[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [3rd Allotted Day]. (proc text)]
[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply – Head K (Ministry of Education)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Madam, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated to Head K of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\"
Madam, I believe that everyone, regardless of their age, income, connections or ability, deserves equal access to an excellent education. Singapore's education system is said by many to be one of the best in the world. Many countries look at us with envy. However, we are not perfect and we face our own giants.
I would like to use the language of Finance Minister Heng Swee Keat's \"Budget speak\" and share on three areas: (a) addressing near-term concerns in education; (b) future-proofing the education industry; and (c) educating for a caring and resilient society.
First, addressing near-term concerns. At a recent Meet-the-People session, a couple with three children asked me to appeal for more childcare subsidies for her younger ones. When I asked for more details, they shared that they are paying more than $500 for their eldest, a Secondary 1 student, for tuition. The tuition fee is more than 10% of their household income. Tuition is, indeed, too prevalent to ignore. It is still thriving as a shadow education industry.
And as though the $1-billion academic tuition industry needs another boost, another form of tuition for Direct School Admissions (DSA) has arisen. It was reported that there are tutors who can help pupils build DSA portfolios at the rate of up to $300 per hour.
The Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) cut-off points for entry into secondary schools of one's choice are a key performance indicator (KPI) for not only many students, but also their parents and school educators.
Some educators feel that the education rat race has begun even before one enters Primary 1. Others fear that meritocracy is at risk of losing its place as a social leveller as those in the higher-income groups self-perpetuate themselves. Woe be the day when a child's postal code determines his destiny.
Then, for those who learn differently, whether in special or mainstream schools, including the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), quality of support is still inconsistent. Education excellence for this group of learners is still an aspiration.
But all is not lost. As a member of the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Education for many years, I know that the Ministry has been diligently confronting these mountains. They and many other Singaporeans know we must level the playing field so that every child has the opportunity to excel.
In January this year, I had spoken at length about the unhealthy trends of our preoccupation with academic success; \"parentocracy\" and the physical segregation of students based on their learning abilities.
I had also given several suggestions, including removing the high-stakes PSLE at the age of 12, but retaining the rigour of academic learning; and a review of the current model of sorting students into geographically different physical schools which may not reflect the microcosm of society.
It leaves me to seek an update from the Minister on how he intends to:
One, further level the playing field for students of lower socio-economic backgrounds.
Two, use technology to empower students, families and educators to access the best education practices and resources in content, pedagogy and assessment.
Three, review the PSLE, the Gifted Education Programme (GEP) and DSA systems and reduce the obsession with academic scores and perceived \"elite\" schools.
And four, provide better support to those with special needs in special schools and mainstream schools, including IHLs.
Next, I want to touch upon future-proofing the education industry. Madam, we have heard how the world has changed and how technology and disintermediation – the removal of the middleman – disrupt the jobs of not manufacturing but also service industries, such as in journalism, travel, real estate and retail.
Our education sector is not immune to the fast-changing world that Budget 2016 has warned us about. The need to fend off disruptive advances, move from value-adding to value-creation, getting into the Internet of Things are, I believe, as real in the not-for-profit education landscape as it is in the business sector.
How do we future-proof our education system? Surely, there is a similar need for the Ministry of Education (MOE), like the rest of Singapore's key industries, to develop an industry future-proof transformation plan to look into deepening innovation capabilities and to help our people adjust and seize new opportunities.
SkillsFuture was the first salvo to future-proof our nation. It represents a strategic and new look at how Singapore looks at schooling and learning – instead of a paper chase – and skills mastery, lifelong and self-driven learning.
Minister Heng has announced a SkillsFuture or a future-ready toolkit that will be available from Primary 5. What about for our educators and parents? How about learners who continue to learn long after their traditional school exit at the age of 18 or 21? How can the current schools, including special schools and IHLs, be relevant to all of them?
Besides doing things to our students, we should work with partners to develop an Education Sectoral Manpower Plan. Resources ought to be invested heavily in developing the future-ready mindsets and skillsets of educators and parents. Lead by example. That is for SkillsFuture.
Next, to future-proof our education sector, I feel there is the need to speed up the application of technology to bring excellence to many more. Besides its plan to launch an online learning space for its students, can MOE build an open-source platform to allow participants to develop, evaluate and contribute education ware?
Madam, I also believe that MOE needs to assemble a team to study the potential disruptions in the education model we are used to in this country.
Some of us have heard of The Independent Project where United States (US) high school students are allowed to start a mini school for themselves. But that is at the extreme.
Across the world, there are dream-school projects which are collaborations with researchers and innovative businesses, born out of a need for more effective and future-ready models for content, delivery and assessment.
MOE should give space to develop dream-school projects that can address current hot buttons and further future-proof ourselves.
Lastly, on education for a caring and resilient society. I commend MOE’s recent plans to have all students clean up their school on a daily basis. I also support its plan to build resilience in our youths through its National Outdoor Adventure Education Masterplan.
The goal of an excellent education must be the character of a person and must be based on a few key principles.
One, that values are caught, not taught. Students gather their morals and values from their experiences.
Two, that seeing is believing; and the modelling of the significant adults in a student's life is worth many lectures on good character. As Ralph Waldo Emerson puts it, \"Your actions speak so loudly I cannot hear what you are saying\".
Three, that serving others must be the rent one pays for being here on earth, and to whom much is given, much is also expected.
There are so many ways by which the education sector can contribute to the making of a caring and resilient society. Ad hoc or piecemeal efforts bear little impact either for the giver or the receiver. One of the ways is to adopt a targeted approach to adopt causes on a committed basis and serve those who need a leg up.
One, develop academic and non-academic support schemes so that those who are stronger in some areas can buddy and coach those who are less so.
Two, encourage graduates to make use of their school holidays or gap years to serve students at risk, localising the \"Teach for America\" model that is quite well-known to suit our specific local needs.
Third, go for bolder and more audacious initiatives, such as co-locating and co-running special schools within mainstream school compounds.
Four, help address key painpoints in society that are often talked about and not easily resolved, such as the homeless, the karang guni peddlers, families with members with rare diseases or other severe disabilities.
In conclusion, Madam, MOE is one of our largest Government agencies. As the captain of the education industry, it has to not only address its near-term challenges but also envision and transform itself to be a key game changer so that Singapore will be future-proof and will be here for many more 50 years to come.
Antoine de Saint-Exupery, the author of the classic \"The Little Prince\", was believed to have said, \"If you want to build a ship, don't herd people together to collect wood and assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them first to yearn for the endless immensity of the sea.\" I look forward to both yearning for the sea and building a ship with the Ministry and my fellow Singaporeans. [Applause.]
The Chairman: Dr Intan, you have two cuts. Please take them together.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): Madam, over the years, our education system has evolved from survival to efficiency, to being ability-driven in terms of strategies, approaches and expected outcomes. We are now promulgating multiple pathways to diverse peaks of excellence in our education system. In our bid to make our education system more diverse and holistic, we have to include more co-curricular activities (CCAs), outdoor learning, the creative arts and community involvement in our school curriculum.
I laud the move to recognise students' involvement in clubs, societies, sports, music and drama as part of the formal school curriculum, hence, placing such involvement as CCAs, rather than what was previously known as extra-curricular activities. This is good because values, such as resilience, sportsmanship, having the spirit of teamwork and developing one's leadership skills, can be honed.
However, currently, students' involvement in CCAs depends a lot on their ability in a particular interest group. For instance, before a student is able to join the school's netball or football team, the student has to undergo trials to see if they are good enough to be part of the school team.
The purpose of CCAs is to allow more of our students to have a more balanced and holistic education in schools. But having trials to see how good they are before they are allowed to be part of a particular sport or ensemble unnecessarily restricts participation and does not allow late bloomers the space to blossom. I would propose that our schools expand their CCA intakes to take in different tiers of student abilities. For example, a school can have a Tier 1 netball team to compete in national schools' competitions and a Tier 2 netball team to train students in the sport or even have friendly matches with other schools' Tier 2 teams.
In addition, the integration of outdoor learning and creative arts in our main school curriculum will strengthen learning and personal development of our students in schools. Schools in countries, such as Finland, have incorporated outdoor learning in their curriculum where students learn map reading and trekking and put the knowledge learnt in Mathematics, Geography and Physics into practice; while schools in Australia have incorporated creative arts in their curriculum where students learn to appreciate music, visual arts, drama and dance and apply the knowledge learnt in English, Literature and Physical Education. I would even propose that appreciation of music, dance and culture of the different ethnicities in Singapore be included in our creative arts curriculum.
Being involved in the community through projects and outreach programmes helps foster values, such as empathy, caring for others and magnanimity. I hope the Ministry will continue to build on our Values in Action programme and grant sufficient space for our students to design and implement their own community outreach projects so that they are able to learn and internalise these values in a more authentic manner.
On inclusivity, the new PSLE scoring system that was first announced by the Prime Minister at the National Day Rally in 2013 is a strong signal to parents, teachers and students of our move away from chasing the last point for the PSLE aggregate score. This chase, in turn, affects admission to secondary schools, particularly those that are more popular than others and where the school cut-off points can be rather high.
As a result of such keen competition to gain admission to these popular schools, many students depend on the DSA to leverage their other talents, such as in sports, music, dance or specific academic subjects. There are students who may not have met these popular schools' cut-off points for PSLE but have talents in other areas. There have been some concerns that popular schools which admit students through DSA in non-academic areas may end up having these students under-performing or doing poorly in national examinations, hence, affecting the schools' overall performance.
I can understand that some popular schools are proud of their traditions and would like to retain a certain standard of excellence among their students. However, excellence cannot just mean achievement in academics. Excellence must be holistic and include those in sports, the arts, music and community work and volunteerism. I would like to urge the Ministry to continue to allow popular schools to admit students who have talents that are non-academic in nature. The diversity in student population created would then be more representative of the larger community where different abilities exist and where the environment is not so exclusive.
Similarly, I would also like to urge the Ministry to help the less popular schools attract a more diverse student population, such as those who have talents in both the non-academic and academic arenas, by allowing these schools greater flexibility and autonomy to admit more students through DSA.
As schools strive to create greater diversity among students and provide multiple pathways of excellence for them to pursue their interests and abilities in, there must also be efforts to ensure that our schools are a lot more inclusive. I have two suggestions.
One, as the PSLE grading system will be tweaked, I call on the Ministry, once again, to consider abolishing the academic streams. Sorting our students according to academic streams has served its purpose during our efficiency-driven education era. But now, as we try to move away from putting too much emphasis on scores and instead allow students to learn different subjects at different levels of difficulty, according to their abilities, let us go one step further and remove these self-limiting but no longer necessary labelling which we call Gifted, Special, Express, Normal (Academic) or Normal (Technical) streams.
Let us recognise that students develop differently and at different rates. We have already allowed subject-based banding and allowed students in the current Normal (Academic) stream to take some Express stream subjects because they are able, for instance. Let us now be bold enough to remove the labels entirely and yet continue allowing our students to learn different subjects at different levels of difficulty according to their abilities and progress.
Second, in our bid to make our schools more inclusive, I would urge the Ministry to include more students with special needs in our mainstream schools, as long as they are able to cope with the rigour and expectations of the curriculum. There are Allied Educators for Learning and Behavioural Support or AED(LBS) who can help students with special needs in the classroom. Although we have AED(LBS) in all our primary schools, it is not quite so for our secondary schools. I would like to see all of our mainstream schools having AED(LBS) so that students with special needs can enrol in any of our mainstream schools.
To mitigate the challenge of not being able to employ enough AED(LBS), I hope the Ministry would consider my earlier suggestion to train suitable parent volunteers to take on this role. I envision our schools to be a lot more inclusive, being a microcosm of our society, where various abilities and disabilities exist together, and where our students learn to work together and help one another with compassion and magnanimity.
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): The Ministry has taken steps to reduce competition in PSLE scores. We stopped announcing the top PSLE scorers since 2012 and stopped revealing the highest and lowest scores in a cohort.
Despite these changes, the PSLE remains a high-stakes examination for 12-year-olds. Without T-scores, children and parents will still be in a race to achieve the \"best\" grade bands to secure a place in the \"good\" schools. Even the DSA Exercise has just been an entry route for students who have had the resources or opportunity to be developed in certain areas of sports or arts. At the end of the day, children are still pushed to compete against others, if not in academics, then in sports or arts.
Competition is a fact of life, and we do our children a disservice if we do not prepare them for it. But we also need them to appreciate that human beings cannot be measured like the weight of fish or the height of trees. And our children need to develop in a less stressful and competitive way.
MOE is developing diverse programmes in schools to meet the needs of different children. This is an encouraging development, but how will this be aligned with the review of the PSLE system? Will school admissions still be based on how well the children perform academically or in that area of specialisation, or more based on whether the child's interest and aptitude match the school's programme? How can we improve our PSLE system of grading and make it less stressful, broader and free up more time and space for them to pursue other interests outside of academics?
Finally, we recently introduced SkillsFuture initiatives, such as the Earn and Learn programme for polytechnic and the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) graduates, recognising that students can take a longer or different pathway to their respective careers. This is a positive step. Can the Minister tell us how we can carry this through to primary school so that it is not necessary to just \"cram\" at the PSLE level and make it a must to get into that one good school?
Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Mdm Chair, the seven neighbourhood schools that received no Secondary 1 posting from this year were attributed to the following cohort size. Indeed, the 2015 cohort of 38,600 Secondary 1 students is about 10% lower than the previous year. However, if MOE were to divide the 2015 cohort size by the number of secondary schools, it can easily fill all schools, including these seven schools, with at least five to six classes of 40 students each. Thus, the reality is that all schools are created not equal, as popular schools will continue to attract more students at the expense of neighbourhood schools. These call into question the mantra that every school is a good school.
The mad rush to become a parent volunteer, join the Residents’ Committee or even relocate just to secure a better chance in the balloting exercise for admission into popular schools for their children has become a stressful ritual for parents year after year. So, in the minds of parents, every school is definitely not the same. But what do teachers and principals think? I am sure when teachers and principals come together, the issue of funding for their schools will surface somewhere down their conversation. It is my belief that MOE must walk the talk that every school is, indeed a good school by addressing the funding issues first.
In a reply to my Parliamentary Question on funding for schools, the Minister said it is not meaningful to compare funding per school but rather we should look at the per capita funding per student. Madam, I believe comparing funding for schools is meaningful because we are talking about every school is a good school at the school level. So, while we know that every student can be a good student because they are given the same per capita funding, I am not sure if every school can be a good school in the context of funding at the school level.
Popular schools with higher enrolment numbers, by default, will have more budget to work with. This, in my opinion, creates an unlevel playing field for less popular schools. I shall confine my speech to primary education to illustrate this point.
Let us compare Rosyth Primary School with an enrolment of 2,000 students with Bendemeer Primary School with an enrolment of 1,200 students. Based on per capita funding per primary school, Rosyth Primary School is effectively receiving $7.8 million more than Bendemeer Primary School every year. This disparity is significant and needs to be addressed because smaller schools will always face a budget constraint by default. This disparity will perpetuate year after year as popular schools with bigger budgets will be able to do more for their students, and at a lower cost due to economies of scale.
And when schools churn out even more top students, it will be a hard sell to tell parents that every school is a good school because neighbourhood schools will be shrinking in size and disappearing over time.
Madam, we are living in a social media world. We do not need the mainstream media to publicise anything anymore. The popular schools will get more popular through the grapevine. Does the Minister not agree that it makes a world of difference for principals and teachers of smaller neighbourhood schools to have a comparable amount of funding as those popular schools to run their programmes each year?
For a less popular school with a smaller cohort, the extra funding will come in handy to compensate for the lower economies of scale in the procurement of products and services for their students. These schools will also be able to do more in sports and enrichment programmes which, I strongly believe, are important activities for small neighbourhood schools to build character and instil a sense of belonging and pride in their students. I urge the Ministry to release such funding data so that all stakeholders can have a meaningful discussion over this mantra that every school is a good school.
Next, I wish to suggest a fundamental change to the Secondary 1 posting in the context of every school is a good school. I propose that graduating students finishing in the top tier of their primary school based on PSLE results, to be given direct admission to a secondary school of their choice. Currently, primary schools are already recognising their top PSLE students. So, the chances of top students from neighbourhood primary schools going to popular schools like Dunman High, Hwa Chong or Raffles Institution are no lesser than their peers from popular primary schools now and still based on merit at the school level.
This will ensure a good mix and spread of students from all spectrum of primary school going into secondary school. This will also prevent elitism from entrenching itself in the feeding primary school and the popular secondary school. This new posting exercise will make every primary school a good school, as the top graduating student in each school will have a direct entry to a school of their choice. For parents who want their children to attend a popular secondary school, every primary school is a good school to start the journey now.
Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Non-Constituency Member): Madam, in financial year (FY)2013, the per capita funding per student for secondary schools was $11,400 and, for independent schools, it was $14,100. That is a 24% disparity. In FY2015, the disparity decreased to about 10%. This is a step in the right direction. But the Ministry needs to commit to 100% equitable funding for all schools.
Equitable funding means levelling the playing field for neighbourhood schools so that they will have additional funds to invest in varied arts, sports and enrichment programmes. This will help develop students more holistically and improve the overall quality of schools. Currently, neighbourhood schools have less disposable funds than independent schools, putting them at a distinct disadvantage.
The Ministry has a long-standing position that schools are resourced on a needs-basis, depending on programmes offered and the enrolment of the school. I have two concerns on this.
One, if a neighbourhood school has lesser funding to begin with, how can the school even start to invest in, say, a niche elective in the first place, to justify for additional funding?
Two, neighbourhood schools do not enjoy the privileges of independent schools like higher school fees and a wealthy alumni. How does the Ministry take this into account in schools' funding criteria to ensure fairness?
As we see more schools merge due to lower enrolment, it is a good opportunity for the Ministry to redistribute funding across neighbourhood schools to equalise this disparity.
Yes, resources may only be a part of the solution, but it is, nonetheless a basic and critical component. I believe that equitable funding is a realistic and worthwhile objective that the Ministry should seriously consider. Improvements have been made in recent years. It is possible.
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Madam, first allow me to declare that I have a child who is receiving education in a private institution.
Madam, the Ministry has put in place good and comprehensive financial schemes and funds to assist Singaporean students from needy and lower-income families who are receiving their education at Government-funded institutions. These schemes and the relevant awards are significant in motivating students who display excellence and commitment during the course of their educational endeavours.
Members of this House would be familiar with some of these schemes. These include the Financial Assistance Scheme, EduSave scheme and the Opportunity Fund scheme. In their respective ways, these schemes go a long way in helping and supporting needy students in their educational, enrichment and personal pursuits.
The Ministry took a big step forward by extending EduSave contributions to all Singaporean students. Upon deliberation and discussion, the national examination fee waiver was also extended to all Singaporean students in 2015.
It is in this spirit of lending a helping hand to our children and fostering their respective development, where every child is an invaluable asset to the future of this country, that we should further assess the feasibility of extending all MOE assistance schemes, awards and funds to all eligible Singaporean students, including those who are receiving their education in private institutions.
As a Ministry that is tasked to nurture the holistic development of every precious Singaporean son and daughter, the extension of its schemes to all eligible Singaporean students, regardless of their choice of school, is a bold act of inclusivity that will motivate our children to aim for the horizon and pursue the rainbow before them. Let us partner our children and lead them down the many unknowns in their educational life with anticipation, hope and joy.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin (Nominated Member): We communicate our intentions in three ways: through what we say, what we do and what we reward. And each form of communication is more important than the last, and people always listen to rewards the most. No matter what you say, they will take what you reward as the truth of what you really want. So, if we care about priming our kids in the habits needed for innovation and collaboration later, we have to build in the reward of those behaviours into the school system now.
Change across the board is hard. So, I was wondering if MOE could consider collaborating with researchers and just one or two progressive primary schools to prototype a solution trying out these two interventions.
First, redesign report cards. They tell us plenty about our priorities. MOE has eight stated outcomes of what a kid should have achieved by Primary 6, including great things like: (a) they know their strengths; (b) they have a lively curiosity about things; and (c) they cooperate, share and care for others. But because every primary school still dedicates the biggest real estate on report cards to subject grades, every stakeholder gets the message that these outcomes do not really matter.
If these behaviours are not tracked or rewarded on a report card, it is not going to happen systematically; just accidentally. You can hear few parents freaking out about their child not \"knowing their strengths\" or stressing about Ah-Boy's lack of \"curiosity\", even though that is actually more indicative of future success. So, I suggest we give significant space on report cards to non-academic indicators closely linked to our strategic outcomes of innovation and collaboration.
Second, develop a homework policy. Progressive American schools have done this. Principals can collaborate with researchers and staff to develop a policy that grounds everyone in a common agreement on what productive, purposeful homework looks. Homework also comes with clearly marked learning objectives to prevent miscommunication. A succinct and specific set of standards less than a page long makes clear to all stakeholders from the start what to expect from the school in terms of ideology, quantity and quality of assignments.
For instance, a school that believes in family-friendly homework policy could say something upfront like \"In here, our Primary 1s get three traditional academic assignments and two unconventional homework assignments that have academic and non-academic purposes\".
Differentiated homework policies can help schools build up distinctive cultures appealing to distinctive types of parents. So, I hope MOE can consider piloting a Mindful School strategy.
Mr Leon Perera (Non-Constituency Member): Mdm Chairperson, good KPIs make for good outcomes. The MOE KPIs in the 2016 Budget Book are still heavily skewed towards academic credentials, stressing the number of passes and so on. These are important but in the 21st century, we will increasingly need qualities like leadership, initiative, confidence, creativity, communication skills and altruism.
While we have stopped publishing PSLE top scorers and the like, I fear credentialism is still deeply entrenched among parents, teachers and students, and we need to break this self-reinforcing loop. For example, in Singapore, parent-teacher meetings (PTMs) often take the form of the teacher explaining the gaps in the child's performance without the child being present, with the view to the parent helping to remedy those gaps at home. Many of us are familiar with this. I do not blame our teachers at all for this. They are doing their jobs as defined by the system, and usually they are motivated by genuine care for their children.
But contrast this with the PTM held at one western international school here that I learned about. The PTM was run by the children themselves. It was the child who led the PTM by explaining to their own parents in front of the teacher what they have done that term, what they will try to do next term and so on, with the teacher's facilitation. Would this not be leadership? Would this not be confidence?
I suggest that MOE give some thought to designing and measuring KPIs for such softer but critical qualities. There are a number of international measures of such qualities that could be surveyed each year without recourse to mass standardised testing and which warrant further study by MOE.
One such KPI that I would like to suggest is the number of students' self-initiated projects which enjoy positive peer and teacher reviews and can sustain a critical mass of student participation, encouraging our students to initiate their own projects in an entrepreneurial way and breed these kinds of qualities.
Initiating one's project, like setting up a new club, a new sports activity, a charitable project, an informal business activity and so on, both reflects and nurtures just the kind of qualities that we need in the 21st century.
Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Madam, schools widely have encouraged the active participation in various CCAs in order to promote a more well-rounded and holistic education. We believe CCAs inculcate values, such as perseverance, and help students develop transferable skills in organising, planning, self-discipline and other areas. CCAs also foster integration and deepen the students' sense of belonging and responsibility towards the community.
However, CCAs may have increasingly become more exclusive in two respects: the cost of taking part in them and the push for deliverable results. There are stories of students turned away from certain CCAs because the students have no reasonable prospects of winning trophies for lack of prior training or natural ability. In fact, it appears that the further students progress in their education, the more difficult they find it to participate in CCAs and sports or in the performing arts. This is even more so if the CCA is known to be a niche CCA that the school is supposedly good at, where, presumably, you have more teachers and fellow students with much to share.
There are also stories of schools that have closed down popular CCAs because they have been unable to deliver quantifiable results. I would like to call on the Ministry to look into how CCA participation may be broadened and made less exclusive. CCA participation, I feel, should importantly be based on students' keen interest to take part, in addition to their demonstrated competency. Allowing students to follow their interest will keep them motivated to remain in the CCAs for the long term and reap the rich educational benefits that CCAs in schools have to offer.
The Chairman: Dr Lim Wee Kiak; not here. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh, you have two cuts, please take them together.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Thank you, Madam. Mdm Chair, no matter how meritocratic our education system is, no matter how well trained our teachers are, there will be inequality in two areas. There will be students coming from underprivileged backgrounds who will need closer attention and motivation, and there are teachers who are, by nature, more caring and motivated to go the extra mile to change the lives of their students.
I ask that the Ministry consider establishing a \"Teach for Singapore\" programme to match exceptionally motivated teachers to underprivileged students. This will be modelled after the US' \"Teach for America\" and the United Kingdom's (UK's) \"Teach First Programmes\", both of which have good track records in improving educational outcomes for underprivileged students. We should, of course, make specific adaptations to the Singapore context.
Practising teachers could apply to join \"Teach for Singapore\", with a select group chosen each year to train in a one-year diploma programme in counselling, cultural sensitivity and teaching for social mobility. Graduates could then be deployed as \"Teach for Singapore\" fellows for three years to schools with a high number of students on financial assistance.
\"Teach for Singapore\" alumni are then free to develop their teaching career. The aim is to create a national core of dedicated alumni who will continue to inspire and improve one another through conferences, courses and retreats. This will seed and grow the pursuit for education and equality and social mobility among our teachers as well as close the school quality gap.
Mdm Chair, the average class sizes at primary and lower secondary levels in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries are 21 and 24 respectively, while MOE's planning parameters are for 30 students per class at lower primary and 40 at upper primary and secondary levels. Only in GEP are class sizes kept at 25 to promote better teacher-student engagement. I understand that the pupil-teacher ratios for primary and secondary schools are equivalent to OECD averages. But teachers in Singapore are deployed to provide support and extra classes for low-progress students rather than to reduce class sizes. However, reducing class sizes will remove the need to provide these extra remedial classes, which reinforce the stressful tuition culture in schools.
Nothing beats the close attention paid to students by the primary teacher in class and only a smaller class size can facilitate this. In line with falling student enrolment numbers and instead of closing down schools and merging them, I ask the Minister to again consider reducing class sizes to the OECD and GEP equivalent.
Mr Png Eng Huat: Madam, we have spent the first 50 years of our nationhood trying to clean up the country in every sense of the word. I must say we are making some progress, albeit not to the level of civic consciousness like in Japan or Switzerland.
We all know we need to cultivate a mindset of civic consciousness and we need to start young. We all know that but, for some reason, these mindsets get reset rather easily each time we are out in the public. We are taught to clear our own trays from preschool to university, in the army camp and at home, and yet we have so much problem doing that in our hawker centre, food court and even in this Parliament, Madam. I always wonder what is impeding our effort to become a gracious society after 50 years of nationhood. Perhaps, we need to refocus, reset and redouble our effort to achieve that in the next chapter of our history.
Last year, I urged the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources to bring back the spirit of the Keep Singapore Clean campaign. This Committee of Supply (COS), I would like to urge MOE to plant the seeds of civic consciousness into our young again.
We not only need to teach our young about ownership and responsibility, we also need to make them appreciate how hard our cleaners are working every day, and that keeping Singapore clean is not just the job of the cleaners but everyone else's responsibility as well.
Madam, after 50 years of nationhood, we need to make civic consciousness a way of life soon. It has to begin at home and in the school. We have to constantly work to get the mindset right in our young, so that they will lend themselves readily to acts of kindness, volunteer work and philanthropy for the betterment of society when they grow up.
While I urge parents to do their part at home, I urge our schools to teach our children well, so that, together, we can make civic consciousness a way of life.
Mr Kok Heng Leun (Nominated Member): Madam, I would like to continue my call for \"small acts of repair\" in my previous speech. Specifically, I am proposing for a focus on emotional and critical learning in children and young people, where responses to issues of loss and changes in life are addressed.
In my encounters working as an educator with children, youths and adults, many have been scarred by deep-seated emotional issues, such as loss, for example, when a child has to part with a long-familiar domestic helper at the end of her contract or when a pet dies or when a child's precious toy is thrown away without his or her knowledge or consent.
There are also cases of more extreme losses and adjustments for the young: when they leave their friends in school and move on; when family members pass away; when their school or classmates die suddenly in accidents or even suicides. It pains us greatly, as adults, to see young people struggle in such circumstances.
What we cannot prevent, we should prevail, we should overcome. The pain and burden of a child in school should be carried by more than just the child. A caring society should begin with a humane school environment, one that places value on compassion as much as competition, and goodwill as much as grades. Emotional upheavals should not be dismissed as personal failure, as if those who go through pain somehow deserve it because they had not done enough to prevent it.
Minister Shanmugam shared about the difficulty of getting whole families to participate in the rehabilitative process when they face problems. Imagine how many more unknown problems exist out there, with families unwilling to speak of their pain, let alone seek help.
In this context, I would like to advocate for schools to take on a proactive role in preparing young people to deal with emotional distress.
Firstly, literature. My predecessor, Nominated Member of Parliament for the arts, Ms Janice Koh, had spoken passionately about the importance of literature. Allow me to quote from an article by Keith Oatley, Professor Emeritus of cognitive psychology at the University of Toronto:
\"The process of entering imagined worlds of fiction builds empathy and improves your ability to take another person's point of view. It can even change your personality...The emotional empathy that is critical to our day-to-day relationships also enables us to picture ourselves living as the characters do when we read fiction.\"
I would like to suggest that reading sessions become part of our primary and secondary schools' core curriculum and not merely an exercise within the English class. Led by facilitators with strategies, reading sessions can help students access the lives of characters and understand their deeper emotions. In this way, the students can better deal with similar issues that they may be facing.
Secondly, Character and Citizenship Education (CCE). Firstly, I would like to commend MOE in their recent revamp of the pedagogical approach to CCE. Here, I would like to suggest the topic of loss be included in the syllabus at all levels. The content can be scaffolded. For primary school students, we can use relatable stories, like taking care of pets, to examine issues of loss. For higher levels, we can tackle more complex situations. However, the approach must be nuanced. Students have to be guided in the process. And I would think that experiential learning would be a good strategy. Experiential learning builds within the body a memory that does not forget easily and help the students to cope. It is like riding a bicycle. You cannot intellectually learn how to ride a bicycle; you have to go on it, fall. But after a while, you realise that even if you do not ride a bicycle, you will still remember how to do it because your body recalls it for you.
Thirdly, the teachers. To deal with the issues in the classroom may sound very daunting. As it is, the teachers are already swamped with work. I hope that more teachers can be employed, specifically trained to manage these areas of teaching, where a lighter touch is needed and where a safe environment is crucial. Schools may already have existing counsellors. But these operations often appear to be detached from the daily grind of school life – as if being in touch with a counsellor is a sign of weakness or, worse, a taboo. Imagine then if such teacher-counsellors are part and parcel of school life. Imagine if a child can ask questions about algebra and fractions in one class, and then talk about the pain of losing her favourite cat minutes later. The message is simple: we care about you and not just how well you do.
These are some of my suggestions which I hope MOE, in partnership with the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) and the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), will consider. I believe that a multi-agency approach is required to effect this change in our social, familial and education systems. Some may think that my proposals would mean that parents are excused from their responsibilities. I would, however, like to suggest a paradigm shift: let us begin work on the young, so that as they grow in their ability to handle change and loss, they, in turn, can be the living examples that their children can learn from. Would this not be groundbreaking, effective and empowering?
As I speak, I remember this young adolescent whom I taught, who cuts himself to stop his girlfriend from cutting herself also. The best story was his mother left home when he was very young. His father never explained to him why he had to go through this. He is living through the pain and, now, he does not want his girlfriend to go.
The philosopher Arthur Schopenhaur said: mostly, it is loss which teaches us the worth of things.
Miss Cheng Li Hui (Tampines): Madam, cybercrimes and online scams have been on the rise and it is not surprising with the majority of Singaporeans accessing the Internet every day across different platforms.
According to the \"Annual Survey on Infocomm Usage in Households and by Individuals 2014\", 54% of our children aged between seven and 14, and 92% of our young aged 15 to 24 use portable infocomm equipment to connect to the Internet wirelessly.
While they are tech-savvy, they may or may not be Internet-savvy. They are comfortable navigating the Internet and may forget there are real dangers lurking in cyberspace which they have to guard and protect themselves against. Cyberbullying, online predators and online scams are just some of the dangers that youths face.
Some people believe that it is the parents' duty to protect their children from online threats. While this may be true, it is difficult for parents to monitor and control the online behaviour of their children. Parents are often less tech-savvy than their children.
We have to equip our children and youths with the skills to navigate the Internet safely and to differentiate between fact and fiction, outdated news and incorrect sources.
Hence, may I ask the Ministry for an update on the Cyber Wellness programmes in our schools and whether they also include IHLs? Would the Ministry also share what other initiatives will be implemented to promote cyber safety?
The Chairman: Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak (Sembawang): Chairman, it is a well-known fact that students learn and develop at different rates and different pace at different periods of their lives. Some are fast learners during the early years and plateau as they grow older while some are late bloomers. MOE has set the noble mission of inculcating learning for mastery, learning throughout life and learning for life.
In our very fast-paced formal education system, how does the proposed learning for mastery fit in? For some students who may need more time to master their subjects, they will lag behind their peers if insufficient time is given to achieve mastery. They may pass the tests and exams with just above 50 marks and get promoted to next level. When they reach the next level, the difficulty level of the subject is going to be raised another notch. Since they did not have a chance to master the subject, their weak foundation will give way and they may lose interest in learning the subject.
I am concerned with under-performing students, in particular, those from low-income families. Not every home is able to offer a conducive environment to study, especially for those in rental flats where space is limited and those from dysfunctional families. Poverty becomes a vicious cycle and social mobility is hindered. Some students fall into bad company when they get discouraged by their poor performance and there is no one at home to supervise them. There are teachers who would stay back after school on their own accord and at their own expense. This is very commendable. Nevertheless, we cannot expect every teacher to do so, because of the heavy workload.
I hope that there is more assistance from the self-help groups which offer student care services at subsidised rates. They are planning to join hands to run as many as 30 centres. I am concerned whether they have enough resources. Does the Ministry have any plan to support them? What is the Ministry doing to track these weaker students and their progress and give them more support? What is being done to help those whose parents cannot afford tuition? Is there an early warning system so that the Ministry can intervene when a weak student is spotted?
Mr Chen Show Mao: Madam, the great harm done to our bodies by the unchecked consumption of refined sugar and other types of sugar is increasingly clear. Research has also shown that eating habits and food preferences are acquired when young and are more difficult to change after adolescence. Our schools, therefore, have an important role to play to help foster healthy eating habits and food preferences in young Singaporeans.
I wish to commend MOE and the Health Promotion Board (HPB) for their efforts in the area, resulting in the \"Healthy Meals in Schools\" programme in 2016. I would like to learn about other proposed efforts in the area and look forward to the testing of innovative policy solutions in this area, perhaps developed in partnership with the private and people sectors. I hope these will enable the Ministry and HPB to further cut down the amount of sugar allowed in the food and drinks sold in our schools, be they juice, carbonated, or other types of drinks, for the further promotion of health among our school children.
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Mdm Chairperson, the need to build and strengthen family-school-community partnerships is now recognised as essential towards helping students achieve at their maximum potential. Many schools now realise that the job of educating students cannot be achieved by their efforts alone. Rather, it requires a collaborative effort with families, communities and other stakeholders.
In most of our schools, there is some measure of parent and community involvement and it is usually directed and guided by the schools, with the main focus being on fundraising initiatives, volunteering and supporting school activities. However, moving forward, I feel community partnership should go beyond such traditional engagement and be expanded to involve families and the broader community in decision-making and school governance.
When schools actively involve parents and engage community resources, they are able to respond more effectively to the learning needs and create an environment conducive to the general well-being of the students.
As Stephen Covey said \"Synergy catalyses, unifies and unleashes the greatest power within people\". Hence, I would like to know whether MOE has plans to give more support to the schools to strengthen partnerships of schools with parents and the community.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Mdm Chair, many studies have suggested that young children of school-going age ought to get adequate rest every day. To do so, they should not have to wake up very early in the morning and then make their way to school which may be 30-45 minutes away from home.
Our current primary school registration system does not give priority purely based on proximity to schools. Several other factors are considered like whether a sibling is at the same school, whether the parent is a former student or alumni from that school or whether the parents are linked to the school through a religious order, clan association or community leader.
I acknowledge the importance of each factor in wanting schools to have links to former students and to develop a school culture. These are important factors.
However, whatever reason a parent has for wanting a child to attend a particular primary school, it simply does not make sense for young six- or seven-year-old students to have to travel more than 20 minutes to attend their school.
I urge MOE to review the current primary school priority system. We should discourage parents living more than five kilometres away from the school from sending their child to the school and give greater priority to students living near the school. This way, the students benefit from having more time to sleep and not having to wake up at some unearthly hour.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar: The Compulsory Education Act implemented since 2003 has been instrumental in ensuring that our children have at least six years of primary education. Although the Act is in force and there are penalties under the Act to act as a deterrent, the responsibility of sending children to school for primary education and ensuring they remain in school during those six years still remains with the parents.
I support compulsory education as I believe our children need a solid educational foundation that is not just about gaining knowledge, but also includes social interaction and developing communication skills. However, I would like to propose that the Ministry consider extending compulsory education even earlier, to the preschool level.
Substantial research has shown that a child's learning ability is at its peak between the ages of two and five years. Their language ability increases manifold, moving from knowing about 50 words at the age of two, to at least 1,000 words by the age of five, when they learn to think, reason, read, count and identity colours, their body parts, the planets, the solar system, the different dinosaurs and just about every other category of objects.
They also develop their social and emotional intelligence during these crucial years and, by age five, they would have learnt how to make friends and remember their friends' names and birthdays.
