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad spoke about workers who earn less than $500. I think he made a clarification of the 20,000 figure but I did not catch what the new figure was. I do not believe the Minister shared it. I apologise if he did. But I would be grateful if the Senior Minister of State would share what that number actually is.
Dr Tan See Leng: The short answer to your first point about whether we can consider firms' support in terms of the local training, the transfers of skillsets, I think as we evolve the framework, we are not closed off to this thinking. At some stage, we will be able to continue to tweak the framework. Of course, we need to ensure that tweaking is not done in such a frequent manner that after a while, companies who want to look into investing into our country itself would think that we are having a series of moving goal posts. That is not the intent. So, the consistency, the constancy of this framework must be preserved.
However, at the fringe, anything that would strengthen it, to see how we can continue to improve our Singaporean Core, the transfer of skill sets, I think would be something that we can consider.
If you talk about comparing with the numbers today, how many would pass the framework, I think it is difficult to compare. Because in terms of, for instance, even at C1, notwithstanding the fact that we have a qualifying salary, even at C1, we measured according to the sector, what is the 65th percentile. So, I think, just off the cuff, finance in general, already you can see that there are two separate categories.
Suffice to say, from now till the next four to five years, when all the renewals of existing applications have been taken that into consideration, I think that the churn in EP holders would take care of whatever slack that exists together, even if the numbers do not meet the COMPASS framework that we put up today, the churn will take care of that.
In terms of the perspective, today, on any given year, our churn in EP holders is about 40,000 a year. So, that is the number of new applicants applying to join and people leaving. So, this churn, when put through COMPASS, will more than adequately take care of what we intend to do over the horizon. I hope that sort of gives you a picture of where we envisage we will move to.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his question. My clarification was basically to say that the Minister's speech quoting the 20,000 is the right number. Because the way I mentioned it, the way I clarified, some might interpret it as the number was different or lower. So, I thought just to clarify that the Minister's speech was the correct number.
The Chairman: Mr Sharael Taha. Keep it tight, please.
Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Thank you, Chairman. I am heartened to hear about the role of COMPASS to strengthen the complementarity of our foreign workforce. However, I would like to raise a few clarifications to the Minister.
The Chairman: I request that you could just to keep to one clarification and let others clarify.
Mr Sharael Taha: Okay, Chairman. So, the clarification will be – how will it be administered? Will the companies do self-assessments on an automated system or will every application be assessed by an MOM officer? How do we ensure that the process is effective but does not create a bottleneck in the recruitment process?
Dr Tan See Leng: I think in the interest of time, I will keep it short. COMPASS will not make the application process more cumbersome or lengthier. Much of the information required is already collected upstream in our databases such as the firm's workforce profile. We would be able to automate these processes so that the processing times will not be lengthened.
Earlier on, in my main speech, I have also shared that there will be a rubric that published on our website. Companies, before they even apply, they can actually score the potential candidate on the rubric. And they will also know before they even apply, what is the chance of this EP being approved.
Most of the businesses that we have spoken to, that we have gotten feedback from, appreciate the transparency, the clarity that COMPASS brings. I think this is a very important feature for us in designing and implementing COMPASS. COMPASS is meant to tell the world we are open, we are connected and we are welcoming of foreign work pass holders to come in and work as long as they can help uplift our economy, contribute to our workforce in uplifting and strengthening the Singaporean Core.
The Chairman: End of clarification. Mr Desmond Choo, would you like to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Leong Mun Wai (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, Point of Order, Chairman.
The Chairman: Yes, Mr Leong Mun Wai.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: I would still like to ask questions.
The Chairman: Time is up. Thank you. Mr Desmond Choo, please proceed.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: Chairman.
The Chairman: Mr Leong.
Mr Leong Mun Wai: I said, there are still questions. The debate is not over when there are still questions.
The Chairman: Mr Leong, we are moving on. Thank you. Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo: Mr Chairman, I would like to thank Minister Tan See Leng, Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad and Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon and Minister of State Gan Siow Huang for their indulgence in their clarifications in preparing for this Committee of Supply. I also want to congratulate them for taking very bold but measured steps to build workers' compact but at the same time, keeping the workforce competitive. We know that it is a difficult policy tightrope for them to walk and they can be reassured of the tripartite support to their efforts.
At the same time, I also want to thank Permanent Secretary Aubeck Kam and his team. This will be his last MOM COS. He has done quite a fair bit to strengthen tripartite relations and we want to extend our appreciation for his efforts. With this, Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $8,641,646,700 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $90,013,900 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 K (Ministry of Education)","subTitle":"Building a strong and vibrant economy, and future-ready workforce","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (Pioneer): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head K of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\"
Sir, with the half-life of skills shortening in an increasingly disruptive, transformative, highly unpredictable and uncertain world and future upon us, I see an urgent imperative for Singapore to build and forge an even more future-ready and future-proof education system – one that encourages a learning continuum where our education system and a Continuing Education and Training (CET) ecosystem where our teachers and adult educators, our students and our adult learners are seamlessly aligned and well-connected to be best prepared for the future of skills, jobs, education and training.
Implementing lifelong learning will require more than expanding opportunities for adult learning. Lifelong learning will push systems to fundamentally rethink the timing and sequencing of education and skills development over an individual's life course. This includes the early stages of learning from childhood and into early adulthood and beyond.
Learning trajectories will become more complex for people of all ages, requiring more sophisticated support arrangements. Establishing how individuals learn best at different stages in their lives and how to distribute learning opportunities and resources over the life cycle will become key policy paradigms.
We have done much over the past years in building and fortifying our education system to help ensure that each and every student has an opportunity to the provision of multiple pathways offered by our education system. Moving ahead, the challenge falls on how to marry, match the passions and interests and aspirations of every Singaporean and to help every Singaporean to realise fully their true potential.
To ensure our education system continues to be future-ready and future-proof, I opine that that should be greatest synergy, collaboration, linkages and integration between the mainstream education, pre-employment training all through to adult and worker continuing education training and learning.
In short, the entire continuum and ecosystem needs to rethink what we teach, when we teach, where we teach and how we teach.
We need to better align the future of education and learning to the future of work and workplaces. This is crucial if you want to truly embrace the love of learning and lifelong learning.
The old adage of \"learn, work and retire\" will become passé. The next normal will be \"learn, work, learn, work, learn, work and then, perhaps, retire\".
If I may draw on some learnings of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) report on the future of education.
Tomorrow's educational institutions will need to help learners to think for themselves and join others in work. Educators will need to learn to learn learners develop a strong sense of right and wrong and a sensitivity to the claims that others make. Individuals will need to learn to live with themselves, with others and with the planet. At work, at home and in the community, people will need a deep understanding of how others think, whether as scientists or artists, and how others live in different cultures and traditions.
Technology is also creating new, alternative channels for human learning outside of institutional frameworks. Isolated time and space for learning was necessary when teachers and resources were scarce. But the ubiquity of opportunities will allow learning to move beyond its institutional confinements.
Enhanced by technology, learning will gradually flow to informal contexts and move beyond age defined limitations. We will shift from qualification oriented attainment upfront to a new distribution of learning and skill development. Technology can support both learning throughout life as well as ways to recognise such learning. Moving learning out of its institutional and age-related barriers will create important public policy challenges, requiring the development of new partnerships, support learning with innovative arrangements on both the supply and demand side.
Teachers in our schools and educators in our Institutes of Higher Learning, including in the PEIs and CET centres, have undergone much change and have had to grapple with the many exacting requirements. I am particularly concerned with the mental well-being of our teachers, as well as adult educators, in light of such curveballs constantly hurled at them and having had to cope with the demands and expectations of students, learners, the administration as well as parents, and so on.
I therefore urge MOE to embark on an in-depth study and survey of our teachers and educators, together with our tripartite partners to better assess the current state of stress, mental health, and wellness of our education fraternity so that better interventions and support can be provided for them in their teaching journey.
In a similar vein, the future of teaching is fraught with new challenges. The age old one-size-fits-all teaching method has long been outgrown, with the focus moving on to catering teaching methods to different styles of learners. Educators also need to not just use technology but make use of the right technology. Classroom management and curriculum will also need to keep pace with changes across industries, including a need to foster a global mindset in today's students.
To keep pace and stay abreast of what is happening across industries and sectors, I suggest that MOE allow our teachers and adult educators an opportunity to take sabbaticals and industry attachments, including secondments outside of MOE and the private sector for an extended period of time so that they can translate their learnings, experiences in their teachings, when they return to the education space.
For our students, classrooms would continue to move towards being paperless and more computer based. Coaching and mentoring will become more important. Though the students will incorporate much independence into their learning process, mentoring will become fundamental to our student and learner success. As such, more resources should be dedicated by MOE to this function, which actually integrates leading with early career guidance, which I submit, we can do more of and better in across the board.
On the adult learner front, NTUC recently embarked on a study with 564 business leaders across industries, looking into how CET can be enhanced to upskill our workers to meet the needs of today's and tomorrow's labour market. The five key findings revealed: (a) skills mismatch continues to be the most prevalent form of mismatch; (b) the top five transferable skills sought after by business leaders are adaptability, customer orientation, communication, problem solving and collaboration; (c) only 50.9% of business leaders have sent their workers for training in the past six months. Out of those business leaders who sent workers for training, only 33.6% of their workforce actually attended training; (d) workers with skills gaps are not the top priority for training as compared to workers with higher potential; and (e) majority of the business leaders are reported to have observe positive changes in their workers post training.
In conclusion, it is therefore submitted that to succeed in CET for adult learners and workers, it has to be in collaboration with our tripartite partners and a multi-stakeholder approach. We need to promote more equal distribution of training opportunities for workers. With the $100 million announced at Budget 2022 to support the Labour Movement in our company training committee formation and CET, MOE and SkillsFuture can now leverage on NTUC's training and placement ecosystem as a strategic partner to drive the CET agenda for workers and adult learners.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Singapore’s education system, as we know it, will lose its currency and relevance if we do not make some important moves.
There are enough evidence and inputs to inform us on what the future of education will look like. The frontloading of education – cramping most of learning before one’s first job – has to change. Traditional content such as basic literacy, English, Mathematics, will need to be updated; adding to them, digital literacy, data literacy, financial literacy and a slew of competencies, attributes and values needed to survive in this age of unprecedented change.
Person-centred, competency-based, mastery-based, self-driven, bite-sized, just-in-time, chasing skills, not paper; classrooms without walls, schools without walls – these are all quoted as the future of education. The entire education ecosystem has enlarged. Members of this House have just seen the National Library Board’s latest blueprint that talks about learning marketplaces, learning superstores that serve all Singaporeans. And NLB is not even part of MOE.
Sir, the future of education is now. Think big, believe big and act now. Let me propose five ways to begin this exciting journey.
First, update and cascade the vision of education so that more Singaporeans are aligned in our end in mind, from K to 12, from young to old. I fully resonate with Education Minister Chan Chun Sing’s views of what education should be – of continual learning, connecting, collaborations and confidence building. Minister spoke about having to stop thinking of educating cohorts and the traditional KPI of \"Cohort Participation Rates\" and replace it with the concept of \"Lifelong Learning Participation Rate\". Makes a lot of sense, if we think of how every Singaporean ought to prepare for each of the average four to five job changes he makes in his working life.
Second, address the restraining forces of change, the often unspoken elephants in the room. The glaring and valid concern of educators in the face of an ever increasingly overloaded curricula; an expectation of the educators to pivot to become content curators, learning designers and life coaches; and then to teach in a way that they themselves had not quite experienced before.
What about the less glaring but stronger restraining force that is unseen, below the waterline? The beliefs, the conditioned behaviours and fears of the very people involved in education: our school leaders, educators, parents and employers?
Someone once quipped that education is an inherently conservative social enterprise and changing education systems is sometimes like trying to move a graveyard. It will be hard for Singapore. We are a victim of our success. We are so used, for example, to use the academic yardstick in parenting, in hiring and even in judging each other.
Three, show it can be done. Be bold. Pick a few strategic pilots and go for broke. For instance, pilot through-train schools without the PSLE – an idea I brought up for years. If PSLE, regardless of what the MOE has tried, is still a sacred cow and if slain, can free time and space for change, then let go of it! The risk is not high. Singapore will not be the first in the world to operate through-trained Primary to Secondary schools.
Four, start with the educator of educators. Singapore is blessed to have a teaching workforce that is well regarded, professional and motivated. Their mothership, the National Institute of Education, will need to be prepared to raise our educators to find their place in the new enlarged education ecosystem. NIE will have to rethink its traditional modes of management, collaborate and connect with local and global partners, to reframe and to refresh its institution and offerings.
Lastly, let us start addressing the challenges of adult learners. Andreas Schleicher, OECD’s Special Adviser, has observed the striking skills gap between Singapore’s younger and older workforce, and he advised the strong need for Singapore to seriously develop our older workers. There are of course challenges – not availability of courses only but likely the motivation to learn or the way by which adult learning is designed and offered. But focus, we must, seriously on our adult and older learners. If we do not, many of them will become Singapore’s future low-wage earners.
Sir, the future of education is now. Think big, believe big and let us act now.
Mr Darryl David (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Chairman, Marva Delores Collins, an American educator who is famed for her teaching method and for her work in educating impoverished students once said that “when someone is taught the joy of learning, it becomes a lifelong process that never stops, a process that creates a logical individual. That is the challenge and joy of teaching.”
Although this adage was made years ago prior to the advent of the Internet and before the age of technology assisted learning, it is now truer than ever. In today’s day and age where new knowledge is constantly being created and new skills render old ones irrelevant, it is important for educators to inculcate the joy of learning in students so that they are truly educated and have learned how to learn, not just schooled. While we know the importance of inculcating the joy of learning in students, it is a challenge to do so in an assessment-driven and exams- focused education system where rote learning and regurgitation might reap great rewards.
Some time ago, MOE took the step of removing exams for Primary 1 and Primary 2 to allow for a learning experience and learning environment that would allow children to grow and develop without having to deal with the pressures and burdens of major exams.
I believe this was a step in the right direction, I commend MOE for this, as it encouraged students to uncover the joys of learning without having to worry about how well they do in summative assessments like exams. Without a doubt, summative assessments are still important because they allow us to assess how much the students have absorbed the material and knowledge, and tests and exams are useful indicators of one’s progress in knowledge acquisition.
But, as I have said before in this House, formative assessments can also provide an indication of a student’s development and academic growth. Grades can also be apportioned to coursework and there are many subjects that are based on 100% coursework.
Would the Government review the need to have less summative assessments across all levels of Primary school even up to Secondary school levels, and move towards having more formative assessments that cater to more holistic and complete development of our students?
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Sir, last year, MOE cancelled the year-end examinations for Primary 3 and Primary 4 students to mitigate the disruptions to schooling caused by COVID-19. Many parents and students alike heaved a sigh of relief as they were uncertain of the requirements due to the disruptive nature of the pandemic.
Exams do add a huge amount of stress to students. Frequently, students spend hours trying to memorise the content of the textbooks which they had studied during the year in order to regurgitate the answers to which their teachers want to read in the student’s exam script.
But in today’s world, knowledge content, while it is still important, is no longer the sole criterion of a person’s ability. The Dean designate of the new NUS College, Prof Simon Chesterman, wrote an Opinion article for The Straits Times in January this year. In his article, he shared that in the past, “teachers and professors were in possession of knowledge, and they were paid by students, or their parents, or the state, to pass on that knowledge to the students. However, today, every student holds a device that can access almost all of human knowledge. Thus, our phones are a portal to vastly more knowledge than will ever fit into any of our brains.”
In view of the availability of technology, I urge MOE to review the current curriculum of the students. MOE had previously said that they had reduced 20% of the school curriculum under the “Teach Less Learn More” initiative. However, the previous reduction in curriculum had not resulted in less stress or less workload for the students. Hence, I urge the schools and tertiary institutions to consider reducing the content of the subjects taught to the students.
Instead, more focus can be placed on how the student can do research or acquire information; how to discern truth from false information. It is the training of the mind to learn how to acquire knowledge that is more important. Can MOE also emphasise on the overall development of a student’s character so that the student can be prepared for life ahead in the real world?
May I ask the Minister how can MOE help our students to develop future-ready competencies through a more varied and engaging pedagogy in the classroom as well as self-initiated learning? Education should be a journey where a student enjoys and takes delight in learning and the discovery of new things which are important to him in life. It should not be a stressful period because of the need to memorise school work and to pass year-end examinations.
Dr Tan Yia Swam (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Chairman, I have two kids who are in Primary school. Parents all want the best for our children, and we may have different ideas of what is \"best\", and have different levels of means to provide. Some people send their children for enrichment classes, some assign their kids chores at home. Whatever method is used, there’s generally more awareness now to teach life skills and resilience.
There have been many positive changes in our formal education since when I was in primary school. There is more structured learning, and improved communications with parents. There are great resources on the MOE website on social and emotional learning.
But theory is just the beginning, the challenge is in the real life implementation. How may we truly teach emotional wellness and resilience: that it is okay to not be liked all the time, that it is okay not to be perfect. How does one teach children to think for themselves, shrug off failure, handle disappointment, and to have the strength and courage to keep on going.
I want to register my thanks and appreciation for school teachers and educators of all levels, who have been working doubly hard in these COVID times, to provide face-to-face lessons, and to also standby for home-based learning, in addition to doing safe distancing measurements. I am thankful to them for keeping such a close eye on our children.
Parental involvement is essential to a child’s educational journey, but I have to constantly remind myself not to solve every problem for them. In previous speeches, Mr Tharman spoke on how Singapore parents must evolve, and avoid the trend of helicopter parenting.
I have met older teenagers holding part-time jobs and doing their part to pay for their schooling. I have also met people in their 40s, who still need to ask their parents for all decisions, because that is how it has been their whole lives – to check with their parents.
Personally, I see that my role as a mother is to provide for them and to teach them to be the best they can be. I cannot be around for them forever. So, I need to teach them to be independent. I know it is hard, but we have to let our children make their own decisions and accept the consequences of their actions. This may start from the playground, to allow them to climb and fall- while we stand ready to catch them, rather than forbid them to climb at all.
Fellow parents, let us stop pursuing the perfect checklist, and truly enable our children to be ready to face the challenges of the real world.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Sir, this House has previously debated the possibility of later school start times. Those in favour have cited evidence, which was compelling in my view, that phase delays in adolescent Circadian rhythms predisposed them towards sleeping and waking later, typically by about two hours, although some, like my sister, appear to have never grown up and exited this phase.
The counter arguments are often two-fold. First, that any delay would simply mean that students go to bed even later and, second, that such delays could give rise to disruptive rush-hour crunches. The first assertion, as it turns out, is one that is weakly supported by evidence. Students who have later start times sleep longer, with bedtimes that either remain unchanged or delayed by a smaller amount than the additional time afforded. Many credible studies have shown that affording adolescents additional sleep can have yielded payoffs in terms of improved behaviour, health and academic outcomes. This is even so, with a relatively modest delay of just half an hour or so. More importantly, the reality is that students are already experiencing sleep deprivations from the status quo. One study placed this proportion at a staggering 80% of Singaporean teenagers hailing from high-ranked schools.
Think of all the marginal steps that parents take – the additional hours of supplemental tuition, the move to a neighbourhood closer to a preferred school, the endless bottles of essence of chicken. And it strikes me as failing to pick the lowest hanging fruit when we look at more expensive and intrusive educational interventions but neglect this relatively simple one.
As for the second assertion, I am sure that we will all agree that we should not be compromising as important an outcome as student performance simply in favour of one of logistical convenience. My proposal today is simple. Delay upper Primary school start time by half an hour and Secondary school start time by an hour. For schools currently starting at 7.30 am, the earliest start time at the moment, this would mean a meantime of 8.00 am for the Primary cohort and 8.30 am for the Secondary cohort. While I am not suggesting any strict guidelines for post-Secondary levels, it is reasonable that ITEs, Polytechnics and Junior Colleges start even later, at 9.00 am.
The additional half hour for upper-Primary students is consistent with how sleep phase delay may occur as early as the onset of puberty and also, certainly, by the time that they are teenagers. And since Primary cohorts are also comparatively larger than Secondary cohorts, it also makes sense to balance out the inflow of students headed to schools in the morning.
While delays for upper Primary and Secondary school students will, undeniably, alter traffic patterns, its contribution to the overall morning rush-hour jam is likely to be somewhat limited. The half-hour delay for half the Primary cohort would likely add a limited number of additional vehicles to the road, seeing that many upper Primary school students would already begin travelling to school by public or private buses by then. Moreover, these buses would, in any case, begin their pick-up rounds between 7.00 am and 8.00 am, well before typical work start times. And as more Secondary school students already know how to travel to school independently by public transportation, their even later start time will also likely have a limited impact on traffic patterns. Indeed, with more parents working from home or exercising flexible work schedules in a post-pandemic world, it could easily be the case that any anticipated increase in rush-hour traffic be offset by the reduction in working commuters.
The staggered school start times could also carry a tangential logistical benefit. Schools currently often face jams during arrival and dismissal times, with roads surrounding schools ensnarled by traffic. This is an isolated but genuine problem as those of us who have received complaints from residents living near schools would well understand. Staggering school start times could reduce the incoming traffic by as much as a third, which would help alleviate this morning school rush-hour crunch.
Ms Hazel Poa (Non-Constituency Member): Mr Chairman, first of all, I declare that I run an education company operating education centres and a private school.
Today, I wish to again urge MOE to consider implementing a pilot project of a 10-year through-train programme for Primary and Secondary school students, bypassing the PSLE. Members of Parliament across time and political parties – Ms Paulin Straughan, Mr Hri Kumar, Mr Yee Jenn Jong, Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin, Mr Kok Heng Leun, Ms Denise Phua and myself – have spoken up either for the scrapping of PSLE or a through-train pilot programme giving parents and students the option of bypassing PSLE.
The PSLE remains the most stressful examination for local parents and students. Despite changes to the assessment, the PSLE stakes are high for parents, educators and students. Chronic stress from high-stakes examinations on young children is undesirable. Neuroscience tells us that long-term negative stress impedes the brain development of children. These are bad outcomes for their esteem and mental health. Lately, tragic incidents have given us a rude wake-up call to pay more attention to the mental well-being of our students.
Over the years, efforts have been made to reduce stress on students by removing examinations at certain levels. However, the PSLE is the elephant in the room. A previous Education Minister has said that “removing the PSLE and having a through-train will only transfer the stress on parents and students elsewhere, such as at the P1 registration”. But if the through-train programme is implemented in a limited number of schools while the mainstream is still on the PSLE system, this would not happen. This would, at least, give parents and students a choice. As we learn from the experience, we can decide later whether the through-train programme should be extended to more schools. In Mandarin please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Today, I wish to again urge MOE to consider implementing a pilot project of a through-train programme.
Over the last 10 years. Members from different parties have urged the Government to scrap PSLE and allow parents and students to bypass PSLE. PSLE remains the most stressful examination for local parents and their children. Chronic stress from high-stakes examinations form a long-term negative stress that can impede the brain development of children and also affect children's esteem and mental health. Lately, tragic incidents have given us a wake-up call to pay more attention to the mental well-being of our students.
A previous Education Minister has said that \"removing the PSLE and having a through-train will only transfer the stress on parents and students elsewhere, such as at P1 registration\". But if the through-train programme is implemented in a limited number of schools, while the mainstream is still on the PSLE system, this will not happen. This will at least give parents and students a choice. As we learn from the experience, we can then decide whether we should extend it to more schools.
(In English): In 2020, MOE announced the introduction of student-initiated learning (SIL) in Secondary schools, Junior Colleges and MI. I would like to seek more information from MOE on this initiative. One, how many schools have implemented SIL? Two, if there are schools that have implemented SIL last year, how was it implemented and what was the outcome?
PLD was also rolled out last year. Can MOE confirm that no students are without access to PLD due to financial reasons? After one year of implementation, how has PLD affected the students’ learning?
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Sir, when the Compulsory Education Act was implemented in 2003, MOE implemented a minimum academic benchmark for madrasah students, requiring them to attain a PSLE aggregate higher than the average PSLE aggregate score of Malay students in the six-lowest performing national Primary schools. It was deemed necessary for madrasah students to meet this benchmark to ensure that they will be able to complete their Primary education and will possess the minimum academic standards required for them to qualify for Secondary school.
Regrettably, a madrasah was not able to meet MOE’s benchmark in 2008 and 2010, which resulted in the madrasah being barred from taking in Primary 1 students from 2012 to 2014. Aside from that, all madrasahs have been able to meet MOE’s benchmark. In fact, the PSLE results of madrasah students in the past two years have been extremely encouraging.
Through the efforts of the madrasah administrators and teachers and support from both MUIS and MOE, madrasahs have become private educational institutions that provide quality education to its students.
Although the MOE benchmark was born out of good intentions, it may cause undue stress for the madrasah administrators and teachers, as well as for madrasah students and their parents. This is because the MOE benchmark disallows a madrasah to take in Primary 1 pupils for three years if it fails to meet the benchmark. A madrasah that cannot take in new students may find it difficult to continue operating as a private education institution.
As such, I would like to ask MOE to work with MUIS and the madrasahs to review the necessity of this benchmark and to consider either removing it completely or easing the benchmark. Alternatively, instead of the two mentioned options, the Ministry could also consider issuing warnings to the madrasahs that do not meet the benchmark, accompanied by a requirement for them to conduct an independent audit of its practices. Sir, I would like to declare that I have a child who is studying in a full-time madrasah.
Mr Baey Yam Keng (Tampines): Chairman, full Subject Based Banding (SBB) was implemented in 28 Secondary schools from 2020. Students are grouped in different classes for both STEM and Humanities subjects, according to the levels at which students take them. When MOE announced this new arrangement, it was to provide students with a more customised learning experience according to their subject-specific strengths and interests and to empower students to take greater ownership of their learning.
May I ask the MOE what has the experience been in these 28 schools over the last two years? Have we been able to quantify and qualify the benefits enjoyed by the students? Although I hope that is not the main indicator of the performance of the programme, I would like to ask the Minister what is the proportion of students who have been able to move to a more demanding level?
I would also like to ask about the experience of teachers, Allied Educators and executive and administrative staff of the schools in running SBB. Unfortunately, SBB started around the same time as the COVID-19 pandemic. With students being grouped in different classes for different subjects, this might prove challenging when we are trying to minimise interactions in a school. I am aware that providing a safe learning environment is already taking a toll on everyone in school. I hope that our school staff well-being is also taken into consideration when SBB is being piloted and rolled out.
With these learnings, are we in good stead to progressively roll out SBB to more Secondary schools this year? The MOE has committed that from 2024, the Express, Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) courses will be removed. I welcome this move as it will do much to remove the stigmatisation of being in a less academically demanding stream. More importantly, it recognises and reminds us that each of us has different strengths, even among various academic subjects.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Chairman, based on the 2020 Population Census, more residents are using English as the most frequently used language at home, that is 48.3% in 2020 as compared to 32.3% in 2010. Unfortunately, this means that more residents are speaking less of their mother tongue at home.
Our ability to be bilingual or trilingual gives us a huge advantage when it comes to competing for jobs locally, regionally, globally, and this makes us an attractive business hub. Having a strong command of our mother tongue is not only important culturally, but also economically, if we want to stay relevant and remain ahead in the global competitive market.
Hence, I would like to ask the Ministry if there are any initiatives that students can get to expand their opportunities to learn about their mother tongue languages and culture, beyond exams.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Chairman, similar to Member Denise Phua, I agree with Minister Chan Chun Sing's speech on the three Cs that our universities should achieve: continual learning, connections and collaboration for value creation, and confidence building. And certainly, learning must not stop at a tertiary level. It needs to be a lifelong passion. However, the challenge ultimately lies in implementation. How do we track and monitor progress, both at the individual learner level and also at the societal level? What measurables do we use to define whether someone is a lifelong learner?
These days we try to avoid labels, but it is still important to have some tangible ways to determine whether the various programmes are effective. This is to help promote lifelong learning in our youth and prepare them for the new challenges ahead. What does this mean for IHLs in shells in terms of delivery of content and certification?
In the past, students were largely graded based on how they performed on paper. Assessments have since evolved over the years, with internships, project work, exchange programmes and 360° evaluations counting to their graduation results, but COVID-19 has nevertheless disrupted in-person learning and training. How will IHLs work with industry players to enhance the learning process for our students?
For most students, the hands-on work experience with industry stakeholders will be their first taste of formal working experience, so it should be a meaningful and enriching one. How do we encourage more on-the-job training (OJTs) with industry players? Lastly, are there other societies and countries that we are studying with regards to the best practises for continuous learning?
Mr Chairman: Ms Mariam Jaafar, you can take your two cuts together.
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Sir, for a lot of young Singaporeans, education, especially higher education, is a series of check the boxes. Choosing the best course they can get into, based on \"cut-off points, study hard, get good grades, get a job\". What is the Government doing to encourage young Singaporeans to explore opportunities and embrace the lifelong learning mindset from a young age, even while they are still in the formal education system. For example, taking part in boot camps outside of the university curriculum or during NS.
Will the Minister consider extending SkillsFuture credits to younger Singaporeans perhaps from the age of 18 or 21? My next cut.
Globally, the world of education is transforming. Governments need to move away from the idea that they can educate and prepare our workforce of X number of graduates for the labour market, that has led to their configuration of schools, universities, polytechnics, ITEs and other institutions that we know today. Sir, education systems must evolve, every Singaporean will have his or her own lifelong learning journey, and there will be new forms of education to deliver learning at the right time, right context, right format as part of this journey
These education systems must be closely intertwined with work and delivered as part of digital ecosystems. Learning would include specific technical skills demanded by industry, but also digital skills, life skills, and as we work towards a greener future, sustainability skills. How can the Government encourage our IHLs to strengthen partnership with industries and develop these ecosystems, in order to better serve their evolving role in higher education and continual learning?
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Mr Chairman, Sir, I would like to declare that I am an advisor to the National Instructors and Coaches Association, an association formed by the NTUC. As CCAs are essential to students holistic education through the discovery and development of talents, interests, characters and values, our MOE instructors and coaches play a significant role in this aspect. Throughout this pandemic, MOE instructors and coaches who experienced difficulties in conducting CCAs in schools, COVID-19 uncertainties surfaced the issues of pay-per-use contracting model.
As a result of the pay-per-use contracting model, many CCA instructors had to leave the industries as it is no longer viable with the number of paid CCA hours greatly reduced. It is indeed heartening that there is an implementation of a new contract mode that ensures a minimum level of commitment towards contracted CCA hours. This was a result of discussions between MOE and National Instructors and Coaches Association (NICA) last year.
NICA appreciates MOE's intervention, especially given a time when MOE had to implement various learning modes due to the evolving COVID-19 situation. NICA hopes to foster this dialogue and partnership further with the common goal of providing high-quality CCAs for the holistic development of our students. I believe we can achieve more.
Firstly, the existing practice of most schools procuring service in the last month of the year means that contract opportunities are bunched up, resulting in instructors bidding for different schools’ CCA contracts simultaneously. As a result, some instructors and coaches may win multiple contracts. For those with too many contracts, they are forced to withdraw their bids. Often, this creates a delay in CCA start date, as affected schools then have to issue new Invitations to Quote (ITQs) with a later award. This affects students’ CCA learning outcomes and opportunities.
Secondly, contract terms are usually one to two years. Instead of a short-term period, which increases the chances of disruptions to students’ learning experience, I propose a term that is based on key milestones and development runway for events such as National School Games (NSG) and Singapore Youth Festival (SYF). This ensures that MOE instructors and coaches are able to design and execute structured programmes based on the development runway for NSG or SYF which often takes more than a year to train for. In this way, students can be assured of learning with a clear structured runway.
Thirdly, I seek MOE to recognise instructors’ value of work through intellectual property and copyrights. The curriculum created and proposed by the instructors and coaches should be the intellectual property owned by them. Being a key stakeholder in the education ecosystem, instructors and coaches are nurturing partners that can be counted to support schools, teachers, and students.
I would like to recommend that MOE partners closely with NICA to enhance the development and delivery of high quality CCAs. Through this partnership, I believe our children will benefit from a balanced and well-rounded education that is aligned to MOE’s mission.
Mr Darryl David: Chairman, a strong education system is built around a few key pillars, one of which is to have passionate educators who are committed to bring out the best in every learner. Educators who not only teach textbook knowledge but also bring with them different perspectives and experiences that can enhance the learning of our learners.
I believe that our MOE educators are committed professionals who have been given very good preparatory training that equipped them with the academic and pedagogical development knowledge, as well as with classroom management skills before they are deployed to teach in our schools. That said, that continuous professional development is very important, especially in the area of pastoral skills.
Today, teachers not only have to deliver and teach, Chairman, they also have to manage the emotional and mental well-being of students and deal with interactions with parents, which are likely to be outside regular classroom hours. These are chronic stressors that might negatively impact the mental well-being of teachers, especially sustained over a prolonged period.
I would like to encourage MOE to consider how we can better equip our educators with stress management and self-care techniques, so that they can better manage their own mental and emotional wellness.
