1 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health what steps is the Ministry taking to raise awareness of regular strength training and resistance activity to mitigate the effects of muscle loss and to maintain functional independence among middle-aged and older Singaporeans.
2 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health what plans does the Ministry have to support safe and guided strength training for middle-aged and older Singaporeans and less active adults who may lack confidence or knowledge to use gym equipment effectively.
\tThe Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 1 and 2 together?
\tMr Speaker: Please go ahead.
Ms Rahayu Mahzam: The Health Promotion Board (HPB) and Sport Singapore (SportSG) have undertaken many initiatives to raise awareness of the risk of muscle loss and encourage strength training. This includes jointly issuing the Singapore Physical Activity Guidelines, which recommend that adults engage in muscle-strengthening activities at least twice per week, conducting outreach through multiple channels, exploring organising gym orientation workshops to familiarise seniors with gym equipment and offering various structured physical training programmes in the community, such as Start2Move, a beginner-friendly programme with guided introduction to strength-building exercises in a supportive environment.
A significant development is the expansion of community nodes, such as the Active Ageing Centre (AAC) network. With this expansion, plus the Healthy 365 app, we can better reach out to seniors and engage them in strength training exercises.
Mr Speaker: Ms Mariam Jaafar, you have a supplementary question?
\tMs Mariam Jaafar (Sembawang): Let me clarify. I am asking actually not really for senior seniors, who I think are supported by the AACs. But in my house visits, I have gotten an increasing number of people in their 40s and 50s who do not really want to exercise with seniors but who are starting to feel on their holidays that they are getting tired easily and things like that. So, they want to keep functional independence.
I have three supplementary questions. One, can the Minister of State share whether the Ministry has tracked functional outcomes of those who have been involved in the programmes that she has cited for seniors and for some programmes that exist for younger seniors too, for example, ActiveSG's Combat Age-related Loss of Muscle (CALM), and whether there has been a significant benefit in their functional performance since?
My second supplementary question is for middle — did the Minister of State answer Question Nos 1 and 2, or just Question No 1?
Mr Speaker: Both.
Ms Mariam Jaafar: Both. Okay. My second supplementary question is for the middle aged and older group, people in their 40s and 50s who are less active today, but want to start and lack the confidence to start with gym equipment. How does the Ministry ensure that there are programmes that are safely-guided and appropriately-paced through ActiveSG gyms and other community partners? And strength training is expanded under Healthier SG; so, how will the Ministry ensure that there are enough venues as well as enough trained instructors to provide a consistent quality and safe venues?
And I will bring in my Parliamentary Question (PQ) for written answer – which is a request, whether the Ministry will consider working with the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) to get an ActiveSG facility in the Admiralty part of Woodlands where there currently is not any; today, they have to go to Woodlands Swimming Complex which has the only ActiveSG facility in the area, or Sembawang.
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: Mr Speaker, on the first question as to whether we are tracking the functional outcomes, we do for some of the more structured programmes. The data though, I do not have the details with me. If the Member is interested in some of those, she could file a further PQ on that.
On the second question, relating to those who may not be as familiar with the gym equipment, I can imagine the concern and how we want to encourage people to use the gyms more. For the ActiveSG gyms, there are trainers who are onsite, who are very willing to support and encourage those who come and attend to use the equipment. We also have introductory programmes for those who may not be familiar with the gym equipment. And so, I hope these are things that will encourage some of the new users to use the gyms more often.
On the third question, I know that Ms Mariam Jaafar is asking for her constituency and I am sure many others feel the same way. For the North, attention is being given to see how we can look at the needs. I do not want to pre-empt the answer to the written PQ, but we can definitely look into this. At the moment, the Healthy 365 app is quite comprehensive. So, there are already in existence many opportunities in places. Perhaps, we could look at where the gaps are and look at how we can improve on that.
I would encourage those of your residents whom you say are not very familiar and are lethargic, and they do want to seek some guidance, the Healthy 365 app does provide a very good starting point and perhaps, that could be an initial introduction to a change in healthy living of the residents.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Food Security Strategy with Revised 2035 Fibre and Protein Production Targets","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"3 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how do the revised targets for fibre and protein productions by 2035 compare to the \"30 by 30\" targets in terms of total local food production volume; and (b) how will the Ministry ensure that these revised targets are adequate, sustainable and resilient to current and future challenges.
4 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what is the rationale for setting targets specifically for (i) fibre and (ii) protein production in the Ministry's new 2035 farming goals; and (b) how is Singapore's food security measured vis-à-vis local farming production.
The Senior Minister of State for Sustainability and the Environment (Mr Zaqy Mohamad) (for the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment): Mr Speaker, the previous \"30 by 30\" strategy sought to develop local capability and capacity to produce 30% of our nutritional needs by 2030. This has evolved into the Singapore Food Story 2, which aims to bring about overall food resilience. This ensures that we have sufficient food supply in times of disruption. Local production is one of the food security pillars of the Singapore Food Story 2, complemented by three other pillars which are import diversification, stockpiling and global partnerships.
We want to work with our local farms to build up the capability and capacity to supply 20% of our local consumption of fresh leafy and fruited vegetables, beansprouts and mushrooms; and 30% of our local consumption of eggs and seafood.
The revised local production targets take into account the important role of local food production as a regenerative and assured source of fresh food, the strengths of our local farming ecosystem and their potential for growth.
We will focus on food types that are feasible to be produced at scale efficiently. This is consistently applied in our grants and land tenders.
Protein types such as meats are not part of the revised targets due to factors such as resource efficiency, land intensity and climate conditions. Alternative protein is also excluded given the nascency of the sector. What we are not intending to produce locally, such as rice and poultry, will be considered under other pillars of the Singapore Food Story 2 such as import diversification and stockpiling.
The revised targets balance ambition and pragmatism, by considering what we can produce and scale locally as well as the challenges our nascent sector faces, including higher production costs and the need for substitute demand. To achieve them, we will continue to find ways to support new and existing farms in lowering production costs, building capability, strengthening the supply resilience of inputs and enhancing demand offtake.
The Government will continue to invest efforts in building local production capability and capacity. Food security is a joint responsibility that requires the nation's collective effort. We also need strong support from local consumers and businesses which is essential for our farms to achieve scale and commercial viability.
We will provide more information on our support schemes at the coming Committee of Supply (COS).
\tMr Speaker: Senior Minister of State Zaqy, I assume you are answering Question Nos 3 and 4?
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Yes, Mr Speaker, I was answering Question Nos 3 and 4. Thank you.
Mr Speaker: Alright, thank you. Mr Yip Hon Weng.
\tMr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. I have two supplementary questions. The first concerns farms. Small farms and food producers form part of Singapore's small and medium enterprise landscape. What concrete job creation or retention targets accompany the new production goals, especially for sectors affected by high production costs and workforce shortages?
My second supplementary question pertains to consumers. Given that locally produced food often cost more than imported alternatives, how did the Ministry assess the potential price impacts on households, if the revised targets are met? What measures are in place to prevent local production from inadvertently raising food prices for Singaporean families?
\tMr Zaqy Mohamad: I thank the Member for his questions; very important ones, especially if you are thinking of how we are supporting the local production in our farms.
Over the past few years, as the Member has highlighted, the global agri-food sector has faced headwinds. We have also faced supply chain disruptions ever since COVID-19 and we have seen how those have impacted us. Of course, Singapore also faces other challenges, such as high energy costs, labour constraints, especially since farming is not exactly one of the more favoured jobs, as the Member was alluding to. And therefore, I think in terms of how we support our farms, it has to be in sustainable ways, such as capability development, providing funding and schemes through our Agri-Food Cluster Transformation Fund. This helps our farms build up capability in new areas such as agri-tech.
So, we have seen farms such as Green Harvest, as an example, who today own several farm plots and already supply to many of our supermarkets, even wet markets as well. While they have been established over decades, they have also been able to transform. They set up a joint venture, Green Harvest, together with Team Build Construction. Today, if you compare their traditional farms, which are in Lim Chu Kang, and their new farms, I think you can see that the yields are about three times more than what they do in the traditional farms – using agri-tech, using new technologies, using new ways of doing things.
We want to help our farmers transform, because with higher yields, it also means that they can be more competitive. They can provide a different suite of offerings. And certainly, when we think about Singapore's land constraints, where only 1% of our land use is dedicated to farms and farming, I think then, we have to be really smart about how we use our farms to achieve these outputs.
Having said that, I am also going to say that I think it is also important that as we look at agri-tech, agri-food, new technology, new capabilities, it also has to overcome some of our constraints. Energy use, I think, is one area in which some of our new farms are able to overcome – they are now looking at low-energy type facilities, where they can reduce energy costs. At the same time, automation helps us reduce manpower.
I have spoken about Green Harvest that today already produces about three times the yield of traditional farms. On the extreme end, we also have Greenphyto which just, I think some Members may have read in the news, launched last week, at the cost of about $80 million investment. But not everyone can reach that. That is the extreme. What it claims to do is to get up to about almost 45 times yield of our traditional farms. If you can get to somewhere in between, then that, I think changes the game for our agri-food sector.
I want us to imagine a very different food sector in the near future where we talk about not just food resilience in terms of local farming, but also how we use our other pillars in the Singapore Food Story 2, which has evolved our food resilience narrative. I have spoken about stockpiling at the last Sitting. There is also import diversification. There are also global partnerships, which Members would have probably noticed, some of the recent agreements which have been made.
More importantly, I think it is really about overcoming our land constraints, but thinking about how we achieve our outputs and productions in a very different manner from where it is today.
Mr Speaker: Ms He Ting Ru.
\tMs He Ting Ru (Sengkang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have three supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. The first is, given the shift in 2030 target, to 2035, what prevents further deadline extensions if headwinds persist, particularly given the current uncertainty around the geopolitical climate as well?
The second is in relation to, especially for the food security and to help us better understand our food security situation, if Singapore's food imports were to stop completely, how many days could the country sustain itself on local production alone under these new targets?
And my third supplementary question is, given the original \"30 by 30\" goal was described as aspirational, could I just ask for confirmation whether these new targets are targets or aspirations?
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Member for her questions. Let me take us back one step. I will start with the third question first, on \"30 by 30\" and where we are in the Singapore Food Story. I think the Member will recall, it was in 2019 when we embarked on the \"30 by 30\" vision, where we wanted to grow a local food strategy to build food supply resilience. That was how we got Singaporeans to really think about food resilience, how we build this story and how we build this narrative of relying on local produce, helping local produce grow and support us in times of difficulty or challenges, when it comes to supply disruptions.
\t
And certainly, even then, we had some forms of the other pillars, which is stockpiling and others. Since 2019, we have gone through several rounds of challenges and disruptions, which has taught us that we have other options too. That gave us the confidence to look at different options as Singapore learned from various things. For example, if you recall COVID-19, we had border closures, we had supply disruptions, which got us to think about supply diversification – when it came to eggs, when it came to chickens. It also got us thinking about whether we need to strengthen stockpiling. And therefore, in the last Sitting, we had Parliamentary Questions (PQs) on stockpiling, and what we do with rice and what we do with chicken.
With greater options now, I am not solely reliant on local food production only. And we also have to manage risks. So, we look at risk profiling. And therefore, in the short term, I think what is required is really to think about how we develop the Singapore Food Story in a slightly different way. So, we now set ourselves new goals, which is 20% through leafy and fruited greens, as well as the proteins for 30%, which I think we are already somewhat there for the protein side. We have about 26% out of 30%. We have about 8% out of 20% for the leafy vegetables, which we think over time, we can grow. But overall, I would say this, that our yield production has certainly shown promise.
If you look at the statistics between 2019 and 2024, the productivity of farms has increased in yield by 10% for vegetables, 17% for seafood and 50% for eggs. So, that gives very good promise in terms of whether we are able to meet the 2035 target. Certainly, it is something that we are doing more than just aspirations, we are tracking quite carefully.
As I said, we are tracking the statistics, we are putting in programmes, schemes to ensure and help our farms transform to achieve those goals.
If you think about the Singapore Food Story security plan, I think we got to then reframe the thought that is more than just local production supplying 30% of our nutritional needs, to one of four pillars of food security: local production, import diversification, stockpiling and putting in global partnerships. These, put together, give us a bit more options.
Are we changing the goalpost? I think that is one question some people ask me all the time. I think maybe it is not so much thinking in terms of goalpost, but maybe perhaps I am giving you a better goalkeeper that can perhaps save the day with more options or more plays or more tool kits in this playbook. This is one way in which we can ensure food security in Singapore in terms of need.
As for the question on how many days we can survive, I think that is something that we keep for national security. I spoke about stockpiling. It is not wise for us to reveal how long we can hold out with our stockpiles. But I would like to assure the Member that this is something that we watch very closely to ensure that in times of need, in times of security, we want to attain and ensure some sort of normalcy in the short term, such that you do not feel too much of a difference, in terms of how we practise and what we eat every day. And that is where stockpiles come in.
But over time, you will need to look at other options, whether it is local food security, or by hopefully then, we are able to find options through our diversification efforts. With that, thank you very much.
Mr Speaker: I want to clear as many questions as I can during this Question Time. I still see quite a few hands. Please keep your questions short. And the same applies to the front bench answering. Ms Poh Li San.
\tMs Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the Senior Minister of State. Well, if the 2030 goal was a moonshot, then I think it does make sense to come back to earth and find spots that will work as well. On that note, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State, can you share more about our diversification strategy and which are the non-traditional countries that we have started importing more food from?
\tMr Zaqy Mohamad: The short answer is, that is not part of this PQ, so you may want to file another PQ. Having said that, an example would be chickens. We have seen how we have coped with the supply chain disruption during COVID-19. We have gone from just Malaysia to other countries, such as Brazil. If you think about eggs, we went all the way to Ukraine. But I think you can find the whole list of diversified sources on the Singapore Food Agency (SFA) website too.
Mr Speaker: Mr Dennis Tan.
\tMr Dennis Tan Lip Fong (Hougang): Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the answers. I have filed two questions for yesterday's Sitting and the Minister said that these will be addressed today. So, one question regarding how will the SFA supports and transitions farms that have invested heavily in technology to meet the original target, but now, whose produce is less aligned with the new protein and fibre targets, and what enhanced grants or offtake schemes are available to assist?
I have not really quite heard the answer to this question. I have one supplementary question to this. Will the Government consider going beyond one-off grants for capital expenditure and offer grants to help with operating expenditure?
And one supplementary question for my fibre question, has SFA considered whether narrowing the recognised fibre crop set, increases systemic risk, such as pest or climate vulnerability, and if so, what will be the mitigation measures?
\tMr Zaqy Mohamad: Mr Speaker, thank you for allowing me to answer these questions. To the Member's questions on cost and vulnerability, I think that it is something that really depends on your mode of farming. If you are dealing with traditional land farms, of course, you have got things like soil disease, you have things like pests and other things, and farm and vegetable diseases that could spread. You have that kinds of risk.
Where you have the extreme case where you have agri-tech farms in very controlled environments, I think that also provides a different sort of environment which helps to mitigate risks. We find that some of our farmers have already moved in this space. So, as I mentioned earlier on, Greenphyto is one, but you have others like Green Harvest and Yili Farms, who have also done some transformations to put their crops in greenhouses, which reduces the effects of climate. And therefore, a number of our farms that we have funded out of our schemes – so not so much invested in; let me rephrase that, we did not invest in, but we funded through our schemes – have been many of these new climate-resilient farms too, which helps in terms of yield, because you have shielded yourself from the weather, as one example. And of course, that reduces pests as well.
On other areas in which Member spoke about, including whether we will fund operating costs, I think that is always a danger down a slippery slope. Ultimately, where we want to focus on is capability building, looking at new areas in which we can support. I will give you examples. We have a hatchery centre and a broodstock centre, which helps, for example, to get higher yields for our egg stock. We also have hatcheries that improve the quality of fingerlings, so that aquaculture can be farmed and raised with higher yields and that are stronger in terms of survivability rates.
These help farms in more game-changing ways than just helping to fund the operating costs, which may continue in current modes, current forms, which are not sustainable in the long term.
But I think what we want to do, as I shared, is build new capability, new capacities and new ways of farming, which maximises yield, which helps overcomes our constraints in land and other weaknesses that we have in terms of manpower, for example, through automation.
Today, for example, we are also encouraging some of our farms, whether it is aquaculture farms or even traditional agriculture farms, to go abroad, understand from some of these trends that can be found, agriculture or agri-tech type farming that you find overseas, whether it is in China or in other parts of Europe, and other areas in Asia, to which we can learn from too, in terms of how they have been able to scale, if they have been able to bring down cost of production. These are areas in which we want to learn from.
So, we are trying to help our farms overcome our constraints here in Singapore.
Mr Speaker: Okay, last supplementary question. Mr Tiong.
\tMr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat (Aljunied): Thank you, Speaker. The Senior Minister of State spoke about enhancing demand offtake. Given that our local farms face structural disadvantages against cheaper imports, has the Ministry considered any form of minimum local sourcing requirements for major retailers and food service operators, even a modest starting quota, so as to create guaranteed demand and help farms achieve commercial viability?
This could be a 1% quota for major food importers and supermarkets like NTUC Fairprice and Sheng Siong. You can call it \"1 by 30\", if you would like.
\tMr Zaqy Mohamad: Speaker, I think as a principle, we go with free market principles. Ultimately, I do not think it is in the interest of consumers or the Government to fund or subsidise food products, just as we do not do it for energy costs nor petrol.
What we really want is to help our local farmers connect them through organisations such as Singapore Agro-Food Enterprises Federation Limited. We are working very hard to connect them with many of our retailers, hoteliers, restaurant caterers – and many today are already supporting our local farms.
As an example, while Greenphyto was just launched last month, a year ago, they have already started to reach out and they are already selling to about 75 retailers here in Singapore.
I spoke about Kok Fah Technology Farm, I spoke about Green Harvest, traditional farms, new farms. I think what is key is really to be competitive with the market to provide an offering that Singaporeans would consider. I know supermarkets such as Fairprice, for example, tell me they have got a whole section dedicated just for local produce.
We can encourage Singaporeans to support. I think ultimately it is also encouraging and building awareness with our consumers that local farm produce is fresher. Today, most of them are pesticide free. So, we give you slightly different offerings for a slightly different premium. But I think for things like vegetables, even bean sprouts, the reason why they have a pretty good hold on the market is because consumers also want freshness and there is a segment of market that wish for that.
We hope that with helping our businesses build new capabilities, improve yields, lower their cost of production, we hope that in the long term that helps them be more competitive in the market. I hope that our consumers will also be able to discern the advantages of supporting local and buying local.
On our part, whether it is through procurement, whether it is through encouraging retailers, hoteliers, I think we will continue to do our part to encourage them to buy local produce, so that we can support local farmers. It is in our interest, on the record, to ensure that our local farms, our local producers thrive, progress and play a big part in our Singapore Food Story 2.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review of Lifetime CPF Contribution Threshold for Silver Support Scheme","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"5 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry has reviewed the $140,000 lifetime CPF contribution threshold for eligibility under the Silver Support Scheme; and (b) what considerations guide any adjustments in light of cost-of-living changes affecting seniors reliant on CPF payouts.
\tThe Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): Happy New Year, Speaker. The Ministry periodically reviews the eligibility criteria for the Silver Support Scheme. In 2021, the total Central Provident Fund (CPF) contribution (TCC) threshold, which reflects the income that seniors earned during their working years, was doubled from $70,000 to $140,000. In 2025, we raised the qualifying monthly per capita household income threshold, from $1,800 to $2,300 – this is about an approximate 28% increase.
We also increased the quarterly payments by 20%. About 290,000 seniors aged 65 and above currently benefit from the scheme.
The Government also provides various forms of support to help Singaporeans, including seniors, to cope with the cost-of-living concerns. This includes the Assurance Package, and the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Voucher schemes, which were enhanced in 2025.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.
\t
\t
\t
Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Sir, between 2016, when the Silver Support Scheme was implemented, and today, the CPF Full Retirement Sum (FRS) was adjusted 10 times, rising from $161,000 to $220,000, a 37% increase. If we take the Silver Support threshold of $140,000 as a share of the FRS a decade ago, the equivalent adjustment would bring this to around $191,000 today.
Keeping in mind that the FRS itself represents the Government's own assessment of a basic standard of living in retirement, the rigidity of the equivalent CPF threshold for Silver Support is somewhat puzzling to me. Would the Minister be willing to share the rationale for this seeming inconsistency between CPF FRS adjustments relative to the Silver Support threshold?
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I do not think it is a like-for-like comparison. You need to look at the Silver Support Scheme in a holistic manner. Because we do have a number of other schemes that has come alongside the Silver Support Scheme to support our elderly. On top of that, there are also significant CPF enhancements that we are doing to support our elderly, the cost-of-living vouchers and the different packages – such as the Pioneer Generation Package to the Merdeka Generation Package to the Majulah Package. They are all aimed at different sectors of uplifting our seniors. So, in addition to the Silver Support Scheme, you need to look at it on a broader, a more comprehensive and a more holistic scale.
On top of that, we periodically review the parameters in which the Silver Support Scheme is improved and refined. As I have shared earlier on in 2021, we expanded the coverage from $70,000 TCC over a lifetime, to $140,000. This has resulted in a larger number of elderly Singaporeans becoming eligible. In 2025, just a year ago, we enhanced the quarterly payouts by some 20%. We have also expanded the household per capita income by almost 28%.
So, you need to look at it on a very comprehensive, holistic scale, before you make that comparison.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Shawn Loh.
\tMr Shawn Loh (Jalan Besar): Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Silver Support Scheme is a lifeline for many of our seniors, especially our very senior seniors – maybe those above the age of 80. I see them every time in Jalan Besar and Whampoa. And as Assoc Prof Jamus Lim noted, the Silver Support Scheme is already 10 years old.
My question for the Minister is whether the Government could consider a more fundamental review of the Silver Support Scheme and in particular, the eligibility criteria; not the levels, but the criteria themselves.
Assoc Prof Jamus Lim asked about the coverage of some of these criteria, like the lifetime CPF contribution. I think that we should instead review whether the lifetime CPF contribution should even be a criterion for the Silver Support Scheme, keeping in mind that there are a lot more seniors who have lived far beyond their retirement savings. Those above 80, would not remember what they contributed up to the age of 55, which is the current criteria. And the Government now has more sophisticated means testing criteria and mechanisms compared to 10 years ago, when the Silver Support Scheme was first implemented.
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank Mr Shawn Loh for his supplementary question. Indeed, we constantly review the frameworks, the criteria, as to how we can better support all of our elderly Singaporeans. Not just all of our elderly Singaporeans, we have also gone upstream to see in their younger working years, through the entire lifespan of their working career, their entire work life journey itself, to see how at different points in time we can provide uplifts to our Singaporeans, fellow citizens. I think this is an important point because we have never, never ever let any difficult spot go unnoticed.
I think we need to look and see against the entire fiscal sustainability of what we have as a Government, how can we continue to sustain whatever measures, whatever policies, whatever incentives support schemes that we have given out to all of our Singaporeans, particularly when they are in their golden years. When we balance fiscal sustainability with fiscal prudence, we also – if I may use a medical word – we also immunise and boost some of the savings along the way through top-ups.
Over the last two to three years of the previous Government, we have introduced the Majulah Package, we have enhanced this Silver Support Scheme, we have also introduced, at various points, the GST Vouchers, Community Development Council Vouchers, cost-of-living vouchers to support and uplift our elderly Singaporeans. We believe that through a differentiated, a graduated and more targeted series of support, we can better, more adequately and more precisely reach out to each and every one of our elderly Singaporean.
Having said that, we share the same view, we share the same end objective, as Mr Shawn Loh and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, because we constantly want to look for ways to continue to uplift each and every Singaporean, way into their golden retirement years.
\tMr Speaker: I am moving on. Next question, Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Aligning Silver Support Scheme's Monthly Income Threshold with Local Qualifying Salary Quantum ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"6 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the rationale for maintaining the Silver Support (SS) Scheme's monthly income per person threshold at $1,500 for the higher tier benefit given that the Local Qualifying Salary has been set at $1,600; and (b) whether the Ministry will review the threshold for SS Scheme to ensure consistency and adequacy of support for lower-income seniors.
\t
\tMr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik (Sengkang): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. Given that Local Qualifying Salary (LQS), full-time equivalent as —
The Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): I have not answered the Parliamentary Question yet.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik.
\tMr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik: Yes?
\tMr Speaker: I actually wanted to go on to the next question.
\tMr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik: Okay. Thank you.
\tMr Speaker: Which is your question.
\tMr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik: Question No 6, sorry.
\tMr Speaker: I am doing this because we have a lot of questions. So, I want to confine and give priority to those who have filed questions, for the benefit of our Members.
\tDr Tan See Leng: Mr Speaker, the $1,500 threshold for the higher tier of payouts in the Silver Support Scheme refers to the monthly per capita household income (PCHI). This is not the individual's monthly income. I hope that this can be a point of clarification for the Member.
This monthly PCHI is computed as the total gross household monthly income, divided by the total number of family members living together in the same household.
Our Silver Support Scheme payouts are tiered by flat types – so, a 5-room flat, 4-room flat, 3-room flat, 2-room flat – they are tiered by the different flat types and of course, the monthly PCHI. This is to ensure that the support is targeted most at seniors who now have little or no family support and resources in their retirement.
The LQS serves a different purpose. It is to ensure that firms who wish to employ foreign workers also pay their local workers meaningfully, rather than on token salaries. It is not intended as a measure of retirement adequacy or financial need and is therefore not correlated with the Silver Support Scheme's monthly PCHI criteria.
As I have earlier on answered Assoc Prof Jamus Lim's Parliamentary Question (PQ) and also responded to the supplementary question by Mr Shawn Loh, we recently enhanced the Silver Support Scheme, just last year, in 2025, and we raised the qualifying monthly PCHI threshold from $1,800 to $2,300. This is approximately a 28% increase. This has enabled more seniors, including those with lower incomes, to qualify for Silver Support payouts.
Let me reassure everyone in this House – we will continue to review the Silver Support Scheme periodically.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik.
\tMr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I understand that the LQS and the Silver Support Scheme are two different schemes. But given that there is a progressive increase from $1,400 to $1,600 since July 2024 for LQS, whether the Ministry has assessed how seniors whose wages were adjusted by employers to meet the LQS, have consequently been pushed into the lower Silver Support tier. This is mostly for those elderly who are staying alone in their own household.
My second question is: how many Silver Support recipients have moved from the higher tier to a lower tier, since the LQS increase to $1,600?
\tDr Tan See Leng: I thank the Member for his supplementary questions. But I think that perhaps he did not understand the construct of the LQS and the fact that it is not related to the Silver Support Scheme payout. There will be further refinements to the LQS in the upcoming Budget, the Committee of Supply. I do not think I want to go too much into the details.
Suffice to say, let me reiterate that they are not in any way interlinked. I mean, that is not how we constructed the LQS to be. Because the LQS, as I have shared earlier on, is aimed at working and solving our companies' needs for foreign workers. We do not want the companies to hire our locals on a token salary, so that they can get the foreign worker quota. So, please remember that they are not related.
To his point about how much of the LQS has pushed the elderly seniors living alone down to below or set at that monthly PCHI threshold of $1,500, I do not have those statistics because it is not how we work that scheme out to be. I hope that addresses his point.
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal For Highest Tier of Silver Support for Seniors Above 80 Who Live in Smaller HDB Flats","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"7 Mr Shawn Loh asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the highest tier of Silver Support can be given to seniors above age 80 living in smaller HDB flats, considering that they would likely have outlived their life expectancy and depleted their CPF savings; and (b) whether the Government can top up the CPF LIFE accounts of low-wage seniors who continue to work to cope with living costs.
\tThe Minister for Manpower (Dr Tan See Leng): The Silver Support Scheme is a targeted support scheme which provides support to seniors aged 65 and above, who had lower incomes during their working years and now have little or no family support and resources in their retirement. Eligibility is determined by the senior's lifetime wages, housing type and the level of household support. Eligible seniors living in smaller flats with fewer financial resources will receive higher payments.
The Silver Support Scheme is part of a wider set of social support measures. These include the Workfare Income Supplement and the annual Earn and Save Bonus under the Majulah Package, which help boost the retirement savings of lower- to middle-income working seniors and can increase their Central Provident Fund (CPF) LIFE payouts. The one-off Retirement Savings Bonus and MediSave Bonus under the Majulah Package also provided an additional boost to eligible seniors' retirement and healthcare savings in their CPF accounts. In addition, the Assurance Package helps defray living expenses for Singaporean households. Seniors who need further assistance to meet their basic living needs can approach their nearest Social Service Office to apply for ComCare.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Shawn Loh.
\t
\t
Mr Shawn Loh (Jalan Besar): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his care for our seniors and for his assurance that the Silver Support Scheme will continue to be reviewed periodically and sometimes, fundamentally.
I only have a specific question with regard to my earlier question on flat type. I cannot be the only Member of Parliament in this House who has had residents come up to me, who live in 5-room flats, to complain that their neighbours who live in 4-room flats are getting more from the Silver Support Scheme. And my question for the Minister is whether the Ministry could consider, in the future, merging some of these flat types so that residents, often neighbours who stay close to each other, can get the same higher level of Silver Support?
Dr Tan See Leng: I thank the Member for his suggestion. In all of our future reviews, we take the feedback, not just from this House, but from our regular Meet-the-People Sessions, at dialogues, at town hall sessions, and at chit-chat sessions with all of our residents, and at different opportunities. We take that feedback and we certainly will see how to manage that feedback. We may not be able to, at a particular point in time, address each and every single one, but rest assured, we certainly will look at it over the medium to long term. Like I said earlier on, we have to balance it between fiscal prudence and fiscal sustainability. If we do something, I think, we need to ensure that we can sustain it over the long haul.
Of course, I hope for the day, through the collective efforts of all of us here, where we have done so well that we are able to upstream and ensure that every Singaporean has enough in their golden years; they can meet all of their Full Retirement Sum needs; and the Silver Support Scheme can then wither down to just a very small proportion. I think, then, we would have arrived.
I hope that gives the Member that reassurance of what we are thinking about over the long haul.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"AED Installation in New Estates Such as Tengah","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"8 Dr Choo Pei Ling asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) what preparatory steps are required before Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs) can be installed in newly developed estates such as Tengah; (b) what is the estimated timeline for AED installation in Tengah estate, and how it compares with other HDB precincts; and (c) what interim measures are in place to support emergency preparedness in new estates pending AED deployment.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Home Affairs (Ms Sim Ann) (for the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs): Sir, prior to installing Automated External Defibrillators (AEDs) in new estates, the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) would need to ensure that the relevant infrastructural and security works are completed. This includes having closed-circuit televisions (CCTVs) in the vicinity to deter AED theft.
Twenty-nine AEDs have been installed in Tengah estate to date; 11 more will be installed by February 2026. This will cover about 70% of the Housing and Development Board (HDB) blocks in Tengah where residents have already moved in. Installation will continue in 2026.
To equip residents with fire safety knowledge and life-saving skills, SCDF organises community emergency preparedness events, such as Community Resilience Days and MyNiceHome roadshows, in partnership with the People's Association and HDB. Several of these events have already been held in Tengah in recent months.
Mr Speaker: Dr Choo Pei Ling.
\tDr Choo Pei Ling (Chua Chu Kang): Thank you, Speaker. And thank you, Senior Minister of State, for the assuring responses. I have one supplementary question. Tengah is Singapore's first town built entirely anew in over 20 years. Timely access to life-saving equipment, like AEDs, is critical. May I ask, what further measures can be implemented to strengthen emergency preparedness in Tengah while awaiting full AED deployment?
\tMs Sim Ann: Sir, in addition to the programmes that I have mentioned earlier, there is also the \"My Responder Plus\" programme, which is run by SCDF, which the community can partner SCDF in organising for residents. And at the same time, I also encourage the community to work very closely with their Community Emergency and Engagement Committees, because they can also partner SCDF in organising activities and programmes that help to equip residents with life-saving skills.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effect on Retail Tenant Mix and Leasing Terms at The Clementi Mall Following Acquisition by Owner of Neighbouring Mall","subTitle":"Proposal for safeguards to protect SME tenants from possible abuse of dominant position in lease renewals","sectionType":"OA","content":"9 Mr David Hoe asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry regarding the acquisition of The Clementi Mall by a property firm which owns Grantral Mall@Clementi, (a) whether the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCS) has assessed the competition effects on retail tenant mix and leasing terms in the Clementi catchment; and (b) whether the Ministry will issue guidance on when such mall acquisitions shall be notified to CCS for competition review.
\tThe Senior Minister of State for Trade and Industry (Ms Low Yen Ling) (for the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry): Mr Speaker, tenancy mix and turnover in commercial developments are the result of commercial decisions made by both property owners and tenants. These decisions are influenced by market factors, such as consumer demand preferences and prevailing economic conditions.
With regard to competition concerns arising from mergers and acquisitions, Singapore adopts a voluntary merger notification regime to balance between effective regulatory oversight and keeping compliance costs low. Merger parties are expected to self-assess whether their transaction may give rise to potential competition concerns. Merger parties may approach the Competition and Consumer Commission (CCS) for pre-notification discussions or seek guidance on whether the merger may be anti-competitive. To support businesses in this process, CCS has published detailed guidance on the circumstances under which mergers may raise competition concerns.
The parties to the acquisition of The Clementi Mall have not formally notified CCS for a merger assessment. CCS will continue to monitor market developments and is empowered to step in, if it obtains information suggesting that a merger may result in potential competition issues.
\tMr Speaker: Mr David Hoe.
\tMr David Hoe (Jurong East-Bukit Batok): I thank the Senior Minister of State for her response and reassurance. At the same time, I also want to thank the Minister for his written response to my two Parliamentary Questions yesterday on The Clementi Mall. I would like to assure that, even though the three questions are relating to The Clementi Mall, they address different concerns. I have three supplementary questions.
First, when CCS assessed the effects of competition beyond pricing, does it also consider non-pricing effects, for example, diversity of offerings and consumer choice, particularly in heartland malls? Because these are places where our residents rely on for their daily needs. I raise this because in Clementi today, a single owner controls two malls within the same catchment area. And in my conversation with my Clementi residents, they shared with me their concerns: \"David, over time, will The Clementi Mall also have the same resemblance of tenant mix as Grantral Mall?\"
My second question is on what basis would the effects of competition warrant intervention by CCS and what forms of intervention are available to CCS, particularly in situations when transaction of sale has already been made?
Third, I understand that CCS may step in when it receives information suggesting potential competition concerns. Could the Ministry clarify what type of information this would look like? And would feedback from residents and the general public serve as such information? If so, how might they be able to convey such information to CCS?
\tMs Low Yen Ling: I want to thank the Member, Mr David Hoe, for his three comprehensive supplementary questions. And I will respond this way.
I think it bears repeating, for commercial developments, the tenancy mix is primarily market driven and a result of commercial decisions that is made by mall owners, operators as well as tenants. And over time, many Members who serve on the ground, you have heartland malls and so on, and Members will realise, over time, the tenant mix in a heartland mall often reflects the consumer demand driven by the needs, driven by the preferences of the residents. Customer is king. We need to allow the market forces to be at work. And I think, generally, we will all agree that it is in the mall operators' interest to provide differentiated products and services. If the malls are within near proximity, it will be quite interesting to have the same brand shop operating in both malls, unless it is due to capacity issues.
But I also want to assure the Member that allowing market forces to be at work does not mean CCS is hands-off. At the various platforms that we have shared, CCS has various levers, we have guidelines, very detailed guidelines. With regard to this, it is the CCS Guidelines on the Substantive Assessment of Mergers. We also have measures, and obviously we have law, the competition law or the Competition Act, to maintain a healthy competitive environment. CCS will assess the degree to which competition may be affected or is affected, based on facts, based on circumstances. Certainly, not based on hearsay, uncertainty, projections and so on.
I want to assure the Member that, for example, if any transaction results in substantially less competition that compromises the consumer welfare, CCS will step in. We will step in. And since the Member asked, price obviously is an important indicator. Another example is if CCS observes the behaviour of the organisations and if we pick up signals that they are coordinating the behaviour to raise prices, to reduce quality, to reduce output, to reduce innovation, CCS will step in.
I want to assure the Member that members of the public, including his residents, can certainly provide feedback – qualitative as well as quantitative – to CCS directly. And we will follow up accordingly and seriously. I wish that the Member will now pick up a pen and note this down. Let the Member's residents know to call us via the hotline – 1800 325 8282.
And well, if the Member prefers the web-based approach, we have a very succinct FormSG, where you can just use your handphone and go to www.ccs.gov.sg. There is a module that says, \"Contact Us\". I check it regularly. There is a link that tells you that if you want to report any anti-competitive behaviour, it points you there.
We welcome the Member's residents to give us the feedback and I assure him that we will follow up accordingly.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Home Caregiving Grant Applicants and Top Conditions Cared for by Applicants","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"10 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what is the cumulative number of applicants for the Home Caregiving Grant (HCG) to date; (b) what are the top three conditions cared for by HCG applicants; and (c) what is the number of applicants broken down by age group of (i) 30 to 39, (ii) 40 to 49, (iii) 50 to 59, (iv) 60 to 69, and (v) 70 years and above.
\tThe Minister of State for Health (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health): Mr Speaker, since the Home Caregiving Grant (HCG) was introduced in 2019, there have been over 94,000 applicants for the HCG cumulatively. Of which, 74% were aged 70 and above, 15% were aged 60 to 69, 5% were aged 50 to 59, 2% were aged 40 to 49, and 1% were aged 30 to 39, at the point of application.
The Ministry of Health does not collect information on the specific conditions of HCG applicants.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin.
\tMs Nadia Ahmad Samdin (Ang Mo Kio): Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Minister of State for her response. In an ageing estate, such as Ang Mo Kio, the HCG is very much appreciated. And while primarily designed for seniors, my understanding is that it is also designed to recognise other forms of caregivers. And so, I have two supplementary questions.
The first, for those with autism and intellectual disabilities, can the Minister of State clarify whether the individual must also separately meet the Activity of Daily Living (ADL) criteria? If so, would the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) consider decoupling this? As the care recipients also have some level of independence and we want to encourage them to maintain these ADLs; the caregivers would greatly appreciate the support.
Secondly, while caregiving needs may present differently across physical health and mental health conditions, the intensity and impact on caregivers are equally significant. So, could I check whether the Government can extend the HCG to care recipients who are facing diagnosed mental health conditions and, if necessary, to introduce the appropriate criteria similar to ADLs for this qualification?
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: I thank the Member for the question and also acknowledge her interest in advocating for the caregivers of those with different needs.
I would want to explain that the HCG is actually designed to help defray caregiving costs and expenses for those with greater needs and that is why it is actually means-tested. The recipients are those who are unable to perform the ADLs.
That is how it is structured, because we see ADLs as being a key function and essential portion of our daily living.
\t
So, HCG itself is a specific scheme for caregivers. When the Member asked the question about the caregivers of those with autism or intellectual disability, as well as those with mental health conditions, actually, if they meet the criteria of not being able to perform the ADLs, they will satisfy the requirement of HCG. And then, of course, there is the means testing.
I understand and appreciate where the Member is coming from, because there are clearly other concerns with those who are caring for individuals with special needs. There are many different other schemes that are in place to address many different concerns. In particular, with regard to those with special needs, there are existing efforts that we are looking at and reviewing, and trying to understand and appreciate better how we can support them.
So, it may not just be from the HCG. I want to assure the Member that, at the moment, yes, HCG has certain requirements. It is meant and intended to help those with the most or greater needs with regard to ADLs. I do see and appreciate the concerns she has with regard to those with other types of caregiving challenges. And we are looking at some of those to see how we can fill in the gaps.
In the meantime, if there are some specific concerns, she can raise the issues and then, we can see what are the existing infrastructure or support that is already existing that we can channel to the residents who are in need.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin, a short supplementary question, please.
\tMs Nadia Ahmad Samdin: Thank you, Speaker, and I really appreciate the Minister of State's assurance. I recognise, especially for those with special needs, there may be alternative schemes, for example, through SG Enable. However, for the care recipients who are facing mental health conditions, could the Minister of State clarify what sort of testing? Because for the mental health condition and the doctor issues a total permanent disability, is there an equivalent sort of testing which can be offered to assess ADL, in order for them to qualify for this scheme? Because my understanding on the ground is that this is a little harder to do; and for mental health conditions, there is not as many schemes available.
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: Let me clarify, Mr Speaker. The description of what the ADLs are, is quite clear. So, if, let us say, the care recipient is not able to perform those daily activities permanently and the doctor certifies that he or she is not able to do so, then they would be eligible to apply for this. So, it is not a separate assessment.
I note the Member's concerns that it is not so clear cut. In those cases, perhaps that could be surfaced to us and we will see where we could streamline that a bit better. But there are quite clear descriptions as to what the ADLs are.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Possibility of Legislation Similar to Australia's Social Media Ban for Those Under 16 for Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"11 Mr Vikram Nair asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether the Ministry has completed its review of the Australian government's move to ban social media access for individuals under the age of 16 through legislation; and (b) if so, whether the Ministry will consider introducing similar legislation.
\tThe Minister of State for Digital Development and Information (Ms Rahayu Mahzam) (for the Minister for Digital Development and Information): Mr Speaker, Australia's social media minimum age regulations came into effect on 10 December 2025. The Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) is actively engaging our Australian counterparts and assessing the effectiveness of the measures in Australia.
Meanwhile, we have progressively introduced measures to better protect our children when they go online.
We have imposed age assurance requirements on designated app stores to reduce the likelihood of under-18 users accessing and downloading age-inappropriate apps of all types, beyond just social media apps. Designated app stores are expected to implement these age assurance measures by 31 March 2026.
We also plan to extend age assurance requirements to designated social media services to reduce children's exposure to age-inappropriate content on social media platforms. The age assurance measures will come on top of the existing protective measures for children under the current Code of Practice for Online Safety – Social Media Services. Consultations with designated social media services are ongoing.
We acknowledge parental concerns about the impact of social media on their children as well as the potential implementation challenges of age assurance requirements. There is no silver bullet. A child can still circumvent these measures, such as through using an adult's account to access age-inappropriate content. This is why MDDI will continue to work with partners from the people, private and public sectors, to co-create resources and programmes that are convenient and accessible for parents to help guide their children to foster healthy digital habits from young.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Nair.
\tMr Vikram Nair (Sembawang): I thank the Minister of State for the reply. And I think the age assurance practices are probably a good first step. I would just like to clarify whether the social media platforms are then required to take steps to prevent these young users from using those platforms. Because I think there are two issues: one is harmful content, and the second is addiction to the platforms itself even if the content may not be ostensibly harmful.
So, that is why a clean block and putting the obligation on the social media platform to verify age before the users are allowed to use it, sounds like a tidy solution – and that is what they have done in Australia. It is not perfect, but it sets a clear line.
\tMs Rahayu Mahzam: Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for the question, and I appreciate the concern. I would like to assure the Member that we are indeed studying and trying to figure out what is the best approach for this.
How we have been looking at this issue is that, yes, indeed, it is not just a function of accessing it. There are three main things that we look at.
First is screen time, which is one key area and that leads to addiction. If you are spending too much time and you are not controlling that, that is a big issue.
The second is inappropriate content. And which is why, we then need to have certain measures to make sure that children are not exposed to this.
The third is undesirable online behaviours, such as cyber bullying and all the types of behaviours we have tried to prevent through the Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Bill, for example.
So, we are categorising and looking at the multi-dimensional effect of the social media platforms.
While the legislative changes that the Member is hearing which are happening in other countries sound very attractive and seem like an obvious solution, what I think we want to ensure is a meaningful implementation that will actually make a difference in the experience of the children and the parents. So, we have been looking at it.
I would want to highlight a couple of points.
Firstly, we have observed some implementation challenges in what Australia is trying to do. There was an observation that there was a migration of children or the users to platforms that are not within the regulatory ambit. So, we have to make sure that if we do this, it is something that will be quite meaningful. We are also seeing people bypassing it. So, we need to make sure that the enforcement measures are clear cut because children can use their parents' identification, so, the structure needs to be in place there. There was also a rise in virtual private networks, which then, undermines all these. So, we want to make sure that we can address some of those concerns meaningfully.
Second, I would highlight that we are not starting from a blank slate. It is not like we do not have measures in place. There are very strong regulatory measures that are already in place. We already have the Code of Practice on Online Safety for designated social media services, which we have already put in place. We have also implemented age assurance requirements for apps and so, it means that they now have to stop the users who are below a certain age from coming in.
We have not been prescriptive with how age assurance measures are put in, because even for age assurance, you have age verification and age estimation. These are some of the things that we know we want to allow platforms to put in. We have set the targets. We are outcome-driven. We say, \"You must put in place these things to ensure that children are not exposed to these things.\" How they actually do that is something that they have to look at in their circumstances. So, that is the second bit. There are already some structures in place to provide safeguards and ensure that it is a healthy ecosystem for children.
And the third thing is that we are doing more. We are actually looking at how we can continue to improve regulatory infrastructure to support this and we take a multi-prong approach. So, it is not just about having the legislation; it is also about building capability within the community, and which is why I mentioned about helping to build healthy digital habits and providing support for parents through resources and programmes on the ground. This is something that we will be ramping up in time.
I hope that this is something that we can work together on because there are multiple stakeholders: parents have to play a part, the regulators, the social media platforms. Indeed, we are in close contact with them to ensure that they are doing their best. So, these engagements are underway.
And we are also studying the technology. We are trying to figure out what is the best solution in these circumstances.
I hope that gives an appreciation that we are really appreciating and understanding the concerns and we are trying to figure out a robust approach that fits and would be meaningful for parents and children in Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reasons for Sharp Decline in Dengue Cases Reported in 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"12 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what are the major reasons for the sharp decline in the number of dengue cases reported in 2025; and (b) when will the Project Wolbachia trial be extended to all the towns in Singapore.
