Alex Yam
Singapore
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I know the Minister of State indicated that while it is still undergoing investigation, we should not speculate. I know also from her reply that they have removed the wrong classification of our trade deficit with the US.”
“Thank you, Speaker. Building on the point that the Minister-in-charge of energy had raised earlier about fixed rates. There is concern amongst consumers that the gencos and the electricity suppliers may, at some point, invoke a force majeure, and that would affect the supply contracts that are signed with consumers.”
“Chairman, therefore, I look forward to hearing how MCCY intends to further embed the ethos of "we first" across multiple aspects of society so that our national identity is formed through participation, not just persuasion.”
“Thank you, Chairman, 41 questions and 330 minutes later, I certainly think the Ministry deserves the $100 back. So, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $2,407,711,100 for Head X ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.”
“Thank you, Chairman. The Minister updated the House earlier about the importance of keeping pace with technological advancements as well as hybrid threats, especially in the cyber domain.”
“If we are intentional in leveraging the reach and influence of institutions like SAFRA, we can ensure that Total Defence can remain a lived national commitment and not confined to the uniformed services or to our schools.”
The complete record
Every one of 592 lines we hold for Alex Yam, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 12.
“Chairman, permission to take my cuts together.”
“The site in question is in my constituency and I have observed first-hand the change to the site on many walks with my residents. By equal measure, my residents also look forward to the transformation of Sungei Kadut to bring more jobs and residential opportunities for them. I have two quick supplementary questions – one to the Minister for National Development; it is more factual. It relates to part of my question on how many such unauthorised clearances have occurred in the last 12 months and what were the actions taken to them? The second is for the Minister-in-charge of the Public Service. As mentioned by a number of Members, many public officers are involved in any large scale and complex project, and often resulting in cross responsibilities. How does the Minister-in-charge of the Public Service plan to look into the processes and into this incident as a learning point, so that such unauthorised actions do not occur again? The Minister shared earlier that Permanent Secretary Joseph Leong will be looking into this. Could the Minister share if there are specific areas that the Permanent Secretary will be directed to look at so that we can improve on processes?”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank the hon Member for his supplementary questions and clarifications. I agree, because that is what I made as a closing point in my speech. We all have the good of Singapore at heart. We may disagree with the route to get there. But on the first point, yes, as we go along, we make adjustments, such as introducing the NIR. But as was described earlier, we put in measures to ensure that we never empty out the cookie jar, that the cookie jar exists for moments of need, such as these. And even at the current moment, where we would benefit certainly from being extraordinarily generous, we have decided on what is prudent to ensure that there is always something left over and, not only that, that where we have the opportunity, to top it back up. So, it is a quite different scenario from introducing changes to rob the cookie jar. We have always ensured that we are prudent about it, that we make returns to it. As things evolve, just as it has in the past, ideas can be considered and adjustments made. But always with the view that we think about the future and not just about the now.”
“Yes, there is always room to do more but raiding the cookie jar till it is empty does us no good, if we fail to top it up. On the one hand, we may propose taxes, such as carbon tax. On the other hand, by equal measure, we oppose petrol hike, both of which achieve similar goals. These seemed to conflict with one another. A government, however, needs to be cognisant of the fact that there are costs to everything that we do, both in terms of our revenue streams, what more we can do for our people and, more importantly, also our popularity and our standing. The Government is cognisant also of the fact that a policy like an increase in GST is unpopular but necessary because, ultimately, the responsibility of a responsible government is to do the right thing, even if occasionally unpopular. Populism and opportunism will, however, all but turn us into cookie monsters, always dipping into the cookie jar. I am sure the Minister for Finance is open to many other suggestions on how we can fund these programmes and yet remain sustainable as an economy and balance our fiscal position. And if there is one that works as an alternative, I am certain it will take the biscuit. Much has been said over the last two days by both sides of the House. Many new suggestions, all of which will cost us. The Minister for Finance has to decide which are for the long-term good of the country and which will take us to the next mile. All of us have the good of Singapore at heart. We differ perhaps greatly on our ideas but, at the end of the day, we need to take responsible decisions to bring Singapore forward. With that, I support the Budget.”