Based on an earlier reply from MSF, the number of children of ages five to six who do not attend any form of preschool has declined from about 5% in 2006 to 0.8% in 2012 and, in 2015, this figure remains below 1%. This is encouraging as efforts to reach out to their families have shown success.
However, there is still the 1% or so, or around 250 children each year. For this group of children, they start Primary 1 without much preschool preparation and with what, I believe, to be insufficient optimum cognitive and socio-emotional development.
MOE has already embarked on providing preschool education and has established MOE Kindergartens which now number about 15 centres around the island. Accessibility and affordability to preschool education would not be a prohibitive factor for parents not to send their children to preschool. I would propose that MOE look into bringing forward compulsory education to before Primary 1. It would be ideal to start compulsory education at the Kindergarten 1 (K1) level, but it would be good enough, for now, to begin compulsory education at the K2 level.
The intent is not to make it difficult for parents or to enforce the Compulsory Education Act on them. The intent is really to ensure that our children have an earlier start at developing cognitive, social and communication skills, and to give a boost to children from less privileged families to help them have a better start at primary school.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak: Mdm Chair, the schemes introduced in the Budget to support families with children are welcome measures and certainly encouraging to those who have just started a family. It would also encourage others to start a family in the near future as well. Nevertheless, parents in Singapore are rightfully very concerned about education opportunities for their children. Accessibility and affordability of related services, preschool education in particular, are the concerns of parents.
I have spoken, like many other Members in this House, on the importance of early childhood education on the overall development of our children and have appealed to the Government to put in more resources to enhance early childhood education as it is an important social leveller. I have also proposed that the Government build larger early childhood education centres similar to our primary schools instead of tucking them at void decks. Will MOE consider starting mega early childhood centres or kindergartens so that there are economies of scale and better career prospects for our early childhood educators? Can MOE consider using the premises of soon-to-be closed secondary schools to run this project?
In the past years, the Government has done quite a lot to enhance the quality of early childhood education, keep fees affordable and increase the number of early childhood education centres in Singapore. Early childhood educators are getting more relevant training as well as employment perks. But to create a children-friendly society that embraces the concept of families, we have to do more to enhance the quality of the centres that we have in Singapore now. Currently, there are 15 MOE-run kindergartens, including the new ones to be set up this year, as well as 169 run by partner operators. How adequate is the current supply of early childhood education centres in matching the demand? What are the plans in place to expand this network of early childhood education? We should consider investing in the training of early childhood educators and the pedagogy of doing so. We are dealing with the foundation years which are very important to our students.
Over the years, there has been an upward trend in the number of preschoolers diagnosed with developmental issues like speech and language delays, learning difficulties and autism spectrum disorders. How aware and well-prepared are our early childhood educators in identifying these problems to facilitate early diagnosis and intervention?
Many families have both parents who are working. They usually put their children in a full-day childcare centre or kindergarten. When the child enrols in a primary school, after-school care services are critical for this group. There seems to be a mismatch between full-day childcare and after-school care services. Can the Government do a more accurate projection of the demand for after-school care services in each estate by the number of children who are in full-day childcare?
A news report in 2014 revealed that the demand for vacancies in after-school care services was so overwhelming that in some primary schools, they are holding ballots to enrol their students in their student care services. Most parents prefer to put their children in after-school care services in the same primary school. Since all primary schools are going single session, can the Ministry put an after-school care service in all primary schools and cater to all students who need it?
The Ministry had announced plans to increase the number of student care centres to about 120 by 2015. Can the Minister update the House on the status of this programme? When can we see all our 190 primary schools having their student care centres? I hope MOE can ramp up the number of student care centres faster to cater for the demand to match MSF's rate of ramping up childcare centres.
The Chairman: Ms Chia Yong Yong, please take your two cuts together.
Ms Chia Yong Yong (Nominated Member): Thank you, Madam. The first cut on —
The Chairman: Sorry, Ms Chia. I think I have forgotten Mr Zainal Sapari. My apologies. Mr Zainal Sapari first.
Mr Zainal Sapari: Mdm Speaker, I support the call by Dr Intan Azura for compulsory education to be brought forward.
Bill Gates said, \"The first five years have so much to do with how the next 80 turns out.\" The importance of preschool education cannot be underestimated and, hence, we must make it a priority to invest in preschool education so that we open the doors of opportunity to every child and help them acquire the skills they need for a meaningful learning to realise their dreams.
Hence, I was heartened that MOE started piloting MOE Kindergartens (MKs) in 2014 to offer quality and affordable pre-school education, and there are now 15 such centres.
Compared to private preschool education, MOE has more resources to develop a comprehensive preschool curriculum. I would like MOE to provide an update on programmes and resources that will be made available to more pre-school centres to support them in building this strong foundation.
Will MOE develop a framework to share the expertise with private school operators? Such a framework to support private-school operators will level up standards to ensure quality preschool education will be accessible to all, just like general education in all our mainstream schools. It is my dream that any child can get the best quality preschool education, regardless of the fees that the parents are paying.
The Chairman: Ms Chia, please take your two cuts together.
Ms Chia Yong Yong: Thank you, Madam. The setting up of Disability Support Offices (DSOs) in 2014 in all publicly-funded tertiary institutions was a great step of facilitation for students with disabilities in such institutions.
In addition, Singaporean students with physical or sensory-related impairments who are in such tertiary institutions may tap upon the Special Education Needs (SEN) fund to purchase assistive technology devices and supporting services, such as signing interpretation and Braille printing.
Could the Minister let us know:
(a) the number of students who have received assistance from DSOs to date and the nature and outcome of such assistance;
(b) the number of students who have utilised the SEN fund and the average amount utilised;
(c) whether the Ministry is satisfied with the take-up rate; and
(d) what measures would the Ministry be taking to facilitate students taking up more of such services?
Currently, all primary schools are staffed with at least one AED(LBS) to support students with mild special educational needs (SENs).
As of July 2015, 81 secondary schools have each been resourced with one AED(LBS) to support students with mild SENs. About 10% to 20% of teachers in every mainstream school are trained to have a deeper knowledge and skills to support students with special needs. In addition, all newly-recruited allied educators are required to attend a one-year, full-time Diploma in Special Education Programme conducted by the National Institute of Education (NIE).
MOE is continuing to train teachers in special needs, and I thank the Ministry for that. The current training, unfortunately, is undertaken by individual schools on a request basis where special potential training providers submit training proposals.
Can I suggest that the Ministry consider, specifically approaching training providers for more efficiency and greater efficacy in outcome?
Mr Zainal Sapari: Mdm Chair, I am aware that MOE is supporting schools with special needs children through the deployment of Special Needs Officers (SNOs), but the support is insufficient. Hence, parents with special needs children would prefer their children to be in specialised schools where there is better support, but either there are no vacancies in those schools or the cost of putting their child in these specialised schools is too expensive as they may not be eligible for subsidies.
I would like MOE to consider improving the ratio of SNOs to the number of special needs children in schools. MOE should also consider having more special needs schools and providing more support for special needs children. Ideally, the school fees must be the same as those paid by students in mainstream schools.
Every parent wants the best for their child and I believe there is something that we can do as the Government to show that, indeed, we care for every Singaporean student.
The Chairman: Acting Minister Ng Chee Meng.
The Acting Minister for Education (Schools) (Mr Ng Chee Meng): Mdm Chair, I would like to thank all the Members for sharing their views and suggestions.
All of us value education, as individuals and also as a society. For individual students and families, it is a journey of hopes and aspirations, as well as anxieties. For the country, education is a strategic pillar of nation-building and economic and social development. It is important to take both perspectives as we evolve our education system with the changing times.
Today, I will be speaking about what we must do differently and how to make a paradigm shift away from an over-emphasis on academics, in order to better prepare our children and people for the future.
This is a significant shift for MOE, together with all our stakeholders. It will involve not just the schools, but also our IHLs, parents and our industry and community partners.
Minister Ong Ye Kung and I will talk about this shift today.
Many Members have spoken about global developments as well as changes in the local operating environment, such as our ageing population and shrinking workforce. These will impact Singapore, our security and economy. Challenges and uncertainties are unavoidable. But I believe we can be optimistic. With changes, there will also be new opportunities, such as the growth of frontier markets and disruptive innovations like robotics, 3D printing and the Internet of Things.
The Committee on the Future Economy (CFE) is looking at how Singapore can reframe the way we add value to the world and enable our people to be future-ready. MOE supports this effort closely in our schools and IHLs. Our education system must prepare our future generations to embrace this increasingly complex and dynamic world and preserve and strengthen the cohesiveness of our society.
This goes beyond providing our children with academic knowledge. It includes helping them to learn the right values and attitudes, and the broader attributes and competencies to navigate the demands of life and work. They will need to be adaptable and resilient to face uncertainties and change. Just as important, they must grow up with a heart for Singapore and fellow Singaporeans.
Hence, the education that we gift our children should be holistic. Every child should be provided with opportunities to discover and develop his or her strengths and interests in multiple domains. Every child should grow up a well-rounded individual, a lifelong learner who pursues mastery and fulfilment in a domain of his or her choice. I believe that this is the best way forward to prepare our young people and nation for the future.
To prepare our children for the future, we need a collective paradigm shift. Let me elaborate what this shift entails for MOE and schools and, just as importantly, what it means to parents and students.
Today, academic excellence is a hallmark of the Singapore education system. Our students rank highly in international benchmarking studies. We are recognised for the high standards that we have achieved. However, the focus of our education system should go beyond test scores. Currently, despite our efforts to move towards a holistic education, there is still a narrow emphasis on academics and paper qualifications. This is deeply ingrained in our culture, translated into the expectations of our children, parents and teachers. Eventually, this is perhaps even manifested in the employers’ mindsets at workplaces.
We need a better balance in our students' education journey. This means dialling back the excessive focus on academics. We need to free up time and space to nurture other dimensions that are just as important for our children's development. Let them not just study the flowers, but also stop to smell the flowers and wonder at their beauty. We want to cultivate a generation of young people who grow up with a sense of curiosity and a love for learning, asking both the \"whys\" and, sometimes, even the \"why-nots\".
But this would not be an easy or straightforward thing to do. As we often say, in education, it takes a village to raise a child, but that also means it takes the whole village to change the way we raise a child. MOE and our fraternity of educators have taken the lead and made improvements to policies, structures and processes over time. I thank Ms Denise Phua for her endorsements.
But policy changes can only go so far. This is not something that MOE can do unilaterally or from the top down.
We need a partnership with parents and the community to make this shift, and this will take time. Students, parents, educators and employers must come on board and adjust mindsets and behaviours as well, together with MOE.
On MOE's part, we will address this paradigm shift in three ways: one, we will put more emphasis on non-academic aspects of learning; two, we will reduce excessive focus on academic results; and three, we will offer more opportunities for different forms of merit and achievements to be recognised.
Let me explain the first point on placing more emphasis on non-academic learning.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar, Mr Seah Kian Peng, Mr Leon Perera and Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin touched on the importance of non-academic learning as part of holistic education. I agree fully that good character, socio-emotional competencies and other skills like critical thinking and effective communication are necessary foundations for work and life.
Schools leverage curricular and co-curricular programmes to design meaningful learning opportunities and provide students with regular feedback to help them develop in these non-academic aspects.
For example, subjects, such as design and technology and project work, provide avenues for students to develop creativity and innovation. Students also get opportunities to develop and apply leadership, initiative and collaboration through Values-in-Action (VIA) projects and CCAs.
I am glad to share that our schools regularly review the progress of our students and the effectiveness of all programmes in developing our students holistically, not just in their academics.
Ms Kuik spoke about redesigning student report cards to reflect non-academic attributes. In fact, this is already being done.
At the end of each school year, a Holistic Development Profile of each child is provided in the report card given to parents. Parents are able to see not just academic grades but also the student's participation and achievement in different school programmes as well as a description of the child's personal qualities, such as responsibility, teamwork and perseverance.
We are making progress towards holistic education, but this remains a journey.
I thank Dr Intan Mokhtar and Mr Chen Show Mao for bringing up the value of CCAs and values-in-action, or VIA.
Our students can discover their interests and develop their character and strengths through a range of CCAs and school programmes. All these are important educational goals. MOE encourages students to participate in CCAs, even if they do not represent their schools. We will strive towards this across schools, subject to limited school resources.
They are also given the flexibility to join various CCAs throughout their education journey, or take more than one CCA if they so wish, provided they can cope. Outdoor Education (OE) is another platform that provides rich learning experiences outside the classroom for building resilience, tenacity and ruggedness in our youth.
Since 2014, we have set aside formal curriculum time in all primary and secondary schools for OE as part of physical education (PE) lessons. School camps are another way of immersing our students in authentic and often challenging situations, where they need to work in teams and learn to take responsibility for decisions they make. These experiences develop a culture of self-reliance and mutual support with their peers.
On a recent camp visit, I met some Primary 5 students who were learning how to cook a simple meal outdoors with instant noodles. For some of them, it was the first time they had ever lit a matchstick.
On another occasion, I was told the story of a group of Secondary 1 students who boiled water in mess tins over an open fire to make hot chocolate. They shared that it was the most delicious hot chocolate that they had ever tasted, simply because they made it. I was heartened to see that even simple activities like these can help our children build a sense of independence and appreciation for daily comforts. Small as these examples may be, they are meaningful and much needed experiences.
Today, our students participate in about two or three school cohort camps at upper primary and secondary levels. Going forward, I am happy to announce that we will enhance the cohort camp experiences for all students as part of our National Outdoor Adventure Education Master Plan.
Over the next few years, we will progressively rejuvenate and upgrade camp facilities at our MOE Outdoor Adventure Learning Centres. We will offer new camp programmes and raise the competencies of camp facilitators.
The school cohort camps and OE in PE lessons will lead up to a five-day expedition-based camp for all Secondary 3 students held at the Outward Bound School (OBS) on Coney Island and Pulau Ubin. MOE will co-design the camp programme with OBS, pilot it with some schools starting in 2017 and roll it out across all schools from 2020. We are also partnering MCCY to build the new OBS campus on Coney Island. This camp provides a unique opportunity for students from different schools to collaborate and overcome challenges in the outdoors. Their common experience will contribute towards building a stronger Singaporean identity, a point raised by Mr Seah Kian Peng.
Under the National Outdoor Adventure Education Master Plan, MOE will also continue to partner outdoor adventure service providers to offer varied programmes to our schools, both locally and overseas. They have expertise that our schools can tap on. Together with OBS and other partners, MOE is committed to raising the quality and quantity of our outdoor adventure learning programmes for our students.
To date, many students have benefited from their OBS experience, including our Prime Minister, who shared on his Facebook page how OBS was a significant growing-up experience for him.
Michelle Chua is a Secondary 4 student from Jurongville Secondary School who also had a memorable OBS experience in Pulau Ubin.
She recounted how her team lost their way on the second day of a three-day land-trekking expedition. This set the team back by several hours, probably delaying their dinner time. Despite the hunger and exhaustion, the group of students encouraged one another and sang in unison to motivate one another on the way back. That night, when they arrived back at camp, they were last among all the teams. But they kept their spirits high and were unfazed by this setback. The next day, with better planning and teamwork to navigate and pace their trek, they came in first. Interestingly, it was not the victory that Michelle was most proud of; it was the comeback of the team and the \"can-do\" spirit that gave her the greatest sense of achievement. This is character-building.
Let me stress that the safety of our students remains paramount even as we enhance and expand OE. We have appointed an Advisory Panel for Outdoor Adventure Learning to help us raise the quality and safety of our outdoor adventure learning programmes, both locally and overseas. The panel will be chaired by Dr Tan Lai Yong, who is well-regarded for his work with the youths and community and who is currently Director for Outreach and Community Engagement at the College of Alice and Peter Tan at the National University of Singapore (NUS).
The second, and a very key part of the shift that we want to achieve, is to reduce excessive focus on academic results. Ms Denise Phua, Dr Intan Mokhtar and Mr Seah Kian Peng spoke on this, especially with regard to the PSLE.
Today, there is a deeply ingrained mindset that the PSLE is a very high-stakes exam. Many perceive that a child's PSLE T-score at the age of 12 determines his or her success and pathway in life. But we know that this is not true, from the many stories of many who have done well in life despite not having done so well in PSLE. What we observe is that a student's PSLE indicates the progress that a child has made in his or her learning in primary school, but it does not cast in stone what he or she can achieve in the future, in life.
Yet, such a mindset has persisted. And as a parent, I can empathise with that. It is easy to get fixated on what is measurable. We put a score on something and that makes it easy for us to compare with one another. But what is measurable, sometimes, may not be what is most important in the long run. Chasing after that last point in an exam could come at a cost to other aspects of our children's overall development, especially at a young age: too many anxious late nights, too much tuition and too little quality time for family and friends, for play and for exploration.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin raised concerns that the amount of homework that our children have is excessive. Given appropriately, homework reinforces students' learning, contributes to their progress and cultivates a healthy disposition towards learning. However, I agree that more is not always better, and the amount of homework has to be calibrated appropriately.
All our schools have put in place a homework policy and mechanisms to regulate, monitor and coordinate homework across departments and subjects.
People often draw comparisons between education and botany. I am not much of a gardener, but I did plant some green beans for a school project when I was a small boy. I remember waking up each morning, impatiently monitoring my glass jar day after day, waiting for the first shoot to sprout. I soon realised that over-watering my seedlings did not make them grow any faster. In fact, it stifled them. I believe our children, like young seedlings, ought to have time and space to breathe, learn and dream.
So, there is a need to reduce this over-emphasis on academic results. We have made several steps in this direction over the last few years. For example, in 2012, we stopped naming the top PSLE scorers. Today, we celebrate students' performance in all domains, across both academic and non-academic areas. But we can do more to change mind-sets and culture.
The Prime Minster had announced in 2013 that we would review the PSLE scoring system. I would like to share an update on this today.
The main issue to address is that the way we currently score PSLE is too precise and differentiates our students more finely than necessary. A student may score one point more than his friend at PSLE, but educationally, that one point does not mean that he is better prepared for secondary school than his friend. It also does not mean that he is very much smarter or will grow up to be more capable or lead a more successful or fulfilling life. We should therefore, in time, move away from such fine distinctions, which are not meaningful, especially at that young age.
The way that the T-score is calculated may have also created unhealthy competition among our young children. Because it is calculated based on how students do relative to one another, students may feel the pressure to do better than their peers rather than help one another out to learn. This runs counter to the values we want to inculcate in our children. We can find a better balance between encouraging our students to study hard and get good results, and making them overly-competitive and anxious about outdoing one another.
Our over-arching objective in the primary school years is to build strong foundations for learning in our children. After studying the issues carefully, we propose to make a few changes to the PSLE scoring system.
First, we will replace the PSLE T-Score with wider scoring bands, and the new system will be similar to the GCE \"O\" and \"A\" levels. Some broad level of differentiation is still needed to guide students to academic programmes that best suit their interests and strengths. But the scoring will be blunted to a large extent.
Also, similar to the \"O\" and \"A\" levels, we will move towards a scoring system that is more reflective of a student's learning and level of mastery. Once a student shows a level of understanding and ability that meets the professionally-set standard, he will receive the grade, regardless of how his peers may perform. This is more educationally meaningful than assessing a student's performance relative to his peers.
We know that there will be many questions about how these changes would impact secondary school posting. We intend to make some adjustments to the Secondary 1 posting system as well. It will still be a fair and transparent system based on academic merit.
With the move to broader PSLE scoring bands, students will be able to choose a school that is a good fit for them from a wider range of schools of a similar academic profile. In doing so, students can consider factors, such as the school's distinctive programmes, CCAs, and partnerships with the community and industry, and better match these factors with their interests.
These planned changes are significant. So, MOE will not rush the implementation. The current PSLE system is well-established and we must be fully ready before moving to the new system.
So, we will take the next few years to work through these changes carefully. We have already begun our journey of evolving our school landscape. We want to give all schools time to develop their distinctive strengths and niche programmes towards the vision of every school a good school. This remains important. Meanwhile, we will need to develop and test the new PSLE scoring and posting systems thoroughly. Most importantly, we want to give enough time and support for parents and students to understand and adjust, so that they are ready when the new system takes effect.
So, we are planning for the new PSLE scoring system to be put in place from 2021. This will start with the Primary 6 cohort of 2021, who are in Primary 1 this year. Details about the changes to PSLE scoring will be released in the next two to three months.
Over the next few months, MOE will be working closely with our school leaders and educators on the proposed changes. We will subsequently also engage parents and members of the public on these changes and provide an update at the COS debate in 2017.
The third part of this paradigm shift is to offer more opportunities for different expressions of merit and achievements, across all schools.
Academic merit continues to be important in secondary school posting, because our primary school students should be matched to secondary schools that would be a good fit for their aptitudes. However, there is scope for greater flexibility in how we recognise different forms of merit and achievements in the overall Secondary 1 posting system. We want to encourage students and parents to choose schools carefully, so that they can select a school which can best nurture their interests and strengths.
The DSA scheme was introduced back in 2004 for this very purpose. The intent of DSA is to open up opportunities for students to be recognised for a range of achievements and talents when seeking admission into secondary school. It also allows some flexibility on the school's part to admit students with specific aptitudes, so that the distinctive programmes offered by the school benefit the right profile of students.
The DSA scheme has benefited many students. I recently visited Admiralty Secondary School and met a Secondary 3 boy. His name is Jun Heng; he is somewhat of a shy and quiet boy. However, behind his soft-spoken demeanour, I discovered a bright young man full of passion for programming and robotics. There is a sparkle in his eyes when he speaks about robotics.
Jun Heng has had an interest in robotics since he joined his primary school's robotics club. He was so eager to pursue this further in secondary school that he applied through DSA to join Admiralty Secondary School, which has a well-known robotics enterprise programme and won many national and international competitions.
When I asked him why he likes robotics so much, he said, quite simply to me, \"Because there are no limits to what you can do\". That is what inspired me about Jun Heng's story. This young man makes his choices and takes concrete steps towards his dreams with conviction. I am very glad that he chose a school that is a great fit for him and I wish him all the very best.
There are many more students like Jun Heng who begin to discover their passions early, through their CCAs or activities. These can be further nurtured in secondary school.
By 2017, all our secondary schools will offer two distinctive programmes in various domains, through the Applied Learning Programme (ALP) and the Learning for Life Programme (LLP). With a more diverse and vibrant secondary school landscape, we want to enable more students to benefit from the DSA scheme and tap on the range of programmes our schools offer. This will complement the changes to the PSLE system.
Learning from more than a decade of implementing DSA, we know that many students have benefited from this opportunity. At the same time, there is some unevenness in how different schools select their DSA students.
It is timely, therefore, to take a step back and see how to realign the implementation of this scheme with its original policy intent. In this regard, MOE is undertaking a review of the DSA scheme, with two guiding principles.
First, we would like to expand opportunities in more secondary schools for students with specific aptitudes and talents to enter a school with distinctive programmes via DSA. This will provide students with more options when selecting a school that can best nurture their interests and talents.
Second, we would sharpen the focus of DSA to better recognise talents and achievements in specific domains, rather than general academic ability that can be demonstrated through the PSLE.
MOE will consider the views on DSA shared by Ms Denise Phua and Dr Intan, and we will share more details about the DSA review in due course.
In sum, with changes to the PSLE scoring system, DSA and a more variegated secondary school landscape, we will create more opportunities and choices for students at the Secondary 1 posting juncture.
I want to encourage all our students to consider carefully which secondary schools offer education pathways and opportunities that are best suited for you, based on your specific aptitudes and aspirations. Get to know your schools better, beyond their cut-off points. If you do not quite know what you want to do yet or are passionate about, that is okay, too.
Whichever school you choose to go, give yourself the time and space to explore different domains and learn new things. Enjoy the learning journey. MOE and our educators will be there to support you.
At the same time, we are committed to investing in all schools and providing the resources to develop our students holistically and fully.
Mr Png Eng Huat and Mr Dennis Tan asked about how we fund our schools equitably. MOE resources schools based on the needs of students, programmes offered by the schools and the enrolment of the schools.
Over the years, we have significantly increased funding for education across all levels and schools. In fact, where we could, within our limited resources, we have been more generous in allocating more for our mainstream schools.
Besides funding, we also ensure that our schools are adequately resourced with teachers to meet the needs of our students. We decided more than a decade ago to grow the teaching workforce. Over the past 10 years, the average pupil-teacher ratio (PTR) has improved from 23 to 16 for primary schools, and from 19 to 13 for secondary schools. I would like to highlight that PTR, an aggregate measure of our teaching force, is not the same as class size, which depends on how teachers are deployed in schools.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh enquired if we could reduce the class sizes in mainstream schools to the levels in OECD countries.
Rather than reducing class sizes across the board, we adopt the approach to deploy resources in a much more targeted way, to support areas of greater educational need. This allows our schools to implement appropriate intervention strategies and give individual attention to low-progress students and students with special learning needs.
For example, levelling up programmes are in smaller groups of about eight to 10 in pull-out classes; and the School-based Dyslexia Remediation (SDR) programme goes down to four students per class. We think this is a better and more inclusive approach to deploy the limited resources that we have.
Furthermore, it is not conclusive that smaller class sizes improve student outcomes on a system-wide basis. In fact, studies show that teacher quality matters much more. While we do not rule out further improvements in class sizes, we must balance this carefully with what is sustainable, and not risk compromising the quality of teachers we recruit.
We also want to help students to be posted to schools that can cater to their learning needs and interests. I spoke about the changes to the Secondary 1 posting and school landscape earlier, which will provide more choices and opportunities for posting.
For younger students in primary schools, we recognise that the distance between home and school is also an important consideration for school choices and posting. Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked if MOE could review the current Primary 1 (P1) registration framework to give more priority to students living near primary schools.
The P1 registration framework carefully balances various factors and is not limited to just home-school distance. Other factors include elder siblings, community involvement and the schools' ties with their stakeholders.
Overall, the system works. In the past few years, about 98% of Singapore Citizen and Permanent Resident students obtained a place in either a school of their choice or one that is within two kilometres of their residence.
Nevertheless, I would like to assure Mr Lim Biow Chuan that MOE will continue to ensure sufficient school places on a regional basis, so that our young children will not have to travel far to primary school. Mdm Chair, allow me to say a few words in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I mentioned in my English speech that in order to make the shift towards holistic education, we have to adjust our mindsets and reduce the excessive emphasis on academic results. Therefore, MOE will be making changes to the PSLE scoring and the Secondary 1 posting systems. In addition, MOE will also promote OE to nurture resilience, ruggedness and tenacity in our students.
Every child is like a seedling. We should not be overly anxious and rush their growth, as pulling young seedlings harms them instead. Nor should we over-shelter them, or they will become delicate flowers that are unable to weather the storms of life. We have to understand and balance the different needs of each seedling and nurture them with care. With adequate sunlight, water and space, our children can freely grow into sturdy trees that are firmly rooted.
We must nurture future generations of Singaporeans who are not only successful, but also have a sense of belonging, national identity and care for fellow citizens. Therefore, we will continue to emphasise character education in our schools in order to cultivate the right values in our students from a young age. These outcomes may not be easily measured, but they last through life and help our children to be better-prepared for the future. We can then nurture a strong \"Singapore Heartbeat\", united towards our common vision.
(In English): Mdm Chair, let me now speak about an inclusive education system. We must ensure that every Singaporean can find their own pathway to success and be part of the nation's progress, regardless of their starting points and background. This is the essence of a united Singapore Heartbeat that I spoke about in my maiden speech.
An inclusive education system is a critical lever to close societal gaps and promote social mobility. While we cannot ensure equal outcomes, we must provide children equal access to opportunities in all our schools.
Ms Denise Phua and Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked for an update on what MOE is doing further to level the playing field for students from disadvantaged backgrounds and provide dedicated support to those who are academically weaker.
Children enter our schools with different starting points, abilities and learning needs. We must continue to do our utmost to provide pathways for every child.
First, we have levelling-up and specialised intervention programmes for students weak in literacy and numeracy skills, such as the Learning Support Programmes for English and Mathematics in Primary 1 and 2. Beyond Primary 2, low-progress students continue to be supported through other programmes all the way to secondary school.
Second, for students who may need a different, more customised approach, we have also developed four Specialised Schools.
Students who do not pass their PSLE articulate to Northlight School (NLS) and Assumption Pathway School (APS), while Crest Secondary and Spectra Secondary Schools cater to Normal (Technical)-eligible students who prefer an applied curriculum. These Specialised Schools adopt a whole-school approach and customise their curriculum and pedagogy to the learning needs of their students.
Third, and very importantly, we resource schools and train teachers to support our low-progress learners. The Learning Support Programmes that I mentioned earlier are centrally-designed and taught by teachers who are specially trained to engage low-progress learners and be able to address not just their academic needs but their socio-emotional needs effectively. Our goal is not just to help them level up in their studies, but also to develop their self-confidence and self-esteem.
As a result of these efforts, the proportion of these students in our system has beenreduced significantly over the years and is among the lowest internationally.
I would like to address Assoc Prof Daniel Goh's specific suggestion for MOE to set up a national corps of specially trained teachers for underprivileged students. As I have explained, we already have differentiated and dedicated support for low-progress learners, including those from needy families. Our context and approach are quite different from many other countries. We are able to centrally train and deploy teachers, being a small country. So, I am proud to say that we already have a national corps of well-trained teachers for all students.
Students with financial needs should benefit from a quality education, regardless of their family's circumstances. Mr Muhamad Faisal Abdul Manap asked about the extension of assistance schemes, awards and funds.
MOE heavily subsidises the cost of education for all Singaporean students in our schools. In addition, we provide targeted assistance for needy Singaporean students in our schools through various schemes, such as the Edusave Merit Bursary, MOE and school-based Financial Assistance Schemes (FAS) and the Post-Secondary Education Account.
Many Members, including Mr Zainal Sapari and Dr Lim Wee Kiak, have asked about what more we can do in early childhood to provide every child with a strong start. Minister of State Janil Puthucheary will give more details on MOE's efforts in this area. He will provide an update on how we are enhancing support for children with special educational needs. This is an issue that Ms Denise Phua, Ms Chia Yong Yong and Mr Zainal Sapari spoke passionately about just now.
Mdm Chair, let me conclude. I earlier used the metaphors of flowers and seedlings. Well, there is one more. The Chinese proverb \"十年树木，百年树人\" compares the task of nurturing people to growing trees – it takes 10 years to grow trees, but 100 to nurture people. Education is a far more complex and arduous task than growing trees; nevertheless, we can extract useful insights.
As gardeners, we must tend our seedlings with great skill, care and love by ensuring that the plant has sufficient, but not overly harsh sunlight, and watering the plant based on how much the soil can take. More importantly, as the seedlings grow and take root, we should hold back and give them enough space and freedom to flourish. We must not over-shelter them or suffocate them with too much watering and over-fertilising, but allow them to grow upright, strong and sturdy and resilient to any storms.
Today, I fear we are overcrowding our young ones with a narrow focus on academics. While we have their best interests at heart, too much of one thing impedes, rather than supports, overall growth.
I believe the changes in the PSLE system, the DSA review and the OE programmes are critical to preparing our children for the future. These changes will contribute to reducing the emphasis on exam results and give more time and opportunities for every student to develop as a well-rounded individual. However, there is no easy solution, no silver bullet, to the issues of stress and competition that Members raised.
I started out saying that education is both a personal journey as well as a societal concern. Hence, while MOE can change policies and structures, ultimately, this is a personal journey for every child, parent and family. It is a partnership among MOE, educators, students, parents and even employers. Collectively, our choices will determine whether we can succeed in making this paradigm shift to free up time and space for holistic education.
So, let us make this journey together. Let us help our children to make good use of their time to branch out to explore other interests and passions and to pursue what they want to do in life. Let us help them to make good choices about their educational and career pathways based on their aptitudes and aspirations. Let us help them to be ready for the future. This, indeed, will be the best gift that we can present to our next generation. [Applause.]
The Minister of State for Education (Dr Janil Puthucheary): Mdm Chair, an inclusive education system is one where every child is challenged to their full potential and given every opportunity to develop their talents and abilities. To make this a reality, some children need more help. We cannot treat every child in exactly the same manner.
Some children have special needs, some have learning difficulties and others come from less-privileged backgrounds. To achieve equality of opportunity and bring out the best in all of them, we need to treat each child differently. More needs to be done for certain groups of students who need our attention the most. This will appear as an unequal distribution of time, effort and resources.
An inclusive education system has to start in the child's early years. This is when children develop literacy, numeracy, socio-emotional skills and a sense of curiosity and wonder. These are important foundations for all. But we need to recognise that we should not be over-preparing our children for primary school.
Dr Intan Mokhtar has pointed out that we have already achieved almost universal access to preschool. We recognise that having some parental choice and involvement in the type of experience a child has at preschool is important. Our current system allows for this, and compulsory education for preschool may not be the best way forward. Nevertheless, the Government will continue to explore ways to provide every child the opportunity to benefit from a structured preschool experience. For instance, a new pilot programme, KidSTART, will be established to encourage preschool participation at younger ages for children in vulnerable families. MSF will provide more details.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak and Mr Zainal Sapari asked about early childhood education. We have and will continue to invest substantial resources in improving preschool education. Our 15 MKs currently enrol about 1,700 children. The first batch of MK children is now in Primary 1, and parents have shared that their children have the confidence and social skills to adapt well to primary school.
MOE will continue to engage partners and stakeholders in the early childhood education sector to see how we can best use the lessons learned from the MK programme to help all children. Since 2014, we have been sharing good teaching and learning practices at various platforms, including the annual MOE Mother Tongue Language Symposium and the annual Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) Early Childhood conference.
From this year, we will be sharing teaching and learning resources we call \"Big Books\". They are quite large books, for English and Mother Tongue languages, large in font and format, not necessarily very thick. These \"Big Books\" have been piloted at our MKs. The teachers can use these \"Big Books\" as a structured approach towards language-learning. This will help more preschool children to speak and read in English and their Mother Tongues with confidence.
In line with our belief that we need to do more for those who need it, additional help is given to those with weak foundations in language and literacy. We have done this through a programme called Focused Language Assistance in Reading (FLAiR) for K2 children in about 360 preschool centres run by anchor operators and MKs. FLAiR has benefited around 17,400 children since 2007, helping them to build a strong foundation in English and narrow the reading gap with their peers.
This programme is especially important if you come from a background or a family that does not have English as a common language at home. English literacy becomes a foundation for studying a wide variety of other subjects – Science and Mathematics, for example, for assessing knowledge on your own in a library and for achieving the sort of self-directed learning that you need to access knowledge on the Internet. So, the FLAiR programme is available as an additional support for all children who need it.
We want to replicate and extend FLAiR's success by increasing the number of anchor operator-run preschool centres offering FLAiR, and it has now been made available to not-for-profit centres. Over 50 such centres are offering FLAiR this year, benefiting about 450 children. We intend to reach out to even more children by doubling the number of not-for-profit centres offering FLAiR over the next few years.
I agree with Ms Denise Phua about the need to level the playing field for all children, regardless of their backgrounds. We ensure that education is heavily subsidised for all students at all levels, and we provide additional financial assistance for needy students.
The provision of technology can also be a social leveller. We give all our schools the resources to provide their students, including the underprivileged ones, with access to computing devices for learning. The online learning space that Ms Denise Phua spoke about, we will take this a step further by giving all students access to self-paced learning anytime and anywhere. This also allows teachers to design lessons and upload them and share work among students. This will also make possible the provision of third-party applications and education ware, including open-source applications. These can be developed separately, to be integrated for use by both teachers and students.
Miss Cheng Li Hui will be pleased to note that we also guide our students to be responsible and safe online. All our schools teach cyber wellness and also appoint students as \"Cyber Wellness Student Ambassadors\" to help guide their fellow students. Our ITE, polytechnics and autonomous universities also teach cyber wellness in a number of ways, including guidelines, compulsory modules, orientation camps and online platforms.
During and after school hours, we aim to provide a supportive environment for all children, especially those from less-privileged backgrounds. The four Self-Help Groups have come together to form a joint venture which operates six school-based Student Care Centres and will open up another four Student Care Centres in schools by this year.
MOE has supported the establishment of these school-based Student Care Centres (SCCs) that provide after-school care, supervision and development. The number of SCCs has risen from less than 50 four years ago to 130 today, now benefiting 15,000 students. To continue to cater for more students, we will increase the number of school-based SCCs to 140 by the end of this year, with all primary schools having SCCs by 2020.
Promoting health is another way we can provide support for our students. I would like to assure Mr Chen Show Mao that our school canteen stalls comply with HPB guidelines that stipulate the need for healthier ingredients in food preparation and also stipulate a cap on sugar content in beverages.
Equipping children with social and emotional competencies help to increase their mental well-being, reduce risky behaviours and improve academic outcomes. Mr Kok Heung Leun will be pleased to know that social and emotional competencies have been included in the school curriculum a decade ago and are also incorporated with the revised CCE curriculum. Students go through the process of acquiring the skills to recognise and manage emotions, develop care and concern for others, make responsible decisions, establish positive relationships and handle challenging situations.
I would also like to reassure Mr Kok that teachers do use stories of loss, stories of managing change in family circumstances, from Literature as well as from the media to reinforce these lessons and, particularly, to highlight the need for resilience and to develop the mental and social skills in order for the children to have resilience. These values and socio-emotional competencies are reinforced during CCAs and camps. The CCE curriculum also aims to inculcate other 21st century competencies, such as civic literacy and critical thinking.