\tThe Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (Ms Goh Hanyan) (for the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment): Sir, 4,036 dengue cases were reported in 2025, which was the lowest number since 2018. An absence of major local outbreaks locally, the global decline in dengue cases in 2025 and concerted efforts by all stakeholders and residents in Singapore to control the mosquito population, collectively contributed to the decrease. The National Environment Agency's (NEA's) holistic dengue control strategy, which combines Project Wolbachia, vector control operations and actions by all to keep premises free of mosquito breeding, continue to help keep dengue incidence low.
By March 2026, Project Wolbachia will be expanded to cover 740,000 households, up from 580,000 households in April 2025. By end-2026, Project Wolbachia will be released to cover 800,000 households or 50% of all households in Singapore, covering the majority of areas at risk of large dengue outbreaks. NEA will continue to monitor the progress of Project Wolbachia and adjust its deployment strategy.
Reducing dengue risks in our community requires the cooperation and support of residents. We seek residents' understanding that more mosquitoes may be seen during the release periods of male Wolbachia-carrying mosquitoes, but these mosquitoes are necessary to help suppress the Aedes Aegypti population and do not bite or transmit disease.
\tMr Speaker: Mr Ang.
\tMr Ang Wei Neng (West Coast-Jurong West): Thank you, Speaker. Can I ask a supplementary question? How effective is this Wolbachia trial? Is it the main reason for the significant drop in dengue cases last year?
If so, I would ask another supplementary question. Because at one point, Nanyang was considered a dengue red zone and quite a number of residents shared with me the agony of getting dengue fever. I have appealed to NEA to extend the Wolbachia trial to Nanyang, which is in Jurong West. And indeed, NEA has extended the trial to Jurong West, but stopped short of reaching Nanyang. So, I have also checked the NEA website just a while ago to confirm this, the extension of the trial.
Since NEA has considered the Wolbachia trial to be effective, what is the bottleneck that is preventing NEA from expanding the Wolbachia trial faster to Nanyang and the rest of Singapore? And even by the end of this year, NEA is only covering 50% of households. So, how could NEA add more resources to expand the trial of Wolbachia faster and better?
\tMs Goh Hanyan: I thank the Member for his supplementary questions. He had a couple, so I will answer the first one on whether Project Wolbachia was the main reason for the decline in dengue cases in 2025. As I shared, Project Wolbachia is part of NEA's comprehensive strategy to suppress mosquito population and manage dengue risk. It has demonstrated good performance, as the Member has highlighted, reducing the risks of dengue transmission by more than 70% in release areas. So, that is a pretty good result.
However, I would also like to say that it is not a silver bullet for suppressing the mosquito population and managing dengue risk. Sustained vigilance and collective responsibility by the community is important to prevent mosquito breeding and remains critical to reduce the risk of dengue transmission. Globally, in 2025, we also saw a decrease in dengue cases from 14.4 million for the year before, to five million; and locally, as I said just now, there is absence of local clusters as well.
All of this, collectively, including the combined impact of NEA's comprehensive strategy, rather than that as a single intervention, has helped to lower the number of dengue cases. In short, it is one of the reasons, but it is not the only reason why we are seeing a decline last year.
On the other question, I thank the Member for raising the request on behalf of his residents. In terms of site selection, site selection on areas to receive the Wolbachia Aedes mosquito release is based on multiple considerations, including historical dengue situations and the current Aedes Aegypti mosquito population. So, there are many factors in play and it is on a relative basis across different locations in Singapore. NEA will announce the new sites in due course, so we take note of the Member's request.
The other question was around what are the constraints? Resources are finite and so the pace of expansion is also influenced by how quickly mosquito populations can be suppressed, which depends on the local mosquito situation and prevalence of mosquito breeding habitats.
So, it is a matter of figuring out how effective our current site releases have been. This is a dynamic situation. And then, on a forward-looking basis, figuring out which sites, then, have a higher incidence and also, the local population of these mosquitoes, for us to decide when the sites will be expanded into.
So, in due course, we will be announcing where the new sites will be as we lead up to further expansions towards the end of the year.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Emergency Communications between Parents and their Children given Smartphone Ban in Secondary Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"13 Ms Poh Li San asked the Minister for Education in view of the smartphone ban in secondary schools from 2026 (a) how will schools address parents' concerns about the need for emergency communication with their children; and (b) how will the Ministry ensure that teachers are not burdened with the additional workload to check and enforce the new rules that may compromise classroom teaching time.
\tThe Minister of State for Education (Ms Jasmin Lau) (for the Minister for Education): Mr Speaker, my response will address Ms Poh's question and related oral Parliamentary Questions (PQs) set for subsequent Sittings.
To support secondary schools in implementing the tightened guidelines for use of smartphones and smartwatches, the Ministry of Education (MOE) had engaged school leaders and provided resources such as implementation guidelines, answers to Frequently Asked Questions, and we have also shared good practices by schools that have seen positive outcomes.
On enforcement, MOE provides schools with guidelines to formulate their discipline policies and school rules based on their student profile and student needs. Secondary schools already have existing school rules and discipline policies to manage students' smartphone use during lesson time. So, these continue to be applicable with the implementation of the tightened guidelines.
Schools also have protocols for emergency communication with parents. Should parents have an urgent message to relay to their children, they can contact the school's general office. Students who need to contact their parents may also do so using phones in the general office. There is no need for students to own or use a handphone.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Poh.
\tMs Poh Li San: Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you Minister of State for the reply. I just like to know one week into school opening so far, what has been the feedback on the ground. Do the teachers feel or face any challenges and also, would this ban extend further to handheld gaming devices that are similar to smartphones in that sense – that is, they are taking up a lot of time and screen time for students?
\t
\tMs Jasmin Lau: I thank Member for the supplementary question. I think there is a variety of feedback and experiences on the ground. By and large, parents are supportive of the ban. Schools are in the process of implementing the new measures. Some continue to have questions about how it ought to be done and how it ought to be implemented. And MOE continues to engage the schools and the school leaders on how best to do it. I think we are also mindful that the ban should improve the overall experience of both teachers and students in the school. If there are further feedback and questions from school leaders or teachers, we remain open to engaging them on this.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reviews and Enhancements to Sports Excellence Awards to Support Elite Athletes' Training, Welfare and Long-term Development","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"14 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) how the Government reviews and enhances the Sports Excellence awards to ensure that they sufficiently support elite athletes' training, welfare and long-term development; and (b) whether adjustments are needed to better enable Singapore athletes to achieve sustained success and international recognition in world sports.
15 Mr Alex Yam asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) whether the Ministry will engage the Singapore National Olympic Council to review the Major Games Award Programme (MAP) to consider recognising SEA Games Silver and Bronze medallists to motivate and retain emerging athletes; and (b) whether the Ministry can support alternative non-monetary or tiered forms of recognition beyond the MAP, taking into account the SEA Games' biennial nature and competitive standards.
20 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what is the breakdown of funding allocated to national athletes competing in the SEA Games 2025 across different sports; and (b) how does this compare to funding levels over the past five years.
\tThe Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr David Neo): Mr Speaker, my response will address Question Nos 14, 15 and 20 raised by Ms Valerie Lee, Mr Alex Yam and Ms Elysa Chen in today's Order Paper together.
Our Team Singapore athletes have done well, as seen in the last few editions of the Olympics, Paralympics, Asian Games, Asian Para Games, and most recently, at the Southeast Asian Games (SEA Games) in Thailand. We are all very proud of them.
The Government invests in a few areas to build up a strong High Performance Sport (HPS) system to nurture all our athletes to achieve their fullest sporting potential.
First, we have direct financial and programme support to athletes through our suite of Sport Excellence (spex) programmes, and we design such support to be bespoke and holistic, based on our athletes' needs during different stages of their sporting career. Today, we support more than 1,500 carded athletes across 55 sports, compared to 272 athletes across 14 sports when we first started spex in 1993. This is a 450% increase in the number of athletes supported and 350% increase in the number of sports supported. [Please refer to \"Clarification by Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth\", Official Report, 13 January 2026, Vol 96, Issue 13, Correction By Written Statement section.]
We routinely review and enhance our spex programmes. For example, in recent years, we introduced the spexPotential programme in 2024 to enhance support for younger athletes making the transition to higher levels of sporting success. Last year, we awarded our inaugural batch of spexEducation Undergraduate Scholarships. This provides greater assurance to our athletes' academic aspirations. We also introduced Central Provident Fund (CPF) top-ups for spexScholars, bolstering their finances as they focus single-mindedly on the pursuit of excellence in their sport.
Second, systemic investment in our HPS ecosystem. We invest in coaching development, sport science and sport medicine, and athlete life management to give our National Sports Associations (NSAs), coaches and athletes the competitive edge that they need.
The support that each athlete or sport receives is calibrated according to their needs, performance and potential to do well. The support is also reviewed annually to ensure adequacy and accountability, and we will continue to enhance them as needed.
Third, we will continue to invest in the hardware, through the new home of Team Singapore, which will bring together the Singapore Sports School (SSP) to Kallang and integrate all elements of the HPS ecosystem under one roof – sport science and sport medicine support, national training centres and sport administration.
To build a holistic HPS system, the Government recognises that recognition and rewards play a complementary role in making sure that our athletes feel supported and they can go the extra mile.
Sport Singapore (SportSG) administers the Singapore Sport Hall of Fame, which celebrates the exceptional achievements and contributions of Singapore's sporting heroes. The Singapore Sport Hall of Fame now includes a new category for sport leaders and recognises the achievements of athletes beyond medals, including contributions back to the sport and to the community.
But it takes a whole Singapore village to journey with, to support and to develop our athletes. We greatly appreciate efforts by the community and Singaporeans to step forward to recognise and to support our athletes in all forms.
One such example is the Major Games Award Programme (MAP). It is a private award scheme that is managed by the Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC) and funded by their sponsors. SNOC reviews the scheme periodically and decides on the categories of awarded medallists and the monetary rewards offered to each of them, in consultation with sponsors.
The MAP award structure also takes into account the level of competition and the frequency of the major games. The Olympic, Commonwealth and Asian Games, for example, they have more competitive fields, take place every four years, while SEA Games takes place every two. We will take to heart Mr Yam's suggestion, and request for it to be considered in their review. At the same time, we also encourage more corporates and sponsors to come forward to support our athletes and contribute to the MAP.
Beyond MAP, SNOC, the Singapore National Paralympic Council and the NSAs recognise our athletes' achievements in other ways, such as SNOC's annual Singapore Sports Awards, SNPC's Athletes Achievements Awards, and the different NSAs' awards nights and dinners.
The Government will continue to review our policies and programmes for our athletes and for the HPS ecosystem so that we can nurture every athlete to achieve their fullest sporting potential.
\tMr Speaker: Acting Minister Neo, I just want to be clear your answer is in response to Question Nos 14, 15 and 20. Am I right?
\tMr David Neo: Yes.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Valerie Lee.
Ms Valerie Lee (Pasir Ris-Changi): Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you, Acting Minister. I have two supplementary questions. The first one would be: beyond medal outcomes and the increased number of spex awardees, what indicators does the Ministry use to assess the effectiveness of the spex scheme in supporting athletes' welfare and long-term development? For example, are we asking the athletes themselves of the satisfaction levels of spex?
For the second one is, what formal mechanisms exist for athletes to provide feedback or raise welfare concerns and how does the Ministry ensure that these concerns are addressed objectively?
\t
Mr David Neo: Sir, I thank the Member for her questions. In terms of assessing the outcomes, what we are after, ultimately, it is about improvements day after day, and the athletes' ability to reach their fullest potential. When it comes to that, medals are one measurement, but how the athletes perform on the field is another one. The athlete's holistic development as a person, as an athlete, the ability to give back to the sport and to contribute to the community – these are all the different ways in which we assess the effectiveness of our programmes.
Most importantly are the athletes themselves. Do they feel supported? Are they performing better? Are they becoming better people?
And when it comes to whether or not there is a feedback process, our HPS ecosystem, our coaches, our support staff work very closely with all our athletes. Come down to Kallang on any given day and you can see our athletes working together with all the different support staff and that provides one channel of feedback, the daily conversations.
Beyond that our athletes also work very closely through the different NSAs. We work closely with our NSA partners to get feedback from them. I regularly have conversations and lunches with our NSA presidents and the different staff to find out how our athletes are doing.
Beyond that, there are also formal structures like the Athletes Commission, which organises workshops, talks to allow our athletes to have a channel to feedback and let us know about the efficacy and the effectiveness of the programmes.
Ultimately, the whole HPS ecosystem is designed to support the athletes and to make sure that the athletes get the best support and the best way of doing so is to continue to maintain an open communication channel and take all our feedback from the athletes seriously so that they can feel well supported and achieve the best.
Mr Speaker: Mr Alex Yam.
\tMr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for outlining the range of existing support schemes. Having served previously in NSAs, I think our athletes would be very happy to hear that a review will be undertaken.
I just have a very simple supplementary question. Could the Minister share with us what is a possible timeline by which SportSG will be working with SNOC on the review of cash incentives and recognition for our SEA Games medalists, especially those who are in silver and bronze categories?
\t
\tMr David Neo: Sir, I thank the Member for his question and also for his support for Team Singapore athletes. It is my understanding that SNOC has recently concluded the review. And I believe they should be ready to announce the updated Awards in due course.
\tMr Speaker: Ms Elysa Chen.
\tMs Elysa Chen (Bishan-Toa Payoh): I thank the Acting Minister for sharing the very good news that we are seeing more athletes supported, with younger athletes and as well as CPF top-ups. Just wanted to ask two supplementary questions.
First is whether the Ministry has assessed the effectiveness of current funding models in translating investment into medal outcomes, and if so, what adjustments are planned to better support athletes' competitive readiness for future regional tournaments?
Second, whether the Ministry has plans to expand the SportCares Bursary and financial support coverage for youths from underserved communities to access and represent Singapore at the national level in sports such as aquatics, football and athletics?
\t
\tMr David Neo: I thank the Member for her questions. Going by the last SEA Games, what we have observed is that our spex Scholars as well as our spex Potential recipients won half of our medals and almost nine out of 10 of every gold medal that was won, In the same way, our SSP students and alumni also accounted for about a third of our medals and almost half of our gold medals.
Going by some of these measures, but like I said, medal outcome is not just the only measurement, it is also about their performance. Holistically, looking at their measurements and the way our athletes performed, as well as how they have developed in character, we are quite confident that we are in the right direction, and we have been achieving very good results and outcomes.
On her second question about improving sport access, especially for children from lower-income families, last year we announced the School Sports Fiesta, which is one of those ways in which to broaden sport access to young children from all backgrounds. In this year's Committee of Supply, we will announce further initiatives and ways in which we are trying to make sure that sports is something that kids from all backgrounds can grow to love and be a part of and can benefit from.
\tMr Speaker: I am going to squeeze in one more Parliamentary Question. Dr Charlene Chen.
\t
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Noise Mitigation Measures for Residents near Tampines Expressway and Loyang Flyover Construction Work Sites","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OA","content":"16 Dr Charlene Chen asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) what interim noise mitigation measures are in place near the Tampines Expressway and the Loyang Flyover construction work sites; (b) how is post-completion noise impact of such sites assessed; and (c) whether additional safeguards will be implemented to protect residents' sleep, health and children's learning environment in the interim.
\tThe Minister of State for Transport (Mr Baey Yam Keng) (for the Acting Minister for Transport): Various noise mitigation measures are in place. These include temporary noise barriers, enclosures around machinery, the use of special tools such as rubber materials for hammering works, as well as carrying out noisier works as far as possible during the day. Noise meters are also installed to ensure that noise levels do not exceed the levels stipulated by the National Environment Agency (NEA).
Post-construction, permanent noise barriers will be erected along the section of Loyang Viaduct facing residential blocks. Low noise pavement mix that better absorb noise will also be used for the road surface.
\tMr Speaker: Dr Chen, a short one, please.
\t
\t
Dr Charlene Chen (Tampines): Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for his response. The reason why I have been asking this is also because residents have been experiencing a lot of noise along the Tampines Expressway (TPE) and in the night as well, in the wee hours. I have been receiving a lot of feedback, residents sharing with me, and often times, they email me late, in the wee hours of the morning.
And I wonder if the Ministry would consider expediting the use of noise reducing road surfaces. And post completion, when the viaduct is completed, whether there will be post-completion monitoring and additional mitigation measures, if let us say the noise levels exceed what residents can reasonably live with.
Lastly, I would also like to ask if the Ministry will be willing to explore enhanced soundproofing measures such as improved window treatments or insulation. And whether when they plan new highways and road expansions, do they consider the impact of the well-being of the residents who live around the area?
\tMr Baey Yam Keng: The quick short answer to most of her questions is yes. We will plan and look for ways to reduce noise, noise impact on residents living near road infrastructure. But it is about taking a balance of cost, about technical feasibilities and also using very measurable tangible measures because residents' noise tolerance levels could differ from person to person. We look at existing noise limits that are set by the relevant authorities. When infrastructure-level kind of mitigation are not adequate, we will definitely look at possible ways, working with other agencies to see how we can add on to the measures to reduce the impact on residents living around it.
As for noise reducing pavement mix, we have a schedule of resurfacing these expressways, especially near residential areas. But this new section that we are building near Dr Chan's residents will already be using the noise-reducing mix for the road surface.
\tMr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the Day and Notice of Motion.
[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"National Council of Social Service (Amendment) Bill ","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Minister Masagos.
The Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M): Mr Speaker, I move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time.\"
The National Council of Social Service (NCSS) plays a vital role in Singapore's social service sector, driving better outcomes for those who need support.
Communities coming together to support those in need have always existed. In the early Independence years, the social service sector was primarily made up of many small voluntary groups, each doing their best with limited resources. To coordinate and bring together these groups, NCSS' predecessor, the Singapore Council of Social Service (SCSS) was formed in 1958. By 1992, rapid economic growth brought new social challenges. To take on a more strategic and proactive role in welfare planning and provision, SCSS was restructured to become NCSS, serving as a Statutory Board and membership body.
Today, social needs are more complex and cut across multiple domains such as economic and health. Greater coordination and collaboration are needed across the sector. To more holistically support those they serve, social service agencies (SSAs) have expanded beyond addressing singular causes. The broader ecosystem supporting social services has also expanded. While SSAs remain our sector's backbone, we now have more stakeholders such as social enterprises, corporates and philanthropic organisations.
In response to these shifts, the Government and NCSS have been partnering more closely over the years to support the sector, playing distinct yet complementary roles.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) leads the development of social policies, rolls out nationwide initiatives and performs key statutory functions. For example, MSF has stepped up in developing, managing and co-funding a range of social services, such as family services, to raise their quality and accessibility. In addition, MSF's funding for social service programmes has doubled in the last decade from $172 million dollars in financial year (FY)2014 to $346 million dollars in FY2024. NCSS has taken a larger role as sector developer to strengthen social service delivery, build organisational and professional capabilities and develop the social service ecosystem.
To ensure that NCSS is adequately resourced to fulfil this expanded role, the Government has progressively increased its funding over the years, particularly by providing full funding for NCSS' core functions since 2022. This has enabled NCSS to invest in building the sector's longer-term capabilities.
To share some examples: NCSS set up the Community Capability Trust in 2020 to strengthen the organisations that deliver services, including helping SSAs adopt digital technologies that improve the quality and efficiency of their services.
NCSS has also introduced various initiatives to develop the people that deliver our services. The Social Service Institute (SSI) operates as the sector's main continuing education and training centre to upskill social service professionals.
NCSS also supports the sector in talent attraction and retention through programmes like Sun Ray, to develop sector leadership.
NCSS published the Sustainable Philanthropy Framework and Guidelines for Social Impact Metrics in 2024 and 2025 respectively, to encourage long-term corporate philanthropy and support businesses in measuring their social impact. In tandem with the Sector Evaluation Framework launched by NCSS in 2022, the sector now has a common language to measure the impact of services. This enables providers and funders to deliver better outcomes for service users.
Mr Speaker, the NCSS Act which empowers NCSS to carry out its role has remained largely unchanged since it was enacted in 1992. Given the significant shifts in our social service landscape, MSF and NCSS reviewed how NCSS should be best positioned to continue serving the sector effectively. This Bill is the result of that review and reflects both NCSS' and the sector's proposals.
To shape this Bill, we conducted extensive engagements with about 300 NCSS member organisations and members of the public. I thank all who gave their views and ideas. Your feedback has helped us better understand the sector's needs and aspirations, and has been instrumental in shaping the current proposed amendments.
I will now share the key provisions in the Bill, which can be grouped into four key areas. First, to reflect NCSS' role as sector developer. Second, to introduce a streamlined sector membership framework. Third, to strengthen the Council, the Community Chest (ComChest) and NCSS' committees. And fourth, to update and align the Act with those of other Statutory Boards.
The first key area relates to refreshing NCSS' objectives, functions and powers. NCSS has responded to shifts in the landscape and expanded to become a sector developer for the social service sector.
NCSS does so in three important ways which are articulated as NCSS' core objectives in the Bill. First, strengthening social service delivery. Second, building the capability of sector stakeholders. And third, developing the broader social service ecosystem. Clause 6 reflects this by inserting a new section 11 on objectives and functions of Council and section 12 on powers of Council. It also gives NCSS clear functions and powers to pursue these objectives.
The updated scope of NCSS' objectives and functions also clarifies its mandate to develop the wider social service sector, beyond focusing on specific stakeholders. Allow me to elaborate how NCSS' work will reflect this.
First, in terms of strengthening social service delivery. The social service sector exists to improve the lives of persons with social needs. NCSS will monitor service users' progress and make data available to the sector. This is important so that we have a feedback mechanism for service providers, funders and philanthropic organisations to improve the outcomes for service users and increase their social impact.
NCSS will also collect and use data to identify emerging needs and to allocate resources to services that address critical and unmet needs. For instance, NCSS launched the Disability and Inclusion Panel Study in 2022 to understand the experiences and needs of persons with disabilities and their caregivers, which informs Singapore's broader strategy for disability inclusion.
Second, in terms of building the sector's capabilities. NCSS will ramp up existing efforts to develop the sector's organisational and professional capabilities such as enhancing the Organisational Health Framework for Social Services. This will enable service providers to identify their strengths and areas for development, so that they are better able to deliver services. NCSS will also drive efforts to better harness volunteers and technology in the sector, enabling service providers to innovate, expand their outreach and improve services.
Third, in developing the broader social service ecosystem. In the spirit of \"we first\", NCSS will ramp up efforts to encourage those who are able to contribute their time, talent, treasure, testimonies and ties to uplift communities in need. NCSS will pilot new ideas and technologies, and develop new partnerships with stakeholders such as social enterprises and the private sector. For example, NCSS has embarked on a pilot with private providers to explore new ways of delivering counselling and make services more accessible. Another example is the Social Changemaker Series, where NCSS will bring together corporates and SSAs to co-develop solutions to address needs in the sector.
These efforts to meet the needs of service users and improve their quality of life are at the heart of NCSS' work.
The second area introduces a streamlined sector membership framework. Membership has been central to NCSS since its early years as SCSS, when it brought different agencies in our sector together. Through our engagements, many member organisations have told us that membership remains of sentimental and practical value as a platform for networking and community-building.
Today, NCSS has three types of membership for organisations in the sector, \"Full\", \"Associate\" and \"Honorary\" membership.
With the change in NCSS' constitution, clause 10 introduces sector membership, a single-tier membership framework for organisations in the sector to complement NCSS' sector developer role. Organisations whose primary function is to provide a social service in Singapore or to directly support the provision of a social service in Singapore may apply to become a sector member.
By social service, our intent is to especially cover interventions or programmes that improve the welfare of vulnerable or disadvantaged persons in Singapore, or support the emotional and psychological well-being of the local community. For instance, this would include services such as family counselling and financial assistance.
We also took in feedback that organisations whose primary purpose is to directly support the provision of a social service are important players and should be able to apply for sector membership. This includes professional bodies for social service professionals; organisations that mobilise resources for social service providers or service users; and organisations providing capability building to social service providers.
An organisation's eligibility for sector membership will be assessed based on a range of factors, including what it states as its objects and how it carries out its activities. Member organisations are charged nominal membership fees today. However, fees will not be charged for sector membership.
With these changes, the current membership base will be rationalised and supported in their transition. Most member organisations will experience minimal impact to their day-to-day membership experience. All Full Council members, who make up the majority of NCSS' membership today, will be transitioned to become sector members. This is because the current criteria for Full Council members aligns with that of sector membership.
NCSS will ease the transition for all other current Council members. This includes honouring all existing funding support until the expiry of the support.
As sector developer, NCSS will also continue to engage and support stakeholders in the wider ecosystem, beyond sector members alone. NCSS' priority is to deliver better outcomes for service users rather than to focus on an organisation's sector membership status, type or size. MSF and NCSS will continue to keep open channels and engagement platforms to hear from the wider sector. NCSS' grants or other support will also be accessible to agencies whose work aligns with NCSS' priorities, even if they are not sector members.
The third key area focuses on strengthening the Council and its committees. As NCSS' responsibilities expand, we must ensure that the Council is fit-for-purpose and understands the sector's needs, to provide effective governance and lead NCSS and the sector through the fast-changing landscape.
In line with other Statutory Boards playing a sector developer role, clause 5 provides that NCSS will be constituted and governed by its Council, headed by a Chairperson.
Clause 5 also introduces amendments to broaden representation on the Council, through a Council appointed by the Minister and widened pool of eligible candidates. Today, excluding the President, half of the NCSS Board is elected by member organisations. We want to ensure that the sector's diversity, vibrancy and voice is reflected in the Council, and it possesses an optimal mix of skills, experience and knowledge to guide NCSS' work. A fully-appointed Council, with nominations from sector members, will enable us to achieve this.
To this end, we will move away from the current restrictions applicable to the NCSS Board and allow employees of sector members to sit on the Council. The practical, operational and programmatic expertise of senior management of sector members will complement the governance perspectives that other Council members can provide.
I would like to assure Members that at least half of the Council, excluding the Chairperson, will be appointed from individuals nominated by sector members. So, putting aside the Chairperson, it will always be at least half from sector nominees. For example, if there are 10 Council members appointed from sector members' nominations, the Minister will appoint at most 10 other Council members, as well as the Chairperson. This is similar to today's practice, where about half of the NCSS Board consists of individuals elected by NCSS member organisations, as earlier mentioned.
Sector members will be invited to submit one nominee each, who must be from their organisation at the point of appointment onto the Council, as a potential Council candidate. The NCSS Chairperson, operationally assisted by a Nominations Committee comprising respected sector leaders, will submit the full list of eligible nominations to the Minister for consideration. These changes are important as NCSS plays a critical role in the sector, as a fully funded Statutory Board with expanded objects, functions and powers as sector developer.
The Council will comprise a maximum of 27 members and a minimum of 15, with a maximum term of three years. Today, the NCSS Act provides for a Board of 23 members, with a maximum term of two years. By providing for a range in the Council size, we will have greater flexibility in determining the optimal Council size for each term, informed by the sector's needs. For the incoming Council in 2026, we intend to maintain a Council size comparable to today's Board. This will allow us to balance both diversity on the Council and agility in the NCSS' decision-making.
By setting the maximum Council term at three years, Council members will have a longer runway to contribute meaningfully to NCSS' work. Council members may also be re-appointed, subject to the Public Service Division's (PSD's) guidelines that apply to Statutory Boards.
Along with the amendments to NCSS' committees, we will also refresh the functions of ComChest, which serves as NCSS' philanthropic and engagement arm. Clause 7 provides that ComChest's role extends beyond fundraising to include mobilising other resources, such as volunteers.
Finally, we have also taken this opportunity to update the NCSS Act in line with current legislation for other Statutory Boards with similar functions. This includes modernising the language and structure of the Act, such as updating the financial provisions, strengthening clauses relating to the governance of the Council, ComChest and NCSS' committees to maintain high standards of conduct; providing for Council members to be paid an honorarium in line with the PSD's guidelines; and reclassifying NCSS as a Group 1A public body in the First Schedule to the Public Sector (Governance) Act 2018, similar to other Statutory Boards that play sector developer roles.
Mr Speaker, let me conclude. The work of the social service sector directly impacts the lives of our citizens, especially those in need. The social service sector has always been driven by its strong sense of purpose. This is a strong foundation for us to build upon.
As our sector faces increasingly complex social needs, our policies and institutions must continue to strengthen, support and transform the sector so that we not only meet the needs of today, but are prepared for what lies ahead. To build a future-ready sector, we will continue to take a strengths-based approach, be proactive to address problems upstream and adopt a whole-of-society approach.
The Government cannot do all this alone. Even with increased Government involvement, we need the continued partnership of our sector and community to support those in need. NCSS has played an instrumental role in sustaining this ethos, including by rallying the community to give their time, talent and treasure back to society. NCSS' efforts empower stakeholders from the sector and wider community to play their part, contributing to our \"we first\" society. The enhancements in this Bill will further position NCSS to carry out this role.
This Bill reflects MSF and NCSS' shared commitment to building a strong and future-ready social service sector, supported by a compassionate and giving society. Mr Speaker, I seek to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr Xie Yao Quan.
Mr Xie Yao Quan (Jurong Central): Sir, let me first declare that I am working in a philanthropic organisation that is an associate member of NCSS.
I stand in support of this Bill. The Social and Family Development Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) also strongly supports this Bill. A number of GPC Members and other colleagues from the People's Action Party (PAP) will be speaking on this Bill, contributing their views and suggestions.
What is most noteworthy is that almost all of the Members speaking are involved in some way in the social service sector themselves. Some, in particular, are running, or have run, SSAs or social enterprises, for years. Members like Ms Denise Phua, our sector veteran or, as we would called it, one of the old OGs. Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim, Ms Elysa Chen and Mr Cai Yinzhou have been in the trenches, and have a ringside view of working with and alongside NCSS. They will be sharing their views on what ought to be NCSS' development priorities as a sector developer.
But more generally, all Members speaking on this Bill speak with a deep understanding of the sector and from a diversity of perspectives. I am thus looking forward to a very substantive and constructive debate, which can only strengthen this Bill, NCSS and ultimately, the sector.
The debate will focus on a few key themes.
First, the new Council appointment regime. This is the part of the Bill that represents the most significant change from current practice for the sector. The Board sets the direction for NCSS and by extension, the sector. The new appointment framework must therefore produce Boards that will continue to serve the sector well and reflect the diversity of the sector well. Ms Lee Hui Ying, Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim, Ms Elysa Chen, Mr David Hoe, Mr Cai Yinzhou, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Melvin Yong will all address this issue in their speeches.
Second, compliance burden, especially for smaller member organisations. Ms Denise Phua, Mr David Hoe and Dr Hamid Razak will touch on this in their speeches.
Third, the overall outcomes, impact and NCSS' measures of success going forward. Ms Elysa Chen, Mr David Hoe and Mr Yip Hon Weng will be speaking on this aspect.
And finally, on the sector workforce and the heart-work that they do, every day, for every case, every client. Dr Wan Rizal, our labour Member of Parliament (MP), will dive deep into this topic and cover workforce development, wages and welfare. Mr Melvin Yong, also our labour MP, will also raise a point on sector wages, while Ms Lee Hui Ying will touch on workers' welfare and well-being in the sector.
Beyond the substance of the debate on this Bill, let me conclude by making a point on the process that has undergirded this Bill. And here, I wish to commend NCSS and MSF, for undertaking a really thorough and extensive consultation process with the sector and stakeholders. NCSS has not only listened to the sector but also responded to the feedback by actually making meaningful, substantive changes to the draft Bill. The best example of this is NCSS' decision to expand the range of the Board size after consultation with the sector.
NCSS has demonstrated, through its consultation process for this Bill, the very spirit of collaboration and partnership with the sector that it says underpins this Bill. May this ethos of collaboration and partnership with the sector, in all its diversity, continue to animate NCSS, as it presses on to build a future-ready and sustainable social service sector, with the sector, to improve the lives of Singaporeans.
Mr Speaker: Prof Kenneth Poon.
Prof Kenneth Poon (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak in support of the NCSS (Amendment) Bill. Before I continue, I wish to declare interest in this matter, as I currently serve on the NCSS Board of Council and on the board of one of the SSAs.
Over the past two decades, I have served in various capacities, as a volunteer, committee or board member, of several SSAs. From that vantage point, I have seen the sector, as Minister said, change in a fundamental way. The social service sector today is no longer simply a collection of charities and societies, but rather, a complex set of interdependent systems across social service provision, workforce development and cross-agency collaboration.
As the quality of social service provision improves, coordination becomes even more essential, and this happens amidst a tight labour market, which places increasing strain on sector-wide talent pipelines. At the same time, COVID-19 and rapid technological advances have reshaped how services are delivered and how different generations of users engage with support. These changes reflected, for example, in the NCSS' Quality of Life studies, have real consequences for individuals, for families and caregivers who rely on the social service system.
I would like to comment on two aspects of the Bill and seek clarifications on one of the provisions.
First, the expanded role of NCSS as a sector developer. As Minister outlined earlier, NCSS today does more than convening or funding agencies. It identifies gaps in the system, such as the recent focus on behavioural addictions and it mobilises capacity, funding and partnerships to address them. It also leads sector-wide efforts in organisational development and digital transformation, so that agencies can continue to deliver services effectively and at scale.
Initiatives, such as the Sun Ray scheme, have also strengthened workforce pipelines by bringing much needed experienced professionals from diverse backgrounds into the sector, whilst campaigns to support volunteerism and philanthropy help sustain community participation. These amendments recognise and formalise this expanded role.
Second, the governance of NCSS through its Council, which is what the board is termed after proposed amendments. As NCSS takes on an increased role in charting sectoral priorities, building workforce pipelines and in fostering long-term partnerships, effective stewardship requires both expertise as well as continuity. While solutions may appear clear on the surface, the stewardship of such a complex ecosystem requires broad expertise and deep insight into the sector's many constituents and service users. The changes in who and how the Council is appointed, strengthens the Council so that it can work hand-in-glove with the NCSS management in setting strategic directions, exercising oversight and providing the stability needed to see these efforts through in the longer term.
Third, the proposed size of the NCSS Council. Section 5, sub-section 1 provides for the number of Council members to range from 15 to 27. That is compared with a previous upper limit of 23. Given the increasing complexity of responsibilities within NCSS, I would appreciate some clarification on the rationale for providing this wider range. In particular, it will be helpful to understand the circumstances under which such a larger Council would be required and how these flexibilities are intended to support effective representation, expertise and governance of a more complex sector.
This clarification notwithstanding, it is my view that the NCSS (Amendment) Bill better reflects the reality of what NCSS is responsible for – by strengthening the Council and aligning its governance with these expanded responsibilities. The Bill enhances NCSS' capacity to provide stable and capable stewardship of a complex and evolving social service system, and very importantly, in the interest of individuals and families that benefit from it.
Mr Speaker: Ms Denise Phua.
Ms Denise Phua Lay Peng (Jalan Besar): Speaker, Sir, I rise to state my support for the Bill. I declare I am an active volunteer in the disability sector for more than 25 years and I currently chair two large autism charities, both are NCSS members, and I help to supervise services from early intervention to special schools to services for adults.
In my job as Mayor of Central District Community Development Council (CDC), my team and I also partner many from the people, public and private sectors. We work with agencies and donors to support families in need, especially those living in rental flats. We also work with hundreds of organisations, including corporates and foundations, to raise disability awareness and dignity, through example, The Purple Parade movement and The Purple Symphony orchestra. And NCSS is one of our key partners.
Over the years, I have seen first-hand the good work of the NCSS and its partnership-oriented approach across different generations of leadership – Ms Anita Fam, Mr Hsieh Fu Hua, Ms Ang Bee Lian, Ms Tan Li San – and many more.
What has historically distinguished NCSS is just the policies it advanced or the funds that it administered, but its ethos as a membership-based organisation. NCSS had for years worked with agencies, then known as voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) and now SSAs, they work with them, rather than over them. NCSS recognised that effective social service delivery depends not just on structures and systems and power and hierarchy, but also on trust: trust of character and competence, professional judgement, morale and sustained relationships on the ground.
This context matters, because the Bill before us marks a clear institutional evolution. The NCSS (Amendment) Bill formally expands NCSS' statutory functions as a system steward of the social service sector. I support this direction.
Our social service ecosystem today is far more complex than when the principal Act was first enacted three decades ago. The landscape is shaped by an ageing population, rising mental health needs, greater diversity amongst vulnerable groups, post-school cliff effects faced by the disabled adults, technological impact and higher expectations for accountability and outcomes.
In such an environment, a stronger and better-coordinated sector is not an option, it is a necessity. And this Bill recognises that reality, and for that, I welcome the Bill. However, as NCSS assumes a more formalised system-steward developer role, it becomes even more important that institutional strengthening does not dilute the partnership-driven ethos and culture that NCSS is known for.
It is from this perspective that I will highlight both the strengths of the Bill and several areas that merit careful attention.
First, on three key positives of this Bill.
One, clearer mandate and stronger governance. Sir, clause 6 of the Bill replaces sections 6 to 12 of the Act and introduces a new section 11 that sets out an updated set of objectives and functions of the Council. These reflect and strengthen the role of the Council as sector developer for the social service sector.
It gives statutory clarity to the Council's role as a strategic sector developer, beyond that of a convenor or a grant administrator. The Bill expressly provides for functions such as advising Government, coordinating social service provision, setting standards, building sector capability, mobilising resources and supporting the implementation of national social policy. This clarity matters. It provides legitimacy for NCSS to act across boundaries and also provides a stronger governance basis for it to steward the sector responsibly and strategically. So, that is good.
Key positive two: stronger coordination and long-term system stewardship. The Bill also enables NCSS to better address cross-cutting needs that spans agencies and life stages, and to reduce fragmentation within the sector. Over time, stronger coordination can help minimise duplication, close service gaps and create clearer and more navigable service pathways, especially for individuals and families who require support from multiple touchpoints. In this regard, the Bill can move the sector towards a more integrated and user-centered system.
The third key positive: strengthened capability development and data-informed practice. Sir, the Bill further strengthens NCSS' mandate in workforce and organisational capability development. This includes training and professional development, development of specialised skills, leadership and talent pipelines. The Bill also clarifies the Council's role in collecting, analysing and using sector-wide data for planning, evaluation and research, building on improved digital and data capabilities.
Taken together, these provisions support a more capable, evidence-informed sector – one that is better equipped to adapt, to learn and to respond to evolving social needs in a sustainable way, and I applaud these directions and recognise the value that they bring to a more complex and demanding social service environment. But the very strengthening of Council's statutory role also raises important questions of balance, boundaries and execution. As we strengthen the system, we must not build this safety net with the chains that bind the very hands that weave it. It is to these considerations that I now turn.
Sir, I would like to next raise four areas of concern and some of the implementation risk.
Concern number one: risk of over-centralisation. A stronger NCSS can improve coherence coordination, but if it is not carefully calibrated, it may also lead to unintended over-centralisation of decision-making, resources and influence. This will not bode well for the sector. For larger SSAs, closer alignment to NCSS frameworks may result in a greater emphasis on compliance over innovation, increased risk aversion and also growing bureaucratic overheads.
I recall an instance where, sometime back, in submitting a tender for a facility for one of our charities, my team and I were required to comply with the norms and specifications that were decades old. We were a bit stuck because non-compliance would render our tender ineligible, yet compliance would constrain our ability to innovate or pilot new models. This illustrates how rigid requirements and compliance can sometimes discourage innovation and progress.
For smaller SSAs, stronger NCSS stewardship can bring benefits, such as access to shared services and professionalisation; and the Sun Ray Scheme, that many spoke about. However, uniform standards often assume an administrative scale that sometimes, smaller agencies simply do not have. This may result in disproportionate compliance burdens, pressure to conform to standardised templates and reduced responsiveness to local community realities. The risk, therefore, is over-uniformity due to over-centralisation.
Concern number two: rising compliance and administrative burdens. The Bill's strengthened governance and data obligations may increase reporting, audits and evaluation requirements. Today, funders and donors rightly expect outputs and outcomes; not to mention impact, the latest buzzword. Impact, which is the latest ambitious expectation. Some of these measures are often difficult to attribute, to isolate and to track meaningfully, especially in complex social settings.
Accountability is necessary, but it is not cost-free. From experience, the charities I serve already incur significant expenditures on internal audits and external audits, procurement systems and compliance processes – costs that involve not just financial outlays, but also substantial manpower and administrative effort.
Many SSAs are already operating under severe manpower constraints, high caseloads, burnout and staff turnover. Compounding this, many of these compliance costs must be supported through donor funds, and we know that many donors are often reluctant to fund overheads and want to fund only direct service costs.
It is, therefore, important that in strengthening governance, we recognise the true cost of accountability and compliance, and avoid adding unnecessary administrative strain that will divert energy away from frontline service delivery. This caution applies not only to administrators in the social service sector, but also across the health, ageing and special education domains.
Concern three: safeguarding diversity and innovation. Many of Singapore's most impactful social interventions began as small, ground-up initiatives. Pathlight School, which I co-founded, started that way. Started by volunteers, professionals who are professionals and also parents. We started only with 41 students, and thanks to the Ministry of Education, NCSS and SG Enable, it is now a large and popular school serving thousands.
Happee Hearts Movement, started by Dr Chen Shi Lin, started modestly and is still that way, but nimble. So is Helping Joy – I think they are featured in the newspapers these days – started by Steven Goh, to help clear hoarding homes and thankfully, also a partner of Central Singapore CDC. Both Dr Chen and Mr Goh are nominees for the Singaporean of the Year Award.
If agencies, such as NCSS' expanded statutory powers, unintentionally privilege scale, maturity or compliance over proximity and trust, we risk losing such grassroots energy, and cultural and linguistic diversity, and high-touch relational approaches. And missing contributors, such as Dr Chen and Mr Goh.
Over time, if we are not careful, agencies may default to policy-safe, standardised interventions, rather than develop innovative models to respond to emerging needs. And therefore, a healthy social service ecosystem requires not only strong institutions, but also space for diversity, for dissent and experimentation; without compromising quality and due diligence.
Concern number four: system sensing, how NCSS will identify emerging gaps. A stronger mandate and better data capabilities do not automatically translate into better system intelligence. The social service landscape spans multiple vulnerable groups with overlapping, evolving and often invisible needs. Many critical gaps surface first through frontline practitioners, caregivers, volunteers and even small niche organisations – long before they appear in formal data sets.
The key question, therefore, is, how will NCSS know, early and hopefully, accurately, where these urgent gaps lie, particularly when needs are localised, emergent or poorly captured by existing reporting frameworks? And how will it know who to trust, in character and competence to work with? So, a system steward, like NCSS, must, therefore, be designed not only to coordinate, but to listen deeply, sense early and respond proportionately.
And next, on clarifying NCSS' role within the broader care ecosystem. Sir, the four concerns I raise lead naturally to questions about role clarity. Singapore's care ecosystem today is complex. It is organised along different population and service domains. For instance, those of us, as MPs, would know, seniors' services are largely coordinated by the Agency for Integrated Care under MOH; then, disability services are supported by SG Enable and MSF's Disability Office; family services and social service offices fall under MSF; and then, recently, I just heard, volunteer mobilisation, now, it is not just by NCSS, but it is also previously by National Volunteer and Philanthropy Centre (NVPC) and the Prime Minister also just instructed the CDCs to look at increasing volunteers.
With this Bill strengthening the Council's functions in coordination, capability development, data use and system stewardship, there needs to be clarity on how these roles and agencies intersect. I think there will be overlaps, but the overlaps with existing lead agencies must be addressed in practice, especially in areas, such as needs assessment, service planning, capability development and data reporting.
Beyond relying on nominated Board members and occasional meetings of members, there should be, in NCSS, a systemic and structured platform to sense, identify, prioritise, plan, coordinate and resource the critical gaps with the other agencies, across the sector for both existing and emerging gaps.
And with that, I have three questions for the Minister, for clarification.
The first is to do with governance and innovation. How will the Bill be implemented to ensure that stronger governance and funding relationships do not inadvertently encourage compliance-driven behaviour, stifle innovation or add unnecessary layers of bureaucracy within the social service sector?
My second question is about proportionate compliance and reporting. How will compliance and reporting requirements be calibrated to the size, to the capacity and maturity of the SSAs in this sector, so that both large and small SSAs are not overburdened by administrative costs that detract from frontline service delivery?
My third clarification question is this: it has to do with managing overlaps and identifying system gaps. What system and what structured platform will be put in place to sense, to identify, to prioritise, to plan, to coordinate and to resource critical gaps, both existing and emerging, across the sector? How will NCSS and existing agencies work together to ensure that the most significant and urgent service gaps, such as that in adult disability, the impact of technology, artificial intelligence (AI), AI-driven robots, which really kept some of us worried because these technologies will take away some of the jobs that we are trying to create for the disabled, for the elderly. How will all these gaps be surfaced such that they will be addressed in the sector, in a coordinated and effective and timely manner?
In conclusion, Sir, this Bill marks an important step forward in how Singapore supports and governs its social service sector. It strengthens coordination, builds capability and also enables a more data-informed system – one that seeks to leave fewer people behind in our society, in our country. But at the same time, as a framework Bill, much will depend on how the Council's powers are exercised through subsequent regulations and implementation. Its true test will, therefore, lie not in the passage of the Bill today, but in how it is applied in practice after today.
As we strengthen NCSS and the system around it, we must also preserve the diversity, the humanity and the community-driven spirit innovation that give the sector its strength. So, in conclusion, with appreciation for the dedicated work of NCSS, Government partners, MSF and all the SSAs, and with a call for continued partnership and mutual trust, I do support the Bill. Thank you very much for doing this.
Mr Speaker: Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim.
Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim (East Coast): Mr Speaker, I declare interest as a member of the ComChest as well as a member of the Board of Director at one of the member organisations of NCSS.
Mr Speaker, having spent close to 15 years journeying with SSAs and social service professionals and being inspired by the originators as well as players in the philanthropic space, I believe it is important for the Government to continue levelling-up support for the sector. It is important to ensure the sector and its professionals continues to uplift lives.
Many SSAs or Social Purpose Entities are members of NCSS and many social service professionals are dependent on NCSS for their growth and development. This review is timely, given how much Singapore and the world has changed. I support the Bill and its intentions.