Another area where I hope MOE can consider is how to enrich the learning experience of our students, by encouraging educators with more diverse backgrounds to join the profession, or to ensure that our educators have diverse exposures, so that they can bring additional perspectives to the curriculum that they teach.
Many educators went straight into the teaching service from NIE out of a passion for wanting to educate young minds and to serve the community through education. As such, many of them might not have had much opportunity or exposure to other industries or professional environments before they become teachers.
It would thus be good if MOE could explore industry attachments, not only for the teachers’ own personal and professional development, but also so that they can contextualize the subjects that they are teaching in the classrooms to the students.
So, could MOE please share if there are such plans for the professional and holistic development and training of our educators?
Dr Wan Rizal: Chairman, I began my career as a teacher more than 20 years ago, and have taught at various levels from Primary to Secondary schools, Polytechnics and University. Like many of my fellow educators, what keeps us going is our love for teaching.
The joy of curating lessons and imparting knowledge to students is hard to describe.
But being an educator it not just about teaching. The inconvenient truth is, educators wear many hats. They are administrators, disciplinarians, confidantes, counsellors, peer support advisors, CCA coaches and managers, amongst others. And certain hats require them to work beyond their work hours.
In my recent Budget speech, I mentioned about the need for individuals to undergo phases to re-invent themselves, to prevent them from going through physical and mental burnouts. I also believe that it is important to expose educators to new and different opportunities beyond their teaching scope.
This experience will rejuvenate them and help them to inject fresh ideas into their work. Thus, I would like to ask, how is the Ministry supporting and managing teachers' well-being? And this includes the deployment and workload as well as defining clear working hours and discourage educators from responding to emails and texts so that they are well rested mentally and physically.
Mr Chairman: Mr Louis Ng, you can take your three cuts together.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, We should be fair to our teachers when reviewing their performance. In my Budget speech last year, I called for a performance management system or stack-ranking to be more standardised, transparent, fair and informative for teachers. We have done a lot for our students, we stopped ranking them and comparing them to their peers during PSLE, we tell them learning is not a competition. Why then do we make teaching a competition?
It seems contradictory that teachers are the ones telling students that students are no longer ranked and compared with their peers when they themselves are ranked and compared with other teachers. MOE has bee engaging teachers on improving the performance management systems. After one year of further engagement, I hope MOE will remove the quota for grades, provide objective criteria for certain performance grades, starting with A, C and E; remove punitive implications of getting lower grades and allow for professional development leaves for those who get C- grades.
Like our students, our teachers deserve a nurturing environment. My next cut.
Teachers wear many hats from teaching the curriculum, to holistic development, CCAs, and now COVID-19 regulations. We keep adding to teachers’ workload, but we still expect the same quality output from them.
A 2019 study already found that working hours of Singapore teachers is higher than the OECD average. The working hours have increased over the pandemic and our overstretched teachers are reaching out for help.
The average number of teachers seeking support through MOE's counselling services has almost doubled from before COVID-19.
Teachers shared with me that they are stressed and overworked. One shared, \"Many teachers are burning out, but seeking help is not an option because we are expected to show up for our students. I’ve had multiple anxiety attacks in school but I have to put up a front to go back to class.\"
Will MOE consider setting limits for teachers’ working hours and workload? Other than enhancing the Parents Gateway, reducing coverage of national exams, removing some school-based exams, how else will MOE reduce teachers’ workloads? Next cut.
Like many of us, teachers should enjoy flexible work arrangements (FWAs). Many are parents themselves. They prepare and send their children to school every morning before rushing to their own school. As a parent myself, I experience this chaos every morning.
Some teachers struggled with this, including my resident who told me that her principal does not allow her to have staggered working hours. On the other hand, I know of teachers who do and I used to take the elevator every morning with a teacher who sends his child to school before going to his school late.
We should ensure consistency across schools and all teachers should have FWAs, including staggered working hours.
Another teacher shared with me about flexible working hours for teachers without children. She shared that her school allowed her to leave school after 11.30 am if there are no matters in school. However, another school only allow teachers to leave after 2.30 pm even if they have classes before that.
Can MOE require all schools to offer FWAs, including staggered working hours and allow teachers to leave as long as there are no matters to take care of in school?
Shawn Huang Wei Zhong (Jurong): It is important to have diverse experiences. A carefully curated learning experience will enable students to better understand local and regional culture, traditions, work ethics, people and history. We must also ensure that sufficient amount of time is spent in the region to enable one to form an assessment and better understanding of the region, develop useful engagements and relationships that would enable them to build up familiarity and courage to further engage the region in the future.
How is the Ministry strengthening the diversity of experiences to better understand culture, people and history of the region? How can we give everyone an opportunity to have a immersive overseas experience?
The Chairman: Ms Sylvia Lim. Not here. Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, I filed a Parliamentary Question last November, asking for data on the socio-economic backgrounds of students admitted into different categories of Secondary schools, such as Government, Government-aided and Independent categories. I wanted to find out the extent to which students from well-off families were concentrated in the more popular and well resourced group of schools. While the Government gave a response describing the school admissions process, it did not release the data I asked for.
I unsuccessfully attempted to file a follow-up question this January asking if MOE possesses this data. The question was not allowed on grounds of repetition.
In 2018, Prime Minister Lee acknowledged the fears of popular schools becoming closed circles.
Sir, I repeat my call for the data to be released as a measure of how we are faring on diversity and inclusivity if we are serious about recognising and tackling school-based socio-economic status (SES) trends which may have profound consequences for social mobility. Note that I am asking for data on SES by category of schools and not by each individual school.
The Chairman: Ms Carrie Tan. She is not here. Mr Shawn Huang.
Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong: We need to strengthen the support for mental well-being. We need more early warning capabilities to identify students who need support and to be able to provide these capabilities much earlier. As mental well-being cuts across various domains, we must be able to coordinate our approach together with other stakeholders and parents. We must be able to respond appropriately with a range of responses and capabilities.
I would like to ask Minister how are we better supporting the mental well-being of students? How are we building up capabilities to build conducive and supportive environments for higher ends students? How are we assuring that we are nurturing students with special needs today and equip them with skills for life?
Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mr Chairman, former Manpower Minister Mr Lim Swee Say once mentioned should Singapore be hit by higher employment, it would be because of a shortage of skills as a result of the widening of job skills mismatch – and not a lack of jobs.
How is our education system preparing our students for employment in the skills-based economy?
For students in our ITE or Polytechnics, can the Ministry consider apprenticeship schemes where students can work with experienced staff from industry partners for a longer duration, as compared to internships so that they can learn job specific skills and gain applied competency?
Given the digital nature of all jobs now, how do we ensure all our students leave our education system with skills to perform at least tech-light roles? Can we consider coding, dashboarding or data visualisation as a core skillset for our students to acquire before they leave Secondary schools?
Dr Wan Rizal: Chairman, there are many ways for an admission to the Polytechnics. Apart from the Joint Admission Exercise (JAE), there is also the Early Admissions Exercise (EAE) for graduating \"O\" level students, who receive conditional offers based on their aptitudes and interests before taking their GCE \"O\" levels.
The Direct Admissions Exercise (DAE) allows applicants who are not eligible to participate in the EAE and JAE to apply for the course of their interest. And finally, there is the Polytechnic Foundation Programme (PFP), a one-year programme that accepts Normal (Academic) students.
I have witnessed many students from the PFP programme as well as those from the ITEs, and they are doing just as well as or even better than their \"O\" level counterparts.
Sir, as a whole, I am grateful that we allow the Polytechnics greater flexibility to select students from varied pathways, based on broader measures of merit, beyond just academic grades. But I think we can do more. We can do more to continue to change mindsets and show that truly, there are multiple paths to success.
There are several questions that I would like to raise.
Firstly, would the Ministry consider expanding admission to Polytechnics via the PFP, in a move to continue to broaden the definition of academic merit and results beyond what was achieved in the national examinations?
Second, for students enrolling in Polytechnics from the ITEs, are there plans to introduce industry attachments prior to this admission so that they are better prepared before they embark in the diploma programme?
And finally, for students who need more time to build up their academic foundation, what are some of the options for them to be eligible to enrol in Polytechnic courses based on their non-academic achievements?
Dr Shahira Abdullah (Nominated Member): In the latest graduate employment survey for 2021, it was found that more university graduates secured full-time employment, with salaries also increasing as Singapore’s economy recovered. It was found to be \"comparable to pre-COVID-19 levels\". The Polytechnics have also shown improvements in employment rates and salaries. However, the results for ITE have not been released.
May I know if MOE has an employment survey for ITE graduates? And if that is available, what are the employment rates and starting salaries? Has it improved over the year, or rebounded to pre-COVID-19 levels? What is the percentage of ITE graduates who have furthered their studies instead?
I understand there are many traineeships available currently for these young graduates. However, may I know the rate of conversion to full-time employment for the ITE graduates and if they are comparable to those from Polytechnics and Universities? For those who have been unable to convert, what are the reasons cited by the ITE graduates as well as the companies themselves? Should there be initiatives to encourage companies to hire ITE graduates?
It is of concern to me as if these graduates are not able to get decent-paying full-time employment, many of them might turn to gig work, especially if they have to help with their family finances. The longer they stay in gig work, the more difficult it will be for them to get out.
Mr Abdul Samad (Nominated Member): Chairman, my focus on Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) is more towards both Institute of Technical Education and Polytechnics.
Our country education landscape and system of IHLs had evolved over the past few decades since I last completed my Diploma in 1992 from Singapore Polytechnic.
I am very heartened to see the increase and Improvement not just for Polytechnics, but even in converting them – from Vocational Institute of Training Board to one that is more encouraging: Institute of Technical Education, in short ITE. Since this change, can MOE share how many students have graduated yearly and how fast do they actually get employment?
I also note that there are many ITE students that choose to continue to acquire Diploma upon graduation before entering their work life. Can MOE share how many students have gone through prior this route after taking the Higher Nitec straightaway into Diploma?
Aside from ITE, the number of Polytechnics has increased gradually from two to five now. Can MOE share how many graduates annually from such Polytechnic across the five different ones?
Notwithstanding, the thing that is more of concern is how are the courses curated so that it can meet the industry demands? How often are these courses reviewed and even new courses curated, to meet potential demands of the future job market?
Does MOE also work closely with EDB to ensure that we have sufficient required talents to meet the future economy and industry demand so that we can build a Singaporean Core in our workforce and also provide good global job opportunities?
In addition, I also call MOE to work closely with NTUC via our young NTUC team so that these students can have a teaser on work-life and from then on learn the need for continuous learning in their future career.
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Chairman, I would like to declare my interest as CEO of WMI, a continuing education and training (CET) provider.
Much has been said about the rapid pace of industry development and how jobs are fast evolving. This means the acquisition of new skills and knowledge must keep pace and even intensify over our lifetime. It is timely that we think about how CET can be even more impactful and emerge as a strategic pillar in our human capital development.
Sir, for CET to be more impactful to support lifelong learning with clear career outcomes, CET's funding, operating and accreditation framework need to be further enhanced.
Based on MOE’s estimated expenditure for Financial Year 2022, about $1.3 billion will be spent on SkillsFuture-related programmes. This represents about less than 10% of the total MOE Expenditure. Yet this amount is supposed to support 2.4 million resident working adults, averaging $542 per worker. This contrasts starkly with the amount of about $16,000 per child up to Secondary level and about $22,000 per full-time University student. What would be a more reasonable amount of CET spend per adult to achieve the outcomes we intend? What about the contribution we should expect from employers?
Sir, besides budget, we need to think about how we can enable workers to engage in deep learning while they work. One of the struggles we often hear from working adults is that it is already hard enough to cope with the day’s work, let alone set aside time to learn new skills.
CET can take place in different ways, both online and offline, on campus as well as at the workplace. How can we support workers, integrate Continuing Education and Training to their work, including the provision of study leave as part of employment terms?
Sir, CET must be relevant with credentials recognised by employers and the industry. The credentials from CET must translate to job opportunities and career growth. For this to happen, there must be close partnerships among CET providers, employers and the industry to agree on industry accreditation standards and the recognition of a common set of CET qualifications.
Mr Darryl David: Mr Chairman, education and personal development is indeed a lifelong journey. This axiom is now more apt than ever.
The Fourth Industrial Revolution or Industry 4.0 was coined by Klaus Schwab, the founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum in 2016 to describe how the confluence of artificial intelligence, advanced robotics, Internet of Things, quantum computing, genetic engineering and other technologies will create the perfect storm that paves the way for radical transformative changes in the conduct of businesses and how we live our lives.
Today, we are barely five years from that and into the Industry 4.0 and futurists and academics have already begun to describe how the Fifth Industrial Revolution, Industry 5.0, will look like. As one consulting group has aptly described, Industry 5.0 is the new renaissance for humanity where humanism, civility, inclusivity, creativity and purpose will thrive alongside profit and digitally enabled progress.
Think metaverse and you get the picture.
Singapore needs to prepare our workforce for Industry 5.0 and beyond. Our educational institutions have traditionally focused on Pre-Employment Training (PET) to prepare our young for work. Compared to a few years ago, it is now becoming even clearer that getting a basic education is a necessary but insufficient condition for work in Industry 5.0 and beyond. We need to develop a new educational framework that integrates PET with Continuing Education and Training (CET) to meet the new reality of work.
Chairman, MOE has traditionally focused on PET and CET has typically been the domain of SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) and Workforce Singapore (WSG). Moving forward, would we see a closer integration between the PET and CET frameworks so we can develop a future-ready workforce that is equipped with basic know-hows as well as the mindset that training and development is a lifelong journey, especially in Industry 5.0 and beyond?
How could MOE, SSG and WSG work together to re-conceptualise how the education landscape will look like in Singapore? Thank you.
Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong: Being relevant to the industry is of utmost importance to strengthen employability and continued employment. Mid-career upgrades and continued learning is not an easy feat as one usually has to manage multiple obligations.
I know of many who will take time after a long day of work to attend classes or courses. We have a duty of care to them. We must make sure that their efforts will be accretive to their careers and to their personal development.
I would like to ask the Minister how is MOE expanding applied learning opportunities in its Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and to ensure that courses are highly relevant to the industry's needs? How is MOE measuring the value of the certification or programme post its completion? How does MOE ensure compatibility or stackability of courses toward an academic or professional certification?
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Sir, there are 22 Special Education (SPED) schools in Singapore catering to about 7,000 students with moderate to high support needs. The Government has invested resources, manpower and funds into the sector and many of us are grateful.
There are three compelling reasons why it is time for SPED schools to be elevated, to be uplifted to be more prepared for the future.
One is the incredulous pace at which technology has changed lives at home, at work and out in the community.
Two, the need for better education outcomes. The prognosis of SPED graduates is not as positive as expected in spite of more MOE funding, more MOE controls, more pay and more seconded MOE mainstream principals and teachers. We need a breakthrough in the SPED education system for higher returns in the form of physical wellness, literacy, numeracy, community living and independent living skills as a result of a SPED education career.
Three, the need to continue learning for life and throughout life is even more critical and urgent for students with special needs. SPED school graduands literally stop learning after they leave the school gate.
In a complex, rapidly digital, volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world, the Government must facilitate the transit of SPED schools to become better schools for the future. Let me propose five features.
One, SPED schools of the future must be scoped to cover lifelong learning – to learn for life and to learn throughout life. Special education can no longer be about frontloading content in the first 18 years of one's life. Learning must extend beyond 18 to avoid the falling off the cliff with no hope of any more education.
Two, SPED schools of the future must be masters of their mission. No lip service to SPED basics like person-centred planning, individual education planning and other aspects of disability-specific curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. SPED schools must become truly schools without walls and strongly facilitate learning at home, in the community, at the workplace and care facilities – just in time, self-paced and appropriately paced, bite-sized, with repositories of learning resources which are easily accessible.
Three, SPED schools of the future must develop strong thought leadership and practice to the extent that it can guide and inform the support of students with special education needs (SEN) in mainstream schools – in MOE schools. In education systems elsewhere, educators with strong expertise in SPED are better regarded and even better paid. Singapore has only begun its journey in building expertise in special education. With 80% of students with special education needs in Singapore's mainstream schools, SPED schools can become the precious resource to uplift them.
To reach this leadership position, the National Institute of Education, NIE, the mothership that now trains special educators, will need to upgrade and update its current service model. Set up a Special Education Academy for that.
Four, SPED schools of the future should be led not just by MOE but by a SPED Leadership Council at the national level comprising many strong helping hands, with members who can represent the ecosystem of SPED – the Government, disability and education experts, family representatives and the industry.
SPED schools of the future should be trusted. They should not be managed in a cookie-cutter way. They should be trusted to deliver according to the outcomes agreed upon. SPED schools of the future should not be micromanaged and those who are competent and have a proven track record should be given more autonomy and space to innovate, to experiment and to break new grounds, just as how MOE has allowed for the autonomy of schools and IHLs in the mainstream.
Lastly, SPED schools of the future must actively partner and enskill family caregivers in the education of their students, of their children. Parents or caregivers will play an active role in the education of their own children. They will not wait till when they or their children become much older to worry about their unpreparedness for life or life after the parents' death.
In conclusion, Sir, it is time to lift Singapore's SPED Schools to the next lap. The time is now.
Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song (Aljunied): Parents of children with special needs face a complex dilemma when making educational choices for their children. A wide range of services is available at various price points but parents are largely left on their own to identify the optimal ones.
Could ECDA provide more one-stop advisory services for parents? This will help ease the anxiety that many parents of special needs children feel.
For children who require medium to high levels of early intervention support, such services can be prohibitively expensive. While ECDA does provide subsidised support through the Early Intervention Programme for Infants & Children (EIPIC) programme, EIPIC centres have wait times ranging from three to 18 months and most provide a limited number of hours of intervention a week. This requires parents to turn to additional services that can cost thousands more every month.
Can ECDA work with EIPIC providers to increase the capacity and range of services provided so that children can receive all the early intervention support they require from the same centre? A centralised provision of early intervention services can bring economies of scale which can reduce costs for parents.
Children who require lower levels of early intervention support can attend mainstream Primary schools but may still require supplemental support services like occupational therapy.
Can MOE provide an integrated special needs support programme at mainstream schools? This will enable children with special needs to thrive in such environments and reduce the cost and inconvenience borne parents for external support services.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam (Jurong): Like other parents, parents of children with special needs like me also want to see our children do well in school and achieve their fullest potential. The education journey, though, is often a lot more challenging.
The children are differently abled and require more support. If we intervene early in schools and give them the necessary skills to prepare them for the future, there is a greater chance that many of them could carry on with their lives with minimal reliance on others and work and socialise like everyone else.
If they can be independent and contribute meaningfully towards the economy, less resources need to be spent on support structures or schemes when they are adults or when they age. It is thus important to have the appropriate educational pathways for these students to prepare them well so that they can integrate and contribute to society.
Schools offer the support structure for parents in their children's developmental journey. The challenge for parents sometimes is in getting to the services they need, in enrolling in appropriate schools which are within the vicinity of their homes.
Special Education (SPED) schools play a key function in the special needs community. How can we continue to enhance the accessibility and affordability of SPED schools?
It is also particularly challenging for families as their children move on to different stages of their developments. We should continue to build on the efforts to support special needs students as they transit into the various milestones in their lives.
MOE had previously announced Transition Support for Integration or TRANSIT to help children ease the transition into Primary school. Could I get an update on the implementation of TRANSIT and find out if there are any plans on the expansion of this programme?
Dr Wan Rizal: Chairman, last year, we were rocked by the unfortunate loss of life in school during school hours. The incident impacted many – students, educators and parents. Inevitably but most unfortunately, the issue of mental health was brought to light.
Our educators are trained to look out for signs of distress amongst their students and mental well-being is taught in the curriculum. There is also a peer support programme to bridge the gap. However, as an educator and a peer support coordinator, I find that it is not easy to identify these students.
I have had students coming up to me and sharing their difficulties and I in turn, in confidence, make subtle arrangements to accommodate such students. But often, they go totally unnoticed or students and parents are aware but would like to keep their issues private. It is understandable.
Over the past two years, I have asked for mental health literacy programmes, screening both physical and mental as well as time-outs to be introduced. I am grateful that Character Citizenship Education (CCE) now covers the literacy aspect and I hope that the Ministry can integrate screening as well as time-outs.
I would like to ask, Sir, what are some of MOE's plans to enhance support for firstly, students who have yet to be identified to suffer from mental health issues and secondly, students who are suffering from mental health and well-being problems in schools and at home or outside?
The Chairman: Minister Chan Chun Sing.
The Minister for Education (Mr Chan Chun Sing): Chairman, we thank Members for their suggestions and the support for our education system and especially our educators. Let us also thank our educators on the frontline.
In the past two years of COVID-19 disruptions, they have taken on additional workload and have gone beyond the call of duty to keep our children safe, our schools open and our learning undisrupted.
COVID-19 has accelerated many trends and heightened the need to evolve our education system urgently. Mr Patrick Tay and Ms Denise Phua also spoke about the future trends of education. We aim to emerge stronger from this pandemic. We will not waste the opportunities that have arisen from this crisis. We will lock in the gains from the disruptions to distinguish ourselves for the long term.
Chair, three driving forces shape our education system. First, technology and business cycles have become more compressed. Workers now take on multiple jobs in their lifetime and need to be reskilled regularly to remain relevant. How fast we evolve our skills, products and services will determine our competitive advantage, both as individuals and as a nation, much more than our population base or our resources.
Second, the world is becoming polarised and fragmented, even as we grow more inter-connected and inter-dependent. The geopolitical environment has become more volatile. Competition of ideas and values, contestation of ideologies and influence. Both will intensify. Countries that cannot create relevance for themselves will have to worry about having to choose sides. Yet, there are opportunities for those that can value-add and play the role of a connector to transcend these fault lines.
Third, our social fabric is evolving. Our people have more diverse aspirations and perspectives. The Internet has increased access to information but algorithms on social media can also skew the information that we are exposed to. They cater to our preferences and amplify our biases.
Our youths are not just Singaporeans, but also digital natives. Technology and social media have allowed them to stay connected and organise around meaningful causes. But it is also easier to compare themselves with their classmates and friends, as well as anyone else in the world online. This has an impact on their sense of identity and self-confidence.
We have seen other societies with longer histories fracture, as the values and aspirations of their people diverge. We are a young nation. Our challenges cannot be any less.
The definition of success for our education system must then evolve. It must enable every Singaporean to do justice to their own set of gifts; constantly seeking to surpass themselves both individually and as a team, rather than just surpassing others; contributing towards a better future for the wider community, to Singapore and to the world.
Chair, our vision of our education system has three elements: to develop confident Singaporeans; to build a competitive Singapore; and to forge a cohesive society.
Let me start with the first – confident Singaporeans. Confidence starts from understanding our own strengths and interests. This starts from school. Then, confidence comes from knowing that we have multiple pathways that give our people lifelong opportunities to acquire the knowledge and skills for success through life. We must also have confidence in our values and solutions, that we have the will and the means to chart our own destiny with our own solutions for our own context. Finally, we must be confident in our contributions to our society, to future generations and to the world.
Second, a competitive Singapore. This comes from our speed of evolution and our superior connectivity. Evolution speed depends on us quickly learning, unlearning and relearning, so that we can combine and recombine ideas and knowledge to always create something new and relevant. Superior connectivity enables us to go beyond geography and size, with the world as our hinterland and market.
By connectivity, I refer not just to the physical dimensions of air, land and sea, not even the non-physical dimensions of data, finance, rules and technology; but also of ideas, cultures and values. As the world threatens to fragment, we connect and value add. This connectivity is our special, man-made competitive advantage.
Third, a cohesive society. We distinguish ourselves as a nation that celebrates our diverse roots while forging a shared identity with a set of shared values. Our diversity unites, rather than divides. It is the substrate upon which our new ideas grow.
Therefore, Chair, we will take a life course approach to education. “MOE for schools\" must become “MOE for life”.
We begin by giving every child a good start in life. The early years set the foundation for heathy and balanced development for our children. We have invested in many quality and affordable preschools, where our children can enjoy and learn through play, develop early literacy and numeracy, as well as social and emotional skills, ask questions and explore their interests, and most importantly – ignite their innate curiosity.
We are updating the Nurturing Early Learners Framework to guide our preschool educators, to incorporate social and emotional skills even more prominently and emphasise core values of respect, responsibility, care, and honesty from young.
As they progress through our schools, we build on these fundamentals by giving our students greater confidence in themselves and of their abilities, with more opportunities to explore their interests and cultivate their curiosity, so that they are unafraid to try. And if they fail, they pick themselves up and try again.
We cannot shield our children from all uncertainties and the imperfections of this world, nor should that be our aim. But we certainly can and want to equip them with the skills to manage the uncertainties and navigate the imperfections. This means creating time and space for our students to develop the life skills they need for success, including the ability to deal with failure, inventive thinking, adaptability and cross-cultural skills that Mr Darryl David and Mr Lim Biow Chuan raised.
Over the past few years, we removed mid-year examinations for Primary 3, Primary 5, Secondary 1 and Secondary 3. We saw the positive impact. Schools and teachers can better pace and deepen students’ learning. They use ongoing assessments to identify what students have mastered and the areas they have difficulties with. Students also focus more on their learning and less on marks.
We will build on these gains, by removing mid-year examinations for all Primary and Secondary levels by 2023. This frees up more time across all levels for self-directed learning and development of 21st Century Competencies. We are also reviewing curriculum content and assessment demand. Any one standard curriculum will necessarily not be able to meet the diverse learning needs of our students. Any \"average curriculum\" will necessarily mean that many students will be overstretched while others are under-stretched.
Hence, we must have a range of options to cater to our students' diverse abilities and learning needs. Our teachers must have the ability to pick and choose from a menu of options and customise them to suit the diverse and respective needs of their students. These moves seek to bring about a cultural shift: where our students learn holistically and master skills, driven by intrinsic motivation and future relevance, and not be distracted by incessant comparison with others.
Chair, next, we want to customise education as much as possible to bring out the best in every child. We will give students more agency in their learning. Regular Home-Based Learning will be implemented for all Secondary and pre-university students by end-2022. This lets students take ownership of their learning at their own pace. Students will also have dedicated time and space to pursue their own interests outside the curriculum through Student-Initiated Learning. And we are studying how technology can further customise learning to help teachers provide feedback, track students’ learning progress, and we will also explore the use of adaptive learning systems to tailor learning to our students’ needs.
We thank Ms Denise Phua and Ms Hazel Poa for suggesting a through-train system for Primary to Secondary school education. Ms Denise Phua has raised this idea for some time. The PSLE remains a useful checkpoint for our students and parents. We made significant changes to the PSLE scoring system last year, to broaden emphasis beyond academic results. We will continue to look at ways to enhance the diversity of our school landscape.
But there are some fundamental principles we must always maintain: to provide quality and holistic education for every child, no matter their learning profile; to give opportunities for children of different backgrounds to mix with one another to strengthen our social cohesion; and to ensure equity and fairness in admissions and posting.
In line with these principles, we will expand Full Subject-Based Banding (Full SBB) for more porous and diverse educational pathways and encourage students to take greater ownership of their education journey.
Mr Baey Yam Keng has asked for an update. Our Full SBB pilot started in 2020. In the pilot schools, students taking different courses come together in mixed form classes. They take six subjects at the common level, which is one-third of curriculum time and other subjects at different levels. The experiences from the pilot gives us confidence that we are on the right track. Students have made more friends across courses, learnt new perspectives and learnt how to relate better to their peers from different backgrounds. And they have become more confident in themselves and of their abilities.
From 2024, we will remove streaming totally. In Secondary schools, students will be grouped in mixed form classes. Students can choose to take different subjects at different subject levels, suited to their pace of learning. These subject levels, known as G for General: G1, G2 and G3. They are broadly mapped from today’s Express, Normal (Academic) and Normal (Technical) standards.
There will be greater subject-level flexibility. Those who are strong in a subject may take it at a more demanding level, while those who find it difficult to cope with a subject may offer it at a less demanding level, based on their school’s guidance.
We will also shift away from course-based subject offerings under Full SBB. For example, students currently in Express and Normal (Academic) courses who face exceptional difficulties with Mother Tongue Language (MTL) learning may take MTL \"B\". With Full SBB, they can now study MTL at a level that better meets their learning needs – whether G1 or G2. We will thus discontinue MTL \"B\" from the 2024 Secondary 1 cohort. MOE will provide more details later in the year on other curriculum changes that accompany Full SBB.
To allow more students to benefit, MOE will extend Full SBB to more schools. Crescent Girls’ School, Tanjong Katong Girls’ School and Tanjong Katong Secondary School currently admit only students in the Express stream. From 2024, they will go on board Full SBB and admit a wider range of students, including students taking mainly G2 subjects. Students of more diverse learning profiles can then benefit from these schools’ distinctive programmes.
Full SBB represents a major shift to customise learning to each student according to their strengths. However, I must say, Full SBB does require more resources. It entails more complex coordination of timetables and requires our teachers to adapt their teaching methods for a wider range of students.
Customisation also means giving schools the flexibility to best support their students' needs. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim spoke on later school start times. In MOE, we have a simple baseline – schools are not to start before 7.30 am. Beyond that, schools decide when to start and end, based on factors like their unique needs, student profiles and the local transport situation. For example, Junyuan Secondary School starts at 8.30 am twice a week and 8.00 am the other three days, and Junyuan Secondary is not the only school that has different start times.
We will also adjust post-secondary admissions, to better recognise students’ individual strengths. First, we will expand the Polytechnic Foundation Programme (PFP) and relax selected grade requirements for entry from Academic Year 2024. A wider group of learner profiles can benefit from a practice-based preparatory pathway to the polytechnics, while still ensuring that students can cope with the rigour. We expect another 200 students every year to benefit, in addition to the 1,500 today. We will continue to review admissions for other pathways to better recognise the different subject levels under Full SBB.
Next, we will expand Direct School Admission (DSA) for Government and Government-aided Junior Colleges (JCs). Starting from 2022, these JCs can admit up to 20% of their non-Integrated Programme intake through DSA, up from 10% today. This recognises other forms of merit beyond academic grades.
Our efforts to customise education continue after Secondary school. Last year, Second Minister for Education Dr Maliki Osman led the Review of Opportunities and Pathways in Applied Education. The review aims to enhance Polytechnic and ITE education to support our students’ diverse strengths and aspirations. Its recommendations include providing students with greater flexibility in their pathways and supporting them in navigating these pathways, enhancing their career readiness and resilience for the future economy and equipping them with life skills and expanding opportunities for deeper industry exposure. The Second Minister for Education will update more later.
We must also help our students to be curious about the world. Around two-thirds of our schools have established partnerships with their overseas counterparts. Building on this, we want every school to have an overseas partnership. This facilitates more student exchanges, so that students can broaden their horizons and learn about different cultures.
While the exchanges have been virtual for now, because of COVID-19, technology allows our students and their overseas peers to still learn, play and celebrate special occasions together.
In this same spirit, our IHLs will continue to work towards the 70 by 70 target disrupted by COVID-19 – 70% of all students will have an overseas experience, of which 70% will be in ASEAN countries, China and India.
Chair, we will give our students greater confidence to venture beyond Singapore.
We will pilot a modular Third Language programme so that more Secondary school students can learn new languages and discover other cultures. Starting with one or two of our existing Third Language offerings, students can pick up the language from different starting points or at different levels and build their proficiency and \"stack\" modules towards a certificate.
At the same time, our students must have a sense of rootedness and identity.
As Dr Wan Rizal said, our bilingual ability helps us to navigate across cultures. Every student should learn their Mother Tongue to as high a level as possible. Hence, we have a range of Mother Tongue Language special programmes, like the Language Elective Programme (LEP), which we have expanded to our secondary schools in 2020. It allows those strong in their Mother Tongue to learn it at a higher level and nurture their interest in literature and culture.
The Elective Programme in Malay Language for Secondary Schools (EMAS) is another example. EMAS is offered at three host schools today. We will expand EMAS to a fourth host centre, Raffles Institution, from 2023 so that more students can access it, including students from other nearby schools. Students with a strong proficiency in the Malay language can develop their interest for the Malay language and culture.
Across the system, we continue to pay special attention to students with greater needs. They too must have the opportunities and resilience to overcome challenges and do well in life.
Our philosophy is this: no student should be held back from their dreams and aspirations because of his or her starting circumstances. So, we will press on with UPLIFT in schools, ITE and the Polytechnics to support students with Special Educational Needs and to support the mental well-being of our students. My MOE colleagues will elaborate.
Chair, this is our social compact – to continually invest in our people, enable every Singaporean to develop to their fullest potential regardless of their starting point and to partake in the country's growth so that we can strive towards a fairer and more inclusive society.
Previously, we have focused on investing in the first 20 to 25 years of our people's lives. On average, we spend a quarter of a million dollars on each child to prepare him or her for their first job. But now, firms and workers face greater disruption and faster skills obsolescence. Therefore, upfront investment is necessary but insufficient.
On the other hand, beyond paper qualifications, those with the relevant skills, who can take advantage of the new technologies, will benefit the most. Therein lies our challenge and opportunity.
Therefore, we will need to seriously intensify efforts on continual learning throughout life, as Mr Yip Hon Weng and Ms Mariam Jaafar mentioned.