Many teachers whom I have met feel that this is a central part of their duty. They have a moral obligation to not just be educators but also provide a degree of care and social support for the students they are in charge of looking after. Away from the public eye, there are many circumstances that I have come across in my previous professional life where it was the teacher who demonstrated a very deep understanding of some of the traumas that an underprivileged or vulnerable child may go through and was able to support both the child as well as the family that they were in touch with.
All teachers are equipped with the skills and knowledge to help our students develop character and the kind of competencies that Mr Kok spoke about. They have to take a CCE module during their pre-service training, which also includes opportunities for them to engage in dialogue with experienced CCE teachers. In addition, all teachers have to take on Service Learning Projects to prepare them to conduct VIA programmes in schools. These two modules, these two ideas of a CCE module and Service Learning Project, in the teacher training process informs us on how we map some of our expectations of behaviours and values that we have of our students to the process that the teachers undergo in their training. So, what we expect in terms of values and behaviours for our students inside our curriculum and in our schools are expressed through the expectations we have of our trainee teachers while they are being trained to be teachers. There is a very tight link between the two.
To address Mr Png Eng Huat's concerns, these VIA programmes are central to our aim of developing a strong civic consciousness. Students learn to take responsibility for their own spaces in class and at home at the primary school level, before progressing to initiating collective action among their peers to improve the lives of others in school and the community at the secondary school level and beyond.
This year, we have reinforced being responsible for the community in a very tangible and physical way. All primary school students play a part in cleaning their schools every day − learning good habits, good values, respecting their school environment and the people who work to keep their schools clean.
Mdm Chair, if I could return to the principles I stated at the beginning, our philosophy of developing inclusivity by giving more support where it is needed most is clearest in our efforts for children with special educational needs.
I would, first, like to assure Dr Intan Mokhtar that the majority of these children, who have relatively mild special educational needs, are already in mainstream schools. We, at MOE, and many of their families believe that these children can cope with the rigours of a mainstream curriculum once they are given a little extra support. Every primary school and 81 secondary schools are now resourced with at least one AED(LBS), as has been pointed out. MOE will continue to recruit more going forward. We do wish to recruit more going forward and extend the availability of this service. But they are doing an important and challenging job. We have to recruit the right people with the right disposition and skills.
We have invested heavily in training both teachers and AEDs(LBS). As Ms Chia Yong Yong has pointed out, we give our schools the flexibility to source specific programmes to meet local specific needs. But these school-based programmes merely supplement the structured training already provided at NIE, our key training partner. All teachers, during their pre-service training, are equipped with an awareness of special educational needs.
NIE also conducts in-service training, covering disability-specific areas, leading to a Certificate in Special Needs Support. AEDs(LBS) undergo the full-time pre-service Diploma in Special Education. The Advanced Diploma in Special Education is also available to them. We work with the Dyslexia Association of Singapore and the Autism Resource Centre to provide these AEDs(LBS) staff with in-service training. As we are committed to training teachers and the allied educators well, we will continue to review the structured training available to them.
MOE has also made available the School-based Dyslexia Remediation (SDR) programme, a specialised intervention programme, to all primary schools from this year. This helps students with dyslexia to overcome their core difficulties in reading and spelling. As part of the programme, we have also developed resources to enable parents to help their children at home to overcome the challenge of dyslexia.
More students with special educational needs are entering our IHLs. More than 1,400 students have sought assistance at the SEN Support Offices, available in every IHL since their establishment. This is almost triple the number who sought assistance as of February 2015. Rather than be concerned about the average disbursements or a particular target, what is important is that these students have access to resources matched to their needs. The needs are greatly varied. Some students need a very small intervention, such as a ramp or a mechanical keyboard, whereas other students need a very wide series of both physical as well as process interventions. So, the average may not be very meaningful. To give an idea, about 90 students, since 2014, have been assisted by the Special Education Fund for the purchase of assistive technology devices and support services. About a quarter of a million dollars has been disbursed to them.
For the smaller group of students with more severe special educational needs, we believe that they are better catered for in Special Education (SPED) schools. These schools are provided substantial funding by MOE – significantly more than the mainstream schools – which goes towards paying specialised staff and providing more intensive support for their students.
We have worked closely with SPED schools to provide a quality education and to help prepare the children for life after school. To cite just one example, we have piloted the School-to-Work Transition Programme in five SPED schools with MSF and SGEnable so that more students can be gainfully employed upon graduation. We identify these students' interests and strengths and put in place structured internships and customised training pathways, with support from job coaches in various organisations. Most of the participants from the first cohort are now successfully employed in a wide range of industries.
The School-to-Work programme will be made available to more SPED schools. MOE is working with interested schools to put in place new processes to enable them to identify and support their students. As we look to improve the transition from school to work, a consistent challenge is the mindset of employers and co-workers. This will take time to change and I urge all Singaporeans to keep an open mind, to offer these students and the adults they grow into every chance to be part of our society.
Ms Denise Phua suggested co-locating SPED schools and mainstream schools to promote inclusivity. To some extent, this is already happening. We need a range of inclusive practices to cater to a range of different needs and allow for meaningful interaction and integration. Our satellite partnership model includes this range of practices. Some SPED schools practise \"social integration\" with their mainstream partners. Others, like Pathlight School, allow their students to join their mainstream peers in class. Canossian School practises \"full inclusion\" and its students already join in mainstream classes for all academic and non-academic activities.
In addressing Mr Zainal Sapari's concerns regarding SPED schools, I would like to point out that the majority of SPED schools – 13 out of the 20 schools – charge around $10 to $20 per month. This is comparable to fees at Government schools. The remaining seven SPED schools charge higher fees. This is because they cater to students with multiple disabilities and challenges, who have a greater need for additional educational and therapy support. Nonetheless, their fees are still significantly lower than private SPED schools or international schools. In addition, MOE provides help for needy families through the SPED Financial Assistance Scheme. These schools also offer fee subsidies for eligible students. We will continue to work with SPED schools to improve their affordability.
Over the years, we have been upgrading school premises, setting up new schools and expanding existing ones to allow more students to access special education. In the past few years, we have built a new campus for Delta Senior School, expanded Metta School and created additional classrooms for Pathlight School.
More than physical capacity, skilled, committed and passionate staff are at the heart of our efforts to support children in SPED schools. Just last year, we made available more funds for SPED schools to increase the salaries of teachers, allied professionals and other staff. This is not only to help schools attract and retain personnel, but also to recognise the crucial and challenging work they do every day.
Madam, I have visited a number of SPED schools, including, most recently, AWWA School. Speaking to everybody in all the schools − the members of the board, the education and therapy staff, the nurse who mans the medical bay − you get a very pervasive sense of mission, purpose, pride and professionalism. They explain how much they are devoted to this calling that they have, the work that they do and the students that they care for. But from the outside, it does not look so much like just a job or the professional pride in their job; it looks like love. They love their work. They love their cause and their mission. They love the institutions that they have supported and worked for, raised funds for and volunteered for. They love their students. Sometimes, the students are challenging. Some of the staff get injured. There are problems with the physicality of their work, but it does not stop them. They go back to it. They love what they do and they love their students.
Voluntary welfare organisations should continue to play a key role in SPED. Over the years, they have built up a deep expertise in catering to specific disability types. Each has created, nurtured and supported a specific community of educators, therapists, families and focused on a particular group of children and their challenges. This is a model of shared responsibility between the Government and the community. MOE will continue to support these groups, schools, children and professionals to do what they do so well.
Mdm Chair, let me affirm MOE's commitment to building an inclusive education system in an inclusive society. We will continue to invest the necessary resources to enable all children, regardless of their starting points, to reach their full potential.
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Mdm Chair, SkillsFuture has great potential to help Singaporeans develop new capabilities and achieve their fullest potential. If implemented effectively, it will sustain Singapore's competitive advantage and help our people get good jobs and have fulfilling careers. This is especially critical at a time when many workers have to keep pace with rapid technological changes whilst others, affected by economic restructuring, have to be reskilled, possibly multiple times, throughout their working life.
SkillsFuture can provide that lifeline for Singaporeans to ride the waves of change, rather than be dragged down and crushed by disruptive forces in the marketplace. I, therefore, applaud the Government for this visionary initiative. It is a significant investment in our people, costing S$1 billion a year for the next few years, and we must fully capitalise on it.
Madam, I would like to start by highlighting some feedback from my constituents on aspects of the SkillsFuture system that need to be addressed for it to really work for us. The current system is more useful to workers who know what they want to do, but less helpful to those who are thinking about a career change or who have been made redundant. The system does not lay out a clear path to build new skills for new careers. There must be clear linkages from training courses, to skills, to jobs. And I repeat: there must be clear linkages from training courses, to skills, to jobs.
Equally important is the information on industry growth clusters where vacancies exist and where future jobs will flourish. There should be a simple tool to help people narrow down their options, to focus their efforts. For a segment of the less-educated older Singaporeans who will have difficulty going online to search for courses, we must have an alternative ready for them.
To fully leverage SkillsFuture, we should start with better career guidance for school leavers to choose their future vocation well, so that they are well-guided in their choice of post-secondary education. We should learn from the best practices in Switzerland where about two-thirds of 15- to 16-year-old students leave school to start their vocational training. Before leaving school, students should have the opportunity to have \"look-see\" experiences at vocations that may interest them, carried out in a very systematic way, whether they are curious about being a doctor, a chef or a computer programmer. Companies and trade associations should work with MOE to conduct \"open house\" exercises to provide insights to jobs, working environments and career prospects in their industry.
Madam, I was happy to hear Acting Minister Ng Chee Meng speaking about nurturing interests and passion in students in his speech. I have received many appeals from young people who are disappointed that they have missed the entrance marks to the study of their choice despite a very clear interest and passion for their area of study. Therefore, I would like to appeal that IHLs consider providing places to prospective students who have demonstrated a passion for the field of study they are applying for, in addition to being assessed purely on academic results. Madam, mastery can only be nurtured starting with a passion.
Presently, the most urgent need for SkillsFuture is to really help the retrenched professionals find their feet, rebuild confidence, guide them to acquire new skills and, more importantly, find ways to get employers on board to provide job opportunities. There must be significantly more effort invested on \"place and train\". The connection between training and employability must be more direct and stronger, so as to provide a line of sight between the efforts that one puts into retraining and the hope for re-employment. Displaced professionals, managers and executives (PMEs) should also be supported through \"mid-career\" Earn and Learn Programmes, so that, for \"senior interns\", there is a \"bridge\" to permanent jobs. And I fully support initiatives, such as TechSkills Accelerator, and would like to ask the Acting Minister when similar programmes will be launched for other sectors.
SkillsFuture will only succeed with careful planning and coordination amongst all key stakeholders – individuals, employers and the Government − to ensure the right set of outcomes. The Government's active involvement should in no way diminish the employers' critical role in training and developing their employees. So, I would like to ask the Acting Minister how companies are complementing the efforts of SkillsFuture to develop their staff, including the provision of annual leave.
Mr Ang Wei Neng (Jurong): Mdm Chair, many hon Members have praised the importance of SkillsFuture and its significance for the survival of Singapore. At the same time, we also need to develop a system to ensure that the courses eligible for SkillsFuture credits are of acceptable quality. I agree on all these three counts.
I would like to raise two suggestions. While SkillsFuture caters mainly to working adults who want to upgrade their skills so that they are still relevant in the job market, it also caters to elderly Singaporeans who want to upgrade themselves in their golden years. Thus, it would be good if the course directory of SkillsFuture can include a section that consolidates courses which are more suitable for retired adults.
For that matter, I would like to seek clarification with the Acting Minister for Education Mr Ong Ye Kung whether there is an upper age limit for them to claim their SkillsFuture credit entitlement. If there is no age limit, could Singaporeans who have passed on transfer their SkillsFuture credits to their loved ones?
For SkillsFuture to be inclusive, I hope that the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) and other Government agencies could devote some time developing suitable courses for persons with disability or make provisions for some of the existing courses to be friendly for persons with disability to attend. If this suggestion is acceptable to the Acting Minister, the SkillsFuture course directory could also include a section dedicated to persons with disability to reflect the focus in this area.
Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Mdm Chair, I declare my interest as an employee of Singapore University of Management University (UniSIM), a private university dedicated to lifelong learning. UniSIM has a large enrolment of working adults and is involved in the provision of SkillsFuture courses.
As the Minister for Finance has emphasised, providing good jobs is a priority. It is also important to ensure that workers with the right skills are available to take such jobs. A prolonged shortage of workers with the requisite skills will, ultimately, put the job creation process under intense pressure. If the supply of workers with the right skill sets is not forthcoming, job creation will have to adjust to the realities of labour supply. For decades, our labour market policy had been able to address this challenge, supported by intricate planning from MOE.
However, technological disruption and increasingly intense global economic competition threaten to catch us unprepared. With skill obsolescence being one of the most severe long-term threats, SkillsFuture promises to be a sustained long-term effort that can confront these problems.
One of the main challenges with the shift in emphasis to long-term programmes, such as SkillsFuture, is how to sustain interest and effort, and how to balance accountability while allowing for scope for individuals to take control of their self-directed learning needs. It is not easy to predict the impact of SkillsFuture on individual organisations, including education institutions like mine. Will the emphasis on acquiring skills lead to a reduction of emphasis on achieving qualifications? Regardless of whether it does, what will happen to institutions which do not promote skills-based learning? Some will be caught unprepared, while others will be much more prepared and come out well. Individuals will not be spared from the consequences of being caught unprepared.
But how does one prepare for SkillsFuture and what does it mean to be prepared? To begin with, I think we should look at SkillsFuture as a journey, one in which we must be prepared for the long haul, pace ourselves and not deplete our resources, including our enthusiasm, too quickly, and ensure we reach the destination that matches our individual objectives. Learning journeys for working adults often take place against a backdrop of individual and family sacrifices, unlike full-time students with neither dependants nor work responsibilities, the most mundane aspects present challenges for adult learners.
This can range from what time they should leave work to navigate rush-hour traffic in order not to be late for lectures, to whether family time or home work should take priority over a weekend. Working adults who take night classes experience such difficulties more than others, without any recognition and little understanding of their circumstances.
The most important difference between learning for skills and learning for qualifications is that the former should be a perpetual ongoing process, unlike the latter, where each stage, as well as an endpoint, are clearly and uniformly demarcated for entire cohorts, and the achievement of qualifications is accompanied by awards, celebration and the shelving of course material.
Acquiring skills can also be accompanied by dirt and grime. The providers of Earn and Learn placements reveal the reality of the job environment without flashy trappings, comfortable surroundings and swanky privileges. They end up with few or no takers. Artificially jazzing up everything just to attract interest risks misrepresenting the facts about what lies ahead for SkillsFuture aspirants.
The mindset with which both individuals and organisations embrace their SkillsFuture journey is, therefore, important. Perhaps, one of the most important hurdles I foresee is the way SkillsFuture aspirants perceive themselves. This issue may have an impact on how deep the effort goes in effecting real change in our workforce. The Government has done its part, but how will it sustain its effort for the long term without getting caught up in superficial indicators of performance?
As taxpayers' funds are involved, accountability and appropriate measures of performance of all programmes mounted under the SkillsFuture initiative are needed. However, this has to be balanced against an overly heavy focus on chasing KPIs. We should be careful not to lose sight of the length of the SkillsFuture journey and the rigours to be endured by those who embark upon it.
How do we balance these two − the need for accountability and the desire to allow each individual enough room to learn at a pace to fit their needs?
In addition, how do we balance the long-term goals with the short-term need for accountability? Acquiring skills on the job is quite different from acquiring knowledge in the classroom. In classroom-based learning, experimentation and trial-and-error are positively encouraged. There is little doubt that employers would want their workers to deepen their skills on the job. Yet, while both experimentation and trial-and-error are inevitable in a workplace setting, they are meant to be incidental. Performing the task at hand correctly each time is the priority in a workplace setting. Even as the physical boundaries of the classroom become blurred, such distinctions would have to be appreciated in order for stakeholders to keep faith in one another and remain committed to the SkillsFuture journey.
Mdm Chair, in conclusion, how do we promote depth in skills acquisition without dampening the enthusiasm for exploring hobbies and interests? Would the Ministry consider using SkillsFuture top-ups for this purpose, such as by linking the amount of top-ups to whether skills that had been acquired match the progression in skills levels in a particular area?
Miss Cheng Li Hui: SkillsFuture courses are very diverse, from Aerospace to Domestic Cleaning, Marine and Port Services to Tourism. With such a wide range of subjects and with so many different providers, how does the Ministry ensure the quality of the courses and their relevance to market needs? I am interested to know what are the checks and mechanisms in place to maintain consistent standards and encourage providers to keep their content updated and relevant.
What are also some measures that will be put in place to prevent potential abuse of the schemes by the vendors? Would the Ministry also share how often audits will be conducted on training providers and their companies?
I also tried checking up the various types of approved courses on the website and it is actually not quite friendly. I would like to request for the design of the SkillsFuture website to be more informative and user-friendly. In addition, can there also be a platform for interested learners to exchange information and feedback about the courses with past participants and the vendors?
Ms Chia Yong Yong: Madam, the Government has been progressive and flexible in the implementation of SkillsFuture for all Singaporeans, including seniors and persons with disabilities.
As we continue to expand and deepen SkillsFuture, I hope we will continue to extend reasonable accommodation to seniors and persons with disabilities to enable them to secure job opportunities and attain career progression. As such, I would like to know whether training providers will be required to grant reasonable accommodation to these groups of trainees and make their training facilities and venues accessible to them.
In addition, I would like to bring to the attention of the House a group of special students. They have disabilities, and are mostly attending SPED schools. This group of students will finish school at a much later age than their peers. And, unlike their peers, they will require longer training pathways to acquire vocational skills for employment. I would urge the Government to consider making SkillsFuture credit available to this group of students at an earlier age to support them during the training pathways prior to employment.
Mr Baey Yam Keng (Tampines): Mdm Chair, I commend the Government for the introduction of SkillsFuture. It is a significant commitment in Singapore's next phase of people development. The success of SkillsFuture lies in building a culture of lifelong learning. Each individual must have an intrinsic motivation to identify his areas of interests and pursue them to achieve deeper skills mastery.
So, I was heartened by the introduction of the SkillsFuture Credit earlier this year. This will empower everyone to chart and embark upon his or her own lifelong learning journey. I have received several initial positive feedback on the SkillsFuture Credit from residents and others. Some are still thinking about how they should use their credits, but a few others have already started to explore courses that they would not have had taken otherwise. This, I think, is a good development, as it spurs individuals to start thinking about their own learning journeys.
Last month, I opened an exhibition by the first batch of SkillsFuture students who completed a course in Digital Photography Technology and Techniques at UniSIM.
The students came from all walks of life. There was a freelance photographer who said that the course has enhanced his skills. Another student, who is a corporate trainer, told me that with better photography skills, he could make his teaching materials more interesting.
I have requests from senior citizens to transfer their SkillsFuture credits into their MediSave or their children's SkillsFuture account, as they could not find a suitable course. Some said that they are already in their 70s or 80s; what more can they learn or should they learn?
To be fully effective, the list of courses eligible for the SkillsFuture Credit should cater to a broader range of interests. On that note, I would like to ask MOE what are the additional or new types of SkillsFuture courses that will be open for Singaporeans, including seniors, because only then can we truly promote lifelong learning. I would also like to ask the Minister on the uptake of this programme thus far, including the profile of Singaporeans who have utilised their SkillsFuture credits.
Mr Gan Thiam Poh (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Chair, recently, there have been some issues with privately-run education institutions. The Council for Private Education (CPE), which is responsible for regulating our private education sector, has the challenging task of ensuring the quality of these schools. As of last year, only 57 of the approximately 300 private schools hold the four-year EduTrust quality mark.
Many more courses in diverse fields will be offered under SkillsFuture. If CPE's experience can be used as a benchmark, it will be challenging to \"patrol\" so many programmes. In addition to setting up accreditation frameworks, we need regular enforcement to ensure the rigour and quality of the courses. How can we ensure that prospective students are enrolling in reliable and relevant programmes?
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Mdm Chair, many Singaporeans are excited by SkillsFuture, but some have concerns about how they can use their SkillsFuture credits meaningfully. The ones who know what they want to do already have a particular field and specific courses in mind.
However, they might not be sure what progression the course will lead to. Then there are those who are overwhelmed by the sheer number of courses, of which some can be rather similar-sounding. This group may end up spending their SkillsFuture credits randomly. The third group might not have the information technology (IT) literacy skills to trawl through the directory of courses. Can the Ministry share on the SkillsFuture credit utilisation rate by demographics to date? Are progressive utilisation targets useful to gauge the success of SkillsFuture credit? If not, what would be better progress tracking metrics?
Our Singaporeans might need guidance to spend the credit wisely. I would like to suggest that the Government provide \"course curation\" for more informed selection, for example, in an Amazon recommended reading list manner. In an Amazon-style course curation system, users will be able to get course suggestions based on their training preferences and peer reviews. It also ensures that course providers constantly upgrade and innovate to cater to industry's and users' demand. Can the Ministry create platforms for peer reviews to be shared publicly to differentiate the quality of courses and guide Singaporeans better? How can the Ministry help Singaporeans to navigate the training terrain better?
For workers to deep-skill and traverse industries, they can be provided with sectoral-based pathways and skills ladders linked to training courses in the SkillsFuture directory. I would like to ask the Minister how many skills ladders have been developed to date and how many more industries with defined skills ladders can we expect this year?
These skills and competencies should also be mapped to economic and manpower needs to optimise manpower usage. The Sectoral Tripartite Committees have been developing their sectoral manpower plans (SMPs) to do so. How many SMPs have been developed? Do they seek to feature the courses in the said directory?
SkillsFuture should also be about providing workers with options to secure their future and livelihood. For example, many residents questioned why Class 3 Driving Licence is not included even though it can lead to many driving-based jobs or enhance their employability? To many lower-income workers, it secures livelihoods in the event of retrenchment. In comparison, for example, floral arrangement, which is in the course directory, is interesting and can be a useful skill. But it might not lead to the immediate broader array of opportunities from a Class 3 driving licence. What is the current set of criteria in making a course SkillsFuture credit-eligible? Can we include more employability-related courses to be eligible for SkillsFuture credit?
Mr Ang Hin Kee (Ang Mo Kio): Mdm Chair, I welcome the news that SkillsFuture credit will be strengthened with more training programmes being added into the course directory. The stepping up of the Professional Conversion Programmes (PCP) will also help more Singaporeans adapt, grow their skills and find a new career path.
However, I have also received feedback that the sheer number and wide-ranging choices can be overwhelming for an individual to choose from. Some may just jump into the training bandwagon and sign on courses without giving adequate thought about the areas they really need to invest in. Others may follow in the footsteps of their friends or peers or succumb to the persuasions of advertisements.
To enhance their decision making, I would like to propose that individuals be allowed to use their SkillsFuture Credit to attend sessions conducted by professional life coaches. Typically, life coaching sessions allow attendees to set clear goals, assess their current realities, run through options and determine the next best step forward.
The concept of life coaching is still quite new in Singapore, but it is gaining popularity amongst working adults. Will the Ministry consider including life coaching under the SkillsFuture credit course directory? Coaching format can also be in a group setting besides the usual one-to-one sessions.
With SkillsFuture, we want to empower our workers with skills mastery and inculcate a lifelong learning attitude. Through a life coach, I believe that workers can do constant checks and reviews on their skills gaps, career goals and pathways of growth. This is a bold new area but also a pre-emptive effort to prepare our workers to be in control of the career of their life and to be future-ready, instead of seeking help only when a problem arises or when they get retrenched.
I urge the Ministry to consider trying this unexplored area to help our workers take ownership of their careers and personal growth, to be fully aware of what their goals and aspirations are, and have the right drive and motivation to move towards realising them.
Mr Baey Yam Keng: Mdm Chair, I would like to speak for parents of children who increasingly seek advice on education and career, as well as for those who have chosen to answer the call to be an education and career guidance (ECG) counsellor.
Students, and their parents, are naturally anxious about their future. We know that some students feel pressured to consider popular jobs or pathways that may actually not be suited to their strengths. Some may not know what is available and others may simply want a second opinion. So, they look to the experts, or ECG counsellors, for assistance.
ECG counsellors are vested with heavy responsibility, and yet they are only human. Many are former educators or industry professionals.
Already, it is no easy job to have at one's fingertips knowledge about the education system. It is harder still to imagine that ECG counsellors would have come into their role with knowledge about all kinds of jobs. There are new jobs in emerging fields, and existing jobs are constantly evolving. Even industry experts find it challenging to predict what jobs will continue to exist, how they will change, how pay levels will evolve, and the whims of demand and supply.
When I was a young boy, my ambition was to be a teacher. I conducted lessons for my two younger brothers and made them do homework. However, I do not think I did so then because I had a lofty desire to nurture the younger generation, probably more to lord over my siblings. Looking back, I had wanted to be a teacher then simply because it was the only job I knew. As a child or even teenager, our exposure was limited. That is where ECG counsellors help to fill the gap.
Yet, students and parents need to be assured that the ECG counsellors have adequate and updated knowledge to provide good advice.
My question for MOE is: \"How can we ensure that ECG counsellors stay knowledgeable and updated on what is happening in industries, so that they provide good education and career guidance to students?\"
The Chairman: Mr Seah Kian Peng, you have two cuts. Please take them together.
Mr Seah Kian Peng: Mdm Chair, it is no mean feat for a Singapore university to emerge as the top one in Asia and 12th in the world. In the latest international rankings, we are placed higher than Yale.
That partly comes from the willingness of our universities to attract overseas students and academics of calibre. This is part of our national psyche – we are an international island open to trade and global talent. However, we are a nation, first and foremost, a home for our people and a place where our children need to find their own footing, voice and identity.
In all of this, our places of higher education play a crucial role.
The percentage of Singaporean university academics in some departments, such as Political Science, and Communications and Public Policy, hovers from a quarter to less than half in 2014; that percentage is unlikely to change at current state.
On the supply side, it could be that the pool of Singapore Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) students applying for an academic position locally is very small. It could be that many already have offers from the international job market and the 11 universities that are ranked higher than us. It could be that they are paid so much overseas that they prefer to teach elsewhere than in Singapore. It could be; but I do not think so.
The Minister has visited many IHLs, both in Singapore and abroad. I would like to ask him: in his most recent visit to a national university, how many Singaporean professors did he meet? How many international faculties? Does he think this is proportionate in a national university?
Second, I would like to ask what is the percentage of local professors in national universities in the US, UK and Australia. I have raised this in Parliament in the past and was told that we do not have the numbers. I would not be surprised if we still do not have them. There is no way better to ensure that a man does not know something when his job depends on his not knowing it.
Whatever the international figures, however, I think the current situation where the global talent outnumbers local ones in key departments, like the ones I have just mentioned, is less than ideal.
Can I ask the Minister for an update on the figures, what he thinks about them and what he intends to do? I am not saying that we ought to hire Singaporeans only or even for any sort of nationalistic affirmative action policy, but merely to see if we can put local professors on a more equal footing.
Next, I wish to express my reservation about university rankings. Rankings, be it Quacquarelli Symonds or Times Higher Education, may be construed as useful in many ways, and it is precisely these many ways of interpretations from different interest groups that I would like to ask the Minister what these agencies really measure and, for that matter, how they reflect our national priorities.
The methodologies used to construct these rankings change, too, and we are not sure whether the climb upwards is because we are getting better or we are hitching a ride on changed methodologies or, worse, that we are restructuring ourselves so that we become more attractive to the people compiling these rankings. Can the Minister tell us if the climb up the rankings factors in the KPIs of key administrators and what other considerations are taken into account?
Mr Ang Wei Neng: Mdm Chair, since the launch of the Global Schoolhouse initiative in 2002, many private universities were established in Singapore to attract international and local students. A few years ago, there were some consolidations in the private education industry sector. Could the Minister share the number of private educational institutions in Singapore that offer undergraduate courses between 2000 and 2015 as well as the number of undergraduates who have enrolled in these institutions each year and how many of them are Singaporeans, Singapore Permanent Residents and foreigners?
As the Government pushes the cohort participation rate of Singaporeans being offered a place in the six public universities to 40%, would MOE be reviewing the roles, capacity provisions and quality of private education, in particular, private universities, in Singapore?
Singapore is an Asian society. Most parents would like their children to obtain a university degree. If the private universities are maintaining the current provision of university places for Singaporeans as the six public universities are ramping up their enrolment figures, there is a genuine concern that the quality of Singapore students enrolling at these private universities will drop. At the same time, the supply of graduates will also increase significantly and we may run into the same problem faced by Taiwan and South Korea where more than 70% of each cohort is a university graduate. Many graduates from the private universities may then be underemployed. This will cause much angst to the graduates as well as their parents who have to fork out tens of thousands of dollars to pay for the tuition fees.
Thus, we hope that MOE will tighten the framework that governs the quality of private universities, making it more transparent to prospective students and their parents the probable employment outcome of their graduates. At the same time, MOE could also encourage private universities to shift their focus and run courses geared towards lifelong learning under the SkillsFuture initiatives.
The Acting Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mdm Chair, I am still having a cough and will try my best. But let me, first, start by addressing the current worry that Ms Foo Mee Har has raised. I chair the subcommittee on jobs and skills of CFE. So, I met an old friend recently. He is a journalist and I asked him what his readers expect out of the sub-committee. And he said, \"The economy is a bit sluggish, tell the students and the parents what to study, and after that what jobs to get. You used to say it!\" And when he said \"you\", he meant the Government. The Government used to say, study chemical engineering, biomed. And so, what is next?
When I see young students today, some of them ask me the same question. There are two answers to this question, from two opposite, yet related, perspectives.
The first perspective, the first answer, is to understand the environment. It is very frustrating for a young person to graduate with a degree or diploma, step out into the workforce and find that there is no demand. Very frustrating. Something Mr Ang Wei Neng just mentioned, it happens in Korea, it happens in Taiwan. We must know how economic winds are blowing domestically, in the region, in the world and what is developing, what are the technological advancements. What skills and knowledge are in demand? We should never ignore demand. From this perspective, governments all have a duty to decipher all that is happening around us and signal to the people what are the areas to pursue.
The second answer is to know the individual. If we can help every one of us discover our interests and aspirations, uncover innate talents and abilities and fulfil the potential of as many individuals as possible, that will become an enduring strength for the collective, for Singapore. From this perspective, what to learn is also a very personal enterprise; we must help each individual follow their respective rainbows.
I will start with the first answer – understand the environment. While the global economy is sluggish, there are still opportunities. It is the case for every slowdown and recession. Let me just name a few here.
First, cybersecurity and data analytics are growth areas. They are driven by the proliferation of the Internet of Things and our Smart Nation initiative. One major telecoms company told me that they alone need 3,000 cyber security specialists. And we all know that the Infocomm Development Authority's (IDA's) Infocomm Manpower Survey projected about 15,000 more jobs in the information and communications technology (ICT) sector in the coming years.
We also need people to develop and operate public infrastructure, such as the new Changi Airport Terminals 4 and 5, plus new Mass Rapid Transit lines. The Government is ramping up the recruitment of engineers. The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) is building up its engineering corp, granting engineering scholarships.
To better support parents with young children, we need to expand the early childhood education sector, which needs another 1,500 educators over the next two to three years.
With an ageing population and new hospitals, nursing homes and step-down care centres being built, there will be thousands more job opportunities in the healthcare sector across all levels.
We live in an exciting region with the markets around us presenting tremendous opportunities. If Singapore-based companies can venture out to these markets and successfully tap into them, that will create many, many jobs for our people. But it requires us to be able to go overseas, have boots on the ground and understand those markets.
Ms Foo Mee Har asked about helping PMEs who have lost their jobs to find new ones in such growth sectors. This is something that WDA has set out to do since it was formed in 2003. This effort predates SkillsFuture. And before we had PCP, we had SMCP, Place-and-train (PnT), Attach-and-Train (AnT) and several other schemes. Minister Lim Swee Say will be speaking more on these during his Ministry's COS debate to help the retrenched and the misplaced to find employment again.
Now, the second answer, from the perspective of understanding the individual. In this age of possibilities, we make room for a universe of purposes – encouraging our young people to find meaning in new and unimagined ways, such as new ways to deliver services, entertain the masses, power our industries, protect the environment, protect Singapore, or build machines to do things better and faster.
How Silicon Valley became a crucible for innovation, how the Swiss became a leader in watchmaking, how Singapore became a food haven – these are not plans drawn up by governments. They happened because enough people were interested about something. They congregated and made it happen. It is organic; it is ground-up; it is haphazard.
We have, therefore, embarked on a movement to harness the collective interests and aspirations of our people, develop varied paths for people to develop mastery and go as far as they can, regardless of their starting points. That movement, we call SkillsFuture.
I thank Ms Denise Phua for devoting a good part of her Budget Debate speech to SkillsFuture. We will study her suggestions carefully. But I must first, explain that SkillsFuture is not the $500 Credit granted to individuals, because I have gotten so many cuts on that. The Credit is a small but important part of SkillsFuture. SkillsFuture is much more.
It starts with schools, laying the foundation for our young; and then, higher education, that is, ITEs, polytechnics, universities, take over. These help our young discover their interests and aspirations, impart knowledge to them, hone their skills and prepare them for the real world. From there, a lifelong learning system takes over, where they embark on a continuous journey of learning, updating and even finding a new path.
Along the way, they will persevere, improve and achieve mastery in their chosen fields, and maybe teach the next generation. If they do that, at the individual level, there is a tremendous sense of fulfilment and pride. Collectively, Singapore becomes more competitive and more inclusive in the way we view success and merit. But beneath this learning infrastructure, what underpins SkillsFuture is the personal enterprise of each and every one of us, to learn a lifetime to achieve a mastery, a mastery that is a part of who we are.
Today, I will talk about what MOE is doing in three areas of focus as we move forward on SkillsFuture: first, interests and aspirations; second, developing mastery; and third, innovation.
First, interest and aspirations. If we are learning something we are interested in, we are more likely to stay curious and engaged. If we stay curious, we are likely to make learning that subject a lifetime pursuit. If we make it a lifetime pursuit, we achieve mastery. So, it starts with interest, or a deep sense of purpose and, as Ms Denise Phua said, a yearning for the sea.
That is why we must make a greater effort to help students discover their interests and passions, through ECG. Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling will speak more about this topic.
We then match student interests with their course of study as much as possible during the admissions process. That, I fully agree with Ms Foo Mee Har. Today, the polytechnics and universities are doing this to some extent.
We have an exercise called the Direct Polytechnic Admissions (DPA). Here, students are assessed through a range of measures, like interviews, write-ups and artistic portfolios, which cover not just academic scores but also other strengths, a much more holistic approach. Some secure a place in a polytechnic before they even receive their GCE \"O\" level results, a little bit like DSA. DPA today covers 2.5% of total admissions at the polytechnic level.
But at the course level, we allow up to 30% of the admission to be based on the applicants' interest and passion in the vocation, on top of their academic scores. Last year, as a pilot, we raised the cap for early childhood education courses from 30% to 50% and it worked well. The universities also have some flexibility to admit up to 10% of students on the basis of their unique strengths and talents. The effort to admit students into their areas of interest has yielded good results.
MOE studies have looked into students with similar GCE \"O\" level aggregate scores. So, we have a control group, one group brought in through DPA; another group through the normal aggregate scores method, but both with similar GCE \"O\" level scores. The students who are admitted to the polytechnics via DPA do better in their studies. They have lower drop-out rates and are far more likely to embark on careers in the sectors which they are educated and trained in.
This confirms what had been intuitive to us all along. When you are able to choose and enter a course you are interested in or feel passionate about, you feel more ownership and enthusiasm, and will likely do better. There is a Confucius saying, \"知之者不如好之者, 好之者不如乐之者\". If I may provide an imperfect translation, it means somebody who knows cannot match somebody who wants to know; somebody who wants to know cannot match somebody who loves or is passionate to know. And we see that happening.
MOE will, therefore, strengthen aptitude-based admissions. At the polytechnics, we will expand the pilot done for early childhood education courses. We started with the early childhood education courses out of necessity, because some of the students do not have staying power in the industry, something that Assoc Prof Randolph Tan mentioned. When you hit the ground, when you see the kids, after a while, you might give up, because you really need to love to interact with kids and have a knack of doing so to be a good professional in the field.
There are many other trades where similar considerations will apply, where interest, aspiration and some innate abilities, play a big part in ensuring that the student enjoys learning the specialised skills and has staying power in the trade. Having said that, not all courses are suitable for aptitude-based admissions, but we can certainly expand the scope we have today.
We will allow a total of 75 courses, or one-third of total polytechnic courses, to admit up to 50% of their students based on more holistic aptitude-based assessments. Some of these courses are baking, culinary, architecture, mass media, sports coaching, nursing, social work, drama and psychology, game design, interior design, digital forensics and so on.
To support more aptitude-based admissions at the course level, we need to raise the DPA allowance at the polytechnic level. We will do so by 10 percentage points, from 2.5% today to 12.5%. We will rename the exercise and call it the Early Admissions Exercise (EAE).
With this change, we will also wind down what we call the Joint Polytechnic Special Admissions Exercise (JPSAE), which covers a small segment of students today applying based on achievements, such as sports or community work. This will be folded into EAE. In the same vein, we will also put in place a new aptitude-based admissions exercise for students progressing from ITE to polytechnics. At the universities, we will increase the aptitude-based admissions intake allowance for NUS, Nanyang Technological University (NTU) and Singapore Management University (SMU) from 10% to 15%. The Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) is already a heavy user of such methods.