“Sure, I will come to that. But no one wants to say how much it would cost nor be the one to buy the ingredients and bake those cookies. That big elephant in the room, of course, is GST. We cannot be constantly asking for more without being cogent of the cost. Funding from recurrent tax ensures that all that we are doing is sustainable. With GST, we have also built in buffers for the low-income. Over and above that, as the hon Member Mr Saktiandi pointed out earlier, we also the GST Voucher Fund Act in March 2020, just under a year ago to cushion the impact of any GST increases for all Singaporeans both low-income and middle income families. With these, we also give time for incomes to catch up so that we can deal with long-term cost of living. The challenges that we face are many and varied, including an ageing society that will propel increases in many areas, including, most importantly, healthcare cost. It is not just us that are facing these challenges. Hong Kong and Singapore are very similar cities with very similar traits at the end of the day. And they have just announced their Budget as well, just yesterday. But despite the similarities, our Budgets have taken very different trajectories. Some commentators point to a future deficit in the Hong Kong spending plan. Andy Mukherjee of Bloomberg raised the point that Singapore's plan for an increase in GST is to ensure that we have enough recurring revenue to pay for permanent costs, such as healthcare. He compares these to Hong Kong and says, like Singapore, Hong Kong also has an ageing population, but they do not have a sales tax and has only been able to overcome its lack of steady revenue by fanning a gigantic real estate bubble. It is certainly a scenario we will not be able to stomach locally.”
“On the topic of fruits, I now move to the kitchen larder. We have been drawing from our reserves in the last two years – difficult, but needed decisions. It is a bit like taking a cookie out of the cookie jar. It is really tempting after that first delicious cookie to keep reaching in, cookie after cookie. Soon, you end up a cookie monster, forever tempted when you see a cookie. I have been listening quite intently to many of the alternative suggestions that have been put forward in this House over the last two days. And I imagine that, for the Minister for Finance, it is a tremendously difficult task. From the opposite bench, many of the suggestions seemed to indicate that everything can be easily funded because it is only X% of the GDP – very easy one, can be done. But if we take all these suggestions together – X% here, Y% there, Z% somewhere else – it adds up significantly. That is a whole lot of cookies to be given out. So, right now, while there is a lot of cookies that we are eating, there does not seem to be a whole lot of cookie-making. Our hon friends from the Workers' Party seem to say that eat, eat away, not everything, be careful, but here is a little chocolate chip and sprinkles while you at it. And if we run low, instead of buying the ingredients, the Government should make more, yet not what is necessary to provide ingredients to make the cookies. Our colleagues from the PSP, on the other hand, over the last two days, seemed to indicate we should take everything from the jar, everything, including the crumbs. However, no one wants to say how much it would cost nor be the one to be buying the ingredients.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, it is always a challenge to be one of the last speakers of the day. But it is also an opportunity to look back at the day and slowly remove paragraphs that other hon Members have already covered. As you may well conclude from my written notes, I have thrown out my original and just gone for some key points. My first plea this evening is that amidst the boldness of this Budget that looks beyond the now and focuses on the future, post-pandemic, ready not just to take off, but also be at the front of the pack, that we take another bold step. And that suggestion is to make vaccination mandatory. Let me explain why. We have taken bold steps to control the pandemic over the course of the last one year, many of which involved making things compulsory – mask wearing, social distancing, amongst others. We now have in our hands a weapon that brings the fight to the virus and over 216 million people worldwide have received at least the first dose. Adverse reactions have been very, very low, much like many other common vaccines that we take on a regular basis, and much less risk compared to smoking. The decision to vaccinate is not just personal to holder. It does not just impact you as an individual. It is a matter of life or death for loved ones, friends, fellow countrymen, especially those who, because of medical reasons, are unable to be vaccinated. And we have invested significantly in this endeavour. So, let us be bold. We cannot be willy nilly about it. If we believe in it, that it works, we should stand by it and, therefore, it should be conditionally opt-out rather than voluntarily opt-in, because only when we control this enemy, this virus, can the bold moves that this Budget and its intents bear fruit.”