The Government started SkillsFuture seven years ago. In 2021, we spent nearly $1.2 billion in skills training for our workforce. This is 40% more than 2019 and it excludes spending on COVID-19-related programmes.
We will do more to support Singaporeans to achieve greater career resilience and job mobility through a major investment in skills refresh. This will be the next needle-mover for the competitiveness of our people beyond their first work-ready qualification. This will become a key pillar of our social compact with Singaporeans we will invest in every Singaporean not just in school but throughout life.
We are focusing on two areas: providing more opportunities for our people to pursue a degree or diploma, especially as working adults, and enhancing structural support for mid-career reskilling.
Today, we have a 40% cohort participation rate target for subsidised university places for fresh school leavers and an additional 10% allowance for adult learners. As we increasingly move towards interspersing working and learning throughout life, we should look beyond the proportion of each cohort that goes to university before starting work. We should focus instead on ensuring that Singaporeans can upskill continually according to their needs and aspirations.
This ties in with major efforts to transform our economy. The refresh of the Industry Transformation Maps (ITM) aims to create more good jobs for Singaporeans. With more and better job opportunities for degree holders, we will study increasing the \"lifetime cohort participation rate\". This will provide more opportunities for working adults to pursue a degree at a suitable point in their life and support key growth areas in our economy.
MOE, together with MTI and MOM, will further study the mix of the increase in places to better cater to the needs of our learners and the economy.
Beyond expanding degree places, we need other ways to strengthen support for our mid-career workers, especially those in their forties and fifties. They are more vulnerable to retrenchment and long-term unemployment and need greater support to pivot to new job roles. This structural change is here to stay post-pandemic.
During the pandemic, to help mid-career individuals move to new sectors or job roles, we introduced the SGUnited Skills (SGUS) and SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways – Company Training (SGUP-CT) programmes. We will bring these programmes to a close and transit to a new SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme (SCTP).
This will be a permanent feature of our training and placement ecosystem. Courses under SCTP will be highly subsidised. The SCTP will support the career transition needs of Singaporeans, with industry-relevant training involving potential employers, and employment facilitation into sectors with good hiring opportunities. Minister of State Gan Siow Huang will elaborate later.
Beyond these moves, MOE, MTI, MOM and MOF are studying how we can enhance the structural support for Singaporeans in their mid-forties and fifties who may need significant reskilling to provide a second wind to their careers.
Regardless if our workers are looking to switch industries or jobs, they recognise that their current jobs need upgraded skills to keep pace with evolving business models and technologies. Reskilling can help them to keep up with the changes and remain employable.
We will take a holistic review of the accessibility and the different support that adult learners need, to help every Singaporean enhance their career resilience by refreshing their skills throughout life.
Chair, we need to strengthen and transform our higher education and training ecosystem. Rather than simply ramping up quantity, we must also enhance quality and accessibility. We must accelerate the transformation of our training to better cater to adult learners, leveraging on technology to enable every individual to learn at their own pace, anytime and anywhere.
We will improve how we reach out to individuals and support their upskilling as they pursue their career goals through new partnerships with companies, trade associations and chambers and of course, our unions.
All three pillars of our ecosystem, our institutes for continual learning, private training providers and employers, all must pull together in the same direction. Let me elaborate.
First, our Institutes of Higher Learning must grow into institutes for continual learning. While the number of adult learners trained by our institutions has more than doubled from around 165,000 in 2018 to 345,000 in 2020, we can expect this number to go up further.
To cater to more diverse learners, our institutions need to review their programmes. Adults' learning needs, commitments and prior experiences differ from our younger learners. This means improving andragogy, or adult education by using technology to make learning accessible and achievable and making learning bite-sized and on-the-go based on their existing skills foundation.
For instance, SUSS's flexible, modular and applied curriculum, accompanied by online provisions, caters well to adult learners. The curriculum is taught by a mix of SUSS full-time and associate faculty, many of whom are industry practitioners. It is supported by learning analytics to tailor learning to individual students.
New pathways are also being created, like SIT's new Competency-based Workplace Learning Pathway. Skills and competencies acquired through prior work experience also count towards the graduating requirements. This brings the university to the workplace.
All our institutions also offer stackable pathways for learners to take bite-sized modules that count towards a full qualification. This gives our adult learners more flexibility to juggle work, study and family responsibilities.
Second, we need a stronger nexus between our institutions and industry, as Ms Mariam Jaafar suggested. Industry and workforce transformation must go hand-in-hand. Our institutions need to do so in three ways.
First, partnering industry to provide more workplace learning opportunities. For example, internships, job-shadowing or work-study programmes.
By 2025, work-study programmes will be a mainstream pathway catering to 12% of each cohort, up from 4% today. We will support industry partners to develop in-house on-the-job training capabilities through the National Centre of Excellence for Workplace Learning. Industry can also offer industry micro-credentials that are recognised by employers alongside our institutions' credentials.
Two, ensuring that our institutions' faculty remain industry relevant. We must encourage faculty to gain industry-relevant knowledge and competencies and most importantly, to keep them current. Our institutions will ramp up industry engagement and attachment opportunities and hire faculty with industry experience to complement existing faculty.
Three, collaborating with industry on research and innovation projects.
We will provide additional support to our Centres engaging in Technology, Innovation and Enterprise activities in our Polytechnics and ITE. They can then partner more SMEs on innovation projects and that will allow our SMEs and companies to be a ready receptacle for our upgraded workers and upgraded students.
Our companies also need to take ownership of this transformation because transforming themselves to attract, retain and upskill local talent is an important piece of this jigsaw puzzle.
Over the past year, MOE, MTI, and MOM initiated efforts with industry leaders, unions and other Government agencies, and educators to strengthen the employability and career prospects of our Polytechnic and ITE graduates in the future economy.
We looked into raising the quantity and quality of internships and on-the-job upskilling opportunities for our students, starting with sectors like Manufacturing, Built environment, Information and Communications Technology (ICT), Retail and Food Services. We have developed strategies to promote access to jobs with good career prospects.
We have encouraged companies to recognise the skills and competencies of our Polytechnic and ITE graduates and invest in talent attraction and retention and also to invest in their workers' continued education. Good internship experiences and progression pathways are key to encouraging our students to join and stay in the sector they were trained for.
Some of these initiatives were announced at the recent MCI's and MTI's Committees of Supply, such as the TechSkills Accelerator (TeSA) for ITE and Polytechnics Aliiance, and the Accelerated Pathways for Technicians & Assistant Engineers (Manufacturing) Grant.
Chair, MOE cannot transform our education system by ourselves. We need and want to partner educators, parents, industry and our community to achieve this vision.
First, our educators. Mr Darryl David, Dr Wan Rizal and Mr Louis Ng have spoken about them.
To inspire our students, we need to inspire our teachers. To widen the exposure for our students, we need to widen the exposure for our teachers. To empower our teachers to steward change, we will partner with the people, public and private sectors so that teachers can take up more short-term attachments.
Through the Teacher Work Attachment Plus programme, our teachers can broaden their perspectives, enhance their skills and build connections. Our teachers must then be able to grow and they must grow as they help our children grow.
Many Polytechnic and ITE educators have prior working experiences from our industry. However, we also need to help them keep pace amidst the current fast changes in the industry. We will therefore send more Polytechnic and ITE educators for industry attachments and for more of them to have collaboration projects with our companies, including many SMEs. This will refresh their skill sets and keep their competencies at the frontier.
Our educators have worked much harder and for much longer hours in the last two years.
In MOE, we have a saying, \"One cannot pour from an empty cup.\" Hence, we will continue to take care of our teachers' mental well-being and workload.
Schools are committed to ensuring that workload remains manageable and we will continue to work towards all schools having Wellness Ambassadors. To strengthen the culture of care and peer support for our teachers, Staff Well-Being Committees will place more emphasis on the mental well-being of our teachers, with support from MOE headquarters. These efforts complement free in-house counselling services at iCARE and the free 24/7 whole-of-Government counselling hotline.
Mr Louis Ng also asked about teachers’ appraisal. We appreciate his concern for their well-being. Our teachers are driven by a strong sense of mission and responsibility for our students, and it shows in their work and attitude. Therefore, it is important for us to recognise and affirm deserving teachers, especially those who have gone beyond their call of duty, those who have excelled, and those who have set the pace for the fraternity.
At the same time, we need to identify teachers who require more support, so that we can build and sustain an excellent workforce. Our appraisal system must, therefore, ensure consistency and fairness in the ranking of our educators. Mr Louis Ng can be assured that we are constantly updating our policies so that all our teachers can continue to have access to our training programmes and be guided to improve, to better nurture our students.
We also hear Mr Edward Chia’s call to support instructors and coaches. MOE and our partners, like SportSG, the National Arts Council and the National Instructors & Coaches Association, recognise the important role they play. We have platforms for regular engagements and have been working closely with them, including reviewing our procurement processes and contractual terms to mitigate the impact of COVID-19, and we will continue to do so.
Our second group of partners are our parents. As Dr Tan Yia Swam said earlier, all of us want the best for our children. But our definition of success must evolve beyond just getting good grades in examinations. Let us help our children acquire skills based on their interests and strengths that will allow them to have a unique value proposition when they join the workforce. This strengthens their value proposition, our collective diversity and resilience.
Let us work together to support the well-being and development of our children – not to chase after the marginal last mark, instil fear of failure, or excessively compare our children’s achievements with others. Let us help them surpass themselves throughout life, rather than just surpass others in an examination.
MOE will continue to partner and support our parents. We will provide parenting resources and tips throughout our platforms and work closely with Parent Support Groups.
Our partners, like the council members from COMmunity and PArents in Support of Schools (COMPASS), have also initiated ground-up efforts to support parents. Minister of State Sun Xueling will elaborate.
Our third partner will be our industry. As I have stressed earlier, industry needs to work closely with our institutes for continual learning, provide learning opportunities for our students to prepare them for the workforce and transform themselves to create good jobs for our graduates. Companies which partner our institutions well will also have the first call to the next generation of talent, and this is a significant competitive advantage.
Our fourth partner is our community. As they say, “it takes a village to raise a child.” In this spirit, we partner the community to support our students with higher needs, including through UPLIFT, ComLink and other efforts. But this is not all. All of us can contribute to this effort as well.
For example, as school alumni, we can give back to our alma mater, by mentoring younger students and giving them career advice. Let us all acknowledge the support we received from the community and the opportunities we received from society. Therefore, it is also our responsibility to give back where we can, so others may benefit as we have, so that every generation of Singaporeans can aspire to do better than the previous generation. Only so will we continue to preserve education as an uplifting force for all Singaporeans.
Chairman, may I have your permission for my MOE colleagues to elaborate on the various MOE policies please.
The Chairman: Please do. Second Minister Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman.
The Second Minister for Education (Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman): Mr Chairman, every child is important to us. MOE is committed to supporting our students to achieve their fullest potential, regardless of their background.
We agree with Mr Shawn Huang and Mr Leon Perera on the importance of supporting students in disadvantaged circumstances. These students may not have the best environment or opportunities to support their learning. Some may face challenges at home that could translate into poor attendance, motivation and self-esteem.
We are committed to ensuring that these students are not limited by their starting points in life. Across the system, we have dedicated programmes and support based on the students’ areas of need, including academic and socio-emotional support, financial assistance and provisions for special education needs. Our teachers pay extra attention to them, tirelessly reaching out to their parents, making home visits to understand their circumstances and providing support when the children are in school. It is very resource-intensive. But our teachers do so with passion and commitment. And the support goes beyond the school.
A key initiative we have undertaken is UPLIFT, or Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce. Introduced in 2018, UPLIFT has been actively helping students from disadvantaged backgrounds achieve success.
Let me share one example. Last year, I met Hafiza. Hafiza’s mother is the sole breadwinner of the family, which includes her and her infant stepbrother. Hafiza’s mother was busy with work and rarely around to guide Hafiza when she was growing up. Hafiza felt lost and unmotivated and ended up mixing with bad company. She ran away from home several times, missed school frequently and felt disengaged from her teachers and peers.
However, her teachers did not give up. They continued to reach out to her. Hafiza was touched by their concern and, gradually, opened up to them. Hafiza's teachers encouraged her to join after-school activities, like the Youth Community Outreach Patrol, where she built positive relationships with her peers and mentors who helped her gain confidence.
The UPLIFT Town-Level Coordinator and a volunteer family befriender also worked with the Family Service Centre and other agencies to provide the financial and emotional support the family needed and find ways to provide a more conducive home environment for Hafiza. For example, Hafiza’s mother made alternative care arrangements for Hafiza's infant brother, to allow Hafiza to focus on her studies for her graduating year.
Through these efforts, Hafiza achieved good results at the GCE \"N\" Level examination last year and progressed to a course of her choice in ITE.
When I met Hafiza, I could see the confidence in her eyes and was proud to see a young girl turn around and do better with self-determination and support from the community around her. Hafiza’s example illustrates three key components of support we will provide our students.
First, we will provide a supportive school environment responsive to the needs of each student. Providing customised support and attention to students with higher needs requires time and dedication. We will support our schools in doing so. We introduced UPLIFT Enhanced School Resourcing to provide schools with additional manpower, guidance and teaching resources to help students with higher needs more effectively. Forty-seven schools are currently supported under this initiative. We plan to expand this to 100 schools in total over the next few years to support around 13,000 students.
Second, we will keep students meaningfully engaged in programmes after school. Many of these students do not have conducive home environments and many of us know about it. Through a structured and nurturing after-school environment, we give them the opportunity to develop routines and skills to succeed. Since 2020, MOE has set up a Student Care Centre in every Primary school to provide a safe environment for students to rest, play, do their homework and engage in meaningful after-school activities.
We have made fees affordable. With subsidies under the ComCare Student Care Fee Assistance scheme, eligible students pay as little as $5 per month. We are also reaching out to help parents who have concerns over enrolling their child, like providing the necessary supporting documents. Last year, teachers in our Primary schools helped more than 700 students from disadvantaged families enrol in our Student Care Centres. We are seeing good progress made by these students. Many are more confident, they are more engaged in school and also more engaged in after-school activities. We will continue to help more disadvantaged families enrol their children into our Student Care Centres.
Our focus on after-school programmes continues into the Secondary school. About 120 Secondary schools provide after-school mentoring and motivational support under the GEAR-UP programme.
Third, we are building a strong network of community partners to complement efforts in schools and address challenges that the families of these students face. We started the UPLIFT Community pilot in 2020, creating a network of agencies, including Family Service Centres, Social Service Agencies and relevant Government agencies like ECDA and HDB. The pilot has supported more than 300 students in four towns so far. Most have seen improved attendance and their families have seen increased community support for them.
Encouraged by the success, we will expand this pilot. The UPLIFT Community Network has been rolled out to eight new towns in 2022. Eventually, when it is rolled out nationwide, 1,800 students and their families will be supported by the UPLIFT Community Network each year. We are grateful to our community partners who have been supporting our UPLIFT efforts and I urge more members of the community to step forward.
In addition to support for each student, we are also expanding pathways and opportunities across the educational system to cater to the different aspirations and needs of our students. I will now elaborate on our efforts in our applied education.
Mr Chairman, through the various initiatives I have highlighted, we will strengthen support to students with greater needs, especially those from challenging backgrounds. While we will provide equal access to opportunities to all our children, it is natural for each generation of parents who are better off to be able give their children a head-start in life, sometimes leading to unequal outcomes.
The link between socio-economic background and student outcomes that Mr Leon Perera has observed and is concerned with is not unique to Singapore and, in fact, is seen across countries. It is part of societal progress and development which result in social mobility for most, albeit at a different pace.
There will always be those who are slower due to challenging circumstances. What is important is that we give them the best support we can to develop the best that they can, enable them to move up the social and economic ladder, and do better than their parents.
As I have told the House earlier, we are encouraged by our students from less advantaged backgrounds. They do well, compared to their international counterparts. This gives us confidence and conviction to press on with our efforts.
Beyond targeted support and programmes like UPLIFT, we want to help all our students to be confident and resilient in the face of adversity. I thank Dr Wan Rizal and Mr Shawn Huang for highlighting the importance of supporting the mental well-being of our youths. We agree. As part of adolescent development, our youths face pressures on multiple fronts – from themselves, parents, peers, or from society.
This challenge is made more complex because technology has transformed the way our young people live today. Despite its benefits, technology and social media use can also distort their self-image and increase social pressure for many of our youths.
Improving youth mental well-being requires a coordinated effort. Minister Chan Chun Sing described earlier how we will give students more opportunities to develop holistically in school, and Minister of State Sun Xueling will share how we can equip parents to support their child’s well-being.
Let me focus on how we prepare students to be resilient as they cope with the pressures throughout their life and ensure that help is available if they cannot cope.
First, we equip students with the social-emotional skills to be resilient. We want our students to be confident in themselves, to acknowledge their limitations and celebrate their strengths. They also need to be able to manage their emotions, seek help when needed and navigate online space safely.
These topics are taught under the refreshed Character and Citizenship Education, or CCE, curriculum. For example, one lesson teaches students how people respond to challenges quite differently. Students discover their signs of distress when they reach their limits of coping. They are encouraged to look out to others for support and realise that these experiences are normal. At different points in time in their lives, given the circumstances and experiences, they need help and it is normal for them to seek help.
Second, we are strengthening the supportive relationships around students, so no student feels that they face their challenges alone. This is especially important, as Dr Wan Rizal says, there are those who are suffering in silence. The more they are connected with friends, we hope the more ready they are to come out early, should they face some challenges.
Youths often seek out their peers for a listening ear. Today, every school has a peer support system that empowers students to look out for one another and build strong social support networks. Activities such as CCAs and camps also help students develop strong connections with their peers.
Students also look to their teachers for support. Teachers use CCE periods and form teacher periods to offer pastoral care. Schools have also set aside dedicated time and space at the start of each term for teachers to engage students on their well-being, be it managing relationship stress or other academic stresses.
Third, we provide students with access to the care that they need. Teachers are trained in basic counselling skills. They actively look out for signs of distress, offer support and refer students to counselling resources in school. We will continue to develop our teachers’ mental health literacy, so they understand and recognise symptoms related to common mental health issues early. Early identification is critical.
We are also increasing counselling resources to our schools. Beyond school counsellors deployed in every school, we are equipping teachers to help students with more challenging mental health issues and adjusting their teaching workload accordingly. We currently have 700 teacher counsellors and plan to deploy an additional 360 over the next few years.
Our efforts to strengthen the confidence and resilience of our students extend to our Institutes of Higher Learning, or IHLs. The Polytechnics and ITE offer a mental wellness curriculum to all students to provide a better understanding of mental health issues and where to seek help. They are also equipping more students with skills to support their peers as peer supporters. Each Polytechnic and ITE student is assigned a personal tutor, who they can turn to for guidance and support. We will strengthen professional development, so that these tutors can provide better care for their students and study ways to enhance their contact time with their students.
Another area we are studying is the coordination of care and support for students with more complex needs in the Polytechnics and ITE, as it often includes working with external stakeholders.
The Autonomous Universities have also introduced mental wellness programmes, including online modules and training workshops to equip students to help look after their mental and emotional well-being. They also have in-house counsellors available for our students.
Mr Chairman, let me now talk about enhancements to our Polytechnics and ITE.
We agree with Mr Sharael Taha, Mr Abdul Samad and Mr Shawn Huang on the need to prepare students for the jobs of tomorrow, especially given the pace of industry transformation. IHLs regularly review their course offerings and curriculum in collaboration with industry and economic agencies, to keep pace with the latest developments and ensure our students secure good jobs.
Our Polytechnics and ITE are a key part of our higher education landscape, catering to seven in 10 of each Primary school cohort. As we prepare our students for the future economy and their future, we also acknowledge the growing diversity in interests and aspirations amongst our young people. This was an area studied by the Review of Opportunities and Pathways in Applied Education launched last year. Let me give an update on our efforts in the review.
First, we agree with Dr Wan Rizal on the importance of providing flexible pathways for students to discover and pursue their interests. This gives students ownership of their learning and a more fulfilling educational journey that helps them find meaningful careers.
We have expanded admissions to allow students to enter the Polytechnics and ITE based on interests and aptitude, more than just their academic performance. Today, 20% of each Polytechnic intake enters through the aptitude-based admissions. The expanded range of Common Entry Programmes in the Polytechnics also allows students more room to explore their interests before specialising.
From Academic Year (AY) 2022, all Polytechnics will pilot the offering of flexible modular loads to students who need the time to build stronger foundations or pursue side interests such as entrepreneurship.
Second, we will continue to equip students with deeper industry ready skills. This was consistent feedback that we receive from both students, industries and other stakeholders. Indeed, rather than just learning in a classroom, we want our students to learn from active practitioners and be inspired by the range of opportunities out there. More than nine in 10 Polytechnic and ITE students today complete structured internships in the final year of their study. We will pilot the provision of earlier industry exposure opportunities for students in the Polytechnics from AY2022, beyond their final-year internships.
We agree with Dr Shahira Abdullah on the importance of securing good outcomes for our ITE graduates. This was why we introduced the enhanced three-year ITE curricular structure last year, to meet the aspirations of our ITE graduates to deepen their skills and upgrade beyond a Nitec qualification. Under the enhanced curricular structure, ITE students will be exposed to two linked industry attachments to deepen their industry exposure.
I am pleased to share that ITE recently welcomed their first cohort of about 2,000 students under their enhanced curricular structure. I am confident that these students will be well-supported and able to make full use of the opportunities in ITE to discover and pursue their interests. ITE will review the outcomes from this first phase of implementation and move more courses into the enhanced curricular structure after AY 2024.
As more ITE graduates obtain the Higher Nitec qualification, we will provide them options to deepen their skills and meet their aspirations. I would like to assure Dr Shahira Abdullah and Mr Abdul Samad that ITE continues to prepare its graduates well. Despite the pandemic, nine in 10 graduates from the ITE Class of 2020 found employment within six months of graduating [Please refer to \"Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)\" debate for clarification to the number stated, Official Report, 7 March 2022, Vol 95, Issue No 55, Budget section.], with a median salary of $2,000 for those who were in full-time permanent employment, which is comparable to the year before. Results for the Class of 2021 will be ready later this year.
Besides our Polytechnic Diplomas, ITE’s Technical Diplomas, or TDs, and Work-Study Diplomas, or WSDips, provide an alternative form of learning with a greater emphasis on learning-by-doing. Some students actually learn better this way.
I met Sharon, for example, a graduate from ITE’s Higher Nitec in Cyber and Network Security. Upon graduation, Sharon pursued her interest in F&B initially. However, she discovered that she still had a strong passion for IT, and wanted to deepen her knowledge and skills. Sharon was informed about the Work-Study Diploma programme in Cyber Security and Forensics by her ITE lecturer and decided to take it up. This allowed her to embark on a career in a cybersecurity firm, in a sector that is increasingly important.
Preliminary outcomes of our WSDips are promising. Among the batch of graduates in 2021, around 80% stayed on with their host companies after graduation. These students saw an average increase in salary of about 20% upon completion of their diploma, with many taking on higher-level job roles.
Students can look forward to more opportunities as ITE works with industry partners and other educational institutions to expand their diploma programmes. We have made progress in our plans to provide 1,000 WSDip places per year in 2025. In 2022, ITE will offer 36 WSDip programmes, catering to over 500 students.
ITE also offers three Technical Diplomas, or TDs, in Automotive Engineering, Machine Technology and Culinary Arts, catering to around 100 students per intake. They plan to expand their TD offerings to other engineering, business and service domains. Employment outcomes of Technical Diploma, or TD, graduates have been very promising, with nine in 10 employed within six months of graduation, and their salaries comparable to graduates from the Polytechnics.
Third, beyond the technical skills, I am pleased to inform Mr Shawn Huang and Ms Mariam Jaafar that we will strengthen our focus on softer skills and competencies, for work and life.
With your permission, Mr Speaker, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a copy of the LifeSkills framework developed for our IHLs.
The Chairman: Yes, please. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]
Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Mr Chairman, this framework prioritises 10 skills, including critical thinking, collaboration, as well as mental resilience. These skills will prepare our students for the future workforce, where they are expected not only to excel in their domain, but also have confidence in working with their colleagues locally and globally. We will strengthen these skills through experiential opportunities outside the classroom, including internships, student activities and overseas exposure. The Polytechnics and ITE will enhance their curricula, so the incoming batch of students in AY 2022 will benefit from the enhanced baseline competencies across all 10 LifeSkills.
Building on this common framework, the Autonomous Universities will also embark on enhancements to their curricula to ensure graduates are equipped with baseline competencies in the same LifeSkills, but adapted to their student profile. Through these enhancements, we will continue to support the diverse needs and aspirations of our students, and prepare our graduates to learn for life and succeed in a wide range of fields. Mr Chairman, allow me to say a few words in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Chairman, the learning of Mother Tongue languages is an important part of our vision to help our students remain rooted and appreciate their culture.
During the Budget debates, Mr Faisal Manap shared his concerns about how our children would develop strong Malay language skills.
I would like to assure him that our Malay students are still performing well in their mother tongue subjects where the percentage of those who pass in national examinations has remained high over the years. This is something that we should be proud of although we acknowledge the challenges that they face due to exposure to the use of English language in today's world.
At the same time, we must continue our efforts to get students interested and maintain their performance in mother tongue learning.
We will continue to provide opportunities for our students to deepen their learning in mother tongue languages in schools, and increase their interest in mother tongue languages through activities organised by the Mother Tongue Language Learning and Promotion Committees.
At the policy level in MOE, we are pressing ahead with important reforms to our education system. We need to be prepared for a future where technological and business cycles are more compressed and the demand for skills is more dynamic, and also a future where our world is increasingly polarized and fragmented, even as we remain more interconnected and interdependent. A future where our social fabric continues to evolve as well, with more diverse aspirations and perspectives amongst our people.
Our vision for the education system has three key elements.
First, we want all Singaporeans to have confidence in our abilities and ourselves, so we can keep growing and maximise our full potential.
Second, we want all Singaporeans to continue to maintain our competitive advantage, through the ability to learn and re-learn, and our connectivity with the world.
Third, for us continue to appreciate and celebrate diversity, even as we work to forge a shared identity,
Achieving this vision requires us to rethink our approach to education. Our education is no longer something which ends in schools, but a continuous journey throughout our lives.
At a young age, we will build strong foundations for all students and spark their curiosity and desire for learning.
In schools, we will continue to free up time and space for students to discover their strengths and cultivate future-ready competencies. In higher education, we will continue to equip our students with the skills and competencies to succeed as they transit to the workforce. At the same time, our Institutes of Higher Learning will also grow into their roles as institutes for continual learning, working closely with industry to enhance the quality and accessibility of their upskilling and reskilling programmes for adult learners.
Chairman, we will continue to enhance our education system for the future of our children and our country. We need the support of all Singaporeans in this effort. Educators, parents, as well as community and industry partners all play a key role in developing a future that enable Singaporeans to have the confidence to chart their own path, and the resilience to respond to changes and disruptions.
(In English): As we embark on the enhancements to our education system, we will help our students to make the best of these changes. Together, we will nurture generations of confident and resilient students who are prepared to face the challenges and opportunities of the future economy.
The Chairman: Minister of State Gan Siow Huang.
The Minister of State for Education (Ms Gan Siow Huang): Mr Chairman, Minister Chan Chun Sing has emphasised that we need to adopt a lifetime view towards learning instead of relying only on the education that we go through in the first 20 years or so of our lives.
Our higher education institutions and adult training system must provide re-tooling opportunities for Singaporeans as they journey through different jobs over their career lifetimes. It is important that we do this well as it enables Singaporeans to remain employable and access good jobs.
This is why MOE has worked closely with our Statutory Board SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) to push ahead with our efforts to strengthen our Continuing Education and Training (CET) ecosystem, as Ms Foo Mee Har, Mr Shawn Huang and Mr Darryl David have asked about.
Under SkillsFuture, we have been expanding the range of opportunities for Singaporeans to regularly reskill. This is especially important for mid-career workers who need to re-tool in the face of fast-changing technologies and new trends.
The need for reskilling was particularly evident during the pandemic, which brought great disruption to our industries and workforce. To address this, we introduced the Enhanced Training Support Package that helped enterprises make productive use of the downtime to train their workforce. To-date, companies have sent workers to take up almost 245,000 places in training courses, which better prepare them for emerging roles when the economy recovers.
As part of the SGUnited Jobs and Skills package, we launched the SGUnited Skills (SGUS) and SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways – Company Training (SGUP-CT) programmes to help mid-career individuals acquire new skills and capture new career opportunities as the economy recovers.
We worked with 18 CET Centres and 16 companies to provide industry-relevant training, coupled with employment facilitation, to help jobseekers secure placements. More than 22,000 Singaporeans enrolled in SGUS and SGUP-CT. The outcomes have been encouraging.
Two out of three of the initial batch of SGUS trainees found employment within six months after course completion. For SGUP-CT with companies, such as Google and IBM, more than half the trainees found jobs as well.
I met Mr Oscar Yong last year, one of our SGUS graduates who successfully switched to a new career in food manufacturing after working for more than 20 years in the electronics sector. Oscar is in his 50s. He was displaced from his previous job when his company relocated overseas in 2020. He signed up for the six-month SGUS Advanced Manufacturing Programme at the Singapore Institute of Management in the hopes of making a career switch. As part of the programme, Oscar did an industry attachment with Super Bean International. He performed well during the attachment and was offered a job of assistant manager of inventory and quality control when he graduated. I am heartened by Oscar's determination to reskill in pursuit of a new career and I hope that his story will inspire more Singaporeans to upskill.
As we look towards post-pandemic recovery, we will build on our experiences with SGUS and SGUP-CT and merge these two programmes into a new SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme (SCTP) from April 2022. The SCTP will be our steady-state train-and-place programme for mid-career individuals. It will be delivered by IHLs and selected private training providers and will incorporate key features of the SGUS and SGUP-CT which have worked well to strengthen training outcomes.
First, skills and training advisory services will be made available upfront to help trainees select courses that best suit their strengths and interests.
Second, all courses will have elements of industry involvement, such as industry projects or attachments with companies, to enable trainees to acquire industry-relevant skills.
Third, employment facilitation and career coaching will be part of the SCTP to support trainees in their job search.
SCTP will have a duration of between three and 12 months and we plan to launch them in sectors with good hiring opportunities, such as ICT and advanced manufacturing.
SCTP will be subsidised at SSG's prevailing rates, with enhanced funding of up to 90% for Singaporeans aged 40 and above. On top of this, to ensure that jobseekers with greater needs can access the SCTP, we will provide additional subsidies to cover up to 95% of course fees for eligible Singapore Citizens who are lower-income earners, long-term unemployed or persons with disabilities.
The SCTP is part of the continuum of initiatives by SSG and Workforce Singapore (WSG) to ramp up reskilling opportunities for Singaporeans who are looking for jobs or considering career switches. By working closely together to offer a suite of place-and-train, attach-and-train and train-and-place programmes and by jointly delivering outreach at career fairs and SGUnited Jobs and Skills Centres in the heartlands, SSG and WSG are aligned in their efforts to help Singaporeans access good jobs.
When we started to scale up the provision of career transition programmes at the CET Centres in 2020, we also provided additional SkillsFuture Credit (Mid-Career Support) to enable Singaporeans in their 40s and 50s to access such programmes. Along the way, we received feedback about individuals who may not intend to switch careers but would, nevertheless, like to utilise their credit to pursue meaningful upskilling to remain employable.
To this end, I am glad to share that we will expand the range of courses that the additional SkillsFuture Credit (Mid-Career Support) can be used for. Around 7,000 courses will be available from 1 June 2022, from around 300 courses today to give mid-career individuals more options to use their credit for upskilling and reskilling.
The list will remain focused on courses that deliver good employment outcomes. These include SkillsFuture Series courses in IHLs, industry-relevant courses offered by CET Centres, including private training providers, and courses which enable workers to progress in sectors with the Progressive Wage Model.
While we strengthen support for individual upskilling, I agree with Ms Foo Mee Har that enterprises also have an integral role to play in supporting their employees in their skills development journey. We also agree on the importance of workplace learning. This is why we have incorporated elements of workplace learning into many of our CET offerings.
For example, the SkillsFuture Work-Study Programmes allow trainees to upskill through a combination of structured on-the-job training and classroom learning. To increase such opportunities, we rely on employers to step up to deliver quality trailing at the workplace and we will continue to support them in their endeavour to do so.
We have expanded the reach of the National Centre of Excellence for Workplace Learning (NACE) to uplift the workplace learning capabilities of companies, especially SMEs. To-date, about 1,500 companies have benefited from the programmes offered by NACE.
We also encourage enterprises to play the role of SkillsFuture Queen Bees to mobilise other companies within their networks to engage in training and upskilling. This will raise the capabilities of the sector as a whole and enhance their competitive advantage.
SSG has been expanding partnerships with enterprises through the SkillsFuture Queen Bee initiative. Since its launch, more than 930 companies have participated in programmes curated by the SkillsFuture Queen Bees, of which 90% are SMEs.