Today, I will focus on three key points: the important role NCSS has and must continue to play; the importance of strengthening Council and committees for effective leadership; the importance of keeping ground-up social service initiatives supported; because everyone has a part and a role to play. First, Speaker, Sir, in Malay.
(In Malay): Within our community, there are many Malay or Muslim organisations (MMOs) and all of them have channelled their efforts to build and strengthen Singapore's support ecosystem – working hand in hand with other SSAs and organizations.
Often, these organisations do not just help the Malay or Muslim community, but also the wider society who are in need.
Therefore, councils such as the NCSS are important platforms for social service practitioners to collaborate, exchange knowledge and share experiences in their efforts to improve the quality of life of Singaporeans.
Hence, Mr Speaker, it is also important for NCSS to ensure that council members possess comprehensive skills, understanding and representation, whether clinical or cultural.
And as a statutory body with membership, I hope NCSS is also committed to supporting small organisations that are newly established.
But most importantly, today's amendments should benefit Singaporeans.
Fundamentally, NCSS and SSAs must ensure they continue to work hand in glove. Professor Poon earlier mentioned about \"working hand-in-glove\" – the same figure of speech.
(In English): Speaker, coming back to my three points. The important role NCSS has and must continue to play. Over the years, NCSS role extended beyond the membership association. I remember being elected as the President of the Singapore Muslim Women's Association (PPIS), back in 2020. I was a COVID-19 president and the sector was tackling the pandemic, having to pivot to safer service delivery while redesigning how we engage our beneficiaries and each other.
I remembered NCSS playing a key role to support members through initiatives, such as the Beyond COVID-19 Taskforce, funding so the sector can tide through, and guidance and support to accelerate digital transformations. When restrictions were lifted, I remembered the NCSS Council and senior management invested time to visit member organisations and convening like-minded organisations for professional circles, so we could collaborate and learn from each other.
One particular project I personally had a chance to work on with talented social service professionals is the NCSS' Volunteer Management Capability Development project, affectionately known as the VMCD in the sector. The initiative took member organisations through a comprehensive journey that helped participants develop their volunteer management policy and at the same time, strengthened resource management.
In essence, NCSS has been driving sector development by building capabilities, enabling ecosystem partnerships and mobilising resources from people and public sectors, but more importantly, by bringing members together to identify gaps and bridge services, all toward a more inclusive and caring society.
Increasingly, social challenges are becoming more complex and interconnected, requiring multi-dimensional intervention. Service users may find it challenging to navigate fragmented systems or interface with multiple agencies and overlapping interventions. As a sector developer, the outcome should also translate for service users to benefit from better coordination, resource allocation and optimisation to areas of greatest need, better lived outcomes not just now, but into the future.
Second, on a Council for diverse experts, representation and inclusion. Given the NCSS has more than 500 members currently, representation on the Board has to be deliberate and intentional for a diverse range of expertise and perspectives. I am truly appreciative that NCSS really took time to engage member organisations to explain the rationale of the amendments, including transitioning to a fully-appointed Council and to consider feedback from the ground to retain membership.
The selection process for the Council should ideally reflect expertise diversity and commitment to developing the social service sector. This would ensure an optimal mix of skills and experience to fulfil NCSS' updated mandate.
Additionally, it is important to ensure transparency, rigour and representation in the nomination, selection and appointment process. Needless to say, robust due diligence when assessing potential candidates is key, as is ensuring clear safeguards are in place for integrity and sector credibility and endorsement.
NCSS must remain close to the ground especially its members, who are important resources and sounding board for the Council to remain nimble to evolving to emerging needs and even as it streamlines its membership criteria. Having said that, NCSS should also pay close attention to ground-up initiatives in the sector, as well as support members whose membership may be affected during this transition.
On the sustainability of the social service sector, I am hopeful for NCSS to go further in shaping a sector that is not only responsive and cohesive, but also sustainable, supporting emerging ground-up initiatives and appealing, more importantly, to the next generation of social service professionals who choose a meaningful pathway and a career that is impactful.
Many SSAs and Special Purpose Entities are older than Singapore and started because a group of driven individuals got together, motivated to help vulnerable communities. The origin story of newly-founded charities has largely remained the same, such as SmilesSalamSG, founded by my Fengshan residents, whose work focuses on tackling food insecurity through pop-up grocery initiatives.
As sector developers, I hope for NCSS to continue to extend your ambit beyond your members, as has earlier been mentioned, and to support newly established SSAs to grow its impact sustainably.
And at the core of any sector, much like Singapore, is the people. Social service professionals should have elevated access to support for growth and development, to remain ahead of the curve and be equipped to support emerging needs of beneficiaries.
I recently spoke with a young talent, Q, who made a career switch to the sector and started his journey as a youth worker, a care staff. His drive saw him crossing the line to be an executive, but according to Q, his journey is an exception and not the rule.
Taking inspiration from how the Ministry has professionalised and continues to do so with the early childhood industry, I am hopeful that the refreshed mandate will also see more pathways for aspiring professionals in social impact, particularly specialised courses at post-secondary level.
With NCSS operating with a refreshed mandate, I am hopeful this Bill will strengthen Singapore's social service ecosystem, nurturing a sector that is capable, connected, diverse and aligned with the needs of the people it serves.
Mr Speaker, this Bill shows the sector's evolution and its aspirations. It reflects not only how far our social service sector has come, but also the level of stewardship now required of it. NCSS should continue to elevate its efforts as the drivers developing a sector that is capable, trusted and responsive to the evolving needs of our society. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Dr Wan Rizal.
Dr Wan Rizal (Jalan Besar): Mr Speaker, I wish to share a few observations and expectations from the perspective of workers and families who rely on a strong and sustainable social service sector.
If NCSS is to take on a stronger role as a sector developer, we must be clear that sustainability cannot be measured solely by service outcomes but also by the well-being, skills development, workplace support and retention of the social and care workforce. I will focus my remarks on what a \"sector development\" must mean for workers on the ground.
Sir, as we support this Bill in principle, we must be clear. A sector cannot be sustainable if its workforce is not.
When we talk about social services, we often focus on clients and programmes, and rightly so. But the people delivering this work are our social and care workers, broadly defined, those on the ground doing casework, community support, caregiving, befriending, counselling, outreach and operational coordination. They are often under high emotional load, high caseload pressures and in a space where outcomes are not immediate and solutioning can be quite complex.
So, if NCSS is to be a successful and well-trusted sector developer, it must go beyond ensuring service delivery and pay close attention to the workers' needs, wages, skills, welfare, employment prospects and, of course, their well-being. It must also recognise that implementing this may increase service delivery costs and it must fulfil its duty to acquire the appropriate skills to work with the relevant Ministry to right-size funding support for the sector, so that the sector's employers can do right by their workers.
The Bill explicitly empowers NCSS to promote competencies and professional standards and to establish and maintain standards and guidelines for sector members. I would urge the Ministry and NCSS to interpret the \"sector developer\" role as explicitly workforce-centred, with real accountability. What I hope to see are three \"worker outcomes\" to be developed alongside service outcomes.
First, clear skills and progression pathways. Our social and care workers need structured development, entry pathways, bridging routes, advanced practice tracks, leadership development and supervision standards that protect both client and outcomes and worker well-being.
Second, a fair and comprehensible wage standards. It is difficult for any sector to recruit and retain talent when wage signals are unclear or comparability across sub-sectors is poor. Today, we see differences in how wage guidelines are expressed, for example, one using basic wages while another uses gross wages. This creates confusion for workers and makes it harder for employers to benchmark responsibly.
Third, well-being and workplace protection. The social service sector is emotionally demanding and draining. Worker well-being is not a \"nice-to-have\". It is a pre-requisite for quality service. We should treat supervision quality, psychosocial safety, manageable caseloads and respect in the workplace as part of sector development, because staff burnout and turnover ultimately harm the very clients we aim to support.
Sir, please allow me to make a few constructive requests.
Since NCSS now has a stronger sector-developer mandate and standard-setting role, can the Minister clarify how NCSS will institutionalise regular engagement with the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) and the relevant unions so that worker outcomes are not incidental but are designed into the sector roadmap? In particular, I hope NCSS will welcome a discussion with NTUC on workforce standards and job quality, because workers' issues are often raised through unions, long before their problems become visible in the system-level indicators.
At a recent dialogue, the union side proposed to harmonise community care and social services wage guidelines and recommendations, precisely because inconsistent approaches, such as \"basic versus gross\", as I mentioned earlier, can distort benchmarking.
I understand that the goal discussed was to have harmonisation in place by first quarter 2026 before moving into accreditation, not just for the Community Care Organisations but also for SSAs. Could the Minister confirm whether the first quarter in 2026 remains the intended timeline for wage-guideline harmonisation and whether NCSS will play a facilitative role, given its new function to establish and maintain standards and guidelines for sector members?
On being \"direct\" about wages, Sir, I think we can do both. We can keep the principle high-level, that is, strengthen the wage competitiveness and clarity and also set a clear milestone through the harmonisation of first quarter in 2026. We owe social and care sector workers that level of seriousness, while giving agencies and employers room to manage implementation responsibly.
Sir, the Healthcare Services Employees Union shared a proposed accreditation framework for the community care sector, the Community Care Progressive Employer Mark, with tiering of bronze, silver and gold, to recognise employers who commit to wage benchmarks, workforce development, productivity improvements and progressive employment practices.
The proposed framework is structured around four pillars. First, wage benchmarks, referencing MOH salary guidelines; second, workforce development and skills enhancement aligned to Agency for Integrated Care skills standards/skills framework; third, manpower productivity, including job redesign and use of grants; and fourth, progressive employment practices – tripartite standards and fair employment practices should be in place. I welcome this direction, because it sends a clear signal. Being a good care provider must also mean being a good employer.
If NCSS is to be a sector developer, then I would ask, can the Minister share whether NCSS will support an accreditation approach that includes wage benchmarks and workforce development as central pillars and whether this can be extended beyond community care to social service agencies, in line with the earlier discussions?
We should also encourage employers in the social services sector to access support for job redesign, training and transformation. Where appropriate, I welcome employers to work with NTUC to explore schemes, such as the Company Training Committee grant, so that productivity improvements translate into better job quality rather than simply a higher workload.
Sir, I would also like to address implementation.
The Bill introduces sector members and requires compliance with prescribed standards, including those for cooperation with NCSS. This is understandable if NCSS is coordinating the sector more actively. Could the Minister clarify how NCSS will ensure that standards and reporting requirements are proportionate, particularly for the smaller agencies and charities that may not have the same administrative capacity? We must avoid where smaller organisations spend more time \"servicing the system\" than serving the clients.
Relatedly, the Bill also allows NCSS to consider whether an organisation's aims, objects and activities are contrary to the public interest, public order or national harmony when deciding whether to appoint or revoke a sector member. This is a serious evaluative ground. I would ask the Minister to elaborate on the safeguards and due processes in place to ensure decisions remain fair, transparent and consistent, particularly given that sector members status will likely be important for participation and sector coordination. Sir, please allow me to continue in Malay.
(In Malay): Sir, I support this NCSS (Amendment) Bill in principle, but its implementation must truly reflect NCSS's role as a \"sector developer\".
It is not about merely ensuring service delivery, but developing the social and care workforce that forms the backbone of the ecosystem with the support of our community.
The social sector does not just \"help\" the economy; it is a part of Singapore's economic and social infrastructure.
When families receive timely support, workers can continue working, maintain their productivity and recover from any hardship.
In an ageing society, community care support for loved ones also becomes key to ensuring workers do not have to choose between work and family responsibilities.
As a sector developer, NCSS needs to focus more decisively on job quality: skills development and career pathways, wage clarity and competitiveness, as well as workplace well-being and psychosocial safety.
We welcome efforts to harmonise salary guidelines across subsectors, including aligning definitions such as basic wage and gross wage, with clear targets, before moving towards progressive employer accreditation that recognises fair employment practices, training, productivity and worker protection.
In summary, to ensure better services for our people, we must first ensure that this sector offers good jobs to those entrusted to care for our community.
(In English): Mr Speaker, I hope we remember the spirit behind it. Strengthening NCSS as a sector developer is ultimately about strengthening the whole ecosystem, the services, the organisations and the people who do the hard work behind the scenes.
If we get this right, we will not only improve service delivery. We will also help workers stay in the workforce because their livelihoods and families are continually supported, strengthen community care for loved ones as our population ages, protect national mental and physical well-being through upstream support, and strengthen our social safety net so that people have a real chance to bounce back and thrive.
And crucially, we will create a sector where social and care workers, central in my speech, can build meaningful careers with fair pay, progression and well-being because that is what a truly sustainable sector looks like. Sir, with these observations and requests, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Melvin Yong.
Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye (Radin Mas): Mr Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill which seeks to reconstitute the NCSS to reflect and strengthen its role as the sector developer for the social service sector. However, I have some questions and suggestions.
Sir, I support the Bill's proposal to strengthen sector membership criteria of the reconstituted Council. By prioritising organisations whose core business lies in the social service sector, the new Council will have the clarity and direction needed to perform its role effectively.
First, I fully support the proposal to remove membership fees and to streamline to a single-tier membership framework. This reduces costs in a backdrop where social service agencies are facing a double whammy of rising expenses while being hit with poorer fundraising outcomes. In fact, a recent CNA article in December 2025, just last month, reported that some charities saw their worst fundraising season in recent years.
Given NCSS' role as sector developer, a tiered membership structure with differentiated access is no longer necessary. Any cost savings for our social service agencies should be regarded as a beneficial outcome.
That said, I would like to ask, out of the more than 500 current NCSS members, how many members would be impacted by this move to narrow the membership criteria of the reconstituted Council? What is the percentage of members who have objectives and activities that are unrelated to the social service sector, and for this, I am truly curious as to why did they join NCSS as a member in the first place?
The Bill also proposes to shift to a fully Minister-appointed Council that will comprise of between 15 and 27 members. This may lead to an increase of the current Council size of 23 members. While the Minister has stated quite clearly that the Council will keep to 23 members in that immediate term, I would like to ask, what were the reasons behind setting such a large maximum size of the Council? Because having too many members risks making the Council bloated and perhaps unable to come to quick decisions.
On the other hand, if the Ministry should one day use the lower bound and appoint 15 members to the Council, what would be the considerations for this downsizing? And how would this impact the functional performance of the Council, which traditionally has 23 members?
Sir, I also support the new statutory appeal provisions proposed under the Bill. However, I note that such statutory appeals are currently limited to membership decisions made by the Council.
As the NCSS takes on an expanded role as the sector developer, which encompasses a larger social service mission beyond membership, I would like to ask if the other administrative decisions, as laid out under section 11, subsections (2) and (3) of the Bill, would also be open to similar formal appeals to the Minister. Examples of these administrative decisions include the award and revocation of funds, which has significant impact on our SSAs.
The expanded role of NCSS must be properly supported by having the right Council with a good mix of skills, knowledge and experience to drive NCSS as a sector developer. While I am happy to note that there will be continued sector representation in the new Council, with at least half of the Council appointed from sector members' nominations, I would like to ask the Minister what the nomination criteria would be. We should ensure that the Council has the right subject matter expertise to drive the necessary changes to the social services sector.
Sir, the ComChest is the primary fundraising and engagement arm of our social service sector, created to support the NCSS. Under the ComChest, fundraising is centralised and funding is then used to drive certain outcomes in the social service sector. How will the role of the ComChest and in particular, the functions of the staff of the ComChest, evolve with the new NCSS? Will changes to the enhanced governance framework for the ComChest impact current grant recipients and, if so, will there be a transition period for such recipients to improve their processes in order to qualify for continued grants?
Lastly, the NCSS releases a regular salary guide for social service professionals. This is a good guide that helps organisations in the sector to benchmark salaries paid to staff without having to engage expensive consultants on their own. However, I understand that every edition of the salary guide causes some consternation among social service executives, some of whom have given me feedback that it is a daunting task to try to match these salary guidelines.
I would like to ask if the NCSS plans to do a survey on the number of organisations that comply with the salary guidelines and in doing so, provide more support to help the social service sector become an industry of choice among Singaporean workers.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, I cannot stress enough about the importance of the contributions made by our social service agencies and the tireless work that our social service workers must do daily. Many often have to sacrifice their personal time to help beneficiaries deal with issues that are complex, diverse and often multi-faceted.
As we reconstitute NCSS in its role as a sector developer, I urge the new Council to do more to build operational and professional capabilities of our social service agencies and our social service professionals to help them better cope with the ever-increasing complexity of the challenges that they face. We must also ensure that the new Council is equipped with the right mix of skills, knowledge and experience to give success in this area. Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Elysa Chen.
Ms Elysa Chen (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak on the NCSS (Amendment) Bill. Before I proceed, I declare my interest as the Executive Director of CampusImpact. It is a registered charity and social service agency serving children from lower-income families, and we are a member of NCSS and also a close partner of NCSS.
Over the past few decades, Singapore's social sector has made significant strides, not just in the breadth of social provision but in the intentionality and foresight of how we plan for social needs. In recent years, we have seen deliberate shifts across multiple sub-sectors toward more preventive, community-based and person-centred models of care. I would like to highlight three examples.
For lower-income families, ComLink+ has moved beyond short-term financial assistance towards long-term family coaching, bringing together Government agencies, charities and the community to support families on sustained pathways towards stability and social mobility. In eldercare, the Age Well SG model and the development of Active Ageing Centres islandwide have embedded preventive care and social connection within our heartlands. In the disability space, the Enabling Masterplan 2030 charts a forward-looking vision centred on inclusive employment and lifelong learning. These efforts are supported and enabled, in part, by NCSS, which strengthens the charities and social service agencies that undergird much of our social impact work.
Established in 1992, NCSS has progressively widened its remit to strengthen the social service ecosystem. Between 2015 and 2025, NCSS introduced the Social Service Institute to build professional capability, launched the ComChest integrated fundraising model and developed sector-wide capability frameworks in areas, such as digitalisation, volunteer management, governance, fundraising and programme evaluation. In 2022, NCSS also introduced the 4ST Strategic Roadmap, guiding the sector towards more collaborative, user-centric service delivery.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to briefly centre this in a practical example from the ground. At CampusImpact, NCSS support has gone beyond funding alone. Through various capability-building and programme grants, NCSS enabled us to articulate our theory of change, develop service standards for our flagship programmes, adopt digital solutions to improve our productivity and strengthen our organisational processes, while hiring talent to strengthen our management team.
Just as importantly, NCSS officers worked closely with our team to help us navigate policy parameters, refine our proposals and think through implementation challenges. This combination of financial support and professional guidance helped a smaller agency like ours translate intent into effective delivery. It is this role, as an enabler, connector and capacity-builder, that makes NCSS more than an administrative body to the sector.
While much has been achieved, the sector faces significant challenges ahead. By 2035, Singapore's ageing population and the shrinking size of intergenerational households may necessitate a fundamental rethinking of care models. Over the next two decades, the resourcing landscape will continue to evolve, with charities facing tighter fundraising conditions and manpower constraints, exacerbated by competition with the healthcare sector and regional labour markets.
These pressures place a high onus on NCSS' role as an anchor institution for the sector. As this Bill seeks to formally entrench NCSS' position as a sector developer, I would like to raise several queries that relate to its long-term strategic alignment and governance. I appreciate that sections 5(3) and 15(3) of the Bill allows employees of NCSS member organisations to sit on the Board, which would ensure that ground experience and practice wisdom is brought to discussions at the board level, ensuring greater diversity and optimising the skills, experience and capabilities of the Board.
However, regarding Council appointments under sections 5 and 5F, while Ministerial appointment may strengthen strategic alignment, NCSS has historically maintained close relationships with frontline agencies and smaller charities. I would like to ask the Minister: how will the new framework ensure that frontline perspectives, particularly those of smaller agencies serving high-need or emerging communities remain meaningfully represented? What mechanisms will ensure that policy direction continues to be informed by lived realities on the ground rather than predominantly top-down considerations?
On oversight, what are the “prescribed requirements” for sector-nominated members of the NCSS Council? Will these criteria be publicly gazetted or tabled before Parliament? And will reasons for rejecting sector-nominated candidates or removing Council members be communicated to nominating organisations or made publicly available?
Second, on Ministerial directions and information requirements. While oversight is important, NCSS plays a unique bridging role, translating sector feedback into policy refinement while balancing government priorities. What measures will ensure that NCSS retains sufficient professional independence and capacity to surface gaps in funding models, workforce sustainability and unintended policy consequences so that it remains a trusted voice for the sector rather than a purely operational arm?
Third, on financial oversight. While the application of the Public Sector (Governance) Act strengthens accountability, key instruments such as the NCSS Endowment Fund and the ComChest direct significant resources across the sector. Will NCSS continue publishing annual accountability reports that set out major financial decisions, reporting metrics against its expanded mandate, and audit findings relating to these funds?
Mr Speaker Sir, with its strong track record and the challenges that lie ahead, NCSS will remain a cornerstone of Singapore’s social sector. To fully step into its role as a sector developer, it must continue to act as a central coordinator, enabling agencies to support vulnerable communities, persons with disabilities and other at-risk groups in a cohesive and complementary manner.
I appreciate Prof Kenneth Poon for recognising the close-knit network that the social service sector has grown into. If our social service sector is much like an orchestra made of many skilled and committed players, then NCSS is not meant to play the loudest instrument. Rather, it is the conductor, setting the tempo, ensuring harmony and allowing each organisation to contribute its strengths at the right moment. When the conductor does its job well, the music belongs to everyone. This Bill strengthens NCSS’s ability to play that role. NCSS should conduct the sector and not dominate it. For these reasons, Mr Speaker Sir, I rise in support of the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Lee Hui Ying.
Ms Lee Hui Ying (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of the NCSS (Amendment) Bill. I would like to first declare that I work in a non-profit philanthropic organisation that supports impact programmes in the region including Singapore.
Social service is the quiet work of standing with people on their hardest days. It takes place inside homes, family service centres and conversations where people are at their most vulnerable. This work carries emotional weight: listening, comforting and standing with families through moments of uncertainty. These are the steady hands that help keep our community strong even when the challenges are not always visible.
The Bill formalises NCSS’ role as sector developer of Singapore’s social service sector. Empowering the vulnerable members of our communities is a mission close to my heart and the hearts of my residents. The Bill’s proposed amendments demonstrate NCSS’ commitment to evolve its role, strengthen our social services sector and give Singaporeans the help they truly need.
I have three points of clarification, regarding first, NCSS’ mission to support sustainability of our social workers and social service officers. Two, nomination of the board members and third, the criteria for appointing sector members.
My first clarification relates to the sustainability of our social workers and social service officers. They are the foundation of our social service sector. If our transport workers move people, our social workers move hearts. We must give our social workers and social service officers the same care which they bring to the people and families they support.
Sadly, it is well known that social work has always been a very challenging career. Burnout is real. Difficult work conditions are real. Manpower shortages are real. Social workers have been known to handle 20 to 50 cases at one time and often handle crisis outside usual working hours. During the pandemic, when their help was most needed, it is concerning to learn that in a Singapore University for Social Sciences (SUSS) survey, over half of social workers surveyed suffered from anxiety.
I am glad that the Ministry recognises this and included in section 11 that the sustainability of the social service sector is one of the Council's statutory objectives. First, can the Minister share on the active steps that will be taken to meet this objective? What specific goals will the Council set to improve the sustainability for social workers and social service officers? For example, set targets to reduce caseloads, increase manpower and implement new strategies to help reduce workload for our social service officers.
Second, the Bill makes a major change in how the NCSS Board is appointed. Under the section 5 amendment, all Board members would be appointed by the Minister for Social and Family Development instead of having some elected members. Having elected members, especially SSA employees on the Board is important as these elected members have a strong mandate from their peers in the social service sector to speak out on critical issues. It would also allow more diverse representation across different issues and groups from people who regularly interact with volunteers and beneficiaries.
So therefore, it is extra important to uphold transparency in appointing Board members, or risk losing confidence and ownership by our social service sector in the Council. Can the Minister clarify the rationale for removing elected members and what will be done to ensure continuity of transparency? These are some potential gaps which should be addressed early so that we start with the right principles to build trust. What criteria will guide the Minister to ensure that sector members’ nominations provide a diverse representation of the social service sector? How will the Chairman receive nominations? Could the Minister also choose to reject a nomination by the Chairman? Will there be public disclosure of the nominations and the reasons for accepting or rejecting any nomination?
Lastly, can the Minister clarify exactly who will be eligible for NCSS Membership? Section 15 states that NCSS would appoint or re-appoint social service agencies who apply to be sector members, defined as “[having] the primary function of providing or supporting the provision of social services in Singapore.” Since memberships are no longer applicable, we can take a wide definition so that more groups can benefit from the support and network the Council provides.
How will NCSS define this “primary function”? Would social enterprises, for example, Dignity Kitchen, informal ground-up groups or religiously affiliated social organisations be eligible to be appointed as members? Are there any members now who would no longer be eligible for re-appointment under the new definition? Mr Speaker Sir, in Mandarin, please.
(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I support this Bill. Social services means being quietly present with those in need during their most difficult times. This work has no specific locations. It takes place in people's homes, at social service centres and in conversations during the most vulnerable moments.
Listening to, comforting and supporting families when they are lost and helpless inevitably involves deep emotions. Social services are like a pair of large hands that support our community, even in places we cannot see.
This Bill formally recognises the National Council of Social Services' (NCSS') role as a sector developer.
Through interactions with residents, I know that helping vulnerable groups in our community to become self-reliant and strong is our common vision.
The proposed amendments in this Bill demonstrates NCSS' commitment to its developing role and strengthening the sector to better help Singaporeans.
I hope to have further clarifications on how we support social workers. Social workers are the foundation of social services. Their care drives many people forward and we also need to care for and look after social workers, in order to enable them to continue this important mission.
We all know that social workers face enormous challenges. Burnout, poor working conditions and manpower shortages are very real problems. Some social workers may handle 20, or even 50 cases simultaneously and often need to deal with emergency situations outside office hours. A survey by the Singapore University of Social Sciences found that during COVID-19, more than half of the social workers surveyed faced anxiety issues, which is concerning.
I am heartened that the authorities have recognised this situation and included the sustainability of the social service sector as one of the Council's statutory objectives in this Bill.
Can the Minister further explain what actions will be taken to achieve this objective? Secondly, what specific plans will the Council establish to strengthen the sustainability of social service sectors, for example, reducing caseloads, increasing manpower or implementing new strategies to reduce social workers' workloads?
(In English): Mr Speaker Sir, social service is built on emotional labour. It carries heavy emotional drain and demands emotional resilience to continue caring for others. With the NCSS' expanded role in developing the social service sector, I hope this enables more social organisations to be able to reach and support all Singaporeans. Mr Speaker Sir, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Cai Yinzhou.
Mr Cai Yinzhou (Bishan-Toa Payoh): Thank you Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker I would like to declare my interest in NCSS, having been a past beneficiary of the NCSS 40-Under-40 Youth Leadership Development Programme.
I rise in support of the NCSS (Amendment) Bill. Recognising the importance of SSAs in providing support to Singaporeans and Singapore. This Bill codifies the role of NCSS as a sector developer and strengthens the delivery of social services to underserved groups in Singapore. Nevertheless, I would like to raise a few key areas for clarification, particularly on maintaining sector representation on the Council’s Board and furthering support for social enterprises.
My first clarification relates to ensuring sector representation on the Board of the Council. The social service landscape in Singapore is highly diverse with NCSS representing over 500 SSAs that support a variety of causes such as eldercare, persons with disabilities, youths at risk, lower-income families and mental health needs.
The public consultation on these amendments, conducted by MSF and NCSS indicated that ensuring sector representation on the Board is a priority. I commend the Ministry for taking this feedback into account and increasing the proposed Board size to 15-27 members and ensuring that half of the Board will be appointed by the Minister from sector members’ nominations.
To help the social service sector and public better understand how these new processes will be put into place, I would like to clarify the criteria for appointment to the Board. What specific criteria will be used to select Board members and what mechanisms will be put in place to ensure a diverse and representative demographic of organisations and members on the Board?
The ethos of the NCSS to unite communities for an inclusive and caring society is important. We should encourage not only a diversity of sectors represented on the Board, but also diversity of individuals of different genders, age groups, ethnic backgrounds, experience and skillsets. I strongly believe that doing so would support NCSS in its work and facilitate the balanced and holistic development of the social service sector.
My second clarification relates to the relationship between NCSS and social enterprises. Membership in NCSS is a valuable platform for the sector for networking, cross-learning and community-building opportunities. One of the amendments proposed in the Bill is to streamline the membership of NCSS, such that a member must either \"have the primary function of providing a social service in Singapore\", or \"have the primary function of directly supporting the provision of a social service in Singapore\". I note that, currently, some NCSS members have registered separate social enterprises as separate entities. In general, the operations of most social enterprises are closely intertwined with the social service sector.
The social enterprise sector strengthens social service delivery in Singapore. As the saying goes, \"Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day; but teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.\" Social enterprises adopt diverse business models to better align with the complex needs of different stakeholders. For instance, many provide underemployed communities with critical employment and training opportunities, such as the Social Kitchen which employs disadvantaged individuals and their caregivers; or Foreword Coffee which hires workers with special needs. Operating social enterprise models allows them to reinvest their profits in their social missions. This provides a more sustainable income stream for the organisation, reduces reliance on donations and provides employment for beneficiaries and expands the capacity of their social programmes.
I note that many social enterprises might be members of raiSE Singapore, which is a cross-sector collaboration between MSF, NCSS and others. In line with the vision of expanding NCSS' role as sector developer, I would like to ask whether social enterprises will be eligible to register as members under NCSS or, if not, how NCSS plans to provide greater support for our social enterprises. Such support could take the form of linking social enterprises with investors, connecting social enterprises with individuals in need of employment more effectively and centrally.
Additionally, could the Ministry clarify the distinction between NCSS and raiSE, in terms of the functions they will play in supporting social enterprises? Social enterprises would also benefit, knowing whether they can seek support and membership with NCSS in addition to with raiSE. Notwithstanding these clarifications, I support the Bill for its decisive update to NCSS and the strengthening of the social service sector in Singapore.
Mr Speaker: Dr Hamid Razak.
Dr Hamid Razak (West Coast-Jurong West): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the NCSS (Amendment) Bill 2025 and I would like to declare my interest as a past beneficiary of the NCSS' 40 Under 40 Programme as well as a Board Member and an advisor to aspiring sector members as well as current associate members of NCSS.
The social service sector has evolved significantly over the years, as mentioned by the Minister earlier. It now addresses a broader and more complex range of needs, from ageing and disability to mental health, family violence and social isolation.
In this context, I think it is timely that we update the legislative framework governing the NCSS so that it remains fit-for-purpose and well-positioned to guide the sector into its next phase of development, because when the social service sector functions well, it is our families, seniors and our vulnerable groups that will continue to do well and ultimately benefit.
I welcome the Bill's clear intent to strengthen governance, accountability and strategic clarity.
By explicitly articulating the Council's objectives, which is to build an effective, efficient and sustainable social service sector, the amendments provide important direction not just to the Council, but also to organisations working closely with it, particularly in a sector where resources are finite and expectations often high.
I also support the strengthened functions relating to the capability building, research, standards-setting and the ecosystem development.
Social service work today requires not only compassion, but strong governance, professional competencies and cross-sector collaboration. These amendments help position the Council as a sector developer, rather than merely a coordinating body.
A sound and professional social service sector builds confidence through transparency, credibility, accountability and excellence, strengthening trust among stakeholders, including donors and partners who are vital to the ecosystem.
Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to speak next about the introduction of sector members under the new framework. This refinement of the sector membership framework helps sharpen the Council's engagement with organisations that are directly involved in the delivery of social services or that directly support such delivery. A larger Council will allow for diverse sectoral perspectives to be represented at the highest level, enabling the Council to steer the organisation effectively in an evolving landscape while also taking on the expanded functions that this Bill provides for.
In addition, by formally engaging organisations whose primary function is to provide such social support services, the Council can strengthen partnerships with the sector while clearly maintaining lines of accountability. On this note, the Bill provides for clearer guidelines on the appointment and disqualification of members to the Council, among other terms, which I welcome as it enhances the professionalism and the operational efficiency of the Council. By addressing and correcting any perceived ambiguity, the Bill helps remove any future organisational issues.
At the same time, I note that the Bill provides the Council with powers to prescribe standards, require cooperation and revoke sector membership in certain circumstances. These are understandable and necessary from a governance perspective. However, I would encourage the Minister and the Council to remain mindful of the importance of sector voice and autonomy.
Many SSAs operate on the frontlines, working with vulnerable individuals and families in rapidly evolving circumstances. Ground realities often evolve faster than policy, and innovation frequently emerges from practitioners themselves. This is alluded to by Member Ms Dennis Phua earlier as well.
It is therefore important that the exercise of the Council's powers continues to be accompanied by regular consultation, dialogue and co-design, so that the standards and expectations are developed collaboratively and do not unintentionally stifle innovation or discourage candid feedback from the ground.
Mr Speaker, Sir, related to this, I wish to raise a second consideration for the Minister: the impact of these amendments on smaller and volunteer-driven organisations.
The Bill rightly emphasises professionalism and accountability. However, the social service sector is not uniform. Alongside large and well-resourced agencies, there are smaller community-based organisations that serve niche and minority groups and may not have the same administrative capacity. In fact, personally, I have been involved and continue to be involved, in such community-based organisations that have well-intended objectives and sincere and passionate leaders but, sometimes, lack large resources and deep capabilities.
While I understand that the Council already has existing powers under current membership, regulations to set standards and reporting requirements, I hope that these will be reviewed and operationalised under the amended framework. I hope that this would not cause these smaller community-based organisations to lose their membership status and, as a result, do not get resources allocated to them to serve these smaller groups in our population.
So, it would be prudent for the Council to adopt a graduated and supportive approach, such as perhaps, differentiated requirements, clearly defined transition periods and capacity-building support to those who need it. I am reassured by the Ministry's commitment to engage the sector on any changes to existing requirements, so that professionalisation does not come at the expense of diversity, grassroots energy or community trust. The strength of this sector is also reflected in its ability to innovate and welcome new ideas, participants and members.
I also note the provisions allowing the Minister to issue directions to the Council in defined circumstances. While this is understandable, given the Council's role in implementing Government policy, I trust that this power will continue to be exercised judiciously, preserving the Council's ability to engage openly with the sector and to provide frank policy advice grounded in operational realities.
The amendments relating to the ComChest are, likewise, timely. By clarifying its role in mobilising financial and in-kind resources, including volunteer support, the Bill reinforces the ComChest's position as a vital bridge between philanthropy and social needs. The updated governance framework will help maintain donor confidence while ensuring alignment with the Council's broader objectives.
I also welcome the strengthened financial provisions, including those relating to funds, investments and the endowment fund. As social needs grow more complex, financial resilience and stewardship will be increasingly important and these amendments provide a more robust framework for long-term sustainability.
Mr Speaker, Sir, in closing, this Bill represents a meaningful step forward in representing the institutional foundations of our social service sector. It equips NCSS with clearer authority, stronger governance and a more strategic mandate, while also reminding us of the need to balance oversight with partnership and accountability with trust.
I raise my points in the spirit of strengthening the Bill so that good governance goes hand in hand with sector vitality, innovation and inclusion. With these observations, I support the Bill and I look forward to its implementation, contributing meaningfully to a more resilient, responsive and compassionate social service ecosystem.
Mr Speaker: Mr David Hoe.
Mr David Hoe (Jurong East-Bukit Batok): Mr Speaker, before I begin, I would like to declare my interest that I work in a philanthropic organisation and was also one of the \"40 Under 40\" members for NCSS. Today, I am speaking in support of the NCSS (Amendment) Bill.
At its core, this Bill formally positions NCSS as the statutory sector developer for social services. It aligns the law with what NCSS has been increasingly expected to do in practice: to build an effective, efficient and sustainable social service sector, and to strengthen the wider ecosystem around it, including community support and volunteerism.
Today, NCSS is seen as a sector developer. It is expected to lead, to coordinate and to help the sector evolve. That said, as we strengthen the NCSS' mandate, it is important to carefully think about how these powers are exercised in practice. And for this, I would like to raise five points for consideration.
First, there is a risk of over-centralisation and perceived distance from the ground. Stronger coordination is the intent of the Bill, and rightly so. It is important to note that any system-steward model, where the role is not only just merely an operator, regulator or content owner, but as a caretaker of the wider ecosystem, it carries a trade-off.
However, one concern on the ground with NCSS taking on this role that we are here is, will it create more rules and frameworks that actually discourage experimentation? If we over-standardise, we may unintentionally dampen the local innovation that specialises in serving specific communities.
In my conversation with many agencies, many often innovate because they know what works for the community that they interact with. Many try new outreach methods, new approaches, culturally sensitive approaches or partnerships with schools and employers.
But if standards become too rigid, then the \"cost of trying something new\" rises. Staff may worry that a pilot will fail an audit requirement, fall outside prescribed service boundaries or create additional reporting burden. All these can create a risk-averse culture where agencies stick to safe, familiar programmes, even when emerging needs require new approaches.
In this regard, social needs are not uniform. What works for seniors living alone might not work for youths-at-risk. What works for families living in a rental block may not work for persons with disabilities navigating employment. Hence, we should strive to continue supporting innovative and tailored approaches as we journey towards strengthened sector coordination with this Bill.
One possible way forward is a \"standards-plus-sandbox\" approach over clear baseline for safety and governance, paired with structured space for innovation and differentiated models. This allows for consistency without crowding out creativity on the ground.
My second point, like many have mentioned, is Council composition and sector nominations. The Bill requires that at least half of the Council, excluding the Chairperson, to be appointed from individuals nominated by sector members. It also allows the Chairperson to exclude nominees who do not meet prescribed requirements. Also, when appointing the members of this Council, the Minister must consider whether the members of the Council will collectively possess appropriate knowledge, skills and experience for the Council to perform its functions effectively.
Against this backdrop, I was asked what is considered \"appropriate knowledge, skills and experiences\". From my viewpoint, it should not be narrowly read as titles or credentials. It should include practical exposure to service users' journeys; for instance, having prior experience on seeing how a resident moves from first contact to assessment, to referral, to ongoing support. This enables an understanding of where friction occurs, where people fall through the cracks and what dignity in service actually looks like.
These are not soft qualities. They are practical lenses that help a Council to anticipate unintended consequences, blind spots in standards and design policies that citizens can actually live with. We must also avoid the possibility of a perception risk where nomination pipelines are dominated by larger agencies with more administrative capacity and wider networks.
While I do not think every detail needs to be hard-coded into primary legislation, I think a clearer competency framework would strengthen confidence in how the Council is constituted. Put simply, the Council should collectively cover a balanced mix of core skill sets. For example: service delivery and practice insight; skills in governance, risk, audit, finance, accountability; sector capabilities and an eye on quality improvement.
At the same time, beyond skill sets, the Council should be mindful of representation across sectors, including diversity across sub-sectors that ensuring smaller and specialised SSAs have a meaningful voice.
At the heart of it, Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not about excluding anyone; we know everyone can bring something to the table, but what is also equally important is what exactly does this table needs so that we can be more effective in the work that we do.
Third, we should also avoid unintentional compliance burdens on smaller agencies, as mentioned earlier. The Bill introduces \"sector members\" and requires compliance with prescribed standards for management, administration, service provision and cooperation with NCSS in section 15(4).
This direction is sound since standards protect service users. But there is also a real risk if compliance becomes too heavy or too uniform. NCSS' own Industry Digital Plan for Social Services has highlighted uneven capacity across agencies, particularly in digitalisation and capability building. This, in my view, is a proxy indicator for broader compliance risks.
We should avoid a situation where: reporting becomes a hidden tax on smaller SSAs; agencies with weaker back-office capacity fall behind; compliance becomes a proxy for quality, but actually they are not always the same. These two are not the same.
In my view, I think a proportionate, tiered approach to standards, supported by templates, shared tools, transitional support, would help to ensure that raising the floor does not inadvertently shrink the sector.
Allow me to clarify what does \"proportionate, tired approach\" means. It means ensuring that all agencies meet clear baseline requirements for safety, governance and accountability, while scaling additional compliance and obligations according to an agency's size, risk profile and service complexity.
Smaller community-based agencies should not be weighed down by the same administrative burdens as large, system-critical providers, while agencies serving more vulnerable populations should rightly face with higher safeguards. Paired with shared tools, templates and transitional support, such an approach will allow us to protect service users without unintentionally squeezing out innovation or capacity on the ground.
My fourth point on procedural fairness must be clear and accessible. The Bill allows NCSS to revoke sector-member appointments, with appeals to the Minister within 14 days, and with Minister's decision being final. These safeguards are important, but they must be usable in practice.
In the guidance, it would be helpful to ensure that: there are clear written reasons for refusal; there are reasonable timelines and plain-language appeal templates; accessibility support for smaller agencies with limited administrative capacity is made available and accessible; and a predictable and transparent processes that are laid out so that this regime, this process is experienced as a fair one rather than an arbitrary one.
Finally, a few asked me this question, because the public will eventually ask this: after this Bill, how will we know that the sector is stronger?
The Bill anchors NCSS' objectives clearly: effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, stronger delivery, capability and ecosystem development. These are the right goals. But citizens are also looking for measurable signals. Without oversimplifying complex social outcomes, it may be useful to publish sector-level indicators such as service access and timeliness, aggregated service-user satisfaction and outcomes, and workforce retention and training uptake.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, there is a saying: if you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go together. And social services are, by definition, a \"go-together\" endeavour. They are a vital pillar of the \"we first\" society as we seek to strengthen.
This Bill strengthens our ability to go together, through clearer stewardship, clearer standards, stronger coordination and modern governance. If we pair these reforms with fair processes, proportionate standards, transparent governance and real sector voice, this Bill can help to build a social service system that is both stronger and more trusted. With these points, Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Mr Yip Hong Weng.
Mr Yip Hon Weng (Yio Chu Kang): Mr Speaker, Sir, many residents in my Yio Chu Kang constituency do not look at this Bill to scrutinise its technical clauses. They judge our social service system by its real-world impact: does help arrive on time? Is a vulnerable senior noticed? Is a child kept safe?
I have several clarifications on this Bill.
First, Mr Speaker, Sir, the composition of the Council determines the sector's perspective. Who sits at the table potentially decides what issues are prioritised and more importantly, what blind spots remain. Families in rental flats often rely on small agencies and volunteers who see early warning signs that larger systems miss. The Council should reflect the realities of those who work closest to danger. Under the new section 5, the Minister appoints the Chairperson and the Council, with at least seven nominees from the sector. While this provides representation, it may not automatically secure independence or the necessary frontline perspective.
Furthermore, under clause 5(3), the Chairperson may exclude nominees who do not meet \"prescribed requirements\". If these are not transparent, we risk screening out plain-speaking, ground-level voices.
We must also guard against over-selecting representatives from organisations whose funding incentives align them towards administrative stability rather than candour. The Council needs \"risk signal specialists\" whose duty is to identify blind spots, not simply reinforce consensus.
Mr Speaker, Sir, my second point is about the risks of hidden directions, absent enforceable duties and fragmented accountability.
Under clause 10(6), the Minister may issue directions which the Council \"must not disclose\". While I understand the need for confidentiality in state security, social services deal with safety. If a Ministerial direction effectively changes escalation thresholds for child abuse or elder neglect, and that direction is sealed, how can this House scrutinise whether those thresholds are safe? We cannot provide a counterbalance to what we cannot see. I ask if Parliament could at least receive an anonymised annual briefing on such directions.
Clause 11(4) explicitly states that the objectives of the Council \"do not impose any duty on the Council enforceable in a court of law\". After reviewing past cases involving systemic lapses and delayed escalation, this can be concerning. If clause 11(2)(b) empowers NCSS to coordinate the sector, authority must be paired with responsibility. Should NCSS not have a statutory responsibility to lead serious case reviews and publish anonymised lessons?
Finally, regarding clause 14, which grants immunity for officers acting in \"good faith\". While I support protecting social workers from frivolous liability and recognise the difficult judgement calls they face on the ground, \"good faith\" must not become a shield for repeated oversight.
We must ensure this immunity does not inadvertently reduce the incentives for rigorous self-critique. When no one is legally responsible, everyone becomes morally invisible. When every agency can point to a process that was technically and legally followed, cases can still fall through the cracks.
Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, I am concerned that the broad powers to appoint or remove sector members may unintentionally make agencies more cautious about escalation. Many agencies serving my residents are small and nimble. They enter rental flats daily. They detect risks early. They escalate issues promptly. We need them to be brave.
Clause 10, under new section 15(6), empowers NCSS to revoke membership if an organisation acts \"contrary to the public interest\". These are broad terms. Could a passionate agency that challenges policy gaps be misinterpreted as acting against \"public interest\"? We need clarity on how public interest is distinguished from administrative convenience.
Furthermore, section 15(4) requires \"cooperation with the Council\" as a condition of membership. We must ensure that \"cooperation\" is not misread as \"compliance\". True cooperation includes the duty to raise concerns, notify relevant authorities and comply with the law by lodging police reports where necessary. Sometimes, the most constructive partnership is demonstrated when an agency says, \"You are wrong, and this child is in danger.\" This Bill must protect such engagement as a vital form of cooperation.
On recourse: under section 16, appeals regarding membership go back to the Minister. What prevents this from becoming a circular loop without independent review? If an agency is removed for being too vocal about a systemic failure, appealing to the Ministry that oversees that system provides little reassurance.
Finally, regarding clause 18 and the dissolution of committees without compensation: while legally standard, we must consider the signal it sends. We should ensure long-serving members and volunteers feel recognised, not dismissed so they remain empowered to speak up.
Mr Speaker, Sir, after past cases involving serious harm and delayed intervention, no agency should ever hesitate to escalate a risk because they fear losing their status, their funding or their place in the system. This Bill must strengthen the courage of the sector, not the caution.
Lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, the new \"sector developer\" powers under section 11 must translate into real-world outcomes. Residents measure success simply: when we call for help, does someone actually come? I have four questions on how this will be operationalised.