“If there is an infraction, there is a misuse of the data, it is punished, action is taken. We are in the midst of a pandemic. These are extraordinary times and TraceTogether is an extraordinary measure. It is a temporary tool and that bears repeating. It is a temporary tool. We use to build our resilience against COVID-19. It helps to keep all of us healthy and safe, and it is crucial in reducing community cases. As the past months have demonstrated, we are far from being immune to COVID-19 resurgence. We have seen that in many other countries. Therefore, the usage of TraceTogether remains crucial. Any refusal to participate in contract tracing will impede our efforts and turn us back from the gains we have made in the last year. Therefore we must stay rational in this process. Mdm Deputy Speaker, as the Government has already introduced the amendments before this House and has communicated to the public more than once its intention to do so – to ringfence the data for only the stipulated seven categories of serious crimes – I therefore reluctantly support the intent of this Bill to formalise those assurances about the use of contact tracing data to maintain trust. But I emphasise again that I am uncomfortable with the limits upon our Police capability to solve crime and to keep us safe and also to prove innocence. This must therefore not set the precedence for future data access for new technology when it comes to issues of public safety. Stability, safety, security and human lives are at stake, pandemic or otherwise.”
“There have been mention of other jurisdictions where contact tracing have been limited. But why? It is not because of some noble ideal but because no one is taking it seriously. They do not download it. They do not participate in contact tracing. These measures are not so much a noble ideal in protecting the privacy but to encourage them to protect their lives. Singaporeans amidst this pandemic have been responsible, cooperative and with a mind on the greater social good. This has helped us tremendously in combating the pandemic. I note from feedback and conversations with residents who are volunteers and many others that the unhappiness does not stem from the Police access to the data but from a broken trust – from the sense that trust has been broken, that a promise was not kept. Had all the cards been laid on the table from the very beginning, perhaps we would not even be having this debate today. The problem really lies with the omission of information and a perceived lack of transparency to the public on communication regarding the use of TraceTogether. Certainly, the Government should have been more open, more prepared and more diligent about communicating this aspect to the public. But I come back to the point I made three times in this speech – that I am uncomfortable with Police access to any information that will be helpful to keep our society safe. Because even if the Police is allowed to use the data, it does not mean that they use it callously. They use it with great responsibility. The hon Member Mr Murali, from his experience, has also indicated that the Police take the use of evidence and personal data very seriously. It is not something that they throw about willy-nilly.”
“Some may of course argue that it is the Police's responsibility to seek out evidence via other channels that have always been available – a plethora of sources of information – and therefore the Police need not use TraceTogether. That might be true to a certain extent but if it makes it more efficient, if it solves a crime, it saves a life and it safeguards security in our society, it upholds justice, I fail to comprehend why they should be denied access to any tool that would allow them to do so. Time is of the essence in any investigation. Over the years, new technology has been consistently introduced and existing ones also enhanced to aid our Police, to improve the quality and speed of investigations. The Police are therefore able to review many cases with conclusive results. I therefore fear that if we start introducing restrictions to Police investigative prerogatives, this will set a precedence for future technology where then, there is an expectation that applicable scenarios must be spelt out in full. This will then seriously impact the capability of not only the Police but other security agencies and the Government because they would have to overcome a huge amount of red tape just to get evidence. On a wider scale, it is also imperative that we get our priorities right. Data privacy is important, I think it is universally acknowledged – but so is safety, security, life, preservation of life, both in health as well as in safety. In other countries, the limitation of capability and access to information seriously impacted the management of many governments on the pandemic itself. Some governments have had to seek approval to declare a state of emergency or to introduce measures just to control COVID-19. Even when powers are accorded, they are inadequate.”
“While it may be rare that TraceTogether data could produce conclusive evidence for every single investigation that it is used for, sometimes you just need one small jigsaw piece to complete the puzzle. As with the hon Member Mr Vikram Nair, I have reservations on this legislation that we are placing a restraint on the Police's investigative powers and limiting the type of crimes that the data can be used for. There are crimes that might not at the current moment be classified as serious crimes but have the potential to escalate. An example is stalking. We have seen in various cases, not just locally but internationally, that stalking can give rise to more serious crimes such as sexual assault or even murder and kidnapping. Some have also scoffed at the idea. If you have to commit a crime, do not bring along your TraceTogether token then. Do not turn on your app. But not all crimes are planned. Most are opportunistic: molest, pickpocketing, even assaults are sometimes committed on impulse and are not so much pre-planned. These situations will benefit from the use of TT data in investigations as well. Many also tend to look at the use of TT data, in the most recent conversations, solely for the Police to establish guilt or to trace where you have been. Let us not forget that in the entire process of investigation – all the way from Police until it makes its way to Court – it is also equally important that evidence is available to prove innocence, not just guilt. Whatever the gravity of the crime, any miscarriage of justice, whether for a minor crime or a serious crime, weighs equally on the person.”