Sheng Siong is an example of a company which took on the role of a SkillsFuture Queen Bee and is helping its suppliers build up workforce capabilities to accelerate the adoption of digital technologies.
With the support of Skills Managers and training providers, Sheng Siong has reached out to more than 60 suppliers to customise skills development interventions based on their business needs and skills gaps. This includes SkillsFuture for Digital Workplace courses to build foundational digital skills. Sheng Siong is also integrating SkillsFuture courses and resources into their supplier portal to encourage their wider network of suppliers to engage in continuous learning.
Such examples show us the significance and impact of enterprises taking on a more proactive role in supporting skills development. This is why we have pressed on with our plans under the next bound of SkillsFuture. Strengthening the role of enterprises in driving workforce transformation will continue to be our key priority in the coming years.
As we ramp up our efforts to drive enterprise-led training, we can tap on unions and industry intermediaries as our key partners, too. With their extensive networks and understanding of companies’ needs on the ground, they can help us broaden outreach, aggregate skills demand and spread the benefits of our job-skills interventions to more companies and workers.
Our tripartite partners are supporting companies in their business and workforce transformation efforts, such as through NTUC's Company Training Committees (CTCs). Employers are supported in their firm-level action plans in areas like employment facilitation, job redesign and training. SSG can complement the CTC process by helping these companies build their skills development capabilities.
SSG’s partnership with PM Link and the Building Construction and Timber Industries Employees’ Union, which formed a CTC in 2019, is an illustration of how this can be done.
Over the past two years, SSG worked with the CTC to pilot a skills profiling digital solution that is based on SSG’s Skills Frameworks. PM Link, a project management company in the building and construction industry, used the Skills Frameworks to identify core competencies for their workforce. This enabled their employees to self-assess and benchmark their skills proficiencies against industry standards, identify relevant training to address skills gaps and participate in SSG-supported courses.
We also want to better tap on industry intermediaries, such as trade associations and chambers (TACs) and professional bodies, as they have deep industry networks and great agility in sensing the jobs-skills needs of employers.
SSG plans to partner TACs as \"Skills Development Partners\" to identify in-demand and emerging skills, facilitate timely dissemination of Jobs-and-Skills insights and put in place structures to accredit skills acquired at the workplace. This will help companies better plan for workforce upgrading and improve job mobility of individual workers.
For a start, SSG will work with IMDA to partner the Singapore Computer Society and SGTech in the ICT sector. SSG is also exploring similar partnerships with other TACs to expand outreach to more sectors. Mr Chairman, I would like to conclude in Mandarin please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Building a strong skills ecosystem is essential to ensure that our workforce can access quality training opportunities throughout their lives. We endeavour to build a robust ecosystem that leverages the different strengths of the IHLs, private training providers, NTUC, TACs and industry.
Chairman, our plans to achieve this were set in motion seven years ago when we launched the SkillsFuture movement. We will continue to strive towards our goal of providing opportunities for all Singaporeans to develop to their fullest potential, and progress together as a society.
The Chairman: Minister of State Sun Xueling.
The Minister of State for Education (Ms Sun Xueling): Mr Chairman, as we work towards our vision of Confident Singaporeans, a Competitive Singapore and a Cohesive Society, we remain committed to supporting students with different needs, to enable them to develop confidence in their future and the skills and resilience to do well in life.
I thank Ms Denise Phua and Mr Shawn Huang for highlighting the importance of supporting students with Special Educational Needs (SEN). MOE has developed our landscape of support significantly. We will continue to enhance support for students with SEN throughout their educational journey.
I agree with Mr Gerald Giam that some children with SEN need more intensive interventions. I will say more about the early intervention provided for preschoolers at MSF’s COS.
In our mainstream schools, all students with SEN, with or without a diagnosis, can get support. As part of our whole-school approach, support is provided through inclusive classroom practices by all teachers, guided by Teachers Trained in Special Needs and Allied Educators in learning and behavioural support, or AEDs(LBS).
A small number of students may need individualised therapy delivered in clinical settings, or they may need a customised curriculum in a SPED school. For these students, schools work with MOE Educational Psychologists and parents to facilitate referrals.
MOE is constantly innovating to develop evidence-based interventions for the skills development of students with SEN. School-based Dyslexia Remediation, Circle of Friends and Facing Your Fears are examples. I would like to share more on another one, TRANSIT.
Entering Primary 1 can be a major transition point for our students. Some students may need additional support in developing social and behavioural skills to cope with this transition. Last year, I shared that MOE was implementing TRANSIT for P1 students with social and behavioural needs. With TRANSIT, students receive support from Allied Educators in learning and behaviour support and teachers at P1 to learn and apply self-management skills, to get ready to learn independently.
Since the introduction of TRANSIT, about 180 students have made encouraging progress in developing their self-management skills. I visited North Vista Primary recently and saw how students in TRANSIT had dedicated teaching resources to support them in their management of their socio-emotional needs, as well as in their abilities to interact with others. There are, currently, 66 schools implementing TRANSIT. Each can support up to 10 students in TRANSIT and we are preparing to support this number in every Primary school by 2026.
Mdm Rahayu Mahzam spoke about enhancing accessibility to SPED schools. We had announced in 2019 that we are working with our SSAs to set up three new Government-funded SPED schools that can support students with Autism Spectrum Disorder who can access the national curriculum, but need to learn in a SPED setting due to their moderate level of SEN.
One of these schools is St Andrew’s Mission School (SAMS), which began operating in January 2022 at Bukit Batok. With SAMS, there are currently 22 SPED schools distributed across Singapore to serve students with moderate-to-severe SEN. SAMS’ permanent site will be located next to Nan Hua High School and it will provide 500 Primary and 350 post-Primary level school places.
As part of our continued efforts to plan ahead and improve SPED school capacity, I am pleased to announce that MOE will be working with Cerebral Palsy Alliance Singapore to set up a second school in the West for students with multiple disabilities. These students have complex needs which can affect their learning and mobility and may also face medical challenges. Families can look forward to strong support for their child’s holistic development with SPED educators, Allied Professionals and parents working closely together.
We wholeheartedly agree with Ms Denise Phua that our vision to develop the full potential of our students with SEN should be a shared vision, requiring close partnerships with key stakeholders.
MOE works closely with schools, Early Intervention Centres, the Department of Child Development in hospitals, sister agencies and organisations, such as ECDA and SG Enable as well as, very importantly, our SSAs, to meet families’ needs at different stages of their journey.
We thank Ms Phua for her vision of the impact that SPED schools should have. We believe in the SPED schools and in our SSAs which run them. We are committed to resourcing them well, financially and through co-developing quality SPED curriculum and investing in SPED teaching.
The development of the SPED sector is situated within the larger Enabling Masterplan 2030. MOE is committed to co-creating solutions in the range of areas beyond SPED, across the lifespan of the children and families that we serve.
Both within and beyond special needs, MOE has been strengthening our partnerships with parents to equip our children so that they have the resourcefulness, resilience and confidence to meet challenges in the future.
Ms Phua and Ms Carrie Tan have brought across the critical role of parents, as what happens at home complements what happens in schools. We will support parents in the following ways.
First, we will strengthen our partnerships with parents through the COMmunity and Parents in Support of Schools (COMPASS). This is a different COMPASS from MOM's Complementarity Assessment framework.
MOE's COMPASS council has embarked on efforts to support parents as we continue to encourage broader definitions of success. For example, COMPASS has organised a series of Facebook Live sessions to create awareness of different pathways of excellence. The first session was held with industry leaders to discuss the qualities that make for a future-ready individual and the need to broaden definitions of success for our children. The next two sessions will share perspectives from parents and individuals.
Recognising the impact of social media and online behaviour on our children’s mental well-being, the COMPASS team is also working to encourage a culture of cyber kindness in parents and children through creating a set of cyber kindness best practices. They are partnering the Singapore Kindness Movement to provide resources to raise parents’ awareness and understanding of cyber wellness and kindness and how they can support their children in it.
COMPASS has also started capability-building sessions to equip Parent Support Groups (PSGs) to support their parent community to build good relationships with their children and enhance their overall mental well-being. This is carried out through a series of \"Let Us Chat!\" training workshops for PSG Leaders, which was recently completed across 14 schools.
Second, MOE is working closely with PSGs so that they can connect with and support fellow parent communities. I recently met with the 25 PSGs who are leading the charge in their own ways to support parents, through understanding the parents’ needs and being creative and resourceful in meeting those needs.
One example is Presbyterian High School’s PSG. By providing a listening ear and being a befriender, the PSG builds a strong circle of support for parents and provides different avenues for them to reach out and seek help, such as through level group chats and parent engagement sessions.
Another example is Victoria Junior College’s PSG. The PSG has been tapping on their student alumni to share their education and career journeys with their student and parent communities and provide tips on coping with stressors that students may face. Parents could hear from alumni about their aspirations and struggles, which helped them to better support their children.
Over the next two years, we will have more PSGs coming onboard these efforts.
MOE has launched a Mental Well-being Resource Guide and an online repository of resources for PSGs. Developed based on suggestions and feedback from PSGs, the Guide provides tips and resources that can inform PSGs’ efforts to support parents. The online repository is a live document and we will work with PSGs to enhance its content over time to cover other issues.
Lastly, we share useful resources and tips with parents via MOE’s social media platforms and the Parents Gateway, which has a new feature called \"Parenting Resources\", to guide them in supporting their children’s education journey. We are also working with partner agencies to incorporate more resources into the portal.
Our partnerships with parents, via COMPASS and PSGs, extend MOE’s efforts to build students’ confidence and resilience beyond the school environment.
We are also stepping up partnerships with other stakeholders in society. This is particularly pertinent in the area of mental well-being. Dr Wan Rizal asked how students with mental well-being concerns can be provided with stronger, coordinated care and support.
Second Minister Dr Mohamad Maliki had spoken about our strengthened support for students’ mental well-being in schools through the refreshed Character and Citizenship Education curriculum. We recognise that the issues that affect student mental well-being are multi-faceted and stressors outside of school can have an impact. MOE is part of a whole-of-Government effort to support youth mental well-being through the Interagency Taskforce for Mental Health and Well-being, which is being led by Senior Minister of State for Health, Dr Janil Puthucheary.
As part of this task force, MOE and MSF are working together to provide greater support for families, children and youths to enhance mental well-being. Parenting is one key area we are looking into. I had earlier described MOE’s recent efforts, through the PSGs, to support fellow parents in taking care of their own children’s mental well-being. Through this task force, we will engage and empower a wider segment of parents with evidence-based, bite-sized parenting strategies and mental health and well-being knowledge, so that parents can build stronger relationships at home and help their child effectively meet life’s challenges. We will also explore effective ways to parent in the digital age.
Another area that we are concerned about is the potential impact of the digital world on students’ mental well-being. We are working with Government agencies, social media and technology companies and SSAs to create awareness of positive ways to use digital technology, harness technology platforms to promote a healthy online peer support culture and find practical solutions that mitigate online risks.
MOE is also part of whole-of-society efforts like the Youth Mental Well-being Network, which was set up in February 2020 by MSF, MOH and MOE to co-create ground-up solutions to improve youths’ mental well-being. Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary and Minister of State Alvin Tan will be announcing some updates on the Network later.
I have shared about our work with parents, Government agencies and the community to build an inter-connected network of care, support and opportunities for our students. Dr Mohamad Maliki had also spoken about our efforts, as part of UPLIFT, to build a strong network of community partners to support our disadvantaged students and their families. Minister Chan Chun Sing has shared about our partnerships with industry to provide more workplace learning opportunities for IHL students, and with Government agencies and companies to strengthen the employability and career prospects of our Polytechnic and ITE graduates in the future economy.
Together, these partnerships reflect our concerted, whole-of-society effort to transform the education system and achieve our vision of a confident, competitive and cohesive Singapore. Mr Chairman, Sir, in Chinese please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Our students face a future that is being shaped by rapid technological changes, a world that is increasingly polarised and fragmented, and a society with more and more diverse perspectives, ideas and values.
To respond to the opportunities presented by these forces of change, we must be prepared to continuously learn and relearn, transcend fault lines in the world, and stay cohesive.
Singapore must therefore embrace three characteristics: to have the confidence in our abilities and ourselves, so we can keep growing and maximise our full potential; to stay competitive with the world and seize opportunities wherever they may be and, as a society, to stay cohesive.
We need to move beyond seeing education as just for schools, but as a continuous journey through life. We will build a strong foundation for our students from an early age, by sparking an innate curiosity and desire for lifelong learning. In schools, we will support our students to discover their strengths, and hone future-ready competencies, while gaining a sense of rootedness to Singapore.
Beyond school, we have an entire ecosystem of continual education and training, which will move beyond training some thirty to forty thousand students every year to ‘retooling’ some three to four hundred thousand workers a year. This life course approach requires a whole-of-society effort. Educators, parents, the community and industry partners are our essential partners in this endeavour.
Let us journey together to strengthen our education system and achieve our vision of a confident, competitive and cohesive Singapore.
The Chairman: Clarifications, please. Mr Patrick Tay.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Sir, I just have two clarifications for the Minister. Firstly, on my suggestion to do an in-depth study, that is, to assess the mental health and wellness of our teachers and educators and whether MOE intends to embark on that. The second question is on the removal of mid-year exams for Primary and Secondary schools, which is upcoming. Does it also mean that in the mid-year, there will not be any sit-down tests as well as weighted assessments?
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Chairman, to Mr Patrick Tay's first clarification, yes, indeed, we are closely monitoring the mental well-being of our educators and students, given the exceptional circumstances that we are in at this point in time. We do regular dipsticks. So, it is not just a one-time survey. We regularly monitor this and we have a certain baseline to see whether there are specific areas that we should be concerned with, not just in general for the whole teaching population, but also, very specifically, whether any particular schools or any particular group of educators might be facing a bit more stress than others. So, that is the assurance that we can give Mr Patrick Tay.
To Mr Patrick Tay's second question about doing away with the mid-year examinations, what we will have – and, increasingly, we are doing this in all our schools – is a series of continuous assessments. In fact, when I first went to MOE, I asked my colleagues: what is the difference between an exam and a test or assessment? I learnt this new word and I understand what my professionals are doing. A continuous assessment examines our students' ability to apply what they have learnt based on various modules. When it comes to the year-end exam, we have this term called the \"synoptic assessment\", which is that they are able to pull together different parts of what they have learnt to answer different questions. So, it takes a much broader perspective.
So, we will continue to have year-end exams where relevant and then we will couple that with continuous assessments module-by-module.
The Chairman: Mr Darryl David.
Mr Darryl David: Thank you, Chairman. Just two clarifications for the Minister. The first involves PSLE. Some time ago, I made a speech where I did not suggest that we should remove the PSLE. But rather, while we have PSLE, to also incorporate some coursework component such that every Primary 6 student ends up with an actual composite grade that is a combination of the PSLE examination and the coursework component that they have done, maybe a 70% examination, 30% coursework. So, I just wanted to ask the Minister if the Ministry is considering this and, if so, could he provide some thoughts on this.
Second clarification is about teachers. I mentioned earlier that I am really happy about the quality of our teachers. They have undergone some really good training. But I also talked about the possibility of encouraging or having more mid-career teachers coming in from other jobs, other industries, into the teaching profession to bring their experience with them. This can also be synced in quite nicely with continuing education and making sure that our people are trained to move into a different career. Could the Minister perhaps update or share if the Ministry has any plans to enhance this or to have this as a more structured programme for mid-career switchers to come into the teaching profession?
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Chairman, with your permission, if I may take the second question first and then I will come back to the first question, which I will give a more elaborate reply.
Mr Chairman: Please proceed.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: On Mr Darryl David's suggestion on having more mid-career teachers, indeed, we have a healthy pipeline of teachers who join us mid-career. Every week, I visit at least one or two schools and every time when I visit the schools, I will always ask about their prior experience. And just from my random sampling, I can see that we have a very healthy pipeline of people who are mid-careerists and decided to join the teaching service.
As Mr Darryl David says, they do bring with them a wide spectrum of prior experiences that they can share with their fellow teachers and also the students. Having said that, I think we need it to be both ways, meaning that we need to recruit a fair share of mid-career teachers to enrich our portfolio of teaching experiences; at the same time, we must also enable our existing teachers in service to go out and build new connections and also to refresh themselves.
As I have always mentioned, I have never seen any of my teachers who were afraid of hard work, but instead, I think, when they work hard, they want to feel that they themselves are growing, that they also have the development opportunities so that they can feel refreshed, they can feel recharged and, if they feel refreshed and recharged, then I am very confident they will continue to spread this spirit of lifelong learning, the spirit of inquiry to their students.
So, we will continue to do that, both ways, to have more mid-career people coming into service and also to have more people in-service going out to have exposure. And this is particularly important for our Polytechnic and ITE lecturers.
Mr Chairman, on the first question of PSLE, I must share what is on my mind. I have given this very serious thought and I have listened very carefully to what Ms Denise Phua had said over the years. The fundamental issue is this: why are our exams stressful? Why? I have given a lot of thought about it. And I will perhaps sum it up in these four dimensions.
Why are our exams stressful? We then have to ask ourselves: why do we test? How do we test? When do we test? And what do we do with the test results? If we are not clear on our answers to these four questions, then exams will always be stressful, never mind if it is PSLE or year-end exams.
Let me start with \"Why we test\". If we see a test or an assessment as an opportunity for us to know ourselves better, to know our children better – where they stand, where they are strong at, where they are weak at – then this self-assessment should not be stressful. It is about surpassing ourselves rather than surpassing other people. But if we get this wrong, if the reason for testing is to compare with other people, on a relative scale, then, by definition, any test will be stressful.
If the test is to sort people out according to their different abilities, with serious consequences for their career pathways, then it will be stressful. So, the first point I want to make is this. If we truly, truly want our exams to be less stressful, we need to re-orientate our perspective on why we test.
And from MOE's perspective, we want all our assessments to be a feedback to our students and our parents on how their child is doing. It is how the individual child is doing vis-à-vis his previous self or her previous self, and not how he or she is doing vis-à-vis other students. We want to do away with this incessant comparison on a relative scale to truly appreciate what the child is strong in and what the child may be weak at and we need to help the child with.
The second is \"How we test\". I think many Members have spoken on this and we agree. Going forward, tests will be less and less based on rote memory. Instead, going forward, it will be about how our children can apply the concepts they have learnt to solve tomorrow's problems.
Coming from NTUC and MTI, I can speak on behalf of the employers. All progressive employers are less and less interested in how our students are able to solve yesterday's problems with yesterday's solution or even today's problems with yesterday's solutions. All our progressive employers are looking for our students to be able to solve tomorrow's problems with tomorrow's solutions. Which means that more and more of our tests must be geared towards helping our students to prepare, to apply their knowledge in solving tomorrow's problems in context.
That does not mean that the tests will get easier. In fact, some people will think that tests by rote memory is easier. But that is not the skillset that we are looking for, as many Members have said. Today, with Google and the Internet, anyone can go onto the Internet to search for the information they require. The new skillset that is required is how we make sense of the plethora of information and combine them and create new solutions in context. So, that is how we test. Whether that is more or less stressful, it depends on our perspective again.
The third question is, when we test. If we test too early, as many Members have said, then it might be detrimental to some of the late bloomers, it might be detrimental to some of our younger children. But on the other hand, if we test too late, we will be unable to apply the interventions necessary to help our children to progress at a pace that is suitable to them.
So, somewhere in between testing too early and testing too late, we need to find the Goldilocks point that is just right. And we will continue to study this.
And I must qualify, given the diversity of our learners, it is very hard to say that there is just one point for everyone. But to the extent that we can, we will find that point – be it PSLE or otherwise – to cater to the bulk of our students. But the assurance that we want to give to everyone is this: that one point does not and will not define a person's future forever.
We have a process of what Senior Minister Tharman called \"continuous meritocracy\", where it is about continuous assessment, performance that determines one's achievement in life and not just on a single point and a single assessment – that should not be our attitude, otherwise, we instil fear in our students.
The final question is, what do we do with the test results? If our attitude and answer to the first question of why we test is – this is a self-assessment to find out the strengths and weaknesses of our students so that we can best apply the resources to help them fulfil their potential; then what we do with the test results, the definition of success for that, is that we apply the correct resources, provide the correct pathways to the students that require the necessary help. It is not about going to a particular school that is deemed as most popular or most successful.
If we take that attitude of what we do with the test results and that is about providing the correct pathways to give our children the best opportunity possible, then I think exams will be less stressful.
So, having said this, I am under no illusion that exams will have some stress. And I must also qualify that it is not our aim to remove all stress from our children. It is not possible and that should not be our aim. Our aim is to make sure that we stretch our students appropriately. Not too much, not too little. Having said that, we as parents, we as educators, we need to focus on these four sets of issues and hopefully find the correct answers for ourselves. Why we test, how we test, when we test and what do we do with the test results.
The Chairman: Ms Foo Mee Har.
Ms Foo Mee Har: Thank you, Speaker. I have two clarifications. One for Education Minister and the other for Minister of State Gan Siow Huang. The first question: Minister shared that we spend about quarter of a million per child in the formative school years and affirm that more will be invested in CET. And I spoke about CET currently, in this financial year, it is estimated to be less than 10% of MOE's budget. So, I would like to ask the Minister to elaborate exactly how funding for CET will be enhanced to allow workers to attain a more substantial qualification that is relevant to their work. So, more investment: how exactly do we see that being evolved over time?
The second question is for Minister of State Gan Siow Huang. Minister of State spoke a lot about career conversions programmes: place-and-train, train-and-place. And I do agree that these have been very useful for those whose career is in a transition. But I would like to ask about the framework that MOE is thinking for those who are still employed. So, they are not in transition, they are still employed, that is the majority of the people. These are the people who would like to pursue CET, to develop mastery as well as updating their skills and knowledge about constant upgrade. So, how can we ensure the CET programmes are duly certified and recognised by the employers, as well as ensure that CET credentials are recognised within the industry to allow mobility across employers in the same sector?
The Chairman: I would like to remind Members to keep their clarifications short, please.
Ms Gan Siow Huang: I would like to thank Ms Foo Mee Har for the two questions. I will attempt to take both of them.
First, on CET funding. Our spending on CET has increased steadily over the years and for this year's budget, what we think we will do substantially to strengthen the CET funding, is through the SkillsFuture Career Transition Programme (SCTP) that I mentioned earlier on. You would have noticed that SCTP is actually quite different from the past CET programmes that we had under SSG. You would notice that it is more holistic, it goes from the beginning to the end. The beginning portion we will put in a skills advisory, training advisory type of discussion with the trainee so that the trainee can pick suitable courses, not just what he or she likes to do, but what we think might help the person get a job and also meet the person's aspirations. I think that upfront is actually quite important.
The second thing about the SCTP is industry involvement, and that requires us to work with industries and some funding will be required for us to be able to scale this up.
And the third, the career coaching element and employment facilitation services, these are also very substantial investments that we are putting in. So, it is not a CET as in just training alone. But also translating it into getting jobs, good jobs for the individuals. We have learnt a lot from this SGUnited Jobs and Skills journey. We have learnt that individuals on their own, when they pick courses, the courses may not lead them to where they want to go. So, upstream intervention is needed. Also, early career coaching, helping them discover their career goals and providing the facilitation can make a big difference in helping a person land a better job. All in all, the investment in CET will go up substantially with this year's budget.
The second point about career conversion, indeed, there are many people, while they are already employed, are thinking of how to upskill, what to train themselves in, how to make themselves employable for a much longer term in their lifetime. I would say that, over time, we have also taken on board a lot of feedback from individuals, as well as from companies on what would be useful, what mode of training would be useful.
You would have noticed that now, there are a lot more bite-sized modules provided by our IHLs and our training providers. Some are online, some offline, all to tailor to the needs of busy working adults who want to upskill themselves but may not have the complete time flexibility to be able to do so consistently. It is important that we build in a wide range of types of courses, different modalities and have a lot of flexibility for individuals to be able to choose courses, not just in terms of content that suits their needs, but the form of delivery.
On the recognition of this type of training, we are undertaking a holistic review of our skills frameworks. And in fact, we are working closely with our colleagues in MTI and MOM to make sure that the training investment, the courses, that we provide to Singaporeans, while the courses will be recognised not just by the institutions and training providers, but actually more importantly by the industries, by the employees.
The Chairman: Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Just one point of clarification to the Minister Dr Maliki who addressed my cut and it is in relation to my cut where I asked if the Government can publish data by SES, background, for admissions into the different categories of schools: Government, Government-aided and Independent.
I think that having some transparency about that would be helpful to help us to monitor our progress to ensure that the more popular and well-resourced schools do not become closed communities. And that is the goal I think we all share. I would hope that the Government would consider just making that data public.
Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman: Mr Speaker, I thank Mr Leon Perera for the supplementary question. I just want to start off by saying that we understand that what he is saying is we should have a good mix of students to encourage social mixing, students from different backgrounds in our schools. We must begin with the premise that no one education setting fits all students, although we have the same objectives in mind. We want to make sure that there is a good mix as students learn to grow in their adolescent period and understand the real world.
But I want to assure Mr Leon Perera that most schools have good representation from different socio-economic backgrounds – Government and Government-aided schools are largely representative of the national average. Our Independent schools, including Specialised Independent schools, there is some variation from the national average by virtue of the performance of the students at the PSLE – I mentioned during the Parliamentary Question by Mr Louis Ng earlier that there is a correlation between socio-economic background and performance at PSLE. But Independent schools cater to specific learner profiles that are different and with different aptitudes.
But really, our fundamental objective is not to achieve identical profiles for every school. Even our neighbourhood schools, they are identical in broad based curriculum, but they are unique in some specific aspects and because of that, almost all Secondary schools, in fact, all Secondary schools today, admit students in Secondary 1 through DSAs. Which means that they are able to niche themselves sufficiently. And what does DSA mean? DSA means that people with different unique talents go into the school. And we want to encourage that. We want to encourage that diversity in our school systems and in our school environment.
So, in the Independent schools, for example, we provide that opportunity for students from different backgrounds to interact. For Independent schools today, roughly, we have close to half of our students coming from public housing. So, there is a good spread of students from different socio-economic backgrounds in all our schools, including our Independent schools. Mr Leon Perera talked about how they are well-resourced. I want to assure Mr Leon Perera that all our schools are well-resourced.
In fact, in my speech, I spoke about resourcing schools with higher needs. Because they have higher needs, we want to give the students the best that they could get and we respond to their needs accordingly.
But even if we do see situations where schools may not have the demographic profile that reflects the national profile, we also encourage them to use other platforms for integration, for students to interact and appreciate the Singapore society's profile. For example, once the students are in school, we facilitate interactions like Values in Action projects not just within the school but across schools, projects, co-curricular activities (CCAs), joint CCAs, joint camps, cohort level camps – many opportunities for the students to interact.
So, while the school provides certain experience which are relevant, with a right understanding of the objectives, it does not mean that our students are not interacting, that they are not mingling with students from different socio-economic backgrounds.
Just to give some examples. Integrated Programme (IP) schools are doing this too. They are also interacting with other students. For example, Anglo-Chinese School (Independent) works with Queensway Secondary School on their programme called the Play Inclusive Programme; Raffles Institution working with Crest Secondary School, collaborating with students in Scouts in the CCA, doing projects, community projects together; Raffles' Girls School with Edgefield Secondary School, with Guangyang Secondary School, collaborating on CCA programmes.
So, it does not mean that we need to just focus ourselves on the profile of students in those particular schools when, as I mentioned earlier, in almost all our schools, the profile is generally reflective of the socio-economic backgrounds across our students.
Mr Chairman, I just want to make one clarification to my speech earlier. I had said that in response to Mr Sharael Taha and Dr Shahira Abdullah nine in 10 of our ITE students are employed within the first six months. The correct figure is eight in 10. Maybe it was a mix-up, because nine in 10 of our technical diploma students get employed within six months. Just a clarification.
The Chairman: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim. Keep it short, please.
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim: Thank you, Chair. I have two questions for Minister Chan. The first builds on the question by Member Patrick Tay about abolishing the mid-year examination. Could I just clarify that the weight that was originally to be assigned to the mid-year will actually go to continuous assessment instead? Because if not, of course, removing the mid-year just means that the final exam becomes even higher stakes and it is more stressful.
Related to this, has the Ministry considered actually lowering the weight on this so-called synoptic assessment?
The second question is just to clarify what the Minister also said earlier on the later school start times. He mentioned that there were many other schools with later starts. How many schools or what proportion of schools have these later starts for at least the majority of the school days?
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Chairman, the answer to Assoc Prof Jamus Lim's first question is that the weights in different schools differ slightly because of the different profiles of students. If you would like to know the specific weights for different schools, then I think we can provide him with the information.
But as I have mentioned, the school profiles are all different and we should not try to homogenise, have a one-size-fit-all measure or yardstick to judge all our students. We are moving towards a system that is much more customised to the respective needs of the students.
On the second point, in fact, a lot of our schools have different start times. Some of them have later start times on certain days of the week but it all depends on when they start, when they end. Some of our schools have kept certain afternoons totally free for their students and their teachers to recharge and do other things.
What I want to emphasise is this. If we recognise that the learning needs of our students are diverse, if we recognise that the background profiles of our students are diverse, we should strive towards a system that provides more diverse options for our schools, our teachers and our students. I think we must take care to not try to homogenise all the conditions when we in fact have agreed that we need greater diversity, which was what I mentioned in my speech. Actually, MOE has just one very simple rule: Thou shalt not start school before 7.30 am.
But I have gotten feedback from different schools on when they want to start and also when they want to end, which the day they want to start later and how much later.
In fact, this is a very good exercise for our students and teachers to come together and decide collectively what are their priorities and how do they prioritise the time.
I will be very careful as the Minister for Education to try to dictate for every school, given their different conditions, to have the same start or end time. I think I want my teachers, I want my students to have that agency to take charge of this and come to a reasonable understanding of where they want to be, given their different conditions.
The Chairman: I will squeeze in one more clarification. Dr Wan Rizal. Can you keep it short and the responses can be short as well? Thank you.
Dr Wan Rizal: Thank you, Mr Chairman. My question revolves around the mental well-being of the students and teachers. Maybe, I start with the teachers first.
Sir, thank you for laying out these plans that you have for the teachers but I think what is missing right now for the teachers is really a hard cap on their working hours because they tend to mark and it goes beyond their working hours. That is number one. Can the Ministry consider that as part of my clarification?
Number two is really on the students —
The Chairman: Just one clarification. Thank you.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Mr Chair, in fact, the question that Dr Wan Rizal posed, I have asked my teachers in my weekly visits to the schools. Do they want a hard cap? Is it practical to have a hard cap? I am actually very heartened by the answers given to me by my teachers.
We all know our teachers work way beyond what we expect of them in taking care of our children. In fact, for some of the high needs students, our teachers have no cap whatsoever.
I visited Northlight School. A very challenging group of students. Sometimes, they get into trouble with their families. Sometimes, they get kicked out of their home in the middle of the night. But guess what? Many teachers in Northlight School gave their personal handphone number to their students to call them if they ever get into trouble outside school or if they ever got kicked out of their home. We have teachers that responded in the middle of the night, way past midnight, to pick up a student, to take care of them.
So, Mr Chairman, I think we all appreciate the point that we want to take care of our teachers and we want to do more. We all want in our different ways to try to alleviate the workload for our teachers by partnering them, by not overly burdening them with unrealistic expectations. We all can do something.
But I think it is also very unrealistic for us to put such a cap on our teachers. And even if I do, I do not think my teachers will stop just because they consciously calculate that, \"My time is up and therefore, I will not respond to this high-needs student of mine\".
I think that is something immeasurable. That is something that speaks to the quality of our education workforce, the kind of people that we have in the system that make our education system something that we can all be proud of, that makes our education system able to continue to function, notwithstanding COVID-19.
So, yes, MOE will continue to see how we can lighten the workload of our teachers by making sure that we review the curriculum, applying technologies and so forth. That is our promise to our teachers. We want to do that. But I think it is also not realistic for us to therefore say that every teacher shall not work more than x hours. Because their conditions are different, the types of students they are managing are different and I have seen all my teachers, including the very good teachers and counsellors in Northlight School, going way beyond their call of duty in order to take care of all our children.
The Chairman: Mr Patrick Tay, would you like to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Sir, I would like to thank our fellow Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) Members as well as Members of this House who have filed cuts for MOE's COS so that we can hear their thoughts, ideas and suggestions.
Having had three children, one doing \"A\" levels this year, one doing Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE), another doing \"O\" levels next year, I thank Minister Chan Chun Sing, Minister Mohamad Maliki bin Osman and Minister of State Gan Siow Huang, Minister of State Sun Xueling and the entire MOE COS team for powering this entire Committee of Supply and bringing us fresh perspectives as well as some of the policies, announcements and programmes to make our education more caring, more inclusive and more future-ready.
At the same time, I also put on record our thanks to Director-General Wong Siew Hoong who is retiring from service at the end of this month. A big thank you to him as well. And the entire MOE team for giving us a good sharing of solving tomorrow's challenges with tomorrow's solutions.