First, on coordination under section 11(2)(b). Will this include cross-system risk detection mechanisms? Specifically, will this include mechanisms to detect risk across systems and agencies early? Past tragedies have shown that failures often arise not from the absence of services but from fragmented information and lack of shared visibility. We need a system that links data so that when, say, a child goes missing in one domain, the alarm rings in all.
Second, on standards, in section 11(2)(e). How do we prevent over-standardisation from suppressing local innovation? Often, ground-up charities spot risks first because they are not following a rigid, top-down template. Standardisation must raise the floor without lowering the ceiling of innovation.
Third, on geographical vulnerabilities. A rental block in Yio Chu Kang faces different pressures from, say, a Build-To-Order (BTO) in Punggol. Should NCSS not publish region-level indicators of responsiveness, instead of only national averages? A national average of \"90% satisfaction\" is of no comfort to a neighbourhood where the response time is three weeks.
Fourth, on capabilities under section 11(2)(f), the most vital capability is learning from failure. Should there not be an explicit requirement to turn every serious case review into sector-wide learning? We also need a \"near-miss\" reporting system, similar to aviation, so the whole body learns when one part fails.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill gives NCSS more authority, more responsibility and more influence over how our social service ecosystem evolves. That matters, because residents do not experience systems in theory. They experience them in moments of need. They ask simple questions: does help arrive on time? Is a vulnerable senior noticed? Is a child kept safe?
Having listened carefully to the various speeches today, there is a clear conversion in our PAP MPs' views. Members have broadly welcomed the Bill's intent to strengthen NCSS as a sector developer, while consistently emphasising shared priorities. Members have also asked for stronger governance and workforce development to go hand-in-hand with meaningful sector voice.
Accountability and data use must be match by transparency, proportionality and trust. Coordination must strengthen, not weaken, responsiveness to frontline realities, small agencies and emerging needs. It is in this collective spirit that the clarifications raised today should be considered.
These shared concerns bring us back to why this Bill matters and why its design choices matter. Authority without independence is brittle. Responsibility without transparency is hollow. Standardisation without courage is dangerous. Development without protection is meaningless. We should not pass this legislation in a vacuum. We pass it with the memory of every case where the system hesitated, fragmented or deferred when it needed to act. The names change, but the lessons do not. The cost of hesitation is life itself.
Our duty is clear. When a warning light flickers, the system must sharpen, not soften. It must escalate, not hesitate. It must protect, not disappear into administrative cracks. If we shape NCSS into a body that welcomes frank voices, values ground insight, supports escalation and learns from failure, this Bill will do more than restructure a Council. It will strengthen the safety net for every child, every senior, every caregiver and every vulnerable person in Singapore. Notwithstanding these clarifications, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Minister Masagos.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Mr Speaker, I thank the Members for their comments and support for the Bill. I hear their aspirations, their caution and I take them in good spirit. I am heartened by the care shown for the social service sector and the endorsement of NCSS' work.
Members have expressed broad support for NCSS' role as a sector developer, the value of sector membership and the need for a diverse and representative Council. I will now address the questions and clarifications that Members have raised.
Ms Lee Hui Ying, Mr Cai Yinzhou, Mr Melvin Yong and Mr David Hoe asked for clarifications on sector membership. On whom will qualify, an organisation must have the primary function of providing or directly supporting the provision of a social service in Singapore. NCSS will look at each application and assess the organisation's objectives and activities against these criteria.
Today, there are about 400 Full Council Members and close to 100 Associate Council Members. With the changes, all Full Council Members will be transitioned to become sector members. So, about 400 of them, since the criteria for Full Council membership align with those of sector membership.
Associate Council membership will be ceased. Current Associate Council members who meet the criteria are welcome to apply for sector membership.
But there may be some organisations, such as those whose primary functions do not relate to social services within Singapore, which would not qualify for sector membership. Such organisations are a subset of all Associate Council Members, and joined NCSS at a time when the membership criteria was much broader. NCSS will ease this transition, including honouring any existing support until its expiry.
On social enterprises, the Singapore Centre for Social Enterprise (raiSE), established by MSF, serves as the dedicated membership body to provide them tailored support and resources. Moving forward, if a social enterprise also wishes to be an NCSS sector member, its application will be assessed, in consultation with raiSE, on a case-by-case basis, depending on its objectives and activities.
Nevertheless, as a sector developer, NCSS will work with partners in the ecosystem regardless of their sector membership status to find solutions to our social challenges. Indeed, over the years, NCSS has been working closely with raiSE – itself a current NCSS member organisation – to build stronger enterprise capabilities in the sector for financial sustainability and partnerships between SSAs and social enterprises to better serve users.
Mr Yip, Mr Hoe and Dr Hamid Razak asked about the rejection and revocation of sector membership and appeals to the Minister for such decisions, emphasising the importance of transparency and independence of such processes. In particular, Mr Yip asked if agencies that challenge policy gaps could be misinterpreted as acting against the public interest.
I assure Members that we want to continue to have constructive conversations. In fact, we welcome diverse views and suggestions, including surfacing challenges and gaps in existing policies and programmes, that can help us strengthen the ecosystem. The aim of these powers is to ensure that organisations meet the criteria for sector membership and to safeguard the diverse yet cohesive, responsible and respectful social service sector that we have built over the years.
This is also the thinking behind the clause requiring that sector members' aims, objects and activities do not go against public interest, public order or national harmony. Similar clauses exist in other legislation.
The appeal mechanism is also precisely in place as a check and balance for NCSS' sector membership decisions. Sector membership applications will first be assessed by the Council. Appeals will only go to the Minister if an applicant disputes a decision that the Council stands by.
We agree with Mr Hoe on the importance of transparency and the appeal processes and timelines will be clearly communicated.
I will now move on to the Council-related comments. I would like to thank Members for their suggestions and comments, including Prof Kenneth Poon for sharing his personal experience as an NCSS Board Member.
Ms Elysa Chen, Mr Hoe, Ms Lee and Mr Yip asked how we can ensure diverse representation under a fully-Minister appointed Council. Unlike the previous elections system for the NCSS Board, an appointment approach gives us greater certainty that we can constitute the Council with people from various backgrounds, including candidates from organisations of different sizes and nature, and with the necessary range of skills and experiences.
We have provided that at least half of the Council, excluding the Chairperson, must come from sector members' nominations, as a clear indication of our commitment to ensure that the sector is represented on the Council. To further expand the range of perspectives, we have also proposed amendments to allow employees of sector members to be appointed onto the Council, since their expertise and experience will provide important ground perspectives, as Ms Lee also observed.
Based on our past experience with the NCSS Board, the results of elections are dependent on who chooses to run at the annual general meeting (AGM), how well-known the candidates are amongst those voting and sometimes, how influential the nominating organisation is. The shift to a fully appointed Council allows for the composition of the Council to be considered as a whole, so that it better represents the sector and has the necessary mix of skills and perspectives.
This brings me to the specific criteria and process for Council appointments, which Ms Chen, Mr Yip, Mr Cai, Ms Lee, Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim, Mr Yong and Mr Hoe asked about.
As Mr Hoe rightly pointed out, it is not desirable for every detail and criterion to be hardcoded in primary legislation, and trying to do so may introduce unnecessary rigidity that will not be helpful to NCSS functioning effectively, particularly as needs change in the future. We are working out the specific implementation details and will share more with sector members in due course.
As Prof Poon pointed out, NCSS needs broad expertise and deep sector insight to effectively steward the sector. Broadly, we will consider whether individuals have relevant experience in senior leadership, governance or social service. We would also look out for individuals with specific skillsets, like law, finance or technology. Beyond professional credentials, experience on the ground is also important.
Process-wise, the Chairperson will submit all nominations to the Minister, except for those which do not meet requirements prescribed by Regulations. These prescribed requirements cover procedural matters, such as each sector member nominating only one individual from their organisation, which would include their board members, and fully completing application forms.
As earlier shared, a Nominations Committee will be established to assist with the nominations process. To Ms Hazlina's points, the committee will comprise individuals with diverse experience, expertise and high standing in the sector. We will share details of the composition of the committee in due course.
Mr Yong and Prof Poon asked about the rationale behind providing for a range in the Council size, with an increased maximum size of 27, and how the exact size will be determined in practice. The range is comparable to that of the allowed size of other Statutory Boards that play similar roles in their sectors, like the National Arts Council and the National Heritage Board, and the eventual size will be based on the needs of the time.
Ms Chen and Ms Lee asked if the reasons for rejecting nominations or removing Council members would be communicated. Sector members will be notified of the outcome of their nominations. If there are prescribed requirements that the nominees do not meet, we may inform the sector member accordingly.
On the removal of Council members, even though the Bill provides that the Minister is not obliged to provide reasons, where appropriate, we will engage the relevant Council member in the exceptional circumstances where the Minister has to exercise the power.
Mr Yip asked about the transition for current NCSS Board and committee members. Practically, our intent is for them to serve out their current term, that is, until 31 July 2026. Mr Yip may be assured that MSF and NCSS values the work of all who serve on NCSS' committees and Board and recognises them through various platforms.
I would also like to highlight that at the end of the day, Council appointments are not the only avenue for sector voices to be heard. As sector developer, NCSS will continue to closely engage the sector, gather insights from the ground, and partner with the Government to strengthen outcomes.
In the last few years, NCSS has been organising leadership visits between MSF's and NCSS' management and SSAs, small group engagements with Board leaders, on top of large-scale engagements, workshops and clinics that are open to all NCSS member organisations. I have attended some of these engagements. And these will continue. MSF and NCSS value the views, insights and work of our ecosystem players, and will continue listening to and co-creating with the sector.
Like many Members stressed in their speeches, the key is to have processes that build trust. There is no single perfect system or process, but it will be in the conduct of each nomination and appointment, and in the everyday engagements and partnerships that NCSS forms with stakeholders in social services, that we strengthen the trust that we have built over the years.
Lastly, I want to address the most important issue, which is the impact of the changes on the users of social services, the sector and society. As Ms Denise Phua noted, this Bill will indeed strengthen NCSS' role, as sector developer, to coordinate services to provide more effective and efficient support to those in need, and raise the sector's organisational and digital capabilities. As social issues have become increasingly cross-cutting, NCSS will work closely with relevant Government agencies across different domains and leverage inter-agency platforms and mechanisms to identify and meet service users' needs holistically and in a coordinated manner.
A few Members also asked about the implications of the Bill for innovation in the sector. Ms Phua, Ms Chen, Dr Hamid, Dr Wan Rizal, Mr Hoe and Mr Yip expressed concerns about the potential impact of NCSS setting standards on sector members, especially smaller ones, as well as of the Ministerial power to issue directions to NCSS.
First, on innovation. It is in NCSS' DNA to work with the sector to incubate ideas to meet emerging needs. This will not change with this Bill. For example, NCSS recently introduced the Income OrangeAid Caregiver Support Accelerator Grant, in partnership with Income Insurance Limited, to encourage SSAs and their partners to develop solutions to strengthen support for caregivers in Singapore – an important area of need that we are seeing.
NCSS also supports innovation in the sector, for example, through the National Design Challenge, a platform where anyone can step forward to design solutions for social issues. NCSS also supports SSAs in measuring the effectiveness of their programmes through the SG60 Towards Sustainability Fund, which provides funding and capability building support.
NCSS will continue to take a principled and risk-proportionate approach to governance, to promote innovation and reduce red tape, while maintaining high standards of accountability. The need to meet standards and obligations set by NCSS is not new to current Council Members. Broadly similar obligations already exist in subsidiary legislation under the NCSS Act today and are intended to protect service users, for accountability and to uplift the sector. For example, today, Full Council Members must submit copies of their annual report, audited accounts and balance sheet to NCSS yearly.
This is important, given that many of these organisations, who will become sector members after the amendments, receive donations and public funds and must steward these resources appropriately. NCSS is always mindful of the compliance load on member organisations, particularly small ones, when new standards and obligations are introduced.
We thank Mr Hoe, Ms Phua and Dr Hamid for their suggestions to take a proportionate approach and provide sufficient time and capacity-building support for sector members to meet any standards imposed. NCSS will support and engage sector members when implementing any new standards and do so in a practical manner, including providing relevant resources and training, as it has been doing.
In response to Mr Yong's query on the functions and governance of ComChest, the amendments do not change the fundraising function of ComChest. The updated governance provisions apply to the conduct and management of ComChest, rather than grant recipients. Besides impact on organisations, Ms Lee, Dr Rizal and Ms Hazlina asked about the impact on professionals. It is indeed both MSF's and NCSS' intent to support our social service professionals and we have been doing so.
In recent years, NCSS has embarked on several initiatives to address sector manpower needs. This includes funding SSAs through the Transformation Sustainability Scheme to enhance their people management practices, redesigning jobs and augmenting manpower with volunteers and technology.
We share Dr Rizal's views that worker well-being is important and have rolled out various initiatives to support our sector professionals. For example, NCSS introduced the Sabbatical Leave Scheme, which offers eligible professionals a chance to rejuvenate with 10 weeks of paid sabbatical leave.
Moving forward, MSF and NCSS will be setting up a Protection Practitioners Care Fund to implement capability building and well-being initiatives for protection practitioners. More details will be shared later this year.
Ensuring good jobs in the sector will continue to be part of NCSS' work as sector developer and we will work with all stakeholders, including sector members, unions and MOH to ensure there are quality jobs and clear salary guidelines in the sector. On the Ministerial power to issue directions, this is part of the governance framework for all Statutory Boards and there is already a broadly similar power under the NCSS Act today. This is not intended to interfere with NCSS' exercise of its functions or limit NCSS from representing feedback from the sector. We value the critical function that NCSS plays in reflecting the sector's voice, to ensure that our policies are grounded in operational needs and realities.
Mr Yong asked about the channels to provide feedback on NCSS's administrative decisions. Both MSF and NCSS have open channels for organisations to provide feedback and we are committed to ensure that our policies and programmes are effective in meeting their outcomes.
Finally, I note Members have given useful inputs and suggestion that we will take into consideration when drafting the subsidiary legislation as well as operational procedures to support the implementation of the amendments. I also ask for Members' understanding that I will not be able to address some of Members' other queries and comments that go beyond the remit of this Bill.
Mr Speaker, I will now conclude. This Bill has been several years in the making. NCSS first formally engaged the sector on the proposed amendments at its AGM in July 2024. Since then, there have been many further engagement sessions, which have helped shape the Bill before us today. Many Members, including Ms Phua, Dr Hamid and Ms Chen, highlighted the importance of preserving the sector's voice and of continuing to engage the sector and ensure coordinated action across stakeholders. To echo Mr Xie Yao Quan's observation, this is indeed what MSF and NCSS have been doing, including through the consultation process for this Bill and will continue to do.
This Bill strengthens NCSS' ability to act as the bridge for sector feedback to be translated into policy. By formalising NCSS' expanded role as Sector Developer, NCSS is better able to consult more widely, identify ground needs and closely partner and coordinate with stakeholders to develop the social service sector. With this Bill, NCSS will be well positioned to lead the sector to achieve better outcomes and improve the quality of life of users of our social services.
I thank Members for your support for this Bill. Mr Speaker, I seek to move.
Mr Speaker: Are there any clarifications for the Minister? None. Okay.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)]
[(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M]. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill considered in Committee. (proc text)]
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
The Chairman: The citation here \"2025\" will be changed to \"2026\" as indicated in the Order Paper Supplement.
[(proc text) Clauses 1 to 18 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill reported with amendment. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Question for Third Reading put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: We have been in the Chamber for over four hours, so I propose to take a break now. I will suspend the Sitting and will assume the Chair at 4.30 pm. Order, order.
Sitting accordingly suspended
at 4.12 pm until 4.30 pm.
Sitting resumed at 4.30 pm.
[Deputy Speaker (Mr Christopher de Souza) in the Chair]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"BP","content":"[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: The Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth.
The Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr David Neo): Mr Deputy Speaker, I move, \"That the Bill be now read a Second time\".
Sir, the Singapore Sports Council Act was enacted in 1973 to establish the Singapore Sports Council, also known as Sport Singapore (SportSG), as the statutory body responsible for promoting and developing sports in Singapore. For over five decades, SportSG has led the development of a vibrant sporting culture in Singapore. Together, we have achieved significant progress in two areas; first, participation in sports; and second, sporting excellence.
In the last decade, SportSG has achieved a significant increase in participation in sports in a number of ways. First, in partnership with the Ministry of Education (MOE), we have effectively embedded sports programmes across mainstream and special education schools and expanded the outreach of sports to the young very significantly.
The Sports Education Programme, which promotes development of skills and sports knowledge of students, their active participation of sports, and promotion of team spirit and character building is now offered in more than 320 schools, up from 187 just five years ago.
The School Sports Partnership programme, which allows more children to be exposed to multi-sport experiences at introductory and intermediate levels regardless of their skills and abilities, has grown from 19 in 2020 to 92 schools today.
These programmes expose our youths to diverse sporting experiences, nurtures a love for sports and builds a strong foundation for active and healthy lives.
Outside of schools, we engage our youths through ActiveSG's academies and clubs. These offer structured sports programmes for our children to pursue their sporting interests and form bonds and networks with peers beyond schools. And together with our affiliated partners' programmes, we reach out to about 15,000 regular participants each year. And we want that passion for sport to continue beyond the school years. To help them stay connected with sports for life, the ActiveSG Sport Interest Groups provide avenues for Singaporeans to continue to pursue their sporting interests together. This also allows them to form new friendships and meet others of different ages and abilities to play sport together regularly. Today, SportSG offers more than 3,000 interest group programmes annually, reaching close to 30,000 participants.
Second, we have increased access to sports through our expansion of sports infrastructure. In addition to rejuvenating and building new ActiveSG Sport Centres with an expanded offering of sports facilities, we have also built more sports facilities closer to residents' homes through Sport-in-Precinct programmes. Where we can, we have integrated them with government facilities in our heartlands to provide Singaporeans with a one-stop facility to live, work and play, such as at Our Tampines Hub, Bukit Canberra and Heartbeat at Bedok. We have also rejuvenated several others such as the Delta Sport Centre and ActiveSG Sport Parks at Teck Ghee and Bedok North.
With convenient access to sports programmes at facilities such as gyms and swimming complexes, Singaporeans' visitorship to ActiveSG facilities has increased by more than 50% from 13.2 million in 2014 to about 20.8 million in 2025. More than 1.9 million Singapore Citizens and Permanent Residents have also signed up to the new web-based MyActiveSG+ platform for facility and programme booking since its launch in 2024.
Through these efforts, three in four Singaporeans aged 13 and above now participate in sport and fitness activities weekly, up from just one in two a decade ago. This is a significant jump. Many more Singaporeans now adopt active and healthy lifestyles. And this is a big step in our effort to bring our health-span closer to our life-span, and to help Singaporeans live longer, healthier lives.
Beyond physical fitness activities, mind sports and e-sports have also seen strong growth in participation and recognition both here in Singapore and globally. Take chess for instance. We hosted the World Chess Championship for the first time in 2024. In schools, around 1,700 students competed at the 75th National Schools Individual Chess Championship in the same year. That is about a 20% increase compared to 2022, which was when it was last held.
As for e-sports, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) region is one of the world's fastest growing e-sports markets. The upcoming 2026 Asian Games will also feature an increased number of 11 medals for e-sport titles, up from seven at the 2022 Asian Games. So, in line with young Singaporeans' widening interest in e-sports, we partnered the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to host the inaugural Olympic Esports Week in 2023. Our Team Singapore e-sport athletes also achieved medal success at the Southeast Asian Games (SEA Games) and other competitions such as at the World Taekwondo Virtual Championships.
Sir, these trends reflect the contemporary sporting landscape where players, competitors and supporters are no longer limited to the traditional disciplines of physical sporting activities.
In terms of sporting excellence, we have progressively strengthened our High Performance Sport (HPS) ecosystem to nurture more Team Singapore athletes and help them realise their full sporting potential to perform better in more sports.
Just last month, we celebrated Team Singapore's achievements at the SEA Games in Thailand. We fielded our largest SEA Games contingent of more than 900 athletes competing across nearly 50 sports, with more than half competing for the first time. And our athletes did very well. They won a record number of 202 medals, with 52 folds.
At the games, our athletes also achieved many firsts.\tCalvin Quek and Avvir Tham won our first gold in 60 years in the 400 metres hurdles and diving respectively. Marissa Hafezan won Singapore's first SEA Games karate medal since 2011 and first gold medal since 1993. Our men's 3x3 basketball team won a historic silver medal with a young team averaging just 21 years old. And I am also happy to report that about half of our athletes who competed for the first time won medals, including some of our youngest Team Singapore athletes, 12-year-old sailor Anya Zahedi and 14-year-old swimmer Julia Yeo. Julia was just sitting behind Nominated Member Dr Kenneth Goh and myself, and cheering on the Team Singapore athletes one moment, and the next moment she was in the water. Well, she set her personal best in the backstroke during the womens' 4x100 metres medley relay, and together with her teammates Ting Wen, Jing Wen and Letitia, broke the meet record and won the Gold medal. And all this while she was swimming in borrowed goggles and swimsuit. Imagine if she had brought her own!
And it was Singaporeans' support for our athletes at the games that made all the difference. Whether it was Singaporeans who were supporting the team from back home or Singaporeans who went to Thailand to cheer on the team, like our Team Nila volunteers.
Whether it was cheering the mens' water polo team through their dominant wins in the pool, enroute to their 29th gold medal or our netball teams' heartbreaking three-point loss in the finals, Singaporeans stood with Team Singapore through both victories and defeats.
Our supporters embodied the very essence of the Singapore Spirit. On the fields and in the stadiums, we were united as one voice, cheering as one nation for Team Singapore.
As our Team Nila volunteer Mr Andy Toh aptly put, the journey with Team Nila in Bangkok was both poignant and fulfilling, marked by the emotional highs and lows of witnessing athletes' triumphs and disappointments. He was deeply moved by our athletes' grace, fortitude and determination to bring glory and honour to Singapore, and felt privileged to be able to contribute with fellow Team Nila volunteers.
And with Singaporeans' strong support, Team Singapore's average SEA Games gold medal tally has increased significantly over the past two decades. From around 20 in the 2000s to about 40 in the early 2010s, to more than 50 today.
At the highest levels, our athletes have also showed that we have what it takes to do well at the Olympics and the Paralympics. In Paris 2024, our Team Singapore contingent came home with two golds, a silver and a bronze. They also broke two national records and had two personal bests.
We have also stepped up to host top-tier international sporting competitions, testing our capabilities against stronger and more established nations, and rallying our nation's support for our athletes.
For close to three months in 2025, we worked to host the World Aquatics Championships, World Aquatics Masters Championships and the World Para Swimming Championships. We welcomed over 9,000 international athletes, including the world's top swimmers to Singapore across these events. We saw outstanding performances from our swimmers like Yip Pin Xiu and Gan Ching Hwee who achieved medal success and broke national records.
Our TeamSG para-swimmer Wong Zhi Wei fondly recounted his experience at the World Para Swimming Championships in September last year. He said, and I quote, \"I was really grateful for the crowd because every time I came up to breathe I could hear them say \"Go!\" and I could hear a lot of them shouting my name so I am really glad for the support that I have especially for this meet that is held on home ground.\"
Through the years, our athletes and para-athletes do more than just make Singapore proud. They inspire dreams.\tThey show our youth what is possible when they dare to dream. And we are committed to nurture more youths to turn their dreams into reality.
Next week, our contingent of 37 Team Singapore para-athletes across 11 sports will participate in the ASEAN Para Games and I invite all Singaporeans to join me in supporting Team Singapore to make Singapore proud.
Our achievements so far, both in participation in sports and in sporting excellence, gives us confidence that we are on the right track. And we want to do better.
First, we want to continue to build up our high-performance sports systems to nurture our athletes to their fullest potential. For our athletes, we are investing in a new home for Team Singapore as part of the Kallang Alive Masterplan. We will integrate all elements of our hardware – our high performance sporting development and sports science system – under one roof for athletes to stay, train, study and compete, supported by the High Performance Sport Institute and the National Sports Associations (NSAs).
We will also continue to improve our software, to start organising ourselves around an integrated structure to enhance the end-to-end development of our athletes from youth to adult, so that our athletes can be supported holistically. And we will continue to refine our sporting policies and programmes to ensure that athletes have the right infrastructure, adequate resources and multiple opportunities to excel. This reflects our concerted, strategic and long-term commitment to build a sustainable and thriving sports ecosystem for all our athletes.
Second, we will continue to make sport more accessible and inclusive for all Singaporeans. We announced the refreshed Disability Sports Master Plan (DSMP) in 2024. The DSMP lays out our vision to build an inclusive and vibrant sporting landscape where persons of all abilities will have ample opportunities to participate in sports. One of the key moves is the launch of the Enabling Sports Fund to support community-led programmes that make sport accessible, inclusive and meaningful for persons with disabilities.
Similarly, we want to make an effort to leverage sports to develop youths from disadvantaged backgrounds. SportSG's philanthropic arm, SportCares, will continue to work with key partners to leverage sport initiatives and programmes to deepen its outreach to vulnerable communities. For instance, Saturday Night Lights (SNL), a flagship SportCares programme since 2013, has served more than 1,000 youths-at-risk or from disadvantaged households.
These youths develop important life skills such as respect, discipline and resilience through SNL's regular football training and are given a safe and structured space to grow, with coaches acting as their mentors. We will also continue to expand opportunities to students in our schools to access and excel in different sports.
Today, programmes, such as Strategic Partnership Co-curricular Activities (SP-CCAs) allow students keen to participate in sports not offered as in their schools to do so. These include athletics, canoeing, hockey and water polo. We will continue to work with MOE to expand such opportunities for our young.
We are also working to uplift standards so that Singaporeans can take part in sports safely. For instance, SportSG introduced the National Registry of Exercise Professionals (NREP) in 2023, to build capabilities in the physical fitness sector.
Registered exercise professionals under NREP are certified in areas, such as Standard First Aid and Safe Sport, in addition to their fitness or exercise certifications. Registered exercise professionals under NREP are also certified in Standard First Aid with Automated External Defibrillator (AED), Safe Sport, Basic Exercise Science or equivalent, so they can better serve Singaporeans.
SportSG is also working with industry partners and Government agencies to establish a Code of Practice for gyms and fitness studios. This aims to help align best practices in areas, such as equipment and facility management, among other safety considerations for better and more consistent standards across the industry.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have described how our sporting landscape has evolved over the years and become an integrated part of Singaporeans' daily lives. I have also set out what we plan to do going ahead.
To support these plans, we need to update the Singapore Sports Council Act, which has not been significantly updated since its enactment in 1973. This is to empower SportSG to more effectively administer its role in driving all Singaporeans to live better through sport. Hence, we are seeking to make the following amendments in this Bill.
First, to provide holistic education and career support to our Team Singapore athletes, clause 6(h) of the Bill inserts new section 8(k) and (o). These provisions provide an enhanced mandate for SportSG to establish institutions to develop and train national athletes. This includes overseeing their sporting activities and working with MOE on the Singapore Sports School's (SSP's) academic curricula.
Specifically, new section 8(k) provides SportSG with the mandate to establish an institution formed that will be formed through consolidating the SSP with the High Performance Sports Institute. This is a key step to implement our plans announced at the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) Committee of Supply (COS) debate in 2025 and will enhance our end-to-end support for our athletes.
SSP will retain its brand and identity and serve as the educational arm of our HPS system. This consolidation will strengthen our system and it will stand us in good stead for future Major Games, especially when we host the SEA Games and ASEAN Para Games in 2029.
We are also laying the groundwork early for the relocation of SSP to Kallang, bringing the school together with sports science facilities, sports medicine centres, national training centres and national sports associations under one roof as the home of a new Team Singapore. More details on this will be provided at our 2026 COS debate.
Second, to uplift standards of the sports industry, clause 6(h) of the Bill inserts a new section 8(m) and (n) to recognise the leadership role of SportSG in raising the capabilities and safety in the sports sector. This includes establishing and maintaining quality standards and codes of practice for coaching, equipment, facilities as well as the relevant accreditation systems.
With the growth in national participation in sports and physical fitness activities, we need to strengthen SportSG's mandate to build capabilities in the sports industry. Rather than becoming a regulator of the sports industry and taking the approach of regulatory enforcement, SportSG will continue to exercise leadership in the sport sector by encouraging the adoption of industry best practices. This includes but is not limited to its existing policies and initiatives, such as the Safe Sport Commission, National Registry of Coaches (NROC) and NREP.
Third, to strengthen disability sports and support our effort towards greater inclusivity, clause 6(b) of the Bill seeks to amend section 8(d) of the Act to recognise the Singapore National Paralympic Council (SNPC) as SportSG's key partner, the same way Singapore National Olympic Council (SNOC) is recognised today. This is in line with the refreshed DSMP where we have also expanded access and opportunities for persons of all abilities to participate in sport.
Next, to support Singaporeans' diverse sporting aspirations, clause 2 of the Bill seeks to amend section 2 of the Act to define \"sports\" to include mind sports and e-sports and to define \"mind sport\" as a competitive game based on intellectual skill such as chess or bridge.
Clause 6(a) of the Bill seeks to amend section 8(a) of the Act to expand the functions of SportSG to expressly include the planning and promotion of physical fitness activities, in addition to sports, for both competitive and recreational purposes.
Clause 6(c) to (f) seeks to amend section 8(f) to (i) to expand the functions in those provisions to include physical fitness activities. Specifically, cause 6(c) amends section 8(f) to specify that research and study in sports and physical fitness activities includes sports science, sports medicine and other subjects that are related to sports and physical fitness activities.
The field of sports science has advanced significantly, and it is now integral to public health initiatives and high-performance sport development both locally and abroad. Active Health programmes, grounded in sports and exercise science, will also play a larger role in helping our seniors lead longer, stronger and healthier lives.
These amendments signal Singapore's increased commitment to sports science and sports medicine as foundational elements in supporting our nation's next bound in sports and physical fitness activities.
Collectively, these moves support Singaporeans' diverse sporting aspirations and is consistent with the wider local and international developments, including at Major Games.
The gameplay and disciplines of mind sports and e-sports will continue to evolve. Therefore, the updated definition of sports in the Bill takes a balanced and future-ready approach to support newer and more varied forms of sporting participation and sporting excellence by Singaporeans. SportSG will calibrate its support for these activities and sports based on their specific needs, governance standards and contributions to national sporting objectives.
Lastly, the Bill includes and introduces technical amendments to align the Act to the key moves that I have discussed.
Clause 4 of the Bill amends section 4 of the Act to increase the maximum size of SportSG's Board from 15 members to 25 members, so that more expertise could be brought onboard as needed. Clause 7 of the Bill sets out a detailed list of updates to the powers of SportSG under section 9 of the Act, to align them with the expanded functions of SportSG in section 8 of the Act.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, the Bill is an important enabler in driving Singapore's sporting culture and for our national sport ecosystem to be inclusive, dynamic and future-ready. It reaffirms that sport is for everyone, regardless of age or ability and our effort for every Singaporean to live better through sport. It states, in one voice, our support for Team Singapore athletes and our effort to nurture every athlete to fulfil their fullest sporting potential. We will continue to work closely with partners in the sport ecosystem and industry to ensure smooth implementation of this Bill. Sir, I seek to move.
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Alex Yam.
Mr Alex Yam (Marsiling-Yew Tee): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Bill. This Bill touches on a wide and interconnected sporting ecosystem in Singapore and many of my colleagues will be speaking on its various dimensions.
Ms Gho Sze Kee and Ms Valerie Lee will address how we strengthen Team Singapore and disability sport. Dr Charlene Chen, Mr David Hoe and Ms Elysa Chen will speak on mind sports and e-sports, as well as the importance of governance and accreditation. Ms Poh Li San will speak on the importance of board diversity in our sports associations, while Dr Hamid Razak will address the need for a calibrated and disciplined approach to resource allocation. Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Lee Hong Chuang will take a broader view across the Bill's themes. And closing off will be the Deputy Chair of our Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC), Ms Joan Pereira, who will close off the bench's contributions to this debate.
Collectively, these contributions will reflect the breadth of the Bill. My remarks today will therefore focus on framing the overall direction of travel, before my colleagues go deeper into the specific policy areas where their suggestions and observations will be made.
Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill reflects how sport in Singapore has evolved over the last decade and, more importantly, how it must continue to evolve if it is to serve not just our medal ambitions but also our people, our social compact and our national identity.
At its very core, this Bill recognises a simple truth, that sport today is not just confine to podiums, pitches or to the playing fields. It is increasingly also about inclusion, health, character, opportunity and lifelong participation.
The proposed amendments give SportSG the clarity, mandate and flexibility to meet these realities responsibly.
I will, therefore, focus my remarks on four broad areas: inclusion and disability sport; the broadening of what we recognise as sport; standards and professionalism in our sports ecosystem; and finally, the holistic development of our athletes across sporting and educational pathways.
First, on disability sport and inclusion. Mr Deputy Speaker, in my view, one of the most important shifts reflected in this Bill is the formal recognition of the SNPC as a key partner of SportSG. This is alongside the SNOC and the NSAs. This is not merely symbolic. It is a signal of intent.
The refreshed DSMP made it clear that inclusion is not an adjunct to our sporting system. It must be integral to it. Athletes with disabilities do not exist on the margins of Team Singapore. They are Team Singapore.
So, therefore, formal recognition of the SNPC strengthens accountability, coordination and partnership across the entire sporting ecosystem. It enables clearer alignment in athlete development, competition pathways and event organisation. It also affirms that disability sport deserves the same strategic attention, resourcing discipline and long-term planning as able-bodied sport.
I would therefore encourage SportSG, as it operationalises this partnership, to continue investing not only in elite pathways, but also in grassroots access. This includes adaptive facilities, trained coaches and community-level programmes that enable persons with disabilities to engage in sport early and confidently. Inclusion succeeds not when we create parallel systems, but when our mainstream systems are designed with inclusion in mind from the very beginning.
Secondly, on supporting diverse sporting aspirations. The Bill updates the statutory understanding of what sport is and in doing so, reflects how Singaporeans actually live, train and compete today. Beyond competitive and recreational sport, the Bill explicitly empowers SportSG to promote physical fitness activities, mind sports and e-sports. This is a pragmatic and necessary evolution.
Physical fitness activities are foundational to public health, especially in an ageing society like Singapore. Programmes under ActiveSG, as well as local efforts, such as the North West Healthy Living Festival, recognise that many Singaporeans may not aspire to competitive sport, but still seek structured, social and motivating ways to stay active.
As an example, the North West Brisk Walking Club has grown into, what is perhaps, Singapore's largest and most consistent community fitness movements, with a strong membership base of 70,000 spanning seniors, working adults and families. What has also been particularly encouraging is its recent evolution, across all the five Community Development Councils (CDCs).
With the launch of CDC Walking Trails, the intentional design of routes to be more accessible, scenic, gamified and digitally supported, we have seen, since its launch in August 2025, a broadening participation of over 85,000, including many younger residents and first-time exercisers. When we invest thoughtfully in simple, inclusive physical activity, we lower the barriers to participation and bring more Singaporeans into physically active lifestyles.
Mind sports, such as chess, bridge and e-sports, reflect cognitive skills, discipline and international competitiveness. Singapore, as the Minister has described, has hosted various events, such as the World Chess Championships and the Olympic Esports Week as well. These, to me, are not fringe pursuits. They are globally recognised domains of excellence as well.
At the same time, I do appreciate the Bill's careful calibration that recognising the sports may not automatically mean equal funding or blanket support. SportSG retains the discretion to assess governance standards, athlete pathways and alignment with national objectives. This, to me, is important. We should be inclusive without being indiscriminate. Public resources must continue to be stewarded carefully and transparently.
I would, however, ask SportSG to continue communicating clearly with the public on how decisions are made, especially when certain popular activities may not receive immediate support, because transparency helps us to build trust, even when not all aspirations can be funded immediately.
Third, Mr Deputy Speaker, on uplifting standards across the sports industry. Because as participation grows, standards matter more, not less.
The Bill provides SportSG with the mandate to establish and maintain quality standards and codes of practice for coaching, equipment, facilities and accreditation systems. I support this direction. Parents entrust their children to coaches. Athletes entrust their bodies and careers to training systems. Recreational participants as well deserve safe environments and competent instruction. Standards protect not only performance but more importantly the people who participate.
I note the assurance that SportSG does not seek to become a regulator at this point in time and that standards will not, at this moment, be legally binding. This calibrated approach is sensible. It allows the sector to mature, to professionalise and to align voluntarily around best practices. Initiatives, such as the Safe Sport Commission, the NROC and the NREP, have already raised confidence across the ecosystem. I would encourage SportSG to continue engaging multiple stakeholders, especially smaller clubs and independent coaches, so that standards uplift rather than exclude. Because professionalism should be enabling, not burdensome.
Over time, Mr Deputy Speaker, as the sector continues to mature, there may be merit in reviewing whether certain baseline protections should become mandatory. But the present approach, to me, strikes the right balance between leadership and flexibility.
Fourth and lastly, on holistic education and career support for our athletes. Mr Deputy Speaker, perhaps the most far-reaching amendment in this Bill is the empowerment of SportSG to establish and oversee institutions that develop our national athletes across both sporting and academic domains.
The consolidation of the SSP and the High Performance Sport Institute into a single entity represents a significant shift in how we think about our athlete development. For too long, young athletes have been forced to navigate parallel systems – one focused on sporting excellence; another on academic progression. Integration therefore allows us to design truly athlete-centric pathways, where education and sports reinforce rather than compete with each other.
The SSP retaining its identity as a school is important. Education must remain a pillar, not as a concession. But strengthening its role as the education arm of our high-performance system ensures that sporting ambition does not come at the expense of future options.
The planned relocation of SSP to Kallang, alongside national training centres, sports science and sports medicine facilities, is particularly promising. It signals a whole-of-ecosystem approach to Team Singapore development, from youth to elite levels. We will miss the school in the North West district, but we wish it well when it does relocate.
I do look forward to further details at the COS, particularly on how athlete welfare, dual career planning and post-sporting transitions will be strengthened under this consolidated model. Our duty is not just to produce champions but to ensure that those who wear the Singapore crest proudly emerge with dignity, resilience and viable futures beyond sport.
Mr Deputy Speaker, taken together, these amendments reflect a maturing sporting nation in Singapore; a nation that values inclusion alongside excellence; participation alongside performance; standards alongside accessibility; and ambition alongside with a caring ecosystem.
SportSG's growing role must continue to be exercised with humility, partnership, accountability and transparency. Sport thrives not by central control but by enabling communities, athletes, volunteers as well as professionals to flourish together. I support this Bill because it provides the right statutory foundation for the next phase of Singapore sports, a phase that is more inclusive, more diverse, more professional and more humane. One team, one dream, one Singapore. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Fadli Fawzi.
Mr Fadli Fawzi (Aljunied): Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the intent of the Bill. The sporting landscape has evolved significantly since the Act was first passed in 1973 and it is only right that our legislative framework reflects modern realities. It is a pragmatic step forward to expand the definition of \"sport\" to include mind sports and e-sports and explicitly incorporate physical fitness activities.
However, as we expand the remit and powers of the Singapore Sports Council, which is now renamed SportSG, we must ensure that these changes are fiscally sustainable and do not inadvertently stifle the local private sector. I have two broad areas of clarification for the Minister: one related to funding dilution and alternative funding streams, and the other to the manufacture of sporting and fitness equipment.
The expansion of SportSG's functions to include e-sports and mind sports is a significant undertaking. These are rapidly growing fields that require specialised infrastructure, coaching and international participation. Does the Government plan to increase SportSG's budget to account for these new categories? My concern is that if SportSG's budget remains stagnant, we risk diluting the financial support currently available to athletes involved in traditional sports. We must ensure that a \"win\" for e-sports does not come at the cost of a \"loss\" for other programmes, such as track and field or swimming.
In light of this, would it be prudent to expand the scope of section 8(d) of the principal Act to explicitly allow SportSG to enter into strategic partnerships with commercial entities and other organisations? By leveraging on private sector funding, SportSG can alleviate the burden on the public purse.
It goes without saying that athlete training is very expensive, as we can see from the experiences of our own Olympic medallists. To support Joseph Schooling's training in the United States, his parents – Colin and May Yim Schooling – had to spend more than $1 million, including selling a house in Perth and cashing out an endowment plan. Maximilian Maeder estimated that the cost of training and competing at his level to be around €250,000 a year. He was supported by a three-year sponsorship agreement with local beverage company, Yeo Hiap Seng, or better known as Yeo's, and the Ng Teng Fong Charitable Foundation, demonstrating how corporate sponsors and external partners can help to chip in to groom more elite athletes for Singapore.
I hope that the Ministry and SportSG can develop comprehensive strategies to institutionalise the role of corporate sponsorship in funding athlete training and expand the Sports Excellence Programme (spex) Schemes to support high-performing athletes. We need a sustainable model where the state is not the sole benefactor but a facilitator for private sector investment in our sporting talent.
In addition to the funding perspective, for e-sports specifically, the e-sport ecosystem is unique because the \"arenas\", namely the games themselves, are intellectual property owned by private publishers. To run programmes or tournaments, SportSG will necessitate a different level of commercial engagement than traditional sports. How does SportSG intend to navigate these proprietary hurdles?
Mr Deputy Speaker, the Bill will retain section 8(k) of the principal Act as Section 8(l), which allows SportSG to \"to prepare, manufacture and supply any equipment and items used for sports or physical fitness activities\". I would like to ask the Minister to clarify whether SportSG has previously used these powers to manufacture equipment and if not, what is the intention for SportSG to retain these powers?
Traditionally, the Government procures from the private sector to stimulate the economy and benefit from market competition. Is there a specific gap in the market that SportSG is trying to fill?
In addition, the new section 8(m) will allow SportSG \"to establish and maintain codes of practice or conduct, guidelines or standards in relation to any equipment, items and facilities used for sports or physical fitness activities.\" This creates a potential conflict of interest. If SportSG is both the regulator in setting the standards and the supplier in manufacturing the equipment, how do we ensure a level playing field with the private sector? How can we avoid a situation where SportSG sets the standards that unfairly disadvantage private competitors?
While I support the promotion of physical fitness, I believe the Government should be a catalyst rather than a competitor. If SportSG begins manufacturing fitness equipment at scale, it could inadvertently crowd out local retailers and manufacturers who operate on thin margins. I hope the Minister can provide assurances that these new powers will be used judiciously and only when the private sector is unable or unwilling to provide the necessary equipment.
In summary, while I welcome the modernisation of SportSG's remit, we must be wary of over-extension. I hope that the Minister can clarify how the Ministry will continue to increase support for our athletes and whether leveraging private sector resources is an active consideration and explain how it intends to use SportSG's powers to regulate and manufacture sports equipment. Mr Deputy Speaker, notwithstanding these clarifications, I support the Bill.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Dr Hamid Razak.
Dr Hamid Razak (West Coast-Jurong West): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill 2025 and I would like to declare my interest as a committee member of the Singapore Hockey Federation.
The Bill reflects an important recognition that the meaning of sport has evolved in today's society. Sport is no longer confined to traditional physical competition alone. It encompasses physical fitness, high-performance sport, community participation, mind sports and increasingly, e-sports. In fact, aside from the Edusave Merit Bursary Award ceremony in my constituency, the other event that attracted so many youths to participate was the e-sports carnival. In this respect, the amendments before us are timely and reflect the lived realities of how Singaporeans engage with sports and physical activity.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I welcome the expanded definition of \"sports\" to include mind sports and e-sports, as well as the explicit inclusion of physical fitness activities within the Council's functions. This reflects a broader and more inclusive understanding of sport – one that recognises its role not only in elite competition but also in public health, mental well-being and social cohesion.
I have seen first-hand many e-sports groups in my constituency and the role they play, not just in the expanded definition of sports but also in its innate ability to bring people, particularly our youths, together in a productive and positive way to hone and pit their skills against one another, to build communities and deep networks. They were, however, usually hampered by a lack of resources and funding, in part because they were measured against the frameworks used for traditional sports.
By including such new sports under the Council's mandate, the Bill gives them an opportunity to blossom and flourish under a focus on financing and talent development, while allowing them to develop their own frameworks with the Council.
In addition, by extending the Council's mandate to planning and promoting physical fitness activities, the Bill strengthens SportSG's ability to support national priorities, such as preventive health, active ageing and lifelong participation in sport. This aligns well with our broader efforts to encourage healthier lifestyles and to reduce long-term healthcare costs.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I also support the expanded functions and powers of the Council, particularly in areas such as research in sports science and sports medicine, the establishment of standards and codes of practice, and the provision of educational and career support for active and retired sportspersons.
On that note, this Bill is timely as the aspect of the proposed legislation comes on the back of the recently concluded SEA Games in Thailand where Minister earlier said the Team Singapore did commendably well in several sports, despite some challenges.
We can see from the public discourse, involving members of the sporting fraternity but engulfing the wider public too, that Singapore expects and desires more for sports. We have seen enough in the past decade that our athletes can reach the very top of their fields with the right support, perseverance and opportunities. We can certainly do more to support them.
Athletes today face increasingly complex demands – balancing training, education, competition and eventual transition out of sport. The explicit recognition of career and educational support in the Act is an important signal that we value not just sporting excellence, but the long-term well-being of our sportspersons as individuals.
The provision allowing the Council to establish institutions or entities for the development and training of sportspersons, including oversight of their academic progression and curricula with the approval of MOE, also reflects a more integrated and holistic approach to the development of our athletes.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I note as well the increase in the maximum number of Council members and the corresponding adjustment to the quorum requirements. This should provide flexibility to ensure that the Council has access to a broader range of expertise, including in emerging areas such as e-sports, sports science and physical fitness promotion, while still maintaining sound governance and decision-making processes.
While I am broadly supportive of the Bill, I would like to raise two points for consideration.
First, on the inclusion of mind sports and e-sports. While their recognition under the Act is appropriate and forward-looking, it will be important to maintain some clarity of purpose and proportionality in how resources, funding and institutional attention are allocated.
Traditional sports, community sports, school sports and disability sports continue to play a critical role in fostering physical health, teamwork, resilience and social integration. As new sports such as e-sports grow in prominence, may I seek the assurance of the Minister that the Council will ensure that their development complements rather than crowds out existing sporting pathways, especially those that promote physical activity and broad-based participation.