“What the Government must do now is to rectify this mistake, apologise for the miscommunication, acknowledge the concerns that have been raised, understand the reasons for the discontentment, and reassure the public on what will be done to prevent similar occurrences for future policies. Coming back to the use of TraceTogether for Police investigations, I think it bears repeating that Singapore is ranked top for personal safety. This is according to the most recently available 2019 Safe Cities Index published by the Economist Intelligence Unit. We have our Police and security agencies to thank for this. But it is easy to get complacent. Just as it is with combating COVID-19, we must not take our safety and security for granted. Singapore may be safe, but it is not crime-free. Violent crimes do occur, though rarely. In 2019 alone, 155 serious crimes were recorded, including some violent ones, and in recent months, resurfacing of cold cases, a small number of which were horrific crimes involving suspected murder and rape that remain unsolved till today due to the lack of sufficient evidence. Indeed, therefore, access to information is key to the resolution of any crime. Police need evidence and the sooner the better, the more complete the better. To leave no stone unturned is perhaps the unspoken operational motto that guides exemplary police forces around the world. This helps them to protect civilians' safety and security. Therefore, it strikes me as counterintuitive to deliberately place restrictions on the Police on their access to information that could be helpful in the course of the investigation. It would be akin to walking past a bloody knife and ignoring it completely.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I think I can speak on behalf of many Singaporeans and all Members of this House will agree when I say that I take pride in our Police Force. We are proud of the work that they do in keeping all of us safe. They are efficient, reliable and responsible. They are not known to abuse their authority and they have always used their investigative powers diligently. They are the reason they walk our streets safely and our children play freely. I trust them with my life, I trust them to keep us safe, and I trust that they take their responsibility and duty diligently. I must admit that I was a little surprised at the furore over the revelation that TraceTogether data may be used in Police investigations under the Criminal Procedure Code. After all, public safety and public health are of equal importance. However, I can empathise with the reasons for the unhappiness. The abrupt change in the terms concerning personal data usage is upsetting for many. In this pandemic, the people have entrusted their personal data for an important purpose. To be then told it will also be used for something beyond the original intention feels like trust has been broken. This breakdown in communication could have been avoided. If more time was spent engaging various stakeholders and examining the communication strategy for loopholes, we could have avoided the current situation that we are in. But with the urgency due to the raging pandemic last year, I can fully understand that things developed quickly and this unfortunately led to incomplete and inaccurate information being disseminated to the public. The communication process could indeed have been better managed. People rightfully expect better from their government.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Two supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. First, over the weekend, the EU has issued rules tightening the export of vaccines manufactured within the EU region. I would like to ask how this affects our vaccination roll-out and the supply to Singapore. Related to that, will we at some point consider also vaccine production in Singapore to avoid any of these future issues? On a more practical level, on various parental platforms, there have been a lot of questions from nursing mothers regarding some confusion over advice on vaccine safety for those who are breastfeeding. The current advice from the MOH website and various healthcare websites in Singapore indicate that nursing mothers should consider suspending breastfeeding for five to seven days after vaccination but then also proceed to say that if mothers are unable to suspend breastfeeding, they should still proceed to vaccinate themselves. So, there is some confusion over this advice and they are wondering if there is any other safety issues that they should consider before proceeding to vaccination. Thank you.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Ministers for their Ministerial Statements. With regard to my question, the answer provided by the Minister earlier is that, based on the recent surveys, over 60% of Singaporeans were prepared to be vaccinated. I would like to ask the Minister three follow-up questions. One is: this figure of 60% "satisfactory" to the Multi-Ministry Taskforce (MTF), should it be higher, because we had mentioned that we should be looking at above 70% vaccination rate? Second question is: as more vaccines come on stream or are approved for use in Singapore, the sentiments with regard to different vaccines – will that also be similarly surveyed? Thirdly, on when these additional vaccines come on stream. Anecdotally, over the weekend, as I was speaking to residents as well as family members, quite a number of older Singaporeans seemed to indicate a preference for CoronaVac, which is the vaccine that is developed by Sinovac, which is not using the new technology. For some reason, they indicated that it is because it is older technology, it is more established. If it comes on stream, they would like to choose to have that. If, in the event that, at the time that they are assigned to take their vaccinations and these other variants of vaccines are not available and they reject the current vaccines, how soon, when new vaccines come on stream, will they be eligible to be vaccinated?”