On that final note, a big thank you to all our teachers and educators, past, present and incoming, for building this love for learning and embracing lifelong learning so that each and every one of us can stay future-ready, future-proof and be ready with new skills relevant to the new jobs and resilient for the future. [Applause.] With that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $13,410,729,900 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $393,400,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
The Chairman: As Members would realise, normally as Speaker, I do not get to speak until the COS is over. But I would have to make an exception at this moment, especially after MOE’s presentation on lifelong learning and continuing training and education, this feels like one such moment. And you do not have to use your SkillsFuture credits for it.
I am sure Members are all very passionate about the respective topics, a lot of clarifications to ask. But I am sure the many Members would also understand how the process works. We update you and send you reminders.
Earlier, Members would realise there was a Point of Order called by Mr Leong Mun Wai, as he had some clarifications to be made. There was also still discussion last week about tea break time and guillotine time.
I understand and I was made aware that Mr Leong Mun Wai had also posted on Facebook. I would not repeat everything, but he made a comment about “I have a number of clarifications to make but the Speaker didn’t even give me the chance.” And also, he added, “completely ridiculous.”
I am sure Members understand how the process works. I am not here to speculate the intent and purpose of various Members’ postings. But I thought it was opportune for me to refresh everyone’s memories about how this ought to work and why.
Members are aware that all of you would submit cuts. And the formula as to how it works is this: 40% of the time comprises your cuts; 50% of the time would comprise the response time from the Ministries; and 10% of the time allocated for clarifications. All of you are aware of that.
I believe we also do have reminders sent out to all our you. I will just repeat that: “I wish to remind Members that the guillotine time for Head X is such and such a time. The guillotine times are published for Members for information. Pursuant to Standing Order 92, the debate on the respective Heads of Expenditure will end once the guillotine times are reached.
Members can file a Parliamentary Question (PQ) should they have further queries for the Ministry and should they be unable to raise their queries when the debate had ended.\"
Let me go to the source, just to repeat. Just bear with me. In Standing Order 92(7)(a), it states that “The Speaker shall fix the time on any allotted day at which the consideration of any head of expenditure shall, if not previously disposed of, be concluded. If the time so fixed is reached before the head concerned is disposed of, the Chairman shall forthwith put every question necessary to dispose of that head.”
Essentially, we have a time allocated for clarifications and there is a guillotine time. We work that out on a schedule basis and we will update on a daily basis. And you are made aware of that time, so that we can continue to proceed with other orders of business.
I think it is important for us to understand that, and especially for the public as to how this works. I know many of you would like to ask clarifications. We are not always able to accommodate. If any of you text me, grumbling about why, how come you have important question to ask and you cannot ask, I hope you bear with me for that.
It is important for us to understand this, because this is made clear to all of you and I am sure all of you understand that.
Just to also explain that when clarification time is reached and we have not reached guillotine time, then, it is the Chairman’s discretion as to whether we continue or not. In the earlier debate, for example, with MOM, we had finished the clarification time and we continued all the way until guillotine time. As for the debate, for example, with MOE, the guillotine time is 1630 hours, incorporating 20 minutes of tea time. I am actually eating into your tea time. As you will soon realise, your tea break will be a lot shorter than the 20 minutes allocated.
That is how we work out the various timings.
Another point to add, just so that you understand the thinking behind how I for example, call on various Members, I would like to give opportunities for various Members from various parties to be able to speak. Different Members have opportunities to speak at other times. So, we would like to give that airtime to different Members as well.
I keep track of it because I write everything down and I try to roughly allocate that across the space of the whole COS and Budget. And this includes, during normal PQ and supplementary question considerations as well.
So, let me just remind everyone in case we forgot who we called in the earlier MOM COS debate, just for your own understanding. I called Mr Desmond Choo, I called Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Patrick Tay, Mr Louis Chua, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Mr Gerald Giam, Mr Abdul Samad, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, Leader of the Opposition Pritam Singh and Mr Sharael Taha, who wrapped it up.
We have a number of Members who had asked to speak, such as Mr Edward Chia, Ms Janet Ang, Mr Louis Ng, Mr Leong Mun Wai, Mr Melvin Yong, Ms Yeo Wan Ling, Mr Leon Perera – and I apologise. We did not have time because we reached the guillotine time.
So, I thought as a matter of record, it would be useful to just state this. I would not pretend or do I wish to speculate as to why comments are made. But I thought this might be useful to remind all Members of how the process works.
Unfortunately, as I said, the guillotine time for MOE, as you would realise, is 1630 hours. And as a result of this clarification, I would now ask to take a break and take the seat at 4.30 pm. Order, order.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.18 pm until 4.30 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.30 pm.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head L (Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment)","subTitle":"Creating an inclusive and sustainable home","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Mr Chairman, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head L of the Estimates be reduced by $100\".
Sustainability is at the heart of everything MSE does.
The MSE GPC is heartened to hear that Singapore will commit to achieve net-zero emissions sooner and will also raise the carbon tax significantly. It is code red for humanity and this race to zero is crucial. Climate change is an existential threat that we cannot ignore and simply adapt to. A recent UN IPCC report warned that if countries do not do more to fight climate change, the climate will change faster than we can adapt to it. So, we absolutely have to do more. Sir, I am glad we are doing more and responding positively to both calls in this House and outside for us to take concrete steps to tackle this climate emergency.
We are especially heartened with this whole-of-Government and whole-of-society approach. I hope we will continue to work with businesses and citizens to co-create solutions to tackle climate change together.
I hope we can share more about how we are increasing our climate ambition and action, how the revised carbon tax will support our inclusive green transition, how we will soften its impact on households and businesses, and how we are protecting our coastlines as well.
As we chart the way forward, I hope we always remember that there is no Plan B because there is no Planet B.
Beyond climate change, my GPC colleagues and I will be speaking on a broad range of issues. We look forward to updates on the Green Plan 2030, our Zero Waste Masterplan, the disposable carrier bag charge, GreenGov.SG and the lifespan of the Semakau Landfill.
We hope to strengthen our defences against public health threats, advance water and food resilience and security, make progress on our 30 by 30 plan and do more to support our hawkers, who have not had an easy two years during this pandemic.
And we will of course debate my pet topic of second-hand smoke. I am sure Senior Minister of State Amy Khor is looking forward to it and I promise her, no more stealth mode.
Let me be upfront. Second-hand smoke is another threat that we cannot ignore. I have been flooded with appeals for help, people fearing for their health and begging for fresh air. In the past two months, 2,475 people in Singapore have approached me for help as they are suffering from second-hand smoke in their own homes. What scares me is that almost 50% of them have been affected by second-hand smoke in their own homes for more than three years already. I hate to imagine what impact this has had on their health and the health of their loved ones. It is a race towards tackling this public health crisis, and like climate change, it is a race we should not and cannot lose.
There are lots more questions and issues to raise and it is an incredibly diverse range of issues that we will be debating over the next six and a half hours. Sir, I look forward to a robust debate. Next cut.
Four years ago, in an Adjournment Motion, I urged the Government to implement a charge for single-use carrier bags of all materials. The call is not to eliminate the use of disposable bags but to reduce it.
As Prime Minister Lee said: “It is a sensible approach: to make people conscious of the plastic bags they use, but not to ban plastic bags altogether. Using fewer plastic bags alone will not solve climate change or save the earth, but every bit counts. And making us conscious of our habits, and consider better alternatives, has value in itself.”
I am glad the Government announced that it will proceed with this charge but why only for supermarkets? I understand we want to start small but this problem is urgent and massive.
I hope we can extend this charge to smaller convenience stores. I am glad Cheers has already done this and I saw firsthand how this works.
We usually make smaller purchases at convenience stores as compared to at supermarkets. This means the disposable bag charge is a relatively larger amount and people feel the pinch more. When cashiers say, “Do you want a plastic bag? It is now chargeable”, I have seen so many people reply, “In that case, I don’t want it.” Purchases at convenience stores are also usually of a smaller quantity. Many can simply hold or put the purchases in their own bags. Lastly, many of the disposable bags used at convenience stores are smaller and can’t be used to line our rubbish bins. They are usually wasted.
Extending this charge beyond supermarkets can have a huge impact for this planet. I hope MSE will consider this positively.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Chairman, when it comes to using plastic bags, Singapore is among the top. We are using 2.5 billion plastic bags a year, according to NEA. This can be translated to be about 450 plastic bags per person each year. And in 2019 and 2020, NEA pointed out households and trade premises in Singapore threw away 200,000 tonnes of disposables per year, two-thirds of which are disposable bags. In 2018, in a Singapore Environment Council study, it found shoppers take 820 million disposable carrier bags from supermarkets a year, or an average of 146 bags per person.
If we look back at our past, we can understand why Singaporeans have such a voracious appetite for plastic bags. Many of us grew up with them from around the 1970s. Admittedly, they come in very useful when you are at the wet market when buying fish, vegetables and many other uses. Many of us justify taking plastic bags from the supermarket because plastic bags can be reused for disposal of household rubbish. Thus, these plastic bags become an omnipresent product, which can be found in the remotest of places from the seabed to the summit of Mount Everest. This poses major environmental challenges.
MSE has announced that it would implement a disposable carrier bag charge at supermarkets, which was one of the recommendations submitted by the Citizens Workgroup on Reducing the Excessive Consumption of Disposables. Implementing a plastic bag charge will certainly reduce excessive plastic bags consumption but such implementation will also add to the increased cost of living, especially for lower socio-economic group.
Can the Minister share details on the model of this impending bag charge? How has the Ministry consulted stakeholders to develop the model for the disposable carrier bag charge? How will this affect the cost of living, especially the lower socio-economic group? What can be done to mitigate the cost for this group?
Apart from plastic bags, in fact, the current COVID-19 pandemic has brought about another set of problems with the use of plastics, that is, millions of discarded single-use plastic food containers. How are we dealing with the disposal of all these plastics in the current pandemic?
The Chairman: Ms Yeo Wan Ling. You can take your two cuts together.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Pasir Ris-Punggol): The announcement to implement a charge on disposable carrier bags at supermarkets as per the recommendations submitted by the Citizens Workgroup after consultation with the NEA and members of the public, is a move that is highly anticipated, and to some, viewed with some hesitation. Such a solution has already been implemented in various countries and generally attains success in reducing the usage of plastic bags. We likewise hope to see a positive outcome in early 2023 when charges for disposable carriers bags in large supermarkets are made a legal requirement.
In Singapore, supermarket retailers such as NTUC Fairprice and Don Don Donki have already taken the initiative and begun to implement charges for their disposable bags. While such measures look to disincentivise shoppers from using disposable plastic carrier bags offered in stores, there are some who have brought up that Singaporeans have always been recycling supermarket bags, using them as trash bags and such a model might create a situation where consumers take more bags than needed after paying the fee for them. It is of these concerns that we would like to seek clarification concerning the proposed charging model when implementing the mandatory charge for carrier bags at supermarkets. My second cut.
As a smart nation of digital natives, we have become increasingly reliant on electronic devices to allow a society to function. Incorporating more of such devices into our lives naturally means that we generate more of such e-waste, waste that contain hazardous materials and poses a health and environmental risk if not managed.
With the implementation of the nationwide Extended Producer Responsibility Scheme for e-waste in July 2021, we have taken steps to regulate the disposal of such waste by placing greater responsibility on the producers and retailers of such products to ensure that the items ranging from our handphones to our light bulbs will be handled when they reach end of life.
With the current e-waste collection and disposal scheme having been in place for half a year, we would like to seek clarification on whether the scheme has contributed to the increase in e-waste collection. Furthermore, we also seek assurance of the effects of the present scheme has on the ability to recycle the e-waste that we have generated.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, the Zero Waste Masterplan was introduced in 2019. It is an important blueprint for us to move forward towards being a sustainable city and it is essential we continuously move towards the targets we set for a greener Singapore.
I would like to ask: While we have already embraced the circular economy approach in several areas through our successes in closing a number of resource loops such as water, what are the plans to better incorporate circularity efforts as part of our national strategy for other resource loops? How will the Government support the proper management of the three priority waste streams – namely food, e-waste, and packaging – to promote resource sustainability?
In addition, what is the progress of the Zero Waste Masterplan and are we on track to reduce waste to landfills by 20% by 2026?
Ms Ng Ling Ling (Ang Mo Kio): Mr Chairman, also on the Zero Waste Masterplan launched in 2019, our target for Domestic Recycling Rate in 2030 is 30%. This is on the back of our domestic recycling rate declining from 19% in 2015 to 17% in 2019 and 13% in 2020. How can we encourage and support Singaporeans towards achieving our zero-waste target?
I would like to mention Slovenia as a case study in Europe, with a domestic recycling rate of 59.2% for some learning points. Their domestic recycling rate increased by almost 37% over just one decade. Its capital city, Ljubljana, attributed part of its success to strong communications strategies, campaigns and educational programmes to shift its citizens towards an eco-conscious culture. They adopted a bottom-up approach, with communities’ involvement, cooperation from different stakeholders and implementation of nationwide programmes.
Considering our aspirations towards reaching the zero-waste target and Singapore’s strength in whole-of-community approach, I will like to ask how MSE plans to enable families and communities to achieve our targets.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling (East Coast): Sir, Semakau Landfill is projected to be full by 2035. There is an overall decline in waste generation for the past four years, this is a good sign but is this sustainable when our domestic consumption has not significantly reduced, and recycling rates are not increasing proportionately within the industries and general public? I wish to know what more are we doing to extend the lifespan of Semakau Landfill?
Here, I highlight two areas for improving waste management in Singapore.
First, food waste. Discounting the effects of pandemic, the inherent problem lies with the long supply chains for food and losses during the handling and storage. To better manage the supply, we need more focus on technology applications and begin upstream in our food industry.
For example, (a) to use technology like blockchains to assist the wholesalers, large importers and large users to provide key sourcing countries with more accurate information on supply demand patterns in variety and volume of food needs through the year. This will help improve harvesting supply at right timing, production volume with less wastage and better understand the impact of increasing unseasonable weather; (b) to provide specific funding and more opportunities to connect the teams in ecosystem working on similar problem statements, for example, the food preservation with fresh producers using new techniques; and (c) conduct a comprehensive study to understand which part of the supply can be transformed locally or at source in order to mandate partially or in full the adoption of the Food Waste Minimisation Guidebook.
Second, on ferrous metal scraps, waste from construction and demolition, paper and card boxes. All this waste will go into our landfill if not recycled or handled properly. Can NEA provide an update on the sustainable resource recovery solutions piloted thus far? For high volume generated waste materials, what has the Government’s effort been in reducing them jointly with the industry?
I suggest a greater focus on waste reduction in immediate term, from more direct partnerships with business associations and corporations with large waste disposal to find ways to reduce and to reduce the packaging for local food delivery and introduce more environmentally friendly disposable packaging.
Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang): Mr Chairman, with climate change, we can expect to experience more unpredictable and intense rainfall. Over the years, we have been working on a number of projects to improve drainage and surface run-off and enhance storm water management. Would the Ministry share an update on these projects and future ones?
Maintenance and protection of drainage pathways are important, as we learnt from recent incidents where flash floods were caused by blockages and violations from engineering works in the vicinity. What are PUB’s plans to mitigate inland floods?
In the face of rising sea levels, we need to start on coastal protection. To defend our coastal areas from erosion, we have erected walls and stone embankments covering 70% to 80% of Singapore's coastline. Eventually, some of them will have to be built higher. What are the plans for these, including new seawalls, going forward? When do we expect the construction of sea walls to commence? And would the Ministry share updates on the progress of reclamation works as well?
The rest of our coastline are natural areas such as beaches and mangroves. How does the Government ensure that coastal adaptation measures are cost-effective and adequately resourced; and how can the marine ecosystem be protected while these measures are being carried out?
Lastly, what progress has been made on coastal protection efforts since last year?
Dr Lim Wee Kiak: Chairman, last month I watched an interesting CNA documentary titled \"Lost Waterfronts\" which relate the history of Singapore’s former coastlines and waterfronts, which is now replaced by man-made landscapes such as Marine Parade, Changi Airport and MBS. I was amazed by the tremendous transformation that our little island has undergone. What was formerly our coastlines and beaches have all disappeared and replaced with land and development.
I wonder in 50 or 100 years from now, will our descendants be watching a different version of a similar documentary titled \"The Lost Land\", featuring the sea and describing what used to be a huge Changi airport and HDB Marine Parade estates is now replaced by sea. If we do not do anything to protect our low-lying areas against the rising sea level, that may become reality.
I still remember the graphic presentation during Prime Minister's National Day Rally in 2019, on Singapore's map showing all the low-lying areas which will be reclaimed by a rising sea level if nothing is done. And what Prime Minister said, that our descendants may ask: \"why did we not do anything when we had a chance?\" I, and many, are impressed by the ambitious plans shown during the presentation on building polders and a sea wall, not only to protect the low-lying areas but also to create new land and new possibilities.
Can the Minister give an update on our progress to safeguard Singapore's low-lying areas against the threat of rising sea level? Can the studies on the protection measures be speed up, so that it could mitigate the work needed to protect our shorelines? What interim measures can be done now? And how does the Government ensure that the coastal adaptation measures are cost-effective and adequately resourced?
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin: Chairman, during last year's Budget, as part of our climate adaptation measures, it was announced that Public Utilities Board (PUB) and JTC Corporation (JTC) will embark on site specific studies at the coastlines of City-East Coast and Jurong Island for coastal protection. To enhance flood resilience, PUB has spent almost $2 billion in the last decade and plans to spend $1.4 billion more in the next five years for drainage work. I understand that future studies for the northwest coast have also been planned.
I would also like to add to the questions raised by the previous Members before me, to ask how will the Government ensure that these measures are cost-effective? How will the Government plan to take into account existing ecosystems such as mangroves or intertidal zones as nature-based solutions, both in terms of conservation as well as potential solutions.
Mr Sharael Taha (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Chairman, the rising sea levels is a global challenge for many coastal cities and Singapore is especially vulnerable, as we are a low-lying island with only 30% of our land residing five metres above sea level. Unlike other countries, we do not have abundant high grounds. With climate change, we can expect to experience more unpredictable and intense rainfall with sea levels rising faster.
What progress has been made on coastal protection efforts since last year and how can we protect our coastlines from rising sea levels, as well as erosion by waves and storms and reduce the land take for such measures to protect our coastlines? How does the Government ensure that the coastal adaptation measures are cost-effective and well resourced?
Mr Murali Pillai (Bukit Batok): Sir, currently NEA is not able to conduct investigation against drivers of foreign vehicles for infringement of vehicle emission regulations if they are merely reported by members of public, unless NEA officers personally confirm the cases at the scene. This is because unlike local vehicles, NEA does not have the information on ownership of foreign registered vehicles. This gives rise to an unhappy situation as NEA officers have to catch the offenders red-handed.
This gap in enforcement policy must be closed, as NEA officers cannot be everywhere. Those who violate our emission laws must face the same consequences, regardless of whether they are local or foreign drivers. I recommend that NEA work out an arrangement with ICA that will allow for measures; such as not allowing the foreign vehicles to be driven into or out of Singapore until such time the drivers' particulars are provided or the composition fine imposed for the commission of the offence is paid.
Ms Hany Soh (Marsiling-Yew Tee): In May last year, I have filed a Parliamentary Question to MSC, subsequent to several cases of gastroenteritis in preschools, to enquire on what actions will be taken to manage such incidents and prevent them from recurring in future.
I am delighted that Minister Grace Fu has in response, announced the intention to implement the Environmental Sanitation (ES) regime. Since then, I note that the ES regime has been implemented progressively to premises such as social service facilities, schools and preschools, as well as food centres, coffee shops and markets.
Can the Ministry share the current progress on the regime's roll out and share more as to which other sectors or premises will it be expanded to, in order to prevent further gastroenteritis outbreaks from happening in the community. Would places that offer food items to patrons, such as cinemas and spa facilities, be included as well?
The Chairman: Mr Mohd Fahmi Bin Aliman. He is not here. Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, there is no risk-free level of exposure to second-hand smoke. Breathing in small amounts can be dangerous. I have spoken up a lot about protecting people from second-hand smoke in their own homes. It is equally important to protect everyone in public areas. I am glad Orchard Road was designated as Singapore’s first No Smoking Zone (NSZ). Our surveys show that there is strong support for this.
Last year, I asked if the Government will designate other areas as NSZ. It has been a year, and I hope MSE has monitored this space closely and will roll out more NSZ and prohibit smoking in more places.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Sir, the ability to have fresh air and not take in second-hand smoke is an option that everyone should have if they are given a choice. Despite knowing the harms of smoking and increasing prices of tobacco products in Singapore, the smoking rate in Singapore remains at about 10% in 2020.
After the introduction of NSZ at Orchard Road, many are eagerly hoping that NSZ can be expanded especially nearing housing estates and provide permanent digital enforcement at the playgrounds, parks and common corridors of HDB blocks. Can the Ministry provide an update if there is any intent to expand NSZ in other areas of Singapore following the early pilots?
Dr Lim Wee Kiak: Chairman, the COVID-19 pandemic has rightly raised our concerns because of the toll it takes on innocent lives and the suffering of those who were inflicted with the disease. Globally, since the outbreak of the pandemic, there were some 5.9 million deaths, and it is still rising.
There is another pandemic that is also claiming lives, but it is somewhat given a back seat. This is the scourge of smoking. According to WHO, the tobacco epidemic is one of the biggest public health threats the world has ever faced, killing more than 8 million people a year around the world. More than 7 million of those deaths are as a result of direct tobacco use while 1.2 million are the result of non-smokers being exposed to second-hand smoke. The economic costs of tobacco use are substantial, for example, costs for treating the diseases caused by tobacco use as well as the loss of human capital that is a result from tobacco-attributed morbidity and mortality.
There are studies that shows that smoking is highly likely to worsen the severity of COVID-19 and the risk of dying from infection, according to a UK Biobank study published online in the respiratory journal of Thorax. Despite all the health risks, cigarette smoking is one of the most common forms of tobacco use and it is one of the leading preventable risk factors for premature deaths, including non-smokers who are exposed to second-hand smoke.
We have been taking various steps to control cigarette smoking. But some countries, like New Zealand, are taking bolder steps to ban smoking. New Zealand plans to raise the legal smoking age by one year every year, effectively banning the sales of tobacco products to people born after 2008. Malaysia intends to introduce a new law to ban smoking and the possession of tobacco products, including electronic vaporisers, for people who are born after 2005, as a \"Generational End Game\" for smoking in the country.
In 2019, the smoking prohibition was introduced and Orchard Road was designated Singapore’s first NSZ. Does the Ministry intend to roll out more NSZs and prohibit smoking in more places to protect the public from the harmful effects of second-hand tobacco smoke? Do we have plans to introduce \"end game\" laws to snuff out cigarette smoking completely for our young Singaporeans? What is the results and lessons learnt from the 2014 Nee Soon South pilot project to ban smoking in public?
I urge the Government to take bold steps to extend more NSZs and finally also to consider smoking completely banned in all HDB estates.
Ms Poh Li San: The Chairman, the last extension of the smoking prohibition was in 2019, when Orchard Road was designated as Singapore’s first NSZ. Does the Ministry intend to roll out more NSZs or prohibit smoking in more places to protect the public from the harmful effects of second-hand tobacco smoke, such as smoking corners at food retail establishments?
Many residents have been bothered by their neighbours’ second-hand smoke emitted from their windows and balconies. Would the Ministry please do more to curb second-hand smoke in residences, especially when complaints are from families with young children or residents with health problems and the neighbours are consistent and heavy smokers?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Chairman, will the Ministry consider setting out a designated eco-friendly smoking zone at each HDB block for smokers to visit, instead of smoking at home and common corridors? What other plans does the Ministry have to encourage residents who smoke at home to reduce the spread of their second-hand smoke in their homes and to surrounding units? Next cut.
How effective has the wastewater testing surveillance strategy been for COVID-19? Can the Ministry share if NEA intends to make this method of testing regular and routine in all areas for the long-term in order to monitor the spread of the pandemic? Next cut.
Public toilets’ cleanliness and hygiene must meet NEA standards. How does NEA ensure that these standards are maintained? What are the progress and improvement requirements for all toilets in hawker centres, markets and coffeeshops? Next cut.
Hawker centres provide a wide range of delicious and affordable food to our residents in the heartlands. Will there be new hawker centres in the next two years, especially in some of the newer estates?
Mr Don Wee (Chua Chu Kang): Chairman, hawker centres are an important part of our heartland estates, providing a variety of affordable food to our multicultural population. They are also gathering points which serve to help with community bonding.
COVID-19 has disrupted our everyday lives significantly, including slowing down the progress of work in our construction sector. I would like to ask the Government how has COVID-19 impacted the progress of the construction of new hawker centres and will there be new centres that will open in 2022? Will we have enough hawkers to man the stalls at the new hawker centres? There is no point having new and nice hawker centres with low utilisation rate. How is the Ministry ensuring that we are training a pipeline of new hawkers to take over from the older cohort, many of whom will be retiring?
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin: Chairman, as we transition to endemic living, our hawker scene has also undergone significant challenges. Our hawkers are an important part of our heritage, and have seen some tough times during COVID-19. However, some issues are evergreen, for example, urban bird management and ensuring clean hawker centres. I also hope that in due course, we will be able to reduce food, produce and packaging wastage in hawker centres, where everyone can play a part in food rescue efforts with the relevant overarching structures and support put in place.
Can the Government share more details about how the Hawker Centres Transformation Programme is enabling hawker centres to be more efficient and sustainable, and how many hawker centres will benefit from this?
How has hawker centre cleanliness improved over the past year, and does the Government have any preliminary findings on the effectiveness of the Clean Tables Campaign?
The Chairman: Ms Joan Pereira.
Ms Joan Pereira (Tanjong Pagar): Chairman, can I take my two cuts together?
The Chairman: Yes, please.
Ms Joan Pereira: Like any other UNESCO cultural heritage, our hawker culture needs to be preserved and passed down for future generations. However, it needs to transform with the times, in order to remain relevant for our people and for the livelihoods of our hawkers.
In the face of manpower shortage, especially in the hiring of hawker assistants and the shortage of young Singaporeans willing to pick up the hawker trade, I hope that we, as a nation, can consider this as a matter of urgency; we need to look into ways to support and transform this sector, which includes hawker centres, coffeeshops, canteens and food courts. It has not been easy, but our hawkers have been trying very hard to keep their prices affordable.
Can we, therefore, help them reduce their costs with raw materials or improve productivity? I have already seen some of our hawkers adopting machines to automate their cooking or other processes. We have seen how most of our hawkers have adopted digital payments and online ordering and delivery, through the support of efforts such as the Hawker Productivity Grant and the Alliance for Action. Can more be done to bring down costs, such as by working with industry players to consolidate ingredient purchases by hawkers to achieve better economies of scale and lower prices for all?
We have to review all aspects of the nature of the industry and businesses, involve our hawkers in providing their feedback and inputs on how we can help them. I also hope that as we embark on the transformation and rejuvenation of our neighbourhood town centres, through initiatives by other agencies such as Enterprise Singapore’s Heartland Enterprise Centre, the relevant agencies can work together and take a holistic view, to ensure that our heartland enterprises and hawkers are all part of the overall rejuvenation efforts. After all, our hawkers are heartland enterprises too.
I hope to hear more from the Ministry on its plans to transform the hawker trade.
Sir, our hawker trade plays a very important role in our economy. In a nation where many couples work full-time, many of our families depend on hawker centres to provide ready-cooked food.
Our hawkers are specialists in their niche areas, and this is how we can enjoy so many different versions of our favourite meals from across different ethnic cuisine groups.
Singapore will not be the same without our hawkers. How can we improve the job prospects and working conditions, so as to attract more young hawkers? Do we need restructure this occupation, so that they get covered for leave days, sick leave, medical care and insurance? Presently, most hawkers work as independents and some do quite well. However, for many, they really need to work many hours with very few rest days to earn a living, and falling sick becomes an extremely unthinkable costly problem. We must safeguard our hawker trade which is at the risk of vanishing when our older hawkers retire.
The work is tough and not many young people want to take over. However, our ageing hawkers want to pass their recipes and techniques for future generations. Will the Ministry share and update on the progress of the Hawkers Succession Scheme, which facilitates the pairing up of a retiring veteran hawker with an apprentice, so as to pass down his or her culinary skills, recipes and hawker stall to the aspiring successor?
I would also like to reiterate my suggestion for NEA to facilitate the transition and help the veteran hawkers be paid an appropriate compensation amount, while the skills are being taught to the apprentice. The compensation sum should reflect the value of the heritage recipe and technique. In turn, the apprentice would have to serve out the bond at the stall for a period of, say, three years, for example. I hope this will help to safeguard our hawker trade.
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas (Nominated Member): Sir, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Singaporeans enjoy hawker food. Our hawker trade is a key part of Singapore's history and identity. We have strong public support for hawker culture, and many of us celebrated when our Hawker Culture was inscribed on the UNESCO Representative List of the Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity in December 2020.
Therefore, we must ensure that our hawker culture and food continue to thrive for future generations. I am heartened to know that NEA has announced last year it will be rolling out the Hawkers Succession Scheme. This scheme aims to facilitate retiring veteran hawkers pass down their stalls, culinary skills, practices and recipes to aspiring successors through an apprenticeship and mentorship programme.
I would like to ask what is the progress of the scheme, and are there more details available on how the scheme will be implemented?
Dr Lim Wee Kiak: Chairman, plant-based meat is increasingly taking its place on our supermarket shelves, and I generally believe there is a gradual acceptance of this alternative meat substitute for real animal meat. Food security is important for Singapore. We are reliant on many countries to supply many essential items including meat. And if we are able to develop such alternative meat products locally, this would address some of our concerns in this area. Besides, meat substitutes which are produced in laboratory by cell culture would contribute to our efforts to address climate change issue as well.
According to the Good Food Institute, an international US-based non-profit re-imagining meat production, animal agriculture takes up 77% of all agricultural land on Earth despite supplying only 17% of humanity’s food supply. This inefficiency drives the need for agricultural expansion, which is the single largest driver for ecosystem damage on land. They reported that plant-based meat emits 30% to 90% less greenhouse gases than conventional meat production and animal agriculture contributes to more climate change than exhaust emissions from the entire transport sector.
Thus, to meet the nutritional needs of a growing population and, at the same time, protect earth's fauna and flora, and fight against climate change, we need to consider and promote food products like meat substitute that are manufactured using plant-based products and meat produced in the laboratory by cell culture, instead of from animals in farms. This can form part of our 30 by 30 plan. What is Singapore's role in this new emerging sector? How can we promote and grow this sector to benefit from this sector?
Prof Koh Lian Pin (Nominated Member): Safeguarding our food security is among the most important priorities for Singapore in our sustainability journey. One of the Government's efforts to address this goal is to produce 30% of our nutritional needs locally and sustainably by 2030. How does the Government plan to help the local food production industry build up capabilities and capacity to achieve our 30 by 30 goal and enhance the resilience of Singapore's food supply?
As we achieve success in increasing our local food production, is the Government looking to calibrate food imports to avoid wastage?
Unlocking Singapore's sea space for sustainable aquaculture can help boost our local food production in the long term. However, as with our land resource, there will be diverse and competing needs for the use of our sea space. Does the Government plan to provide the local food production industry with greater certainty on the use of both land and sea space to optimise the supply of local produce?
The Chairman: Ms Nadia Samdin.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin: Chairman, may I take my two cuts together, please?
The Chairman: Yes, please.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin: I am heartened that much progress has been made in the last year towards the 30 by 30 plan, to reduce our reliance on food imports. According to a survey done by SFA, 98% of Singaporeans agree that this is an important effort. However, concerns of space and sustainability, including that of sea spaces, are always a concern.
What are the Government’s plans to optimise sea spaces for food production? And given the heavy investment required, does the Government have plans to provide the industry with greater certainty on the use of land or sea space? Will measures be put in place to ensure a more sustainable aquaculture industry?
Last year, it was announced that the Government is working on a framework to shore up defences against marine litter to protect our coastline and surrounding waters.
Some of my youth volunteers and I had the opportunity to join environmental activists, students and clean-up crews at a Kayak and Clean event, where we found discarded nets, plastics and other types of marine litter floating around our island. I have also had the opportunity to do dive clean-ups off our Southern Islands with marine scientists and volunteers from Our Singapore Reefs.
From youths to seniors, expats to Singaporeans, I am grateful for active and caring citizens who run efforts such as the East Coast Beach Plan, Green Nudge, One Planet and even our own Young PAP who have played a part in keeping our shores clean.
I would like to ask whether the Ministry has further plans to tackle marine litter as a concerted effort and how the Government can better consult and co-create solutions with ground-up groups and businesses to optimise efforts and resources in tackling issues, such as marine litter and climate change, beyond dialogues and panels. Can the Ministry consider a citizen committee, for example?
Mr Raj Joshua Thomas: Food security is an existential issue for Singapore. The global food system faces many challenges, from short-term disruptions, such as disease outbreaks in a source country and the pandemic, to long-term issues such as climate change, global population growth and dwindling resources.