This is not a simple matter. Allocating places by grades on a single metric – aggregate score – is straightforward and, to many people, fair, transparent and objective. We just compare numbers. But when you introduce other measures of a student's ability, it calls for an exercise of judgement. Between a 12-pointer who is not so interested in a course but does not mind a course, and a 16-pointer who is very interested in the course, who do you choose? This goes beyond making decisions based on one metric, but making a judgement call. This requires wiser minds.
Notwithstanding the changes, every course will still need some minimum academic criteria, so that we have some assurance that the student can cope with the academic rigour of the course and we do not set him up to fail the course. These changes can meet the aptitudes and interests of more students, but not all students. There will be applications that the polytechnics will have to turn down, and I expect many more appeals. And as Members of Parliament, you may expect more appeals. And I fully expect them to quote what I have just said in their appeals.
I was somewhat apprehensive in wanting to make this move. To be honest, I was asking myself: was I opening a can of worms? But I became convinced that this is the right thing to do when I visited the universities and polytechnics and spoke to the senior educators. They all told me this is so much harder to do but, speaking as educators, it is the right thing to do.
I also spoke with industry leaders, who unequivocally expressed that, today, beyond having people who know stuff, they want students who are passionate about their industry and interested in their industry. So, the changes will be implemented for admissions for Academic Year 2017. We will keep a close watch on how things go and review thereafter.
I want to add a final comment on this topic, which is that, today, while many students have clear interests and pursuits, most are actually unclear about what they want to do. We should not be pushing the young to rush into declaring their interests prematurely. I will be rather upset if I change this policy and then see the sprouting of a new tuition industry teaching students how to ace interviews. That is not the spirit at all.
If a young person has yet to discover his area of interest, the system should give him more time for self-discovery. If he cannot get into the course of study he wants, then I hope he can give what he has a chance. Sometimes, we make the best out of the hand we are dealt with in life.
Creative arts. The creative arts is an area that many young Singaporeans are interested in. We have been working with the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts (NAFA) and LASALLE, our two arts institutions, to provide good pathways for students. I have asked Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim to take a closer look at this sector to see how our creative arts tertiary education can be further developed.
Private education institutions (PEIs). While we expand the options for higher education, one specific area of concern raised by Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Mr Ang Wei Neng is private education institutions. I share those concerns. Parliamentary Secretary Faishal will speak further on this topic.
The second area of priority is to build mastery. It often takes our whole lives to master something. The SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme (ELP) was launched last year, with the objective of opening a pathway for ITE and polytechnic graduates to deepen their skills within their discipline of study. ELP is a dual-track, work-study approach, where students can deepen skills and knowledge in school, while acquiring experience in industries. It is similar to the apprenticeship model of learning in Europe.
In 2015, we rolled out 15 ELPs in 12 sectors. About 150 students were placed in more than 50 companies, of which, about half were small and medium enterprises. The feedback from employers and trainees has been encouraging. We will expand the ELP scheme in two ways.
Today, ITE graduates embarking on ELP obtain a Workforce Skills Qualification Advanced or Higher Certificate. We will introduce a new ELP pathway that will allow ITE graduates to work towards a full, part-time polytechnic diploma. There will be two new ELPs along this pathway in the Air Transport sector. We are also looking into similar ELPs in the Public Transport, ICT and hotels sectors. With this pathway, ITE graduates can take modules that are relevant to their current work first. They can focus on upgrading their skills to do a better job, without rushing to get a paper qualification for its own sake.
In addition, we will introduce another 20 new ELPs, covering 10 additional sectors in accountancy, air transport, electronics, energy and chemicals, facilities management, healthcare, hotel, maritime, spatial design, and visual communication.
This will bring the total number of ELPs to 37, covering 22 sectors.
We will also continue to strengthen the lifelong learning system. Just as learning does not stop after school, the universities' role in education does not stop after students' graduation. All five autonomous universities will be setting up new units dedicated to lifelong learning.
NUS will set up the School of Continuing and Lifelong Education (SCALE). NTU will establish the College of Professional and Continuing Education (PaCE). SMU will set up the Academy of Continuing Education (ACE). So, the way to remember these is: all these will help you PaCE your learning, ACE your skills, and SCALE new heights!
We do not forget the other two. The Singapore University of Technology and Design will also set up its Academy of Technology and Design, and SIT will name its unit SITLearn.
The purpose is not to offer part-time degrees or master's programmes to fuel the paper chase further, but to help workers stay relevant and competitive. A key focus of these centres will be to look beyond traditional degree offerings by offering shorter, bite-sized certificate programmes. So, in response to Assoc Prof Randolph Tan's question, all universities, including research universities, can participate in skills-based learning.
Through these centres, we also hope to underscore an idea pertinent to lifelong learning, which is, after you graduate, the next upgrade need not be a degree, masters or PhD. Often, it is something, in real practical terms, to stay abreast of industry developments and changes in technology, or deepen existing skills.
In IT, this may mean getting a vendor certificate. In aerospace, it may mean getting type-trained for certain aircraft or learning how to deal with composite materials. If you are in the foreign service, it may mean learning a new language.
Ms Foo Mee Har pointed out in her speech that we also need companies and industries to be actively involved in lifelong learning. The best way for companies to contribute is to offer real-life learning that institutions cannot simulate, a point that Assoc Prof Randolph Tan underscored. Even the best graduates cannot be ready for work from day one. They need time to learn about the industry and the company. The partnership between IHLs and industries must, therefore, be an enduring and ever-strengthening one.
In Singapore, we have built up a landscape of private and industry-linked training providers through WDA's work over the years. It has not been an easy process. Whatever we have built up, we have to strengthen.
Today, training providers, such as the SIA Engineering Company's Training Academy, 3dsense Media School, SEED Institute from NTUC and At-Sunrice GlobalChef Academy, provide industry-relevant training which supports both employers, as well as individuals.
In logistics, Dr Robert Yap, Executive Chairman of YCH, is spearheading efforts to set up a supply chain and logistics academy – actually, it is called SCALA, another acronym. Singapore Telecommunications Ltd (SingTel) is planning to start an industry training centre for cyber security. There will always be a place for these private sector providers and industry players in SkillsFuture.
There is, of course, also the SkillsFuture Credit. It is one part of SkillsFuture and it sends a very important message, which is that each of us is in charge of our own pursuit of mastery and learning throughout our lives. This is why only you can use your Credit. We want every Singaporean, young and old, to think about this personal enterprise that cannot be transferred or outsourced to someone else. It is a personal enterprise. So, in response to Mr Ang Wei Neng, while there is no upper age limit for the Credit, the Credit is also not transferrable.
We are at the stage of an evolution where we make every Singaporean think about their personal enterprise. I heard friends who have parents over 80 years old thinking to themselves: what should I learn? And I think that is wonderful.
At this stage, let us get that philosophical message through, rather than add more features into the system and over-administer it. Focus on bringing that philosophical message through. It is for this reason that we have deliberately designed the Credit to be on the generous side. We started with 10,000 eligible courses, not a small number, and included online providers, such as Coursera and Udemy.
If we accept this is a personal enterprise, then my answer to Miss Cheng Li Hui's caution about wastage and Mr Desmond Choo's request for guidance for workers to use the Credit is yes, let us make sure the courses are inclusive and of good standards. Let us also leverage WDA and the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) career coaches to give guidance. We can do all that.
But let us also have faith that individuals would make good decisions for themselves in time to come. Give them some time, space and freedom to discover, wonder, imagine and make individual decisions. Strike a balance, as Assoc Prof Randolph Tan has said.
Whatever people ultimately choose, we also need to suspend judgement a little. Who is to say that an engineer will not find learning fine arts and appreciating the aesthetics useful? Who is to say that a corporate trainer cannot learn photography, as Mr Baey Yam Keng had just cited? Remember how Steve Jobs learnt calligraphy and how he applied that in the development of iMac and all the beautiful fonts we see today?
Mr Baey Yam Keng and Mr Desmond Choo asked for an update on the take-up rate of the SkillsFuture Credit. From January to March this year, about 18,000 individuals have utilised their SkillsFuture Credit, with about $5.2 million disbursed. This is a healthy number, not a mad rush, yet a good response. What is encouraging is that 17% of them are aged 60 and above. We will be working with the People's Association to roll out more SkillsFuture courses through the community centres.
As suggested by Mr Ang Wei Neng, we will expand the list of eligible courses over time. By this month, we will have added about 2,500 courses to the list of eligible courses from just about four months ago.
Ms Denise Phua and Ms Chia Yong Yong have spoken about helping persons with disabilities learn skills and offered some specific suggestions. I have spoken to Minister Tan Chuan-Jin on this and we decided that between MOE and MSF, we will do a joint review on the Post-Secondary Education Account plus the SkillsFuture Credit, look at it together, rationalise and adjust it so that we can better support persons with disabilities. Give us some time.
As for life or executive coaching suggested by Mr Ang Hin Kee, we need to recognise that many of these are one-to-one sessions and are susceptible to abuse: you know, you coach me, I coach you, both of us collect $500 from the Government. It can happen. Let us look at it, but I agree with the Member that it can be useful to many people. Let us look at what practical steps we can take so that workers can use the Credit for genuine and useful executive or life coaching.
The final area of priority is innovation. SkillsFuture is not just about doing things skillfully. It has much to do with innovation, because mastery begets creativity and invention. It is hard to innovate if one does not know a subject deeply enough.
At the same time, knowledge advancement can also open up new grounds for new forms of mastery. Before the Internet breakthrough, there were no expert influencers or masters in web design or e-retailing. That is why all advanced economies need research universities. The quality of research is the key determinant of a university's standing internationally.
Here, I want to make a comment about university rankings, in response to Mr Seah Kian Peng. Our universities have achieved strong international rankings. But we get this right. This is a practical advantage for the students, especially when they step out to look for work. But it is even more important when we examine why our universities have done well in rankings. Not because of the number of foreign students or foreign faculty, but they score best for their strong global reputation amongst academics and employers, which accounts for 50% of the weightage.
Having said that, rankings in themselves have no intrinsic value. So, Mr Seah Kian Peng is correct to have reservations about rankings. Universities exist for a larger and better purpose. We want our universities to make distinctive contributions to Singapore. This must include the core priority of nurturing and developing our young, and this must include discovering new knowledge and techniques that can rejuvenate industries, create new opportunities and help Singapore stay ahead.
To fulfil these objectives, our institutions must have a global outlook. The faculty will need to be diverse, bringing with them knowledge from all parts of the world. Amongst them, there should be global top names to help us accelerate this process.
Mr Seah Kian Peng asked about the share of local faculty in our universities. Today, it is about 45%. Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Oxford have a similar share of local faculty as our universities, but I have a big caveat here because when we look at it, the bases of compiling the data and definitions are very different, and so we may not be comparing apples to apples. This is why MOE has been hesitant to disclose these comparisons. MOE is a very precise Ministry. But walk around the campuses of these top universities, you will find that you, too, will feel the diversity of the faculty. Even if the data is not accurate, I think the sense is that they all have a diverse faculty. Having said that, ours are national universities and there also needs to be a balance between global diversity and having a Singapore character in our universities. This is a key balance to be struck and consistently and continuously fine tuned over time.
In teaching, the faculty must be able to teach students about Singapore and relate the subjects to the context of our part of the world. In research, we must, over time, develop deep, differentiated expertise highly relevant to Singapore and which the world takes an active interest in, whether it is water sufficiency, biodiversity, diabetes, urban planning or education.
I recently visited the Earth Observatory of Singapore at NTU, led by Prof Kerry Sieh, a very famous professor, formerly from Caltech. The team there, which includes local undergraduates, is part of the global effort to monitor volcanic activities all around the world. The devices are planted at MacRitchie Reservoir. They hope to use the information to predict the next big eruption, give early warning and save lives.
I asked Kerry, \"Why did you choose Singapore?\" He said, \"You are near the ring of fire, but not on the ring of fire, that makes you an ideal spot to do this research.\" I thought to myself: how exciting! Singapore has a natural advantage in volcanic research! Surely, if there are bright young Singaporeans interested in this, they can learn from Kerry and his team and, over time, contribute to the sector, the centre, Singapore and even humanity.
Another example – MOE provides competitive research funding open to university researchers, with evaluation conducted by an international expert panel for neutrality and independence reasons. Earlier this year, I asked the Chairman of the Council, Prof Robert Brown, which was the largest research project that was awarded this year. He said it was a project on the Chikungunya and dengue viruses.
I looked it up. The actual name of the project is \"Saliva-assisted transmission of pathogenic viruses by blood-feeding arthropods\", dengue fever and Chikungunya, essentially. I asked him why he approved this particular one amongst so many proposals. He said because it was good science and it was relevant to Singapore. If international experts recognise the importance of research on Singapore-relevant subjects, all the more we must have the confidence to build up our indigenous capabilities in these subjects.
We are doing so in several areas. Prof Tan Khee Giap is developing important knowledge at the Asia Competitiveness Institute to help Singapore gain in-depth knowledge of the economy around us. Prof Lau Hoong Chuin heads the Fujitsu-SMU Corporate Lab. They are using big data analytics to optimise traffic flows and reduce congestion in Singapore. Assoc Prof Low Kay Soon and Prof Goh Cher Hiang respectively lead NTU's Satellite Research Centre and NUS' Satellite Programme. They led the design, construction and launch of six Singapore satellites last year.
We will nurture local academics who can produce quality work and contribute to Singapore. The universities' human resource systems have to value and recognise them. In this effort, we will leverage the Singapore Teaching and Academic Research Talent Scheme that was launched last year.
We will also use the platform of the Social Science Research Council to provide opportunities for local academics to put up their proposals to conduct research into areas that are important to Singapore's social development. MOE will be working closely with the autonomous universities on this effort.
Mdm Chairman, Minister Ng Chee Meng and I did not announce any major financial schemes during this COS debate. Our systems and institutions are well-developed. From here, higher performance of the machine is not pumping more fuel into the machine, and making it work harder, but instead, perhaps by rewiring and reprogramming it somewhat so that we optimise its performance and output.
Our vision of higher performance centres on the intrinsic worth and potential of a student, a vision that requires a dial-back from any excessive focus on academics and paper qualifications at all levels. We also want to focus on other aspects of learning; therefore, outdoor education, a review of the PSLE system, offer more choices and opportunities across all levels, focus on lifelong building of mastery and move towards aptitude-based admission into our IHLs.
We have described Singapore's future as a mountain range of successes. But we cannot assume that everyone wants to climb mountains.
I have a friend who recently went to Nepal and trekked the mountains. He spoke to his Sherpa guide and told the Sherpa, \"You guys live in such a mountainous country. You must be a mountain people.\" The Sherpa replied, \"You are wrong, we are not mountain people; we are valley people, we live in the valleys. In fact, if you go up to the mountains too high, you can die from altitude sickness.\"
We all have different destinations. Some of us go to the village, some to the city, seaside, riverbank, oasis, all kinds of destinations. It is a function of our gifts, dreams, resourcefulness and even luck. We all find different paths to get there.
Our children are growing up in a new world, striking paths into a Singapore that is more inclusive, all-embracing, a place where we can celebrate diverse talents and gifts. Education must be at the heart of this journey, guiding them in purpose, equipping them with skills and helping them seize the opportunities of their age.
The Chairman: Parliamentary Secretary Faishal Ibrahim, you have only 20 minutes divided between the two of you. So, please make good use of them.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Acting Ministers for Education (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim): Thank you, Mdm Chair. My colleagues have spoken about MOE's continued efforts to provide a holistic education that prepares students for lifelong learning.
We agree with Mr Kok Heng Leun in his Budget Debate speech and Dr Intan Mokhtar that the arts play a crucial role in this endeavour. Arts education cultivates creativity, imagination, multiple perspectives and innovation; each trait is important in forging our future. It fosters a deeper appreciation of our shared culture and heritage, and promotes social harmony. Who among us is not moved with pride and a sense of belonging when we come together at the National Day Parade to sing \"Home\"? This is the power of the arts.
We want to harness this further by enhancing students' exposure to the arts and providing more opportunities for students with talent and passion to deepen their learning and pursue it at the tertiary level and beyond.
This year, four more secondary schools began offering the Enhanced Art or Music programmes, benefiting more than 300 students in the 10 schools offering these programmes. In addition, three more centres began hosting Art or Music Elective programmes, with students from over 30 schools selected through demonstrations of their talents and not their PSLE scores.
With expanded opportunities come a growing interest in the creative arts tertiary education sector. Enrolment into diploma-level courses increased by around 30% from 2006 to 2015, and by about 40% in degree-level courses from 2010 to 2015. Minister Ong Ye Kung has asked me to study this sector to see how we might improve on the current landscape and better position our creative arts graduates for careers that align their skills with industry needs. We also want to see how industry can contribute to deepening their skills.
I recently met representatives from arts institutions and polytechnics. Many shared that creative arts should be valued for how it develops the individual. They highlighted that creative arts graduates find employment in industries beyond the creative arts, such as retail and manufacturing, because they bring with them artistic skills and dispositions that can be cross-pollinated to benefit different industries.
One such graduate is Ms Sasha Rafi who found that Ngee Ann Polytechnic's School of Film and Media Studies helped to expand her skills in creative thinking, effective communication and management of group dynamics. These have been a significant help in her current role as head of marketing for the Singapore Grand Prix.
Ultimately, we want these graduates to have good career prospects, contribute to the vibrancy and diversity of our economy and society and, at the same time, keep developing their passion, skills and love for what they do. With more opportunities, students and parents need to make informed choices about the options available for further study or employment, including courses by PEIs. In response to Mr Ang Wei Neng, 50 PEIs offered degree programmes in 2015, with a student intake of around 21,500 Singaporeans and foreigners.
Concerns raised by some hon Members about the quality and relevance of PEI-run courses are valid as this private market sector is highly heterogenous, with uneven standards. While CPE ensures PEIs meet minimum standards in corporate governance and course administration, it does not accredit or endorse the quality of their programmes.
Going forward, we will study how to improve information transparency about courses and employment outcomes, enhance industry-relevance of PEIs and ensure regulatory requirements of CPE remain relevant. The ongoing Graduate Employment Survey covers the nine largest PEIs, which cater for the bulk of private degree students. Survey results will be made public.
We will also study how more PEIs can offer industry-relevant training for continual skills upgrading and support manpower capability development in areas of industry need. Today, PEIs, like SEED Institute and At-Sunrice, already offer relevant training for skills upgrading and mastery.
While we take these steps, students and parents must do their part to get all the necessary information before deciding which courses to pursue. MOE's ECG efforts will help students assess their reasons and readiness to pursue further upgrading and if the course will help them acquire relevant skills for future employment. While I understand we have our own aspirations, I urge Singaporeans not to pursue qualifications as a paper chase but to develop their strengths, talents and skills.
Parental support is, therefore, crucial in helping our children develop the right instincts to make appropriate choices about education pathways, based on their passions and strengths. As raised by Mr Zainal Sapari, the partnership among the home and school is critical in helping children discover and nurture these strengths and interests.
We will continue to support our educators and parents in their partnership efforts. We have developed two resources for this: a Parent Engagement Guide for Educators and a parent-child activity book for all Primary 1 students. If you have a child or grandchild who is in Primary 1, you would have received this. I urge you to make use of this with your child.
We also collaborated with members of our advisory council, the COMmunity and PArents in Support of Schools (COMPASS), to launch the COMPASS-Parent Support Group (PSG) Mentoring Scheme to build PSG leaders' capabilities in structuring and growing as well as sustaining PSGs.
To support PSGs further, we are working with COMPASS to develop an online resource for PSG leaders. This resource is developed by parents, for parents, and will be ready in the latter half of this year. Madam, I will now end my speech in Malay.
(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Education prepares our children for a journey that requires them to undertake lifelong learning and master various skills. MOE will continue to focus on developing our children holistically by reducing the emphasis on academic results and offering multiple pathways to success. Hence, we are making several changes to the PSLE and increasing aptitude-based admissions at IHLs.
Parents play a critical role in supporting our children as they grow older. Give them the space and time to discover their strengths and interests and build a strong foundation of knowledge, skills and values that they can develop in their life. Work closely with their teachers to understand their strengths, in both academic and non-academic areas. That way, you will be able to guide them better in making better choices for themselves.
Navigating the education journey is not always easy and it will be helpful if parents seek the support of other parents. Parents can get support from other parents through PSGs in their children's schools.
For example, Mr Juraiman Rahim joined the Northland Primary PSG in 2014. Initially, his son was apprehensive about his father's presence and involvement in school. However, once he saw how his father was getting along well with his friends, he grew to appreciate having his father around. Juraiman now better understands his son's interest in chess and feels much closer to him. According to Mr Juraiman, the PSG experience \"has been a learning journey for me\".
Madam, by being involved in our children's education journey and working in close partnership with schools to develop their strengths and interests, we are helping our children to be better prepared for the future.
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Acting Ministers for Education (Ms Low Yen Ling): Mdm Chair, today, the world has far more options for learning and education than before. There are thousands of courses. There are new types of courses in developing fields, such as app design, food technology, robotics and more. This creates an array of diverse choices that can also be potentially bewildering. Moreover, an individual's aspirations are likely to change with time and experience.
We want to help our students to navigate the complex universe of choices with confidence. This is a journey that our ECG counsellors embark on with our students, guiding them as their aspirations and experiences develop and mature over time.
With advice and assistance from the ECG counsellors, our students can then better understand their interests and strengths and make informed choices for their education and career path. The guidance provided is not prescriptive; rather, it aims to enhance the students' self-knowledge for decisions that will impact their career.
Mr Baey Yam Keng asked if counsellors know enough about what industries are looking for to effectively guide students to make such choices. I would like to reassure Mr Baey and hon Members that our ECG counsellors are well-trained and supported by a robust knowledge management system with up-to-date data from authoritative sources. The counsellors also conduct regular industry visits and are in direct contact with industry sectors, chamber of commerce and trade and industry associations. With such access, knowledge and networks, the ECG counsellors are well-positioned to give timely and relevant advice on various career prospects.
Just a few months back in February, 68 MOE ECG counsellors and WDA career coaches attended industry sharing sessions by experienced personnel from ECDA and SPRING Singapore. They also heard from homegrown companies, like the Soo Kee Group and Home-Fix DIY.
In addition, the counsellors are kept abreast of information on labour markets. Their learning journeys to the respective sectors also arm them with close-up knowledge and experience. For instance, the counsellors visited Keppel Offshore and Marine last month. This type of first-hand information, with interaction with the engineers and technicians, enable them to better counsel our students.
We will also leverage the existing pool of over 100 career coaches at WDA and e2i to provide individuals with an understanding of industry needs to better guide training decisions. These career coaches, generally, have good industry knowledge and are well-placed to assist jobseekers.
As WDA restructures, part of the agency – as hon Members would know from the earlier press release – will come under MOE, and the career coaches will be under MOM's wing. This move creates a multi-agency force working hard and closely together, linking the education front to the sphere of work very tightly, as well as with the various sectors of industries.
Mdm Chair, may I have your permission to display a few slides on the LED screen, please?
The Chairman: Yes, please. [Slides were shown to hon Members.]
Ms Low Yen Ling: ECG counsellors, such as Dorothea, Noormala and Muhd Faizal, are helping our young people discover their talents and interests, who, in turn, are more sure of what their next steps could be.
We are on track to having close to 100 ECG counsellors serving all schools, polytechnics and ITE colleges by end-2017. Mr Baey Yam Keng talked about the heavy responsibility that the ECG counsellors have. We agree, which is why we are taking great care to select suitable candidates with attributes, such as passion to work with young people, a positive and encouraging nature, and excellent interpersonal, communication and networking skills. We have filled nearly all positions for trained ECG counsellors at our polytechnics and ITEs – 47 out of 48. We have also recruited 14 ECG counsellors to support our secondary schools and junior colleges. More counsellors will join the force.
Our ECG Centres in MOE on Grange Road and in every polytechnic and every ITE college campus are fully operational and have been serving our students since the end of 2015.
Besides having the right guidance, getting wide exposure to relevant industries will help our young people gain a better grasp of what these fields may offer. Hence, we will partner industries even more closely to provide systematic programmes that increase our students' exposure to industries at a younger age. One such initiative is the ECG Fair for Secondary 2 students.
The first ECG fair was held at Tampines Secondary School just last month. More than 2,000 students and teachers participated in the exhibition featuring various education and career pathways. They attended career talks and also received practical hands-on experience related to the chemistry and life sciences sector. For some of them, this really broadened their horizon and perspective.
At the post-secondary level, we will strengthen our linkages with industries so that students will undergo meaningful internships and industry exposure. Last year, MOE announced that the polytechnics and ITE colleges would be appointed sector coordinators for 17 sectors. Today, we are pleased to reveal that we have appointed sector coordinators for 10 more sectors. There are now 27 sector coordinators in total, covering areas of Singapore's future growth and priority sectors. These new sectors are: air transport, design, electronics, energy and chemicals, environment management, human resource, landscape, precision engineering, sports and wellness, and tourism.
Last, but not least, I will now touch on the role and importance of our respective mother tongues. In a fast-changing world, they put us in good stead by giving us a strong anchor to our heritage. Mdm Chair, please allow me to conclude in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin):[Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Bilingualism is the cornerstone of our education system and it enhances our capacity in different domains. For example, it strengthens our cultural and social identity and enables us to have a deeper appreciation of different ways of thinking. It also helps us to maintain close connections with our neighbouring countries, allowing us to communicate cordially and engage in deep exchanges and trade relations.
We are moving forward in the right direction and will continue to support the learning of mother tongue languages in several ways for the next five years.
In 2015, the Prime Minister announced that MOE will increase funding commitment to the three Mother Tongue Language Learning Promotion Committees by about 50% in the next five years to $25 million.
MOE will strive to provide an environment conducive for students to learn their mother tongue. We will continue to strengthen our partnership with the community, enhance current programmes, introduce meaningful initiatives and harness new technology and new media, so that the learning and use of mother tongue can blend more seamlessly into aspects of daily life. For the Committee to Promote Chinese Language Learning, the Government will commit up to $16 million in the next five years to support the committee's work to roll out more exciting and diverse programmes.
We believe our students will develop a deep love for their mother tongue language and their culture. MOE will try its best to help these students develop a rich understanding of their heritage and values to strengthen the unique multicultural heritage of Singapore.
On the other hand, through education and career counselling, MOE will also equip students with a better understanding of themselves and provide them with up-to-date information about the opportunities available, so that they can seize these opportunities to create a brighter future.
The Chairman: Time for clarifications. Mr Ang Hin Kee.
Mr Ang Hin Kee: Thank you, Mdm Chair. I have a question of clarification for Acting Minister Ong Ye Kung. Previously, I was concerned that, with the efforts, the private training provider may be sidelined. But I am glad that the Minister has mentioned that there is always a place for private training providers. I hope to hear whether or not MOE plans to invest in strengthening some of our local-bred training providers like, SEED Institute for Early Childhood Education, and whether we will help them expand and deepen their capabilities.
Secondly, the Minister also mentioned that he is open to having executive life coaches included in SkillsFuture credits. I was hoping that Minister could consider programmes with coaching involved in psychometric tests, like the Dominance, Influence, Steadiness and Compliance (DISC) or Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), and if such programmes can be launched soon or put on trial.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I thank Mr Ang Hin Kee. On SEED Institute, as Members know, we have actually supported it for some years and, in fact, SEED was a very strong contributor in training early childhood educators into the market. So, it has been a very strong partner.
Today, if I remember correctly, it still has a contract with WDA to work in partnership until 2019. Of course, we cannot pre-promise further contract extensions but I think it has a strong track record of being a good partner. I hope we can continue to work with SEED so long as it can continue to maintain its high standards of professionalism, governance and quality of training.
As for life coaching, we will take in the Member's suggestions. We will consider it in a way that does not lead to abuse.
The Chairman: Dr Lim Wee Kiak.
Dr Lim Wee Kiak: Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister of State regarding student care centres. I am quite glad to hear that all schools will have student care centres by 2020. my first clarification is: how does MOE plan to roll out this plan? Which are the areas that will have the student care centres first? I ask this because, in very high demand areas, like mine in Sembawang, we need more after-school care services. So, hopefully, when rolling out, the Ministry could consider the local demand.
Dr Janil Puthucheary: I thank Dr Lim for his question. The rollout will depend on a variety of factors. Local demand is certainly one of those. Space availability is also important. But the key issue for when a centre can develop and how long it will take us to reach a centre in every school is the availability of quality provision for student care centres. We do need to make sure that the providers of the service have the staff with the ability to provide appropriate services and sufficient supervision to make sure that the children are well-looked after. We take into account the suggestion that we should prioritise some areas and I will study it.
The Chairman: Ms Foo Mee Har.
Ms Foo Mee Har: Madam, I would like to thank the Acting Minister for bringing up the subject of aptitude admissions. Clearly, the Acting Minister did not open a can of worms but really open up a window of opportunity for many young people.
So, Madam, I would like to ask the Acting Minister on real cases. For example, a resident who met me last night, for five years, he has tried to go into polytechnic, having completed his Higher Nitec.
In that period, he has taken on roles working in McDonald's, Sushi Express, human resource, doing sales in a bank, all wanting to pursue a diploma in polytechnic to do business studies. He is articulate. He is positive. He has lots of energy. He participated in the Youth Wing. These are all the qualities you would want.
So, my clarification, Madam, is whether, for an individual like that who has attempted three times, the Ministry would consider his case for this year's admission rather than wait till next year where he has to wait yet another year.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I thank Ms Foo Mee Har. I confirm that I have received her appeal and we will look into it. But I just want to sound a note of caution here. Because the Member rattled off some things that he did. When we talk about aptitude-based admissions, it is different from saying that you cannot meet the academic cut-off and, therefore, I take your sports and your community work into account and I deem that you meet the cut-off point. It is not like that. That is what we call discretionary admission, to make up for a failure to meet a cut-off point.
This is aptitude-based admission. That means, if he has really worked very hard on the ground over all the years, helping the disabled, the needy and the low-income and now he says, \"I want to do a degree or I want to do a Diploma in Social Work\", that is a consideration for aptitude-based admission.
I just handled a case recently. She is a mature candidate. She never did a diploma before; worked in the food and beverage (F&B) industry for 17 years; now, being a mature worker, she wants to do a diploma full time and so she puts her name through the system based on aggregate score, in her case it is GCE \"O\" levels 17 years ago. On that, she was sent to the nursing course. She appealed to me to say, \"Why nursing? I have been working in F&B for 17 years.\" So, we raised her appeal to the polytechnic. The polytechnic interviewed her and put her into a Food Science and Nutrition programme, which is exactly what she wanted.
These are the kinds of examples that we hope we can have more of in future.
The Chairman: Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin.
Ms Kuik Shiao-Yin: I have a question for Acting Minister Ng Chee Meng about report cards. First, I would like to clarify whether this new style of qualitative report card is practised consistently throughout all schools at all levels because it does not seem to be the experience on the ground.
The second question is: how can MOE also work with schools to clarify the mixed messaging that some parents are getting because I have heard of parents who are quite happy with the progressive report cards they are getting but, at the same time, they are also getting these assessment schedules, detailing extensively what is the weightage of grades and all that kind of stuff? Their complaint is that they are both confused about what the system wants from them, the holistic assessment, and there is also an issue of distrust. They are not sure whether there has been a real shift at all.
The third question is: I am aware that it is a work in progress, but is MOE working towards consistently connecting the non-academic competencies that they are tracking on these report cards to the desired key stage outcomes that MOE has listed? This is because, for example, at the primary school level, one of the eight desired key stage outcomes is awareness of the arts and, clearly, there are not many primary schools prioritising this as a competency on a large scale.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the questions. The answer is yes, it is implemented across all schools and if there are instances where there is unevenness in the implementation, we would appreciate if the Member can let us know and maybe we can look into that. On the rest of the issues that the Member has mentioned, I do not have those details today. If the Member does not mind, I can take it offline with her to clarify those specifics.
The Chairman: Mr Leon Perera.
Mr Leon Perera: Mdm Chairperson, just two points. Firstly, a point of clarification to the Acting Minister on the issue of class sizes which he discussed in relation to what Assoc Prof Daniel Goh had mentioned. The Minister mentioned there is no proven causal link between smaller class sizes and better educational outcomes. I would like to ask, if that is the case, then why is it that the OECD average is smaller, why is it that our GEP classes are smaller, why is it that our international schools in Singapore have smaller class sizes and why is it that the tuition centre classes that we have in Singapore all have smaller class sizes than the norm, compared to the primary and secondary schools?
The Minister alluded to the fact we can generate good educational outcomes in Singapore based on tests like the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and so on in spite of having larger class sizes than the OECD average. But we have to bear in mind that that is also with the help of the $1 billion tuition industry.
My question and my suggestion are − and relating to the point about sustainability − right now, we have a situation where enrolments are gradually declining and, if we assume that the attrition rate remains stable and that teachers are not made redundant, would not this create an opportunity to redeploy teachers in such a way as to reduce the class size, to avail ourselves of those kinds of benefits? So, that is my first point.
My second point is: just in relation to the increased emphasis on outdoor learning with OBS and so on, what are the provisions being made for students with physical disabilities in order to be inclusive towards them?
Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the questions. What I said in the speech is that on class size, according to research, on a systemic basis, there is no conclusive evidence. But we do go on a needs basis to tailor our education programmes for specific needs, whether it is GEP or for Normal (Technical) classes. Where the class size of Normal (Technical) is concerned, in Spectra and Crest secondary schools, we go down to 20 per class to meet those needs. So, it is not just an issue of having a smaller class size for GEPs but according to the needs. Both ends of the spectrum.
On OE learning and physical disabilities, we are running a pilot programme and it will be implemented in 2017. I would like to update that, just last evening, we were talking to Ms Denise Phua about how to have this inclusive programme for children with different disabilities. So long as they can meet the criteria of certain programmes, we would like to include them in those OE opportunities.
The Chairman: Dr Intan Azura.
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar: Madam, I would like to ask Parliamentary Secretary Muhammad Faishal with regard to the enhancements to the Creative Arts. How do the skills of Arts graduates from our polytechnics, NAFA or LASALLE meet industry requirements? And I understand that four more secondary schools will have the Enhanced Arts Programme. Are there plans to extend or eventually introduce this to all secondary schools?
My second clarification, Madam, is to Acting Minister Ng Chee Meng. I note that the Minister has not touched on reviewing academic streams in his response. But I would like to urge the Ministry to review academic streams in tandem with the PSLE review. I recognise that it is not easy because having the academic streams have made Secondary 1 posting and teaching a lot more expedient and targeted, but I think the timing is right. With five years or six years before the PSLE review kicks in, we should attempt to move away from this self-limiting sorting.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: I thank Dr Intan for the questions. With regard to the second question, what we have now is we have three more centres which are already hosting Art or Music Elective Programme (AEP), whereby students who are interested can also be routed to these centres.
Interestingly, I have the case of a student which I had no time earlier to mention during my COS speech. It is this student from Kent Ridge Secondary School, Leonard Chia. He did not get a place in a school which offered AEP but because of the three centres that we have, they enabled students like him to be able to have opportunities to take on the courses. We will monitor the situation. Nevertheless, we can see the value of art education to our people.
With regard to the arts education and graduates meeting the industry's need, you realise that when you engage someone who has those capabilities and that education journey, they are actually equipped with a multitude of skills. For example, these skills can be transferred and applied to the various industries. They are able to think critically on certain issues and they also have this sense of aesthetics where they are able to innovate and create products, which I think is very useful.
I gave the example of Ms Sasha earlier. She found that what she learned in her polytechnic became very useful in marketing. That has somehow given her an edge and her employer, Singapore Grand Prix, found it very useful.
Another area is the user-experience design where, today, we see more and more companies, like OCBC Bank, the Airport SilverKris Lounge, as well as offices like HDB in Punggol, where they use such skills to innovate to enhance the user's experience. Our Arts graduates would be able to meet such a need in the demand for the industry.
All these are happening and you see the changing landscape not only in terms of what they can do but in terms of employment and job scope. And of course, at the local arts institutions, we have enhanced internships for the students who can learn from companies and transit to working life better.
The Chairman: I still see a lot of hands. Please keep your clarifications short. The purpose of clarifications is to seek clarification on the replies by the front bench, but not to add new points or to start another speech. Acting Minister Ng Chee Meng.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: Yes, Mdm Chair, I would like to reply to Dr Intan's question to me.
The Chairman: Yes, please.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the question. I appreciate the concern raised. But an equally important point in our education system is that, at the PSLE juncture, we would like to determine, after six years of education, how to tailor the secondary school curriculum to the needs of the individual child. As we know, each individual child has different abilities, learning paces and learning needs. PSLE, together with streaming, has allowed us to place students into the appropriate courses to best cater to their learning needs.
I have joined the Ministry for about six months and I looked at the history of our education. In the long past, we lost about 40% of our Primary 1 cohorts who started but did not finish secondary education. With the combination of different things that we have done, we have reduced dropout rates to less than 1%. So, this tailoring, while I do understand some of the potential downsides, does have its important educational outcomes.
But I hear the Member. Over time, the educators have also tried their very best to do different things to allow lateral transfers, across streams. Even where we have, let us say, a Normal (Academic) student who has done well, we will permit transfer to the Express course. For specific subjects, under subject-based banding, if we see a student who is very good at Mathematics and may be in Normal (Academic), we do permit and encourage him to take Mathematics at the Express level. These things that we are doing allow porosity. We try our very best to afford the opportunities for the student to excel in whichever course he may be in. This will always be evolving and we will be continuing to study the Member's proposals to see how we can further improve.
The Chairman: Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Madam, I would like to pose two questions to the two Acting Ministers. One, a lot of the plans that were outlined by the Acting Minister is for what you do for the students and to the students. But I said in my sharing that I think the education sector is not immune to the changes of this world. I wanted to hear the Acting Minister's views on what SkillsFuture plans MOE has for itself to address the new economy. How does the Ministry plan to help its staff meet these challenges and also adjust to these challenges?