Clear policy frameworks and differentiated strategies may help ensure that each category of sport is supported in a way that reflects its own distinct objectives and value to society.
Secondly, I would like to touch on the Council's expanded powers relating to the establishment of standards, accreditation and the manufacture or supply of sports and physical fitness equipment.
These powers surely can help raise professionalism, safety and quality across the sector. However, I would like to caution that their exercise should be calibrated and consultative, particularly where community clubs, volunteers, coaches and small operators are concerned. In particular, many in the new sports segments may still be developing and finding their feet and they may lack the track-record, experience, capabilities and resources at the same levels of more established sports organisations.
Over-regulation or overly rigid standards, if applied too uniformly, may inadvertently increase compliance burdens or even discourage grassroots initiatives. Therefore, may I seek the assurance of the Minister if the Council would adopt a graduated, risk-based approach, with appropriate consultation, transition periods and guidance – so that standards uplift the sector without stifling participation or innovation.
Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, more broadly, as SportSG's mandate expands, it may be useful to continue strengthening partnerships with schools, community organisations, disability sports bodies and private sector operators. Sport is most effective when it is embedded within communities and when national strategy is complemented by local ownership and ground-up energy. Sports in Singapore should always be accessible to all and not just the mandate of the elite professionals. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Tamil, please.
(In Tamil): Hon Deputy Speaker, when the great poet Mahakavi Bharathiyar sang \"Run and play, child\" he celebrated the joy and freedom of sports.
Starting with childhood and throughout life, sports strengthen us physically and mentally.
This Bill fortifies the belief that sports should be attainable by all despite age, skill or whatever one's background may be.
I wholeheartedly welcome this effort that brings communities together towards a common ground that fosters sports.
(In English): This Bill represents a thoughtful and necessary update to the Singapore Sports Council Act. It equips Sport Singapore with a broader mandate, modern tools and clearer authority to support sport, physical fitness and athlete development in a changing landscape. I raise my observations and clarifications to ensure that as we expand the scope of sport policy, we do so in a way that remains inclusive, balanced and anchored in the long-term interests of Singaporeans. With these remarks, I support the Bill, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik.
Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik (Sengkang): Mr Deputy Speaker, before I address the Bill, I wish to begin by congratulating our athletes who represented Singapore at the 2025 SEA Games. They competed with heart, dedication and unwavering commitment to excellence. Every athlete who wore our national colours deserves our recognition and gratitude. They trained countless hours, made personal sacrifices and gave their absolute best for Singapore. To them I say, \"Thank you. You have made us proud\".
Yet, Mr Deputy Speaker, pride in our athletes' efforts must be accompanied by honest reflection on our sporting ecosystem. While our athletes competed admirably, our overall performance at the 2025 Games raises important questions about whether we are providing them with the support, infrastructure and strategic direction they need to succeed.
Singapore's medal tally and rankings demonstrate that despite investments over the years, we continued to face challenges in developing consistent sporting excellence across disciplines. When we compare our performance to regional neighbours, some with fewer resources but more strategic focus, it becomes clear that our current model requires serious examination. This is the context in which we consider the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill 2025.
This Bill represents a significant evolution in how Singapore approaches sport, competition and athlete development. While I support the overall direction and intent of these reforms, I believe we must scrutinise the details carefully to ensure that good intentions translate into effective governance and tangible outcomes for our sporting community, outcomes that our athletes deserve.
Let me begin with what I welcome wholeheartedly – the formal recognition of Mind Sports. The Bill defines Mind Sports as a competitive game based on intellectual skill rather than physical skill such as chess or bridge. This is an important and overdue recognition. For too long, we have conflated sport with purely physical activity.
Yet, the chess player who trains for hours daily, analysing positions and studying strategy, demonstrates the same dedication, discipline and competitive spirit as any athlete. The bridge player who competes at international level exhibits mental stamina and strategic thinking that will challenge any sports person.
By bringing Mind Sports explicitly under SportSG mandate, we create formal pathways for these athletes – access to coaching standards and the possibility of structured support. This modernises our understanding of competitive excellence and acknowledges that mastery takes many forms.
However, Mr Deputy Speaker, I have significant concerns about the proposed expansion of the Council from 15 to 25 members, as outlined in clauses 4 and 5 of the Bill. The expansion by 10 additional members suggests the Government recognises the wider variety of sports and activities now falling under SportSG's purview. This is logical given we are adding mind sports and e-sports to the mix. But I must ask what is the strategic purpose of such a large Council?
From a governance perspective, larger councils are typically less effective, not more. Decision-making becomes slower, coordination more complex and accountability more diffuse. There is nothing preventing SportSG from establishing sub-councils or sport-specific working groups with external experts co-opted on an ad hoc basis. This would provide the specialised expertise needed without bloating the main governing body.
I therefore propose the following amendment that the maximum Council size remains unchanged at 15 members with provisions for establishing expert sub-committees as needed. A lean engaged Council of 15 will serve Singapore's sporting community far better than the sprawling body of 25 where attendance is optional. Our SEA Games performance demonstrates that we need decisive focused leadership, not a committee too large to be effective. Our athletes deserve better governance, not bigger committee.
Clause 6 proposes to amend section 8 to grant SportSG new powers to establish institutions for developing and training sports persons. This appears to pave the way for significant institutional restructuring.
I would like to ask the Minister: is this amendment intended to move SSP from MCCY's purview to the SportSG's jurisdiction? Are there other sport excellence schools planned in the pipeline that would similarly fall under SportSG's management? If so, what is being done to beef up the capabilities of the SportSG to take on these substantial new responsibilities? Managing educational institutions requires expertise in pedagogy, student welfare and academic administration, not just sports development.
Our performance at the 2025 Games provides a real-world benchmark. Despite years of investment and institutional development, what tangible improvements have we seen? Where are the success stories that justify continued investment in the current model? And where are the failures that demand course correction. Without this accountability for past spending, how can we have confidence in the expanded mandate proposed under this Bill? And without understanding what worked and what did not, how can we allocate future resources wisely?
Our athletes who completed at SEA Games 2025 worked with the system we gave them. If that system underperformed, the responsibility lies not with them, but with us, with the structures, funding and strategic direction we provided. We owe them answers before we ask them to trust a new expanded system.
Mr Deputy Speaker, clause 6 seeks to empower SportSG to provide educational and career support to athletes, both active and retired. This is genuinely welcome and represents a more holistic approach to athlete welfare.
For too long, talented young Singaporeans have hesitated to pursue sporting excellence because they feared an uncertain future after retirement. By providing structured educational pathways and career transition support, we make sports a viable life choice, not a risky gamble. This will unlock talent that currently goes untapped. Perhaps, if we have implemented such support earlier, we might have retained more athletes who could have contributed to stronger SEA Games' performances. How many potential medalists chose safer career paths because the sporting pathway seems too precarious?
However, I must ask, what about our past athletes? Many former national athletes, including those who represented us at previous SEA Games, struggle after retirement. Having sacrificed their peak earning years and educational opportunities for Singapore's sporting glory, some face financial difficulties, struggle to enter the workforce or lack credentials for career advancement.
Will the Government extend retroactive support to these past athletes who competed before such programme existed? They deserve consideration, not just those who benefit from future systems. These are athletes who paved the way, who competed when support was even more limited than it is today.
I will also propose practical support mechanisms. Could we provide additional CPF contributions for athletes who hit performance targets, including those who have represented Singapore at SEA Games and other regional competitions? Could SportSG support the healthcare needs of our past athletes, especially for conditions which were associated with their sporting careers, as brought up by Ms Sylvia Lim on 6 July 2023? These are athletes who have represented Singapore with pride, who have stood on podiums wearing our flag. Our 2025 SEA Games athletes and those who came before them surely deserve more that career counselling. We can provide concrete financial instruments that secure their futures.
Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill contains much to support the recognition of mind sports, the commitment to athlete welfare and the modernisation of SportSG's functions. This represents genuine progress. But progress requires not just good intentions but sound governance and demonstrated accountability. A Council of 25 is a recipe for inefficiency. Expanded institutional responsibilities without demonstrated capability and accountability for past spending is putting the cart before the horse.
Our performance at the 2025 SEA Games should serve as a wake-up call. We cannot continue expanding mandates without first addressing the fundamental issues that have limited our sporting success. Our athletes gave everything at those Games. Now we must ensure that our institutions match their commitment with excellence of our own.
I urge the Minister to address these concerns directly. Show us the performance analysis from SEA Games: explain what went wrong and what will change. Demonstrate that SportSG has the capability on these expanded responsibilities, while also fixing the problems that led to disappointing results.
I also urge consideration of the amendments I have proposed: maintain the Council size at 15 and extend meaningful support to past athletes who have already served Singapore. We continue to believe that those who have already given their best years to Singapore's sporting glory deserve the same consideration in our promise to future athletes. Let us pass a Bill that is not just forward looking but also well-governed, adequately resourced, accountable and fair to all who have contributed to Singapore's sporting legacy.
Let us ensure that when we host or compete in future regional Games, we can point to this legislation as a turning point that led to sustained sporting excellence. Our athletes have done their part. Now it is time for us to do ours. Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker.
Mr Deputy Speaker: You have a clarification, Mr Alex Yam?
Mr Alex Yam: Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker, just two clarifications for the hon Member. I note in his speech that he used the words that he proposes amendment, in terms of the size of the Council. Is the Member proposing a formal amendment to the Bill or is he making a suggestion?
Secondly, he has made an assertion that we should reflect on the results of the 2025 SEA Games. I am not sure by what measure he is referring to, because certainly in terms of medal haul, it was a record of 202 medals: I think 51 gold, 43 silver and 64 bronze. That is way more than what we had in 2023. So, I am not sure how he came to the conclusion that we did not perform better in 2025.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik, would you like to respond to the hon Member Mr Yam? He has two clarifications of you.
Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik: Okay, thank you to the hon Member for the clarification. So, for the first point that he made, it was a proposal. Sorry, if I mentioned \"amendment\". And for the second item, with regard to the performance during the 2025 SEA Games, even though we had broken a few records, there are some sports that were not doing well, for example, football and badminton.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Alex Yam. Do you have clarifications arising out of what the Member said?
Mr Alex Yam: Yes, Mr Deputy Speaker. Thank you to the hon Member for the clarification. With regard to his clarification on the performance, I would like to clarify with him if it is accurate to say that he is referring to specific performances of specific sports during the SEA Games, rather than the overall performance which was markedly better in 2025 than in previous SEA Games.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik would you like to respond to that clarification of you?
Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik: So, in general, Singapore in terms of our region, I think we are still fifth, so, I guess there is still room for improvement, even though in terms of medal tally we had exceeded, as compared to previous years.
Mr Deputy Speaker: Any further clarifications? Next speaker, Ms Gho Sze Kee.
Ms Gho Sze Kee (Mountbatten): Mr Deputy Speaker, please allow me to also extend my congratulations to Team Singapore for their showing at the 2025 SEA Games. They have flown our flag high and done our country proud. Well done, Team Singapore.
Their performance is a fitting backdrop for the passage of this particular Bill in the House and at this juncture I would also extend my best wishes to Team Singapore at the ASEAN Para Games next week.
Sir, Mountbatten has long been the sports hub in Singapore and not just because our ward is home to the Singapore Sports Hub complex, or now known as The Kallang. Sir, 22 Mountbatten residents donned the national colours to Thailand this year. Mountbatten is where many of our national sportsmen and sportswomen train, the home base of many NSAs and the Singapore National Olympic Council, the Singapore Disability Sports Council and SportSG itself. I especially look forward to the realisation of the Kallang Alive Master Plan when the Singapore Sports School will also find a new home in Mountbatten.
We should acknowledge that the Government has done a great deal for sports in Singapore. One only needs to take a walk around the Kallang precinct to see the physical embodiment of the Government's support and commitment. And it is not just the physical facilities and hardware. We have also built a very comprehensive support system for our high performance athletes, one which supports them from the start of their sporting career journey through their transition into a second career.
[Mr Speaker in the Chair]
Today, the various spex schemes support our athletes. Many of them receive a monthly stipend to a maximum cap of $804,000 dollars a month, and recently with CPF top-ups. Emerging athletes can receive a smaller amount through spexPotential. Non-full-time athletes can receive spexTraining Assistance Grants and tap into spexGLOW, which provides monetary offsets for loss of income for athletes taking time off in the run up to Major Games. There is also spexEducation for athletes to pursue tertiary studies during or after their sports career and spexCareer to help athletes transition into new careers after sports.
In the past two years, more than $500 million dollars was allocated annually to SportSG to support our sports ecosystem. This underscores the Government's commitment and resolve to support our sports ecosystem. And yet, there have been many calls for the Government to do more, more and yet more for sports in Singapore. To show more commitment, to provide further support to sports and our athletes. Much has been said about how Singapore can win more medals.
There are a few thoughts that I must share. Firstly, it is easy to dismiss that $500 plus million dollars a year is not enough and that we can always do more. But then so too would $1 billion, $2 billion, or $4 billion be not enough. It costs nothing to ask for more. But this is a zero-sum game. We must always keep in mind the big picture. Our national resources are finite and there are many competing priorities of Government that are essential to our nation: defence, education, healthcare, transport, homeland security, national infrastructure, housing, the environment and so on.
Indeed, even for MCCY itself, sports is just one aspect of their broader remit that also includes our arts scene, community and youths. While support for sports is important, it must be balanced against the broader national responsibilities and prudent allocation of resources.
Next, we must also keep in mind that SportSG's mandate is not just limited to high performance sports and medal tallies alone. SportSG also has the larger social and community mission of fostering inclusion, cohesion and bonding through sports, as well as encouraging personal character building and fostering an active, healthy lifestyle in the larger community. The payout to our society from this mission is just as meaningful and important to our society as nurturing medal winning athletes, if not more so.
Intra community sporting events such as the Pesta Sukan and the Singapore Urban Sports and Fitness Festival, our ActiveSG framework, public sports facilities like our neighbourhood swimming pools and stadiums are all part of this mission.
The other point is the cold hard reality of elite competitive sports. It is brutal and unforgiving. The calculus is Darwinian. For every podium finisher and every gold medal, many more would have fallen short by the wayside. This is something that we must confront honestly. Elite sporting careers are also inherently short. Physical ageing is a reality for every one of us, athletes included. The hard truth is that the majority of our sportsmen and sportswomen will not succeed in reaching the pinnacle of their sport, nor will they succeed in making sports a viable long-term career.
This is the reality many of our athletes face. Yet many postpone, disrupt or forgo education and career development during their peak years in order to pursue excellence in sports. It is an enormous personal sacrifice and takes grit and courage. Our focus therefore cannot be limited to how athletes perform during their competitive years alone but also must extend to how they emerge after them.
To me, the benchmark of our support of our athletes should never be the number of medals they have won. Instead, it should be measured by how well we stand by them after the stadium lights dim and how we help them, regardless of their sporting success, to succeed in life beyond sport.
I note that SportSG has already does this. Its support ecosystem that provides holistic education and career transition assistance to athletes is especially commendable.
To me, the most important sub programmes within the spex framework are spexEducation and spexCareer because these programmes are designed to equip our athletes with the qualifications, skills and pathways to successfully transition into post sports life. I look forward to further announcements on such holistic support for our athletes that will be forthcoming in the Committee of Supply debates.
A common theme that often arises in this House when we discuss support for sports and athletes is that it takes a village. When it comes to funding and resources, that village naturally includes the corporate world. Another invariable point is the disparity in medal prize money awarded for the Olympics and the Paralympics. I do not disagree. Our corporate world can and should do much more. But since we have been on hard truths and harsh realities, I would like to offer up more of them.
The hard truth is that we are a tiny country. Our size translates to a small commercial audience and domestic market. That makes the commercialisation of professional sports and athletes difficult. The struggles of the S League demonstrate this. Our corporate world, too, despite our outsized economy, is quite small, with a correspondingly small sponsorship pie.
Mr Speaker, I shall not belabour the point on prize money disparity. Too many others have already done so but allow me to float an idea. With respect to the work of SNOC and the National Paralympic Council, I propose that these two bodies can be merged.
This Bill essentially recognises the Singapore National Paralympic Council as a key partner to SportSG, similar to SNOC. A merger between them will be the natural next step.
There are many advantages to such a merger. At a minimum, it would reduce duplication of effort and allow the sharing of common resources, saving costs. More importantly, a merged body will make corporate funding easier and strategic by presenting a large and unified front to sponsors. It will also have more clout.
It offers greater value to corporate sponsors and prevents the cannibalisation of each Council's share of Singapore's already limited sponsorship pool. Such a merger sends a strong and unequivocal message about equality and inclusion, signalling that we value and support all Team Singapore athletes, abled or differently abled, equally. Within this unified entity, we shall no longer see two separate and different sized and medal sized pools. Countries, such as South Africa, Denmark and the Netherlands, have already done so.
Furthermore, such a merger already has a public face. There already exists a unified corporate identity in Team Singapore, which brings Olympics and Paralympics athletes together under one marketing banner.
Mr Speaker, I recognise that they are two independent bodies, but the Government and SportSG can do much to encourage and facilitate the realisation of this idea. I hope MCCY, SportSG and the respective councils can give this idea some serious consideration. I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh.
Assoc Prof Kenneth Goh (Nominated Member): Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill and the direction it sets for SportSG in shaping Singapore's sporting future. I do want to also congratulate our Team Singapore athletes at the recent SEA Games. I spent 10 days with them and cheering them on. So, I do apologise as my voice is still recovering from those 10 days of cheering. I do want to also declare my interest as the President of Singapore Aquatics, an NSA.
In supporting this Bill, I will focus on three areas. First, how we expand participation and inclusion in ways that strengthen our sporting base; second, why uplifting standards and professionalising coaching are essential as participation grows; and third, why high-performance sport remains vital, not just for medals, but for the values it inculcates in society and the sense of who we are as a nation.
First, I welcome the expanded definition of sport to include e-sports and mind sports, in line with wider local and international developments. This recognises that structured competitive activities can take different forms and allows more Singaporeans, across different interests, abilities and life circumstances to participate meaningfully in sport, whether recreationally or at higher levels.
The Singapore Chess Federation, for example, runs regular programmes in prisons and in rehabilitation settings, showing how mind sports, like chess, can provide structure, discipline and engagement even in higher constrained environments. In the same spirit of inclusivity, I also strongly support the continued emphasis on disability sports through the recognition of the SNPC as a key partner.
This amendment, together with the refreshed DSMP signals a sustained commitment to ensuring that sport remains accessible and meaningful for Singaporeans of all abilities and affirms inclusion as a core principle of our sporting ecosystem.
For Singaporeans who may not be drawn to organised sport, but simply want to stay active, bringing the promotion of physical fitness squarely within SportSG's functions is critical. It allows SportSG to lead in creating accessible everyday opportunities for Singaporeans to keep active from neighbourhood ActiveSG programmes to platforms, like the Singapore Urban Sports and Fitness Festival. And the impact is clear. The proportion of Singaporeans who exercise regularly has risen, from 65% in 2018, to 74% in 2024.
So, taken together, these developments help Singaporeans stay active. They help them bond and it helps us strengthen our resilience in the community. But as participation grows, ensuring sport is safe and well conducted becomes even more important.
Coaching quality, facility standards and codes of conduct matter even more, not just for performance, but for safety and longer-term participation. In particular, professionalising coaching at the developmental level is critical, as research shows that early experiences strongly influence whether young people remain engaged in sport.
And so, this is why initiatives, like the NROC, matter. The certification is meant to signal professional standards and support better remuneration. But its impact is limited when certification is not consistently required across all instances where sports coaching is practised. For instance, a coach whose NROC registration is suspended may be restricted from coaching at ActiveSG facilities. But they can still coach in a privately-owned non-ActiveSG facility. Without the stronger reach to uphold standards, the professionalisation of sports coaching is weakened and, more crucially, it also puts our young athletes at risk.
In this regard, I would ask the Government to consider whether SportSG should be given greater discretion, not only to set standards but, when necessary, to make them binding across sporting and fitness settings beyond ActiveSG-managed facilities. This is important in context involving youth instruction where safety and proper conduct are paramount.
In the meantime, uplifting standards must remain a shared responsibility. Our NSAs already work with SportSG to require NROC certification for official roles in NSA-sanction activities. I know in schools as well, many schools require coaches with NROC certification. But the clubs, sporting organisations, they can also make recognised certification a requirement when engaging coaches. Parents, too, play a role. They can ask about certification, encourage coaches to attend professional development courses organised by SportSG or CoachSG, and support remuneration that reflects a coach's training and qualifications.
Mr Speaker, when we professionalise coaching in this way, we improve performance outcomes as well as safety, retention and the quality of sporting experiences.
This brings me to a related point about how athlete development is organised under this Bill. I support the intent behind clause 6(k) which empowers SportSG to develop and train sports persons, particularly at the national and elite levels where a more centralised approach can strengthen high performance.
But at the same time, I seek assurance and clarification on how this role will be exercised alongside existing developmental pathways. In several sports, early-stage development is already being carried out by private clubs and private organisations working closely with the NSAs. They play an important role in building the pipeline. Could the Government clarify that SportSG's approach under clause 6(k) is not to crowd out these developmental programmes by competing with them, nor to leave them to compete freely over a fixed pool of resources, like previous Members have mentioned, but instead, to support a complementary and sustainable ecosystem?
In particular, I would appreciate clarification on how SportSG intends to work with NSAs to identify and support credible development partners that are aligned with national objectives, meet governance and safeguarding standards and contribute meaningfully to athlete development.
Mr Speaker, while participation forms the base of our sporting system, high performance competitive sport defines its peak. We must, therefore, continue to remain attentive to how we support those who represent the nation at the highest levels. Excellence and Major Games, such as the Olympics, play a unique role in our national consciousness. It projects Singapore's identity. It builds pride and creates moments of collective unity.
Many of us will remember Joseph Schooling's gold medal at the 2016 Rio Olympics. It was not just that he won, but how he won, defeating the legendary Michael Phelps in a race that ended in a rare three-way tie for silver. That race reminded Singaporeans that, on the biggest stage, against the greatest in the world, we can still make our mark.
More recently and closer to home, at the SEA Games, we witnessed that same inspiration expressed in different ways. We saw history made as hurdler Calvin Quek and diver Avvir Tham, each ended longstanding gold medal droughts for Singapore in their respective events, achievements not seen since our Independence in 1965. What a gift for SG60.
But high performance sport is not only about individual triumphs or podium finishes. It is also about how athletes respond when their team needs them. In men's table tennis, Josh Chua was stretched off after twisting his left ankle. Yet, he chose to return to the court and played on, determined to contribute whatever he could for the team. While he might have lost his game, that decision to carry on despite being injured, had a galvanising impact which lifted his teammates Koen Pang and Izaac Quek, who themselves were battling illness and injury and helping Team Singapore retain the gold in the men's team event.
Team work is about putting the team above itself, even in sports, like swimming, that are often seen as individual. We are familiar with the women's four by 100-metre medley relay at the SEA Games which illustrates this powerfully where we saw our senior swimmers Letitia Sim, Quah Ting Wen and Quah Jing Wen supporting 14-year-old debutant Julia Yeo, who was notified at the last minute to swim in place of an injured teammate. But what was less known was that at the same time that Julia was called, another reserve for the relay, 15-year-old Victoria Lim, also a SEA Games debutant, was also asked to stand by to compete in what would have been the biggest race of her career.
Ultimately, the decision was made to go with Julia. For Victoria, that decision was understandably disappointing. We know the team won and so she lost out on having that chance for the gold medal as well. Yet, Victoria accepted the decision with quiet stoicism. She put the team ahead of her own disappointments and stood firmly behind her teammates without hesitation. I am happy to add that I met Victoria and her parents two weeks ago. After a short vacation, she was back in the pool, more determined than ever to represent Team Singapore at Major Games and to make the nation proud.
But that moment, for me, it captures what a \"we first\" Singapore looks like. Putting the Team first sometimes means being prepared to step aside, even at personal loss, so that the Team can succeed.
Mr Speaker, high performance sport brings these values to life in a salient way, reminding Singaporeans that while we may be small in numbers, we are united, disciplined, resilient and capable of standing our ground on the world stage. And it is precisely because high-performance sport carries this national meaning and because it is inherently resource-intensive, we must approach it with focus and intent.
And so, even as we expand opportunities for participation and inclusion, we must be careful not to spread ourselves too thin. This calls for a pragmatic strategic approach, guided by a long-term view of elite sport development.
So, if in the spirit of inclusion, we want to support a wider range of emerging sports, and if, in the spirit of excellence, we also want to sustain high performance competitive sport, then we must expand the pool of funding available to the sector.
In this regard, there is untapped potential in engaging the private corporate sector more deliberately, as some Members have mentioned, but what I would suggest is to engage them as private donors as the commissioner of charities, annual reports consistently show, sport receives the smallest share of charitable donations. To complement MCCY's One Team Singapore Fund matching grant scheme, perhaps the Ministry could explore additional mechanisms to make it more attractive for private sector partners to donate.
In this context, I wish to express my strong support for the amendment empowering SportSG to oversee the consolidated entity formed from the SSP and the High Performance Sport Institute. This is a significant and forward looking move.
While education and high performance sport require different professional expertise, for athletes, many of whom are still in school, these domains are deeply entangled. They are not separate. As a former national athlete myself, I can attest that these were challenges that I faced awhile back when I was still an athlete and it is an issue that our athletes still face today. And so, it is commendable that SportSG is actively addressing this issue.
The training demands, academic commitments, recovery and family life intersect daily for our athletes. And so, by acting as an integrator – aligning education, training and support, SportSG reduces fragmentation, eases the burden on families and strengthens development pathways; and importantly, this makes high performance sport more accessible to a broader range of Singaporeans.
Mr Speaker, taken together, this Bill strengthens our sporting ecosystem from base to peak. It broadens participation and inclusion, uplift standards and professionalism and sustains high performance sports, so that it inspires us as one united people. For these reasons, I support the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Valerie Lee. From one national athlete to a competitive bowler.
Ms Valerie Lee (Pasir Ris-Changi): Mr Speaker, rise in support of the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill. I would like to declare my personal connection to sports in Singapore. I am currently serving in my first term as the Deputy President of the Singapore Dragonboat Association, together with hon Member Mr Alex Yeo and was formerly a National Youth Athlete in ten-pin bowling under the National Youth Development Programme. I was a beneficiary of the original Sports Excellence 2000 scheme.
Although I left competitive bowling more than two decades ago, I have watched, with great interest, how Singapore sports have evolved since then and our laudable approach in harnessing the potential of our local talents. In the sport of ten-pin bowling, our young bowlers have gone on to win world championships and broadly, our athletes now train with more structured pathways.
More importantly, our sporting ecosystem has grown to support not just elite performance, but also inclusion and participation across the community. For example, I understand that there are at least nine para inclusive teams in the dragon-boating community with an estimated 250 para athletes who might be physically or intellectually impaired.
I have seen first-hand the discipline and commitment required of all athletes, the importance of strong governance and access to facilities and the impact of initiatives that broaden opportunity – all of which are directly supported and reinforced by the reforms in this Bill.
The amendments to the Singapore Sports Council Act updates our legislative framework to better reflect the current sporting environment in Singapore. They clarify the role of Sport Singapore, strengthen governance and recognise a wider range of sporting activities, while continuing to support both high performance sport and mass participation.
I will speak on three areas: first, the amended definition of sports, second, the expanded role of SportSG; and third, the formal recognition of the Singapore National Paralympic Council, followed by some clarifications for the Ministry.
On the expanded definition of sports. This Bill updates the statutory definition of sport to reflect how participation and competition have evolved, by including mind sports and e-sports. Mind sports, such as chess and bridge are internationally governed with their international federations recognised by the International Olympic Committee. These disciplines have also featured as medal events in major multi-sport competitions, including the Asian Games.
E-sports have similarly developed into structured and regulated competitive activities. They were included as official medal events at the 2022 Asian Games in Hangzhou and most recently at the 2025 SEA Games. At the elite level, competitors in mind sports and e-sports undergo systematic training, compete under sustained pressure and commit years to preparation and performance. These characteristics are consistent with what we already recognise in high performance sport.
Mr Speaker, the expanded definition should be understood as complementary and not a departure from our continued support for traditional physical sports. Many athletes continue to train over long periods, often while balancing work or study and have to rely on a stable and well-governed sporting ecosystem. This Bill preserves the statutory framework that enables that support. By recognising a broader range of sporting activities, the Bill allows our policies to remain relevant to evolving participation patterns, while continuing to uphold high standards of sporting integrity and excellence.
On the expanded role of SportSG. The Bill strengthens SportSG's mandate to establish and uphold standards across coaching, equipment, facilities and accreditation. In doing so, it reinforces a clear principle: high standards are not optional in sport, they are foundational. This is particularly important in Singapore's context, where most athletes are not full-time professionals.
For many, sport is pursued alongside education or employment. Our system must therefore support not just peak performance, but the whole athlete and the full sporting journey, including welfare, career pathways and transitions beyond competitive sport, recognising that only a small proportion remain in high performance sport for life.
The Bill also reinforces SportSG's role in promoting physical activity across the population. With a super aged society in Singapore, physical activity is no longer only a sporting issue, it is a public health imperative. Regular activity supports physical health, mental well-being and independence among seniors. By strengthening SportSG's mandate, we invest not only in sport, but in healthier ageing and a more resilient society.
Mr Speaker, I turn to the partnership with the Singapore National Paralympic Council, which is an important feature of the Bill. Singapore first competed at the Paralympic Games in the 1980s and our Paralympians won their first medals at the 2008 Beijing Paralympics. Since then, they have continued to represent Singapore with distinction at subsequent Games. Their achievements remind us that sporting excellence is not defined by ability, but by determination and by performance.
The Singapore National Paralympic Council plays a critical role in supporting these athletes from development pathways to high performance preparation. Formal recognition of the Singapore National Paralympic Council as a key partner sends a clear signal: inclusive sport is not peripheral, it is integral to our national sporting framework. By affirming this partnership in statute, the Bill reinforces a fundamental principle – that access to opportunity, support and excellence in sport should be open to all who have the commitment to pursue it.
But Mr Speaker, I do have a few clarifications to make. First, on Council Membership. Under the amendment to section 4, membership of the Council will increase to a maximum of 25 members, up from 15, previously. I seek clarification on the rationale for this increase, as well as the criteria used in appointing Council members. In a public body with such influence, how members are chosen is not just administrative – it is a question of integrity, trust and accountability. Singaporeans deserve transparency.
Specifically, given challenges unique to Singapore's sporting landscape, including the realities faced by non-full-time athletes and gaps in support for certain sports, how will the Council's composition address these issues? Will experience from countries facing similar constraints be considered? A Council that reflects these realities will be one that can make fair, informed and relevant decisions. The increase in membership numbers can then be justified.
Next, on athlete support and the spex awards. I note the introduction of the spexEducation Undergraduate Scholarship, with the inaugural 12 scholars awarded in April 2025. They hail from sports, such as fencing, swimming, shooting, wushu and silat – truly deserving athletes who exemplify dedication and excellence.
However, I would like to ask how scholars are chosen. How the Government determines the number of scholarships each year and whether athletes in mind sports and e-sports will be considered in the future? Will there be a clear, publicly available framework explaining how criteria are applied? Transparency here is not optional; it empowers athletes to plan their careers and chase excellence with confidence.
Lastly, on making sports facilities accessible to all. Under the amendment to section 8, SportSG will oversee the management of sports facilities. Will it be able to address situations where community organisations or individuals face difficulties booking national facilities, especially at the recently rebranded The Kallang, even when they appear unused for large periods of time?
Given SportSG's expanded role, clear guidelines and fair processes are essential. Access to facilities must be a right, not a privilege. In addition, I would like to raise the potential of unused open grounds and vacant land in the country being made available for short-term sporting use. In my line of work, I have seen how the Government pragmatically allows vacant industrial land under JTC to be leased out on a short-term basis for solar energy generation. This ensures land does not sit idle while still retaining long-term planning flexibility.
That same principle can and should be applied to sports. Temporarily unused open spaces can be leased to sports organisations and community groups to create facilities for training, grassroots programmes and competitions. This not only maximises land use efficiency, but also lowers barriers to participation, supports community sport and allows SportSG to meet demand without waiting for a permanent infrastructure. Efficient access strengthens trust, encourages participation and ensures our sporting ecosystem works for everyone in the country.
Mr Speaker, I would appreciate the Ministry's clarifications on the above matters. And notwithstanding these questions, I support the Bill, because it strengthens SportSG, supports our athletes and ensures opportunities for sporting excellence are truly open to all in a country. And to put on record, I thank Team Singapore for showing us what resilience looks like, because these athletes do not need a wake-up call. They have been answering the call of duty every single day. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker: Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim.
Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim (East Coast): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I join many hon Members of this House, appreciating our sporting talents, particularly for the strong showing at the SEA Games, as well as the Asian Youth Para Games, where athletes showed impressive debuts.
Much like the hon Member Kenneth Goh, I tag key pivotal moments to memories. I remembered Joseph Schooling winning the first ever gold medal for Singapore in Olympics. I was at the newsroom, and like the rest of my colleagues, holding our breaths. Similarly, this year, when Diyanah Aqidah and Nicholas Khaw won Singapore's first gold of the season in taekwondo, no less after a drought, I remembered being at a healthcare institution visiting a patient who also rejoiced when the app alert came in. Similarly, when our 12-year-old athlete won a medal in sailing, and this was Anya Zahedi, I remembered being at a community event where grassroots leaders also rejoiced when receiving the notification that such a young sporting talent was able to achieve significant success in a sporting arena.
Continuing down memory lane, like most Singaporeans, my core memories of school, for the learning journeys or excursions and of awesome Physical Education classes where we were introduced to new sport. In primary school, I learned to swim and was inspired by swim queen Joscelin. In secondary school, we played heaps of captain's and netball, inspired by the Vandas. And in my tertiary years, enjoyed rugby – always looking forward to the Sevens.
The competitive nature of sports is a longstanding one. However, beyond competition and sportsmanship, sports can also bridge communities, through shared experiences, as Singaporeans bond over a mutual love for a good game – football, cycling and pickleball.
In order for sports to continue strengthening our social cohesion, we should ensure sport is accessible to all Singaporeans beyond a privileged few, as the hon Dr Hamid has mentioned earlier. We should also ensure sport is accessible early, to young children and to persons with disabilities. Sports should not be the new measure of affluence. It should be accessible.
Beyond recreation, Singapore should also continue in our pursuit to ensure stronger support for our athletes and sporting organisations to help them succeed as they fly our flag proudly. This Bill must be poised to take sports in Singapore to the next chapter, and it has my support.
I am hopeful that the Bill will lower barrier to access and inclusivity in sports, ensure a balance of excelling in physical, mind and e-sports, as well as ensure holistic education and career support to young as well as professional athletes.
The refreshed DSMP unveiled last year reaffirmed the Government's sustained commitment to our differently abled athletes. It also underscored the importance of partnerships in building a robust and inclusive ecosystem.
I join several Members who have called for more participation from the corporate or private sectors to invest in our sporting talents. I also welcome the Bill's recognition of the Singapore National Paralympic Council as a key partner of SportSG. I am hopeful for Singapore to see an increase in the number of inclusive sporting facilities and skilled coaches who are attuned and also trained to the needs of our para-athletes, equipping them to empower themselves through sports.
Some athletes I spoke to, some para-athletes, in particular, are hopeful for increased resources including scholarships or funds to draw upon in their sporting journey. Their needs are significantly different and require wider support and expertise. I also welcome that this Bill formally recognises mind sports and e-sports – timely with the growing interest and traction. While recognition kickstarts the institutionalisation of mind sports, there must continue to be support for its growth. E-sports organisations and its stakeholders should also be able to expand their capabilities, organise training sessions and tournaments to be able to assess confidently as well as enhance the abilities of athletes.
E-sports, such as chess and bridge, present a unique opportunity for Singaporeans to engage with one another regardless of age or physical abilities. It is important to continue creating a positive and healthy environment to support the participation and training of Singaporean athletes by ensuring competence of coaches. It is also, however, equally important to ensure that e-sport and mind sport does not quite replace but compliments physical sport choices.
Additionally, the amendments will empower SportSG to establish institutions to develop and train national athletes, overseeing their sporting and academic pathways, expanding their versions of success. In particular, the consolidation of the SSP and the High-Performance Sport Institute, should enhance end-to-end service delivery across the youth and senior athlete spectrum. The SSP will retain its identity as a school while strengthening its role as the education arm of high-performance sport systems.
In September, I raised a Parliamentary Question (PQ) to ask on support for youth athletes juggling sporting and academic commitments. It is not an easy feat and I hope SportSG will continue to consider providing greater support for the holistic development of young athletes, many of whom are already facing high pressure situations and societal expectations. I believe it is important for the Government to recognise, appreciate and better support our child and young athletes and their families.
I recently met with A, a dedicated father who discovered sport as a coping mechanism for his first son. While the family sent, in Cantonese, \"Kor Kor\", for badminton coaching, they also discovered that their second son has potential, especially as he has been watching \"Kor Kor\" train on the sidelines. A shared with me that the family made a decision to get his second son to also start training early, since around preschool. With proper guidance, the second son was able to play confidently in matches beyond his age category. Investing in developing sporting expertise from a very young age is a long and costly journey.
Speaker, the profiles of our sporting talents are varied. One Fengshan resident, E, is a mom of one. She is also a professional boxer, representing Singapore in international matches. E shared with me of her challenges to train competitively, build a family, have a career and seek support to fund her journey.
I am hopeful that the refreshed Bill will see more inter-Ministry partnerships as well as people, private and public sector partnerships to support child athletes and their parents to have an earlier start and discover the pathways designed for the child's success as well as more partnerships so that professional women athletes, too, get the targeted support they need. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please.
(In Malay): Sports brings people together even if they have different views or support the opposing team. Sports can also transform lives and represent an opportunity that should ideally be accessible to all segments of society and not exclusive.
For sports to continue strengthening our social cohesion, we should ensure that sport is not merely confined to a selected few.
I recently met a resident, Mr A, a father who shared his challenges in supporting his children's badminton training expenses since preschool. He mentioned that several other parents share the hope that Singapore can encourage and support them, so that sporting talents can be spotted earlier and this will help develop budding athletes at an early age.
Additionally, support should be expanded for para-athletes, like Moza Alyka Baihakki who brought glory to Singapore. This includes improving coaching capabilities, ensuring we invest in infrastructure or facilities, and also potentially offering scholarships that provides them with support to further enhance their sporting abilities.
Therefore, the Government should enhance efforts to ensure stronger support for sporting bodies too so they can fly the Singapore flag high.
But most importantly, I hope this amendment will result in more people being able to participate in and excel at sport; having a balance in terms of encouragement and support for mind sports and physical sports; as well as providing holistic and constructive education for the development of young athletes, disabled athletes, women, and professional athletes.
(In English): Speaker, in gist, the intention of this Bill is to strengthen inclusivity, expand participation and provide better support for athletes of all forms. I therefore call on MCCY as well as the private sector to lend their support and do their best to ensure sport organisations have sufficient resources to support the ambitions and performance of our athletes, and to forge new partnerships with each other to ensure sports always remain relevant and accessible and also meaningful for all Singaporeans. Speaker, I support the Bill.
Mr Speaker: Ms Poh Li San.
Ms Poh Li San (Sembawang West): Mr Speaker, I would like to declare that I am the President of the Singapore Table Tennis Association and hence, may be an interested party in some parts of this speech.
The Singapore Sports Council was set up in 1973 and renamed as Sport Singapore in 2014. The local sporting landscape has grown significantly and become more vibrant, especially over the past decade. The sporting ecosystem has also become more holistic and well-resourced.
Our national athletes are flying our Singapore flag high, with more podium finishes in the Olympics and other Major Games and world championships in recent years. More Singaporeans and residents are also participating in sports across different age groups and sports participation in Singapore has reached an all-time high, with 74% of residents aged 13 and above engaging in sports at least once a week, according to the latest National Sports Participation Survey conducted in 2022.
Across different parts of Singapore, there are high quality recreational sports facilities, such as ActiveSG sports stadiums, swimming pools, gyms and world-class competition venues, such as the OCBC Aquatic Centre. There is the MyActiveSG+ platform to book and use these facilities conveniently and affordably.
Indeed, we have much going on for us in Singapore.
This is a landscape populated by a whole community of sports administrators, coaches, athletes, guided by the vision to Live Better Through Sport, a vision set for Singapore sports for 2030.\tSingapore sports is growing in ambition and reach. The Singapore Sports Hub, which is now known as The Kallang, will become an integrated sports and events hub and will host major events, like the Women's Tennis Association 500, the HSBC Rugby Sevens Series and the National Day Parade in 2026. There will also be a new national training centre for local athletes and a new 18,000-seat indoor arena.
As part of the Kallang Alive Masterplan, the Singapore Sports School in Woodlands will shift to The Kallang. Sports tourism in Singapore is also experiencing a boom as more international sporting events are held here. For instance, the Standard Chartered Marathon, Singapore Rugby Sevens and the World Table Tennis Singapore Smash are some of the world-class sporting events that have attracted sports fans and their families to Singapore every year.
To realise Vision 2030 and live out the goals set for The Kallang Masterplan, there is indeed a need for deeper expertise and experience to develop the new specialised functions, such as precinct and infrastructure development, international sports events organisation as well as sports education and professional skills development. Moreover, significant Government funding for these infrastructure development and programme development will be required. Therefore, strong leadership and governance from the Sport Singapore Board is critical to ensure taxpayers' contributions allocated for sports development are not for an idealistic dream but is well-spent and will uplift our entire nation towards achieving better lives through sports.
The Sport Singapore Board will play a crucial role in this transformation journey. As with any Board, its duties include ensuring strong governance, management, accountability and alignment with key sporting goals.\tI, therefore, agree with the amendment to increase the Board from 15 to 25 members. The current Sport Singapore Board has a bench strength of 15 members and comprises members from the private, public sectors as well as national sports associations and athletes, directly appointed by the Minister for Community, Culture and Youth.
In the current Sport Singapore Board composition, seven out of 15 members have a finance-related professional background. Four members are from the public sector. Only one member is from a National Sports Association, one member from the Singapore National Olympic Council and one member is a Paralympian.
I would suggest that with 10 additional Board seats, the Board members should have a greater diversity of professional backgrounds and would, in turn, bring to the table wider industry networks. For instance, professionals or experts in sports education, sports psychology, sports tourism, community sports and senior sports would bring valuable insights and perspectives into technical capability building, community sports programming and sports excellence for the elite athletes.
Aside from looking at the number of members alone, we might also introduce other measures, such as term limits, which is good practice in the spirit of renewal. I recall that one previous Board Chairman had served 16 years. Last, when it comes to Board seats, it is not merely a numbers game but one of commitment, interest, expertise and passion. With more Board members bringing a wider breath of experience and networks as well as deeper expertise, SportSG is well placed to bring sports in Singapore to new and greater heights.
I would also like to pose a challenge to the better-resourced SportSG board, to aim for a more aspirational vision. Beyond improving the lives of individuals, sports can also uplift and bond the entire nation. In October 2021, I spoke in this House on how sports can bond Singaporeans together. Sports can strengthen our bodies and minds, toughen our fighting spirit and uplift our spirits during difficult times. Sports can also bring Singaporeans of different races and religions, socio-economic backgrounds together and be the unifying force that bonds and builds Singapore.
In the recent 33rd SEA Games in Thailand, Singapore sent the largest ever contingent of 930 athletes across 48 sports. A total of 202 medals were won, namely 52 golds, 62 silvers and 89 bronzes, the biggest medal haul ever.
I was in Thailand, Nonthaburi province to support our table tennis team which contributed four golds, one silver and two bronzes. I know how hard our athletes trained, the sacrifices they made and how hard they fought for every point. Each time the Singapore flag is raised and Majulah Singapura is sung, I felt immensely proud of what our young athletes have achieved.
I also met many Team Nila supporters, more than 200 of them who took time to travel to Thailand in support of our athletes competing in various sports. I also know of many Singaporeans back home who were glued to MeWatch, following the competitions and cheering for our athletes.
There were many inspiring moments that stole our hearts, seeing how our young athletes fought against their competitors to fly our Singaporean flag high. Many would remember how fencer, Amita Berthier, made a spectacular consecutive seven-point comeback to claim victory over her opponent and eventually claimed her third title in Women's Individual Foil event.
There was also 14-year-old swimmer Julia Yeo and her gungho can-do spirit. Despite being called on by her coach to replace her injured teammate just 20 minutes before the race, Julia – who had to borrow a swimsuit and a cap – did her personal best and helped the women's swim team win the women's 4x100-metre medley gold in a meet record time.
Julia is a symbol of all that sports can do – physical and mental strength, a spirit of overcoming and a pride and commitment to the process.
In 2029, Singapore will be hosting the 35th SEA Games and I hope that our whole nation will come together to support, volunteer and cheer for our athletes, coaches and other members of our sports community. The home ground support will give our athletes the extra boost to go the extra mile.
Sir, 2029 is just three years away. I look forward to the expanded SportSG Board, leading the sporting community towards this milestone SEA Games, rallying the whole of Singapore and bonding Singaporeans through sports. This Singapore spirit will be the most precious achievement, more than any number of gold medals. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the amendment Bill.
Mr Speaker: Dr Charlene Chen.
Dr Charlene Chen (Tampines): Mr Speaker, Sir, I must declare I am not as athletic or sporting as my colleagues but I do appreciate good sports and I want to thank our athletes, whether they win medals or not, they spent a lot of time training, the hard work that they put in, the stress that they faced and being in front of the nation, competing with the weight of the nation on their shoulders. I think we definitely should appreciate all of them and I would like to thank them.
Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill. This Bill recognises something many Singaporeans already know from lived experience – that the way we engage through sport has evolved. And our laws need to evolve with it.
But as we widen definitions and expand powers, it is worth pausing to ask not just what we enable, but how these changes will affect people differently – especially our youths, families with fewer resources, and athletes who are already under pressure.