One of the Government’s efforts is the 30 by 30 goal, to transform our agri-food sector, and build capabilities and capacity to sustainably grow in a highly productive, climate-resilient and resource-efficient way. It is important for the Government to work towards the 30 by 30 goal in a sustainable manner. I would like to ask how does the Government plan to help the local food production industry to build up capabilities and capacity to achieve the 30 by 30 goal, to enhance the resilience of Singapore’s food supply.
Further to this, unlocking sea space for sustainable fish farming can help boost our local production in the long term. However, as with land, there will be diverse and competing needs for the use of our sea space. I would like to ask what are the Government’s plans to provide the local food production industry with greater certainty on the use of land or sea space to optimise the supply of local produce.
Mr Don Wee: Chairman, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic and the global supply chain crisis highlight how important it is for Singapore to become more self-sufficient for our food supply. I am glad that the Government is embarking on a holistic exercise to master plan the Lim Chu Kang area into a high-tech agri-food zone. This bodes well for our future food security. What is the status of the Lim Chu Kang Master Plan exercise?
What is the progress of the discussion with the current cohort of farmers? Is the Ministry involving them and inviting them to participate in the new plan? They should be given assistance, to start off, and incentives to upgrade their operations. What other plans does the Government have to help our agri-food industry build up capabilities and capacity to achieve the 30 by 30 goal?
Ms Poh Li San: Mr Chairman, we have water supply from the Four National Taps: water from local catchment, imported water, NEWater and desalinated water. Desalinated water and NEWater meet up to 70% of today's water demand and is projected to go up to 80% in 2030 and 85% by 2060.
While desalination and NEWater are weather resilient and free from the vagaries tied to imported water, they are energy intensive. In view of the current global energy challenges and Singapore’s commitment to transit to greener energy sources, how will PUB leverage on R&D and technology to enhance water efficiency and treatment? And what is the progress of our research projects in this field and are we collaborating with any foreign partners on this endeavour?
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, may I have your permission to take two cuts?
The Chairman: Yes, please.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Desalination and NEWater are two of our four sources of water supply, in addition to imported water and water catchment. The challenge with these two sources is that they require a lot of energy to process and treat the water. How would PUB improve on the energy efficiency of our water treatment to ensure its sustainability?
PUB launched the Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters (ABC Waters) Programme to harness the full potential of our waterbodies – a network of 8,000 kilometres of waterways and 17 reservoirs. Would the Ministry share if there will be any new ABC projects in the next two years?
Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong (Jurong): I applaud the efforts of the Ministry in undertaking long-term infrastructure projects. Joint efforts that use science, technology and our strong engineering capabilities to deliver highly accretive outcomes for sustainability mission.
In addition, much effort was also taken to use an ecosystem approach to leverage on the strengths of each project to further enhance outcomes.
The Tuas Water Reclamation Plant, an integrated waste management facility are prime examples.
In September 2020, PUB and NEA announced the construction of Singapore's first integrated water and solid waste management plant – the Tuas Nexus – consisting of the Tuas Water Reclamation Plant and the Integrated Management Facility. It was mentioned that the Tuas Nexus will tap on the synergies between water, waste treatment and energy – to use water sludge from Tuas when co-digested with food waste will improve bio-gas generation.
I support these efforts by SME and the beyond horizon thinking and bold execution of these officers. To follow up, can I ask the Ministry on the progress of the Tuas Nexus and Tuas Water Reclamation Plant.
Mr Sitoh Yih Pin (Potong Pasir): Mr Chairman, I start by congratulating the PUB for being successful in closing the \"water loop\" through integrated water management, by collecting as much water as we can and reusing water where possible.
PUB had previously announced that the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System Phase Two is to be extended by 2025 to serve the western part of Singapore. This is an important project that will go towards safeguarding Singapore’s strategic interest in water.
As a result of the pandemic situation, we know that many infrastructural projects have been affected due to manpower shortage and supply chain disruptions. I, therefore, invite the Minister to share with this House, whether the PUB is on track to complete the Deep Tunnel Sewerage System Phase Two and an update on the progress of the project in the light of the present circumstances.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Sir, to many, Singapore has a successful water story. From water conservation to building our own water taps. But is this sufficient?
PUB has placed emphasis on driving home the awareness on water conservation and set a target to achieve 130 litres usage per person per day by 2030 from the current 141 litres in 2019. In the 2018/2019 household study conducted by PUB, it showed that shower, flushing, kitchen and laundry constituted 77% of its total water usage and the consumption increased by 20% for households with domestic helpers.
Since the pandemic started, our hygiene alertness has significantly heightened. There is more extensive washing and higher frequency of cleaning in households, public areas and workplaces. While we hope these good hygiene habits continue to prevent the next potential spread of disease, I would like to ask whether the Ministry observed more water usage for maintaining such hygiene standards? Does the work-from-home setting change the consumption usage by the households and what are the other initiatives the Government plan to introduce to improve water conservation?
While raising awareness and changing consumption habits are important, we need to complement efforts beyond these. For example, HDB to consider changing to purpose-built waterless urinal design for new flats, or using other methods to remove dirt from void decks and common corridors instead of high pressure water jets.
I am glad we have over the years built alternate water taps like desalination and NEWater. They are weather resilient technologies, but equally energy intensive. As Singapore is currently unable to harness all of the rainfall for usage, I would like to know how PUB is planning to maximise capacity of the underground water storage systems? At the same time, are more energy efficient technologies being explored for water treatment?
Ms Hany Soh: Household water consumption has increased as a result of COVID-19 due to people spending more time working from home. With hybrid work arrangements expected to continue as COVID-19 becomes endemic, what are some of the initiatives that PUB or the Government will be taking to encourage more water conservation among households?
The Chairman: Minister Grace Fu.
The Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien): Mr Chairman, I thank the Members for their questions. May I have your permission for MSE to address these cuts and take clarifications from Members after Senior Minister of State Amy Khor, Minister of State Desmond Tan and I deliver our speeches.
And thereafter we will have Members deliver their cuts on the joint segment on the Singapore Green Plan 2030 which will be addressed by Senior Minister Teo and several Green Plan Ministries, including clarifications that may arise.
The Chairman: Please proceed.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Thank you. COVID-19, climate change and income inequality. These are among the biggest threats confronting the world today.
The pandemic has laid bare the fragilities of global supply chains, the vulnerabilities of healthcare systems and the cost of being underprepared.
The effects of climate change could be far worse. The latest IPCC report underlines how climate change has resulted in increased frequency and severity of extreme weather events, especially heat waves, droughts, and floods. Climate change will adversely impact economies and livelihoods, as well as security of essential resources such as water, food and energy.
COVID-19 has taught us the importance of resilience and this has relevance in the way we deal with climate change. Whether a disruption is brought about by extreme weather events, or a global pandemic, we must take action today to assess our risk exposure, prepare our people and put in measures that will enable us to bounce back from disruption.
In this COS, Senior Minister of State Amy Koh, Minister of State Desmond and I will share how MSE is strengthening our resilience across three areas: resource resilience; climate resilience; and public health resilience.
First, resource resilience. As a globally connected economy with no natural resources, we are vulnerable to external shocks and supply disruptions. This has been made abundantly clear by the COVID-19 pandemic. As our demand for resources continues to grow, so will our exposure to such fluctuations. Excessive consumption of resources also generates waste and emissions, worsening the climate crisis.
We must reduce waste and maximise resource efficiency. We also need to diversify our supply sources and promote circularity to reuse and recycle resources.
This is no mean feat, but we have shown that it can be done. We have closed the water loop by reclaiming used water to become NEWater, allowing us to reuse every drop of water endlessly. Minister of State Desmond will share how we are strengthening the resilience of our food and water supply.
Ms Nadia Samdin and Miss Cheryl Chan have asked for an update on our waste reduction efforts. Our Zero Waste Masterplan was driven by the need to reduce carbon emissions, boost resource resilience and conserve landfill space. We set a target to reduce waste-to-landfill per capita by 30% by 2030. Under the Singapore Green Plan, we will frontload efforts to achieve a 20% reduction by 2026. In an increasingly resource-constrained world, we need to shift to a circular economy, where trash is turned into treasure and reused endlessly.
As we strive to become a Zero Waste Nation, we need to: encourage sustainable production, build capabilities to maximise resource recovery and collectively adopt sustainability as a way of life.
Let me elaborate.
One key upstream measure to encourage sustainable production is the Extended Producer Responsibility, or EPR scheme. EPR requires producers, such as manufacturers and importers, to be responsible for the collection and proper treatment of their products at end-of-life.
We implemented the e-waste EPR last year to ensure the proper handling and treatment of e-waste. This reduces our waste to landfill and allows us to recover valuable resources like gold and copper from e-waste, for use in manufacturing new products.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked for a progress update. Since the scheme started in July last year, ALBA, the appointed scheme operator, has collected around 3,500 tonnes of consumer e-waste, which is three times the amount collected annually under NEA’s previous National Voluntary Partnership programme. This accounts for approximately 8.5% of the consumer electronic and electrical equipment supplied in 2020. The e-waste collected includes large home appliances like refrigerators and air-conditioners, and ICT equipment like mobile phones and laptops.
Members of the public can drop off e-waste at more than 500 e-waste recycling bins nationwide, at convenient locations such as community centres, supermarkets and electronics stores. ALBA also works with Town Councils to organise quarterly collection drives at housing estates and collection of bulky e-waste. For a fee, members of the public may contact ALBA to arrange for doorstep collection of e-waste.
Efforts are also ongoing to develop an EPR for packaging waste, starting with a return scheme for beverage containers. Under such a scheme, a deposit is included in the price of the pre-packaged beverages. Consumers will receive a refund upon returning the used beverage container.
To facilitate development of this scheme, NEA formed a stakeholder group comprising key industry, academia and civil society representatives in December last year.
Over the past two years, NEA has engaged more than 100 large and small producers, which make up about 80% of the pre-packaged beverage market. This included industry briefings, surveys and one-on-one engagements with individual companies and trade associations. Other stakeholders consulted included retailers, waste management companies and members of the public. NEA will continue to broaden engagement with the public and industry in the coming months, to co-design a cost-effective and suitable Beverage Container Return Scheme for Singapore.
As we strive towards a Zero Waste Nation, we need to continue to ensure the sustainability of essential waste disposal services, while encouraging waste reduction to conserve Semakau Landfill.
Over the years, the operational costs of waste disposal have increased.
To keep pace with rising costs, we will revise the refuse disposal fee for incinerable waste from $77 to $88 per tonne. This fee is paid by public waste collectors and general waste collectors to dispose of incinerable waste at the waste-to-energy plants.
We will also revise the refuse disposal fee for non-incinerable waste from $97 to $124 per tonne. This fee is paid by general waste collectors and toxic industrial waste collectors to dispose of non-incinerable waste at Semakau Landfill, such as treated toxic industrial waste and sludge.
The revised fees will take effect on 1 January 2024, two years from now. NEA will issue notification letters to the industry to allow the industry sufficient lead time to adjust. We encourage all businesses to adopt sustainable practices to generate less waste and recycle more and play their part in the shift towards a greener and zero-waste Singapore.
As we put in place a comprehensive regulatory framework to encourage recycling, we also need to build capabilities in our local industry. A thriving local recycling industry can generate economic value, job opportunities and exportable solutions for the global green demand.
EWR2 is a local e-waste recycling company that recycles large household appliances and ICT equipment and was set up in response to the increasing demand for e-waste recycling services driven by the EPR scheme. It operates a highly automated recycling facility that can recover up to 95% of materials used to make the appliances, of which about 80% is being recycled.
We are also pursuing chemical recycling of plastics that converts plastic waste into pyrolysis oil, which can be used as feedstock for the manufacturing of chemicals and plastics.
NEA commissioned a feasibility study on the development of a plastic recovery facility last year to extract plastics from our waste for chemical recycling. The facility will harness advanced plastic waste sorting capabilities and improve our plastic recycling rates. We are finding other new innovative ways to turn waste into resource.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
Semakau Landfill, for example, can potentially be mined for its landfilled materials. NEA and the Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore are carrying out a feasibility study to use such materials in its reclamation for Tuas Port. If feasible, this will prolong the lifespan of Semakau and at the same time, reduce the amount of reclamation materials to be imported.
Our transition to a Zero Waste Nation will require everyone to play their part. To be a nation known for sustainable development, care for the environment must be reflected through our daily practices. Our personal and societal values drive the actions and choices we make daily.
The use of disposables is an issue that many Singaporeans care about. While disposables have become an everyday convenience, they create large amounts of waste and use up finite resources.
We convened a Citizens' Workgroup in September 2020 to co-create solutions with the public in the spirit of Singapore Together. The workgroup came up with recommendations on how we can reduce the use of disposables such as carrier bags, food containers, cutlery and packaging.
Implementing a charge for disposable carrier bags at supermarkets was one of the recommendations of the workgroup. After careful deliberation, we announced last year that we would work on an appropriate model for a disposable carrier bag charge at supermarkets.
We did not decide on this lightly. Our earlier considerations for not implementing a disposable carrier bag charge in Singapore are still valid. Plastic bags are used by many households to bag our garbage before throwing it down our rubbish chutes. Unlike many other countries, we do not directly landfill our disposables but incinerate them. Hence, we do not face the land and water pollution issues that plague those countries.
Climate action and environmental protection are gaining pace internationally and locally and we cannot continue with business as usual. A bag charge is becoming commonplace in jurisdictions around the world and closer to home such as in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Malaysia.
There is broad recognition that we can reduce wastage of plastic bags.
In Singapore, an increasing number of retailers have voluntarily implemented a charge on disposable carrier bags, which has shown to be effective in encouraging the use of reusables. For example, FairPrice's \"No Plastic Bag\" initiative has saved more than 30 million plastic bags over two years, with seven out of 10 customers willing to bring their own bags.
More importantly, we want Singaporeans to be a part of the shift towards a green Singapore. We should show our care for the environment in the choices we make every day. By making the cost of the bag visible to consumers, the intent of the bag charge is to nudge people to consider what they really need instead of taking bags freely.
The charge is not a ban. It will not remove the public's access to disposable bags. It is a nudge to every one of us to develop the habit of bringing a reusable bag when shopping for groceries and more and to reduce the use of disposables, an essential feature of sustainable living.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked about our consultations in developing the bag charge framework.
We have conducted extensive consultations over the past year, including with supermarkets and members of the public. Close to 6,000 stakeholders were consulted through focus group discussions, industry and public consultation sessions and surveys. We have heard diverse views in our consultations and have considered these views carefully.
Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Dr Lim also asked for details on the bag charge. Let me share with Members about the framework.
We will introduce a charge of at least five cents per bag for purchases made at the supermarket outlets. This will be applicable to all disposable carrier bags. We have kept the minimum charge low to moderate the cost impact on shoppers, including on low-income households.
Charging per bag is equitable and effective. The more bags we take, the higher the amount we pay. Charging from the first bag would also encourage shoppers to bring their own bags from the outset.
The charge will take effect in mid-2023. It will apply to operators of SFA-licensed supermarkets with an annual turnover of more than $100 million, which will cover about two thirds of all supermarket outlets.
We are starting with the larger supermarket operators who have extensive market coverage. We will not extend the charge to smaller convenience stores for now, as suggested by Mr Louis Ng.
During our consultation, concerns have been expressed about supermarket operators potentially profiteering from the charge. We strongly encourage supermarket operators to channel the proceeds obtained from the bag charge to environmental or social causes and consider initiatives to support lower-income families.
To ensure accountability, we will require supermarket operators to publish information on the number of bags issued, amount of proceeds collected from the bag charge and how these proceeds would be used. The public will then be able to see how the supermarket operators are using their proceeds.
Over time, we hope that the charge will encourage Singaporeans to adopt sustainable habits and bring our own bags when shopping at supermarkets and other stores.
At this point, I would like to quote Ms Liu Yining who eloquently expressed on the need to reduce the use of plastic disposables in a recent commentary in Lianhe Zaobao. In Mandarin, please, Mr Chairman.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] On 4 March, Ms Liu Yining wrote a commentary in Lianhe Zaobao titled \"Charging for disposable carrier bags sows a seed for de-plasticisation\", She wrote that \"the moment people take an extra plastic bag, they will have to think about whether they really need it or not, and at that point in time, a seed of happiness and kindness is sowed in the heart, and it is a seed of hope for themselves, the country and the world.\"
(In English): The larger purpose of the bag charge is to make all of us pause and think if we really need the next bag before we reach for the bag. It is a seed of hope for a better world – the first step on a journey towards sustainability and the beginning of a change in how we treat the environment.
Ms Ng Ling Ling asked how we can encourage and support families and communities to recycle more. Applying an idea from the Recycle Right Citizens' Workgroup to encourage right recycling behaviour, we recently piloted the use of transparent recycling bins in Hong Kah North and East Coast Group Representation Constituency (GRC). The residents' response was positive.
To encourage recycling at every home, NEA is collaborating with the Singapore Institute of Technology to design a compact recycling container to better sort out and collect recyclables at home. These containers will be made available to households later this year. To minimise wastage, NEA will only distribute to households that want them.
Our individual actions will determine the collective outcome of Singapore. Together, our zero-waste efforts will bring us closer to achieving our waste-to-landfill targets and extend the lifespan of Semakau for as long as possible beyond 2035.
Next, I will touch on climate resilience. Ms Poh Li San, Ms Nadia Samdin, Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Mr Sharael Taha asked about our progress in shoring up our coastal and flood defences.
Sea level rise poses an existential threat for a low-lying island nation like Singapore. The Centre for Climate Research Singapore has projected that climate change could cause mean sea level rise of up to one metre by 2100. If there should be a confluence of extreme high tides and storm surges, some projections suggest that sea levels could be as high as four to five metres. This is high enough to potentially flood one third of Singapore.
Coastal protection is a long-term endeavour and we have started planning ahead.
In May last year, PUB, the national coastal protection agency, embarked on a site-specific study at the coastline of City-East Coast. We are starting site-specific studies at other parts of our coastline. This year, JTC and PUB will commence studies at Jurong Island and the North West coast respectively.
Singapore has a varied coastline of over 300 kilometres. Hence, our site-specific studies allow us to understand the characteristics of these different segments and develop coastal protection solutions accordingly.
Take the northwest coast as an example. First, there are four coastal reservoirs – Tengeh, Poyan, Murai and Sarimbun. We will study how to reinforce the dykes and dams for these important water sources to protect them from seawater intrusion. Next, we will study how best to dovetail coastal protection solutions with upcoming developments such as the future Sungei Kadut Eco-District and Lim Chu Kang high-tech agri-food cluster.
There are also sections of mangrove habitats at the Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserve and the Mandai Mangrove and Mudflat Nature Park. We must take care to minimise environmental impact in these biodiversity-rich areas. PUB will explore hybrid coastal protection solutions that combine nature-based elements with hard engineering measures and will also work closely with NParks and stakeholders to conduct environmental studies, minimise impact and enhance existing ecosystems. These studies are expected to take a few years.
To ensure that coastal and flood protection measures are adequately resourced, we established the Coastal and Flood Protection Fund in 2020 with an initial injection of five billion dollars.
In May last year, the Government passed the Significant Infrastructure Government Loan Act (SINGA) to allow the raising of loans to finance major long-term infrastructure such as coastal and drainage infrastructure.
Even as we plan long term for the challenges of sea level rise, we are already seeing more extreme weather patterns today. We see more flash floods from more intense rains. Ms Poh Li San and Ms Nadia Samdin asked what PUB's plans are to mitigate inland floods.
The Government has invested significantly with almost $2 billion spent on drainage improvement works since 2011. This includes the Stamford Diversion Canal, Stamford Detention Tank and the Bukit Timah First Diversion Canal. We have set aside another $1.4 billion to carry out further improvements to the drainage system till 2025.
While we systematically improve our drainage system across the island, it is not possible to expand our drains to cater to every extreme rainfall event as it will mean less space for housing, parks or roads in land-scarce Singapore. Hence, it is important to strengthen community resilience and our collective response to flooding incidents.
PUB has been enhancing its early warning systems to provide more timely updates to the public, including launching a dedicated Telegram channel last November. PUB has also expanded its fleet to 13 flood response vehicles that are able to stream real-time flood conditions and drive through higher floodwaters. This allows PUB to provide timely assistance during any heavy rain event.
PUB cannot do it alone. We urge Singaporeans to be on alert for weather events, by subscribing to PUB’s flood alerts for timely updates on heavy rains and potential flood risk locations. Building owners must do their part in protecting their properties by installing effective flood protection measures.
In July last year, PUB trialled the automated flood barrier at the entrance of Fortune Park Condominium leading to the basement carpark. The automated barrier uses approaching floodwaters to buoy itself up and block floodwaters from entering the premises, without the need for any human or mechanical intervention. It is a viable and cost-effective solution for flood protection, and we encourage building owners in low-lying areas to implement these automated barriers.
Mr Chairman, as a small island city-state with no natural resources, we have weathered many crises together as a people and as a nation. We have overcome these crises and seized the opportunities to develop into a clean, green and liveable city that we see today. Climate change is the defining crisis of our generation. Together, let us build a resilient Singapore, for a sustainable future. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Dr Amy Khor.
The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan): COVID-19 has reinforced the importance of good personal hygiene and clean public spaces. These have always been our priorities and will better prepare us beyond COVID-19 for Disease X, which is not a matter of “if” but “when”.
Over the past two years, we have improved the cleanliness of public spaces – from working with premises managers to uphold high cleanliness standards, to ensuring individuals practise personal responsibility by returning trays and binning litter.
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin would be pleased to know that since the Clean Tables Campaign and mandatory clean tables regime were implemented, the national average Tray and Crockery Return Rate (TCRR) in hawker centres has improved significantly, from 33% to 85%.
We have also achieved a national average TCRR of above 85% in coffeeshops and food courts. Many have shared that the dining environment is now cleaner, with faster turnover of tables and fewer incidences of pests and bird nuisance.
We will build on this progress to ensure a clean and safe Singapore.
We commenced the progressive roll-out of the Environmental Sanitation (ES) Regime last July, which specifies mandatory baseline ES standards for high-risk premises and places greater accountability on premises managers to meet these standards.
We introduced the ES regime in more than 3,000 premises under the inaugural phase, including preschools, MOE schools, food centres, markets and coffee shops, and the first tranche of eldercare, youth and social service facilities.
Together with the sector leads, we developed sector-specific ES standards and trained more than 3,600 Environmental Control Coordinators (ECCs). The ECCs will assist premises managers to develop and oversee the implementation of an ES programme, which specifies cleaning frequencies and disinfection protocols. To Ms Hany Soh’s query, the regime was rolled out to preschools in November 2021 and all have appointed personnel to be ECCs.
The ES regime ensures that premises are properly cleaned and disinfected regularly. For example, from March this year, coffeeshops are required to carry out thorough cleaning every quarter on top of routine cleaning. This is a marked difference from just ad hoc cleaning before. High-touch surfaces would also be cleaned and disinfected more frequently.
Premises managers are also sensitised to their responsibility to prevent outbreaks of infectious diseases like gastroenteritis within their premises. For instance, preschools have found the regime useful in providing clear guidance on minimum cleaning and disinfection frequencies, and scope of cleaning and disinfection works, neither of which were clearly defined before.
Ms Hany Soh would be glad to hear that we will implement the regime at another 2,700 premises this year. These would include publicly accessible premises with high footfall such as large shopping malls, as well as private education institutions.
We have worked with these sectors to develop sector-specific ES standards. All premises will minimally require an ECC. For large premises with multiple tenants like shopping malls, Environmental Control Officers (Specified Premises) will be introduced to oversee more wide-ranging public health issues and management of stakeholders. We aim to train 2,700 more ECCs and ECO(SP)s this year.
Another important aspect of a clean and safe environment is protecting Singaporeans against the harmful effects of second-hand tobacco smoke. Today, smoking is prohibited in more than 49,000 premises, including covered walkways and common areas of residential buildings. We have prioritised places where second-hand tobacco smoke affects more people, such as community spaces.
Miss Cheryl Chan, Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Mr Louis Ng and Ms Poh Li San would be glad to hear that, together with PUB, NParks and the Sentosa Development Corporation, NEA will extend the smoking prohibition to more places including all remaining public parks and gardens, Active, Beautiful, Clean (ABC) Waters Sites and 10 beaches from 1 July 2022.
In addition to neighbourhood parks in public and private housing estates where smoking is already prohibited, smoking will be prohibited at Regional and City Parks like East Coast Park and Fort Canning Park, and all Park Connectors. Smoking will also be prohibited at 10 recreational beaches, including three beaches in Sentosa.
With this extension, Singaporeans can enjoy these shared recreational sites without exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke. There will be a three-month advisory period before enforcement commences on 1 October 2022.
We currently have no plans to set up additional No Smoking Zones. We will review the need for further extensions of the smoking prohibition from time to time. Setting up No Smoking Zones requires significant stakeholder buy-in and operational resources to implement. We will need to plan extensively, assess the suitability of the precinct and availability of sites for designated smoking areas.
On smoking in homes, which Dr Lim Wee Kiak, Ms Poh Li San and Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about, legislation is no panacea to curbing second-hand tobacco smoke in homes. There are privacy concerns and technological limitations to gathering evidence required for enforcement.
The Designated Smoking Points (DSPs) in Nee Soon South have thus far not resulted in a sustained reduction in feedback received on smoking in homes in the division since its implementation. Nevertheless, we will continue to monitor the effectiveness of DSPs as localised solutions, even as we work with MOH and HPB to discourage smoking at home.
On \"end game\" laws for smoking, MOH remains open and will study how New Zealand implements the ban, its effectiveness and how their experience could be applicable to Singapore.
Besides adopting preventive measures to minimise the spread of infectious diseases, we are building up capabilities to deal with public health threats.
Singapore is an early adopter of wastewater surveillance for COVID-19, which is being explored in various countries. In response to Mr Gan Thiam Poh's question, when transmission first occurred at workers’ dormitories, NEA brought in wastewater testing to assess the situation, including the viral loads collected from each dormitory. Our findings were used to complement individual testing, guide infection control measures and facilitate the progressive clearance of dormitories by the Inter-Agency Task Force.
Monitoring has since been expanded to student hostels, nursing homes, and residential sites. From a modest eight sites in May 2020, we gradually expanded surveillance coverage to 200 sites in July 2021. Since February 2022, we have achieved surveillance coverage of 440 sites, including 150 sites distributed across residential areas and town centres. We have also expanded our laboratory testing capacity to 4,000 samples being tested per week, up from 2,500 in July last year.
As Singapore transits to COVID-19-endemicity, the focus of wastewater testing has shifted from early case detection to providing situational awareness. The data collected alerts Government agencies and premises owners or operators of the situation, which allows them to calibrate public health measures.
It provides objective information on whether infections among the population are increasing or decreasing, independent of the population’s health-seeking behaviour and prevailing clinical test protocols. This will therefore be an important surveillance tool even as we transit to an endemic state. Further research and development will allow the wastewater surveillance system to be used for monitoring other infectious disease threats in the future.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about improvements to toilets. We launched the Toilet Improvement Programme in October 2020 to raise the cleanliness of toilets in hawker centres and coffeeshops. The programme supported premises in improving toilet design and choice of sanitary fittings for easier cleaning and coffeeshop operators' initial adoption of fortnightly deep cleaning on top of daily cleaning. NEA has received applications from 62 eligible coffeeshops and 28 hawker centres. Twenty-four coffeeshops and one hawker centre have completed their toilet enhancement works.
I will now speak about our hawker culture, my favourite topic! Our hawkers are frontline heroes, providing us affordable hawker food during this pandemic. NEA has provided relief measures to hawkers over the last two years, including 10 months’ rental waivers and six months’ subsidies for table-cleaning and centralised dishwashing services.
Eligible hawkers also received up to $9,000 via the Self-employed Person Income Relief Scheme (SIRS) in 2020 and a one-off cash payout of $500 under the Market and Hawker Centre Relief Fund (MHCRF) last year.
We will continue to support our hawkers. Minister for Finance announced that small F&B businesses, one of the sectors most affected by COVID-19, will receive the Small Business Recovery Grant.
SFA-licensed operators and stallholders in markets, hawker centres, coffee shops, food courts and canteens will receive this grant. They will receive $1,000 for each local employee receiving mandatory CPF contributions, capped at $10,000. Those without local employees will receive a flat $1,000 if they are Singapore Citizens or Permanent Residents.
Our efforts have helped hawkers during these tough times. On average, 17 cooked food stallholders or 0.3% terminated their leases each month between 2020 and 2021. This is lower than the monthly average of 28 terminations between 2017 to 2019.
Ms Joan Pereira asked if more can be done to help hawkers reduce ingredient cost. We will review her suggestion of bulk purchasing carefully and also consider the interest from our hawkers, where many may already have established relationships and specific arrangements with their suppliers for their preferred ingredients.
To prepare hawkers for the digital economy and expand their reach to potential patrons, hawkers, community groups, food delivery platforms, together with NEA and IMDA came together to form the SGTogether Alliance for Action (AfA) for Online Ordering for Hawkers last June and developed pilot initiatives to help hawkers utilise online services.
About one in every four cooked food stallholders have been supported via NEA’s Food Delivery Support Scheme. Currently, about half of our 6,000 plus cooked food stallholders are on board these services, and almost 70% of them have adopted e-payment.
WhyQ, Deliveroo, FoodPanda and Grab have stepped up to pilot a Common Acquirer Model for online food delivery in 15 hawker centres at zero commission to hawkers. Hawkers can receive online orders from any of these platforms through a single ordering device. Alternatively, they can choose to transact offline through WhyQ hawker captains.
To date, 18 hawker centres have set up Digital Support for Hawkers groups, which provide peer support to help less digitally savvy hawkers embrace digital opportunities. This includes creating Facebook pages for each centre, facilitating online community group buys, and organising bulk meal orders.
I am pleased to share that many of my fellow Members of Parliament have adopted AfA’s recommendations on group buys from hawkers for our lunches during Parliament sittings! For today’s lunch, many of us enjoyed wanton noodles, chicken rice and burgers from Commonwealth Crescent, Bukit Merah and Golden Mile! More enticing and mouth-watering hawker dishes to come!
Ms Nadia asked for an update on the Hawker Centres Transformation Programme (HTP). Last year, I shared plans about the HTP to future-proof hawker centre infrastructure.
While HTP will be applied to new and redeveloped centres, we are also piloting it at two existing centres even as they face constraints with limited floor space.
I am pleased to announce that we will consult stakeholders, including Hawkers’ Associations, Town Councils and Advisers in 2022 to jointly develop the HTP pilot at Geylang Serai Market and Cheng San Market and Food Centre.
The proposed scope of works may include High-Volume Low-Speed fans to improve ventilation, provisions to support flexible implementation of Safe Management Measures, such as quick deployment and removal of temporary access control, reconfiguration of tables and chairs to reduce crowding, and additional handwashing facilities to raise hygiene levels.
Finally, our hawker culture would not exist without our hawkers.
On Mr Don Wee’s query, there has been healthy demand for hawker stalls, with high occupancy rates averaging consistently at about 97% at existing and new hawker centres. NEA has also been receiving enquiries from individuals who are keen to take up stalls at the new centres, and the monthly tender for vacant stalls at existing centres have continued to attract a good number of bids.
Ms Pereira asked about efforts to attract new hawkers, including improving job prospects and working conditions. Our hawkers today are mostly self-employed individuals, with the flexibility and autonomy to decide their operating hours based on what they sell. They are covered by Medishield Life and can also top up their medical insurance individually, or even explore purchasing together as a group through their Hawkers’ Associations (HAs).
We have been helping our aspiring hawkers prepare for the trade, through the Incubation Stall Programme and Hawkers’ Development Programme, and similar programmes by Socially-conscious Enterprise Hawker Centre operators. Over 40 new hawkers have joined the trade through these programmes. Their median age is 33, significantly lower than the overall median age of hawkers of 60.
Eleven aspiring hawkers are currently operating incubation stalls, with another six awaiting allocation of incubation stalls.
Some of our new hawkers include Ms Priscilla Huang, aged 31, of Authentic Hong Kong Delights, and Mr Lim Wei Keat, aged 27, of Ah Keat Chicken Rice, who joined the hawker trade over the past year after completing HDP.
In addition to Wei Keat’s chicken rice which we had for lunch just now, I have ordered mochi and water chestnut cakes from Priscilla for Parliament’s tea break today.
A few others like Ms Amber Pong, aged 32, of The Headless Baker at Ghim Moh Market, who converted to a full-fledged hawker after completing her Incubation Stall Programme, even opened a second outlet in July last year.
To ensure that veteran hawkers’ recipes and skills are not lost, the Hawkers Succession Scheme (HSS), which was shared last year, will link retiring hawkers without succession plans but wish to pass on their businesses, skills and recipes, with aspiring hawkers.
To Ms Pereira and Mr Raj Joshua Thomas’s question about the HSS, a 10-member independent advisory panel has been set up to work with NEA to support and review the HSS pilot. Among the 10 panellists, six are established hawkers. The rest include culinary chefs, hawker centre operators and culinary training partners.
The panellists will help identify suitable veteran hawkers, assess aspiring successors’ readiness, and provide feedback to improve the programme.