Two, this is for Acting Minister Ng, on the PSLE review. It is definitely an improvement so that it is not such a fine score to work on. However, at the end of it, it still boils down to grades. I am just wondering what the Acting Minister thinks will be the game changer or the key that will unlock Singaporeans from our habit of chasing the grades and chasing the scores through tuition and, definitely, wanting to go for a degree for that matter. So, I am just wondering how the Acting Minister feels about that.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I thank Ms Denise Phua for her questions. The SkillsFuture plan for MOE will comprise the following. One is for teachers and, that is, at NIE. NIE has always been updating its curriculum and moving forward. It has a big role to play in SkillsFuture to upgrade and deepen the skills of our teachers.
At the polytechnics and ITE, many of them come from industry and they have to continue this strong effort to make sure that there is a rotation of their lecturers moving between academia and industry. That way, they keep abreast of what is happening in the industry and bring the lessons back into the polytechnics and ITE.
In universities, I actually spoke about this in my speech, where I shared research plays a big role because in our research universities, generation of knowledge is a core business and this is something we have to do better, especially for subjects relevant to Singapore and involving both global as well as local talent.
Finally, throughout MOE, all of us have the SkillsFuture Credit. As a Ministry, we will be giving them time, space and freedom to decide what to study.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: Mdm Chair, can I have your permission to answer the second part?
The Chairman: Yes, please.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the question. There is really no easy straightforward solution, no silver bullet answer that I can give for cause-effect outcomes. As I have tried to articulate just now, it requires a collective paradigm shift involving all of us, what we do for the student, so on and so forth, including societal definitions of success, things that Acting Minister Ong Ye Kung spoke about.
So, we do require a partnership with parents and students with the community and, ultimately, in the workplaces as well, on what would people eventually value. That is why in my speech I said that it would take time.
MOE has taken some steps and we are taking bolder steps to review many of these structures and policies. We want to take the step to reduce fine differentiation so that we, at least, free up some space for the students to smell the flowers, as I have mentioned.
MOE, however, cannot do any of these alone. We need all the different stakeholders to come on board with us, to value other areas beyond academics. The three areas that I have spoken about, we should look at them in totality and embrace them to reduce the emphasis on academics, more emphasis on non-academic areas, including character and values, and also provide, over time, a realisation of the possibility of every school being a good school, to open up choices and opportunities for students to pick and choose schools that will best meet their needs. I think this paradigm shift is needed and, again, I do apologise that I do not have a silver bullet answer, a simple one that will be able to move us into the realm that Ms Denise Phua has mentioned.
The Chairman: Mr Desmond Choo.
Mr Desmond Choo: Mdm Chair, I would like to ask Acting Minister Ong Ye Kung if we can have coaches and ambassadors to guide people on SkillsFuture-related initiatives, for example, in the use of the Credit.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I thank the Member for the question. As the Member knows, in NTUC, they set up e2i, which is a tripartite organisation with about 100 employability coaches. Likewise, when we set up WDA in 2003, we also took in all the employability coaches from the Community Development Councils (CDCs) and on the ground, that is, another 100-plus. So, we have over 200 people in the system who have done this for the last 10 years: meeting industry, meeting jobseekers and giving coaching. Let us be very careful. Let us not hire a whole new army every time we start a new scheme. There is an existing group of people with the experience that we can use and leverage to deliver this service that Mr Desmond Choo spoke about. And I think he has also just realised I have shot the arrow back to him.
The Chairman: Assoc Prof Daniel Goh.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: This is for Acting Minister Ng Chee Meng. While it is true that there is inconclusive research on the causal link between reduced class size and teaching and education outcomes on a systemic level, and that is because academics are so good at destroying at one another's research, there are provisional conclusive results that reduced class size would positively affect education outcomes for disadvantaged students, especially in the US and UK.
Given this conclusion, and because the Minister said that there is a possibility of considering improvements to the class sizes, would the Ministry consider pilot studies on reducing class sizes in secondary schools, for example, in mainstream schools that have more students with financial assistance, to see whether results would bear fruit in Singapore?
My second clarification is actually for the \"Teach for Singapore\" programme.
The Chairman: Keep it short, please, Assoc Prof Goh.
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong: Yes. What avenues are there for teachers who are passionate to teach disadvantaged students to take a sabbatical to upgrade themselves with skills outside the regular academic fields so that they can go and teach the disadvantaged students and then, to request for a transfer, where can they go and teach the disadvantaged students?
Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the questions. Perhaps, I will just give an update to Assoc Prof Daniel Goh. When we do a needs-based approach, we provide the necessary resources to disadvantaged students. In Primary 1 and 2, as I had mentioned, if students joining our schools are not able to catch up, we take them out of the form class into a smaller size of maybe eight to 10 students and we provide dedicated teaching resource, one or two teachers, to level them up in English or literacy or numeracy skills, for up to two years. In the time that I have been in MOE, if I recall the numbers correctly, about 6% of our students benefit from these programmes. They do graduate out of these support programmes. So, it is very tailored, as per our philosophy, where there is need, we will put in the necessary resources to level our children up.
For the posting suggestion that Assoc Prof Goh mentioned, when I visited Spectra Secondary School in Woodlands, I was very impressed by one teacher. She was a teacher at Raffles Institution. But because of her deeply ingrained desire to make a bigger difference to children with low progress, she decided to ask for a transfer to Spectra. As I had mentioned in my speech, in the context of Singapore, through NIE, we have a central institute, if you will, to train teachers to a very high quality. In this central system, we do allow these transfers for teachers with the passion that Assoc Prof Goh had mentioned.
The Chairman: Mr Seah Kian Peng.
Mr Seah Kian Peng: Two quick clarifications. To Acting Minister Ong Ye Kung, I want to clarify that he agrees with me that, for certain faculties where local context is important, such as Political Science and Public Policy, having an adequate core of Singaporean academics in such faculties is useful. If so, is the Acting Minister satisfied with the current status? And if not, what steps will be taken, going forward?
To Acting Minister Ng Chee Meng, I am heartened by the changes being made for the proposed changes to the PSLE system. Is the Acting Minister confident that with these proposed changes, it will truly reduce stress?
Mr Ong Ye Kung: I thank the Member for the questions. As I mentioned in my speech, ultimately, our local universities and the teachers, whether they are teaching or researching, must be able to teach Singaporean students about Singapore and put it in the context of what is happening in our part of the world.
Must it be only Singaporean faculty that can do that? I do not want to judge. I have met many foreign faculty and foreigners living in Singapore for a long time. Some of them serve in the SAF Volunteer Corp I talked about yesterday. And their hearts are with Singapore. So, I would not say that this is something only Singaporean faculty can do. So, I suspend judgement here. Ultimately, I do think, in a faculty, putting whatever they teach in our context is important. That, I agree with the Member.
Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the question. I am confident that our school system will do our very best to provide those opportunities and create that environment for our kids. But as I have said in the speech, it is a collective paradigm shift. MOE cannot do it alone.
Stress is something that is an aggregate of different factors. In our school system, as the Members would know, ultimately, there is a personal choice involved: what the students may want to do, what the parents may want him or her to do. We must make this collective shift together, otherwise, the likelihood that it will just continue with a high-stress, high-focus emphasis on academics will continue.
For us to move out of this as a society, I have put up the proposal for us to really look at the totality of education. Do not just overly focus on academics because there are other areas that will be equally important that would lead to good life outcomes, whether it is leadership skills, the ability to take initiative or the tenacity to carry on despite setbacks.
I recently met a group of industry leaders for lunch. They tell me that they are very confident about our Singaporean workers, in that they have the ability, the intellect. But they hope and they gave feedback to us that they hope that our Singaporean worker or graduate from our school system would demonstrate some other abilities or attributes, especially initiative, how to seize opportunities and not just solve problems that are given to the Singaporean in the workplace.
Hopefully, through these steps that we are taking and, over time, with patience, we make a collective paradigm shift that would be needed for the next step of Singapore's development.
The Chairman: Last clarification. Mr Png Eng Huat.
Mr Png Eng Huat (Hougang): Thank you, Madam. This question is for Acting Minister Ng Chee Meng, still on the subject of class size, but for secondary school. There is a falling cohort size. Would the Ministry consider taking the opportunity to reduce class size then for secondary schools, rather than not posting any student to those secondary schools and eventually those schools got to merge or close?
Mr Ng Chee Meng: I thank the Member for the question. With reference to school mergers, falling cohort size is a reality. Enrolment is coming down across the different schools. It would not be right to roll back enrolment in a healthy secondary school to bolster up the lowered enrolment in the other secondary schools because this would lead to a distortion of outcomes.
In our philosophy, when we look at merging schools, we want the students to have the best opportunities to explore different programmes. If you do not have the critical mass in low enrolment schools, we will not be able to afford the programmes, the CCAs that Members have also mentioned. If it is 400 students versus 1,200 students, you can see the potential differences in opportunities to be given to the 400 and the 1,200. So, we do need a certain critical mass and there is a certain design in our school system that affords us these resources for them to run all these different CCA and so on and so forth.
The Chairman: Ms Denise Phua, do you wish to withdraw your amendment?
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng: Madam, Education is the social leveller, transformer of lives, potential game changer for the future of people in countries. So, I just want to thank the Acting Ministers, Minister of State, the Parliamentary Secretaries and the rest of the MOE team for their commitment, their diligence in sticking to this journey of delivering excellent education for all of us, regardless of our age and abilities. Thank you so much for doing this.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $12,140,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $660,000,000 for Head K ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
The Chairman: Order. I propose to take the break now.
[(proc text) Thereupon Mdm Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mdm Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair at 4.10 pm.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 3.50 pm until 4.10 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.10 pm
[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]
[(proc text) Debate in Committee of Supply resumed. (proc text)]
[Mdm 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 S (Ministry of Manpower)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan (West Coast): Madam, I beg to move, \"That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Estimates be reduced by $100.\"
I have been lobbying on Labour market testing, strengthening the Singaporean Core and greater protection for our local professionals, managers and executives (PMEs) since 2011. It has been an arduous, but positive journey.
We have seen the introduction of the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) and the National Jobs Bank in 2014. There is also greater focus and awareness of the move towards not just fair, but progressive workplaces and employment practices by the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) and our tripartite partners. However, anecdotally, when I meet fellow PMEs, I am still hearing complaints of two kinds.
First, the hiring-of-own-kind practices and companies advertising in the Jobs Bank for the sake of advertising and treating FCF and the Jobs Bank as mere window dressing. This happens not just in big multinational companies (MNCs), but also small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Some also share with me that employment agencies and placement companies are also where some of these malpractices happen. The general concern is over the glaring disproportionate number of foreign PMEs in certain sectors and companies. In some cases, the nationality bias results in job losses of local PMEs and hiring of foreign PMEs for jobs which local PMEs can fill.
In this regard, I wish to ask the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) to provide an update on how effective FCF has been the past 18 months since the implementation in levelling the playing field for our local PMEs and in eradicating \"nationality bias\" discrimination in hiring practices, including by employment and placement agencies.
I know the Minister shared that he has nailed 150 companies into what he calls the \"watch list\" where he sees the \"double weak\". I also know he has been having coffee with some of these employers and businesses on the \"watch list\". Has there been an improvement since the last time he shared about this \"watch list\" and can he share who these companies are?
In the same vein, I wish to ask about the progress of the National Jobs Bank and how MOM and the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) have been able to make use of the data to extrapolate the job openings and identify the skills gap to better facilitate job matching and employment, especially for PMEs.
As I am also very concerned with the placement rate from the Jobs Banks, I have three concrete suggestions for MOM, in respect of what we can do to tackle those companies with the \"double weaks\", to better strengthen the Singaporean Core.
Suggestion one – to put a clamp on companies with discriminatory practices, I propose a company-specific and tiered approach which can be scaled up to the industry level, if needed.
Level 1 involves stringent scrutiny of companies which display the two \"weaks\". Those with a weak Singaporean Core and a weak commitment to hire and develop Singaporeans will be identified and differentiated. Stricter Employment Pass (EP) application conditions and requirements are to be enforced on these companies.
Level 2 involves suspending all EP applications of the companies identified at Level 1 which continue to show a disregard or weak commitment to hire and develop a Singaporean Core and turn a deaf ear to warnings.
Level 3 involves imposing a PME dependency ratio. Should companies remain recalcitrant, a company-specific PME dependency ratio can be put in place as a final option.
Suggestion two – to encourage building a strong Singaporean Core, companies which outsource some of their services, such as information technology (IT), human resource (HR) or accounting and even construction projects, can, within the terms of the tender or contract prescribe that there must be a Singaporean Core in the workforce of that entity bidding for the contract or tender. I suggest the public sector can take the lead in this.
Suggestion three – over and above existing requirements under the law, there could be tighter regulation and accreditation of employment and placement agencies to weed out biased and unfair hiring-of-own-kind practices and ensuring a strong Singaporean Core. By the same token, these agencies, recruitment companies and even company HR departments should not and must not treat the advertising requirement as mere window dressing and their practices should be closely monitored. Their frontline and placement staff should undergo mandatory training and accreditation to understand the concept of building the Singaporean Core and the objectives of both FCF and the Jobs Bank.
On the converse, I suggest that MOM also recognise and offer carrots to those companies and businesses which demonstrate an exemplary and progressive Singaporean Core and a resolute commitment to hire and develop Singaporeans. In short, I submit that MOM must make it \"tougher for the weaker and better for the stronger\". Mdm Chair, in Chinese, please.
(In Mandarin):[Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I have three suggestions regarding how to strengthen the Singaporean Core of our workforce.
First, for individual companies, I propose a company-specific approach to eliminate the discriminatory practices. Level 1 involves those companies that have the double \"weaks\". Stricter criteria are to be applied when they apply for EPs.
At Level 2, if those companies identified at Level 1 turn a deaf ear to warnings, we will suspend the application of their EPs.
At Level 3, should the companies remain recalcitrant, a PME dependency ratio can be imposed.
Second, prescribe in the outsourced contract certain rules and regulations to make sure that contractors build a team of staff with Singaporeans as their core. The public sector can take the lead in this.
Third, make sure employment agencies advertise job vacancies according to the legal requirements. In addition, their frontline staff should undergo training so that they better understand FCF and the Jobs Bank. Conversely, MOM can also consider rewarding those companies whose staff have a Singaporean Core.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim (Nee Soon): Madam, since late last year, going around the coffeeshops and local events in my constituency, I could sense that my residents have started seeing and feeling the impact of an economic slowdown. Firstly, they observed the slowdown in international markets and, they have being observing such signs in Singapore. They are worried for fellow Singaporean workers, especially their family members, neighbours and friends.
I would like to ask the Minister, given the current economic slowdown, what will the Government do to help displaced local workers when companies have to downsize or close down. For example, is there scope to increase the number of Professional Conversion Programmes (PCPs) to help retrenched professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) to find jobs in growth sectors?
Our older workers are also worried about the current economic slowdown, as they feel that they are the ones that are going to be affected the most. May I know how is the Ministry going to help older workers to save their jobs?
Madam, I have also come across discussions about the balance between Singaporean and foreign workers. There are companies which have the locals' interest in their hearts, although they have a regular EP inflow. However, there are also companies whose hearts are not with our locals, where I received feedback that they use the locals in filling up the numbers and are not particularly interested in developing our local workers. I would like to ask the Minister what is being done to manage the EP inflow and ensure that the EPs complement rather than compete with locals, and what more can we do for our people. Allow me to continue my speech in Malay.
(In Malay):[Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Madam, in my interactions with the Malay community in Nee Soon and in events organised by Malay/Muslim bodies, just like other Singaporeans, they expressed concern about an economic slowdown. They are worried that their jobs, as well as the jobs of their family members and friends, will be affected by an economic slowdown.
Madam, we must provide more support to our local workers. I would like to ask the Minister what types of support will the Ministry provide to help displaced local workers when businesses have to downsize or close down. In addition, how will the Ministry help older workers save their jobs? Related to that, what is being done to manage the EP inflow and ensure that they complement, instead of competing with locals?
Mr Lee Yi Shyan (East Coast): Mdm Chair, in the face with tightening labour supply, manpower-intensive sectors, such as retail, food and beverage (F&B) and hospitality, are finding it hard to cope with their day-to-day operations. Some businesses have expressed doubt that they could ever expand even if demand for their businesses increases, shortage of workers being the main constraint to growth.
Nonetheless, many SMEs in the services sectors have realised that relying on manpower to grow their businesses is not a long-term solution. They are responding to the Government's call to raise productivity.
SMEs are seeking ways to improve, to become more efficient and effective. For most, improvements made are piecemeal and incremental, often not significant enough to eliminate existing headcounts or avoid new hiring. Not surprisingly, therefore, only SMEs which undertake fundamental changes revamping their business models stand a good chance to succeed and become manpower lean. But the learning curve is steep.
Implementation experiences from SMEs attempting major revamps often suggest that manpower loading can become worse before it gets better. This is because businesses need to maintain two parallel systems until the new one stabilises and can replace the old system.
May I ask, therefore, how the Ministry would coordinate the efforts of the various agencies to help SMEs to embark on holistic and comprehensive re-modelling of their businesses? How would the Ministry address SMEs' needs for additional manpower during their transformation efforts?
Apart from helping individual SMEs, does the Ministry see any benefits of grouping SMEs of the same industry for effective intervention? Would the Ministry provide an update on what the response to the Lean Enterprise Development Scheme (LEDS) has been since its launch in September last year? What are the profiles of LEDS applicants so far?
Mdm Chair, a number of trade associations and chambers (TACs) and businesses I talked to very much welcomed the Industry Transformation Programme (ITP) announced during Budget. Businesses have high hopes that ITPs will be able to meet sectoral needs because of their customised nature.
While recognising that there is much we need to do in embracing technology and modern management as part of the restructuring, some businesses are also worried whether we will have the right quantity and quality of workers and skills to support the restructuring efforts. Given that our labour participation rate is already almost the highest in the world, our indigenous workforce growth tapering off, businesses question if we should selectively let in foreign talents with skillsets to strengthen our Singapore Core, to render our workforce more competent and versatile overall.
Aligning our HR development strategy and skills upgrading programmes with ITP is, therefore, the best way to ensure success in our economic restructuring. The close working relations among the public and private sectors and the unions are pivotal.
In this regard, may I ask how the Ministry is involving the tripartite partners in the development of ITP and their roadmaps? Would MOM officers be represented in the Transformation Champions to co-drive ITP?
Mr Lim Biow Chuan (Mountbatten): Mdm Chair, over the past year, I have seen more Meet-the-People Session (MPS) cases where residents seek help because they have lost their jobs and are unable to find alternative jobs.
In a recent Straits Times article, it was reported that higher-skilled workers make up the bulk of layoffs. More than seven in 10 who lost their jobs last year were PMETs. This is quite disturbing as one would have expected that higher-skilled workers would have less difficulty keeping their jobs.
Given that the economic lookout for the next year appears much weaker, I am concerned that more Singaporeans, especially PMETs, will find themselves displaced and unable to find another equally well-paying job. There is little comfort if Singapore proclaims that we have full employment when, in actual fact, the majority of unemployed workers are Singaporeans.
I would like the Minister to update the House on how effective the Jobs Bank is, in helping Singaporeans find alternative employment. What about efforts by the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) and the Community Development Councils (CDCs) in helping Singaporeans find employment? Would there be a report card on their efficacy?
Can the Minister also comment on whether companies are simply complying with the rules without making any real efforts to help Singaporeans find jobs? If so, what can MOM do to discourage such companies which are not sincere in providing employment for Singaporeans? If such companies list their vacancies in the Jobs Bank without any effort or attempt to employ Singaporeans and instead insist on employing foreign workers on EPs, would MOM consider imposing a one- or even two-year ban on the company from employing any foreign employees? Send a strong signal to these companies that there are serious consequences for flouting the rules.
Can the Minister also share how we can tweak our policies to ensure that Singaporeans are able to find alternative jobs quickly if they are retrenched or lose their jobs due to no fault of theirs?
I urge the Government to ensure that Singaporeans should always remain the core of the workforce. Any foreign workers who come to Singapore to work on an S Pass or EPass should complement our workforce rather than displace our Singaporean core.
I had, in my Budget speech, asked the Government to consider introducing a retrenchment benefit law to ensure that Singaporeans who have lost their jobs would receive compulsory compensation whilst they reskill themselves. Many other countries have similar retrenchment compensation laws. I know that this will have a financial impact on the companies. But I urge the Government to study this so that we can be fair to employees who have lost their jobs through no fault of theirs and, in the process, allow them some time to find alternative employment. It will also deter companies from retrenching their staff just so that they can employ less expensive foreign employees. The details can be worked out so that the financial burden would not be too heavy on the companies.
Mr Thomas Chua Kee Seng (Nominated Member): Madam, in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin):[Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Good afternoon, Mdm Chair, fellow Members of Parliament. The manpower problem faced during the economic transformation phase is of great concern. For example, when PMETs from MNCs sought employment with SMEs recently, employers hesitated because of their \"high education, high position and high pay\". PMETs on the other hand, felt that the environment and benefits of local SMEs are not as good. They were stranded in a situation of mismatched expectations.
This is a regrettable situation. On one hand, SMEs are unable to hire talents while, on the other hand, PMETs are unable to find employment. This situation will continue to worsen. To allow everyone in the workforce to have a role to play, the Government, businesses and individuals need to seriously seek out the reasons and come up with countermeasures.
An SME business owner once told me that he would very much like to transform. He has attended courses and even hired consultants, but he ultimately needs an assistant to help in the execution. Taking advantage of the current environment, when SMEs are able to recruit experienced PMETs on board, the boss would have found a capable assistant. Please allow me to use the famous Chinese classic novel \"Romance of the Three Kingdoms\" as an analogy. Liu Bei was also an \"SME\" and only managed to recruit Zhuge Liang after three attempts. From then, his \"business\" developed rapidly and even managed to contend with the \"larger corporation\" headed by Cao Cao.
As the situation of an ageing population escalates, businesses will face a more severe manpower challenge. I belong to the post-war Baby Boom generation. The total population of this category of more than 900,000 – making up around a quarter of the population – is now moving on to the retirement phase. When this generation of people was younger, it happened to be the time when our country started attracting many MNCs and embarked on rapid economic development. But the MNC-driven economic development is changing.
According to the statistics by the Economic Development Board (EDB), from 2011 to 2015, the fixed asset investment, total business spending and jobs created by foreign companies have been declining. SMEs can take this opportunity to attract more well-educated talents into their companies. SMEs used to provide supporting services to MNCs, but through transformation, they can now grow to become promising Singapore enterprises which can provide a more stable career path to its employees than MNCs. However, SMEs need to create higher-quality job opportunities in order to attract these talents.
SMEs felt disappointed with the publicity on skills upgrading in these two years. For example, the news reports on encouraging skills upgrading that I often read consist of Institute of Technical Education (ITE) students being placed in important roles by MNCs after working hard to upgrade their skills. During the recruitment process, SME owners not only cannot afford to hire graduates, they find it difficult to attract tertiary students and face restrictions on employing foreign talents. Now that even the ITE students are all going to MNCs, who else can they hire?
To my knowledge, many polytechnic and ITE graduates have been entrusted with important roles, assuming major responsibilities in SMEs. We should also widely promote these stories. We should not give SMEs the perception that only MNCs provide career opportunities.
Another publicity that requires adjustment is skills upgrading vis-a-vis pay increments. Upgrading of skills is to correspond with the upgrading of enterprise and the needs of the industry, which, in turn, increases employability. However, this does not naturally equate to pay increments. Some jobs have become obsolete or redundant, thus, employees need to acquire new skills in order to remain employable.
Currently, the manpower issue which I am most concerned about is the Sectoral Manpower Plans (SMPs) which the Government is developing for 25 industries.
EDB, which services MNCs, is leading seven; the other three are hotel, retail and construction. The remaining 10-over industries have yet to be announced.
I would like to understand, in the 10-over sectors, are the needs of SMEs being considered? If yes, I hope the Government can develop training content according to the actual needs of SMEs.
Thus, I would also like to urge the TACs from the various industries to participate in the SMPs proactively to develop more talents for the practical needs of local SMEs through the Government (public), enterprises (private) and TACs model.
Assoc Prof Randolph Tan (Nominated Member): Mdm Chair, in his round-up speech, the Finance Minister has succinctly characterised the challenges for our employment landscape as creating the right jobs, equipping workers with the right skills and bringing about the right match. MOM spearheads the complex and demanding role of realising these goals. In recent years, its officers have ramped up the activity on the ground. I thank the Ministry for taking such a difficult but important hands-on approach and I urge it to continue despite criticism from some quarters.
The Ministry's efforts over the last few years have bought us valuable lead time. As the situation on the ground becomes increasingly complex, I would like to ask about its use of analytics to expand its capacity to monitor the labour market situation.
On the one hand, it is clear that some companies are experiencing problems with the restrictions on supply of foreign manpower. On the other hand, there are also reports of over-representation of foreign manpower in certain instances. Although the overall evidence suggests that such problems are not widespread, why are these two extremes occurring at the same time? Are they symptomatic of some deeper flaw in our system? Is our labour market infrastructure up to the task of incorporating the participation of foreign manpower for the longer term?
Is it possible to use data from the Jobs Bank as well as other labour market transactions to examine these problems, to understand if they are problems of matching? In particular, could the Ministry assemble data on hiring experiences to properly understand if there are differences between the jobs matching process for locals and foreigners? Clearly, there are important privacy concerns. Hence, analytics plays a crucial role, because it is possible to build into such an analysis complete anonymity while preserving the broad patterns that are of interest in voluminous transactions data.
The reason why I am raising this is because the pendulum seems to have swung in the other direction. The chorus of voices against foreign manpower is growing louder by the day. Are we sure we are moving in the right direction? Are we sure we are not swinging too far in the opposite direction?
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo (East Coast): Mdm Chairperson, with the current limited workforce growth and productivity trends, how will Singapore continue to develop and strengthen our local workforce and build a strong Singapore core especially for our PME roles? As PME jobs make up more than 50% of the workforce, there will be increasing pressures given the current economic outlook and employment trends to build the depth and the quality of the local workforce for sustainable growth and for Singapore to be able to continue to attract investments.
I welcome initiatives like the Career Support Programme (CSP). As the current employment trends are a result of both cyclical as well as structural changes in the economy, CSP addresses not only wage and employment support but, more importantly, it addresses the critical aspect of training and skills upgrading. It benefits both employer and employee with wage subsidy as well as it allows employers time to assess the competency of the employee while it provides the employee the appropriate support for training and skills upgrading in that one year.
As CSP is now in place for about six months, can MOM share how many employers have participated in CSP? What is the number of mature PMEs that are on the programme and the progress made? Can MOM consider allowing more mature PMEs who have been made redundant to be eligible for CSP by reducing the eligibility period that the PME has been out of work to be less than the current six months?
With the current changes and the impact of technology, the workforce may not be able to keep up, reskill or upskill fast enough. With this, we must recognise that there will be skills gaps. So, while we need companies to build the Singapore Core, we must recognise that businesses do need time to do so. For companies that are committed with a clear plan and commitment to invest in building a Singapore Core, can MOM take a differentiated approach and provide greater support to these organisations? As restructuring and reskilling require time and resources, can MOM allow for transitional manpower adjustments during that period? This will allow the time and access to resources to train and to advance the skills transfer to the local workforce to build a strong Singapore Core.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mdm Chair, like many of my fellow Members of the House, I strongly believe that we should do more to strengthen our Singaporean Core. Minster Lim Swee Say had described the ideal situation as when local and foreign PMEs do not compete with each other for jobs in Singapore but rather work together to compete for jobs with the rest of the world. We will reach there one day. At this moment, there are still frequent complaints about foreigners doing jobs here that can be performed by Singaporeans. Could the Ministry share how serious the situation is?
What is being done to ensure that EPs complement rather than compete with locals, and what more can we do? Are we going to have stricter EP application conditions and requirements to manage the EP inflow?
Does the Ministry look into how long a particular job has been filled by a foreigner? In cases where it is necessary to hire foreigners, we should ensure that foreign companies execute transfers of skills and expertise to Singaporean employees over time. If a foreigner is replaced by yet another foreigner after a number of years, I would suggest the company be interviewed so that MOM can find out why the transfer of duties to a Singaporean had failed to take place and what can be done to rectify this.
Would the Ministry share with us the success and challenges of the various schemes for retrenched PMETs and the National Jobs Bank? How successful is PCP in helping retrenched PMETs find jobs in growth sectors and is there scope to increase the number of PCPs?
The culture of an organisation, including its hiring practices, is set by the owner or chief executive. The Ministry's senior management should consider having more frequent dialogues and meetings with the owner or chief executive to talk about their hiring practices, starting from the \"double weak\" and \"weak\" companies. This will enhance mutual understanding of the employment situation.
For PMEs who are referred to career counselling programme, we should ensure that the counsellors are more senior and possess more experience than the PMEs that come for this programme. They could also take on the role of a mentor, in addition to counselling and career guidance. The counsellors could be senior management or senior officers of the Ministry, industry TACs or volunteers who possess management experience. This could also be a hiring opportunity for these counsellors if they find the PMEs a good match to their organisation's needs.
Presently, job positions paying a fixed monthly salary of $12,000 and above are exempted from the FCF. This should not be the case, as Singaporeans should have the chance to be considered fairly for all jobs, regardless of salary range. I would like to request MOM to review this.
I would also like to ask whether more could be done for non-PMETs. They would need career counselling and time to adjust to new training to help them handle new jobs. Interim financial assistance should be paired with job advisory and placement to help them tide over the difficult time between jobs.
Mr Seah Kian Peng (Marine Parade): I had previously asked the Minister to consider a \"carrot\" approach to recognise and reward companies that have demonstrated and continue to develop a strong Singaporean Core.
I offer two possible \"carrots\". One is to consider giving such employers flexibility to employ foreign staff by considering the employer with wholly-owned subsidiaries in different sectors and consider them as a group in applying the quotas. Another possible \"carrot\" is to allow companies which employ persons with special needs a higher foreign staff quota. My point is that beyond the cash incentives and support, it is possible to have a nuanced recognition and reward system.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo: Madam, based on the recent manpower statistics, the unemployment rate for PMETs in Singapore is higher than the average overall unemployment rate. With the tight labour market, while there are still job opportunities, the biggest challenge for PMETs has been gaps in skill or experience to match the available jobs. A higher proportion of PMETs are finding it difficult to secure employment. Employers are facing challenges finding the right resources to hire for jobs that they need to fill.
Apart from efforts of SkillsFuture to help workers gain experience and skills required for available job opportunities, what more can be done to achieve more effective matching of the required skills upgrading and Singaporeans to jobs, especially for mature PMETs? Many employers, especially SMEs, have expressed that they are facing challenges attracting suitable Singaporeans to fill the jobs they are hiring for. Can more be done in this area for job matching programmes for SMEs to tap on to get the right skills and support for job matching?
Can more be shared on the TechSkills Accelerator Programme? It was announced in Budget 2016 that apart from enabling our people to learn new infocomm technology (ICT) skills, it will also be a job placement hub for the ICT sector to enable Singaporeans to seize opportunities in new growth sectors. How will the job matching and placements be done and how can Singaporeans interested in the job opportunities in the ICT sector be able to tap on the programme?
Dr Intan Azura Mokhtar (Ang Mo Kio): At our last Parliament Sitting, we learnt that the ICT sector will have about 30,000 vacancies to be filled. While it is understood that not all of these positions can be filled by Singaporeans, I find it too convenient to ask Singaporeans to accept that we would need foreigners to fill these positions because we do not have enough babies born annually or there are just not enough Singaporeans who join the workforce each year. I believe we can do more.
There are more than enough Singaporeans who are retrenched from their jobs in industries that have been negatively impacted by the slowing domestic market and global economy, or those who have been displaced because of increased mechanisation, \"technologisation\" and \"informatisation\" of industries, for instance, those in the marine and process, or manufacturing sectors, and even those in administrative or management positions. Many of them are in their 40s or 50s, while some are in their 60s but who are still keen to be employed.
Once retrenched and displaced, they settle for unskilled or lower-skilled jobs, such as cleaning tables or the streets or taking food orders, and accepting salaries which are a fraction of what they used to earn. Let me state that there is nothing wrong in taking up such jobs, but it is a pity if we were to allow this group of Singaporeans to be underemployed, just like that. They end up in arrears for their monthly bills and financial commitments and developing low self-esteem.
We must help these fellow Singaporeans to reskill, specifically in terms of IT-related skills and other skills needed in growth sectors, such as medical healthcare and technology, gerontology and eldercare, the creative industries and even education and training that also require current IT skills.
I would like to urge the Ministry to work with the Ministry of Communications and Information and the Ministry of Education and with our post-secondary institutions, such as the polytechnics and ITEs, to train, reskill and upskill retrenched or displaced Singaporeans to fill as many vacancies out of the 15,000 that we have been informed about. This is something we must do.
For a start, we can enhance and expand our PCP so that we can prepare Singaporeans for the IT industry and the other growth sectors that I mentioned earlier.
I would also propose that our PCP be extended to help reskill and upskill Singaporeans to join or return to the engineering profession. In a recent job fair in Ang Mo Kio Group Representation Constituency (GRC), I was talking to the HR manager of a local company that specialises in roadworks and construction. The company was looking for project engineers for their roadwork projects. He lamented that it was difficult to employ Singaporeans even though the company offered a salary of $7,000 a month for these project engineers. Well-paying jobs are there for Singaporeans, but there may be a substantial mismatch of skills and experience in order to qualify for such jobs. PCP can help to plug this gap and bring back some engineers who have switched careers.
At this juncture, I would also like to urge the Ministry to look into how eligibility requirements for training programmes, under SkillsFuture or otherwise, can be reviewed to move away from requiring formal educational qualifications as a prerequisite. I would like to urge partner institutions, such as the polytechnics, to consider prior work experience on par with formal educational qualifications, such as the GCE \"O\" or \"N\" Levels, so that more mid-career individuals can qualify for courses to upgrade themselves or be certified to embark on a new career.
Yet another group of Singaporeans that serves as a valuable manpower resource is our retirees and stay-at-home mothers (SAHMs). With the current shortage of childcare educarers and caregivers for the elderly, I am sure we can develop and pilot a training programme for our retirees and SAHMs to be trained as babysitters, child minders, educarers or caregivers for the elderly. We should seriously explore this and find effective ways in bringing back to the workforce our retirees and SAHMs.
Ms K Thanaletchimi (Nominated Member): Mdm Chair, under the various SMPs, much has been done to develop job placement and training programmes (Place and Train Programme), including PCPs, under WDA. How many workers have been retrained under these programmes? How can we better support workers in transition across jobs and industries?
I would also like to ask if MOM could provide some form of wage support beyond the training allowance for working people in transition under the Job Placement and Training Programmes to encourage more to move to growth areas in the various industries. More coordination between the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) and the industry to ensure maximum linkage between Pre-Employment Training (PET) and Continuing Education and Training (CET) is important.
Increasingly, it would be a challenge for fresh school leavers to secure a job upon their graduation unless enterprises provide opportunities to these school leavers under the SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme. Companies need to change their mental models of seeking experienced workers even though applicants may have the right attitude and passion for the job.
Can I ask the Minister how many places for the SkillsFuture Earn and Learn Programme are available for polytechnic and ITE students in 2016?
I shall now speak about the National Jobs Bank. The National Jobs Bank, introduced in 2014, was created to support FCF and, at the same time, help businesses to connect with the local workforce.
It would be good to know the success rates of Singaporeans who managed to find a job through the National Jobs Bank. Does the Ministry monitor the impact that the National Jobs Bank has brought about in supporting the Singaporean Core objective?
Just like Mr Chong Kee Hiong, if the intent is to ensure Singaporeans are considered and hired for well-paying good jobs, the question arises if it is necessary to exempt jobs that pay more than $12,000 in the portal and if this serves the intended purpose. Perhaps, there needs to be further review to examine the impact of the National Jobs Bank and if it requires further enhancement, such as the 14-day duration of job posting and classification of jobs based on sectors, so that it serves the well-intended purpose of supporting FCF.
I shall now talk about uplifting the professionalism of HR practitioners in SMEs. With evolving economic needs, the HR professionals' role is also evolving to be a demanding one. HR practitioners must, therefore, be on top of their profession to play an effective role, especially those employed in SMEs. Can I ask the Minister if there can be specific mandatory training programmes designed for these HR professionals to update them on current laws and best practices? This is also timely as we will soon be introducing the Employment Claims Tribunal (ECT) to settle disputes.
Following the passing of the Protection from Harassment Bill in Parliament in 2014 to better protect people from harassment and anti-social behaviour, a Tripartite Workgroup on Prevention of Harassment at the Workplace was set up to ensure workplaces are safe for all employees. Coming from the healthcare sector, this issue is close to my heart. Many frontline healthcare workers often have to face the brunt of distressed patients and their families, yet are afraid and reluctant to speak up for fear of retaliation. An organisation cannot function effectively when workers are afraid.
Since the implementation of the Protection from Harassment Bill, I would like to ask the Minister for Manpower how many harassment and workplace bullying cases have been reported. Following the release of the Tripartite Advisory to encourage employers to put in place procedures to manage workplace harassment and develop a harassment prevention policy as part of their risk management process, can more be done to encourage sectors in high risk, for example, public services, to take the lead in fostering a conducive and safe organisational culture?