As a psychologist, I see sport not only as physical activity or competition, but as part of a wider social system. When designed thoughtfully, it builds confidence, resilience and belonging. When it is not, it can unintentionally add stress and widen gaps.
I support the inclusion of mind sports and e-sports in our legal framework. Chess, bridge and competitive gaming have grown significantly in Singapore. Many young people already invest time, effort and identity in these activities. Recognising them signals that we acknowledge different forms of talent, including those based on cognitive skills.
At the same time, recognition also carries responsibility.
By defining e-sports as \"sports\" as sports, we are not just enabling support – we are shaping norms. We are signalling what is legitimate and encouraged. And that is why the conditions around recognition matter.
Many youths I meet are motivated and capable, but also increasingly tired. They spend long hours on screens – often alone, often under pressure – to perform, to rank and sometimes to secure opportunities like Direct School Admission (DSA).
A CNA-Institute of Policy Studies survey found that teenagers in Singapore spend more than eight hours a day on electronic devices, and about 60% struggle to reduce their screen time. This reflects a growing imbalance in how technology fits into young people's lives.
As SportSG extends support into this space, it would be useful to hear how governance frameworks will evolve to ensure that youth protection and athlete welfare remain central.
My question to the Ministry is a practical one: how will official recognition of e-sports be implemented in a way that does not normalise unhealthy screen habits, especially for youths who are already vulnerable?
Recognition should not mean endorsement without limits. For publicly supported programmes, it would be helpful to have clear expectations – around training hours, physical conditioning, sleep and posture education, and referral pathways when concerning behaviours emerge. These are not meant to restrict interest, but to protect well-being.
There is also a governance dimension we should consider. Unlike traditional sports, e-sports are not governed by independent federations. They are owned by private publishers, who control game rules, competition formats and even when a title continues to exist.
International research cautions that governance models dominated by commercial interests may not always align with public interest goals – particularly when it comes to athlete welfare, integrity and transparency.
Next, the expanded definition of sport also has implications for education. Sports-based DSA pathways have opened doors for many students. But families with more resources are often better positioned to invest in coaching, equipment, or overseas exposure. Others may opt out early, not because their children lack ability, but because the costs or uncertainty feel too high.
So, I would like to ask how schools will ensure fair and holistic evaluation for mind sports or e-sports DSA pathways, especially where physical benchmarks are less clear. It is important that these pathways support balanced development, rather than a narrow focus at a young age.
More broadly, inequality in sport often starts much earlier than we realise. Some families have the means and confidence to take risks. Others worry about what happens if their child invests heavily in sport but has limited options later on. That is why I strongly support the Bill's provision for educational and career support for both active and retired sportspersons. It helps reduce the sense that pursuing sport is an all-or-nothing decision.
But I would also ask whether we have sufficient early-stage, school- and community-based systems to identify and support talented youths from lower-resource families before gaps widen. If sport development is meant to start early, then access and reassurance for families need to start early too. These concerns are made more pressing by the reality that national sports funding is already constrained.
NSAs compete for funding based on alignment with Vision 2030, key performance indicators, governance standards and development plans. Athletes in traditional sports have raised concerns about gaps in institutional support, particularly beyond the top tier. International evidence also shows that less visible sports, including disability and inclusive sports, tend to receive fewer subsidies unless funding models are deliberately balanced.
So, my question is this: as SportSG's mandate expands, how will funding models continue to balance elite performance, grassroots participation and inclusive sport for persons with disabilities, without disadvantaging those with less visibility or commercial appeal?
While recognising mind sports and e-sports, we should remain clear that physical activity remains central to public health. Resilience is built not only through mental effort, but through movement, teamwork and learning how to recover from setbacks.
I therefore welcome the Bill's explicit expansion of SportSG's role in promoting physical fitness activities. As new categories are brought under its umbrella, it will be important to ensure that community sport and grassroots physical activity continue to receive sustained attention and resources.
I also support the introduction of codes of practice and accreditation for coaching, equipment and facilities. Safety and quality should not depend on informal networks or personal knowledge. At the same time, smaller volunteer-led groups may worry about capacity. A tiered framework would allow standards to be applied proportionately, with stricter requirements for higher-risk or publicly funded programmes and lighter-touch guidance for grassroots groups, preserving both safety and participation.
Finally, the Bill enables a more integrated athlete development ecosystem, including education and career pathways. This is important. Elite athletes face significant pressure and uncertainty, especially as they transition out of competitive sport. Mental well-being should not be an afterthought. We should support athletes not only at their peak, but through the transitions that follow.
As SportSG oversees these institutions, it would be helpful to track not just performance outcomes, but also well-being, educational progression and post-sport transitions. These indicators matter if we want to support athletes as people, not just performers.
Mr Speaker, sport has the potential to support mental health, build resilience and bring people together across backgrounds. This Bill gives SportSG greater flexibility – and with it, greater responsibility. With careful implementation, attention to equity and safeguards for youth well-being, these amendments can strengthen a sporting ecosystem that supports Singaporeans across different abilities, backgrounds and stages of life. I support the Bill.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extension of a Sitting ","subTitle":"Business Motion","sectionType":"OS","content":"Mr Speaker: Order. Pursuant to Standing Order 2, section 5(d), I extend the time of today's Sitting beyond the moment of interruption for a period of up to 30 minutes.
[(proc text) Debate resumed. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Mr David Hoe.
Mr David Hoe (Jurong East-Bukit Batok): Mr Speaker, I am speaking in support of the Singapore Sports Council (Amendment) Bill.
At its heart, this Bill is a modernisation exercise. It updates a 1973 Act so that our national sports agency can reflect the sporting and fitness realities of Singaporeans today.
This Bill does three things: first, it expands what we legally recognise as \"sports\" to include mind sports and e-sports; second, it extends the Council's remit beyond sport into physical fitness activities; third, it strengthens the Council's ability to uplift standards, through research, coaching guidelines, accreditation and the establishment of training institutions and facilities.
I support these changes because it also recognises three realities. First, sport has diversified. Competition today not only happens on courts and tracks, but also on boards and screens. Some of our young people compete in inter-school chess championships, while others represent their campus in organised e-sports tournaments.
Second, our national focus has widened. It is no longer just about participation in sport, but building an active, preventive-health culture. Physical activity is increasingly seen as an upstream investment in long-term health and well-being.
Third, high performance sport today is scientific and multidisciplinary. The Bill emphasises on standards, accreditation and institutions that reflects this reality. While I support the Bill, I would raise four clusters of issues for consideration on mind sports, e-sports, broader system implications and active living through physical fitness and the built environment.
My first set of questions, like many have spoken, relates to the meaning and operationalisation of the term \"mind sports\". The Bill already gives a definition of mind sports, which is \"a competitive game based on intellectual skill rather than physical skill, such as chess or bridge\".
My question is: how will SportSG operationalise recognition of mind sports beyond the examples in the Bill? Specifically, are there any tangible inclusion and/or exclusion criteria that can be laid out? For instance, in my view, mind sports typically consist of one, or a combination of the following: deep concentration, memory, pattern recognition, decision-making under time pressure and composure under stress. But these characteristics are not unique to chess or bridge alone.
In my conversations with my residents and also my volunteers after Meet-the-People Sessions, they asked, \"David, would games like Pokemon cards, mahjong, poker also be considered as mind sports?\" because if those characteristics I mentioned earlier, they do qualify. I must tell you one that someone mentioned. They asked, \"Would even buying Toto or 4D at Singapore Pools outlet could be construed as some as a form of mind sport because there is some element of competition in winning a few million dollars?\" Some may even say, \"It involves some level of intellect because you have to study the number pattern that have \"opened\" previously before you decide what number to buy.\"
So, without clear criteria, we may risk inconsistent decisions, disputes and perception that mind sports is ad hoc. If the term \"mind sport\" becomes too elastic, it may unintentionally undermine the credibility of mind sports as serious competitive pursuits.
Hence, I wonder if it would be good for SportSG to put in place or lay out the following, either in the Bill or when implementing the Bill: a clearer application and recognition framework of mind sports; baseline criteria with inclusions and exclusions more explicitly stated at the outset; a transparent assessment process and a periodic review mechanism of what constitutes as mind sports.
Mr Speaker, my second set of questions pertains to how the inclusion of e-sports in this Bill raises a different and more sensitive issues, especially for our youths. We know from research that competitive e-sports training can be intense. One recent academic paper summarised that e-sports athletes may train four to 10 hours per day.
For a minority, gaming can become especially problematic given its addictive potential. In this context, I welcome that the Bill because it strengthens SportSG's ability to set codes of practice, guidelines and accreditation standards. These powers are important in e-sports, where quality and safeguards vary widely today.
In this respect, I have three questions on how these powers might be used well.
First, will SportSG develop a structured youth e-sports training framework? This could encompass age-appropriate guidelines on training hours, mandatory breaks, expectations around sleep hygiene, because that is what parents tell, and a required physical conditioning component. That aim here is not about micromanaging, but it is about building healthy norms, especially for under-18s who are immersed in the world of e-sports.
Second, will SportSG require accreditation for e-sports coaches and training centres that run structured programmes for our youths? If e-sports is to be treated as a sport, then coaching should also be treated as a profession, with standards and safeguarding expectations, and clear escalation pathways.
Third, will SportSG consider proactively working with relevant agencies from the start to develop parent-facing guidance, for instance, with MOE and the Ministry of Social Development and Family? Presently, many parents tell me that they struggle to distinguish between training from play, or even to assess readiness of their child to take part in competitive e-sports.
A national framework and research-driven guidance could help parents to understand signs of readiness, set healthy boundaries, recognise warning signs of addiction, such as sleep disruption, mood changes or social withdrawal.
We should also give thought to seek consent from parents whose children are under-18 entering higher-commitment e-sports pathways, so that parents know what is the child enrolling into and can provide the requisite support.
My third point pertains to broader systemic concerns arising from this Bill.
First, resources are finite. With the inclusion of mind sports and e-sports, how will the Government guard against crowding-out of resources to physical sports and community participation, which remains critical for population health and social cohesion?
Second, recognition should not blur an important distinction. Mind sports and e-sports are not interchangeable with physical sports. We have made a deliberate and forward-looking policy choice to adopt a broader legal definition of sport. That is reasonable. But we must be equally deliberate in our messaging that physical activity remains irreplaceable for health, development and lifelong functioning. Mind sports and e-sports build cognition, community and excellence, but they cannot substitute movement. An active mind should sit alongside an active body.
Third, there are downstream implications, particularly for schools. Today, activities like chess are often treated as clubs rather than sports co-curricular activities (CCAs). With this Bill, students, parents and educators may ask whether this should change, that should not be a club but will be now seen as a sport. Will there be joint guidance with MOE on how schools should treat and support mind sports CCAs? Where interest exists, schools should know how activities can be supported, coached and how participation is valued.
Relatedly, how might this affect pathways, such as entry into the SSP? Will the scope of SSP be broadened to include mind sports or e-sports? If not, are there parallel alternative pathways that exist for students who demonstrate excellence in mind sports or e-sports to develop and compete internationally?
Finally, I want to speak about the Bill's expansion of the Council role to promoting and planning of physical fitness activities. This aligns well with our national shift toward preventive health.
My question is when the Bill speaks about \"planning\" and \"promotion\", does it extend beyond programmes into shaping the everyday Built environment that makes such activity easier or harder? For instance, when someone engages in a physical sport, it does depend on the facilities or infrastructure, whether it is available or accessible near home. If such options are far from home, poorly connected or inconvenient to access, the best campaigns will still struggle to translate into daily practice or adoption.
In this regard, I previously asked the Minister for National Development in Parliament about the feasibility of converting Housing and Development Board (HDB) car park spaces for alternative uses for sports or recreational spaces. In the written reply, the Minister explained that HDB must take into account of parking demand over time, potential disamenities to residents, technical and safety constraints, such as fire safety provisions, exit capacity and structural loading. The reply also noted that where suitable, HDB has supported such requests by converting upper levels of the multi-storey car parks to greenery and community gardens, and HDB will consider other community-benefiting uses subject to site-specific assessment.
I appreciate the need for safety and site-specific assessment. At the same time, the current posture could feel a little reactive. It depends on proposals coming in one by one, rather than a systematic effort to identify where are the underused or dormant space that can be repurposed for the good of community.
So, I would like to ask: with SportSG's expanded mandate, will SportSG also consider working more proactively with HDB, the Urban Redevelopment Authority and relevant agencies to develop a simple, standard assessment framework and a pipeline of pilots for \"fitness activation\" of suitable under-utilised spaces, such as upper decks of multi-storey car parks?
In fact, both physical sports and mind sports, such as chess can stand to benefit from the conversion of such spaces. They could start modestly as pilots with clear safety and feasibility criteria, and the designs that are low-cost, low-disamenity and easy to maintain. Such a proactive approach would help turning \"planning and promotion\" into something that residents can feel in their daily lives: more convenient spaces to move, closer to home, built into the rhythm into their neighbourhoods.
In conclusion, Mr Speaker, I support this Bill because it strengthens our sports and fitness ecosystem in a way that reflects how Singaporeans live today. In particular, I support the recognition of mind sports and e-sports because it acknowledges that excellence can be achieved cognitively and also physically because recognition can bring structure, standards and safety. But at the same time, we must pair recognition with clear guardrails and clear messaging. Mind sports and e-sports should complement, not replace, physical activity, which remains foundational for health and well-being. And as we pursue preventive health, I hope we can look creatively into under-utilised spaces that can support active living in our neighbourhoods.
Mr Speaker: Deputy Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adjournment of Debate","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Deputy Leader of the House (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Speaker, I move that, \"That the debate be now adjourned.\"
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That the debate do now adjourn.\" – [Mr Zaqy Mohamad]. (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Deputy Leader, resumption of debate what day?
Mr Zaqy Mohamad: Tomorrow, Sir.
Mr Speaker: So be it. Deputy Leader.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Strengthening Support and Dignity for Migrant Domestic Workers and Singapore Families","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"OS","content":"The Deputy Leader of the House (Mr Zaqy Mohamad): Mr Speaker, on behalf of Leader, I move, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\"
[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]
Ms Yeo Wan Ling (Punggol): Mr Speaker, most working families in Singapore today are doing two jobs: one that pays and one that cares – and that is the hidden reality of modern Singapore.
A young couple begins with infant care. Then, childcare. Then, a parent develops dementia. Then, a spouse needs help after surgery. Then, a child has special needs.
Caregiving is not a single chapter in life. It is a cycle. And holding that cycle together are more than 308,000 migrant domestic workers (MDWs) in Singapore today, up from about 247,000 just five years ago. They are not an add-on to our economy. They are the invisible workforce behind our workforce. When they function well, families work. When they fail, families can fall. That is why MDWs are not just a labour issue. They are a critical backbone of Singapore's care economy.
Mr Speaker, Singapore's care burden is growing, and it is growing fast. In 2024, Singapore had 1.46 million households and 27% had at least one resident aged 65 and above. Behind that statistics are real people.
In my Punggol constituency, I met a mother in her early 40s. She had two young children and she came to see me as there was an issue with processing her MDW's entry into Singapore. She shared that her father had just been diagnosed with early dementia. Her husband worked shifts. And she told me quietly, \"Without my helper, I will have to resign. There is no other way. Please help me.\"
This is the reality for thousands of Singaporeans. If we want women to stay in the workforce, if we want families to remain financially stable and if we want our seniors to age with dignity, then we must get home caregiving right.
Mr Speaker, care works only when relationships work. Care does not fail because families do not care. It fails because relationships break down. When employers and MDWs understand each other, seniors are safer, children are calmer, families are stable and workers are treated with dignity. But when communication fails, when expectations are unclear, when skills are missing, that is when things unravel and plans fall apart. Indeed, I believe that our Singapore employers intrinsically care about their helpers, or \"aunties\", as we affectionally call our MDWs.
A few seasons ago, the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) started on a series of \"Meet-the-Members Sessions\", our labour version of the regular Meet-the-People Sessions that Members of Parliament (MPs) conduct. Members could speak with us on grievances in the workplace, unfairness and harassment issues. I had prepared myself on fronting these thorny issues, but I was surprised. In the weeks that I was the attending labour MP, the majority of our members who came to see me were MDW employers, sharing with me the issues that they had with their helpers.
Perhaps, it was because I am the only female labour MP, the sharing was passionate, but the issues were common across all who came. I was impressed and heart-warmed and indeed, inspired by how the sharing was not focused on complaints of MDW behaviours and strained relations but on how the Labour Movement could give practical tips and know-how on managing and improving MDW and employer relations.
It has been a while now, but I still recall how Mdm E, not her real name, a lady in her 50s, told me that after years of hiring helpers in their late-40s who were married with children, she was now the employer of a helper in her early-20s, who is single and carefree. And she had cheerfully quipped that she realised, in the same way that her children are called \"strawberries\", that there is also now a generation of \"strawberry helpers\". And in her careful observations, there are many differences in working well with the many different generations of helpers.
And the differences show in many everyday practices, for example, the use of handphones, personal spaces, sleeping hours and indeed, the use of social media. Mdm E wanted to hear from our session best practices, tips and cultural norms, so that she can better navigate and manage her relations with her affectionately nicknamed \"strawberry helper\".
Mdm E was not the only member who approached the session with this intent. In fact, the majority of the members who came to see me were like Mdm E. And this inspired the NTUC Woman and Family Unit to evolve these clinics and sessions into a series of highly-attended events, called \"POW-WOW: Power of Women WOW\". These sessions brought employers together with their MDWs to better access resources and strengthen relations. Indeed, during these sessions, our partners also organised an award ceremony for exemplary employer-MDW pairs, some working together for more than half their lives.
These events are very well attended and our partnerships well covered, from non-governmental organisations, like the Centre for Domestic Employees (CDE); trade associations, like the Association for Employment Agencies (Singapore); to Government departments, like the Ministry of Manpower (MOM); to private firms like Singtel and DBS. These events demonstrate the openness and desire of Singapore families and their helpers to strengthen their relationships, and the many parties coming forward to offer resources to co-create possibilities, safe spaces and ecosystems for MDW-employer relations to flourish.
Mr Speaker, what families really need is not just rules. They need certainty that care and trust will hold. The need for care is ever-growing, the will for better partnerships is strong and vast resources are available. I believe we can organise better to strengthen support and dignity for MDWs and our Singapore families. And that is what my proposals today are about.
First, train MDWs for real caregiving. Care today is not just only about housekeeping. It is about dementia care, post-hospital recovery, disability support, child development and senior well-being. Yet, many MDWs still arrive trained mainly for chores.
And this is why my first ask is this: the Caregivers Training Grant has provided excellent support for families with eldercare needs by affordably training helpers to take on caregiving duties. My ask is to expand the Caregivers Training Grant to include advanced home care as well as language training, particularly in Mandarin, Malay, Hokkien, Cantonese and other dialects, which are useful for eldercare.
Currently, the NTUC's CDE has partnered with the Singapore Hokkien Huay Kuan Cultural Academy and The Salvation Army to run conversational Hokkien and Cantonese language classes for our MDWs. This has been helpful in building strong bridges between our MDWs and their families. Because when an MDW cannot understand a senior, care becomes unsafe. Language is not just a \"nice to have\". It is actually a safety issue. If a grandma in her 80s cannot tell her caregiver that she is in pain, we will have all failed her in her care needs.
Second, professionalise employment agencies. Mr Speaker, I would argue that too many placements fail not because families are cruel but because they were badly matched. In my Meet-the-People Sessions, I have met many first-time employers who did not even know where to seek help when their MDW plans fail. They relied on their employment agency and many got it wrong.
Take, Ms T, not her real name, for example. She came to see me as she was in a bind. She could not get along with her helper and the language barrier caused deep rifts in everyday handling of chores. She had a young child and was also worried about her child's safety as her helper had different standards when it came to safety and care.
She sought the help of her employment agent but was told that there were no replacements available and if she insisted on having the agent take back the helper, she would need to pay an extra fee. This was not in the contract that she signed and she was actually covered for one free replacement. Not wanting to pay the additional fee, she forced herself to continue with the helper. In the end, they both got into a physical fight. It ended up being a viral clip, traumatising both my resident and her family and indeed, the helper.
This was not a good outcome for all involved and I felt that the employment agency could have stepped in to play a larger role in mitigating. Luckily, with an appeal, our friends from the Association for Employment Agencies (Singapore) stepped in and helped both the helper and my resident out of this situation. A good, responsible employment agency makes all the difference.
So, my second ask is this: raise professional standards for employment agencies, especially in handling complex care households. This is for families with frail seniors, special needs children or medical needs. Matching can be done by trained care assessors, not sales staff. A wrong match does not just only cost money; it can break a family and deeply hurt our workers.
I propose enhanced training and accreditation pathways for employment agencies focused on caregiving assessment, counselling skills and individual agents to empower trade associations to reward and recognise agencies that demonstrate lower transfer rates and better post-placement outcomes, and create a stronger feedback loop between families, MDWs, employment agencies as well as Government agencies.
Third, give MDWs affordable primary healthcare. Mr Speaker, our MDWs are frontline caregivers – they lift our parents, they bathe our seniors, they manage medications and yet, their own care can remain inadequately covered, especially if their employers are less resourced.
So, my third ask is this: to extend a Primary Care Plan (PCP)-type scheme to our MDWs. Our PCP for migrant workers could be a model worth studying as they afford primary healthcare for workers with low co-payments. MDWs today are not covered under the PCP and their mandatory insurance does not include outpatient care, which means employers and MDWs face high out-of-pocket costs for doctor visits.
This could encourage early care-seeking and can worsen health outcomes. Could the Government then consider a similar outpatient primary care scheme for MDWs? Even a modest co-payment structure for routine outpatient visits could prevent small ailments from becoming serious, thereby protecting worker welfare and reducing family anxieties.
Similarly, the current basic insurance of $60,000 annual limit for the hospitalisation of a MDW might not cover more severe cases, leaving our employers responsible for the excess and payment. Mr and Mrs T first came to see me at my Meet-the-People Session, looking both concerned and actually a little guilty. They shared that they are thinking of sending back their helper who has been with them for over 20 years. She has almost become family but as she was struck with cancer and required surgery and treatment, Mr and Mrs T, as retirees, were unable to afford the out-of-pocket expenses for this. With their appeals for subsidised medical fees rejected, the family had to send their helper home, feeling guilty that they could have made a difference since the cancer was caught early.
Ms W's experience caused her to fall into some financial duress. Her helper was with her for only one year, when she suddenly developed a fever and body aches. Her oxygen levels were dangerously low and Ms W had to rush her to the hospital. After several rounds of checks, her helper's condition remained undiagnosable and finally, she was certified unfit to work and was sent back to her home country. This entire episode caused Ms W to go past her insurance thresholds and, with the 25% co-payment, she had to pay a high five-digit sum out of pocket.
As such, would MOM consider getting employment agencies to be clearer on their advisories to employers on the medical and hospitalisation responsibilities for their helpers? As healthcare costs increase in Singapore, too, to mandate timely reviews of insurance coverage and co-payment levels, so that our Singapore families are adequately supported when their helpers need medical and hospitalisation care.
Healthy caregivers mean stable families and we need to re-focus mental health into our system. Unlike regular employees, many MDWs live relatively isolated lives, have no colleagues in the workplace and while living with families and their employers, they are separated hundreds of miles from their own families. Some are caring for sick parents back home via proxies and monthly transfers home while caring for ours here.
I welcome ground-up initiatives, like the Association for Employment Agencies (Singapore) partnering with The RICE Company, to provide recreational and social integration activities, and NTUC's CDE interviewing first-time MDWs within their first six months. These programmes and safety nets – social clubs, craft workshops, excursions, counselling – help build community and resilience.
So, my fourth ask is to make mental health screening and counselling part of a national MDW support framework, should the need arise, and to provide resources to scale up such social and recreational activities. To close the circle, our Singaporean families must also be encouraged to be stakeholders in this, as the care ecosystem can only be complete with our families as participants and beneficiaries alike.
Fifth, create regulated part-time care pathways. Mr Speaker, our households are diverse. Some families need part-time support. Others need specialised or back-up assistance. Some need backup support beyond the traditional live-in arrangement and yet, others guard privacy above everything else, preferring a few hours of help for just a few days in a week. The current ecosystem leans very heavily on the live-in helper model, which works well for many but not for all.
So, my fifth ask is to develop regulated, care-focused part-time MDWs and home care pathways. Flexibility must not mean exploitation. Protection must not mean rigidity. We need both. Building on schemes, like the Household Services Scheme, could we pilot care-focused extensions – part-time carers who are properly trained and fairly contracted or pooling arrangements where several families can share a trained worker on a regulated basis? Such models could serve our working parents, those with intermittent caregiving needs and families who cannot yet afford or require full-time live-in help.
Six, levies. Let us fix our levy rules for real caregiving burdens. Today, levy concessions are based largely on age as well as people with disabilities. But care is not just about that. Caregiver burden is heavier when family's needs are complex. Residents have asked about levy concessions and targeted financial support related to hiring an MDW. Consider single mothers or fathers with special needs kids who are also caring for their senior parents. Consider families where both parents work full-time to make ends meet. Currently, the $60 concessionary levy is available for households with a child below 16 years or an adult above 67 years old. There are gaps in the current levy framework.
So, my final ask is this: review levy and subsidy eligibility to reflect real dependency, not just age. This should include supervision-intensive but non-Activity for Daily Living (ADL) cases, such as early dementia, as well as youths above 16, frail adults aged 60 to 66, moderate dependency cases and families with multiple dependents that require care support. Because, really, being a single mother caring for a disabled teen and an elderly parent must feel supported as she loves and cares for her family.
Mr Speaker, our MDWs are not a side story. If we want Singapore to remain strong in an ageing world, we must invest in the people who keep our homes running. By strengthening training and communication, uplifting employment agencies, improving healthcare coverage, exploring flexible care models and refining support for families with heavier caregiving burdens, we can build a caregiving ecosystem that is fair, resilient and sustainable for both Singaporean families and the MDWs who support them. I thank the House and I look forward to MOM's reply.
Mr Speaker: Senior Parliamentary Secretary Shawn Huang.
The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Manpower (Mr Shawn Huang Wei Zhong): Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for raising this important topic on the role of MDWs in the caregiving landscape in Singapore and her suggestions to better support employers in this regard.
In my response, I will cover three key aspects of how the Government is addressing these issues: first, measures to support MDWs in performing their caregiving duties, such as training and alternative care options by the Government; second, measures to support MDW employers in accessing affordable care services; and third, measures to strengthen MDW employers' working relationships with their MDWs.
Between 2011 and 2025, the MDW population grew by around 3% per year on average, to about 300,000 today. This is driven by various factors including demographic, social and economic changes: more elderly Singaporeans requiring care, as well as more dual-income families with less extended family support.
I share the Member's view that MDWs play an important role in supporting households with different caregiving needs. Their dedication to caring for the young and elderly in our homes are invaluable to many families in Singapore. Hence, we had introduced various measures in the last five years to support MDWs' well-being, such as having mandatory rest days, as well as interviews in the first year of employment to check that they are settling in well. These measures demonstrate our commitment towards improving employment conditions for MDWs, in line with international standards.
With increasing numbers of MDWs providing care to the elderly, we agree with the Member that training is important to enable them to provide quality care on a sustained basis. Both family caregivers and their MDWs may tap on the Caregivers Training Grant (CTG) to offset the costs of attending caregiver training courses organised by approved providers. The CTG was enhanced from 1 April 2024, increasing from $200 to $400 per year, per care recipient.
To support caregivers' training needs, the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) offers over 240 courses covering a range of caregiving training skills, which address the caregiving needs cited by the Member, namely dementia, elder disability and post-hospitalisation care. Home-based training is also available for caregivers to learn how to provide home-based care for their care recipients.
We agree with the Member that language skills by caregivers are important to communicate effectively with their care recipients, especially for MDWs. As mentioned by the Member, employers or MDWs can tap on courses offered by the CDE, the Singapore Hokkien Huay Kuan Cultural Academy and The Salvation Army for basic conversational Hokkien and Cantonese courses respectively. Non-profit organisations, such as the Archdiocesan Commission for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, Brahm Centre and Aidha also conduct English and Mandarin courses for MDWs.
I also agree with the Member, that it is important to support the mental health of MDWs. Employers must provide at least one rest day per month, that cannot be compensated away, to allow MDWs to form support networks outside of the household.
MOM has a dedicated helpline with native speakers for MDWs in distress. We also partner with CDE, Alliance for Domestic Employees Outreach and Brahm Centre to provide psychological first-aid training, counselling and recreational activities for MDWs to improve their mental health.
Even as we strengthen MDW's caregiver support on training and mental health, we should recognise that care needs and family circumstances are diverse. As the Member has rightfully pointed out in her speech, live-in MDWs may not be the best care option for every household and we need to provide more alternatives that are better fit-for-purpose. Therefore, the Government has been working with the industry to offer a wider range of full-time and part-time eldercare and domestic services that are accessible and affordable for our seniors.
In lieu of relying on a live-in MDW, alternative care options such as the recently mainstreamed Shared Stay-in Senior Caregiving Services and the upcoming Home Personal Care enhancements, can help to support seniors with their activities of daily living.
Households that require part-time or ad hoc help with household chores can consider engaging companies on the Household Services Scheme (HSS) instead of hiring an MDW. Since formalising the HSS as a permanent scheme in 2021, the number of HSS companies has increased from about 80 to 240 today.
The Member also highlighted affordability challenges that MDW employers may face. Let me share about the financial support and protection that the Government provides today. First, we have the Home Caregiving Grant (HCG) that currently provides cash payouts of up to $400 per month to support those who are being cared for at home and require permanent assistance with at least three ADLs. The Ministry of Health has announced that it will enhance HCG by first increasing the monthly payout from up to $400 per month to up to $600 per month; and raising the per capita household income (PCHI) eligibility threshold, from $3,600 to $4,800. The enhancements to HCG will take effect from April 2026.
Second, to support families with greater need for MDWs, local households with caregiving needs enjoy a concessionary levy rate of $60 per month, instead of $300. Currently, around 72% of households hiring MDWs already benefit from the levy concession as they have either a child below 16 years old; or an elderly person at least 67 years old; or a person with disabilities living in the household.
Regardless of age or impairment type, persons who require assistance permanently to perform at least one ADL, would qualify for the Levy Concession. This includes persons with dementia or who have special needs, who may physically be able to perform the ADL, but require assistance or supervision to do so.
To better protect employers from high unexpected medical bills, MOM regularly reviews the coverage of medical insurance policies for MDWs. The minimum annual claim limit was raised to $60,000 in 2023. This was a significant increase from $15,000 prior to 2023, and covers 99% of inpatient and day surgery bills incurred by MDWs in the public healthcare institutions. Employers who prefer greater coverage can choose to purchase more comprehensive insurance plans.
On the Member's suggestion to extend the PCP to MDWs, I will highlight that the objective of the PCP is to provide migrant workers with accessible primary healthcare, including setting up of migrant worker medical centres near dormitories, and to strengthen public health resilience. The medical centres for PCP are, thus, largely located near migrant worker dormitories, which are in areas generally not adequately served by existing medical facilities. Employers of MDWs who prefer cost predictability of primary care may consider purchasing more comprehensive insurance claims without patient coverage on a voluntary basis.
I agree with the Member that employment agencies play an important role in the relationship between employers and MDW. Today, more than 80% of employers hire their MDWs with the help of an employment agency. Ensuring a good match between employers and MDWs can help to provide a good start in the working relationship. MOM has put in place process to regulate employment agencies and facilitate better matching of employers and MDWs.
First, employment agencies are required to comply with MOM's regulations and guidelines to ensure that they are professional in their dealings with their clients, both the employers and the MDWs. For instance, employment agencies should not mislead, or provide inaccurate information to their clients, or provide undue pressure on their clients. employment agencies found to have breached these guidelines will be issued with demerit points, which may result in the eventual suspension or revocation of the employment agency licence.
Secondly, we have adopted the approach of making information more transparent so that employers can assess the suitability of prospective MDWs based on their household needs. Employers may use the FDW eService portal to access information about MDWs' past work performance, length of each employment and reasons why MDW have left their past employment.
Thirdly, MOM provides an online employment agency directory to provide information to households looking to engage an employment agency's service, including the employment agencies' customer service ratings, years of experience, retention and transfer rates of their MDWs emplaced. The directory improves transparency by allowing employers to engage the employment agencies that best meet their needs.
Lastly, MOM has an education and outreach programme for both employers and MDWs to align expectations. First-time employers are required to attend the Employers' Orientation Programme, which educates employers on their responsibilities of care towards their MDWs. MDWs, in turn, must go through the Settling-in Programme which educates them on avenues to seek help when needed, on how to manage their own stress and communicate effectively with their employers. This further helps to foster a harmonious relationship between employers and their MDWs.
Mr Speaker, to wrap up, the caregiving landscape in Singapore will get more challenging with increasing demand for care services across different demographics. The Government has been expanding caregiving options and ensuring they remain accessible and affordable. We will continue to find ways to safeguard the interests of MDW employers while protecting the well-being of MDWs.
It takes a many-hands approach to create an ecosystem of support for MDWs and their employers. Our employment agencies, Association of Employment Agencies, CDE, the NTUC and non-governmental organisations play an important role in fostering harmonious relationships between MDWs and their employers. Let us continue to work together to sustain this ecosystem of support for MDWs and employers, and foster a culture of mutual understanding and respect within the community.
[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]
[(proc text) Resolved, \"That Parliament do now adjourn.\" (proc text)]
Mr Speaker: Pursuant to Standing Order 2(3)(a), I wish to inform hon Members that the Sitting tomorrow will commence at 12.30 pm. Order. Order.
Adjourned accordingly at 7.28 pm.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":"Matter Raised On Adjournment Motion","questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expanding Financial Support and Training Infrastructure for Football Following Momentum from Singapore's Asian Cup Qualification","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"19 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth in light of the strong performance and public support demonstrated by the national football team in qualifying for the Asian Cup, whether the Ministry will consider expanding financial support and training infrastructure for football and other team sports that show similar momentum.
Mr David Neo: Our national football team made history by qualifying for the 2027 Asian Football Confederation (AFC) Asian Cup on merit. This is a significant achievement, and we are proud of the Lions.
Today, Sport Singapore (SportSG) supports Football Association of Singapore's (FAS') efforts to develop the national football team in a number of ways.
First, SportSG supports FAS for the national team's local and overseas training and competitions. Second, SportSG provides the national team access to training facilities at the Kallang Football Hub – an environment conducive for uninterrupted, high-quality training for the team. Third, SportSG provides FAS access to technical expertise, such as football performance science and coaching development.
For the AFC Asian Cup in one year's time, SportSG will work closely with FAS on their plans to prepare the national team.
First, SportSG will support enhanced overseas training for the national team, including an overseas centralised training camp. Second, SportSG will provide additional sports science technical support to complement the efforts of FAS. This will ensure that our national team is supported by a holistic set of sport science capabilities based on the specific needs of the team.
SportSG has been and will continue to work closely with the National Sports Associations to develop high performing team sports in Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Acoustic Insulation or Soundproofing Options for Older Flats via Home Improvement Programmes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"21 Dr Charlene Chen asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether the Ministry will consider incorporating acoustic insulation or soundproofing options into the Home Improvement Programme for older flats affected by chronic external noise; and (b) if so, how such measures can be targeted at households most impacted.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Home Improvement Programme (HIP) is to address safety and common maintenance issues that arise due to wear and tear in older flats. Acoustic insulation or soundproofing improvement is not part of the HIP's scope.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Addressing Cost Concerns of Singapore Taxi and Private Hire Drivers Given New Cross-border Arrangements for Ride-hailing Services","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"22 Ms Poh Li San asked the Acting Minister for Transport in view of the new cross-border arrangements for ride-hailing and e-hailing vehicles between Singapore and Malaysia, what are the measures to address concerns by Singaporean taxi and private hire vehicle drivers regarding intensified competition from Malaysian taxis offering cheaper fares due to lower operating costs, and empty return trips.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The enhancements to the Cross-Border Taxi Scheme aim to benefit travellers and facilitate fairer competition between drivers in both countries. While it is not possible to equalise the operational costs between Singaporean taxis and Malaysian taxis, we are working on measures to ensure that cross-border trips are more viable for our taxi drivers. For example, only local taxis are allowed to pick up passengers from any point in their home country, while foreign taxis can only pick up passengers from designated pick-up points. This will allow our taxi drivers to better meet demand for cross-border trips starting in Singapore. Over time, we plan to increase the number of ride-hail pick-up points to include more frequented locations. The improved convenience for travellers can bolster demand for the return trip to Singapore.
The Land Transport Authority will continue to enforce against illegal point-to-point transport services. Licensed cross-border taxis will be required to install Singapore's ERP2 on-board unit for entry into Singapore, and must also be clearly identifiable by livery, tamper-proof vehicle plate with predefined prefix and taxi topper.
As for fuel subsidies, that is a matter for the Malaysian authorities to consider.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans for Improving Employment Outcomes for Lower-income and ComLink+ Families","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"23 Mr Xie Yao Quan asked the Minister for Social and Family Development following the findings of the Ministry's Supporting Lower-Income Households Trends Report 2025, whether the Ministry has further strategies to help more adults in ComLink+ families secure and stay in good jobs.
24 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Social and Family Development in view of the findings from the Supporting Lower-Income Households Trends Report for 2025, what plans does the Ministry have to improve the employment outcomes for lower-income families, if any.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Lower-income families face diverse challenges to stable employment, such as caregiving responsibilities, family functioning issues and lower education qualifications. These make it hard for them to hold down a regular job or attain a higher wage.
Social Service Offices, ComLink+ family coaches and Family Service Centre case workers journey with families to address these issues. This includes linking families with the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) for employment assistance and social service agencies for other needs. Families receive training support under SkillsFuture and Workfare. Those that put in the effort and earn a better wage are further recognised with additional cash and CPF payouts under the ComLink+ Progress Package for Employment.
Beyond these, the Ministry of Social and Family Development is reviewing how we can provide more targeted employment support services. For example, we are partnering e2i and TOUCH Community Services to help more ComLink+ families. To prepare them for employment, we work to increase their motivation and build their skills. Following successful job placement, we help them manage work stressors and stay employed. We are also exploring additional financial support and incentives for jobseekers with lower education qualifications to upgrade their skills.
Ultimately, a whole-of-society effort is needed to help lower-income families achieve better employment outcomes. Community partners can help families address their barriers to employment, and employers can be more understanding and provide flexible work arrangements.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Complementarities between EatWise SG, Healthier SG and Age Well SG","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"28 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) how does the EatWise SG initiative complement other programmes, such as Healthier SG and Age Well SG; (b) how can members of the public find out more or participate in the initiative; and (c) which community care providers have been trained to recognise early signs of malnutrition and provide basic support under this initiative.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question has been addressed in the answer to Question No 43 in the Parliament Sitting on 4 November 2025. [Please refer to \"Contributing Factors to Rise in Malnutrition among Older Singaporeans\", Official Report, 4 November 2025, Vol 96, Issue 9, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Evaluation Criteria for Central Kitchen Pilot Project for Schools and Priorities behind Expansion to More Schools","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"29 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Education (a) what were the criteria used to evaluate the effectiveness of the central kitchen pilot at Yusof Ishak Secondary School; and (b) what were the key priorities behind the decision to expand the operating model to 13 schools commencing from January 2026.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Central Kitchen Meal Model (CKMM) was piloted at Yusof Ishak Secondary School from 2022. The school had just moved into its new campus and did not have existing canteen stallholders.
The Ministry of Education (MOE) had assessed the pilot on four key criteria – operational efficiency, food quality, cost-effectiveness and student satisfaction. The pilot demonstrated that this model could streamline meal preparation and distribution while meeting nutritional standards and food safety guidelines.
The Individual Stallholder System remains MOE's primary and predominant operating model for school canteens, and MOE will continue to support schools and stallholders to operate this model. The CKMM serves as an alternative solution for schools facing challenges in finding enough stallholders for their canteens. This was the basis that the model was expanded to 13 more schools in January 2026. The aim was to allow students in these schools to continue to have access to healthy and affordable meals.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring Impact of Revised Integrated Shield Plan Rider Framework","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"30 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health whether the Ministry can provide details on how it will monitor the impact of the revised Integrated Shield Plan rider framework on (i) private healthcare utilisation and (ii) public hospital waiting times.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: This question has been addressed in the answer to Questions No 1 to 4 in the Parliament Sitting on 12 January 2026. [Please refer to \"Managing Healthcare Insurance Premiums\", Official Report, 12 January 2026, Vol 96, Issue 12, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Suspects and Proceeds Recovered from Gold Investment Scam Involving Genneva Pte Ltd","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"31 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs regarding the multi-million dollar gold investment scam involving Genneva Pte Ltd reported to the Police in 2012 (a) whether there are any pending cases against suspects that have not yet concluded; (b) what is the value of the proceeds of crime recovered by the Police; and (c) when can victims file claims to the recovered proceeds.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Police concluded their investigation in relation to the case involving Genneva Pte Ltd several years ago.
In 2019, six individuals were charged. From 2020 to 2025, five of them were convicted in Court of various offences, including fraudulent trading, cheating and money laundering. Court proceedings are still ongoing for the remaining individual.
The Police had seized properties amounting to more than S$1.5 million from Genneva Pte Ltd and its related companies and will be making a Court application to distribute them to the claimants.
The distribution process is complex and may take some time, as there is a large number of potential claimants. The Police will notify them on the filing of their claims in due course.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Effectiveness of Existing MAS' Requirements on Banks to Protect Customers from Scams","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"32 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) what has been the effectiveness of existing requirements imposed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) on banks to protect consumers from scams; and (b) whether the MAS has plans to introduce stronger safeguards including with respect to credit card issuers.
Mr Gan Kim Yong (for the Prime Minister): It takes whole-of-Government and society to combat scams. The Government has worked with various stakeholders to put in place a suite of measures to address the scourge of scams.
As part of this collective effort, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and banks have been working together to continuously enhance security measures to better protect customers from scams. For example, we have introduced Money Lock accounts and depositors receive regular reminders by banks to set up these accounts. We are progressively discontinuing SMS One-Time Passwords (OTPs) in higher-risk banking activities and transactions, including for the provisioning of credit cards to mobile wallets, because SMS OTPs are more readily obtained and abused by scammers. We have also stepped up fraud surveillance and transaction alerts to account holders, so if there are unauthorised transactions on credit cards, consumers can and must do their part by informing the card issuing bank quickly so that further transactions can be stopped.
Banks will also introduce additional safeguards this year, such as additional cooling periods for higher-risk activities and in-app notifications to help customers verify that an incoming call is indeed from the bank.
While the Mid-Year Scam and Cybercrime Brief 2025 reported that both scam cases and losses decreased by 26% and 13% respectively in the first half of 2025 compared to the same period in 2024, there is no room for complacency. All parties must remain vigilant as scammers will find new ways to target victims. MAS and financial institutions will continue to review and respond to the evolving scam landscape.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support for Employees Affected by Abrupt Closure of Companies and Proposal to Amend Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 to Prioritise Payout to Employees","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"33 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Manpower for each of the last three years (a) how many workers have been affected by corporate liquidations and what is the total quantum of unpaid wages; (b) how many workers received payouts from the short-term relief fund; and (c) what is the total amount disbursed to these affected individuals to help them tide through financial difficulties following the abrupt closure of their employers.
34 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry will explore (i) mandatory wage recovery insurance, (ii) personal liability for directors for unpaid salaries and (iii) amending the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 to prioritise employees over secured creditors by default without requiring employees to file claims with the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management, to deter irresponsible business closures and ensure workers are paid first.
Dr Tan See Leng: When businesses wind up, including preparing for and during liquidation proceedings, firms should act responsibly and ensure that workers' salaries are paid on time to the best of their abilities.
The Government fully recognises the importance of employees' claims on salaries in the event of their employers winding up. In the Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act, employees' claims are already ranked first and above all other unsecured debts, and are behind only the costs and expenses of administration, which are necessary for the winding up to proceed smoothly.
We have measures in place to support employees and ensure responsible business practices. The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) investigates and takes action against employers who breach employment legislation when winding up, including those who wilfully do not pay salaries despite having the means to do so. If employers truly cannot pay their salary arrears due to business failure, the Short-Term Relief Fund (STRF) is available to provide financial assistance to eligible local lower-income workers.
Between 2023 to 2025, about $600,000 was disbursed from the STRF to 260 workers who did not receive their salaries due to corporate liquidation. MOM does not track the total number of workers with unpaid wages due to corporate liquidations.
We also provide workers who have lost their jobs with support to search for and take on new jobs with good longer-term prospects. Local workers may tap on career matching services and training programmes offered by Workforce Singapore (WSG), SkillsFuture Singapore and Employment and Employability Institute, and may also receive temporary financial support under the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme. Lower-income households who require financial assistance to meet basic needs may also approach their Social Service Office.
Beyond measures to support displaced workers, the Government encourages and supports Singaporeans to take care of their career health and stay relevant in their jobs. Under the Career Health SG programme, workers can tap on various tools to do so, such as the CareersFinder feature on WSG's MyCareersFuture job portal and the Polaris career guidance programme. Such programmes help workers to be better equipped to navigate challenges and stay resilient in their careers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Support during June and Year-end Holidays for Children Without Conducive Home Environments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"35 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for Education (a) what support measures are available during the June and year-end holidays for students without conducive home environments or adult supervision; (b) what proportion of primary and secondary students utilised school-based holiday care or study programmes in 2025; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider funding independent holiday programmes to engage students who require stable, supervised environments during these extended breaks.
Mr Desmond Lee: Primary schools proactively identify students who would benefit most from after-school care, such as those without conducive home environments or adult supervision, and encourage their parents to enrol them in school-based Student Care Centres (SCCs). During school holidays, SCCs organise programmes, such as academic coaching, reading support and mentoring. They also offer activities in sports, arts, music and other programmes like coding classes.
In addition, primary and secondary schools partner community agencies or engage vendors to conduct holiday programmes. These include industry exposure programmes, interest-based activities and drop-in centres with mentoring support and age-appropriate activities. Students can access such holiday programmes in their respective schools. The Ministry of Education (MOE) does not track the proportion of students who used SCC or school-based holiday programmes in any given year.