Under the pilot, aspiring hawkers will be assessed on culinary skills and capacity to learn, before pairing up with veteran hawkers. They will undergo a three-month apprenticeship under the veteran hawkers. Aspiring successors will be evaluated on their ability to execute the veterans’ signature dishes. Where needed, veteran hawkers may continue to mentor the successor for two additional months. In recognition of their time and effort spent, veteran hawkers will receive a nominal stipend of up to $5,500.
This is but a token of appreciation and is not a measure of the effort that veterans have invested into establishing their clientele and refining their recipes. The HSS is not intended to be a commercial arrangement but is an option to help retiring veteran hawkers find suitable successors and preserve their culinary legacy for future patrons.
We will also introduce safeguards to protect the interest of the veteran hawkers such as requiring successors to serve the veteran hawkers’ signature dishes and retain the stall names for three years.
Mr Gan and Mr Wee asked about the construction progress of new hawker centres.
While COVID-19 has caused some delay, four new centres – namely Bukit Canberra, Fernvale, One Punggol and Senja Hawker Centres, will begin operations by the third quarter of this year. In addition, five more centres in the construction stage will progressively be completed in the next few years, and two more are in the planning and design stage.
Residents in Tampines Town can also look forward to another new hawker centre. More details of this new centre will be shared in due course.
Ms Nadia will be glad to hear that upcoming centres will incorporate sustainability features. All new centres will have food waste digesters. Some will also have solar panels.
Two redeveloped centres will also be starting operations this year. Market Street Hawker Centre that used to be at Golden Shoe Carpark will open for business from 1 April, at levels two and three of the integrated development CapitaSpring on Market Street and continue to provide affordable food options for those working in the CBD.
We also expect Margaret Drive Hawker Centre, which replaces the hawker centre at Block 1A, 2A, 3A Commonwealth Drive, to commence operations from fourth quarter of 2022. Chairman, in Mandarin please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] NEA will be expanding the smoking prohibition. From 1 Jul 2022, we will ban smoking at Regional and City Parks like East Coast Park and Fort Canning Park, as well as the park connector system linking various parks. The smoking prohibition will also cover recreation sites under ABC Waters projects, as well as 10 recreational beaches, including three at Sentosa.
In the past two years, the Government has been supporting our hawkers through various ways and schemes. This includes waiving a total of 10 months of rent and subsidising six months of table-cleaning and centralised dishwashing fees. Eligible hawkers received up to $9,000 of income relief in 2020 and $500 in cash assistance last year.
To continue our support for hawkers, we will provide all SFA-licensed market, hawker centre, coffeeshop, food court and canteen operators and stallholders with a one-time cash assistance, under the recently announced Small Business Recovery Grant.
For every employee that operators and stallholders pay CPF for, they will receive $1,000, capped at a maximum of $10,000. Those who do not hire local employees will also receive a $1,000 payout.
Over the past four years, we have also been attracting new hawkers to join the trade through various training programmes and over 40 new hawkers have joined the trade through these programmes. We will continue to support aspiring hawkers to enter the trade, including matching them with retiring hawkers via the Hawkers' Succession Scheme.
In addition, we will be opening four hawker centres this year. They are at Bukit Panjang, Sembawang, Sengkang and Punggol respectively, and will provide residents in these towns with food choices and convenience. We will also be building a new hawker centre in Tampines. Details will be announced later.
Lastly, from 1 Apr, Market Street Hawker Centre will return to its original site, and reopen on the 2nd and 3rd floors of the newly developed, large integrated development CapitaSpring. All the original stallholders from \"Golden Shoe\" centre will return to the reopened Market Street Hawker Centre.
(In English): Chairman, despite the challenges of the pandemic, everyone – be it the cleaning industry, premises managers or hawkers – have demonstrated resilience, seized opportunities to improve cleanliness, and embrace new business opportunities online.
Let us continue to work together to build a truly SG Clean Singapore and safeguard our hawker culture for future generations. Indeed, let us support SG hawkers!
The Chairman: Minister of State Desmond Tan.
The Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Mr Desmond Tan): Mr Chairman, I will be speaking about how MSE has taken steps and will continue to secure our food sources and water supply and how we intend to do this with the support of our industry as well as with every Singaporean.
First, on food security. Minister Grace Fu mentioned earlier that climate change and pandemics, such as COVID-19, are some of the biggest threats we face today. Coupled with the war in Ukraine, the confluence of factors is causing global supply and price volatility and we can expect to feel the impact in the coming months. MSE plans to ensure food supply resilience through our three food baskets – diversify import sources, grow local and grow overseas. Our \"grow local\" basket is supported by our 30-by-30 goal – an ambition to expand our capability to grow more food locally in a sustainable and resource-efficient manner.
Last year, I shared about how our intention to masterplan Lim Chu Kang and turn it into a high-tech agri-food zone that can significantly raise food production and thereby also providing new and exciting job opportunities for Singaporeans.
I am glad to update Mr Don Wee and Prof Koh Lian Pin that in 2021, we completed a six-month-long series of engagements on how the Government, industry, including our farmers, nature groups and public can co-create the future Lim Chu Kang region. Many industry players and other stakeholders are keen to embrace high-tech farming, with also other ideas like shared processing and distribution facilities and centralised waste management systems for complementary uses which will enhance the entire farming ecosystem. The feedback and ideas that we received from the engagements will now be folded into our actual planning phase of Lim Chu Kang this year.
We have also been driving research innovation and plugging existing technological gaps. Under the Singapore Food Story R&D Programme, we set aside up to $144 million for R&D for sustainable urban food production, future foods, such as advanced biotech-based protein production, as well as food safety science and innovation. To date, around $75 million has been committed to over 30 projects.
I echo Dr Lim Wee Kiak’s point that alternative proteins, such as cell-based and plant-based meats, can contribute to our nutritional needs. As some alternative proteins do not have a history of use as food, it is important to ensure the safe introduction of such novel food products into Singapore's market.
This is why SFA developed the Novel Food Regulatory Framework in 2019 which requires companies to undertake pre-market food safety assessments as part of the process of seeking approval from SFA. I encourage novel food companies to engage SFA early through platforms, such as SFA's Novel Food Virtual Clinics, to better understand SFA’s requirements, so that they can prioritise their research efforts.
Now, let me move on to our aquaculture industry.
Mr Chairman, fish is a commonly consumed source of protein that can be grown locally to contribute to our food security. To Ms Nadia Samdin’s question, SFA has been working closely with the industry over the past year to understand their needs and introduce best practices that can help them uplift their production and the sector. I have joined them in some of these engagements and visited many of the farms in the Johor Straits as well as in the Southern Waters.
The sea-based fish farms in Singapore are, indeed, quite varied, each with a unique approach to farming. Some, like Rong-Yao Fisheries, culture their fish in traditional open-net cage systems. With good farm management practices in place, Rong-Yao Fisheries has obtained the Good Aquaculture Practice (GAP) Fish Farming certification. We have also seen the emergence of high-tech farms which have the potential to transform fish farming by culturing fish intensively. The Eco-Ark by Aquaculture Centre of Excellence (ACE) is one of the world’s first purpose-built floating closed containment aquaculture production structure that combines Offshore & Marine Technology with a closed containment system, using water treatment technology to provide good quality seawater to culture the fish and, at the same time, reduce the vulnerability to external conditions.
Farms like Rong-Yao and ACE's Eco-Ark have found farming methods that work for them, but they also shared their hopes of getting greater certainty on their use of sea space so that they can continue to invest in their future.
Today, sea-based farms do not have a lease mechanism and this creates some uncertainty for our farms. So, we will offer leases to all sea-based farms in the longer term. Incumbent farms will be eased into this arrangement by starting with yearly-renewable temporary occupation licences (TOL) from 1 January 2023. The charges will be progressively stepped up to market rate from 2023 to 2026. This will give farms sufficient lead time to consider their longer-term investment decisions.
I also mentioned in my speech last year that SFA plans to launch new sea space tenders on lease. I am glad to share that this will happen from the end of 2022.
Sea-based farms will see a reduction in their annual licence fee from 1 January 2023. SFA has reviewed the fish farm licence fees to ensure that it remains relevant and that compliance costs for the industry are minimised. Only new farm applications and farms with major changes to their farming activities, such as a change in food type that they want to produce, will be subject to a separate one-off assessment fee due to higher manpower and equipment costs incurred during the course of the assessment. More details will be announced in the coming months.
To address Ms Nadia Samdin, Prof Koh Lian Pin and Mr Raj Joshua Thomas' queries, we want to provide greater certainty for our farmers so that they will invest more into their farms. I am happy to announce that new land and sea parcels will benefit from longer term leases of 20 plus 10 years. This means that future tenders will offer farmers the option of extending their lease beyond the initial 20-year period for an additional 10 years, subject to the farms meeting SFA’s production output conditions.
This will apply to new land parcels in Sungei Tengah as well as in Lim Chu Kang after the master planning exercise, as well as sea spaces that I mentioned earlier from end-2022 onwards. More details will again be announced by SFA when the tenders are launched.
Mr Don Wee and Mr Raj Joshua Thomas asked how we are helping farmers to upgrade their operations and reach our 30-by-30 goal. Last year, I shared that SFA launched a $60 million Agri-Food Cluster Transformation (ACT) Fund. This ACT fund supports farmers’ needs in different aspects at different phases, for example, from capability upgrade, innovation and test-bedding, as well as tech upscaling. SFA has received a total of 32 applications as of end of last year and eight applications have already been approved, while the rest are being processed and evaluated.
Going forward, we will also expand the scope of the ACT fund to allow more food types that are commonly consumed in Singapore to also benefit from higher co-funding quantum. This includes fruited vegetables, mushrooms and shrimp. More farms can now benefit from the higher co-funding support to invest in their farming solutions.
Prof Koh Lian Pin asked if the Government plans to calibrate our food imports as we increase local food production in order to minimise waste. Even as we aim to produce more food locally, Singapore will continue to need to import most of our food. We remain committed to facilitating free, open and competitive trade, and any substitution between imports and local production will be a result of market forces.
While local farms ramp up production to contribute to our 30-by-30 goal, it is critical that Singaporeans continue to play their part by supporting local produce. Strengthening Singapore’s food security is a whole-of-nation effort and, without strong local demand, our farmers would find it hard to sustain a high level of production.
With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I display a slide on the LCD screens?
The Chairman: Please proceed. [A slide was shown to hon Members.]
Mr Desmond Tan: To help Singaporeans better identify local produce, SFA launched a set of three logos to integrate branding for local produce in February 2022. These are the updated SG Fresh Produce logos you see on the screen to identify, first of all, local farmers – you see the first one on the left with one star; and logos to differentiate farms certified under the Good Agricultural Practice scheme for quality assurance – and they get two stars at the bottom; and Clean & Green scheme for sustainable production, which is the three-star logo.
By choosing local produce, everyone can contribute to our food security. Whether you are buying groceries for your family or for your restaurant, choosing local produce will support our local farmers, helping them not just to survive but to flourish by becoming more productive and sustainable. So, let me remind everybody to try and support our local produce. Mr Chairman, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Chairman, to ensure Singapore's food security, SFA announced the 30-by-30 goal in 2019. We hope that by 2030, we can satisfy 30% of Singaporeans' nutritional needs through local production.
Today, sea-based farms need to renew their sea space lease very year. This has made it hard to attract aquaculture businesses that require large upfront investments. After the reviewing the policy on the lease of sea space, I am glad to announce that we will offer long-term leases to all sea-based farms to help attract investors to develop the local aquaculture industry.
To help existing farms ease into this arrangement, we will start with yearly renewable temporary occupation licences from 1 January 2023. This will give farms sufficient lead time to consider longer-term investment decisions. From the end of 2022, SFA will launch new sea space tenders on lease. From next January onwards, SFA will also reduce the licence fee for sea-based farms to ensure that the fees are more appropriate. We will share more details in the coming months.
To achieve our 3-by-30 goal, besides Government support and funding, we hope that Singaporeans can also play a part by supporting local produce.
SFA launched a set of three logos in February this year to help Singaporeans better identify local produce. I hope Singaporeans can buy and support fresh local produce more and achieve a more secure future together.
(In English): Mr Chairman, I would now like to speak about our other basic need, which is water.
We will continue to strengthen water security by developing weather-resilient sources like NEWater and desalinated water and I am happy to announce that Singapore’s latest plant, Jurong Island Desalination Plant, will be operational in Apr 2022. This plant is co-located with Tuas Power’s existing Tembusu Multi-Utilities Complex (TMUC). It taps on the cost and operational synergies in the water-energy nexus by sharing infrastructure, such as the seawater intake and the substation, with the TMUC.
As pointed out by Miss Cheryl Chan, Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Ms Poh Li San, weather-resilient sources are energy-intensive. Since 2002, PUB and stakeholders have committed more than $800 million in R&D into technologies, such as biomimetic membranes and blue energy, to improve energy efficiency of NEWater and desalination processes. The energy to produce one cubic metre of desalinated water could, potentially, be reduced from 3.5 kilowatt hours to less than two kilowatt hours by 2025.
In 2020, we announced that work had already begun on Tuas Nexus, Singapore’s first integrated solid waste and used water treatment facility, comprising NEA’s Integrated Waste Management Facility (IWMF) and PUB’s Tuas Water Reclamation Plant (TWRP). Mr Shawn Huang asked about the Tuas Nexus project and an update. To date, more than $4 billion worth of contract works have already been awarded by NEA and PUB. The Tuas Nexus is set to complete in phases from 2025.
The electricity generated by IWMF will be sufficient to sustain the operations of Tuas Nexus, and excess electricity will be exported to the national grid. When fully operational, the excess electricity exported to the grid by IWMF will be able to power up to 300,000 four-room HDB flats.
This is just the beginning. We will continue to explore such synergies across various infrastructure facilities across the Government.
Mr Chairman, the Deep Tunnel Sewerage system will transform the way Singapore transports our used water. This is essential in land-scarce Singapore and, when completed, will result in a 50% reduction in the land take for used water infrastructure.
This is a multi-year $6.5 billion project that showcases our commitment towards forward planning. I am glad to update Mr Sitoh Yih Pin that for the Phase 2 tunnel contracts which began in 2017, more than 80% of the tunneling works have already been completed. The overall project, including Tuas Water Reclamation Plant, is scheduled to be ready by 2026.
Mr Chairman, Singapore's water story has been a success not just because of our infrastructural achievements, but through fostering community stewardship among Singaporeans towards our water resources. For example, we have transformed our waterbodies into recreational sites for all to enjoy and protect under the Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters, or ABC Waters programme. I am pleased to update Mr Gan Thiam Poh that 50 ABC Waters projects have been completed since it was launched in 2006 and seven more will be completed over the next two years.
Beyond our local waterways, we are also inspiring collective action to safeguard our marine environment from the threats posed by marine litter. I am pleased to update Ms Nadia Samdin that the Government is on track to publish Singapore's first National Action Strategy on Marine Litter in June 2022. The Strategy will describe Singapore's comprehensive approach to address the sources of marine litter. Ahead of the launch of the Strategy, we organised a public engagement session to seek feedback on measures to address marine litter and to galvanise 3P efforts to improve the situation in Singapore.
Miss Cheryl Chan and Ms Hany Soh asked how we can improve water conservation. The COVID-19 pandemic saw water consumption shift from the non-domestic sector to the domestic sector. In 2021, non-domestic water consumption fell by 6% while domestic water consumption increased by 6% compared to the pre-COVID-19 period.
In per capita terms, household water consumption increased from 141 litres per day in 2019, to 158 litres per day in 2021. This was largely due to more time spent at home because of work-from-home and home-based learning arrangements, as well as more frequent hand washing, showering and cleaning by households to maintain higher hygiene standards as what Ms Chan and Ms Soh have pointed out.
PUB will support households to make informed choices and raise awareness on water consumption at home, for example, through the Smart Water Meter Programme. PUB has commenced the roll-out of the first phase of the programme in Tampines Central in January 2022 and will be installing some 300,000 smart water meters in new and existing residential, commercial and industrial premises, target to complete by 2023.
Water conservation starts with every Singaporean. I hope every individual can play their part to save water to ensure our water supply continues to be sustainable.
I also want to thank Mr Murali for his suggestion to plug the existing gaps with enforcing foreign vehicles that have idling engines. There are practical challenges, but I want to assure Mr Murali that we will be studying this proposal.
Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their support of the work done by MSE, PUB and SFA to ensure food security and water sustainability, and ask that you continue to help us build a sustainable, resilient, liveable and vibrant Singapore.
The Chairman: We have some time, about 15 minutes for clarifications and then we will press ahead with the rest of the cuts until 7.30 pm. So, can I invite Members if you have any clarifications now? Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Thank you, Sir. I have two clarifications. Both relating to having roadmaps, which I think has been very useful that we have published the roadmap for carbon tax so companies and people can plan and adjust in advanced.
First, for Minister Grace, I thank her for sharing details about the disposable carrier bag charge and I also thank her for not saying no to extending the disposable carrier bag charge to smaller convenience stores. I believe she said not now. So, could I ask whether we can have a roadmap in terms of expanding the disposable carrier bag charge. So again, companies and our people can plan and adjusting in advanced.
Second, I thank the Senior Minister of State Amy Khor for sharing the details of the extension of the smoking prohibited areas. The same thing, could I ask whether we can have a roadmap in terms of expanding the no-smoking zone in Singapore. I really do thank the Senior Minister of State for all the hard work in addressing all my questions with regards to second-hand smoke. I sincerely wish and hope that would become her second most favourite topic after hawker culture.
The Chairman: Minister Grace Fu.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Thank you, Chairman. I thank Member Louis Ng for his supplementary question. I would like to assure Members that we do look at his suggestions very carefully and I think that for the issue on disposable bag, this is indeed an important step that we have taken. Having thought through all the considerations and also positions that we have taken in the past about how relevant plastic bags are in our daily lives, we need to make this change, it is important for us start cultivating that habit and let us see what happens after that. We may encourage more businesses to come on board, which we have already been doing, and I would like to see a lot more businesses, individuals, taking this as part of their habit. When you have that as part of your habits, then I think we do not need to use the lever of legislation. So, I am keeping it open for now. We will see what is the response by the people and by the business community, and we will review it over time.
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Khor.
Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: I thank the Member for his question, yet again, on second-hand smoke. But let me also thank the Member for acknowledging that we have provided him with comprehensive answers for the various questions he had posed on second-hand smoke. With regard to a roadmap, as I have said before, we continue to monitor and review if we can further extend our smoking prohibition from time to time. In fact, we continuously do this, in the area of second-hand smoke in homes as well as in public areas. This is something that we will continue to do. So, the roadmap really is about driving, continuing to work on it and continuing to look at how we can actually feasibly implement any extension of smoking prohibition to other areas. Because whatever we do, it will have to be operationally feasible as well as effectively enforced in order to make a difference.
The Chairman: Ms Hany Soh.
Ms Hany Soh: Thank you Chairman. My clarifications is in relations to the ES regime. While I applaud the Ministry's determinations to implement the ES regime next to more premises to keep our community safe, I am also concerned that this will also be equate to increasing operating costs. In my earlier Parliamentary Question that I asked this morning, I have raised my concerns that places like preschools are already grappling with COVID-19 rules and shortage of manpower. So, I wish to inquire whether MSE intends to provide more support or monetary grants which these business operators can tap on to implement and continue to comply with the ES regime.
The Chairman: Senior Minister Khor.
Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan: I thank the Member for the question. Indeed, for the ES regime, what we have actually done is really to work with the specific sectors. Preschools, for instance, we work with them to come up with the standards, the baseline standards for the regime. And in that sense, what we are doing really is to go upstream to implement the baseline standards so that they know, for instance, I have shared that the preschools actually welcomed the fact that now they have clear guidelines on the cleaning and disinfection frequencies, as well as protocols, which they did not have before. Then, they will be able to implement it.
So, what we really have done, as I have said is to work with the sector and calibrate the requirements. And if you think about it, if you do it right upstream, actually it will help you to reduce or avoid costs downstream because it will avoid, say gastroenteritis cases or minimise or reduce the cases. And if you do not, when there are such incidents, there could be additional costs because you will have to do deep cleaning and so on, there will be reputational damage and then closure of the schools. So really, it is also cost avoidance and upstream, it is really about putting in place a proper system and proper measures rather than needing say, for instance, additional manpower
Regarding the ECC that they have to appoint, it can actually be an existing staff. It could be one of the supervisors or teachers for instance, or you could actually employ one to oversee a few within the neighbourhood or within that area. So, we do provide for some flexibility and we are mindful of the cost.
The Chairman: Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak: Chairman, I have two clarifications regarding disposable plastic bag charges. I would like to ask the Minister when we implement this plastic bag charges, because plastic bag charges, the cost price, which is actually very low. It is a fraction of a cent. So, when we charge $0.05 per bag means that the profit margin is quite high. I know you are saying that it is not purely for profit, but does it mean that any other shops, including convenience store, if they decide they want to charge for plastic bags, is it legitimate do so straightaway. Is it considered profiteering?
This is something, especially in this climate of rising inflation, many of the residents are all very concerned about cost. The Minister also mentioned that the cost itself, that is the profit that is – or rather the revenue that is collected from this will be channelled towards other social causes. Is this mandatory or is this voluntary? Which means, how would we ensure that this cost is really channelled towards helping the environment and those of a lower socioeconomic group. Previously, I also asked before how do we help our lower socioeconomic cope with this increase in the cost now even though is just $0.05 per bag.
The Chairman: Minister Grace Fu.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I would like to thank the Member for these clarifications. On the first point about possibility of profiteering, right now, even without this latest legislation proposal, some shops are already collecting a bag charge for environmental reasons. It is for good reasons. You can look at it as a motive for profit, but actually, it is really putting a cost on it.
I would like to remind Members and also all members of the public that this is a cost that can be entirely avoided, you do not have to pay the bag charge if you carry a reusable bag or you put it into your carrier bag. That is the kind of habit that we would like all Singaporeans to cultivate over time, that when you are going out, please have a collapsible, reusable bag in your bag, or carry along with you in your car, so that you can avoid having to pay the bag and do not let any companies make any profit out of this.
Second point about whether we would make it mandatory to apply their proceeds to environmental and social causes. The answer is yes, but we are not requiring them to put it into specific charities or specific causes. The supermarket operators will have the choice of how they want to apply, maybe as part of their CSR and ESG programme.
The idea is, I firmly believe, that this action for climate, action for environment, is not restricted by income segmentation. Whether it is a low-income, high-income family households, everyone has the capacity to contribute to reducing waste and to be environmentally friendly. So, I would like to encourage all households, regardless of your income level, think about how to reduce wastage. And for the supermarket operators, if we are minded about it, you can always work with your charities around you, or the social service agencies around your community to give back and help the low-income family in other forms, whether it is food vouchers or whether it is low-cost food. This is really our way to extend assistance to everyone at this time, a very difficult time.
So, short answer is yes, they are required to and I would like to really see them doing their bit for the environment and also for the social causes in the area where they operate.
The Chairman: Mr Edward Chia.
Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui (Holland-Bukit Timah): Thank you, Chairman. I would like to thank Minister of State Desmond Tan on his sharing that to facilitate greater safety, innovation in the plant-based protein space, they are facilitating dialogues with SFA on the requirements. Conversely, I would like to ask, is SFA also actively updating requirements along with technology, innovations in this space?
The Chairman: Minister of State Tan.
Mr Desmond Tan: I thank the Member for the question. The short answer to the Member is yes, SFA will continue to keep abreast with the latest technology and also review our regulations to keep pace with what is coming up. But I have also mentioned in my speech that because novel food does not have a history of safe consumption, we are paying a bit more attention on the safe implementation before it reaches our consumption market.
And I just also want to highlight on the stepping up on safety, companies can also collaborate with Future-ready Food Safety Hub. In short, we call it FRESH which is a partnership between SFA, A*Star and NTU to conduct their food safety assessments. And, thereafter, these food safety assessments are then rigorously reviewed by SFA's Novel Food Safety Expert Working Group.
So, we have put in place some of the structure. One is to ensure that we monitor the progress and advancements in technology for novel food and, at the same time, to ensure that these are safely assessed and before they are implemented to the Singapore consumer market.
The Chairman: Last clarification, Ms Poh Li San.
Ms Poh Li San: Thank you, Mr Chairman. This clarification is for Minister of State Desmond Tan. I thank him for giving us an update on the progress of the DTSS but I like to know a bit more about what are the PUB's plans to mitigate localised flooding in regions that are outside the capture vicinity of the DTSS? For example, last year, remember that Bukit Timah area as well as Loyang areas experienced quite severe flash floods. I would like Minister of State Desmond to share a bit with us.
The Chairman: Minister.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Thank you, Chairman. I think this will be part of ongoing effort by PUB to reduce inland flooding.
As I mentioned in my speech, we have been spending huge investments in improving our infrastructure. We do that systematically in three ways: we look at the source, we look at the passage and we look at the receptor. So, we look how we can, for example, slow down the flow of flood water. We build detention tanks, we have built one at, for example, Stamford Canal. We have also required building owners, for example, to have detention tanks within their properties. Really, all ways to slow down the movement of water.
We have also improved drainage. We are going to invest significantly over the next few years in order to improve our drainage system, including Bukit Timah. And we will look at how we can improve our flood responses on the ground.
But the challenge is this. I would like to inform Members is that climate change is telling us – all the signs and data are telling us – that we are going to expect more intense rainfall. We are going to also expect rainfall that did not used to collect in places that we are used to. So, we are starting to see some areas that did not used to be flood-prone have now becoming more flood-prone partly because we have already worked on some areas and, therefore, the water will its way towards the lowest point now and we have to continue to improve our infrastructure. But more importantly is that we cannot prevent the possibility of a single flood event in Singapore. And for that, we will have to really get community to be aware, to have the ability to manage and the ability to be resilient towards such an event.
The Chairman: Miss Cheryl Chan, next cut, please.
Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling: Sir, climate change is fast happening with tangible consequences keenly felt by many worldwide.
In the pursuit of meeting net zero emissions by 2050, several countries have adopted carbon pricing to different extent, with this mechanism likely to be a global norm in time to come. While carbon pricing could be one of the levers towards achieving net zero emissions, there are a few clarifications on Singapore’s plan that I wish to seek.
Could the Ministry outline in further details on the considerations and roadmap underpinning this net zero target? As carbon emission varies across the industries and each sector has differing operational needs and product lines that result in GHG emission, is the intent to begin with sector specific approach or to have industries across the board to provide proposals on their efforts in reducing GHG at each site over specified time period?
Further, will companies be identified in the value chain and efforts be coordinated through the Ministry to enable scale up efforts in accelerating the decarbonisation process and possibly enabling the sharing of cost in platforms or tools that can assist players within the same industry to benefit from economy of scale?
As businesses begin to internalise the cost of carbon price impact versus the implementation cost of actions to reduce emissions, how will the Government ensure that the GHG reduction impact is properly measured and accounted for with respect to the targets set at each interval? Will further review be conducted to validate if the revised carbon tax level is deemed adequate at 2026/2027 to achieve the targets set?
Without our own power sources, our reliance on natural gas means the energy supply is a large carbon source that we need to actively consider to decarbonise. Today, we are looking at different forms of renewables, solar sources locally and hydropower overseas. For the solar capacity that are announced to be available in Singapore, will the full capacity being channelled into the grids as part of the energy mix and are the power producers actively working on large scale electricity storage to harness as much of the power generated? Without which, the process to reduce energy source from low carbon to green supply will always be impeded.
I had also previously mentioned the move towards green friendly practices may be easier for the large corporations who have the resources and expertise to do so.
For our SMEs, they will have real tangible costs to them. As we emerge from the pandemic, besides financial grants, will the Ministry be looking at other options to help the SMEs embark on the sustainability topic in the decade ahead?
Finally, the rationale of a carbon tax is to shift behaviours and mindsets to nudge businesses to rethink their existing way of operations and to become more sustainable. A mechanism should be implemented to prevent the carbon tax from being fully passed on to consumers, especially if the goods being consumed is a necessity. Otherwise, it defeats the purpose of making corporates take ownership in decarbonising their footprint.
A possible mechanism that I can suggest could be on the power generation companies to tier the cost being passed down to households based on usage, for example, with the first 400 kilowatt hour having no carbon tax passed on, and a subsequent tier percentage to be determined by the Energy Market Authority of the carbon tax allowable to be passed on for every 100 kilowatt hour thereafter. This would ensure that the households that are conserving energy and using electricity within the national average level are not penalised.
Ms Poh Li San: Chairman, the 26th United Nations Climate Change Conference of the Parties, or COP26 in short, concluded with many countries committing to net-zero pledges. Due to our lack of renewable energy resources, we may only be able to meet the net-zero target by or around 2050, as we avail of new opportunities in the carbon market and technological breakthroughs.
How will Singapore respond to calls for increased climate ambition and action? In order to meet the net-zero target in a shorter time frame, what kind of changes on the part of households and industries would be required? Will the Government share some figures and scenarios to help Singaporeans understand? These details are necessary to get support from Singaporeans for climate mitigation related measures, which will entail changes in our lifestyle, business processes, social practices, just to name a few. What more can the Government do to rally businesses, civil society groups and the people to accelerate the race to zero?
Can the Government also share what are the key considerations that underpin Singapore’s approach to setting climate targets? What are the trade-offs and circumstances that the Government has to account for?
One of the chief concerns would be the impact on the cost of living, jobs and businesses. How will the Government balance the need to mitigate climate change and ensure Singapore’s survival and competitiveness? What are our revised Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to be submitted to UNFCC in 2022? Does Singapore intend to declare our Carbon Net Zero goal to UNFCC and if so, by when?
Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis (Sengkang): Chairman, during this year's Budget, Minister Lawrence Wong announced that Singapore is targeting to reach that net-zero by or around mid-Century.
First of all, I would like to thank the Government for coming to this decision. As party to the Paris agreement, Singapore has a duty to set a clear target that aligns with the 1.5 degrees goal. This is even more so as we recently signed the Glasgow Climate Pact. A new net-zero target sends an urgent that we take climate change very seriously.
I also want to take this opportunity to acknowledge the work of Civil Society members, like climate scientists, youth activists as well as fellow Members of Parliament who have been pushing for a more ambitious target for years.
However, I have several classifications about the new target that increased carbon pricing. From 2024, businesses will be able to use and I quote, \"high-quality international carbon credits to offset up to 5% of their taxable emissions.\"
What accountability measures will the Government put in place to ensure transparency and fair implementation? How much of the Government's own net- zero target will be based on such international carbon credit offsets? With the latest update to net-zero targets, what is the Government's projection of our emissions pathway from today up to mid-century? Specifically, are we still looking at rising emissions levels up to 2030?
Lastly, all this is clearly a huge step forward. Around mid-century is still quite ambiguous, to be honest, and we all know what it means to set smart goals – specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and time-bound. So, will the Government consider setting a more exact deadline to achieving net-zero emissions? Can we strive firmly towards net-zero by 2050?
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, I am glad we have announced our new target of reaching net-zero emissions by or around mid-century. Many activists in Parliament and outside, have been speaking up about this for many years. We are glad that our voices have been heard and that we have a much more ambitious target. We thank all the Ministries and agencies for their hard work.
But I hope we can have a more specific target. Reaching net-zero emissions by mid-century would be good but around mid-century would not be that good. But around mid-Century will not be that good.
Twenty-fifty is not just a random year. It is based on science; global emissions must be net-zero by 2050 if we want to have any hope of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. In Singapore, SIA, Temasek, and DBS have committed to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.
Singapore always punches above its weight on the international stage. We should also punch above our weight when it comes to climate change. Many other countries have made this very specific pledge. Can Singapore also reach net-zero emissions by 2050?
Prof Koh Lian Pin (Nominated Member): Chairman, in line with Singapore's announcement of our revised target to achieve net-zero emissions by or around 2050 and the review of Singapore's Nationally Determined Contributions by COP27, the Finance Minister mentioned in his Budget 2022 speech that public consultations will be done as part of this revision and review. How will these public consultations be conducted and which stakeholders will be engaged in the process?
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Presently, most carbon offset programmes often serve as little more than a palliative. Typically, parties interested in reducing their carbon footprint, the climate-conscious non-profit hoping to attend an environmental conference on the other side of the world, say, will purchase offsets from a vendor or exchange equivalent to the amount of carbon that they expect to generate. Unfortunately, such vendors are seldom closely regulated and depend on the goodwill and enterprise of the operators.
Too often, even among well-meaning vendors, the strategy is to simply pay off some rancher, who would otherwise cut down trees on their land, using the cash from the non-profit with a small fee paid to the vendor for the effort. The system works well, of course, for just about everyone involved. The ranchers benefit from a stream of income for not developing their land, the non-profit believes that they have done their part in reducing their carbon footprint. And the vendor has earned a transaction fee, all while believing that they are doing good. Just about everyone, except the Earth.
The typical scenario sketched out above is such that net emissions will actually have increased. So, go on, do the math quickly in your head.
Now, making carbon offsets that truly work requires that the amount paid for said offsets actually goes toward reducing the total amount of carbon emitted into the atmosphere. This is where a credible system of offsets, paired with an actual cap-and-trade exchange, comes in. Recall, carbon cap-and-trade systems are typically seeded with a fixed amount of carbon emissions distributed via permits. These permits, of course, are finite. Hence, a credible exchange would direct the funds from the carbon offset toward the purchase of permits, which are then retired from circulation.