On workplace safety, the number of fatal incidents has been on the rise. We have extended many efforts in promoting workplace safety and enforcing compliance, especially in the recent year. However, there are employers who are still taking a complacent stand and, as a result, putting the lives of many innocent workers at risk, which also affects their families. What new measures are taken to address the concerns of workplace safety proactively? It has to be a collective concerted effort of all parties in the society. We need to do more to change mindsets, and there is a huge difference between the words \"save\" and \"safe\", although both sound almost the same. Some errant employers \"save cost\" and not provide \"safe\" workplaces for their workers. We need to identify these irresponsible employers so that potential applicants know who are the errant employers if continuous education and awareness efforts fail to change behaviour and responses.
On hindsight, the Minister can also consider a review of the work-life grant criteria in the interim so that the assistance made available is attractive enough for employers to support flexible work arrangements (FWAs). The sectoral tripartite committee should explore FWAs as an option to attract and retain within their respective industry sector. This could be done by sharing best practices and for progressive companies to assist other companies in this regard. A more concerted effort is needed to make this part of an organisational norm to encourage working people, especially working mothers, to continue to be in the workforce without disruption.
On mandating eldercare or family care leave, we have evolved over the years as a nation to place greater importance on caring for the family, community and society as a whole. As a cohesive nation, we acknowledge that for this to materialise, there needs to be holistic support for families to grow and the elderly to be cared for by their loved ones. For years, the Government has been promoting and encouraging firms to provide for eldercare or family care leave. However, companies have not readily adopted these leave provisions into their systems. The issue of an ageing population has been on the national agenda for some time. But more needs to be done to widen the adoption of elder care leave or family care leave. I would like to ask the Minister if minimal provision for family care leave can be made mandatory.
On supporting mature workers, the last item, during an economic downturn, mature workers in their late 50s most fear losing their jobs. These job losses may be due to cyclical effect or are structural in nature. The Special Employment Credit is definitely a good form of support to ensure the continuous employment of such workers. It would be even more incentivising if companies that employ or retain mature workers 60 years and above could enjoy a rebate for foreign worker levy or pay lower levy. However, it is notable that implementation can be a challenge. With a sectoral approach of reviewing foreign worker quota for each company, perhaps the Ministry can explore this further, if possible.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Mdm Chair, we have a rapidly changing employment landscape with job losses, changing workforce profile with more PMEs, changing work arrangements with more freelance professionals and a sombre economic and market condition.
These scenarios have given rise to several concerns amongst the working population. I am highlighting three areas of concern and offering three suggestions.
The first is the rise in the number of PMEs who are facing workplace disputes and issues. From 1 April 2014 to February this year, the National Trades Union Congress' (NTUC's) U PME Centre saw 1,420 PMEs coming to us for our placement, protection, progression and privileges (4P) services.
Of the total, about 500 were on workplace issues.
I am aware MOM has started public consultation on the proposed ECT. On this note, I am asking, with the setting up of the ECT, how can MOM ensure that the sanctity of tripartism is preserved and that the role of unions in grievance handling, advisory, providing representation for our members are not diluted?
I therefore, suggest and submit that the Tripartite Mediation Framework provided under the Industrial Relations Act, which avails union members to resolve three heads of claim, must also consequently have its rules amended and have even greater, wider, deeper ambit, scope and jurisdiction than the ECT which avails all, including PMEs, and with no salary cap.
Can there also be a one-stop facility similar to our U PME Centre, or can we use our existing U PME Centre as a front-facing one-stop facility for all PMEs when they require workplace advice or consultation on workplace issues?
Second, recently, I had an encounter with a unionised company which is in trouble and had been trying to obtain a scheme of arrangement but failed and now applying to Court for judicial management. It is provided in law that a moratorium is imposed when a company files for insolvency proceedings. This means no proceedings can be taken against that company, unless with the leave of Court.
My concern and frustration are with the plight of the workers there. What is horrifying is that the workers have been left unpaid their monthly wages since late last year when the insolvency proceedings started. They are hanging on to the company hoping that some form of retrenchment benefit can be paid to them or that there are monies to be obtained when the company winds up after a proof of debt is filed.
In reality, there are many other secured creditors and the workers may well be unlikely to obtain any retrenchment benefit as the union is unable to take the company to the Industrial Arbitration Court to obtain an order for retrenchment benefits. There may also not be any monies left for distribution via section 328 of the Companies Act after the company winds up. In any case, the maximum amount they can get is $12,500 under section 328.
Such is the plight of the workers. They will also get nothing if they leave their jobs now. Many have been with the company for years. I am told their Central Provident Fund (CPF) contributions are also unpaid for this year and partially for those months late last year. The workers feel helpless. The union has also engaged legal counsel but there is still nothing which can be done. Is there really nothing which the authorities can do against the company or help the workers?
There are about 100 workers still there and many have already left. In many ways, this is a case where the law provides no recourse for these aggrieved workers who may work for months for free and not paid. I am not sure how long this case will drag on and the end is definitely not soon.
Besides some of the financial assistance schemes by unions and the community, can there be specific legislative provisions or regulations in place or exceptions made to help these workers who are left in the lurch?
By the same token, I know of another company which is planning to wind up later this year and has started to prepare for it. Yet, when asked to negotiate for an agreement on retrenchment payouts, it is simply dragging its feet and waiting for the time to come so that they need not pay a single cent.
Can the laws be amended such that for disputes on wages and retrenchment benefits, the case can be allowed to proceed for an Industrial Arbitration Court hearing during the period of \"moratorium\" so as to obtain a judgment or order before the company actually folds.
The third area, unlike traditional contract of service where there is an employer-employee relationship and labour legislation providing protection, there are currently no laws or regulations to help the growing group of freelance professionals in Singapore who are in a contract for service situation.
Even the Trade Unions Act prohibit NTUC and our unions to represent them or formally organise them except through the formation of associations which are not unions per se and not vested with powers provided in the Industrial Relations Act.
The number of freelance professionals in Singapore as of June last year stands at 170,000. Not a small group and I expect it to grow with the advent of the sharing economy and the nature of work, workforce, workplaces and work relationships.
I have had many engagements with freelance professionals via our PME Unit's events. Their top three complaints are late payment or non-payment, no provision of outpatient medical privileges and work injury compensation coverage. The problem we face is that nowhere in the world are there specific laws protecting freelancers and that many freelancers are unable to even band together to form an association. They are not allowed to be represented by unions and their only recourse is to the Small Claims Tribunal with a jurisdictional cap.
NTUC has been trying to assist these freelance professionals and we have started a freelance and self-employed unit and the U-Associate programme. Since 2013, NTUC, in partnership with the Law Society, has started legal clinics, conducted legal primers and even did up a pocket series booklet for them, such as this, to equip them with an understanding of their rights, privileges and responsibilities in partnership.
I submit that we should do a serious study on what we can do for them through a dedicated piece of legislation like a recent Bill that was tabled in California to protect freelancers, especially when the sharing economy and crowdsourcing are happening.
The Chairman: Minister Lim Swee Say.
The Minister for Manpower (Mr Lim Swee Say): Mdm Chair, with your permission, I have asked the Clerks to place an infographic, MOM Committee of Supply (COS) in brief, on the Members' seats during the tea break.
I thank Members who have shared their insights and questions on the labour market in Singapore. I would like to take some of the points now and I will take the rest in my second speech.
Minister Heng Swee Keat said in his round-up speech that Budget 2016 is but \"one step in a long journey\". From the manpower angle, this is not a walking step but a running step. In fact, more like a jumping step.
Since coming to MOM just about a year ago, I have been asked many questions on our labour policies. Employers looking for workers say they cannot find local workers. They ask: can MOM relax on foreign workers, up the quota, down the levy and be more pro-business? Workers looking for jobs, especially those looking for PMET jobs, say they cannot get the jobs that they want or the promotion they feel they deserve, so they ask: can MOM be more pro-worker? Why not \"Singaporean first\", why not \"Singaporean Only\"?
In the past five years from 2010 to 2015, employment rates for ages 25 to 64 have gone up to 80.5%, among the highest in the world. The unemployment rate, at less than 2% overall and less than 3% for locals, is among the lowest in the world. Income growth was broad-based. Real wage went up by 3% in real terms a year, not just the median wage but the bottom 20th percentile in Singapore. The profile of jobs has continued to improve. Local PMET employment now accounts for 54% of our total local employment. So, these are good employment outcomes for our workers and our people.
The next five years will be much more challenging. We are going to see a drop in the growth of the labour force, a sharp and structural drop. The growth in our local labour force will drop by more than half from an average of 55,000 a year in the past five years to just about 20,000 a year for next five years. So, a drop of more than half.
Likewise, the growth in our foreign workforce will drop, too, also by more than half, from an average of 55,000 per year in past five years to just 20,000 to 25,000 a year in the next five years. So, put together, growth of the Singapore workforce will continue to drop from 4% a year in 2011 to 2014, to 2% last year and likely to be around 1% by the year 2020.
This has a great impact on the future employment landscape in Singapore. The days of more than 100,000 job growth a year are over. It is simply not sustainable. With no gain in productivity, we have moved from a 4+0=4 or 4% growth in the Singapore workforce plus 0% growth in productivity to give us a 4% gross domestic product (GDP) growth during the year 2011 to 2014 on average.
Last year, it dropped to 2+0=2 or 2% workforce growth, 0% growth in productivity to give us a 2% growth in our GDP.
The question is: what will happen next? From 4+0=4 to 2+0=2, what is going to happen next? Will employment outcomes in the next five years be better or worse? I can see, I can think of three possible scenarios – the Good, the Bad and, of course, the Ugly.
The first scenario, we are unable to transform fast enough; continue with zero productivity growth; continue with manpower-led growth of more than 100,000 jobs a year. MOM will have no choice, we do a U-turn, relax on our foreign manpower and that is what many employers are asking for.
From 4+0 to 2+0, we now go back to 3+0. We have to let in more foreign workers to make up for the slower growth in local manpower. With 3+0=3, yes, we have 3% GDP growth. But what happens to our local to -foreign worker ratio? It will continue to drop from the two is to one today, maybe to one is to one, one day and, beyond that, Singaporean workers will become a minority in our local workforce. The Singaporean Core will be weakened further and, in fact, the local-foreign divide will deepen further. That is why I call it the \"Ugly\" scenario.
The second scenario, to avoid this ugly outcome, MOM can stand firm, no U-turn in our foreign manpower policy, continue to moderate the intake of foreign manpower. But without breakthrough in productivity growth, we will move from 4+0 to 2+0 to eventually 1+0=1. So, in other words, low growth will become the new norm, in fact, hovering around stagnation. If that happens, it is a matter of time that unemployment in Singapore will go up and wage growth will stop, and I call this a \"Bad\" scenario for all.
The third scenario is for us to recognise that technology is changing the nature of jobs and global competition is changing the nature of investment. Instead of manpower-led growth, 100,000 new jobs a year, we go for manpower-lean growth. We speed up transformation, instead of going for larger quantity of jobs growth, we go for better quality of job growth.
Step by step, sector by sector, we move from high value-added to value creation. From value creation to value multiplication; and then we can return to positive productivity growth again. Instead of going from 4+0, 2+0 to either 3+0 which is an ugly outcome, or 1+0 which is a bad outcome, we should strive for 1+2, 1% growth in our workforce plus 2% growth in our productivity to give us 3% growth. So, 1+2=3 is the good outcome that we must strive for.
The challenge for us is how to make it happen. Along the way, if we are more pro-business and less pro-worker, we could end up with a strong economy but a weak Singaporean Core. If we are more pro-worker and less pro-business, we can have a strong Singaporean Core but a weak economy. Neither is good because growth cannot be sustained, eventually we will go downhill.
The only way to succeed is for us to become more pro-business and more pro-worker both at the same time, so that, hopefully, we have a Manpower-Lean and more Productive economy with a strong Singaporean Core.
This is why MOM will focus our labour policies along three main thrusts: first, to support industry transformation to become more manpower-lean and more productive; second, to build a strong Singaporean Core; and third, to strengthen the global competitiveness of the Singapore Workforce, comprising both local and foreign manpower.
First, to be a more manpower-lean economy and more productive economy. This is of great concern to MOM because if we fail to become a more manpower-lean economy, manpower will become the bottleneck in our future growth. Hence, Industry Transformation Maps are so important for us to visualise the industry of the future, to make better use of technology, manpower, innovation to break the bottlenecks of small size, limited resources, especially manpower limitation.
To forge a new mindset of lean transformation, lean innovation, from lean manufacturing to lean services, from lean industry to lean enterprise. Mr Lee Yi Shyan and Mr Thomas Chua will be pleased to know that we are giving special attention and support to SMEs. SMEs employ about two-thirds of our workforce, so the Singapore economy cannot become more manpower-lean, cannot become more productive and innovative, if our SMEs are not.
Hence, MOM, together with our other agencies under the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) family, launched the Lean Enterprise Development Scheme (LEDS) last year to help SMEs to develop their capabilities, manpower and market, including international market. And with the newly announced Automation Support scheme, in addition to capability, manpower and market development, we can now add on one more pillar, which is, capacity expansion. Therefore, we are very determined to speed up LEDS during this slowdown.
My commitment to SMEs is that those with solid plans, real action to be more manpower-lean and productive, you can be assured of our best support, not just from MOM, but all the other agencies under LEDS. In fact, MOM will also provide transitional flexibility in foreign worker support. This was the point brought up by Mr Lee Yi Shyan. Later, my colleague, Minister of State Teo Ser Luck, will share more on LEDS.
Our second thrust is to build a strong Singaporean Core. Every Industry Transformation Map will be accompanied by an SMP formulated by the Sectoral Tripartite Committee. This will address the concern of Mr Lee Yi Shyan on whether MOM will be involved in co-driving the development of the Industry Transformation Plan.
In fact, we will be coordinating our efforts through the SMPs. Ms Jessica Tan expressed her concern about whether we can minimise this mismatch between skill and job. With SMP, we will be able to look ahead and identify what type of jobs will be created, what kind of skills need to be developed for the future, so that we can support the growth of this transformed industry of the future. In this way, it also helps our people to upgrade, reskill and, along the way, we aim to build a strong Singaporean Core in all major sectors of the economy, as we continue to transform these industries.
The hotel sector is one good example. It is not a sexy sector, but it is an important sector, alongside many other sectors. We are going to see a 20% increase in hotel rooms in Singapore by the year 2020. Those in the hotel industry are fully aware that it is not possible for them to grow the workforce in the hotel sector by 20% because of this keener competition for manpower as we slow down the growth of the workforce.
Under the SMP for the hotel sector, we have three priorities. Firstly, how to become more manpower-lean? The industries are working very hard to reduce the staff-to-room manning ratio, so that as the room number goes up, you do not have to increase the number of workers at the same proportion. Secondly, how to strengthen the Singaporean Core? How to attract, develop, retain and improve the quality of locals working in this sector? And last but not least, the service transformation into hotels of the future, so that we can remain globally competitive.
In support of this direction by the industry, through the SMP, the NTUC e2i, Singapore Tourism Board, WDA, unions and the industry associations, we are working very closely together to attract ITE, polytechnic and degree holders under the executive development programme for the hotel sector for them to join the hospitality, F&B and retail sectors. This was the point brought up Mr Lee Yi Shyan.
First, help them to learn supervisory skills, put them through 12 to 18 months of on-the-job training (OJT), so that they can become duty manager, assistant manager and, from there, develop their career. We are also facilitating the mid-career PMETs through professional conversion.
At the same time, we are helping them to become more lean and more productive. For example, rank-and-file workers in the hotel sector are now undergoing this process of multi-skilling, so that each person can perform more than one task, thereby optimising the deployment of manpower and, along the way, help them to enhance their wages. Another example would be through the use of radio frequency identification (RFID) to strengthen the process of automation.
In fact, the Singapore Tourism Board and WDA are now working together with the hotel industry to formulate an initiative to be known as the Lean Hotel Initiative. In short, make it a movement in our hotel sector, so that the jobs of the future in this hotel sector will become attractive, so that the Singaporean Core will be stronger.
Dr Intan Mokhtar asked about the ICT sector. We will adopt the same line. The ICT sector, under the leadership of the Infocomm Development Authority (IDA), is formulating the SMP. All the areas of opportunities will be identified and we will step up efforts to channel more Singaporeans into this sector.
As we speed up industry transformation, redundancy will go up, as seen in recent years. Most are able to find jobs, hence, our low unemployment today. Yet, we are still concerned because we are seeing, among the workers made redundant, there are more mature workers; there are more PMETs, and, in fact, they also need more time to find jobs, especially the mature PMETs.
Besides helping to strengthen the Singaporean Core at the sector level, sector by sector, like what we did for the hotel sector, we must also do more to support Singaporean workers at the individual level.
We share the concerns of Assoc Prof Muhd Faishal Ibrahim, Mr Chong Kee Hiong, Ms Jessica Tan and others, and we will do more to support them. The \"Adapt and Grow\" initiative will provide enhanced employment support to help Singaporeans, especially the mature PMETs and those affected by redundancy.
We launched CSP in October last year to encourage employment of mid-career PMETs, especially those who are long-term unemployed, who have been out of a job for more than six months. Under CSP, to encourage the employers to hire these mid-career PMETs and at the same time pay them decent wages of at least S$4,000, we offer a wage support of 10% to 40% for the first year of employment. A mid-career PMET who has been out of job for six months, can come under the CSP. We will help them to find employers. For the first year of his employment, under the CSP, we will subsidise wages of up to S$12,600 for that year for those older than 40. For those who are more than 50, it would be up to S$25,200 for that first year.
In the last five months, we managed to reach out to 200 mature PMETs who have been out of job for more than six months. So far, about half of them have successfully secured employment and most are with SMEs. Mr Thomas Chua may be happy to hear this.
We have very positive feedback from both employers and employees because, for the employees, they suffer a smaller cut in wages, given the wage support; for the employers, they have to bear lower wage cost, given the subsidies.
One example is Mr Kuan Mun Fai, 52 years old. He was a Business Development Director with an MNC for 23 years. He left the company. For seven months, he could not find a job that is suitable for him. He came under the CSP when it was launched in October. At that time, he was feeling unsure whether he would be able to get a job that he was looking for. But today, he is a different person, confident and positive. Under the CSP, within one month, we helped him to find a good job with a local distributor of industrial lighting products to develop markets in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and East Asia. Yes, he did accept a pay cut to join this company, but he is prepared to work his way up with this new employer. I wish him well.
To help more PMETs, we have decided to extend CSP to two more groups of people beyond those who are mature and long-term unemployed.
For PMETs made redundant and have difficulty finding jobs, meaning six months or more, we will waive the age requirement of 40. In other words, even the younger PMETs, having been made redundant, if they have difficulty finding jobs for more than six months, they can come under the CSP.
The other group will be for the matured PMETs made redundant. We will waive the requirement on the six-month lead time. In other words, the moment they are retrenched, for those above 40 years old, they can apply to join CSP straight away without having to wait for six months.
Under the CSP, we are unable to promise same job, same pay. What we promise is our full support to help them find jobs as quickly as possible to start again at mid-career with a salary of at least $4,000, so that they can grow again from there.
We are also helping more PMETs to switch careers. A lifelong career with the same company or even the same industry has become less likely for many people. Mid-career PMETs may have to make a career change due to redundancy or other personal reasons.
That is the reason why we launched PCP in 2007, where we provide training and wage support up to 70% for the entire duration of training, which is typically about two years or less.
Currently, there are 10 sectors under PCP. Since the launch in 2007, over 7,000 PMETs have benefited from this scheme. One of them is Chong Kim Seng, 49 years old. He was not retrenched, but he decided to make a career switch from electronics to biologics. Why? Because Mr Chong looked at biologics as an emerging sector with tremendous potential. There is a rising demand for medicines in Asian markets. There is a good career progression path, where there is a headquarters operation, manufacturing or R&D in this sector. He read in the public media that EDB has built up a healthy pipeline. There are new plants as well as plant expansions over the next five years.
In other words, this sector is going to grow in the next five years. There will be more jobs, there will more opportunities. As a result, Mr Chong took a pay cut willingly. As I said, he was not retrenched, but he decided to take a pay cut to move from electronics to biologics. He has to take a pay cut because he did not have any prior experience relevant to the sector. He was supported under PCP. He received a Workforce Skills Qualification (WSQ) Higher Certification in Process Technology and is now working as a Senior Quality Assurance specialist. In fact, with his maturity and adaptability, I am very sure that he will find biologics a good career and one that will be good for him for the next 10-15 years and beyond.
Dr Intan Mokhtar and Ms Thanaletchimi will be pleased to know that we are stepping up our efforts in the existing 10 PCP sectors. Healthcare is one example. I think Ms Thanaletchimi will be very interested in this area. In the last three years, on average, each year, we have attracted about 370 PMETs to join the PCP for the healthcare sector. This year, working together with MOH, we jointly launched added programmes for diagnostic radiographers, occupational therapists and physiotherapists.
As result, we see a 60% increase in response rates. This year, we have about 600 PMETs applying to go through professional conversion, up from the 370 per year in the last three years. We are doing the same for other sectors, such as media and design, going into areas like game writing and advertising.
We are also going to extend the PCP to more sectors, especially those sectors that are still hiring and growing, for example, chemicals and pharmaceuticals, logistics and retail. In addition to that, we also recognise that some PMETs may not be switching careers from one sector to another, but they want to switch careers within the same sector, but different areas of specialisation within the same sector. I think the point was brought up by Dr Intan Mokhtar.
Like in the case for ICT, there are now specialisations in areas of growing demand, such as cybersecurity, network administration, software development and other emerging jobs under the Smart Nation initiatives.
I am happy to say that, henceforth, PCP will now support intra-sectoral conversions, as well as inter-company conversions. If Company A is downsizing, retrenching workers, Company B could be growing and expanding. We will support Company B to take over retrenched workers from Company A and help them go through the professional conversion, even at the company level.
Another way to help mid-career PMETs is to match more of their expertise to the SMEs. This was the point brought up by Mr Thomas Chua. As mentioned by Mr Chua, many SMEs are growing and still hiring, but are looking for PMETs with experience and expertise. I was told that three areas of expertise are very popular and are in great demand by SMEs – business development; marketing and sales; and operational management. They are looking for these types of people.
On the other hand, we also hear many mid-career PMETs say that they are not familiar with career opportunities with SMEs. We launched P-Max just a year ago, to try out whether there is scope for us to connect the mid-career PMETs with the experience and expertise of interest to the SMEs, to connect them better. I am happy to say that in the last one year, we have so far matched over 800 mid-career PMETs with about 800 SMEs.
Evelyn Ng is one of them. She has 25 years of experience in operations, HR and administration with MNCs. She stopped work for one year to look after her mother. Under P-Max, we matched her expertise to an SME. She is now the HR and Administration Manager in an SME. She is not alone; there are more than 800 of them under this programme.
We are going to expand P-Max through more partners and more TACs. Our aim is to place more than 1,000 mid-career PMETs under this programme every year.
The schemes, that is, CSP, PCP, P-Max that I have covered so far, are targeted at the PMETs. As brought up by Mr Chong Kee Hiong, we should not neglect the rank-and-file workers as well. And we have not. The rank-and-file jobseekers will, likewise, get more help under our Adapt and Grow programme.
We have a very successful Place-and-Train programme at NTUC e2i. Under this programme, we provide 70% salary support of up to $2,000 per month and a training subsidy of up to 90%. Typically, these trainings would last three to six months.
Last year, e2i, under the Place-and-Train programme, has placed 1,200 rank-and-file workers. Soon, more sectors and programmes will be introduced this year. We want to expand the outreach of this Place- and-Train programme. For example, in the hotel sector, they are looking for Guest Services Officers. So, we will put it under this programme.
In the infocomm media area, they are looking for communications and network associates, cybersecurity rank-and-file at the National ITE Certificate (NITEC) level. We will include that under this Place-and-Train programme. In addition to Place-and-Train, e2i and the career centres of WDA, also conduct career guidance, the one that Minister Ong Ye Kung mentioned earlier. We provide career guidance and, every year, we conduct more than 200 job fairs to introduce more than 20,000 jobs to our jobseekers. Last year, we helped to place 11,000 rank-and-file workers.
Mohd Fadzli, 30 years old, is one of them. He was working as a cleaner, earning $1,500. He approached WDA Career Centre for career advice and guidance, so we guided him to move into the areas of Workplace Safety and Health (WSH). He went on to receive a WSQ Certificate in WSH, followed by a WSQ Advanced Certificate in WSH. Today, he is working as a Safety Coordinator earning $2,200, a big increase from $1,500.
In some cases, when we try to match the rank-and-file workers to the jobs, both sides are unsure about each other. The jobseekers are unsure about the job, and the employer is unsure about the worker. What do we do? We say, \"Never mind. Go on a work trial\". For 80 hours, WDA will pay a token allowance to the person. In other words, the employer does not have to pay anything. They work together for 80 hours just to try it out. It is for the workers to try out the job, and for the employer to try out the worker.
One example is Foo Lai Leng, 57 years old. She returned to work after 10 years, due to family commitments. She wanted to try out the early childhood sector, but she was not sure if this sector was suitable for her. We put her under Work Trial. After 80 hours, she decided that, yes, this is a career that she is interested in. And yes, the companies in this sector also found her suitable. Today, she is working full-time as an Assistant Teacher. She is now going for a Diploma in Early Childhood Education as her next target.
We intend to help more and more jobseekers, for those who are unsure about what to do under this Work Trial programme. WDA will up allowance from $360 to $600 for the 80 hours. At the same time, we will raised our retention incentive, meaning that after the 80 hours, if you decide to settle down with your job, we will give them an incentive of $500.
On the whole, for both rank-and-file workers and PMETs, we are stepping up efforts in employment facilitation for them. E2i, WDA, together with our partners, we have helped over 6,000 PMETs and 11,000 rank-and-file workers a year to get jobs
With enhanced coverage and support under the Adapt and Grow initiative, we are committed to help even more PMETs and rank-and-file workers. So, besides workshops, seminars, recruitment events, job fairs, we are going to introduce e-services. For example, e2i is now trying out this concept of virtual job fairs. This is a job fair but it does not happen in the real world; it is in the virtual world. They help the jobseekers to submit not resumes, but \"visume\".
I asked them what is the difference between resumes and \"visumes\". They say \"visumes\" stands for video resumes. What it means is that the e2i will help the jobseeker to do a video recording of how the person will describe himself, present his resume in a video form and they will send this video to the prospective employer. The prospective employer will look at it over the virtual world, on the Internet. Apparently, the response has been quite positive, so e2i intends to do more.
WDA, likewise, is going to introduce more e-career services, such as online matching, as well as online forum communities. We will also improve our information support for both employers and the jobseekers. The National Jobs Bank does contain a lot of useful information, I think the point brought up by Assoc Prof Randolph Tan. Our challenge is how to do more data analytics to make that information more useful, more user-friendly, and enable jobseekers and employers to do more self-help, so that they can navigate the information themselves.
We are now studying the \"best-in-class\" job portals in other countries. We intend to collaborate with leading-edge partners to improve the interface to make it more useful for both the jobseekers, as well as the employers, and we hope to see improvements progressively over the next 12 months.
Lastly, another area we will strengthen is our partnership with the employment agency (EA) industry. This was a point brought up by Mr Patrick Tay. We are going to work with them closer to understand the current placement practices and to see how we can work with them, encourage or regulate the industry in such a way that they will step up and pay more attention to the placement of local PMETs. We are going to partner the \"best-in-class\" placement companies, for example, those with industry specialisation or those who are jobseeker-centric.
Many EAs are employer-centric, rather than jobseeker-centric. We are looking for a new model where the EAs have the incentive to become more jobseeker-centric. At the same time, we are looking for those with a strong network of employers because then, they will know where the job opportunities are.
In short, our second thrust is to strengthen the Singaporean Core. First, sector by sector, through the SMPs to channel as many Singaporeans as we can into those respective sectors, to ensure that we have a strong Singapore Core in all the major sectors as we transform them.
Second, enterprise by enterprise, individual by individual, through these career and employment support programmes that I described earlier.
We will do our very best to help out jobseekers, but we need our jobseekers to do their very best to help themselves too. To my fellow Singaporeans, who are affected by redundancy, my concern for them is that the longer they are out of employment, the harder it will be for them to get back into employment. Therefore, our priority is to help them to get back to work quickly.
We are unable to promise no pay cut or a guarantee of job offers, but what we do promise is our best efforts to help, with a variety of options and the diversity of opportunities. We need them to do their best to help themselves. Be prepared to adapt to different jobs, if necessary, in different sectors and even different pay, so that they can grow again.
Mdm Chair, our third and final thrust is to strengthen the global competitiveness of our Singapore Workforce. The Singapore Workforce today is made up of two-third locals and one-third foreign manpower. As I had mentioned earlier, some have asked me, why not \"Singaporean only\", stop them from coming in and why not \"Singaporean first\"? They say, \"Only when no Singaporean can do the job or want to do the job, then we allow them to come in\".
I recall during my days with EDB, we walked the streets, we knocked on doors, we made cold calls, we made hot calls, we have tough calls, we have friendly calls. Call after call. Why? Because quality investments are very hard to come by. Competition is global. The better the investment, the stronger the competition, the stronger the competitors, the higher the demand of the investors. The toughest demand of all, for Singapore to meet, is not land or water, but manpower.
One good illustration is wafer fabrication plants. We chased after wafer fabrication plants because we knew that consumer electronics, after a while, low value-added will be phased out. We knew that, one day, the disk drives sector will go through major restructuring. We needed to find a new growth sector.
Twenty years ago, we identified wafer fabrication industry as the next growth industry. Each plant costs about US$1 billion to build. Each plant is water-intensive and uses one million gallons of water every day. But fortunately, we have NEWater. So, today, they are all supplied with NEWater. But most importantly, each plant will need 1,000 workers – 500 PMETs and 500 production specialists. Our local manpower is good, but we do not have enough, in terms of the range of expertise, experience and, most of all, the number. We just do not have the number.
As a result, we worked with these investors to borrow PMETs, to borrow workers from around the world, bring them into Singapore so that we can bridge three manpower gaps that we face − the number gap, the capability gap and the timing gap. And I must say that this manpower strategy has worked very well for us.
Today, we have 13 wafer fabrication plants employing 8,000 PMETs and 8,000 operators. And of the 8,000 PMETs, 76% 6,000 of them, are our local engineers, local PMETs. Yes, we have 2,000 foreign PMETs in these plants but, together with them, these 2,000 foreign PMETs, we are able to create jobs for 6,000 local PMETs.
Looking back, if we had insisted on Singaporean Only, Singaporean First, I think these plants and many other good investments and good jobs would not be here today.
So, having foreign manpower in our Singapore workforce is a plus for us, not because Singaporeans are not good but because we simply do not have enough in the number, readiness and diversity of capabilities to meet the needs of the global investors and to beat the offers of the other global competitors.
As we transform and grow into the future, we need to compete for even more, even better investments and we will have to face even bigger, even stronger competitors. The demands from investors will only get higher, especially on manpower. We stand a better chance of beating the competition, winning good investments and jobs if our local and foreign manpower here work together as one Singapore workforce − two-thirds plus one-third, as one Singapore workforce; rather than as two competing workforces − two-thirds versus one-third. Because remember, two-thirds versus one-third will always be less than one. At the end of the day, we must recognise that the real competition is out there globally, not in here locally.
Today, at the national level, foreigners account for 21% of jobs within the EP salary range, which is currently $3,300. So, in other words, of all the jobs in Singapore today that pay more than $3,300, foreigners account for 21%, and locals 79%.
By sector, the foreigner share varies, of course, across industries. The highest is 37% in infocomm and F&B. So, these two sectors have the highest 37%, 38%. All other sectors, all other industries, the ratio of foreign to local counterparts is less than one is to two, less than one-third. All the other sectors, less than one-third. We must also bear in mind that the growth of EPs has also slowed down, from 32,000 in 2011 to 9,000 last year. So, from 32,000, it has dropped to 9,000.
Even though the overall ratio, both at the national and industry levels, shows that foreigners are a minority, just one-fifth at the national level and, with the exception of the two, infocomm and F&B, they are all less than one-third. Yet, there is a perception among some Singaporeans that \"Why am I a minority in my workplace, working here in Singapore? Why?\" I think the answer is because of what I call the pockets of \"EP concentration\" in some companies, in some segments of the industry and at some locations. This is highly undesirable.
These pockets of \"EP concentration\" have led to the perception of a liberal intake of EPs, which is not the case, or accusations of unfair consideration for locals or discrimination against our local PMETs. I am also concerned that some of these employers may have violated the \"Employment of Foreign Manpower Regulations\", which require companies to take, and let me quote: \"…reasonable efforts to provide fair employment opportunities to citizens of Singapore, including efforts to attract and consider such citizens for employment or to train them and develop their careers and potential in the workplace\". We will, therefore, refine the processing of work pass applications for EPs. Currently, in processing EP applications, we assess only the individual-related criteria, that is, their qualification, experience and salary.
Going forward, we will also be looking at three additional factors that are \"company-related\". So, not just individual-related criteria but also company-related. And the assessment will be carried out by Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP).
The first assessment: how strong is the Singaporean Core in this company today? The majority of the companies, as I mentioned earlier, in the same industry, have a healthy Singaporean Core. But there are outliers, significantly weaker than the industry norms.
The second assessment: with a weak Singaporean Core today, do they have any firm commitment to nurture and strengthen the Singaporean Core for the future?
Thirdly, and finally, in consultation with relevant economic agencies, we will assess how relevant these \"double weak\" companies − that is, with weak in Singaporean Core and weak in commitment to nurture Singaporean Core – are to our economy and society. If they are not here, how much will we be affected? And if the answer is not much, then they are what we call the \"triple weak\" companies − weak in Singaporean Core, weak in commitment and, at the same time, weak in economic linkage and social impact.
Mr Patrick Tay has shared his concerns regarding these \"triple weak\" companies, which are our target for closer scrutiny. At TAFEP's recommendation, they will be placed on our \"watchlist\", not because we are anti-foreigner but because their behaviour has added to the deepening of the \"local-foreign\" divide in our Singapore workforce. If left unchecked, the sentiment of two-thirds versus one-third will continue to grow. It will weaken the unity, cohesion and, eventually, the overall competitiveness of Singapore.
TAFEP has already served notice on about 100 companies. These are the outliers in various sectors with a weak Singaporean Core, which is much weaker than the industry norm and all of them have a majority EP share of more than 50% and they display a weak commitment to recruit or develop local PMETs. TAFEP is engaging them to improve their HR practices and will do a company-by-company review in six months. So far, these firms have been broadly cooperative. Some of them have acknowledged that there is room to strengthen the Singaporean Core, some have approached e2i/WDA to source for local PMETs through programmes, such as CSP and PCP, that I talked about. Some have engaged external help to review their internal HR process.
For those \"triple weak\" companies with no progress made, at the recommendation of TAFEP, their work pass privileges can be suspended. Renewal of existing EPs, processing of new EP applications will be affected. Curtailment of work pass privilege will have serious consequences on their continued operations and growth in Singapore. So, we hope they will take corrective actions − move out of the \"triple weak\" list, do not just grow their business here but treat Singaporeans fairly, too, and help build a stronger Singaporean Core in their companies and industries.
And I want to assure the vast majority of companies out there that they are not \"triple weak\" and, hence, will not be affected by this move. MOM will continue to serve them as per the current practice. There is nothing to fear as long as they continue to treat our local PMETs fairly.
As we take firm action against the \"triple weak\" companies, we will also take proactive action to recognise and partner those who are \"triple strong\" − strong in Singaporean Core, strong in commitment to nurture the Singaporean Core and strong in economic linkage or social impact, especially in sectors that are crucial to our future growth − Smart Nation, advanced manufacturing, future services and more.
I am very encouraged and impressed by the few companies that I have visited so far. They believe in the development of human capital. Yes, they tap on foreign PMETs to complement and strengthen their overall team and, yet, at the same time, they pay tremendous attention to value and nurture our local talents by transferring capability to them, giving them exposure and nurturing them for higher responsibility locally, regionally and globally. So, in other words, instead of a mindset of two-thirds versus one-third, they embraced the mindset of two-thirds plus one-third. And for some of them, two-thirds plus one-third can actually be bigger than one.
To help strengthen the positive mindset of two-thirds plus one-third, we are going to grow this \"triple strong\" community. MOM will launch a Human Capital Partnership (HCP) programme later this year. We are going to help them tap on SkillsFuture to strengthen the Singaporean Core at all levels in these \"triple strong\" companies: Earn and Learn at entry level; Mid-Career Enhancement; Leadership Development; and to provide greater facilitation for them to bring in foreign talents with the expertise to strengthen and transfer capability to our local PMETs. We can study some of the suggestions made by Mr Seah Kian Peng.
One flagship initiative under the HCP is to nurture promising local talents into regional talents, into potential global talents and, tentatively, I intend to call this programme the \"Glocal\" Talent Development Programme. \"Glocal\" Talent. G-L-O-C-A-L. Now, through this combination of efforts, countering the \"triple weak\", partnering the \"triple strong\", we want to send a clear signal and strong message that whether you are local or foreigner, whether employer or employee, whether you are union or management, we all have a role to play to work together to strengthen the Singapore workforce to compete for the best investments and jobs to Singapore for all to share.
Mdm Chair, if I may speak in Mandarin.
(In Mandarin):[Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] During recent conversations with SME bosses, I asked them for their views on the current economic situation. They said the market is very quiet. Then I asked about their plans, and they said that since the outlook is uncertain, it is better to stay put. Their view is that, if they do nothing, they will not make mistakes, so they will ride this out first and make plans later.
I am not a businessman, but through my interactions with business leaders in the past years, I have learnt a few things that are worth pondering over.