MOE will continue to resource schools adequately to support students with additional needs and work with community partners to develop students holistically during both the school terms and school holidays.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancements to HDB Car Parks to Accommodate Electric Heavy Vehicles","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"36 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Minister for National Development whether an update can be provided on the review on how the structure of HDB carparks can be enhanced to allow electric commercial vehicles with unladen weight exceeding 2,000 kilogrammes.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Ministry of National Development responded to a similar Parliamentary Question at the Sitting in September 2025. [Please refer to \"Assessing Relevance of 2,000 kg Weight Limit for Season Parking of Commercial Vehicles\", Official Report, 26 September 2025, Vol 96, Issue 6, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
The agencies are reviewing how the structure of our car parks can be enhanced to allow electric commercial vehicles, which are heavier because of their batteries. The study is still ongoing.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expanding Support for SMEs to Develop Leading-edge Capabilities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"37 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry whether there are plans to further assist and expand support for Singapore small and medium enterprises to adopt and develop leading-edge capabilities, including in areas such as advanced manufacturing, digitalisation, artificial intelligence and internationalisation, so as to enhance their productivity and competitiveness.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The Government has a suite of initiatives to support the development of our small and medium enterprises (SMEs), enhancing their productivity and competitiveness.
We actively support businesses in developing new capabilities, such as adopting artificial intelligence (AI) and driving digital transformation. For example, the Infocomm Media Development Authority's SMEs Go Digital programme and the Chief Technology Officer-as-a-Service provide grant support for companies to adopt digital and AI solutions. The Digital Industry Singapore's Enterprise Compute Initiative supports SMEs in developing and deploying AI solutions by making cloud credits and related tools from leading cloud service providers available, as well as consultancy from professional services firms.
The Partnerships for Capability Transformation grant supports partnerships between our SMEs and multinational corporations or large local enterprises, in areas such as supplier development, co-innovation, capability training, internationalisation and corporate venturing. This allows our SMEs to boost their capabilities and enhance their regional and global competitiveness.
Businesses can tap on Enterprise Singapore's (EnterpriseSG) Enterprise Development Grant to upgrade, innovate and access new markets or the Productivity Solutions Grant to improve their productivity and automate their processes. For companies keen to internationalise, the Market Readiness Assistance Grant can help them defray the cost of overseas market promotion, business development and set-up.
The Government also partners with Trade Associations and Chambers (TACs) to support enterprise and industry capability development. This includes projects that TACs deliver to their members and sectors, as well as the services provided by SME Centres. SME Centres offer one-to-one business advisory services, capability-building workshops and group-based upgrading projects. For internationalisation, the Singapore Business Federation has set up the Centre for the Future of Trade and Investment, a public-private partnership supported by the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI), EnterpriseSG and other partners, to deepen businesses' capabilities for cross-border trade and investment.
MTI and EnterpriseSG, together with sector agencies, regularly review the supported solutions to ensure they remain up to date to meet the needs of our businesses.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Standardising SOPs for Stroller Use across All Public Bus Operators","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"38 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will consider (i) implementing standardised Standard Operating Principles (SOPs) for stroller use across all four public bus operators in consultation with relevant stakeholders and (ii) launching a public communications campaign to educate commuters and bus captains on these SOPs to ensure a consistent and inclusive travel experience for families.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Based on the current Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for all public transport operators, an open stroller is allowed in the wheelchair bay if it is unoccupied. If needed, or if the wheelchair bay is occupied, strollers should be folded to give priority to wheelchair users.
However, there have been cases where the stroller cannot be folded and, thus, it is not always possible to accommodate both the open stroller and the wheelchair user or to follow the SOP. The Land Transport Authority is consulting commuters and working with the bus operators to review the SOP.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Directing Graduates towards Sectors Maintaining Active Hiring and Wage Growth","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"39 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) which sectors currently maintain active hiring and wage growth; and (b) how are new graduates guided towards these opportunities.
Dr Tan See Leng: Most sectors continued to hire and experienced wage growth in 2025. Even though overall job vacancies eased during the year, the ratio of job vacancies to unemployed persons remained above 1.0 since June 2021, representing more job vacancies than unemployed persons. Financial and Insurance Services, Professional Services, and Information and Communications were among the sectors that saw active hiring and wage growth for professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs). These are roles that are suitable for new graduates. There were 14,200 PMET vacancies in these sectors, based on data as at September 2025, up from 12,600 one year ago. In 2025, these sectors recorded real median income increases that were higher than the overall median growth of 4.3%.
All Institutes of Higher Learning have Education and Career Guidance services for students and new graduates to provide guidance on various career pathways and opportunities, including in growth sectors and to facilitate their transition into the workforce. New graduates can also access career matching services and programmes offered by Workforce Singapore (WSG) and its partners. These include career coaching services by WSG and NTUC's Employment and Employability Institute, and career advisory from working professionals in WSG's Volunteer Career Advisors initiative. New graduates can also explore opportunities on WSG's MyCareersFuture portal, using its CareersFinders feature to discover career pathways.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Transfer of Non-pedagogical Administrative Tasks from Teachers to School Administrative and Operations Personnel","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"40 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry will consider mandating the transfer of non-pedagogical administrative tasks, such as the management of parental consent forms, monetary collections and event logistics, from teachers to school administrative and operations personnel to align with the Ministry's objective of reducing teacher workload.
Mr Desmond Lee: All schools have dedicated administrative teams that help with administrative tasks, like collection of money and logistical aspects of organising events. Schools also use technology for tasks, like management of consent forms from parents. Schools are expected to tap on such support to reduce administrative workload for teachers. Given differing school operating contexts, the Ministry of Education does not mandate which specific administrative duties in a school needs to be transferred. This is to allow individual school leaders, who best understand the needs of the school and the capabilities of his colleagues, to have the flexibility in balancing workload across different colleagues.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Security Implications for Singapore and Region Given Policy Shifts in 2025 US National Security Strategy Paper","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"41 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Coordinating Minister for Public Services and Minister for Defence in view of the policy shifts as outlined in the 2025 US National Security Strategy paper (a) what are the security implications for Singapore and the region; and (b) whether Singapore's ongoing and future defence cooperations with the US will be impacted by the US' prioritisation of the Western Hemisphere.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Member may refer to the written reply to Parliamentary Question No 8, asked by Mr Yip Hon Weng, for the Sitting on 13 January 2026.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reviewing Per Capita Household Income Benchmark for ComCare Applicants in View of Increased Cost of Living","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"43 Ms Poh Li San asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether there will be a review in the near term for the per capita household income benchmark used in means testing for Comcare applicants in view of the increase in cost of living in the past few years following the pandemic.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Yes. The ComCare per capita household income benchmark is reviewed every two to three years and was last updated in July 2023.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extension of Guidelines for Designated Delivery Driver Parking Lots to Existing Malls","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"44 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether the guidelines for commercial mall operators to set aside designated short-term delivery driver parking for bicycles and/or motorcycles will be retroactively promulgated to existing malls, or if they only apply to new developments.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Urban Redevelopment Authority and the Land Transport Authority issued an advisory note in 2022 to encourage commercial malls to set aside delivery waiting bays for the motorcycles and active mobility devices of delivery personnel. This applies to both new and existing developments.
Agencies are also studying other ways to make future developments friendlier to delivery riders, such as mandating delivery waiting bays. More information will be shared when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reasons for 55% Increase in People's Association's Expenditure for Year Ended March 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"46 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what are the reasons for the 55% increase in the People's Association's expenditure for activities and projects to $1,136 million for the year ended March 2025 against $733 million in the preceding financial year; and (b) what is the breakdown of the increased expenditure, by (i) activity and (ii) geography, respectively.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: I am answering in my capacity as the Minister charged with the responsibility for the People's Association (PA).
The increase in PA's expenditure for activities and projects from the FY2023 to FY2024 was primarily driven by the Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers Scheme, a national initiative that PA administers. The FY2024 expenditure covered payments to heartland merchants, hawkers and supermarkets across three tranches of CDC Vouchers, while the FY2023 expenditure covered these payments across two tranches. The increased expenditure incurred by PA in FY2024 reflects the additional tranche, as part of the greater support by the Government in providing direct financial relief to households for daily expenses.
The increase in PA's expenditure for activities and projects in FY2024 is also due to the supporting of a higher volume of events and programmes organised by grassroots organisations, CDCs and PA for the benefit of residents across Singapore.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Educating Parents on \"Set, Think, Report, and Engage & Support\" Framework in Context of Blind Box or Gacha Mechanisms Available Online","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"47 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether the \"Set, Think, Report, and Engage & Support\" framework introduced by IMDA on 1 November 2025 can be used to educate parents in the context of parental regulations on blind box or gacha mechanisms available online; and (b) how does the Ministry intend to educate the public, especially parents, on this framework.
Mrs Josephine Teo: In today's digital age, parents often worry about the impact of screen use and what their children might encounter online. To address this, the Government has identified four key actions that families should adopt to foster healthy digital habits and keep their children safe and supported online: (i) set boundaries online; (ii) think before you act; (iii) report inappropriate content; and (iv) engage and support your child in their online journey. These actions are designed as broad-based principles that are easily applicable to various online situations and issues, including in-game purchases and online spending, and help establish the foundation for children to develop healthy digital habits and become discerning and responsible digital users.
To support parents, the Infocomm Media Development Authority has launched a comprehensive set of resources on the Digital for Life (DfL) portal to translate these actions into practical steps. The resources, developed in consultation with parents, youths and key partners, like the Media Literacy Council, are tailored according to the various stages in the parenting journey, based on their child's developmental age range and their experiences with key digital milestones, such as their first screen and first device. In collaboration with community partners, the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) has also launched a series of digital parenting workshops to proactively reach parents in their local communities.
MDDI, the Ministry of Education (MOE) and the Ministry of Social and Family Development have also jointly developed the Positive Use Guide on Technology and Social Media, with practical tips for parents on setting limits on gaming time and handle stopping points for games with flexibility. Relevant content of the Guide will be reinforced through MOE's Cyber Wellness lessons and shared with parents and families.
Specific to loot boxes, with reference to the Member's query on blind boxes or gacha, the National Council on Problem Gambling also conducts outreach to parents and youths to raise awareness of the gambling inducement risks on youths who may be incentivised to try their luck by buying more loot boxes and are unaware that this constitutes gambling behaviour. This includes social media posts, talks and workshops targeted at parents and youths.
The Ministry, together with other relevant agencies, will continue to monitor these concerns and strengthen support initiatives where needed, through collaboration with parents, community partners and schools.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Supporting SMEs and Smaller Businesses to Reduce Fire Risks at Industrial Estates","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"48 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs in light of a recent fire at an industrial estate in Eunos, whether the Ministry has any plan to further support small and medium enterprises and smaller industrial operators to conduct (i) risk management and (ii) structural safety assessments, to better prevent fire risks at the workplace.
Mr K Shanmugam: It is the responsibility of all businesses to comply with the Fire Safety Act and the Workplace Safety and Health Act to ensure a safe workplace environment and minimise fire risks.
There are available resources for businesses to draw upon. For example, guidelines and best practices on the safe handling of flammable materials are available on the Workplace Safety and Health Council's website, while fire safety advisories and relevant resources, such as fire safety posters, can be found on the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) website. In addition, businesses can reach out to SCDF to seek clarifications on fire safety requirements under the Fire Code.
To prepare for fire emergencies, businesses can send their staff to attend SCDF's Responders Plus Programme, where they will receive free hands-on training on the use of fire extinguishers, cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the use of automated external defibrillators.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Total Expenditure and Budgeted Fees For and Incurred for Renamed \"The Kallang\" and \"The Kallang Group\"","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"49 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth what is the total expenditure and fees budgeted for and already incurred in relation to (i) the renaming of the Singapore Sports Hub to The Kallang and (ii) the renaming of Kallang Alive Sport Management to The Kallang Group.\n \n
Mr David Neo: Since the Government took over the Sports Hub in December 2022, it has become more vibrant and accessible to Singaporeans from all walks of life. In this time, The Kallang has seen more than 4,000 event days and welcomed nearly 9.5 million visitors. The Kallang Group has hosted world-class sport and entertainment events, from the Singapore Tennis Open to the Taylor Swift concerts, as well as various local community events including more than 200 National School Games and school events, and annual signature events like Harmony Fest!, Majulah Fiesta and One Countdown.
The destination rebranding of the \"Singapore Sports Hub\" to \"The Kallang\" seeks to strengthen its reputation as a leading destination for sport, entertainment, lifestyle and community events in the region. We have since received positive feedback for the new name and how it honours the cultural significance deeply embedded in Singapore's sporting heritage and collective identity.
This destination rebranding exercise was managed within the operational budget of The Kallang Group, with no increase to the overall operational budget provision for the Group. The Kallang Group has been prudent, leveraging planned events to amplify rebranding efforts and ensuring cost effectiveness throughout the procurement process.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Government's Contributions to Pax Silica Initiative","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"50 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) what are the nature of the Government's contributions to the Pax Silica initiative, if any; (b) which Singapore companies are involved, if any; and (c) what are the Key Performance Indicators and key objectives relating to the initiative, if any.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Singapore's participation in the Pax Silica Summit is in line with our approach of pursuing cooperation with international partners on the basis of mutual benefit.
The inaugural Summit included government representatives from Australia, Israel, Japan, the Netherlands, South Korea, Singapore, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States. Permanent Secretary (Development) of the Ministry of Digital Development and Information, Mr Chng Kai Fong, was Singapore's representative. The Summit discussed collaboration in key sectors of the emerging digital economy, including potential new opportunities for leading companies and investors across our economies. These include sectors such as advanced manufacturing and AI infrastructure, which are key industries for Singapore and our companies.
The Summit issued a non-binding Pax Silica Declaration that reflects a shared commitment to advance prosperity, tech progress and economic security for our peoples.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extending CPF Matched Retirement Savings Scheme to Low-wage Workers below 55","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"52 Mr Shawn Loh asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Government will consider extending the CPF Matched Retirement Savings Scheme to low-wage workers below the age of 55, with matching funds channelled into their Special Account, to enable low-wage workers to save more for their retirement especially with the help of matched contributions from the community.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Matched Retirement Savings Scheme (MRSS) is designed to help senior Singapore citizens with lower retirement savings to save more for retirement. The age floor ensures that the scheme is targeted at seniors who require greater support nearer to the start of their retirement payouts unlike younger Singaporeans who have a relatively longer runway to build their retirement savings.
Eligible lower-wage workers, including those below the age of 55, can also benefit from the Workfare Income Supplement scheme which supplements their incomes and CPF savings, while those in sectors covered by the Progressive Wage Model can benefit from meaningful and sustainable wage increases in tandem with skills upgrading and career progression pathways.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Distribution of Performance Grades Given to Teachers Annually","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"53 Mr David Hoe asked the Minister for Education (a) whether schools are guided that about 5% to 7% of teachers shall receive C-, D and E performance grades annually; (b) what criteria and approvals govern deviations from the (i) A and B and (ii) C-, D and E distributions, and how often schools deviate from the distribution; and (c) whether any internal C- versus D trade-offs create incentives to award D grades.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Ministry of Education (MOE), like the rest of the Civil Service, adopts a system of relative performance ranking for all staff, including teachers. Their performance grade for the year will be based on how they have performed in relation to their peers in the same substantive grade.
Schools are given guidelines to assess if the bottom 5% of the ranking pool should be assigned C-, D and E grades. These are broad guidelines and deviation is allowed, taking into consideration the school's context and specific circumstances of teachers.
Performance grades of teachers are assigned by a ranking panel after careful consideration of each teacher's performance. D grades are only given to officers with poor performance compared to others within the same substantive grade and not to compensate when the C- performance guidelines are not met. Most schools are able to abide by the performance grade guidelines with a few schools deviating based on strong justifications.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Guidance for Installation of CCTVs at HDB Units to Ensure Neighbours' Privacy","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"54 Dr Choo Pei Ling asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether there are enforcement measures to ensure that closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, including doorbells with video recording functions, do not face the doors or windows of other flats; (b) if so, what are these enforcement measures; and (c) whether installation regulations are consistent across all estates and between HDB and private estates.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: While there are occasional complaints on closed-circuit television installation, these form a very small percentage of neighbour dispute cases.
Should such disputes arise, we encourage residents to discuss the issue amicably with their neighbours and, if necessary, seek help from grassroots leaders through their nearest community club or from their Management Corporation Strata Title if they live in a condominium. They may also apply for mediation at the Community Mediation Centre or file a claim before the Community Disputes Resolution Tribunals as a last resort.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Circumstances Leading to Discovery of Town Council Grant Disbursement Shortfall between FY2011 and FY2024","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"55 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for National Development regarding the shortfall of Town Council grant disbursement calculations between FY2011 and FY2024 (a) what were the circumstances that led to the error being discovered; (b) what steps are in place to ensure that this does not occur again; and (c) what additional guidance will be given to Town Councils deciding whether to retrospectively adjust their financial and handover statements to reflect this.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Service and Conservancy Charges Operating Grant is an annual grant provided by the Ministry of National Development (MND) to Town Councils to help with the costs of estate maintenance, meet their operating needs and reduce residents' cost burden. The grant is disbursed annually for 4-room and smaller flats, with higher grants given for the smaller flat types.
The shortfall in the grant was discovered by the Housing and Development Board (HDB) during an internal review. The conversion of the reports from hardcopy to digital format in recent years has facilitated more comprehensive checks on the grant computation process, which led to the identification of the underpayments.
To prevent future discrepancies, HDB has strengthened the grant computation process by introducing additional checks to reconcile records and verify the accuracy of the grant amounts.
MND has advised Town Councils to consult their auditors on whether it is necessary to retrospectively adjust their financial and handover statements to reflect the underpayment of the grant. For instance, as the underpayments differ across Town Councils, their auditors will have advise whether, in their professional judgement, the amounts concerned are deemed to be material.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adequacy of Clementi Public Library's Space and Programme Capacity Given Upcoming BTOs, Planned Cross Island Line Interchange and Ageing Population","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"56 Mr David Hoe asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether NLB has assessed if Clementi Public Library's space and programme capacity remains adequate for the future in view of new BTOs, ageing population and the planned Cross Island Line interchange; (b) what do recent utilisation indicators, such as visits and seat occupancy show; and (c) whether NLB will consider expanding the library or relocating it to larger premises.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Clementi Public Library saw about 700,000 visits in 2025, moderated from 800,000 in 2023. It continues to operate within its capacity limits and is also supported by the National Library Board's (NLB's) 24-hour digital library.
NLB continuously reviews and ensures that library collections and services meet the evolving needs of the communities they serve. As part of these efforts, Clementi Public Library is slated for a revamp to offer an enhanced experience for patrons. More details will be announced when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proposal to Publish Real-time Train Arrival Data on LTA DataMall","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"57 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether the Land Transport Authority (LTA) will consider publishing real-time train arrival data on the LTA DataMall similar to the existing bus arrival API; (b) if so, what is the implementation timeline; and (c) if not, what are the specific technical or security impediments preventing the release of this data for public scrutiny.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Land Transport Authority does not provide real-time train arrival data online as intervals between train arrivals are short and next train arrivals are adequately communicated to commuters at all train stations.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Approval Rate for LTVP Applications from Spouses of Singapore Citizens over Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"58 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs what is the approval rate for Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) applications from spouses of Singapore citizens over the past three years.
Mr K Shanmugam: From 2022 – 2024, the average annual approval rate for Long-Term Visit Pass applications from spouses of Singapore citizens was around 91%.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proactive Identification of Singaporean Households under Public Rental Scheme in Potential Distress for Assistance","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"59 Ms Hany Soh asked the Minister for National Development whether HDB proactively identifies Singapore Citizen households under the Public Rental Scheme which are potentially in distress in order to refer them to the relevant agencies for assistance, including reviewing indicators such as an ongoing rental but without utilities.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) actively monitors households' rental payments for signs of financial difficulty and follows up closely on any public feedback on the household. HDB also collaborates closely with other agencies, like the Family Service Centres and Social Services Offices, on case referrals, management and resolution. When potential signs of distress are identified, including during house visits and interactions with tenants, HDB works closely with relevant organisations to provide the appropriate support to the households.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Floor Area as Factor to Determine Occupancy Cap for Rental of Private Residential Properties","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"60 Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin asked the Minister for National Development in respect of the occupancy cap for rental of private residential properties (a) what are the considerations for the cap of eight persons for each rented property; and (b) whether the Ministry can consider scaling the limit according to the property type and floor area to allow a higher but capped number of occupants for larger properties.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Private residential properties are subject to an occupancy cap of six unrelated persons. This is to prevent the property from having too many tenants, which will cause disamenities to other residents in the neighbourhood.
From 22 January 2024 till 31 December 2026, the Urban Redevelopment Authority has relaxed the occupancy cap for larger properties of at least 90 square per metre, to allow up to eight unrelated persons. This temporary relaxation was introduced to meet robust rental demand while maintaining the amenity of residential neighbourhoods.
There are currently no plans to further increase the occupancy cap. While a property with larger floor area could physically accommodate more tenants, having too many tenants in one rental property will cause disamenities to other residents in the vicinity.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancements and Follow-up Actions to Changi Point Area Following Charmingly Changi Competition in 2021","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"61 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Minister for National Development (a) what follow-up actions, if any, has the Ministry taken following the Charmingly Changi competition in 2021 to enhance the Changi Point area; (b) why have the ideas proposed in the competition not been implemented to-date; and (c) whether there are any plans or timelines to incorporate these ideas into long-term development strategies for the area.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Agencies have been studying the potential rejuvenation plans for the Changi Point area, with the aim to enhance it into a recreational node with new leisure, hospitality and lifestyle experiences. Ideas from the Charmingly Changi Ideas Competition are being incorporated where possible, taking into account the unique attributes of the area.
Agencies will share more information on plans for the Changi Point area when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increasing Reservist In-camp Durations and Frequency in View of Uncertainties in Regional and Global Security","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"62 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Coordinating Minister for Public Services and Minister for Defence in view of uncertainties in regional and global security, whether the Ministry has any plans to (i) increase reservist commitments, including the frequency or duration of In-Camp Training or (ii) raise the age limit for reservists, like Finland.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: National Servicemen make up the bulk of the Singapore Armed Forces' (SAF's) manpower. In deciding on the frequency and duration of our Operationally Ready National Servicemen's (NSmen) call-ups, we have struck a careful balance between the operations and training needed to keep Singapore safe and secure, and the imposition on our NSmen and their families and employers.
Today, we have many NSmen who volunteer to serve beyond their mandatory requirements. Others have contributed in new roles that tap on their deep civilian skills, experience and expertise. I thank all of them for going beyond the call of duty. We will continue to optimise our NSmen's deployment and expand opportunities for those who are able and willing to contribute in more areas of our national defence.
The frequency and duration of In-Camp Training and the statutory age for our NSmen are broadly adequate for our current needs. SAF will conduct more intensive or specialised training in selected units that require it. Should there be a need to review NSmen's commitments more generally in future, the Ministry of Defence will explain the need and rationale clearly and seek Parliamentarians' and the public's support ahead of time.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Classification Decisions for Oral Interviews with Mdm Kwa Geok Choo and Founding Leaders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"63 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information in respect of the declassification of the Albatross File (a) why was the oral history interview of Madam Kwa Geok Choo classified for over 40 years; (b) whether any other similar interviews remain classified; (c) who are the founding leaders whose interviews remain classified; (d) whether these interviews can be declassified; and (e) if not, why not.\n \n
Mrs Josephine Teo: As Members are aware, my Ministry recently released the contents of Dr Goh Keng Swee's Albatross File, together with the excerpts of the oral histories of many of our founding leaders pertaining to the Separation of Singapore from Malaysia.
Oral history interviews conducted by the National Archives of Singapore (NAS) are governed by oral history agreements signed by the interviewees. The terms of the agreement vary based on the interviewees' requests. For example, Mr CV Devan Nair, Mr S Rajaratnam, Mr EW Barker and Dr Albert Winsemius all signed the same agreement, which specified that the Cabinet Secretary may consider releasing their oral history interviews five years after their death. Their oral history interviews have been released in full.
Before releasing interviews for public access on Archives Online, NAS reviews them for sensitivities, including personal or private information about individuals, as well as matters that may affect national security or international relations. Where such sensitivities remain, access may need to stay partially or fully restricted for a longer time, even after the agreed withholding period has passed. This was the case for the oral histories of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Mdm Kwa Geok Choo and Dr Goh Keng Swee. Substantial excerpts of these oral histories were published recently together with “The Albatross File: Inside Separation”.
About 80% of NAS' oral history collection is already publicly accessible. This includes interviews with many notable leaders from the pioneer generation, such as Mr Lim Kim San, Mr Othman Wok, Mr Lee Khoon Choy, Mr Mahmud Awang and Mr David Marshall. NAS will continue to work towards providing access to all interviews as soon as it is feasible to do so. Dr Goh's oral history interview has been released with some redactions, and a fuller version of Mr Lee's oral history interview will be made available soon. The oral history interview of Mr Ong Pang Boon will also be released later this year, in accordance with his request for a withholding period of 15 years after he was last interviewed in 2010.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expected Singapore Population for Infrastructure Planning Parameter beyond 2030","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"64 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Government expects Singapore's total population to be at, above, or below 6.9 million beyond 2030; and (b) what are the justifications for such projections.
65 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance what is the population figure used by the Government as an infrastructure planning parameter to plan for the long term beyond 2030.
Ms Indranee Rajah: Our future population size depends on various demographic trends, such as birth rates, life expectancies and migration, as well as future social and economic needs. We thus develop various scenarios which are used for infrastructure planning to ensure that we are prepared for a range of possible outcomes, and do not plan on the basis of any single population number.
Our scenarios show that our total population is expected to remain significantly below 6.9 million by 2030, and that 6.9 million remains relevant as a planning parameter for the 2030s.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Number of Public EV Chargers Per 1,000 Battery Electric Vehicles","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"66 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) what is the number of public electric vehicle (EV) chargers per 1,000 battery electric vehicles in Singapore; and (b) whether the locations of such EV chargers are evenly distributed across each town in Singapore.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: There are now about 220 public electric vehicle (EV) charging points for every 1,000 EVs registered in Singapore. The EV chargers are generally evenly distributed, with more chargers in Housing and Development Board towns with higher EV utilisation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Avenues of Recourse for Consumers Facing Predatory Practices by Blind Box or Gacha Mechanism Service Providers","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"67 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what are the existing avenues of recourse for consumers facing unfair and predatory practices by blind box or gacha mechanism service providers; and (b) how does the Ministry intend to educate consumers on such avenues and how consumers can use them to protect their consumer rights.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: When purchasing blind box or 'gacha' products, there is no guarantee of obtaining a specific item. The use of blind boxes or 'gacha' mechanisms is not prohibited under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act 2003 (CPFTA). However, under the CPFTA, it is an unfair practice for a business to make false or misleading claims about its goods and services, such as misrepresenting the odds of obtaining certain variants of a product through a blind box or a 'gacha' mechanism.
Consumers who encounter such unfair practices may approach the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) for assistance. CASE can represent consumers in negotiating a settlement or mediating with the supplier. In more serious cases, CASE may refer errant suppliers to the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCS) for investigation under the CPFTA.
CCS and CASE regularly conduct outreach and public education efforts to inform and educate consumers about their rights and available avenues for redress.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adapting Structural Envelope of Existing North East Line Station Boxes to Accommodate Platform Elongation for Longer Train Sets","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"68 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether the structural envelope of existing North East Line station boxes can accommodate platform elongation for longer train sets as a capacity boosting measure; (b) whether corresponding turnback sidings and depot stabling tracks have the requisite length to support these longer formations; and (c) whether such capacity upgrades can be achieved without extensive new underground excavation.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The North East Line is designed for a six-car train system. Supporting trains with more cars would require major modification works to the underground station, platforms, tunnels, tracks including sidings and the depot. This cannot be achieved without heavy excavation, which would, in turn, require stopping North East Line service entirely for at least a year, if not longer. Significant land acquisition would also be needed to extend the stations.
The Cross Island Line, when completed, will add to the MRT connectivity and capacity for the North East. We are also studying the feasibility of the Seletar Line which will also benefit the region.
69 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) whether any hazardous air pollutants or volatile organic compounds exceeding international safety limits were detected in Jalan Kayu, Punggol or Seletar over the past five years; (b) if so, what were the identified sources; and (c) what specific long-term health risk assessments have been conducted for residents in these areas.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: In addition to pollutants comprising the Pollutant Standards Index, the National Environment Agency (NEA) continuously monitors a range of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) at its ambient air monitoring stations. Long-term data trends of key pollutants are published in the State of the Environment (SOE) report every five years. The first edition of the report was published in 2021, with a second edition due to be released later this year.
The Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) and NEA have been working with Punggol Grassroots Advisors to address similar concerns from residents.
VOC readings at our ambient air monitoring stations in residential areas, including four in the north-eastern regions, are well within relevant international guidelines. One of the VOCs of interest is benzene. On an annual basis, Singapore's national ambient benzene level is approximately 0.3 parts per billion (ppb), well below international benchmarks, such as the European Union long-term exposure annual limit value of 1.6 ppb. For shorter term exposure, the US EPA 1-hour Acute Exposure Guideline Level-1 (AEGL-1) represents the airborne concentration above which the general population could experience notable discomfort or irritation. The hourly benzene readings across each of these ambient air monitoring stations are well below 1% of the AEGL-1 threshold.
Arising from our engagements with Punggol grassroots advisors in recent months, NEA will be making data on ambient benzene levels available to the public more regularly via their website including by geographical locations.
Good air quality safeguards public health and a good living environment. We have a range of policies in place to safeguard air quality, such as efforts to reduce vehicular and industrial emissions. On the bilateral front, we regularly engage our Malaysian counterparts through existing platforms to exchange information on environmental issues of mutual interest, including cross-border pollution concerns.
MSE and NEA will continue to review our ambient air quality targets and efforts to ensure that they remain relevant and effective in safeguarding a clean and liveable environment for everyone.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Improving Accessibility for Seniors Commuting between Hougang Avenue 5 and Hougang Polyclinic by Adjusting Bus Routes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"70 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether LTA can improve bus accessibility for seniors commuting between Hougang Avenue 5 and Hougang Polyclinic by adjusting current bus routes to allow at least one bus service serving Hougang Avenue 5 to stop directly at the Polyclinic, eliminating the need for transferring buses or walking from a different stop.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: We would like to better support our seniors but unfortunately, the bus stop for Hougang Polyclinic is very near to the access road for the polyclinic, and bus routes cannot be amended to call there at this time. As explained in our previous reply, having more buses call at this stop will affect the safe movement of vehicles and create inconvenience to pedestrians and other road users.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring Food Prices at Rental Coffee Shops","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"71 Dr Choo Pei Ling asked the Minister for National Development (a) what specific mechanisms does HDB use to monitor food prices in rental coffeeshops let out under its Price-Quality Method (PQM) tender framework; (b) whether HDB has intervened due to affordability concerns; and (c) if so, how often.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) conducts regular surveys to track the prices of common dishes and drinks offered in HDB coffee shops. HDB does not directly regulate food prices. Instead, HDB strives to provide adequate supply of coffee shops in every HDB town, complementing the network of hawker centres, to offer a range of cooked food options for residents.
HDB requires budget meals to be a full meal option. We recently made some changes to the budget meal initiative to provide enhanced funding support for participating operators who choose to offer budget meals in their eating houses. Part of the changes include requiring the operator to provide three meal options: (i) an economy rice option consisting of rice with one meat dish and two vegetable dishes, (ii) a halal meal option and (iii) a breakfast item.
Beyond these guidelines, it is not feasible to impose nutritional requirements on budget meals, just as we do not impose such requirements on hawker stalls in general.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Potential Adoption of United Kingdom's EV Charging Model to Speed Up Deployment in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"72 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether Singapore will consider the United Kingdom model where users have to bring their own electric vehicle (EV) charging cables to speed up the deployment of EV chargers.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: For public safety reasons, chargers without fixed charging cables are currently allowed in limited locations, such as private landed residences, where access can be restricted. As technology improves, we will consider such options.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implications on Responsibilities and Standing of Physicians with Graduate Diploma in Family Medicine Qualification","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"73 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health in respect of the recognition of Family Medicine as a specialty (a) whether accredited family physicians will face increased responsibilities, including managing non-emergencies and outpatient visits usually managed by hospitals; (b) whether their participation in corporate panels will be impacted; and (c) what are the implications for the standing of physicians holding a Graduate Diploma in Family Medicine.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Family physicians receive training which allows them to provide better care for patients with multiple chronic medical conditions. This is important given the demographic changes in our population and the increasing prevalence of seniors with multiple medical conditions.
Doctors enrol in either the Graduate Diploma in Family Medicine (GDFM) or the Master of Medicine (Family Medicine) (MMed(FM)) programmes to attain these higher clinical competencies. In 2025, Family Medicine was recognised as a specialty, which recognises a group of senior and experienced family physicians who have completed advanced family medicine training beyond the MMed(FM). These Family Medicine specialists are able to provide care in the community for patients with more complex chronic medical conditions, which would otherwise have been managed by specialists in hospitals. Family Medicine specialists are also able to lead multidisciplinary primary care teams, providing integrated care for their patients with multiple underlying medical conditions, coordinating multidisciplinary care in the community and reducing referrals to hospitals. They will continue to work in partnership with other specialists in the hospitals and refer cases for further management when necessary.
Participation in corporate panels are commercial arrangements. All doctors are required to practice within their accredited scope and clinical competencies regardless of any commercial arrangements they enter into.
Family physicians with a GDFM are strongly encouraged to pursue further postgraduate training, so as to provide better care for their patients with chronic medical conditions. They may enrol in the MMed(FM) programme, which qualifies family physicians for onward entry to the advanced family medicine training programme, administered by the College of Family Physicians Singapore and which qualifies them to register as Family Medicine Specialists.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Proportion of Private Condominiums and Apartments Utilising BCA Accessibility Fund","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"74 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Minister for National Development (a) what proportion of private condominiums and apartments have utilised the BCA Accessibility Fund; (b) what has the average utilisation of the fund been over the past five years; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider a dedicated fund to support the provision of other facilities to improve the living environment of seniors in private residential developments.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Accessibility Fund has supported accessibility improvements in 161 buildings as of December 2025. Of these, 20 were condominiums and apartments. Over the past five years, the average utilisation of the Fund was about $0.5 million annually.
In line with Age Well SG, there is an ongoing review to enhance the Accessibility Fund to better support seniors living in private residential developments.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Criteria to Distinguish Scams from Civil or Commercial Disputes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"75 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) how does the Singapore Police Force determine whether a case is classified as a scam in situations where a seller fails to complete a transaction and multiple buyers are affected; and (b) what criteria are used to distinguish such cases from civil or commercial disputes.
Mr K Shanmugam: Sellers who deceive victims into making payments without any intent to provide the goods or service may be liable for cheating under the Penal Code. If the seller failed to provide the goods or service but did not have fraudulent intent, no cheating offence would be disclosed and the buyer may seek redress through civil remedies.
In determining if a case is a scam, the Police assess each case based on its facts and circumstances, for example, whether the seller impersonated a legitimate shop or became uncontactable immediately after receiving payment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reports of Foreigners Using their Vehicles for Business and Trade Purposes in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"76 Ms Hany Soh asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether the Ministry has received reports of foreigners without a valid work pass driving their vehicles into Singapore and using such vehicles for business or trade purposes in Singapore, especially in the construction and commerce sectors.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Land Transport Authority has received reports of foreign-registered vehicles being used for commercial purposes but not on whether the drivers of those vehicles have valid work passes. We will work with other Government agencies to study how to prevent foreigners without valid work passes using their vehicles in Singapore for commercial purposes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Establishing One-stop Default Authorisation for Singaporeans to Allow Verification by Medical Institutions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"77 Ms Hany Soh asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health whether a default authorisation can be established for Singaporeans to allow medical institutions to verify their healthcare financing coverage, withdraw from their Medisave and claim from their insurance policies to settle medical expenses for both inpatient and outpatient treatments at public hospitals to eliminate having to complete the relevant Medical Claims Authorisation Forms.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The requirement for patients to complete Medical Claims Authorisation Forms in order to use their MediSave or insurance policies exists to protect their MediSave monies and their data, as well as to provide flexibility to exercise personal choice.
There are two types of authorisation forms. Patients who wish to authorise their current and future treatments at all public healthcare institutions only need to complete the authorisation form for multiple institutions once. Those who prefer to provide authorisation at a specific institution across one or more episodes can use the form for single institution. The public healthcare institutions will prompt patients to sign the Medical Claims Authorisation Form during or after their visit.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reviewing Income Ceiling for Executive Condominiums","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"78 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for National Development given the small $2,000 differential in monthly income cap for couples applying for BTO flats versus Executive Condominium, (a) whether HDB will consider raising the income cap of one or the other or both to better align with rising household incomes of the top quintile; and (b) whether HDB will institute periodic increases for income ceilings to align with nominal wage changes.
79 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Minister for National Development given the rising prices of Executive Condominiums (EC), whether HDB will review the current income ceiling for EC eligibility to ensure that they remain accessible to their intended group of middle-income households.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The current monthly household income ceilings for subsidised flats sold by the Housing and Development Board (HDB) and executive condominium units sold by property developers are $14,000 and $16,000 respectively.
This Government will continue to ensure that public housing remains affordable and accessible for Singaporeans. I had indicated in August 2025 that the Ministry of National Development and HDB are reviewing the income ceilings, and we will provide an update when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Increasing Public Transport Vouchers for Lower-income Households to Defray Recent Fare Hike","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"81 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether there will be any increase in Public Transport Vouchers to help lower income households defray the recent fare increases; (b) if so, whether the Government aims to maintain its previous objective of defraying six months of fare increases; and (c) whether the Government will consider defraying 12 months of fare increases instead.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Public Transport Vouchers help lower-income households defray part of any fare increase. In 2024, the quantum increased to $60 from $50. Six months of fare increase is indicative but not a cap. Households requiring more support can submit an appeal online or at their local community centres or community clubs for additional vouchers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reviewing Temasek's Risk-return Framework to Value Strategic Ecosystem Building alongside Commercial Returns","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"82 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance (a) whether the Government will review Temasek's risk-return framework to explicitly value strategic ecosystem building alongside commercial returns; (b) whether the Government has assessed the impact of Temasek's recent deprioritisation of direct early-stage local investments on Singapore's ability to nurture nascent high-potential industries; and (c) if so, whether alternative capital support mechanisms will be introduced to fill this gap.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: This question has been addressed in the reply to Parliamentary Question Nos 12 to 14 on the Order Paper for 12 January 2026. [Please refer to \"Temasek Holdings' Planned Restructuring and Potential Impact on Investment Performance and Returns\", Official Report, 12 January 2026, Vol 96, Issue 12, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Strengthening Consular Assistance and Crisis Response Capabilities for Singaporeans during Emergencies","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"83 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether the Ministry can provide an update on (i) how MFA is strengthening its consular assistance and crisis response capabilities for Singaporeans overseas, particularly in light of increasing geopolitical instability and (ii) what measures are being taken to ensure timely communication with and support for Singaporeans during emergencies abroad.
84 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs (a) what are the Ministry's standard operating procedures, if any, for providing emergency consular aid and ensuring the safety of Singaporeans during overseas crises such as the (i) Brown University shooting on 13 December 2025, (ii) Bondi Beach shooting on 14 December 2025 and (iii) Taipei knife attack on 19 December 2025; and (b) what assistance, if any, was rendered by our overseas missions following the Brown University shooting.
Dr Vivian Balakrishnan: This response will address Parliamentary Question No 992 raised by Member Lee Hong Chuang and Parliamentary Question No 1002 raised by Member Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat in today's Order Paper.
When a crisis or major incident occurs overseas, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) mounts an appropriate consular response. First, we determine the nature and severity of the incident. Second, we disseminate relevant information and updates to Singaporeans who may potentially be involved. Third, we provide consular assistance to Singaporeans in distress. This includes contacting eRegistered Singaporeans to check on their well-being, liaising with local authorities, issuing Document of Identity for lost passports and facilitating the return of Singaporeans back home, if necessary. We may also issue Travel Notices and Advisories for Singaporeans to avoid travel to that region. That said, every incident is unique and circumstances in the foreign country vary widely, so our responses must be customised accordingly.
Let me cite some examples from recent incidents. During the floods in Hat Yai, our Crisis Response Team was deployed overseas to reach Singaporeans and help bring them home. MFA also helped facilitate the departure of 11 Singaporeans from Iran during the Israel-Iran conflict in June 2025.
When the attacks at Brown University, Bondi Beach and Taipei occurred, our Missions took immediate action, including contacting Singaporeans that eRegistered, posting updates and advice and liaising with local authorities to ensure the well-being of our citizens.
We encourage Singaporeans to eRegister when they travel as this allows MFA to reach out and render prompt consular assistance where needed. We also urge Singaporeans to stay vigilant and take precautions for their personal safety while abroad, purchase comprehensive travel insurance and refer to MFA's Travel Advisories and Notices.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Establishing Policy Framework for GST Relief on Rare or Complex Conditions' Essential Medications","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"85 Dr Hamid Razak asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health whether the Ministry will consider establishing a policy framework for Goods and Services Tax (GST) relief on essential medications used to treat rare or complex conditions, particularly where patients face high out-of-pocket costs and limited treatment options.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Government absorbs \tGoods and Services Tax for medical services and medications for subsidised patients at Government-funded public hospitals, polyclinics and intermediate and long-term care institutions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Standardised Protocols for Regular Review of CCTV Footage in Government Primary Schools to Minimise Physical and Sexual Abuse of Students","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WANA","content":"86 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Education whether there are any standardised protocols in place for the regularly reviewing of CCTV footage in Government primary schools to minimise the risk of physical and sexual abuse of students, especially those who are younger in age.
Mr Desmond Lee: The Ministry of Education (MOE) employs various measures to ensure the safety and well-being of students in all primary schools. School personnel are trained to identify signs of distress in our students, check in on their well-being and report suspected abuse to School Leaders. From Primary 1, students are taught about personal safety and boundaries and the different forms of abuse. They are taught to protect themselves in physical and online spaces and how to report their concerns and seek help from trusted adults.
Classroom doors are kept open and air-conditioned rooms have viewing windows. Coaches and instructors are also briefed on the expectations of professional conduct, which include maintaining clear instructor-student boundaries and refraining from being alone in an enclosed room or secluded space with a student.
When looking into incidents of suspected abuse, schools review available CCTV footage, but it is not practical for schools to regularly review CCTV footage to try to pick up potential abuse as CCTVs tend to be installed in high-traffic areas.
MOE will continue to review safety measures in schools to ensure that they remain effective and relevant.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Implications of Increased Electricity Demands and Measures to Support Sustainable Growth and Expansion of Data Centre Capacity","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"1 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry in light of the second Data Centre Call for Application issued in December 2025 (a) what assessment has the Government made of the implications for electricity demand; and (b) what consideration is being given to accelerating or increasing renewable electricity development and import targets to support sustainable growth of data centre capacity.
Mr Gan Kim Yong: The development of data centres in Singapore is carefully managed. The second Data Centre – Call for Application (DC-CFA2) exercise was launched only after carefully assessing the availability of electricity and other resources needed to support new data centre capacity without compromising other needs.
Under the DC-CFA2 requirements, at least half of the new data centres' energy requirements must be powered by one or more of the green energy pathways stipulated in the exercise. This requirement is in line with the Green Data Centre Roadmap launched by the Infocomm Media Development Authority in 2024, which guides data centres on improving energy efficiency and using green energy to support our ambitions for the digital economy.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Recidivism Rates for Child Sexual Abuse Offences over Past 10 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"2 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs what are the two-year, five-year and 10-year recidivism rates for child sexual abuse offences over the past 10 years.
Mr K Shanmugam: Table 1 below shows the two-year and five-year recidivism rates1 of local offenders who were incarcerated for child sexual abuse offences and whose re-offending offence was also a child sexual abuse offence. The recidivism rates for such offenders are generally low but are prone to fluctuation since the number of such offenders released each year is small.
3 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) what was the basis for selecting the 11 locations for the installation of new Traffic Violation Enforcement Cameras since September 2025; and (b) whether more cameras will be deployed to other high-risk areas such as school zones, to enhance road safety.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Traffic Police installs the mobile traffic violation enforcement cameras at locations with a higher risk of accidents and violations. They may redeploy these cameras elsewhere, or deploy additional cameras, depending on the prevailing risk assessment.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Violations of Underage Alcohol Sales and Consumption at Licensed Liquor Sellers over Past Five Years and Plans to Enhance Enforcement Actions","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"4 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) for each year over the past five years, what is the number of cases of licensed liquor sellers selling alcoholic beverages to underage persons or allowing underage persons to consume alcohol on their premises; (b) how frequently are spot checks conducted at such establishments; and (c) whether the Ministry intends to increase such spot checks.
Mr K Shanmugam: Between 2021 and 2025, the number of cases of licensed liquor sellers selling alcoholic beverages to underage persons or allowing underage persons to consume alcohol on their premises was 32, 23, 13, 11 and 12 respectively. Police conduct regular enforcement checks on licensed premises, and the frequency will vary based on the public feedback and Police's observations of the situation.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Fire Safety Standards for Mass Lithium-Ion Battery Storage in Workplaces and Measures to Mitigate Fire Risks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"5 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs on the mass storage and charging of larger quantities of lithium-ion batteries in workplaces (a) whether existing fire safety standards and advisories are adequate for such workplaces; and (b) whether additional measures are needed to mitigate fire risks at such storage facilities.
Mr K Shanmugam: The Fire Code stipulates the fire safety requirements for energy storage systems, including the storage and charging of large quantities of lithium-ion batteries in workplaces. These include the use of fire-rated compartments, with stipulations on the maximum stored energy that can be housed within each compartment and the provision of higher discharge density sprinklers as well as mechanical ventilation systems to disperse any build-up of flammable gases.