The major difference between this approach and that of a green vendor is that there it is no longer a counterfactual of otherwise increased carbon emissions that are being funded. Rather, it is now used to fund activities that have to be backed up by actual verifiable emissions reductions. This is where trusted governments can take a lead. A private-public partnership (PPP) led by private sector initiative and efficiencies, but encompassing active public sector involvement to ensure that the programme's purported goals are being met, strikes me as the best way forward for such an endeavour. A separate agency operating under the umbrella of NEA can take the lead on the Government side.
I have previously spoken about why carbon taxes tend to trump cap-and-trade systems. I still hold to that position, which is shared by the majority of economists who have studied the merits of both systems. Still, I see little reason why, if we are going to operate a carbon emissions trading system alongside a carbon tax regime, the system should not also be operated in a manner that complements our carbon reduction efforts. Moreover, a PPP of this nature is consistent with the stated goals of the Singapore Green Plan to develop Singapore as a carbon services and trading hub. Credible carbon offsets can be a major project to help develop Singapore's trusted reputation in the region. Of course, all markets require liquidity and the best way to get the programme off to a solid start is to provide a steady stream of income.
To this end, I would like to suggest that MSE consider requiring the purchase of credible carbon offsets along the lines of what I have described for all official international travel by civil servants. These will operate in line with the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA). Even better, if the Government takes on the proactive role of permanently retiring offsets that it purchases, then I think the world, the Earth in particular, will be much better off.
Mr Kwek Hian Chuan Henry (Kebun Baru): Chairman, during last year's debate, I spoke about the importance of Singapore building a world-class carbon trading ecosystem so that we can use high-quality carbon offsets to help us exceed our NDC.
I also recently spoke about the importance of promoting carbon accounting/auditing services, as well as the importance of influencing the direction of global regulations. As such, I commend Singapore's new net-zero ambitions and our efforts to shape Article 6 of the Paris Agreement.
Can MSE explain on the specifics on how these globally traded carbon credits can help us reach net-zero? I also hope that we can, if we use globally traded carbon credits, source for credits from many, rather than a few countries, because sourcing diversity also builds resilience for Singapore.
Also, I hope carbon credits will supplement, rather than replace our local efforts to improve energy efficiency, import and generate green energy, and adopt mitigation technology, such as Carbon Capture and Sequestration. So, in sum, can MSE share more about our thoughts on how to best balance Singapore-based efforts versus the purchase of overseas carbon credits?
Mr Don Wee: Chairman, Singapore needs to set up an appropriate carbon price mechanism to internalise the emissions cost and incentivise reductions effectively while ensuring we do not impose unbearable burdens upon our enterprises and households. Would the Government elaborate on how the revised carbon tax level and any potential increments will support our green transition and what is the expected impact on households and businesses?
The Chairman: Mr Gan Thiam Poh. Both your cuts together, please.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, Singapore’s carbon tax will be progressively increased to reach S$50 to S$80 per tonne of emissions by 2030, so that we will meet our new target of reaching net-zero by or around 2050. Would the Ministry elaborate on how the revised carbon tax levels and trajectory will support our objective of becoming a green economy?
We are faced with overall rising costs due to the pressures of the pandemic and other crises. In the midst of this, we have begun to transit to use more clean and alternate energy. How would the Government help to minimise the impact of the carbon tax on consumers, especially those in the middle- and lower-income groups?
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang: Sir, currently, carbon tax applies only to facilities emitting at least 25 kilo-tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent a year. This covers around 50 facilities that contribute to about 80% of our total carbon emissions. We should aim for a higher coverage.
I understand that the Government sets a high threshold to limit compliance costs by smaller emitters. But smaller emitters, those emitting at least two kilo-tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, are already “reportable facilities” and have to pay the costs of monitoring and measuring their emissions.
Given that any additional compliance costs would likely be minimal, it makes sense for the carbon tax to cover all reportable facilities. This would, after all, be in the spirit of a whole-of-nation fight against climate change. Emitters, small and large, have a role to play.
Will the Government expand coverage of the carbon tax to include all reportable facilities?
The Chairman: Ms Poh Li San. Both cuts, please.
Ms Poh Li San: Mr Chairman, the Singapore Green Plan 2030 was greatly welcomed when it was launched last year. With the national agenda on sustainability set out, it creates a clear framework to rally a whole-of-nation movement. Can the Government provide an update on our progress thus far for the Green Plan and what are the additional programmes and goals?
Considering the impact of the pandemic, are we still on track to reach the targets of the five pillars of the Green Plan – City in Nature, Energy Reset, Sustainable Living, Green Economy and Resilient Future? For example, are labour shortages delaying the development of new parks, greener buildings and the goal of producing locally 30% of our national nutritional needs by 2030?
How successful have we been in getting green investments and green jobs? Have Singaporeans managed to conserve more water and electricity in the past year?
Research and development hold the key to our green aspirations. How would the Government direct its R&D funding to achieve Singapore Green Plan outcomes? Are we attracting and nurturing enough talents in green and sustainability engineering, R&D and related technological explorations?
What impact has our R&D investments into sustainability and climate resilience projects made? How will we encourage more Singaporeans to take up deeper research in this field as a career?
In 2020, about 52% of the 5.88 million tonnes of solid waste generated were recycled. The rest were incinerated and sent to our only landfill – Semakau Island Landfill. At the current rate of waste incineration, it is expected to be full by 2035. We must expedite measures to reduce waste in the next few years.
Will the Ministry consider more drastic measures, such as higher fees or fines, to reduce waste generation? What are the Ministry’s plans after this date? Will it extend the lifespan of Semakau Landfill?
NEA has been administering the $45 million Closing the Resource Loop funding initiative on sustainable resource recovery solutions. Are there any updates on the progress of this initiative?
Mr Gan Thiam Poh: Chairman, to build a low carbon future, we do need to invest in R&D projects to address our special needs and requirements. How will the Government direct its R&D funding to achieve the Singapore Green Plan outcomes? Which are the areas with the best growth and development potential and how will the Ministry support them?
Miss Rachel Ong (West Coast): Chairman, the Singapore Green Plan 2030 was launched in 2020 with a slew of ambitious targets across the five pillars. More recently, in his Budget 2022 speech, Finance Minister Lawrence Wong committed to raising our goal of achieving net-zero emissions by or around mid-century and increasing our carbon tax rate with a view to reaching $50 to $80 per tonne by 2030. This is most encouraging. May I ask the Government to provide an update on the progress of the Green Plan since 2020?
In light of Singapore’s increased ambitions, as announced in Budget 2022, and also inputs from the Members from the two Motions on Sustainability this and last year, whether the Government is making any adjustments to our Green Plan targets to match this increased ambition.
The Chairman: Prof Koh Lian Pin. Please take your three cuts together.
Prof Koh Lian Pin: Thank you, Chairman. The Government has made commendable efforts in engaging the public on the Singapore Green Plan 2030 and Budget 2022 and has continually encouraged public participation through public consultations. Will the participating Ministries in the upcoming Green Plan conversations consider putting in place guidelines and protocols for greater accountability and transparency in the engagement process, including releasing post-engagement reports of key insights to the public? Furthermore, it is laudable that the Ministries have conducted online public consultations on issues, such as the future of Dover Forest and the proposal for retailers to charge for plastic bags. However, the length of time allocated for seeking public feedback often varies between consultations for different issues, ranging from several weeks to months. Has the Ministry canvassed feedback from the participants of these consultations and the public to better assess the most appropriate length of time for conducting public consultations? Will the Ministry consider ways of ensuring sufficient time be allocated for future public consultations for the public to be more fully aware of issues and to provide even more valuable comments?
In December 2020, the Government announced its Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2025 Plan (RIE2025), amounting to $25 billion allocated for the period 2021 to 2025. One of RIE2025's key focus areas is urban solutions and sustainability, which will address challenges in sustainability and climate resilience. The Government also mentioned that we will allocate $5.2 billion under RIE2025 to scale up innovation and enterprise platforms, including those seeking to facilitate research and technology translation. How does the Government intend to direct its funding under the USS domain to achieve Singapore Green Plan 2030 outcomes and to scale up innovation and enterprise to unlock green growth opportunities? Does the Government have any early examples of the returns on our R&D investments into sustainability and climate resilience for Singapore? Third cut.
Given the revised carbon tax trajectory in Budget 2022, we can expect more Singapore-based companies to tap into funds, such as the Energy Efficiency Fund, to improve energy efficiency of their operations as part of their decarbonisation journey. How much of this fund has been dispersed so far and, of which, how much has been resourced from our carbon tax revenue? Additionally, does the Ministry have any early examples to share regarding the impact of the E2F since its inception?
The Chairman: Ms Hany Soh, both your cuts, please.
Ms Hany Soh: How can communities and individuals continue to participate in the national movement to secure a greener future for Singapore?
The SG Eco Fund was launched in November 2020 and aims to support projects that advance environmental sustainability and involve the community. What is the progress of the SG Eco Fund so far?
The Woodgrove community is one of the beneficiaries of this wonderful initiative. Its community partner, the Singapore Institute of Building Limited (SIBL) has successfully applied for the SG Eco Fund, intending to raise awareness on environmental issues and encourage more residents to adopt an eco-friendly lifestyle through community, education programmes, sustainable markets along with an app with interactive games.
Workshops will also be conducted with the support of our Woodgrove's green taskforce involving residents and volunteers to share useful tips to practise the 5Rs – refuse, reduce, repair, reuse and recycle – and to empower residents with the knowledge to conserve water and energy as well as to reduce food waste.
Looking at the list of the SG Eco Fund awardees, many of them have interesting and practical ideas. Moving forward, I would like to ask if MSE would consider remodeling the SG Eco Fund concept so that more constituencies and divisions can consider applying for the grant to adopt ideas that have proven successful in other divisions.
Apart from the finances, there is also a need to look into improving the existing infrastructures in our community so that individuals and the community are able to practise green living, such as building more community gardens and setting up more recycling bins catering to different recycling purposes.
Many of my Woodgrove residents have shared that the present design of the blue recycling bin poses many challenges to recycle effectively. Are there plans to roll out new types of recycling bins to replace the existing blue bins? Rather than providing one bulk container for people to dispose all types of their recyclables and waste, can the Ministry consider and introduce more innovative solutions to encourage single-type recyclables?
Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin: Chairman, with $50 million set aside in total, the SG Eco Fund has had two grant calls so far, awarding almost $4 million to 79 projects – no small amount to show our commitment to the environment. These funds have supported a wide range of projects from community-based scavenger hunts to a freshwater mangrove wetland development project, among many others.
As we approach nine months since the results of the first grant call, I would like to ask what is the progress of the SG Eco Fund so far?
Given the wide-ranging sizes and types of projects which it has supported, what environmental and community outcomes does the SG Eco Fund track to ensure that the projects are achieving their goals and do these contribute towards our national targets and Green Plan?
Further, how can the SG Eco Fund better reach out to the community and are there ways for the Eco Fund to collaborate with the private sector for catalytic and sustainable funding as well as capacity building?
Mr Don Wee: Chairman, the Government had earmarked Choa Chu Kang, Nee Soon and Tampines as eco towns. Residents can expect transformations which will enhance their built environments so that they will be more green, sustainable and liveable for residents.
For example, hawker centres will aim for zero waste by composting food scraps. In addition, these towns will be able to track their energy consumption, water usage, carbon emissions and their progress in recycling. Can the Ministry provide an update on what has been implemented so far and what future developments can be expected?
Will new waste disposal methods, such as a pneumatic waste conveyance system (PWCS), be introduced in these towns? How about the installation of more energy-efficient light bulbs and solar panels? Will there be incentives for more rooftops to be converted to urban farming? Will the Ministry facilitate community collaborations for recycling projects and electricity and water conservation drives?
Mr Leon Perera (Aljunied): Mr Chairman, Sir, heat inequality is an issue I spoke on in last year's climate Motion in Parliament. The number of very hot days where the real feel temperature, considering humidity, exceeds 40 degrees has increased by about eight times since the 1950s to over 80 days each year now. The situation is serious.
The Government mentioned one year ago that it is working on an urban heat impact mitigation action plan. I would like to ask the Minister for an update and propose that the action plan consider lower-income groups and blue collar workers, including migrant workers.
Firstly, on prioritising low-income groups. The cheapest air conditioners cost about 60 cents per hour for electricity. So, many less well-off residents head to air conditioned spaces like malls and libraries, which are important for the hottest days in the year. There is not always space at the library though.
From what I understand, the Green Towns Programme does not prioritise vulnerable neighbourhoods. Can we quickly provide good stopgap measures for such vulnerable areas? We already know where the warmest areas in Singapore are through Landsat thermal images and these places often have high concentrations of HDB rental blocks. We could focus our OneMillionTrees project on areas where vulnerable people live.
We also have a programme providing vouchers for households to buy high-efficiency appliances like fridges but can we extend this to include fans and include more households? Moreover, can we look into including living space temperature requirements under the building control regulations?
I would also like to ask what are the Government's targets to retrofit all estates to deal with the urban heat island effect?
Next, on blue collar workers. Blue collar workers face the short end of the stick. For shift workers, it can be really hot sleeping during the day. This reduces sleep quality and quantity, which have an impact on workplace safety. Studies show that driving on low-quality sleep can be as dangerous as drink-driving.
With migrant workers, many have spoken about why they choose to sleep on the floor or on hard boards without bedding. The heat can be unbearable because, very often, you have 16 workers in a room and many dormitories have metal roofing and walls.
NEA recently released a Good Environmental Health Practices statement. However, there are no legally binding measures regarding heat management. With the MOM employers' guide for domestic workers, there is no definition for \"adequate ventilation\".
In 2017, one of our non-governmental organisations (NGOs) even reported that a domestic worker was made to sleep on the balcony. Of course, most employers put in effort to ensure workers have decent living conditions but let us work towards stricter binding guidelines so that no worker is left behind.
Ms Janet Ang (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, executing on our Singapore Green Plan (SGP) 2030 is an imperative, whether it is all of us using less plastic bags or NUS researchers finding ways to store CO2 below ocean floor. Like the COVID-19 pandemic, no country is spared, no business can ignore, no individual can hide. We need the collective will of all of humanity to heal the earth for which we are all stewards of.
In this Committee of Supply, I would like to touch on the following points.
One, at the company level, our businesses need to be brought up to speed on the what and the how of sustainability and they need help to assess their gaps and develop the plans that will take them to net zero. The SGP 2030 vision is a great rallying cry. How successful has our engagement of businesses and the public been and what are the next steps being taken?
Next, at the supply chain level. The national Chambers are reiterating the importance for local companies to step up and embrace sustainability practices and standards urgently to better support their multinational companies (MNCs) partners based in Singapore. The race to create competitive green supply chains to stay relevant in the global economy and win is fast and furious.
How are we planning to create competitive green supply chains out of Singapore?
At a country level, our trusted status as a financial hub land ourselves as a potential key player in carbon trading. Besides that, Singapore is also blessed with: (a) having the world's busiest container transshipment port with a global network of more than 50 locations in 26 countries around the world; and (b) our Changi Airport, albeit pre-COVID-19, being the most internationally connected airport in Asia Pacific and among the top 10 air mega hubs in the world, according to OAG.
How can Singapore businesses leverage these two crown jewels to play the bigger game in this world of green and sustainable?
Next, financial support for green transition is critical for businesses as they map out their net zero plans. How will the Ministry ensure a robust financing ecosystem will be in place to support the industry, especially the SMEs?
More assistance schemes may be needed to catalyse the SMEs with specific actions. Switching their fleet of vehicles to electric vehicles (EVs) will be a good first step but SMEs must not be mistaken that they can get to net zero without changing their processes and greening their supply chains.
Can the Government consider providing targeted tax incentives or rebates to SMEs as a measure of their progress in their sustainability adoption? In fact, if players in the supply chain collaborate through research to innovate and partner each other and the Government to achieve progressive outcomes, the Government can provide more tax incentives.
The sustainability agenda will require leadership and talent with new skills and expertise and the collective will to act.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extension of a Sitting","subTitle":"Business motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Pursuant to Standing Order No 91(3)(d), I propose to extend the time of this day's Committee sitting for a period of up to 30 minutes. Ms Jessica Tan.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head L (Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment)","subTitle":"Creating an inclusive and sustainable home","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: If you would like to take your both cuts together, please do.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): Thank you, Mr Chairman. Budget 2022 has outlined Singapore's ambitious plan to achieve net zero emissions by 2050 or around 2050. To achieve this goal, there will need to be an accelerated pace of transition. The green economy announced last year as Singapore's Green Plan 2030 sets out Singapore's objective of sustainability as a new engine of opportunity and growth for Singapore and investments to be carbon efficient.
What is the Government doing to enable R&D to grow the capabilities of our industries to develop low-carbon alternative such as hydrogen and to advance other low-carbon sustainable technology and solutions?
What support and investments has Singapore made and will make to support the growth of businesses in the green economy in areas such as green ICT, carbon services and trading hub and goods and services related to low-carbon project development, project financing, trading, consultancy and measurement, reporting and verification? My next cut.
Mr Chairman, becoming more sustainable is not just about compliance for businesses. While companies will need to be able to address compliance, which often relates to regulations on emission, waste management, energy efficiency and labour practices, compliance also concerns investors' and consumers' decisions. Hence, businesses need to understand the benefits, competitive advantage and growth opportunities of being a sustainable business.
With the unpredictability and instability in energy cost and supply, there is also direct business benefits of reduced cost for businesses to be more energy efficient and in having more sustainable operations.
But we know that to become greener and more sustainable does not just happen. Businesses need funding but also much more.
Companies will have to understand and track the impact of their business on the environment. Businesses need to also review and relook at how they produce their goods and deliver services, their supply chains to reduce waste and impact on the environment. This will require new skills and know-how as well as new systems and tools to manage.
What are the Government's key efforts to support businesses to transition and to capture value in the green transition? What is the Government doing to enable businesses to adopt more sustainable operations and develop sustainability as a competitive edge?
The Chairman: Ms Mariam Jaafar. Please take both your cuts together.
Ms Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Chairman, in past speeches, I have called for Singapore to have a higher ambition, leading the way to a green future in spite of our size. To do this, our local industry must innovate and invest in a green transition. But uncertainty over costs, benefits and risks will influence incentives to make the move.
Each sector has a different emissions profile, transition readiness, industry structure and willingness of the end customer to pay. The increase in carbon taxes may compel companies to move, though it must be implemented in just transition. The Government is also exploring and putting in more regulations and standards and benchmarks.
What else can the Government do to encourage local companies to invest, perhaps, ahead of the market?
One key lever is green public procurement. Globally, public sector procurement activities are directly or indirectly responsible for 15% of global greenhouse gas emissions – seven times the amount emitted by the entire aviation industry. They are also heavily concentrated in six industries: defence and security, transportation, waste management services, construction, industrial products and utilities. And often account for a large share of their suppliers' revenues.
Using this buying power, green public procurement can be a major boost for the green economy. Government can set standards for products, services and project activities, certify companies and materials for sustainability, giving extra points for suppliers that are \"greener\". However, public procurement is complex and highly decentralised and there are competing priorities and socioeconomic considerations.
For example, does HDB prioritise going for the fastest, cheapest way to get a lot of flats out or go for green buildings that have lower embedded emissions and reduce controllable lifecycle emissions? These are complex questions but ones which we must take a position and communicate effectively to all stakeholders as part of the green public procurement transformation.
Other levers for the Government include funding and incentives for innovation and R&D in transformative new technologies, working with industry coalitions to promote decarbonisation across the value chains, upgrading and making available climate and sustainability data and analytics systems, providing incentives for market adoption such as low interest loans and tax credits and boosting understanding expertise and capabilities through education and reskilling programs, the subject of my next cut.
We can also invest in relatable and inspiring public education campaigns to educate Singaporeans on the choices they make. For the right portfolio of measures and pace of implementation, we will need to understand trade-offs, consider cross-sector impact and socioeconomic impact.
How will the Government support local companies that innovate and invest in a green transition ahead of the market? What is the Government doing to activate the market demand and willingness to pay, including among end consumers?
Chairman, I filed the cut but I do not have to write my own speech here as the hon member Koh Lian Pin has very succinctly made the points in his Budget speech.
In a green economy, every worker must have basic and foundational knowledge of climate sustainability alongside functional specific skills and sector‐specific competencies to enable a successful transition of key industries towards sustainable business models and practices. Our IHLs can play a key role in building these capabilities and competencies.
I echo his views. What is the Government doing to reskill and upskill employers, employees and students for managing and capturing value in the green economy?
The Chairman: Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad, would you like to report progress?
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply Reporting Progress","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Deputy Leader of the House (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Chairman, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow?
The Chairman: I give my consent.
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That progress is reported now and leave be asked to sit again tomorrow.\" – [Mr Zaqy Mohamad] (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2022/2023, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.
Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it. Deputy Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn to 10.30 am tomorrow.\" – [Mr Zaqy Mohamad]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at 7.35 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Enforcement Measures for Breach of HDB's Lease Agreement","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"10 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry is reviewing the measures that can be taken to enforce a breach of a covenant of the Memorandum of Lease to HDB's lease agreement; and (b) whether a tiered penalty system can be incorporated.
Mr Desmond Lee: The covenants of the Memorandum of Lease generally set out the acts and uses that are not permitted in HDB flats, in order to maintain a high-quality living environment for all residents. We are not currently reviewing measures that can be taken to enforce a breach of the lease covenants.
Where there is feedback of a possible breach, HDB will conduct investigations where necessary. In cases where an egregious breach has been committed and there is failure to rectify the breach despite warnings, HDB can consider compulsorily acquiring the flat. HDB exercises this right only as a last resort as compulsory acquisition is a harsh measure that is not undertaken lightly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number and Actions Taken for Animal Hoarding Cases","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"11 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for National Development (a) in the past five years, what is the annual number of cases reported on animal hoarding; (b) what action is taken against the hoarders, broken down by the number of animals involved; (c) under what circumstances can the authorities rescue these animals; (d) whether the Ministry will consider legal or regulatory action to strengthen such powers of rescue; and (e) what is being done to deter animal hoarding and prevent relapses.
Mr Desmond Lee: From 2017 to 2021, NParks received a total of 67 cases of feedback related to the hoarding of animals in residences. Of these, NParks took enforcement action in six cases, where there were animal health and welfare concerns. Enforcement actions range from issuing letters of warning, composition fines, and prosecution in court. A majority of these cases involved cats.
NParks works closely with other agencies to tackle the issue of animal hoarding in residences. For cases where there are animal health and welfare concerns, NParks considers factors such as the quality of care provided to the animals, and their living conditions, in determining the enforcement actions to take. NParks also partners stakeholders such as animal welfare groups, and pet owners, to re-home these animals where necessary.
In cases where the resident is found to have suspected mental health issues or socio-emotional needs that could have led to animal hoarding behaviour, NParks will take a multi-agency approach and work with community partners, such as the Agency for Integrated Care and Social Service Agencies to support the resident as appropriate. In such cases, we need strong support from the resident’s family and community for the interventions to be successful.
Beyond regulation and enforcement, NParks works closely with its partners to raise public awareness on responsible pet ownership and animal care through various platforms such as Pets’ Day Out events and webinars. NParks will continue to review its measures to ensure they remain effective in safeguarding animal health and welfare.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Variations to Existing Waste Management Contracts under Government Entities to Factor in Progressive Wage Model","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"12 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Finance (a) what is the number of existing waste management contracts under Government Procurement Entities (GPEs) that will expire beyond 2024; (b) whether an advisory will be issued to these GPEs to allow a contract variation with their waste management service providers to factor in cost increases due to the Progressive Wage Model (PWM); and (c) if not, what recourse is available to these service providers who have signed their contracts before the announcement of the PWM and unable to continue providing the service.
Mr Lawrence Wong: The National Environment Agency has six existing contracts with Public Waste Collectors which provide services across the whole of Singapore. These contracts will expire after 2024. These contracts make up over 90% of Government’s waste management contracts by value. In addition, there are over 100 smaller contracts for general waste management services by various Government agencies, which will mostly end by 2024.
The Tripartite Cluster for Waste Management, comprising representatives from employers, unions, Government agencies and service buyers, had decided to implement the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) for the waste management sector from 1 July 2023, allowing a lead time of about 1.5 years from its announcement. Contracts made after the announcement will factor in the impact of PWM.
To support employers in uplifting lower-wage workers, the Government has introduced the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme from 2022 to 2026. This transitional support will help to cushion the increase in PWM wages in the waste management sector for existing contracts, while employers work towards factoring wage increases in their new contracts.
MOF will work with MSE to issue an advisory to Government agencies on the appropriate treatment for their existing contracts with waste management service providers. For contracts made before the announcement of the PWM, agencies may consider contract variations with their service providers if there is justification to do so or mutually agree to terminate the contract to pave the way for a new tender to be called. This way, we work together to ensure that the PWM is implemented smoothly for our waste management contracts.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Study to Enhance Case Management System by State Courts to Capture and Track Data on Types of Harassment Filed Under Protection from Harassment Act 2014","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Law whether there is an update on the study to enhance the case management system by the State Courts to capture and track data on the types of harassment filed under the Protection from Harassment Act 2014, broken down into categories such as sexual and workplace harassment, online harassment and harassment by neighbours.
Mr K Shanmugam: The specialist Protection from Harassment Court was operationalised on 1 June 2021. With this, the State Courts have also enhanced their case management system to capture and track data on the following types of harassment: (a) sexual harassment; (b) workplace harassment; (c) cyber-bullying; (d) doxxing; and (e) harassment by debt collectors, moneylenders, or creditors.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Potential Impact on Singapore's Investments and Essential Imports from Escalation of Tension in Ukraine and Neighbouring Regions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in view of the escalation of tension and the situation in Ukraine and the neighbouring regions (a) what is the potential impact on Singapore's investments in Ukraine and the region; and (b) what are the measures taken to alleviate the impact of any potential disruption to essential supplies from the region due to the situation.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Government is closely monitoring the rapidly evolving situation in Ukraine. The immediate and direct impact on our economy and firms has been manageable, for now. Singapore companies have a limited presence in Ukraine, and we do not import many essential supplies from Ukraine and the region.
However, the longer-term and indirect impact of the Ukraine conflict on Singapore will be significant. One key area we will be significantly impacted by is energy cost, as we import most of our energy needs. We have already seen a spike in the global prices of oil and natural gas, which Russia is a major exporter of. The crisis will also further strain global supply chains, as Russia and Ukraine are major exporters of commodities such as wheat, and metals like nickel and palladium. Supply disruptions for these commodities will raise the prices of goods that use these commodities as intermediate input. For example, a global disruption in the supply of nickel could affect the production of stainless steel, which is used in the manufacturing and construction sectors. Disruptions to palladium supply will affect the semiconductor industry, and consequently the wider technology goods market. We are working with our key companies to review their business continuity plans, to minimise disruptions to their business operations.
Singapore has adopted a multi-pronged strategy to manage supply chain risks, especially for essential goods, which we had enhanced during the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes diversifying our imports, stockpiling and producing locally where viable, as well as working with major importers and retailers to ramp up supply from alternative sources if necessary. Support measures have been announced at the Budget to help our businesses and households. We will continue to monitor the situation closely and if necessary, introduce additional measures to help them cope with the challenges.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Improve Commuters' Satisfaction with Bus and MRT Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"3 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Transport in view of the dip in satisfaction with public transport services last year compared to 2020, what are the plans by the Ministry to improve commuters' satisfaction with bus and MRT services.
Mr S Iswaran: We are committed to providing safe, reliable and accessible public transport services. That is why we closely track a range of indicators to benchmark the quality of our public transport services.
To give us a broader sense of commuter satisfaction trends, we look at a range of annual surveys conducted by various organisations. In that regard, while the Public Transport Customer Satisfaction Survey (PTCSS) indicated a decrease in satisfaction levels, the Singapore Management University's Customer Satisfaction Index of Singapore for the Land Transport sector found that satisfaction with public transport in 2021 held steady compared to 2020. It is also noteworthy that in the PTCSS that showed a decrease, more than nine out of every 10 respondents were satisfied with our public transport system. Nevertheless, we take every survey result seriously, and study them to identify areas for improvement.
In the case of the PTCSS, the survey coincided with the period of the Delta wave when bus service frequencies had to be adjusted due to a spike in COVID-19 cases within the community that affected our bus captain workforce. We recognise that these service adjustments may have caused inconveniences to commuters, but they were part of our ongoing work with public transport operators to refine and strengthen their contingency plans.
Apart from customer satisfaction surveys, we also track performance indicators such as the Mean Kilometres Between Failure (MKBF) which is a key indicator of rail reliability. In this regard, we have continued to maintain world-class rail services, with our MRT system sustaining a MKBF above one million train kilometres since 2019.
Ultimately, a first-class public transport system depends on the quality and commitment of our public transport workers, and protecting their welfare is a key priority. Hence, even at the height of the disruption to bus services during the Delta wave, we wanted to ensure that our bus captains had sufficient time for rest even if it meant longer waiting times for commuters. As the manpower manning situation improved, we also prioritised our bus captains for their booster shots while progressively restoring headways for bus services.
Last, but not least, commuters can look forward to even more convenient and accessible public transport journeys in the coming decade as we significantly expand our rail network from 245 kilometres (km) today to 360 km in 2030. The progressive opening of the remaining stages of the Thomson-East Coast Line, Circle Line Stage 6, as well as the new Jurong Region Line and Cross Island Line, will shorten commuting times and bring us closer to achieving our goal of a resilient, inclusive and sustainable land transport system.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Streaming of Students at Primary 3 or 4","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Education whether primary school students are streamed into different classes when they are in Primary 3 or Primary 4.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: Primary schools allocate students to Primary 3 classes to ensure a good mix of gender, race and learning ability. This creates a rich learning environment for students to learn holistically, enhance their socio-emotional competencies and broaden their perspectives. Class allocations are maintained from Primary 3 to Primary 4, to provide stability and continuity in teacher-student relationships. This enables teachers to strengthen pastoral care for students and better cater for individual student's development.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Withdrawal of Reservation to Article 25(e) of UN Convention on Rights of Persons with Disabilities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Leon Perera asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Government intends to withdraw its reservation to Article 25(e) of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which recognises that Persons with Disabilities (PWDs) have the right to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of health without discrimination on the basis of disability; and (b) if so, what is the date for the withdrawal.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Singapore supports the principle of non-discriminatory treatment towards persons with disabilities. When Singapore intends to sign to any UN conventions or laws we intend to comply and must therefore prepare stakeholders for them. In this case the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) has been formulating guidelines on fair practices towards all customers, including those with disabilities, and intends to embark on public consultations on these guidelines by the second half of 2022. Following the issuance of the guidelines, Singapore intends to withdraw the reservation to Article 25(e) of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":4996,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Zaqy Mohamad","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-7 Mar 2022 - SMS Zaqy - Reply to MOM Cuts.pdf","fileName":"7 Mar 2022 - SMS Zaqy - Reply to MOM Cuts.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4997,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Gan Siow Huang","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-Gan Siow Huang MOM 7Mar 2022 -Chinese (mom).pdf","fileName":"Gan Siow Huang MOM 7Mar 2022 -Chinese (mom).pdf"},{"vernacularID":4998,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Tan Yia Swam","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-Tan Yia Swam MOE 7Mar2022-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Tan Yia Swam MOE 7Mar2022-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":4999,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Hazel Poa","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-Hazel Poa MOE 7Mar2022 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Hazel Poa MOE 7Mar2022 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5000,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Mohamad Maliki Bin Osman","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-7 Mar 2022 - Min Maliki Osman - Reply to MOE Cuts.pdf","fileName":"7 Mar 2022 - Min Maliki Osman - Reply to MOE Cuts.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5001,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Gan Siow Huang","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-Gan Siow Huang MOE 7Mar 2022 -Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Gan Siow Huang MOE 7Mar 2022 -Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5002,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Sun Xueling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-Sun Xueling MOE 7Mar2022-Chinese.pdf","fileName":"Sun Xueling MOE 7Mar2022-Chinese.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5006,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Raj Joshua Thomas","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-7 Mar 2022 - Mr Raj Joshua Thomas- MSE Cut.pdf","fileName":"7 Mar 2022 - Mr Raj Joshua Thomas- MSE Cut.pdf"},{"vernacularID":5007,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-Grace Fu MSE 7Mar2022-Chinese（mse).pdf","fileName":"Grace Fu MSE 7Mar2022-Chinese（mse).pdf"},{"vernacularID":5008,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Dr Amy Khor Lean Suan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-Amy Khor MSE 7Mar2022-Chinese (mse).pdf","fileName":"Amy Khor MSE 7Mar2022-Chinese (mse).pdf"},{"vernacularID":5009,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Desmond Tan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20220307/vernacular-Desmond Tan MSE 7Mar2022-Chinese (mse).pdf","fileName":"Desmond Tan MSE 7Mar2022-Chinese (mse).pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}