The world is ever-changing. It changes regardless of whether times are good or bad. The difference is, when times are bad, changes are greater and they come faster.
The market may be quiet, but this is only what we see on the surface. In reality, the market is undergoing swift changes. This is why, while it is quiet, it is the time to make changes. Only through drastic changes and transformation, with a new look and new attitude, and by preparing well, can we face the future in a better shape.
Changes or transformations are often easier said than done, especially for SMEs. This is understandable, which is why I launched LEDS to consolidate all the schemes from various Government agencies, to provide a one-stop service to help SMEs transform. We will work on three areas to help companies develop capabilities, promote manpower development and explore new markets. With the addition of the Automation Support Package, we can speed up the transformation of today, to flourish and grow tomorrow.
During this transition period, SMEs may require some room for flexibility in hiring foreign workers, and the LEDS programme has taken this into consideration. In other words, so long as the enterprise has a clear and solid plan for transformation and is determined to persevere, MOM and various Government agencies will definitely give their full support and cooperation.
I hope SMEs can make good use of the LEDS programme to make big changes during the economic slowdown and not miss this good opportunity. With the changes taking place in the labour market, the business model of old is no longer relevant to the future economy.
\"After endless mountains and rivers that leave doubt whether there is a path out, suddenly one encounters the shade of a willow, bright flowers and a lovely village.\" Every cloud will have a silver lining.
If you run, I will run together with you; if you dash, I will dash together with you. Our future can be bright. If more SMEs run together, the impetus will be stronger and the drive will be bigger. We can push and nudge one another and run towards this bright future.
Singapore is not just an economy but a nation. Of course, we need to give our best to strengthen our economy through transformation. Only by doing so will we have enough resources for nation-building. Amid this uncertainty, we will be more pro-business and try to attract the best investments and job opportunities for Singapore.
However, we should not forget that the ultimate goal of economic development is to give opportunities for Singaporeans to fulfil their aspirations and ideals and to improve their quality of life. Therefore, not only do we need to be more pro-business, we also need to be more pro-worker, and help fellow Singaporeans constantly strive to better themselves, especially those impacted by the slowing economy.
MOM has expanded all the employment assistance schemes to help more workers, including the young, old, rank-and-file and PMETs, to constantly adapt and upgrade themselves as various industries undergo transformation. We will create new jobs for you and help you secure better job opportunities so as to strengthen our workforce with the Singaporean Core.
For workers who lose their jobs because of transformation, please do not lose heart. We will help you look for opportunities amidst this crisis, learn new skills and switch careers.
We will do our utmost to help you, but meanwhile, you must also do your best to help yourselves, for your own sake, and for the sake of your family.
So, let us be determined and strive hard together, make every job a better job, make every worker a better worker and make every career an even better career.
Let us sprint forth towards the future economy and the future Singapore.
(In English): Mdm Chair, I became an active member of Singapore Tripartism when I joined NTUC in 1996, 20 years ago. At that time, I learnt from then Secretary-General Brother Lim Boon Heng that a job is the best welfare for our workers.
Then, came the Asian Financial Crisis when we saw record retrenchments; I think about 29,000 workers lost their jobs. Unemployment went up. Workers and union leaders became even more and more worried about the future. So, I decided to add one more line: a job is the best welfare and full employment is the best protection for our workers.
The positive employment outcomes which I outlined earlier and that we have today did not come easy. It did not happen by chance. We actually made it happen here in Singapore.
In the Labour Movement, there is a strong spirit of solidarity because the Labour Movement always believes that unity is strength. And I believe that this spirit applies to the whole nation.
We have major challenges to overcome, as I had outlined earlier, to transform to become more manpower-lean and productive, to build a stronger Singaporean Core and to strengthen the global competitiveness of the Singapore Workforce. Working in unity, whole-of-Government, whole-of-Tripartism, whole-of-Singapore, I believe we can succeed, and we must succeed to secure the best welfare – good jobs, good careers and the best protection, high employment, low unemployment – for our fellow workers, our fellow Singaporeans. [Applause]
Mr Muhamad Faisal Bin Abdul Manap (Aljunied): Madam, it is recognised that MOM has taken a couple of steps towards ensuring fair employment within Singaporeans' workplace, with TAFEP and FCF as two examples.
However, there are two key problems with existing schemes. First, a lack of enforcement measures. While the Government has, in the implementation of FCF, recognised the existence of \"double weak\" firms, firms that are found to have flouted the rules will only have their work pass privileges curtailed. A second problem is the low take-up rates of voluntary schemes. To date, 4,439 organisations have signed the employer's pledge under TAFEP but, with 9,106 manufacturing establishments and another 58,784 service establishments in 2014, TAFEP's coverage does not seem substantive.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]
More can be done in pushing for an agenda in ensuring that the Singapore Core is able to contribute competitively but still ensure a competitive foreign labour force to be engaged by employers.
In order for the Government to effectively manage manpower policies in ensuring the Singapore Core and to enshrine the importance of fair employment practices within Singapore, I propose that a national employment framework be developed and instituted. This would unify all the current frameworks which loosely contribute to the Singapore Core drive into a single coherent framework to ensure minimal overlaps in policy.
To enforce the framework, additional enforcement powers to penalise double weak firms for discriminatory hiring practices should be implemented within the framework. Even then, such a framework will take time to be debated and hammered out. Transitional measures should be put in place to further the incentives for taking up fair employment practices.
I propose that a fair employment contribution fund where firms can contribute to help fair employment efforts. In return, firms can enjoy incentives, such as corporate tax rebates or CPF employee credits. The fund can be used to fund the agency overseeing any FCF activities.
Mr Chong Kee Hiong: Chairman, SMEs are a vital part of our economy. However, our SMEs face challenges, such as tight labour market, difficulty in obtaining loans and an increasingly competitive environment. More needs to be done to help SMEs stay relevant and competitive.
The LEDS is a welcome initiative to help businesses adapt to a manpower-lean landscape and incentivise the development of a skilled Singaporean Core. However, not many businesses seem ready or willing to take on this challenge. Would the Ministry share what has been done so far under LEDS to encourage and support business transformation, and what more can be done, given the current business environment? How could the Ministry work closer with TACs to speed up the take-up rate?
I am glad that the Government is introducing a new SME Working Capital Loan scheme to co-share with participating financial institutions 50% of the default risk of loans up to $300,000 per SME. Total business loans fell 3.5% year-on-year in January to $357 billion and SME loan growth is expected to be a low- to mid-single digit this year. This is understandable as the rising level of non-performing loans last year was a problem for Singapore banks. SMEs struggle to secure loans, some due to their short credit history and others due to a lack of collateral. This lack of capital is stifling businesses and hampering innovation in our economy. Will co-sharing of default risk change the bank's risk appetite in this business climate? Since it is an equal sharing of risk, will there be an appeal process through MOM if SMEs could not obtain the loans from the banks?
SMEs may also need smaller loans over shorter periods of time which banks may not be able to finance. It is heartening to note that, recently, crowdfunding sites have sprung up to meet this need of matching individual investors with small companies that require funds. The loans are more likely to be approved and are processed more quickly than at banks.
While this is good news for SMEs that need more funding, Singapore lacks specific guidelines for peer-to-peer lending. I would like to know whether there are plans to put in place guidelines to protect both lenders and borrowers that engage in peer-to-peer lending.
Mr Desmond Choo (Tampines): Chairman, progressive workplace practices are essential to supporting our young families in pursuing the aspirations of raising a family and building a career. A young Singaporean, especially a new mother, requires a transition period after her maternity leave to adapt to a new work and childcare routine. Especially for mothers who are breastfeeding, this transition period becomes even more critical. A period of flexible work arrangements can help.
During the Budget debate, my esteemed colleague, Mr Christopher de Souza supported my earlier call during the Debate on the President's Address to put in place eight weeks of FWAs on top of the 16 weeks of maternity leave. I support his bolder move of eight weeks of legislated right to unpaid maternity leave in view of FWA.
These FWA options are important symbols of where we stand as a society in valuing people as our most important asset. It also accurately reflects the challenges faced by our mothers. It also encourages our companies to seriously work towards providing FWAs.
Could the Ministry consider legislating the right to request for FWAs? Employees have the legal right to make a request in a reasonable manner for an FWA which can range from changes to hours, work patterns or locations of work. In the UK, an employer can be taken to a tribunal if they do not handle the request in a reasonable manner and there is a good business reason to do so.
In the meantime, can the Minister also share on the reasons for the relatively tepid adoption of FWA incentives under the Work-Life Grant? How can we enhance the Grant to improve the take-up rate of FWAs? What other measures has the Ministry implemented or is planning to implement to extend the adoption of FWAs? Can the Government and the Government-linked companies take the lead? Currently, we have the Tripartite Advisory on FWAs. Would the Ministry consider escalating the signature level and its support by turning it into tripartite guidelines of FWAs instead, to reflect its strong position in supporting young families?
Assoc Prof Daniel Goh Pei Siong (Non-Constituency Member): Chairman, according to the Minister, the proportion of employers with at least 25 employees providing one form of FWA stands at 47% in 2014. However, the actual number of employees who utilise FWAs appears to be very low. According to the Minister, the FWA incentive under the Work-Life Grant has covered only about 900 Singaporean employees in two and half years.
Incentives are low and insufficient to encourage the utilisation of FWAs. The current FWA set-up is entirely dependent on employers' voluntary initiative. Giving employees the right to apply for the Work-Life Grant to fashion and take up FWAs in their companies, with their employers incentivised by the Government grant to accept, can overcome employees' inertia to FWA adoption. After employees initiate such applications, employers can refuse a request on reasonable business grounds but must discuss options available with the employees, with the Ministry acting as facilitator.
Another thing that the Ministry could consider under the Work-Life Grant is to promote all roles flex for larger Singapore companies. Last year, PriceWaterhouse Coopers Australia extended flexible working to all 6,000 employees. In all roles flex, employees' performance rather than actual face time and hours spent working becomes the most important criterion for work evaluation. Vesting employees such flexibility allows them to be at their best, fosters happy families so that employees can focus on their work and, therefore, positively impacts productivity.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo: Chairman, with the increasing role that technology is having in both work and life, there is an opportunity to push for better integration of work and life. There is opportunity to leverage technology to allow for collaboration and productive work, allowing the focus on creativity and innovation, going beyond the mechanics of tasks. This will make work work for people. This, in turn, will raise productivity for organisations.
What measures are in place to encourage more FWAs for people in organisations for more effective work and, hence, greater productivity and higher employee morale?
As we talk about innovation and the need to restructure, I believe that we should also be open-minded to new models for work, rather than just thinking of providing FWAs for both small and large organisations. In fact, especially for smaller organisations, where resources are scarce, companies should innovate on how work is done.
The use of technology alone, however, is not sufficient. There must also be relevant changes to work processes, HR and performance policy to enable quality work to be done. Just imagine how much time can be saved if people are equipped and allowed to work from wherever they are.
When a professional completes a meeting with a client at the client's office, he is able to access the relevant information he requires via whatever device he carries, to go and prepare for his next meeting with his colleagues from any suitable location in the client's office or to go to a site nearby. Just imagine how much time he saves as there is no need for travel time in terms of the effort to return to the office before being able to have his next meeting. Just think about how much time that could also be saved or be released to do work which is needed. This changes the whole concept of allowing people to do their best work from wherever they are, made possible by leveraging the right technology to enable a quality work experience.
Several Members in this House have asked for FWAs for mothers, especially new mothers. I would say that, while well-meaning, this might actually be counter-productive. For flexible work to be made available should be a benefit made to all, so that it changes the whole work culture and you do not single out a particular group, and that people can, therefore, work and access the kind of work and information they need for quality work experience and clear outcomes and impact.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Tanjong Pagar): Sir, we believe that our HR practitioners are well-versed in HR knowledge. However, general HR knowledge may not be enough for these professionals to add strategic value to companies, industries and the Singapore economy. For that to happen, they must also acquire knowledge, hone skills and gain experience in the context of Singapore.
There are three key realities that HR practitioners in Singapore must know and be familiar with. The first is tripartism. I have spoken at length in my maiden speech in this House on the unusual tripartite partnership in Singapore and how it serves as a key economic advantage for us. The second is a local workforce that is maturing and soon peaking in numbers. The third is how to ensure a Singaporean Core within a nationality-diverse workforce.
Until and unless there is a deep and proper understanding of these realities and the design of methods to help companies do well in this context, the HR function will not be able to advance beyond a tactical and administrative role. Can MOM provide an update on the work of the HR Sectoral Tripartite Committee in relation to these aspects?
Mr Zainal Sapari (Pasir Ris-Punggol): Looking back, I am happy to note that the Government has shown great support in working with the Labour Movement and our Tripartite Partners to embark on breakthrough initiatives, such as the Progressive Wage Model, NTUC U Care Centre, Best Sourcing, the Inclusive Growth Programme (IGP) and others, to help low-wage workers. We are definitely moving in the right direction to become a more inclusive society. The importance of these initiatives cannot be understated. All these efforts have resulted in better wages and working conditions. But we still have a long way to go.
For several of our low-wage workers in Singapore, these initiatives provide hope at improving their livelihoods and hopes for a better future for their families. In my Budget Debate speech, I suggested that we set a target to have a higher real wage increase for our workers at the 20th percentile, compared to the median. Will MOM, perhaps working together with other relevant Ministries like MOF, consider setting such a target?
I also made a suggestion of mandating Annual Wae Supplements (AWS) and Annual Increments as part of the licensing condition for the cleaning, security and landscape sectors. This may be a more practical approach in helping low-wage workers, compared to mandating compliance with the National Wages Council's recommendations targeted at them.
The Government can also explore supporting job redesign initiatives to ensure alignment with SkillsFuture, so that workers can apply the skills they have acquired to improve their productivity. The SMP committees, where there might be a large number of low-wage workers, need to work together to have a more customised approach to meet the needs of low-wage workers in the respective sectors to achieve the desired outcomes.
That being said, can MOM provide an update on its efforts to uplift low-wage workers and the key outcomes so far? Are there plans to expand the scope of support provided to this group of vulnerable workers?
Mr Chong Kee Hiong: Chairman, in the last few years, the Government has introduced various schemes and initiatives to help low-wage workers, including Workfare and the WorkRight Initiative. It has also worked with Tripartite Partners to develop and implement the Progressive Wage Model in certain low-wage sectors. In the event that this group of workers lose their jobs, what kind of support does MOM provide to these vulnerable workers?
When companies downsize and close down, MOM should make it a requirement for the companies to direct the displaced employees to WDA, so that the Government can assist them through the various schemes and resources, such as the National Jobs Bank, CSP and PCP. Retrenched employees may not be aware of or are too shy to go for such help, but if this forms part of the retrenchment programme of the company, it will have more outreach.
The National Jobs Bank has a number of jobs in low-wage sectors, but many low-wage workers will need help to access this website. Some are illiterate. Others do not have computers or Internet connection. Would MOM consider setting up physical National Jobs Bank pop-up booths at accessible locations, such as MRT stations or community centres?
WDA runs a number of job and career support programmes. Would the Ministry provide an update on the effectiveness of and the challenges faced by these schemes?
For retrenched PMETs faced with structural unemployment, is there scope to increase the number of PCPs to help them find jobs in growth sectors?
Currently, Special Employment Credit is given to companies that hire older workers. To encourage companies to continue the employment of its existing older workers, would the Ministry consider extending a scheme similar to Special Employment Credit for these companies?
We should also provide more work options for older workers and retirees who want to work shorter hours or flexi-time. So far, FWAs are not very common in Singapore. Would the Government work with the TACs to assist companies in redesigning workflows to allow for more FWAs, so that it will become more widely adopted? Not only will this help to improve the work-life balance nationwide, but it will also enable more mothers, older or retired workers to participate in our workforce.
Would the Ministry share with us how widely have FWAs been adopted within the Civil Service and Government agencies? I would also like to know the form these arrangements take and the profiles of the involved staff in terms of job functions, seniority, gender and duration of the FWAs. Does the Ministry have any quantifiable targets and deadlines for the percentage of workplaces which offer FWAs? How does Singapore compare with other developed nations in this respect? These would be good benchmarks for private companies to follow.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye: Sir, our workers deserve safe working environments, so that they can return home safely to their families and loved ones after a hard day at work. Unfortunately, we continue to experience workplace fatalities where workers die due to workplace accidents.
The number of workplace fatalities has been increasing, from 56 fatalities in 2012 to 66 in 2015. According to the Workplace Safety and Health Council report released earlier this week, 22 workers have died from workplace accidents since the start of 2016. This is more than the 18 reported during the same period last year. These workplace fatalities included the two young lives which were lost in a tragic accident on the Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) tracks near Pasir Ris MRT station just last month.
These numbers are truly alarming and beg for immediate attention. We must prevent the occurrence of workplace accidents and these accidents can be prevented. We simply cannot take workplace safety for granted.
Can MOM share how it intends to work with the tripartite partners to strengthen and enforce workplace safety measures across all industries?
The majority of our companies are SMEs and they may not have adequate resources for comprehensive workplace safety measures. Some of the challenges they face include lack of expertise in workplace safety and the significant financial costs involved. Can MOM do more to encourage and support our SMEs in accessing and managing workplace safety more effectively?
Ms Sylvia Lim (Aljunied): Chairman, as mentioned in my Budget Debate speech, I believe the Government should put in more effort to track under-employment. Let me highlight three areas.
First, the Government could put into its headline numbers not just the employment and unemployment rates but two other indicators it is already gathering. For some years, the Government has been publishing some statistics on \"time-related underemployment\", showing the hours worked versus the hours that the employees are available and willing to work. The Government also gathers data on \"discouraged workers\", namely, those who have given up the job search. Headlining time-related underemployment and the number of discouraged workers will focus public attention on these two important statistics that are not captured in the employment and unemployment headlines.
Secondly, while I accept that measuring underemployment by time is probably the only internationally accepted measure, we know that working fewer hours is just one aspect of underemployment. How can we measure underemployment where a person is being underutilised in terms of his earning capacity? Could we consider collecting data on income earned versus median income for that qualification and age, or perhaps compared with previous income?
Thirdly, it has been noted in the US that in the last decade, the growth of temporary and contract jobs has surged, with the proportion of Americans working as independent contractors soaring. In Singapore, according to the Ministry's report on the Labour Force 2015, there were 202,000 contract workers. Does this figure capture all those who are on contract, freelance or ad-hoc work arrangements? Can we expect such alternative work arrangements to increase, given the uncertain economy, the need for employers to manage costs and the automation of jobs? If so, there will be more Singaporeans facing issues, such as poor job security, intermittent Central Provident Fund (CPF) contributions and little or no medical benefits. Are we adequately measuring the number of Singaporeans who are underemployed in this way?
Mr Azmoon Ahmad (Nominated Member): Mr Chairman, today, I must say I have learnt a lot from Minister Lim Swee Say. There are so many terms – PCP, CSP, LEDS. For me, in my line of work, LED means light-emitting diodes, but yours is a bit different. Nevertheless, I try to pick up.
The Minister have shared a lot about PMEs and I am really, really glad that so many things have happened. Nevertheless, I would like to express my concern about the PME group, especially after doing a lot of community work for the last 13 years.
Those in the middle-aged category who are skilled and possess tertiary educational qualifications, generally struggle to be re-employed after being retrenched. A Straits Times report on 20 July last year reported that 57% of retrenched Singaporeans and Permanent Residents managed to be re-employed within the next six months – 57%. For the PME group within this retrenched lot, only 49% are able to find a job within the same period. This is lower than the lot average. For those aged 40 and above, within the same group, the re-entry rate was only 53%. This meant that roughly half of the older PMEs could not find a job within six months of being laid off, let alone finding one of comparable grade and salary.
The NTUC PME Centre saw a jump of 265 cases of PMEs looking for assistance in employment and employability – from 253 cases in 2014 to 518 from March 2015 to February 2016. It is worrisome that 77% of the PMEs looking for re-employment were aged 40 and above.
Losing one's job through retrenchment can be a devastating, if not traumatic, experience. The affected worker may lose his or her self-esteem and self-confidence. It could lead to health issues when one's mental state is not at rest. For the family breadwinner, this is unthinkable.
Here, I would like to qualify that I appreciate all these safety nets that MOM has put in place. What I am going to propose here is not to undermine what has been done, but I thought it would complement the whole safety net framework.
To cushion the impending tough and challenging experience, I would like to propose a Temporary Income Shield (TIS), an insurance scheme that is modelled after the MediShield. TIS is for those who have lost their job due to retrenchment, resulting in an immediate loss of income. It is meant to cushion the impact, providing continuity to their daily life and mitigating potential disruption to their children's educational progress and the well-being of their elderly parents.
The proposed scheme is progressively decreasing in nature, that is, the payout is calibrated downwards towards zero at the end of a four-month period after being laid off. How does it work? For the first month, he/she receives 75% of his/her last drawn salary. In the second and third month, it is 50% of his/her last drawn salary and, the fourth month, which is the final month, it is 25% of his/her last drawn salary. Knowing it is going to go down, it will give him the urgency to find a new job. So, this is the proposal I have. The last drawn salary is capped at $6,000. That is the proposal I have. Of course, we can discuss further the details.
During the four-month period, the worker is encouraged to take up new skills to help him/her gain re-employment. All other existing schemes are made available. Upon re- employment, the TIS scheme will be terminated automatically. On the other hand, the scheme will lapse after four months, even if the worker has not gained any employment. It is just a temporary cushion given to the worker.
I would like to suggest that the scheme be offered to all working and salaried employees with a monthly income of not more than $10,000, and the payable insurance premium made from the worker's monthly CPF contribution. The usage of CPF contributions towards this TIS scheme is just an expansion to its purpose to supplement the workers in times of dire need, such as medical, housing, education, retirement and, in this case, unforeseeable loss of income.
I acknowledge that this idea is not a new one. It is similar to others which have been raised before. Like I mentioned in my speech in the Budget Debate, as the old economy gets replaced by a new one, job redundancy and obsolescence are inevitable. I salute the Government for taking proactive and constructive measures for our workers through retraining and reskilling. I believe we should continue to explore all possibilities, especially so when I reckon this issue will be with us for many more years to come. I also believe it is going to get tougher with each passing year.
The Chairman: Mr Azmoon, your suggestion is very interesting, but I am afraid you have run out of time.
Mr Azmoon Ahmad: I think we can study further if you need more information. Thank you, Mr Chairman.
Ms Foo Mee Har (West Coast): Mr Chairman, I thank the Government for the Silver Support Scheme, which is a major new feature of our social security system. This will be especially helpful to many women who \"work\" at home as the primary caregiver of their families, with no paid wages and little retirement savings. So, this is going to be very helpful to them.
Taken together with the slew of enhancements made to CPF in 2015, the scheme is now more attractive, more comprehensive and better catered to the diverse needs of Singaporeans.
However, how much does the average Singaporean understand of the CPF scheme in order to fully leverage its benefits? Other than a small group of financially-savvy individuals, it is not easy for most of us to remember the different tiers of interest rates offered in the different accounts, as well as the different rules that apply, so that we can optimise our own savings and those of our family members.
Sir, I think the instinctive solution to this problem is to recommend that the Government launch a comprehensive education campaign. But I would admit that this will not be an easy task, given the complexity of the system. Furthermore, we should consider some learnings from the field of behavioural finance. Drawing on the research of psychology of decision-making, behavioural finance argues that many financial phenomena are the result of less than fully rational thinking on the part of the participants. Behavioural finance helps explain sub-optimal trading and investment behaviours. The science of behavioural finance is already applied to understand asset pricing, investor behaviour and corporate finance.
Sir, I urge the CPF Advisory Panel to consider applying behavioural finance in Part II of their work to help guide optimisation of CPF savings. MOM should study carefully the patterns of transaction of CPF members and take a very proactive role to help members to fully optimise the benefits of the CPF scheme.
For example, since January 2016, CPF members can transfer CPF savings above the Basic Retirement Sum to their spouse's Special Retirement Account instead of the previous Full Retirement Sum. This change means couples stand to benefit significantly if they have varying levels of CPF savings between them. The savings enhancement for a couple can be substantial if the husband transfers, for example, some of his eligible CPF funds to top up the low balance retirement account of his wife, which now attracts 6% for the first $30,000, and 5% for the next $30,000. Overall, in Singapore, we are still seeing a gap of 14% in CPF balances between male and female members. But I believe that even though it is still early days, as it was just implemented, thus far, very few CPF members whom I have spoken to have thought about this, let alone take action to enhance their savings in this way.
I would like to repeat a request that I had raised during last year's COS, that the Minister consider providing \"auto sweep\" functions for CPF members to transfer their savings to their spouse's account to top up the Basic Retirement Sum. CPF members who do not wish to participate can opt out. But they should be helped by a statement explaining how much less they will get as a couple if they do so. This approach may help result in more couples benefiting from the extra interest rates, which will be particularly welcome for lower balances.
Sir, CPF is a great savings scheme. We must do our very best to ensure all Singaporeans can take full advantage of it.
Mr Chen Show Mao (Aljunied): Sir, come July, the first Silver Support Scheme payouts will be made to some 140,000 Singaporeans above the age of 65. The payouts are meant to provide a modest but meaningful supplement to their retirement incomes in support of the bottom 20% to 30% of Singaporean seniors. I welcome this support.
I would like to reiterate our earlier calls for Silver Support payments to be made monthly instead of quarterly. With monthly payouts and a more consistent liquidity that they provide, the elderly will be better able to manage their day-to-day expenses. Would behavioural economics suggest that making the payouts monthly could even nurture the seniors to use more of the payouts to pay for those significant living expenses that are incurred monthly, such as utility bills and others? If they were to do so, it will help them better manage their limited cash flow.
I hope the Minister will also consider adjusting the amounts of future payouts for inflation, perhaps at the start of every term of Government, to ensure that the support our needy seniors receive keeps up with the rising cost of living.
As Members have said in many different ways, I hope that a degree of flexibility can be built into the eligibility considerations of the payout scheme involving the three criteria of lifetime wages, housing types and household support. I appreciate that clear-cut rules and a high degree of administrative efficiency may be required to deliver Silver Support to needy seniors in large enough numbers. However, balanced against that consideration is, of course, our hope that specific needy seniors who deserve support do not fall through the cracks of rigid eligibility criteria. Some use of resources —
The Chairman: Mr Chen, I am sorry, you have also run out of time.
Mr Chen Show Mao: Yes, Sir. Some use of resources, time and effort in making discretionary assessments in exceptional cases would be well-spent.
The Chairman: Mr Louis Ng.
Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang (Nee Soon): Sir, there is a significant population of migrant workers currently residing and working here in Singapore. To address the multifaceted problems they face, we need holistic and cross-disciplinary solutions. This may be a task too large for any one body to take up on its own. Our universities and members of civil society who have worked with migrant workers are sources of information and practical expertise that could be a brain trust for the Government.
Will MOM consider the creation of a working group that includes representatives from the Ministries, the Universities and civil society to tackle migrant workers' labour issues, as the universities can provide comparative jurisdiction knowledge and technical knowhow, and non-government organisations (NGOs) can provide an on-the-ground perspective of how the system functions in reality?
I believe that with greater collaboration among the different stakeholders in the sector, we can show that Singapore also cares for and about the workers who have contributed to our nation-building.
The Chairman: Minister of State Teo Ser Luck.
The Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Teo Ser Luck): Mr Chairman, I am addressing the House about LEDS.
The economic environment situation is getting very real, so we have mentioned that there will be structural labour market challenges, such as slower workforce growth. Workforce growth will drop by more than half in the next five years. But there are also other challenges, such as external economic macro challenges, whether it is the US undergoing an economic recovery or China slowing its growth. There are also security issues around the world. We should also not forget that technology has advanced to the extent where start-ups are posing threats to traditional businesses. So, we hear a lot about disruptive technology.
But, more importantly, in fact, across the world, we are all facing productivity challenges. Productivity growth has challenged us and Singapore has to punch above its weight in order to ride to economic success. Companies are faced with this issue, especially SMEs. That is why we need SMEs to review and know what they need to do to enhance their processes to enable themselves to compete in the marketplace.
Our policies also need to catch up. We need to make sure that we have an ecosystem and environment for SMEs to grow and help progressive businesses to undergo transformation. We hope that these companies, especially SMEs, which comprise more than 90% of our registered entities, will continue to build a Singaporean Core in a very manpower-lean economy. If it is going to be manpower-lean, companies will have to learn to survive in this very manpower-lean economy by being lean themselves.
Late last year, Minister Lim Swee Say launched the LED concept. It is a pro-business and pro-worker concept at the same time. I was in MTI for five years, working on productivity schemes. Applications for productivity schemes continue to go up. The question we ask ourselves is: why is the productivity index not going up as well? Productivity schemes and grants cover a wide area. They have breadth, but not the depth. So, many companies apply for productivity schemes and grants and they get the grants but the change is not comprehensive enough to attain a productivity movement or a lean manpower outcome.
When I understood what the LED concept was about and the vision of what Minister Lim wanted to do, I thought: \"This programme would build depth.\" It would require the firms to dig deep into their companies to look at the processes that they have and see what changes they would have to make, before they could start thinking about what productivity schemes or grants can be put in place.
From concept, we developed it into a scheme. Chairman, with your permission, I have asked the Clerks to place a handout, entitled \"LED Scheme – Integrated Support\", on the hon Members' seats during the tea break.
LED hopes to achieve a few objectives: quality workforce, manpower-lean, developing Singaporean Core. If we achieve the three objectives mentioned above, we are going to be future-ready. It is about helping companies to become more manpower-lean and more productive. Over the last few days, in this House, many people used sports analogies, from marathons to high performance sports. I want to use these as well, since I am a very passionate sportsman.
In the LEDS, it is really like weightlifting. You see some weightlifters are lighter, but they can lift as much as those who are heavier in weight. By right, if you are heavier, you are supposed to lift more or lift the same weight. But some of them who are thin, they can lift the same. This is what we call the power-to-weight ratio. If the power-to-weight ratio is high, you are super fit and super strong. If your power-to-weight ratio is one-to-one, then you can only lift your own weight, and that is average. We want the lean companies or manpower-lean companies to attain high power-to-weight ratio, and that would mean to punch above their weight.
To achieve that, they have to undergo three phases. These three phases, simply put, include the current state of the workforce. Then their business processes will go through a transition of two years – with automation, productivity, process change, job redesign, putting in computerisation and changing the workforce composition in order to achieve the future state. These three phases will need to be supported by the agencies, policies and Government schemes as well. So, we are going to help SMEs undergo these three phases.
First, we will assist them. We will assess all the proposals and see whether their proposals for productivity and being manpower-lean could really result in meaningful change within, say, two years.
Second, one of the advantages of LEDS is that it could consolidate and integrate all the several other schemes into one. So, businesses do not need to worry about what schemes and what productivity grants to apply for. As long as they have the intent to become more manpower-lean, and they apply and are approved as an LED-supported company, we will help to coordinate all the different Government schemes needed for it to succeed. Within that coordination, we provide temporary flexibility in foreign manpower policy to help them. These foreign employees can then impart their skills and knowledge to our local workforce, so that locals can be upskilled and take on better jobs. This temporary foreign manpower flexibility can then be withdrawn.
Thirdly, we will handhold the companies through the whole implementation process. It is not an easy process, but definitely achievable. Based on the applications that I have received so far, it is quite promising. But we want to do more. We need the arms and legs and we need the partnership of TACs to help us.
We have appointed 10 of them. We call them the LED multipliers. They include the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry and NTUC's U-SME. The LED multipliers will educate and handhold companies in the whole application process. SMEs need not worry about whom to approach, because they can approach any of these 10 multipliers. Even the SME Centres, SMEs can approach them and the SME Centres will guide them through the process.
So far, the LED multipliers have held four road shows, and I have participated in all of them, and we would want to continue to build up this outreach. To date, all the 10 multipliers have plans to engage their members. We will want to support them further.
We are going to link up these 10 LED multipliers, not just with business advisors, but also consultants who are professionals in productivity as well as manpower-lean strategies and processes. Since the launch of the scheme, we have received applications from 79 companies, from a broad range of sectors, such as F&B, construction, food manufacturing, ICT and media, professional services, electronics, hotels, logistics, precision engineering and others.
I am glad to see that the Member Mr Lee Yi Shyan has mentioned F&B. They form the majority of the applications. There will be a fair bit of transformation in that sector if more come forward.
There are also many who apply for other grants but achieve manpower-lean outcomes without needing temporary foreign worker flexibilities. We have more than 200 companies in that category. So, there is hope for higher productivity moving forward, because there is greater depth now in terms of their transformation and process change.
We have studied all the applications and proposals and we found that there are three commonalties in this whole development and in their proposals.
First, they centralise a lot of their operations. What this means is that they share facilities among groups of companies. We have more than 10 companies coming forward and saying, \"Let us come together, take our basic processes and centralise them\", thereby achieving some economies of scale and reducing wastage and then, through a hub-and-spoke kind of network, they could do their own differentiation.
Second, they have an automation plan. This automation plan helps them to combine man and machine, as well as to put in machinery within a business process or operational process to make it more efficient. They also support job redesign and reduce lots of manpower wastage.
Thirdly and most importantly, they develop new skillsets, or enhance the skill development, especially for our local workforce. This imparting of new skills will align to our SkillsFuture vision and mission to enable locals to take on new types of jobs in future. So, if the company changes, the worker's job changes.
Let me give Members an example. A good example comes from the Indian Restaurants Association (Singapore). Fourteen members of the Association collaborated to form a consortium. You are probably wondering how they can come together because they could be competitors as well. But they could, because they felt that there were some basic processes that were the same, and they could consolidate them.
So, firstly, they achieved the objective of centralising shared services. The consortium will form a central processing unit, or a shared kitchen, where the basic processes will be centralised. Basic processes involve preparing the certain basic ingredients – onions, cabbage, vegetables and so on. Subsequently, these will be delivered to the restaurants' individual kitchens for their own recipe, so that they will prepare the dishes differently. That will differentiate their dishes.
Secondly, they will automate, putting in new types of machinery and equipment in the central kitchen. For some, automation will be done in their individual restaurants, in their individual kitchens. That helps to upskill the workers too. The skills transfer is extremely important, because they are building a sustainable pipeline of local Indian cuisine chefs. They want to have that pipeline, but this involves skills transfer and capability development, and they need foreign chefs to come to Singapore to transfer skills and knowledge to locals during this transition.
So, MOM provides two years' flexibility to retain S Pass chefs beyond the company's foreign manpower quota. These chefs are needed to impart skills and knowledge to local trainees who can take on such better jobs in future. With a pipeline of skilled Singaporeans ready to take on critical roles, these foreign chefs will then be released once the transition has been achieved.
It is not easy to achieve such a manpower-lean state and we are still going through the process. In fact, we only appointed the multipliers in January this year and the scheme was only launched late last year. But we saw a lot of progress, and we want to work by sectors, clusters and individual companies.
I fully agree with Mr Chong Kee Hiong, Mr Lee Yi Shyan and Mr Thomas Chua that more should be done to help more businesses to break these barriers and shift mindsets in order to achieve this. You have to think out of the box, change your mindsets to do so. But it takes the whole-of-Government as well to support such a transformation programme. This year's Budget has got a lot to do with Industry Transformation Programmes and LEDS plays its part to do so.
LEDS also depends on good HR practices, and good HR practices require good HR and qualified HR professionals. In managing manpower and the workforce in a company, it has to go beyond HR or human resources. It has to go into human capital. It is not just human resource, but human capital. There is a difference here, especially in the way we plan, and in managing the human resource within the company. HR is not just about plugging holes: when there is a job vacancy, you find a suitable person, you plug a hole here. A lot of times they are faced with situations which extend beyond recruitment, with retention, for example. We need a strategic and longer term plan. Look at every single individual, not just as a factor of production, but as capital for investment. Invest in them early, even for our mature workers.
As Mr Thomas Chua has pointed out, companies will need to focus more on building and nurturing human capital, investing in identifying each employee's strengths and making the best use of differentiated talents. We have many good examples that did that, and many are SMEs. Sometimes, it is not about investing only in the young, but investing across the board – young and old.
Let me give Members an example. ROHEI Corporation, a local corporate training SME consultancy, is one such SME. They advocate \"people above process\", often going out of their way to nurture and guide their employees towards achieving their life goals. When their senior consultants in their 50s expressed interest to master different skillsets and practices offered by the business, the company readily supported and guided them to acquire those skills, even though they were close to retirement age. They wanted to ensure that their wisdom and skills could combine together to help the company. This ensured that they could continue to value add, even in their golden years.
Every single person counts, they are our capital, they are our assets. But you need a good HR practitioner if you want to implement such a process. All HR practitioners now have more demanding jobs. To upgrade the HR practices in the different sectors, we need to upgrade their learning process. We need to upgrade their certification process as well.
We formed the HR Sectoral Tripartite Committee (HRSTC) in September 2015 and it comprises unions, businesses, the Government and IHLs. They are currently developing a HR Sectoral Manpower Plan (HRSMP). Mr Melvin Yong has asked for an update. Over the last six months, the HR Sectoral Tripartite Committee has engaged over 150 stakeholders through six different engagement sessions.
One recurring feedback is that they felt the need for HR to evolve to better support business strategy and to be more strategic, to think in the longer term, to be able to look at the macro view of the company, basically, to think like a chief executive officer. They have to move from focusing on operational and transactional approaches, to a more strategic approach, to look at how the company moves forward, forecast its manpower needs in the future. Employers expect that HR professionals can better apply these skills and align them to the organisation's goals. So, they cannot work in isolation. The HR strategy has to be integrated within the company. The committee is also recommending that we develop a pathway because of that requirement.