These requirements, which referenced relevant international standards, were introduced after extensive consultations with the industry and other stakeholders. The Singapore Civil Defence Force regularly reviews the Fire Code, including such requirements, to ensure continued relevance and fitness for purpose.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Government's Security Officers' Working Hours across Different Models and Proportion of Officers Working Overtime in 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"6 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Coordinating Minister for National Security and Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the current percentage of the Government's security contracts that have transitioned to outcome-based models that do not require security officers to be stationed for 12 hours at a time; and (b) what percentage of security officers working under Government contracts work 65 or more overtime hours monthly in 2025.
Mr K Shanmugam: Since 2020, all Government Procuring Entities (GPEs) are required to adopt outcome-based contracts (OBC) in the procurement of security services, unless they have strong reasons not to do so. All GPEs that procure security services have adopted at least one OBC.
The Government does not track data on the working hours and shift patterns of security officers across GPE security contracts. Nonetheless, measures are in place to safeguard security officers' welfare, for example under the Police's licensing conditions. The Government will continue working with tripartite partners to ensure fair and reasonable working conditions for security officers.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Assessment of Singapore's Defence Ecosystem's Competitiveness and Growth in Defence Export Value","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"7 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Coordinating Minister for Public Services and Minister for Defence (a) whether the Ministry assesses Singapore's defence ecosystem dynamism and agility in pivoting towards emerging demands; (b) if so, what is the current assessment and percentage increase in defence export value over five years; and (c) whether the Ministry is aware of any expansion by the local defence industry in manufacturing and research capacity amid global defence spending surge.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: The Ministry of Defence and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) regularly review our operational needs and challenges, and strive to develop solutions, capabilities and technologies ahead of emerging threats. In doing so, we incorporate observations and lessons from global conflicts and developments. For obvious reasons, we do not always disclose all our capabilities or build-up plans, unless it is deemed useful for deterrence or operational purposes.
In developing, producing and sustaining equipment and capabilities for SAF, we tap on the global and local defence industries. In some cases, we work closely with local defence players to develop new solutions for our unique needs. Past examples include our Navy's unmanned surface vessels and our Army's armoured fighting vehicles and the Singapore Armed Forces Training Institute City's smart training facility.
From these experiences as well as their own efforts, some of our local companies have developed solutions and products for overseas markets. We do not comment on such commercial investments, exports and sales.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Impact of 2025 US National Security Strategy on Singapores Defence Interests and Strategic Positioning","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"8 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Coordinating Minister for Public Services and Minister for Defence (a) how the 2025 US National Security Strategy's shift toward hemispheric security, economic nationalism and greater burden-shifting to partners will impact Singapore's defence interests; and (b) what broader strategic issues does this raise about Singapore's long-term positioning, relevance and vulnerabilities in a world where America increasingly narrows its definition of core interests.
Mr Chan Chun Sing: We adhere to the fundamental principle that the responsibility for the defence and security of Singapore must lie with Singaporeans. We do not plan on the assumption that others will come to our rescue when we are attacked. Neither do we rely on others to safeguard our survival and peace. This is the reason we believe in the importance of having a strong Singapore Armed Forces (SAF). It is why we have upheld mandatory National Service since 1967 and maintained steady levels of defence investments through the years, even when the security environment seems more peaceful.
Alongside our efforts to build capabilities to deter and defend against threats to our nation, we pursue defence diplomacy initiatives to build mutual understanding, foster mutually beneficial relations and engage in constructive partnerships with other countries and their militaries. We work with like-minded partners actively in bilateral and multilateral efforts that contribute to regional peace and security.
The United States (US) is one such important defence partner. While there could be some changes in priorities in the US' National Security Strategy from year to year, we take a long-term perspective to our relations with partners. We believe that the US has strategic interests in our region and can contribute to the region's peace and security. We will continue to engage the US on mutually beneficial collaborations.
Having said that, other countries would only find us a reliable, principled and worthy partner if we have real and substantive capabilities that can value-add to the relationship. To this end, the SAF must continue to build up our unique capabilities for our own operational and deterrence purposes, and for others to want to partner us.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Post-natal Care Services and Costs, and Use of MediSave for Post-delivery Complications at Public and Private Hospitals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"9 Ms Joan Pereira asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether the Government has information on (i) the types of post-natal care services and (ii) average costs incurred for such services within eight weeks after delivery at public and private hospitals respectively; and (b) whether the Government will consider allowing the use of MediSave for postpartum care services at public and private hospitals, especially where there are post-delivery complications.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Under the MediSave Maternity Package, MediSave can be used to pay for pre-delivery and delivery expenses as these tend to be more costly. For mothers with post-delivery complications requiring hospitalisation, MediShield Life will provide additional coverage, on top of MediSave.
Some mothers may require additional outpatient post-natal services in hospitals or primary care, such as lactation support or post-natal depression screening. The Ministry of Health (MOH) does not track the costs of such post-natal care, which tend to be episodic.
There are many requests for Medisave to cover more treatments to minimise cash outlay for patients. We need to strike a balance and ensure MediSave adequacy while keeping Central Provident Fund contribution rates reasonable for all. Nevertheless, Singaporeans who face affordability challenges with their post-natal medical care can approach medical social workers in our public hospitals to assess their eligibility for financial assistance, such as MediFund. The MOH will continue to review our financing schemes to ensure maternity services remain affordable.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Exclusion of Regional Regulatory Authorities as HSA Reference Agencies and Impacts on Acceleration of Drug Access","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"10 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what specific technical or regulatory barriers prevent the inclusion of Japan's Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency and South Korea's Ministry of Food and Drug Safety as reference agencies for therapeutic product registration; (b) to what extent does such exclusion delay the registration of medicines optimised for regional populations; and (c) whether the Ministry will conduct a feasibility study on recognising such World Health Organisation Listed Authorities as HSA's reference agencies, to accelerate drug access.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Health Sciences Authority (HSA) currently recognises six reference agencies – the US Food and Drug Administration (US FDA), European Medicines Agency (EMA), Health Canada, Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) of Australia, Swissmedic and Medicines and Health Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) of the United Kingdom.
This current six reference jurisdictions comprise major markets which typically receive first-wave filings from pharmaceutical companies, of which HSA has established collaborative evaluation process and joint review with. This includes aligned scientific standards for quality, safety and efficacy, as well as access to comprehensive scientific assessment and evaluation reports in English that HSA can rely upon for its verification process. Through these arrangements, we could offer an expedited 60 working days turnaround time for therapeutic product registration, which is fast by international standards.
HSA continuously reviews its regulatory framework to ensure patients in Singapore have optimal access to safe and effective therapeutic products. Hence, HSA is in talks with other WHO-listed authorities, including Japan and South Korea, to explore closer regulatory cooperation initiatives.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Significance of Healthier SG's Capitation Model on Healthcare Financing and Mechanisms to Ensure Long-term Fiscal Sustainability","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"11 Mr Kenneth Tiong Boon Kiat asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether the shift in model from the Community Health Assist Scheme's means-tested co-payments to Healthier SG's capitation model signals a departure from the Ministry's philosophy of shared responsibility in healthcare financing; and (b) without market-based price signals to moderate demand under the capitation model, what specific mechanisms will prevent buffet syndrome and ensure Healthier SG's long-term fiscal sustainability.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: What the Member might be asking is why many preventive care services under Healthier SG are fully subsidised, while other healthcare services, including those under the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS), require co-payment by patients.
The key reason is that we want to encourage cost effective preventive care. Hence for preventive care services, where we hope that as many people take it up as possible under Healthier SG, we have given full subsidies to the target population segment. Subsidies for all other healthcare services, including acute hospital care or chronic care, continue to be means-tested and require co-payment, to instill some discipline in healthcare provision and consumption, because unnecessary consumption of healthcare and over-servicing can lead to rapid cost escalation, a financially unsustainable healthcare system and poorer health outcomes in the long term.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Administrative Requirements and Procedures Imposed by Insurers for Cancer Drug Claims","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"12 Dr Hamid Razak asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry is aware of the administrative requirements imposed by insurers on doctors for cancer drug claims under the Cancer Drug List (CDL); and (b) whether the Ministry has endorsed or advised on these procedures for Integrated Shield Plan claims.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Claims for MediSave, MediShield Life (MSHL) and Integrated Shield Plans (IP) are filed electronically through the national claims processing system. The system contains all relevant data fields required for the assessment and processing of claims for cancer drugs listed on the Cancer Drug List (CDL). This minimises administrative hassle and follow-on clarifications from insurers.
The Ministry of Health (MOH) is aware that for some cancer drug claims, especially those for drugs not listed on CDL, insurers may require additional information from healthcare providers. For example, for non-CDL treatments that are not covered by MSHL and IPs but are covered by riders, insurers may need to request for information on whether the treatments have been approved by regulatory authorities or supported by established clinical guidelines, in order to process for reimbursement.
In addition, manual submissions would be required for cases involving providers or payers that cannot be filed through the system. These additional submissions enable insurers to assess the claims and pay out the correct benefits. Where specific feedback about the administrative processes is surfaced, MOH will engage the healthcare providers and insurers to explore opportunities to further streamline the claim processes.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Patient Follow-Up Testing at Different Healthcare Cluster Polyclinics","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"13 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) whether patients may have follow-up tests, including blood tests, scans, or procedures in a polyclinic physically closer to them, but belonging to a different public healthcare cluster from the hospital that ordered the follow-up tests; and (b) whether such hospitals will have access to the ensuing test reports.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: Patients can have tests, scans or procedures performed if available at polyclinics regardless of the public healthcare cluster of the hospital that ordered them. In some cases, patients may be reviewed by a polyclinic doctor before the tests are performed. The test results are made available to the hospitals via the National Electronic Health Record (NEHR), which enables secure sharing of patient data across public healthcare institutions. Access to this data will become more seamless as we move towards using the same electronic medical record system across all public healthcare institutions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on CPF LIFE Monthly Payout Recipients Aged 65 and above Paying Premiums in Cash Due to Insufficient MediSave Funds","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"14 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what is the number of Singapore citizens aged 65 and above who are currently receiving CPF LIFE monthly payouts and who need to pay their annual premiums for national health insurance schemes in cash due to insufficient MediSave funds; and (b) of this, how many are paying amounts that exceed 50% of their annual CPF LIFE payouts.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The Ministry of Health does not track the data requested by the Member. However, we expect most seniors receiving the Central Provident Fund Lifelong Income For the Elderly payouts to have also accumulated a healthy MediSave balance, which can be used for their national health insurance annual premiums.
In addition, the Government provides support to keep premiums affordable, including premium subsidies for the lower- to middle-income, subsidies and MediSave top-ups for Pioneer Generation seniors, and additional support for Merdeka Generation seniors' premiums.
The Government will continue to assure Singaporeans that no one will lose their MediShield Life and CareShield Life coverage due to financial difficulties.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Statistics on Retention Rates of Entry-level Care Workers and Tracking Stability of Care Industry","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"15 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Coordinating Minister for Social Policies and Minister for Health (a) what is the current three-year retention rate for entry-level care workers; and (b) whether the Ministry will publish indicators to track whether care roles are becoming more secure and attractive for Singaporeans.
Mr Ong Ye Kung: The attrition rates at entry-level job grades in our Public Healthcare Institutions (PHIs) have generally improved between 2022 and 2024, decreasing from 6.4% to 5.0% for doctors; from 9.7% to 8.5% for nurses; and from 14.6% to 11.5% for support care staff.
Retaining healthcare workers is a challenge all round the world because of high demand for healthcare. The Ministry of Health ensures that healthcare remains an attractive career option through competitive remuneration, rewarding and fulfilling careers, and opportunities for learning and growth. It is also important that society values the work of healthcare workers and respects the professions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Enhancing Recreational Fishing Access for Children and Families with Temporary Fishing Sites and Implementation of Rod Rental or Family Fishing Programmes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"16 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment to enhance recreational fishing access for children and families, whether the Ministry will consider (i) opening additional temporary fishing sites during school holidays along waterways, such as ABC Waters @ Lorong 8 Toa Payoh, and (ii) piloting rod rental or family fishing programmes in designated fishing locations with higher utilisation.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: \tThe named location will see a large volume of water flowing at high velocity during heavy rain. It is not suitable for the suggested recreational use from a safety standpoint.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Raising Awareness of Cooling Spaces under Mercury Taskforce Heatwave Response Plan and Prioritising Access for Vulnerable Communities","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"17 Mr David Hoe asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) how does the Government intend to raise awareness and publicise the activation and locations of cooling spaces under the Mercury Taskforce heatwave response plan; and (b) whether access to and locality of community cooling spaces can be prioritised for populations more vulnerable to heatwaves including seniors living alone, low-income households, rental flat dwellers and outdoor workers.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Under our national heatwave response plan, which will be activated upon forecast of a heatwave, air-conditioned cooling centres will be open to members of the public, including vulnerable groups, to seek respite from the heat. These cooling centres will be located islandwide at community facilities, such as community centres/clubs, residents' committees, residents' network centres and indoor sports halls. They will generally be situated near residential areas.
Information on the locations and operating hours of the cooling centres will be shared via official Government channels upon activation of the heatwave response plans, together with the other public communications on the heatwave and heat management measures for the public. We will also manage access to cooling centres to ensure that capacity limits are not exceeded, including encouraging the community to work together to ensure that vulnerable individuals have priority access when centres reach their capacity.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures towards Industrial Air Pollution Reduction for North-Eastern Singapore and Cross-Border Air Pollution Public Reporting Framework","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"18 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what measurable targets have been set for reducing industrial air pollution impact in north-eastern Singapore; and (b) whether the Ministry will commit to publishing periodic public reports detailing air quality trends and the outcomes of bilateral engagements regarding cross-border pollution incidents.
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: This question has been addressed in the combined reply to Parliamentary Question No 69 at today's Sitting.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Singapore's Stance on Fossil Fuel Phase-out Language at COP30","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"19 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment whether the Government supported the inclusion of language describing the phasing out of planet-warming fossil fuels in the decision text of the UN Climate Change Conference 2025 (COP30).
Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien: Singapore supported the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change Conference of the Parties COP28's decision calling on all countries to contribute to global efforts to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems. At COP30, multiple parties tabled versions of texts to advance work on this decision, which did not achieve consensus. Singapore remained engaged, along with the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS)1, in the negotiations and will continue to work constructively to advance the global energy transition.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : AOSIS is an inter-governmental organisation representing the negotiating interests of small island and low-lying coastal developing states, of which Singapore is a member."],"footNoteQuestions":["19"],"questionNo":"19"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Preventing Spent Criminal Convictions for Child Abuse Offences","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"20 Mr Ng Shi Xuan asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry will consider including child abuse offences under the Children and Young Persons Act 1993 in the Third Schedule of the Registration of Criminals Act 1949 as offences for which a criminal record cannot be spent.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: Individuals will be disqualified from having their criminal records spent if the sentence imposed on them meets certain criteria as prescribed in the Registration of Criminals Act (RCA). This includes individuals convicted of relevant offences under the Children and Young Persons Act (CYPA), which carry stiff penalties of imprisonment and/or fine. This ensures that screening regimes remain robust, particularly for roles involving contact with children and vulnerable persons.
In more egregious child abuse cases, individuals may also be convicted under the Penal Code, such as for offences of voluntarily causing grievous hurt, or causing the death of a child aged below 14 years by sustained abuse. These individuals will also be disqualified from having their criminal records spent as such offences are covered under the Third Schedule of RCA.
The Ministry of Social and Family Development will continue to work closely with the Ministry of Home Affairs to enhance the effectiveness of the various safeguards in place for the safety of children.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Infrastructure, Financial Plans and Heat Stress Protection Policy Measures for Vulnerable Groups in Singapore","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"21 Ms Elysa Chen asked the Minister for Social and Family Development what infrastructure, policy measures or financial plans are in place or being developed to address heat stress and heat-related illnesses among vulnerable groups, such as elderly, children, persons with disabilities and low-income families, given projections that Singapore's daily maximum temperature could rise by up to 5.3°C by 2100.
Mr Masagos Zulkifli B M M: The Government adopts a multi-pronged heat resilience approach: first, broad-based measures that benefit all segments of our society; and second, targeted interventions for vulnerable groups who face greater risk from heat stress.
We have developed initiatives to raise awareness of the impact of rising temperatures and strengthen the community's resilience to heat. For example, the Heat Stress Advisory was launched in 2023 to help the general population make more informed decisions on undertaking prolonged outdoor activities, so that they can minimise the risk of heat stress and heat-related illnesses.
We are enhancing the heat resilience of our infrastructure to better withstand rising temperatures. For example, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) will work closely with Town Councils to apply cool coatings to all HDB estates, including rental housing, by 2030.
To mitigate the risks of extreme heat, the Government has also developed national-level heatwave response plans which will be activated upon forecast of a heatwave. This includes the opening of cooling centres islandwide in accessible community spaces, such as community centres and residents' networks, where members of the public can seek respite from the heat.
Besides these broad-based measures, the Government provides targeted support for vulnerable groups. Examples include, (a) increasing greenery and shade in schools, and installing more numerous and powerful fans in classrooms to provide a more conducive environment for children’s learning; (b) adopting hybrid cooling or air-conditioning systems in the common areas of new Government-built nursing homes and eldercare centres – that is, senior care centres and active ageing centres – to provide respite; and (c) installing energy-efficient air-conditioning and applying heat-reflective coatings to the roofs and walls in centres and homes for vulnerable groups.
Lower-income households eligible for financial assistance may approach their Social Service Office if they need help coping with rising heat. Agencies are studying if further heat adaptation and active cooling measures for vulnerable groups are needed.
Despite these provisions, we recognise that rising heat affects people differently based on their health and living conditions. The Government will need to partner the community to look out for those among us who need more help.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Cybersecurity Labelling Requirements of Consumer IP Cameras and Video-Recording Smart Doorbells for Local Sales and Usage","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"22 Dr Choo Pei Ling asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information whether all consumer IP cameras and smart doorbells with video recording functions which are sold for local use in Singapore have to undergo assessment for the Cybersecurity Labelling Scheme to allow consumers to make informed decisions towards purchasing more secure devices.
Mrs Josephine Teo: Under the Cybersecurity Labelling Scheme (CLS), manufacturers may register to have their digital products assessed on the strength of their cybersecurity features. There are four levels in the CLS, with Level 4 reflecting the highest standard met.
This is currently a voluntary scheme with the exception of routers, which must meet CLS Level 1 requirements to be sold in Singapore.
The cyber threat landscape is constantly evolving. We are, therefore, reviewing if more digital devices, such as Internet protocol cameras, should require CLS assessment, and will announce any changes when ready.
Individuals can, and should, also take steps to protect themselves, for example, by buying CLS-labelled devices for their home use. To mitigate the risk of a successful cyber attack, individuals should adopt good cyber hygiene practices, such as updating software promptly and not using universal default passwords.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Monitoring of Effective Digital Usage Safety Initiatives for Children","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"23 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information with rising concerns over excessive screen time among children (a) what measures is the Ministry implementing to help parents and schools manage children's digital usage safely; and (b) how will the Ministry monitor and assess the effectiveness of these initiatives.
Mrs Josephine Teo: The Member may refer to the written reply given by the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) on 22 September 2025 on the assessment of the effectiveness of parental education programmes on healthy screentime habits for children, which mentions some of the programmes and resources the Government has rolled out to support parents in managing their child’s screen use. [Please refer to \"Assessment of Effectiveness of Parental Education Programmes on Healthy Screentime Habits for Children\", Official Report, 22 September 2025, Vol 96, Issue 2, Written Answers to Questions section.]
In addition to these efforts, the Government has identified four key actions that families should adopt to foster healthy digital habits and keep their children safe and supported online: a) set boundaries online; b) think before you act; c) report inappropriate content; and d) engage and support your child in their online journey.
In November 2025, the Infocomm Media Development Authority released a comprehensive set of resources on the Digital for Life (DfL) portal as a complementary effort to support parents in adopting these four key actions. The resources, developed in consultation with parents, youths and key partners, like the Media Literacy Council, are tailored according to the various stages in the parenting journey, based on their child's developmental age range and their experiences with key digital milestones, such as their first screen and first device. In collaboration with community partners, the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) has also launched a series of digital parenting workshops to proactively reach parents in their local communities.
MDDI, the Ministry of Education (MOE) and MSF have also jointly developed the Positive Use Guide on Technology and Social Media with practical tips for parents and youth on building healthy and positive relationships with technology. Relevant content from the Guide will be used to support students, which will be reinforced through MOE's Cyber Wellness lessons and shared with parents and families.
The Ministry, together with other relevant agencies, will continue to monitor these concerns and strengthen support initiatives where needed through collaboration with parents, community partners and schools.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Upward Trend in Verbal and Physical Abuse against Teachers in Singapore Following OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey 2024 Findings","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"24 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education whether there is an upward trend in verbal abuse or physical assault of teachers or educators from students or parents, following findings from the OECD Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) 2024 that Singapore participated in, which found that verbal abuse or intimidation directed at teachers or staff concerns about 5% of teachers on average.
Mr Desmond Lee: A similar question was answered in this House in October 2025 relating to cases where students abused or assaulted teachers or school staff. The member may wish to refer to the Ministry of Education's (MOE's) reply to Question No 30 for Oral Answer on the Order Paper for 14 October 2025. [Please refer to \"Cases where Students Physically Assaulted Teachers or School Staff\", Official Report, 14 October 2025, Vol 96, Issue 7, Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer not Answered by End of Question Time section.]
The number of cases of teachers being abused by parents remains low. Nonetheless, as part of our efforts to further support our teachers in schools, we have refreshed the Guidelines for School-Home Partnership in 2024. These guidelines include respectful communication between parents and teachers and positive role-modelling. MOE's Engagement Charter also makes clear that firm action will be taken against parents who engage in such behaviour, including warnings and Police assistance where necessary. For egregious cases, criminal and legal action will be taken, including action under the Protection from Harassment Act.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Distinguishing Effects of School-based Learning Versus Private Tuition on Singapore Students' Performance in International Benchmarks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"25 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry has assessed (a) what proportion of Singapore students' performance in international benchmarks, such as the Programme for International Student Assessment, can be attributed to school-based learning versus external tuition or enrichment; and (b) what methodologies are used to distinguish the relative contributions of each.
Mr Desmond Lee: Research has shown that many inter-dependent factors, both in and outside schools, can influence student learning1. It is not possible to conclusively partition educational outcomes into distinct parts attributable to different contributing sources.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":["1 : E.g., Jacobson, M. J., Levin, J. A., & Kapur, M. (2019). Education as a complex system: Conceptual and methodological implications. Educational Researcher, 48(2), 112-119."],"footNoteQuestions":["25"],"questionNo":"25"},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on Family Justice Court Applications for Divorce Maintenance Compliance over Past Three Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"26 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Law over the past three years, how many applications have been filed with the Family Justice Courts for enforcement of divorce maintenance orders.
Mr Edwin Tong Chun Fai: Under the Women's Charter 1961 (WC), the Court may make maintenance orders for the provision of financial support for wives, children or incapacitated husbands. Maintenance orders may be made even without divorce proceedings. The Syariah Court may also make orders for maintenance under the Administration of Muslim Law Act 1966, referred to as SYC maintenance orders.
A maintenance enforcement application refers to an application to enforce an existing maintenance order, if the party who is required to make payment under the order fails to do so.
The number of maintenance enforcement applications filed with the Family Justice Courts (FJC) via the Integrated Family Application Management System (iFAMS)1 from 2023 to 2025 in respect of (a) maintenance orders made under the WC and (b) SYC maintenance orders is set out in Table 1 below. This represents the number of applications to enforce maintenance orders made during marriage and during divorce, as the breakdown is not available.
27 Mr Shawn Loh asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the expected growth of the CPF Basic Retirement Sum beyond 2027; and (b) whether the Government can release the CPF Basic Retirement Sum at least five years in advance so that Singaporeans can plan ahead.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Central Provident Fund (CPF) Basic Retirement Sum (BRS) provides CPF members with monthly payouts that cover basic expenses in retirement. The Government regularly reviews the BRS for each cohort of members turning age 55, taking reference from the lower-middle retiree household expenditure and factoring in inflation and rising standards of living.
In 2022, the Ministry of Manpower announced the BRS for members turning age 55 from 2023 to 2027. The announcement was made ahead of time to give members advance notice. We are reviewing the BRS for members turning age 55 after 2027 and will likewise announce any changes with sufficient advance notice to enable members to plan ahead.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review Feasibility of Monthly Payouts for Silver Support Scheme and Reduce Differentiation by HDB Flat Size","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"28 Mr Shawn Loh asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Silver Support Scheme can be reviewed (i) to move from quarterly payouts to monthly payouts, so that beneficiaries can more easily plan their finances with more regular inflows of Government support and (ii) to reduce the differentiation between HDB flat sizes, which may lead to unnecessary comparisons between neighbours.
Dr Tan See Leng: Silver Support is paid ahead of each quarter to give eligible seniors greater flexibility to manage their larger expenses over each three-month period. Switching to monthly payments means that recipients will only be able to receive payments for the second and third months later.
Differentiation of Silver Support payments by the Housing and Development Board flat type allows seniors living in smaller flats, who are more likely to have fewer financial resources, to be given higher payments. This ensures that the Silver Support Scheme benefits seniors who need it most.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Measures Addressing Involuntary Underemployment among Fresh Graduates and Junior Professionals","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"29 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower what measures are being taken to address involuntary non-time-based underemployment, especially for fresh graduates and junior professionals, given expected easing in job mobility and hiring sentiments.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) has been working with tripartite partners and the International Labour Organization to study underemployment trends and will be releasing our detailed findings in due course. Based on our findings to date, non-time-based underemployment is comparable to that observed in other developed economies. The incidence of involuntary non-time-based underemployment has remained low and stable over time. Nevertheless, we would support those who are unable to secure jobs that commensurate with their skills and qualifications.
To help individuals to find jobs that better match their qualifications and skills, we have progressively enhanced career matching services and career guidance tools. Last year, MOM also launched the Singapore Opportunity Index to help jobseekers better identify employers that provide opportunities aligned with their aspirations.
Fresh graduates and junior professionals can receive additional support from Workforce Singapore's Polaris by Volunteer Career Advisors for industry-specific career advice during and after their studies. We have also rolled out programmes, like the Graduate Industry Traineeships, to address experience gaps that may lead to graduates being unable to find jobs that are a good match with their qualifications and skills.
We support employers to redesign jobs, through the Support for Job Redesign under Productivity Solutions Grant and Career Conversion Programmes (Job Redesign Reskilling) so that they can more fully utilise their employees' skills.
We will continue to explore ways to maximise our people's potential and minimise underemployment. Through the ongoing Economic Strategy Review, the Government is actively reviewing measures to create good jobs that match our resident workforce's potential, qualifications and skills and to empower Singaporeans to maximise their career potential.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Review on Feasibility of Online versus In-person Cultural Orientation Programme for S Pass Holders","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"30 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Manpower (a) what is the total number of S Pass holders who participated in the Cultural Orientation Programme (COP) pilot from December 2023 to 2025; and (b) in reviewing the pilot, whether the Ministry will consider if an online programme is sufficiently effective in achieving objectives or if a more community-based and in-person approach should be adopted.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Cultural Orientation Programme (COP) was launched as a voluntary programme in December 2023 to familiarise new S Pass holders with working and living in Singapore. As of December 2025, 6,574 S Pass holders have completed the COP. About 95% of the participants indicated that the content was useful and that it had increased their understanding of Singapore's norms and regulations.
The Ministry of Manpower had opted for an online programme to maximise its reach. In addition to the COP, S Pass holders can participate in various community activities organised by various community groups, including the People's Association.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Extending Silver Support Scheme Eligibility to Senior Residents in Executive Apartments with Low Per Capita Household Income","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"31 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Minister for Manpower whether the Ministry will further enhance the Silver Support Scheme by extending the eligibility to seniors living in Executive Apartments and with low per capita household incomes, similar to those living in 5-room HDB flats.
Dr Tan See Leng: The Silver Support Scheme is targeted at seniors who had lower incomes during their working years and now have little or no family support and resources in their retirement. This is why the scheme is targeted at those who live in 5-room or smaller Housing and Development Board flats.
Nevertheless, seniors facing unique situations can write in to the Central Provident Fund Board to review their eligibility for Silver Support. We will review their circumstances holistically on a case-by-case basis.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Indoor Heat Risk Assessment, Potential Subsidies and Cooling Solutions for Older HDB Public Rental Housing Blocks","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"32 Mr David Hoe asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether HDB has assessed indoor heat risks in older public rental blocks which may trap heat due to design and ventilation; (b) what additional resources will be prioritised for such blocks including heat-reflective coatings, shading, and ventilation; and (c) whether HDB will consider the installation and subsidising of air-conditioning for tenants of such blocks.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) has been studying innovative solutions to help mitigate heat in all HDB estates, including at public rental blocks. This includes the use of cool coatings to reflect solar heat and reduce surface heat absorption. Following the successful pilot in Tampines, cool coating will be implemented for residential blocks across all HDB towns. For existing estates, HDB will work closely with Town Councils to apply cool coatings during Repairs & Redecoration (R&R) works by 2030.
There are currently no plans for HDB to install or subsidise air-conditioning in public rental flats. Most tenants rely on fans for cooling, which are more affordable in terms of the upfront cost, subsequent servicing and repairs and electricity bills. Lower-income households eligible for financial assistance may approach their Social Service Office if they need help coping with rising heat.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Update on Implementation of Orchard Road Pedestrian Plans and Target Date of Completion","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"33 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the status of the plan announced in 2022 to pedestrianise a 500m stretch of Orchard Road between Buyong Road and Handy Road; and (b) when is the target date for completion.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The pedestrianisation of Orchard Road between Buyong Road and Handy Road is in its design phase and the completion timeline will be announced when ready.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Breakdown of Property Ownership Value across Income Groups by Singaporean and Non-Singaporean Households in Last 10 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"34 Mr Cai Yinzhou asked the Minister for National Development what is the value of residential property owned by Singaporean and non-Singaporean households as broken down by household income deciles, in each of the last 10 years.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Based on households surveyed in the Household Expenditure Survey, the median value of owner-occupied residential property owned by resident households by household income deciles is in the table below, as follows:
The Government does not collect information on the value of residential property owned by non-resident households.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Noise Dispute Resolution and Enforcement Measures in Residential Developments","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"35 Dr Charlene Chen asked the Minister for National Development (a) amid rising noise-related disputes in residential developments including HDB estates and condominiums, how do agencies determine the source and responsibility of noise when complaints arise; (b) what operational constraints limit enforcement actions on such complaints; and (c) whether the Ministry will study structured approaches used in other dense cities to strengthen enforceable protections for residents' night-time peace.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: When neighbour noise disputes occur, grassroots leaders and frontline agencies, like the Housing and Development Board, would engage the parties involved and their surrounding neighbours to better understand the situation and likely sources of noise. Their aim is to bring the neighbours together, to understand each other's perspectives and find a mutually acceptable solution. Most neighbour noise disputes are resolved this way and many of the remaining disputes are resolved after neighbours attend mediation at the Community Mediation Centre. This approach preserves long-term goodwill among neighbours.
A small number of neighbour noise disputes include cases where an individual deliberately makes excessive noise to cause suffering to neighbours and when prior mediation attempts have not been successful. Where the Community Relations Unit (CRU) is being piloted, frontline agencies triage and escalate such severe cases to the CRU for intervention. The CRU can deploy noise sensors to confirm the source and severity of the noise nuisance, after initial investigations narrow down the unit the noise might be coming from.
If the Director-General of CRU is satisfied that an individual is causing unreasonable interference to his neighbour, he can order the nuisance-maker to cease and desist. This is modelled on what countries, like the United Kingdom and Australia, have done. We are planning to expand the CRU pilot to more towns.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Reviewing Animal and Veterinary Service Protocols during Trapping Operations Following Elderly Dog Incident in Seletar","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"36 Ms Diana Pang Li Yen asked the Minister for National Development (a) what protocols does the Animal and Veterinary Service have in place to assess the health, mobility and stress levels of senior or infirm dogs during trapping operations; and (b) whether these protocols will be reviewed following a recent incident in Seletar involving the death of an elderly dog.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: This question was addressed in the Ministry of National Development's reply to the question asked by Ms Lee Hui Ying on 12 January 2026. [Please refer to \"Animal Welfare Groups' Involvement in Trap-Neuter-Rehome/Release-Manage Programme\", Official Report, 12 January 2026, Vol 96, Issue 12, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Adequacy of Construction Guidelines and Building Codes in Event of Seismic Actions and Plans to Enhance Adequacy","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"37 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the Ministry's assessment of the adequacy of the construction guidelines and building codes in relation to catering for the impact of seismic actions; and (b) whether any revisions are being planned, such as the inclusion of buildings below 20 metres in height.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Buildings in Singapore are required to be designed according to the relevant building codes to be sufficiently robust to withstand lateral forces, including tremors from distant earthquakes.
Singapore is classified as a low-seismicity region under the Eurocode design framework, based on our distance from active seismic fault lines. Due to our low-seismicity context, seismic design considerations apply only to new buildings above 20 metres in height, about seven storeys, that are located on soft soil and there are currently no plans to extend the requirements to buildings which are 20 metres and below in height.
The Building and Construction Authority will continue to review building design and safety requirements, where necessary, in line with latest scientific evidence, international standards and environment conditions.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Data on HDB Flats with Accrued Interest on Outstanding Resale Levies and Waiver Approvals for Second-time Subsidised Flat Buyers in Last 10 Years","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"38 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the number of HDB flats in respect of which accrued interest on the resale levy will be payable if the former owners purchase a second subsidised flat; and (b) over the last 10 years, (i) what is the number of cases annually where such resale levy interest was charged and (ii) what is the number of partial or full waivers granted.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: Under the current resale levy policy, in place since March 2006, second-timers (STs) pay a resale levy upon the sale of the first subsidised flat or on the collection of keys to the second flat, whichever is later. There is no interest component.
Under an earlier policy, ST households who sold their first subsidised flat between May 1997 and March 2006 could defer resale levy payment until the collection of keys to their second subsidised flat, subject to an interest of 5% per annum.
Nonetheless, since 2015, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) has waived the accrued interest on the resale levy payable by all ST seniors right-sizing to a smaller flat. HDB has also been exercising flexibility for other affected STs upon appeal. Following the implementation of the HDB Flat Eligibility letter in 2023, HDB has automatically waived the accrued interest for ST households without requiring an appeal.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Nutritional Value Standards and Quality Checks for Budget Meals Initiative","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"39 Dr Choo Pei Ling asked the Minister for National Development about the Budget Meals initiative (a) whether the Ministry performs routine checks on the nutritional value of the meals; and (b) whether minimum nutritional standards can be set to ensure that such meals contain adequate protein, vegetables and essential nutrients, in addition to carbohydrates.
Mr Chee Hong Tat: The Housing and Development Board (HDB) conducts regular surveys to track the prices of common dishes and drinks offered in HDB coffee shops. HDB does not directly regulate food prices. Instead, HDB strives to provide adequate supply of coffee shops in every HDB town, complementing the network of hawker centres, to offer a range of cooked food options for residents.
HDB requires budget meals to be a full meal option. We recently made some changes to the budget meal initiative, to provide enhanced funding support for participating operators who choose to offer budget meals in their eating houses. Part of the changes include requiring the operator to provide three meal options: (a) an economy rice option consisting of rice with one meat dish and two vegetable dishes; (b) a halal meal option; and (c) a breakfast item.
Beyond these guidelines, it is not feasible to impose nutritional requirements on budget meals, just as we do not impose such requirements on hawker stalls in general.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Participation Rate of Muslims in Wakaf Masyarakat Singapura and Plans to Enhance Outreach Efforts","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"40 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs since the launch of the Wakaf Masyarakat Singapura (a) how many Muslims have added the Fund to their will or nominated the Fund as a beneficiary through their CPF or insurance; and (b) how will the Government ensure that all segments of the Muslim community understand and are able to contribute to the Fund.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Wakaf Masyarakat Singapura (WMS) was launched in August 2024 to create a long-term sustainable funding stream for the social and religious needs of the Singapore Muslim community. At least 150 Muslims have designated the WMS as a beneficiary through their wills, Central Provident Fund nominations or insurance policies.
The Islamic Religious Council of Singapore engages in comprehensive outreach to increase the community's understanding of WMS and encourage contributions. This includes partnering religious and corporate institutions to broaden access to WMS contribution channels, as well as encouraging community participation during key occasions, such as Ramadan, haj and the Islamic New Year. These measures help ensure that all segments of the community understand the significance of the WMS and are able to contribute according to their means.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Syariah Court Divorce Applications and Reasons for Divorce Each Year from 2021 to 2025","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"41 Mr Abdul Muhaimin Abdul Malik asked the Acting Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs for each year from 2021 to 2025, (a) how many applications were received by the Syariah Court for divorces; (b) of these, how many applicants eventually divorced due to (i) infidelity (ii) financial problems and (iii) desertion, respectively.
Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Under the Administration of Muslim Law Act, applicants must first register for and attend the Marriage Counselling Programme (MCP) before they may proceed to apply for divorce at the Syariah Court.
Based on the latest available data from 2021 and 2024, the Syariah Court received an annual average of 2,986 MCP registrations. Of these, an average of 1,991 proceeded to file for divorce and, ultimately, an average of 1,478 cases resulted in divorce.
Data on the main reasons for the application for divorce is as published by the Department of Statistics, which is available at https://tablebuilder.singstat.gov.sg/table/TS/M830267.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans to Review Safety Regulations for Transporting Workers in Rear of Lorries to Prevent Workplace Mishaps","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"42 Mr Lee Hong Chuang asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether there are plans to review current regulations, implement safety standards or promote safer alternatives to transporting workers in the rear of lorries to prevent workplace injuries and accidents.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Government agencies, together with our tripartite partners and the non-governmental organisations (NGOs), have rolled out various measures to improve the safety of workers on lorries. These include requirements for lorries to be fitted with canopies and higher protective side railings, have lower speed limits and minimum space requirements. Government agencies will continue to engage and work closely with industry and NGOs to explore further improvements to strengthen worker safety.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Road Conversion Status and Progress for Footpaths, Cycling Paths or Bus Lanes","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"43 Mr Fadli Fawzi asked the Acting Minister for Transport in respect of the 60 sites identified in March 2021 where roads can be converted into footpaths, cycling paths or bus lanes (a) how many such conversions have taken place; and (b) for those sites yet to be converted, why have the conversions yet to take place.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Of the 60 sites identified in March 2021, six road repurposing projects have been completed and five are in progress. For each site, the Land Transport Authority is engaging stakeholders and undertaking detailed engineering studies before implementation. Some of the sites identified have also been converted under the new Friendly Streets initiative, which will be expanded to all towns by 2030.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Further Enforcement Measures to Protect Vulnerable Bus Commuters from Fast-Moving Cyclists Near Bus Stops","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"44 Dr Charlene Chen asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) what further design, enforcement and behavioural measures will be implemented to protect bus commuters, especially seniors, children and persons with mobility needs, from fast-moving cyclists near bus stops; and (b) how does the Ministry assess whether current measures and enforcement sufficiently reduce near-misses, collisions and perceived safety risks when passengers are boarding or alighting.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: Where possible, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) builds cycling paths behind bus stops to separate cyclists from bus commuters. The \"SLOW\" markings and speed regulating strips remind cyclists to slow down near bus stops.
LTA also enforces against cyclists who speed or ride recklessly, including at bus stops.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Plans for Mandatory PMD Insurance to Protect Pedestrians and PMD Users","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"45 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether the Ministry has plans to reconsider requiring all users of Personal Mobility Devices (PMD) to purchase compulsory insurance to safeguard the interests of both pedestrians and PMD users in the event of an accident involving the PMD.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: \tCommercial riders using active mobility device on public paths must have third-party liability insurance coverage during their course of work. We encourage, but do not mandate, all other riders to purchase insurance to protect themselves from claims.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Arbitrary Parking Fine Enforcement by Regulated Carpark Management Companies and Safeguarding Motorists' Rights","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"46 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Acting Minister for Transport (a) whether the Ministry has received complaints about the arbitrary issuance of fines by regulated car park management companies; (b) if so, how many such complaints were received in each of the past two years; and (c) what measures are in place or planned to safeguard motorists' rights and ensure fair, transparent enforcement practices.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Ministry of Transport and Land Transport Authority (LTA) have received four such complaints in the last two years.
Private parking spaces are managed privately by the owner of the premise or the Management Corporation Strata Title (MCST). LTA issues a Code of Practice for such premise owners or MCSTs to ensure that there is sufficient and clear signage at car parks so motorists are properly informed of charges, fees and fines.
Besides reaching out to the relevant premise owner or MCST, motorists could also consider filing an application with the Strata Titles Board, who can help to conduct mediation between the involved parties.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Evaluation of Selective Door Operation Feasibility on North East Line to Boost Capacity","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"47 Mr Low Wu Yang Andre asked the Acting Minister for Transport whether the Land Transport Authority has evaluated the feasibility of Selective Door Operation (SDO) to deploy longer train sets on the North East Line as a capacity boosting measure.
Mr Jeffrey Siow: The Land Transport Authority has studied the use of Selective Door Operation (SDO) to deploy longer trains along existing lines and found it unfeasible for the North East Line. Longer dwell times would be needed at each station to allow for safe boarding and alighting, especially during peak hours, which will lengthen headways and journey times and reduce rather than increase system capacity. SDO will also require significant depot and track modification works to accommodate longer train sets.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Expanding ActiveSG Gym Facilities and Programmes in Woodlands Town","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"48 Ms Mariam Jaafar asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth whether more ActiveSG gyms and programmes, such as the Combat Age-Related Loss of Muscle series, can be made available in Woodlands town.
Mr David Neo: Residents in Woodlands have access to a range of public sports facilities, including the ActiveSG gym and Active Health Lab (AHL) at Woodlands Sport Centre, as well as the Woodlands Sports Pavillion which is a Sport-in-Precinct facility.
The AHL offers programmes, like the Combat Age-related Loss of Muscle (CALM) programme, which targets seniors for frailty prevention, as well as programmes catering to strength training and exercise performance. In response to greater demand and positive feedback, the Woodlands AHL was recently renovated to increase capacity. It also extended its operating hours to include more weekday evenings and Sundays. This enables it to serve even more residents in Woodlands and neighbouring towns.
To improve accessibility for seniors, the CALM programme has also been offered in Active Ageing Centres (AACs) which are located closer to where our seniors stay. This includes the National Trades Union Congress Health AAC at Kampung Admiralty and the Sree Narayana Mission AAC at Woodlands. More CALM runs will be held in AACs in time to come.
SportSG will explore working with more AACs, as well as the People's Association and Grassroots Organisations to bring the CALM programme to more seniors in Woodlands.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Utilisation Statistics and Family Transfer Options for Unused SG Culture Pass Credits for Disabled Citizens","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WA","content":"49 Ms Valerie Lee asked the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) what has been the take-up rate of the SG Culture Pass since its launch; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider allowing unused credits of citizens who are unable to utilise them, due to disability or other constraints, to be transferred within their immediate family members so that the intent of the Pass to promote arts and culture is retained.
Mr David Neo: As of 1 January 2026, over 1.1 million Singaporeans, out of three million eligible Singaporeans, have registered for the scheme. More than $9.8 million of Culture Pass credits have been utilised by more than 136,000 Singaporeans, with over 46,000 Singaporeans having maxed out their $100 credits. Encouragingly, nine in 10 credit users express willingness to engage with cultural offerings beyond the Culture Pass programme.
Citizens are unable to transfer unutilised SG Culture Pass credits among their family members. However, citizens can use their SG Culture Pass credits to purchase tickets for others, including friends and family members, as long as the total cost remains within their available credit balance.
The Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) continues to work on enhancing the accessibility of the arts and heritage programmes under Culture Pass in a number of ways.
First, MCCY is working with partners, such as the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) and People's Association, to help citizens, including seniors who face constraints, so that they can participate in Culture Pass offerings. For instance, MCCY has made special arrangements with AIC to bring eligible arts events to nursing homes, so that residents who face mobility challenges may use their Culture Pass credits to enjoy local arts events.
Second, MCCY will continue to ensure sufficient accessible events so that those with disabilities may enjoy these programmes. Since the launch of the Culture Pass programme, we have included over 70 cultural events with accessibility friendly provisions, that cater to persons with disabilities.
Third, the scheme has also been expanded to include the purchase of local books. From 1 March 2026, those with mobility challenges can enjoy local literary arts without having to travel.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null},{"startPgNo":0,"endPgNo":0,"title":"Clarification by Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth","subTitle":null,"sectionType":"WS","content":"[(proc text) The following statement was made in a reply given by the Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr David Neo) during the Question Time at the Sitting of 13 January 2026: (proc text)]
The Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr David Neo): Today, we support more than 1,500 carded athletes across 55 sports, compared to 272 athletes across 14 sports when we first started spex in 1993. This is a 450% increase in the number of athletes supported and 350% increase in the number of sports supported. [Please refer to \"Reviews and Enhancements to Sports Excellence Awards to Support Elite Athletes' Training, Welfare and Long-term Development\", Official Report, 13 January 2026, Vol 96, Issue 13, Oral Answers to Questions section.]
[(proc text) Written statement by Mr David Neo circulated with leave of the Speaker in accordance with Standing Order No 29(5): (proc text)]
I wish to make the following factual correction to my reply to Question Nos 14, 15 and 20 for Oral Answer during the Sitting of 13 January 2026. My statement should read as follows:
The Acting Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (Mr David Neo): Today, we support more than 1,500 carded athletes across 55 sports, compared to 272 athletes across 14 sports when we first started spex in 1993. This is a 450% increase in the number of athletes supported and 300% increase in the number of sports supported.
","clarificationText":null,"clarificationTitle":null,"clarificationSubTitle":null,"reportType":null,"questionCount":null,"footNotes":null,"footNoteQuestions":null,"questionNo":null}],"writtenAnswersVOList":[],"writtenAnsNAVOList":[],"annexureList":[],"vernacularList":[],"onlinePDFFileName":""}