Ms Thanaletchimi will, therefore be pleased to know that one of the initiatives being considered under HRSMP is the development of a National HR Professional Certification Framework. We are looking at setting up a system to certify HR professionals based on components, such as HR competencies, HR work experience, professional code of conduct and ethics. Also, they have to possess an understanding of local employment laws, regulations and practices.
It is not just certification. It is a progressive learning ladder as well. This framework has to provide the HR professionals with a comprehensive roadmap to develop their own capabilities. They need to advance their careers through that. HR professionals, once they have gone through the process, can then better support businesses and also enhance their value to the organisation.
The work of the HR professionals has become more demanding. As the expectations increase from bosses to workers to everybody, sometimes, they are sandwiched in the middle. Many times, the expectation from the workers or the employees is about the work-to-personal time ratio. As Ms Jessica Tan had mentioned: how do you integrate that work and that life together? It is not easy to find that integration.
We encourage FWAs in the workplace. And it is a very critical component and critical success factor for any good company that wants to retain its staff, wants to keep it more dynamic and also wants to recruit personnel.
Ms Jessica Tan is right to highlight that FWAs can help businesses thrive, leveraging technology to do so, enhancing it. For example, hotdesking, working from home, working from any other place – it is a flexible workplace. We know that the majority of global businesses have reported increases in employee productivity and company revenue as a result of implementing FWAs. Microsoft is one of them.
More businesses are recognising these benefits. The proportion of companies offering at least one form of formal FWA to their employees has increased from 38% in 2011 to 47% in 2014, but it is a never-ending effort to get more companies on board. I agree with Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Desmond Choo that more should be done.
The Tripartite Committee on Work-Life Strategy (TriCom), which includes representatives from trade associations, has launched several initiatives. The Tripartite Advisory on FWAs was launched in November 2014 to help employers, supervisors and employees through the journey of implementing FWAs. But more efforts in awareness and education are needed. So, we rolled out the Work-Life campaign, which concluded in March 2016, to reinforce that FWAs would benefit both employers and employees.
An online resource portal will also be launched to provide employers and employees with a one-stop access to resources related to the adoption of FWAs. Both initiatives are targeted to be launched in the second half of 2016. Moving forward, we will take a more targeted approach towards some of the sectors that are facing challenges to adopt the FWAs.
We note Mr Desmond Choo and Assoc Prof Daniel Goh have asked about Work-Life Grant adoption rates. The take-up of the Work-Life Grant is improving, from 287 applications in 2014 to 549 applications in December 2015. In particular, the take-up rate of the Developmental Grant, which defrays the cost of companies on a pilot scheme, is increasing.
Mr Desmond Choo has asked about the Government's stance on legislating FWAs. In countries like the UK and Australia, the law provides employees with the right to request such arrangements, but employers also have the right to consider these requests and refuse them. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh had also suggested a similar arrangement.
We need to carefully study the pros and cons of having such legislation in Singapore as being pro-business as well as pro-worker. How do we keep that balance? The success of it depends on integration of different factors, for example, the perception of such a practice within the society, and employers' and co-workers' attitudes towards FWAs. In other countries, FWAs are usually fairly prevalent before this legislation. That will not stop us from taking a review as well as making sure that we continue the awareness and education campaign. Fundamentally, employers and employees need to understand and be committed before such a culture can be in place.
Chairman, a large part of this Budget is about helping SMEs in the industry, and our workforce to adapt and grow for better jobs and better careers. We rolled out so many different schemes – LEDS, LEDS Multipliers, HR certification and HR/HC, the Work-Life Grant. Most importantly, mindsets need to shift, for SMEs need to have the spirit of enterprise to make the change, take that leap of faith and take action on it. The Government can only do so much. We are left with the SMEs to help themselves.
Transformation is not easy, but nothing comes easy. But if we put our hearts and minds together, I am sure we can build and ride the fourth wave of economic success towards the future.
The Minister of State for Manpower (Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong): Mr Chairman, I will now brief the House on three of MOM's focus areas. One, is to help older workers remain employable; two, is to improve low-wage workers' earnings; and three, is to improve workplace safety and health.
Allow me to, first, touch on older workers. Sir, our labour force is ageing quickly and the proportion of residents in the labour force aged 50 and over is about one-third now, up from about one-quarter a decade ago. This trend will continue over the next two decades and we must be prepared to accept and embrace this new reality and turn it into opportunity.
The Government has been engaging Singaporeans of all ages on various platforms. One common feedback that we hear is that seniors want to have meaningful jobs that tap on their wealth of experience and resources. But the responsibility for creating a sustainable working environment for older workers does not just lie with the Government alone, although the Government can take a lead in this area. Sir, employers and employees are important stakeholders and partners as well in achieving this common goal.
My Ministry has, therefore, been working closely with the tripartite partners to help older workers, under the Tripartite Committee on Employability of Older Workers, or Tricom in short.
The Tricom, which I chair, has introduced a series of initiatives to help older workers work for as long as they are willing and able to. We have made some encouraging progress in this direction.
Sir, today, our employment rate for older residents aged 55 to 64 is 67%. This is well above the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) average of 57% and is comparable with some of the developed and advanced countries like Japan's 70% and South Korea's 66%.
Notwithstanding this encouraging process, I share Mr Chong Kee Hiong's view that more has to be done to encourage the hiring of older workers. However, we cannot achieve this goal by giving incentives alone. For there to be a truly age-friendly workplace, mindsets must be changed. The nature and the design of the jobs must also be changed.
To change mindsets, Tricom works through the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) to champion positive workplace attitudes towards older workers. TAFEP has been conducting ongoing publicity campaigns to emphasise the value that older workers can bring to companies and their younger co-workers.
To change the nature of jobs and the working environment, we need to support employers to adopt good age management practices and redesign job processes for their older workers, a point highlighted by Mr Chong Kee Hiong. We have been providing our support through the Workpro grants. To further enhance the effectiveness of the Workpro scheme, MOM and WDA are in the process of reviewing this scheme. Details will be released soon. I wish to take this opportunity to strongly encourage more employers to make use of the enhanced Workpro grants.
Sir, one key concern of the Tricom has been to balance wages with the employability of older workers. In the early years, older workers were less wage-competitive because of rigid seniority-based wages. When the minimum retirement age was raised to 62 in 1999, the tripartite partners at that time agreed that the law could provide some flexibility for employers to reduce the wages of workers turning 60 by up to 10%.
Since then, the tripartite partners have worked hard to promote flexible and performance-based wage systems. Today, the vast majority, more than 98% of the companies, no longer reduce wages at age 60. So, the wage-cut provision that was put in place in 1999 is no longer relevant today. I am happy to announce that from 1 July 2017 onwards, we will remove this provision from our law. Going forward, pay should be reflective of workers' job scope and value, rather than their age.
Let me now turn to re-employment of older workers. Four years since we introduced the re-employment concept, I am pleased to say that implementation of this scheme has been relatively smooth. In recent years, over 98% of local employees who wished to continue working were offered employment beyond 62.
When we introduced re-employment in 2012, we also committed to raising the re-employment age from 65 to 67 at an appropriate time. The Prime Minister shared at last year's National Day Rally that we will do so by 2017. So, again, I am very happy to announce that the tripartite partners have discussed and agreed that the effective date will be 1 July 2017.
I would like to assure Mr Chong Kee Hiong that before the law is changed in July 2017, the Government will continue to support companies which voluntarily re-employ older workers beyond 65. The additional wage offset of 3% for employers who re-employ workers above 65 will similarly be extended to 1 July 2017. This is to help smoothen the transitional process.
Even as we work towards raising the re-employment age, the Tricom has considered other ways to expand re-employment options for employees. We have received feedback that, sometimes, employers are unable to find suitable jobs in their own companies, but can help the worker secure re-employment in a related or subsidiary company. Unfortunately, the existing law does not provide for this.
We will, therefore, amend the law to allow a new employer to take on the re-employment obligations of the original employer, subject to the employee's agreement. As with the other changes announced earlier, this will also take effect on 1 July 2017.
The tripartite partners strongly agree that employers should consider all available re-employment options to identify suitable jobs for their employees. However, there will be situations where re-employment is just simply genuinely not possible. As a last resort, we have provided for an Employment Assistance Payment (EAP). In line with the raising of the re-employment age, the tripartite partners agreed to increase the EAP amounts and age coverage accordingly.
Taken together, all these measures mentioned earlier, represent significant changes for our re-employment landscape. To better prepare employers and their workers, the Tricom has updated the Tripartite Guidelines on Re-employment of Older Employees. It will provide details on many of the changes that I spoke on earlier. We will be releasing these guidelines in the next few weeks.
Sir, we strongly encourage employers to adopt both the spirit and the letter of the new re-employment practices ahead of the formal change in law. This is especially important, given our tight labour market in the coming years.
I will now turn to the second issue – low-wage workers. Mr Zainal Sapari has asked for an update on the measures the Government has taken in this area. Let me highlight two of the key Government initiatives targeted at uplifting our low-wage workers. They are Workfare and the Progressive Wage Model (PWM).
The Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) scheme has been instrumental in encouraging lower-wage Singaporean workers to continue working. The Workfare Training Support (WTS) scheme also provides significant support to low-wage workers to upgrade their skills so they can stay employable and enjoy higher wage growth.
As announced by the Minister for Finance in his Budget speech, the WIS and WTS schemes will be enhanced in 2017 to provide more support for our low-wage Singaporean workers who work and train.
In specific sectors with a larger concentration of low-wage workers, prevalent cheap-sourcing was causing wages to stagnate. To address this concern, we set up tripartite committees to develop PWMs. This is something that Mr Zainal Sapari is very familiar with. He is a champion for this.
These PWMs provide cleaners, security officers and landscape workers with a clear pathway of career progression. The workers can look forward to earning higher wages, in line with higher skills and productivity improvements. PWM has been fully implemented for the cleaning sector since 1 September 2015. As of January 2016, about 40,000 resident outsourced cleaners are covered by this scheme. We will implement PWMs for the landscape and security industries through Government levers from 30 June and 1 September this year.
We are encouraged by the early PWM adopters in the security and landscape industries which have already sent their workers for the requisite training and they are also already paying them according to the PWM model. We strongly urge the remaining employers to expedite their plans to meet the PWM requirements, so that more workers can benefit from the higher skills and better wages and their employers can also benefit from workers' higher productivity.
Mr Zainal Sapari has proposed mandating annual wage supplements and annual increments for low-wage workers in the cleaning, security and landscape sectors. This is a major proposal which will not only affect workers' well-being, but also employers and the industry. It is, therefore, crucial to seek the views of the various stakeholders in the usual spirit of tripartism.
We will raise Mr Zainal's suggestion to the tripartite committees responsible for the PWMs for these sectors. And the tripartite partners will need to decide on what is appropriate and feasible, taking into consideration the interest of workers and bearing in mind economic conditions.
Sir, we are starting to see results of our various efforts to support low-wage workers. They are bearing fruits now. Over the last five years, real incomes of full-time employed Singapore Citizens at the 20th percentile grew by 2.9% per annum in real terms. This is comparable with the growth in the median incomes over the same period. We will continue to work very closely with our tripartite partners on this important issue.
Before I move on to my next subject, I would also like to address Mr Patrick Tay's point on freelancers. Freelancers are not covered by the Employment Act and the Work Injury Compensation Act (WICA) because there is no employer-employee relationship between them and their clients.
This is a complex issue which we should study carefully and not rush into. In the meantime, we will support efforts like those from the NTUC's Freelancers and Self-Employed Unit which has different initiatives for different groups of freelancers, ranging from taxi drivers to those in the creative and media sectors. This is in recognition that freelancers are a diverse group comprising many different trades, skills, values and services. It is, therefore, difficult to prescribe a one-size-fits-all solution to address such diverse and complex needs and situations.
Sir, let me now turn to my last subject − Workplace Safety and Health (WSH). In 2015, our workplace fatality rate was 1.9 fatalities per 100,000 employed persons. This is a slight increase from 1.8 in 2014. We are concerned. Although the increase is quite marginal but we are concerned, nonetheless. Just this year alone, we lost 22 lives at work, as mentioned by Mr Melvin Yong just now. That is 22 too many. In fact, personally, to me, every one fatality is just one too many. Accidents can be prevented. Therefore, I agree with Mr Melvin Yong and Ms Thanaletchimi that more needs to be done to raise our WSH standards.
We will adopt a four-pronged approach to reduce the workplace fatality and incident rate. First, we will raise awareness; second, we will build WSH capability; third, we will strengthen enforcement; and, lastly, we will impose heavier penalties.
My Ministry has put in a large amount of effort over the years to raise WSH awareness among workers, employers and the general public. To build WSH capability, we work closely with the industry to assist them in bringing good WSH practices to their workplaces.
In terms of enforcement, we conduct around 16,000 workplace inspections a year. That is more than 1,300 inspections every month. In the last few months, I have personally participated in three inspections, and I will continue to do so until I feel that the level of workplace safety reaches a satisfactory level. To strengthen deterrence, my Ministry will also be taking tougher actions against recalcitrant employers and will impose harsher penalties if things do not improve.
Fundamentally, WSH needs to be driven from the top. At the very top, we want industry leaders to set the tone and be committed to WSH. Recently, I started a series of dialogue sessions with top management from various industries, starting with those that have higher workplace injury and fatality rates.
My message to them is a simple and sincere one. That is, my Ministry is always ready to work together with the industry to improve safety standards. For those who need help to improve, we will assist them through different schemes. As pointed out by Ms Thanaletchimi, we will also recognise those companies which have achieved good WSH performance because we want to hold them up as good role model for others to emulate.
However, if companies do not take WSH seriously and flout the safety rules indifferently despite warning and advice, we will come down hard on them through stiff penalties. We are doing this as a last resort as we have the responsibility to protect our workers to ensure that they work in a safe and healthy environment.
Mr Melvin Yong is right in pointing out that some SMEs need more help with WSH training and capability building. Others lack the awareness. We will, therefore, be launching many programmes this year that specifically cater to them. More details on the WSH capability building programme will be announced later.
Sir, I have just outlined the key efforts of my Ministry in the areas of older workers, low-wage workers and workplace safety and health. Minister Lim Swee Say will now address the remaining issues in his round-up speech.
The Chairman: Minister, you have 16 minutes.
Mr Lim Swee Say: Chairman, please allow me to address some of the other cuts put up by the Members.
On the Employment Claims Tribunal raised by Mr Patrick Tay, we will set up the Employment Claims Tribunal early next year. I want to assure Mr Patrick Tay that we are equally mindful of preserving the role of tripartism in dispute resolution. Therefore, we will build in a higher claims cap in certain situations where the unions are involved. We will be introducing a new Bill later this year, which will include the necessary changes related to the Act that Mr Patrick Tay spoke of, to implement these changes.
On the FCF Advertising Requirements raised by Ms Thanaletchimi and Mr Chong Kee Hiong, I want to clarify that even though the FCF requirements for job advertisements is capped at $12,000, but all jobs, regardless of salaries, including those above $12,000 are also subjected to fair consideration. In other words, if a company is perceived to have adopted unfair practices, especially discrimination based on nationality, we will investigate. If found to be substantiated, the company is subjected to additional scrutiny, like those that I have mentioned earlier.
On TAFEP, Mr Faisal Manap raised the need to strengthen the framework for workplace discrimination. Currently, the arrangement is that TAFEP and MOM work together to promote fair employment as well as address discrimination in terms of whatever practices that we come across.
The arrangement is that the tripartite partner, through TAFEP, will do the promotion work whereas the enforcement will be through MOM. In other words, TAFEP, upon their promotion and investigation, if they come across any organisation which, in their view, has adopted the unfair practices, TAFEP will alert MOM and then we will take the enforcement. TAFEP's finding or assessment carries a lot of weight with MOM.
So far, the employers approached by TAFEP have mostly heeded the advice by TAFEP and made adjustments to their employment practices. Earlier, I mentioned about the \"triple weak\" and \"triple strong\". In fact, that will be another avenue for TAFEP to step up the effort not just in terms of promotion but advocacy as well.
Underemployment raised by Ms Sylvia Lim. Along with the unemployment figures, statistics on time-related underemployment and discouraged workers are also published annually, every year, in the Report on Labour Force in Singapore. The last report was released in January 2016.
In the latest report, Singapore's time-related under-employment rate was 2.9% by June 2015. It is low by international standards. What is even more encouraging is that it is on the decline. So, for example, in 2013, it was more than 4%, then in 2014, it went below 4% and last year, 2015, it went below 3%. This has to do with the tight labour market that we face today.
As mentioned by Ms Sylvia Lim, time-related underemployment is the only internationally accepted statistical definition of under-employment and it is recommended by the International Labour Organization, so we comply with that. As regards the share of discouraged workers in the resident workforce in 2015, it was stable and low at 0.4%. This is similar to the OECD countries.
On the issue of contract workers and freelancers, Ms Sylvia Lim asked whether they are on the increase, whether they reflect a rise in underemployment. The percentage of workers on contract, that means they are working as employees but on contract, has dropped from 12.7% in 2009 to 11.3% last year. So, 12.7% dropped to 11.3%. In the case of freelancers, they are what we call the \"own account\" holders, so they are like self-employed. They do not have employee-employer relationship. That percentage of the workforce has dropped from 9.2% to 7.9% over the same period, from 2009 to 2015. In other words, both employees on contract as well as freelancers as a percentage of the workforce have been on the decline. The question is whether they choose to be in this situation − contract or freelancer, or they are forced to be in this position. On the part of MOM, what we are trying to do our best is that we offer them options. In other words, if they feel that they do not want to continue with their contract work or be freelancers, I hope they will step forward, take advantage of our CSP, PCP, P-Max and all the other programmes that I talked about earlier.
On the issue of unemployment insurance raised by Mr Azmoon, first of all, let me make it clear that I do sympathise and empathise with workers who are affected by retrenchments and I appreciate the suggestions by various Members, including Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Patrick Tay, for unemployment benefits or insurance schemes to help cushion the impact on such workers.
As I mentioned earlier, our situation in Singapore is quite different from the situation in most of these other countries. Our unemployment rates are low and our long-term unemployment rates are also low. At the same time, and this is something that is worth taking note, the practice of paying retrenchment benefits in Singapore is widespread. According to our latest survey, nine in 10 of the retrenching companies paid retrenchment benefits, and for the retrenched workers, likewise, nine in 10 received retrenchment benefits, including those from the non-unionised companies. It is a fairly standard practice in the industries and in Singapore today.
This is the reason why MOM is focusing our efforts on helping retrenched workers to go back to work as quickly as possible because unemployment is low, under-employment is low, long-term unemployment is low and there is a widespread practice of paying retrenchment benefits. The top priority for many workers is to go back to work. That is the reason why, earlier, I spent a lot of time going into a lot of details to explain the kind of options that we are offering to our workers. I hope that more of them can tap on the programmes that I mentioned earlier.
Mr Azmoon suggested that one way is to allow workers to tap on the CPF savings to finance such schemes like TIS. My reservation is that today, CPF is already used to meet housing, education, healthcare and retirement adequacy. In other words, we should be very careful not to deplete these savings further by using them for other purposes unless it is really necessary to do so. For now, let us focus in helping the unemployed workers to go back to work.
Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked about retrenchment benefits and whether we can introduce compulsory retrenchment benefits. The tripartite partners have discussed this from time to time. The last time was at the recent review of the Employment Act and they came to the conclusion that it is important to allow the employers employees and unions to continue to have the flexibility to negotiate this, rather than prescribing it in the law. This is because the different retrenching companies are in different circumstances and, therefore, it cannot be a one-size-fits-all rule. As I had mentioned earlier, according to our labour survey, nine out of 10 retrenching companies did pay retrenchment benefits.
Mr Louis Ng touched on the role of NGOs and civil society. I agree with him. I would like to assure Mr Ng that MOM already regularly engages tripartite partners, academics and NGOs in the course of our work. These range from employment standards, supporting low-wage workers and retirement adequacy, to foreign worker management. Going forward, I would like to assure Mr Ng that we will continue to engage our social partners as we try to shape the new employment landscape together.
Ms ThanaletchimiI raised the issue of incentivising companies which hire older workers with lower foreign worker levies. Mr Chairman, firms which hire older workers currently benefit from the Special Employment Credit. A wage credit to firms, we believe, is a better way to incentivise the employers to hire more older workers and to keep them, rather than to give them a discount in foreign worker levy. This way, even firms without foreign workers can still benefit and be motivated to hire and retain our local older workers. Lowering the foreign worker levy may also lead to the unintentional outcome of these companies hiring more foreign workers, instead of keeping our older workers.
Ms Foo Mee Har raised the topping up of CPF and the automatic transfer of CPF between couples to enable them to enjoy higher returns on CPF savings. Let me say that I am in full agreement with Ms Foo that we should encourage more and more CPF members to top up the CPF accounts of their spouses, especially working husbands topping up the accounts of the women at home. That is the reason why we have amended the regulation to enable more members to do that kind of transfer like lowering the qualifying savings from the full retirement sum to the basic retirement sum.
Having said so, if I may quote what Minister Tan Chuan-Jin said at last year's COS where this issue came up as well. He said that the decisions on CPF top-ups and transfers between spouses are \"personal decisions best left to the couples to decide. It would be intrusive for the Government to intervene\" by automatically optimising the split of CPF savings between husband and wife. I must say that I do agree with him. What I would do is that I would, together with CPF, step up the effort to create greater awareness in the community so that, hopefully, we get more and more members of the community to be fully aware of this additional interest that they can benefit from. I hope that Members here can also help us to reach out to the ground.
Mr Chen Show Mao raised a question about Silver Support. He asked whether it can be paid on a monthly basis, instead of a quarterly basis. The Minister for Finance has explained this in the Budget. Unlike Workfare, Workfare was given for work done earlier. Workfare was paid after the work was done. In the case of Silver Support, we have decided to pay in advance. So, we are paying quarterly payments in advance. For example, in January, he will get the Silver Support for the next three months. I appreciate Mr Chen's point that if it is paid out monthly, hopefully that will help to manage their finance better. I agree. But on balance, between giving them the money in advance to facilitate better liquidity versus giving it monthly to enforce them to spread the spending over three months, I think, on balance, the decision on advance payment quarterly would probably be more beneficial, given the flexibility.
Mr Chen also asked whether we can adjust the payouts to adjust for inflation and so on. This scheme, when it is introduced in July this year, the total budget will cost about $320 million, which is not a small sum. I would say that we are very mindful of the sustainability of this scheme. Right now, there is no plan to go for this adjustment according to inflation.
Mr Chairman, I think I have covered most of the cuts raised by Members.
The Chairman: Thank you, Minister Lim. Just in the nick of time. We do have some time for clarifications. May I remind Members to keep your clarifications succinct and not to make speeches. Mr Patrick Tay.
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: I thank the Minister and Ministers of State for their replies. I had in my cut earlier raised the plight of workers when companies are entering into liquidation, judicial management and various winding-up proceedings. I hope MOM would partner the other Ministries to look into and review this area to see how best we can provide more safety nets for our workers.
Mr Lim Swee Say: Mr Chairman, this question was raised by Mr Zainal Sapari to the Ministry of Law. I do not have the date, but I think it was in January 2016. At that time, the Minister for Law replied to Mr Zainal Sapari that when a company becomes insolvent, the proceeds from liquidation are preferably paid to employees who are second only to the liquidator.
MOM is committed to protecting the employment rights and interests of the workers, and the Ministry encourages all employees probably to seek assistance for unpaid wages as soon as possible before companies reach the stage of liquidation. From our experience, a majority of local workers do indeed file their claims before this happens.
The Chairman: Ms Jessica Tan.
Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo: I would like to ask: since MOM is committed to letting workers work longer as long as they can and willing to, why not raise or remove the retirement age?
Mr Lim Swee Say: Mr Chairman, when I was at NTUC, this was raised by the workers many times as well. Each time we raised the retirement age or re-employment age, some workers would ask, \"Why are you forcing me to work till an older age?\" We explained to them that the purpose of retirement age, the purpose of re-employment age, is to protect the workers, give the workers the right to work. In other words, employers cannot simply \"complete\" the employment before the worker reaches the retirement age and now the re-employment age. So, if we were to abolish the retirement age, the question is, \"What will happen?\" Are we giving workers more protection or less protection?
Today, workers are protected under the retirement age of 62, re-employment age of 65, and by next year, it will be 67. I believe that if we were to remove retirement age completely, it will be less protection for the workers, rather than more protection for the workers.
The Chairman: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye: I thank the Minister of State for his concern and his personal attention to the rising number of workplace accidents and fatalities. I would like to ask what are the areas the Ministry will be focusing on in the coming year to further improve WSH standards.
Mr Sam Tan Chin Siong: Mr Chairman, I would like to thank the hon Member for raising this very important question. As mentioned in my speech just now, we are focusing on a four-pronged approach to tackle, reduce and, hopefully, eliminate the workplace safety fatalities and injuries. This is not easy. This is what we intend to do, that is, to raise awareness through a lot of media publicity and also public education programmes. Secondly, we intend to ramp up trainings and education for employers and employees. Thirdly, to step up enforcement, and, lastly, to stiffen the penalties.
We discovered in the last few years that there are three areas that constituted the highest fatalities: fall from heights where workers work at heights, workplace traffic safety and crane safety. This year, we will be focusing on these three areas because they constitute the most numbers of the workplace fatalities and injuries. We will work and step up and focus all our resources and manpower to deal with these three critical areas.
We also know that we need to go upstream to work with the companies and industries to introduce this idea called \"Design for Safety\" to make sure that when they start work or design something, they will always incorporate the ideas of workplace safety and health into the planning stage, so that, upstream, they will be able to do something to prevent and reduce the downstream fatalities and accidents at the workplace.
The Chairman: Mr Heng Chee How.
Mr Heng Chee How: Mr Chairman, still on this subject of retirement age. I agree with Minister Lim that the statutory retirement age works towards protecting the workers, giving them the right and peace of mind and confidence to work.
My clarification is on the other end of it. Although the statutory retirement age in Singapore now is 62, there are companies in Singapore today, for example, companies under the ComfortDelgro group which have done their own calculations and have implemented company policy to retire or offer retirement age above the statutory retirement age, that is, 65 or 67, and there are other companies in Singapore doing the same. That also then fits the company's or the industry's own realities and it offers the employees added assurance as well.
So, my question to the Minister is whether the Ministry would consider that this is an area where the tripartite partners can work together on, to widen their awareness of this possibility, so that all companies can look at their situation and avail themselves and their workers of this option and possibility?
Mr Lim Swee Say: Mr Chairman, I agree fully with Mr Heng Chee How. When we prescribe laws and legislation, we are defining the minimum required standard. In other words, if any company were to behave in a way that goes below the stipulated requirement, then what they have done is illegal. Companies would have to comply with the law.
Having said so, our objective is to encourage as many companies as possible to do better than what is prescribed in the law. The example cited by Mr Heng Chee How is exactly what we call \"progressive behaviours\" which we would like to see more and more of in our industry.
In that regard, I fully agree with him that maybe TAFEP, as a tripartite alliance for fair and progressive practices can actually take on such a role to keep encouraging companies to do more, and MOM certainly will give our full support. And I thank him for his suggestion.
The Chairman: Assoc Prof Randolph Tan.
Assoc Prof Randolph Tan: Two questions for the Minister. One is on active intervention. The Minister had explained that the Ministry is taking in the labour market to deal with certain large numbers of cases of retrenchment where the Ministry has stepped in to match the cases of retrenched workers based on different initiatives that the Ministry has thrown up. I think that this is very good and I urge the Ministry to continue doing it. But in specific cases where his Ministry has identified gaps in the market, the reasons why the matching cannot take place, his Ministry has been able to plug those gaps. Will his Ministry, therefore, be seeing to it that the market can ultimately take on this role, such as HR agencies, can ultimately take on this role, so that the Ministry can continue to be active on other areas?
The second question really is to reflect my concerns that we should not let the pendulum swing to the other extreme and then see a certain wave of criminalisation of employers. I know that is obviously not —
The Chairman: Please keep your clarification short.
Assoc Prof Randolph Tan: So, my question is: are we going too far in the opposite direction?
Mr Lim Swee Say: Mr Chairman, I thank Assoc prof Randolph Tan for the two points. Firstly, on the issue of retrenchment, whether MOM is overly active in helping the retrenched workers. The answer is a yes. We are very active. For example, right now, whenever we receive a notice of retrenchment, a task force will actually move in. We will engage the companies and ask the companies to provide us with information of who are the workers, how many will be affected and, in terms of the job profile, how many are PMETs, how many are rank-and-file workers, and for each of these groups, what are the ages, background, and so on. And then, the other programmes will come in, like CSP, PCP and we will talk to the workers, introduce them to these schemes and bring them in. The objective is to help them to go back to work as quickly as possible, both the PMETs and the rank-and-file workers.
Increasingly, the job matching is going to go beyond WDA and e2i. Earlier, I mentioned that we intend to engage our Employment Agency industry more. Because we believe that they, too, can have a role to play. Progressively, we want to engage more of these private placement companies to be our partners, so that when there is a retrenchment exercise, especially for PMETs, we can get them to help us, too, to place them. I would say that, on the whole, maybe we are doing too much compared to many other places. But I must say that it is something which is very close to the hearts of the tripartite partners – NTUC, e2i and WDA. We do feel very strongly that whatever we can do, we must help them. The weakness in our market today is we feel that the employment agency market is not job seeker-centric and so, their objective is really to help the companies find workers. What we end up with is that the less employable workers are the ones who could end up taking a long time. That is why we want to make sure that we do our best to support them.
On the question of action taken, again, employers, whether we are swinging too much, I am very mindful of that. In fact, earlier in my address, I emphasised very clearly that as Singapore moves forward, we must both become even more pro-business as we become more pro-worker. The two have to be the two sides of the same coin. Because if we are pro-business and not pro-worker, we can have a strong economy but weak Singaporean Core. Or if you are too pro-worker and not pro-business enough, we can have a strong Singaporean Core but a weak economy. So, both ways will not enable us to succeed in our growth.
That is the reason why MOM is very mindful that we will always strike a balance between being pro-business and pro-worker. If there is a \"triple weak\", then there must be a \"triple strong\", and the two must go hand in hand. For the \"tripe weak\", so far, we are starting with only the outliers. In other words, we look at sector by sector. We look at each sector and we look at all the companies in the sector that employ EP workers and plot them in terms of their strength of their Singaporean Core. We can see a spread − industry norm somewhere in the centre, the \"triple strong\" on the extreme right, and the \"triple weak\" on the extreme left. What we are doing is that we are taking all these outliers, engage them and take action against them. Hopefully, by sending this clear messaging, the rest will start to gravitate more towards the centre over time.
We are very mindful that we have to strike a balance because, at the end of the day, if we swing too much to, as the Member said, against the employers, eventually we will be hurt. Because if Singapore loses its attractiveness as an investment location, eventually, we will run out of jobs for our workers.
The best way to be pro-worker is to be pro-business because a job is the best welfare; full employment is the best protection. At the same time, we must always be mindful that Singapore is not just an economy; Singapore is a nation.
I always remember what our founding Prime Minister Mr Lee Kuan Yew said. He said that in nation-building, we must have three pillars, and this is what we call the Singapore software. The first pillar is that our economy must always be competitive. Because if our economy is not competitive, all of us will be poor together. However, always be mindful that competitiveness in an economy is only a means to the end. The end objective is social progress and social well-being, and employment is the best way for our people to benefit in its progress. And lastly, he also mentioned the third pillar, and the most difficult pillar, is sustainable development. You can be pro-business today to ensure the economy is competitive. You can be pro-people, pro-worker today, to ensure the society will be cohesive, we will have social progress. But how do you strike a balance in such a way that we can sustain our development for the long term?
Every year, every three years and five years, when we adjust our Government policies, we are trying to define that balance. So, three years ago, there was no \"triple weak\" or \"triple strong\". Today, we have \"triple weak\" and \"triple strong\". Three years or five years from now, there could be something else, not because we have done something wrong in the past but rather because we keep striking that dynamic balance between the two.
I want to assure Assoc Prof Randolph Tan that I am very mindful of this and that I will always make sure that the interests of pro-business and pro-worker will always be harmonised and, hopefully, always strike the right balance.
The Chairman: I am going to take one more last clarification. Ms Sylvia Lim, can you keep your clarification short?
Ms Sylvia Lim: Thank you, Chairman. I have clarifications for the Minister concerning the response to workers who have been retrenched or made redundant. The Government is saying that the main strategy will be, of course, to match jobs to skills. We hope all the three will come together quickly for people who are retrenched. But, of course, that is always the case.
It may take time for the correct match to happen. At the same time also, some of these workers who may lose their jobs may actually have other possible options which are better. For example, he may have his own contacts to explore or he may want to become an entrepreneur and so on. I wonder if the Minister could give his views on whether there is still a place for some safety nets for these workers who may not fit so quickly into your schemes, such as PCP and CSP. In fact, these may not be the best thing for them. That there is actually a place, perhaps, for some safety nets for such workers in the form of some sort of redundancy or unemployment insurance.
","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":"Committee of Supply","sectionType":"OS","content":"The Chairman: Order. Pursuant to Standing Order No 2(5)(d), I propose to extend the time of this day's Committee Sitting to allow for a further 10 minutes. Minister Lim.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply − Head S (Ministry of Manpower)","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Debate in Committee of Supply resumed. (proc text)]
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Lim Biow Chuan) in the Chair]
Mr Lim Swee Say: Mr Chairman, I agree fully with the first part but not the second part. The first part, the Member talked about, for example, some of the retrenched workers who may have their own options in terms of becoming entrepreneurs and so on; that I fully agree. In fact, just recently, a business entity approached MOM and came up with this idea. His idea was whether under our PCP, besides converting a person from one profession to another, or within a sector, whether we can also allow someone to be converted from a profession to become an entrepreneur. His organisation – at this moment I am not ready to disclose any information – is prepared to step forward to play a role. Because when a person becomes an entrepreneur, there are many things he needs. He may need advice on how to run a business, capital to start his business, and so on. So, I would say that this is an idea worth exploring. As I said, I fully agree with the Member's first part.
The second part is about insurance and so on. I have explained earlier. Our belief is that right now, given the context that we have, low long-term unemployment, high incidence rate of paying retrenchment benefits, I think our priority right now is to help them to go back to work as quickly as possible. In the future, hopefully, we can also include this entrepreneurship as one of the alternatives, something that I am very keen to work on.
The Chairman: Thank you, Minister Lim. That is about the time that we have for clarifications. May I ask Mr Patrick Tay whether you wish to withdraw your amendment?
Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan: Sir, in closing, I thank my fellow Parliamentary colleagues who have filed 27 cuts and shared their thoughts, views, suggestions, ideas and recommendations. I believe this MOM COS debate has thrown greater light on the manpower challenges that we face as a country and the right things we must do to stay ready, relevant and resilient. We know the workforce has to adapt and grow. Companies not just have to stay lean and productive, but also have to be \"triple strong\". If I may quote Minister Lim Swee Say's famous proverb: \"You need to be not just better but betterer and betterest\" in terms of our tripartite relationship, labour management relationship and building a Singaporean Core.
I would like to thank Minister Lim Swee Say and Ministers of State Mr Teo Ser Luck and Mr Sam Tan as well as the Permanent Secretary, Deputy Secretaries and the MOM staff, including the Statutory Boards, who have been busy doing a lot of the work behind the scenes. So, thank you very much. With that, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.
[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $1,779,000,700 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The sum of $13,324,200 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Committee of Supply Reporting Progress","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Lim Swee Say: Sir, may I seek your consent to move that progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again on Monday, 11 April 2016?
The Chairman: I give my consent.
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That progress be reported now and leave be asked to sit again on Monday, 11 April 2016.\" − [Mr Lim Swee Say]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Thereupon Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House. (proc text)]
Mr Lim Swee Say: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 2016/2017, and ask leave to sit again on Monday,11 April 2016.
Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien]. (proc text)]
Adjourned accordingly at \t8.02 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exemption from Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty for Second Property Bought on One-for-One Exchange","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Miss Cheng Li Hui asked the Minister for Finance whether the Ministry will allow buyers who own more than one property to be exempted from the Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty if they buy another property as a one-for-one exchange.
Mr Heng Swee Keat: The objective of Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) is to moderate demand for residential properties and promote a stable and sustainable property market. As such, we have imposed ABSD on foreigners' and Singapore Permanent Residents' residential property purchase, and a Singapore Citizen's second and subsequent residential property purchase. Therefore, a Singapore Citizen who owns two residential properties and sells one of them to purchase another residential property will be required to pay ABSD on the new purchase.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[{"vernacularID":2013,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Ng Chee Meng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20160408/vernacular-Ng Chee Meng(1).pdf","fileName":"Ng Chee Meng(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2014,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20160408/vernacular-Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim(1).pdf","fileName":"Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2015,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Ms Low Yen Ling","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20160408/vernacular-Low Yen Ling(1).pdf","fileName":"Low Yen Ling(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2029,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20160408/vernacular-Patrick Tay(1).pdf","fileName":"Patrick Tay(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2030,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20160408/vernacular-Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim(2).pdf","fileName":"Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim(2).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2031,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Thomas Chua Kee Seng","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20160408/vernacular-Thomas Chua(1).pdf","fileName":"Thomas Chua(1).pdf"},{"vernacularID":2032,"sittingDate":null,"vernacularTitle":"Vernacular Speech by Mr Lim Swee Say","filePath":"d:/apps/reports/solr_files/20160408/vernacular-Lim Swee Say(1).pdf","fileName":"Lim Swee Say(1).pdf"}],"onlinePDFFileName":""}