“It was the little sparrow who suddenly said, "Stay calm. Let all of us take one part of this net and fly in unison. And they did. As they did so, they managed to lift the net and the farmer could only look on as the net flew higher and higher way. But, they were still trapped in that net. And so the little sparrow also said, "I know of a friend, he is a little mouse who lives across the hill. I brought him food once during the winter. He might be able to help us". So, they flew across the hill and met the little mouse. The little mouse said, "I can get you out of this quandry," as he bit through the net and freed them one by one. Mr Speaker, it does not matter whether we are a large bird or small sparrow. We are all looking to survive. And where we have more of, we can share. But, we should also not belittle those that are smaller than us, or less skilled than us, or appear to be weaker than us. Because they too, have a role to play in our society and in our country. Perhaps it is them who have the street-smart, who can tell us when we are in trouble, how to get out of there mine. At the same time, there might be others who are very different from us, but in our time of need, can chew us out of that net. So for all of us in Singapore, this crisis is an opportunity for us to re-emphasise what it means to be Singaporean, why we should be proud of who we are. I think, in the course of these few months, we have shown the capacity to be proud of who we are, Singaporeans and to be proud of Singapore. Thank you very much. I support the Motion. [Applause.]”
“Our psychological resilience and our sense of security is important. Again, it is now more than ever that we are in this together. But we see various examples, many of us in our constituency, we hear more and more comments like these, "My neighbour, formally Malaysian" or "you know, that chap who came from India". This idea of you being more Singaporean if you are homegrown or older or spent more years versus those who are newer who have spent less. But, all of us make an equal contribution to our society because we are all Singaporeans here, regardless of how long we have been Singaporeans. As disputes arise, we must strengthen our identity of Singaporean. Again, regardless of how long you have been here, you must be proud, to belong to Singapore. All of us here are proud to be Singaporeans, but some of us were not born in Singapore. Yet, we serve fellow Singaporeans in this House. Many out there in society are doing the same thing as well. And they too, are valuable Singaporeans, they too, are our brothers and sisters. Mr Speaker, let me end off with a short story. A group of pigeons, led by their mother, was searching for food. Driven by hunger, they came across a pile of rice. As they started eating, a little sparrow came by. The sparrow asked one of the brothers, "Could I share in your meal?" The brother said, "No, we found it first." Yet, the mother pigeon said, "There is more than enough, let us share." And so, she welcomed the little sparrow. As they ate and were filled, they were preparing to fly away when suddenly a huge net came across them. The pigeons panicked, they flew off in different directions But, as they struggled in different directions the more tangled they got. In a distance, they saw the farmer coming at them with a club.”
“For this, we must engender change in our attitudes across Singapore in all sectors – at home, at work, in our economy. We need to rethink our values, redefine success, refocus our beliefs, interests, causes, passions. This is the only way we can stop perpetuating the sense of inferiority or feeling of being unrewarded despite trying our best, amongst different groups in our society. We should, therefore, revalue vocational and technical skills as much as academic dexterity, shift out perception of value based on work or academic performance alone. In many other societies, being a plumber, being an electrician, is a valued skill set. Can we revived that in Singapore? That way, we can ensure that our social fabric is strengthened, not because we are one giant piece of cloth but like a warm comforting blanket comprised of different multiple equally important layers, so that we can all play our role equally in society. The Members before me have spoken very passionately also about the digital sphere. Digital defence is important to us as well. Amidst the crisis that we are experiencing with COVID, it is also a primary concern because good communications is key in preventing the spread of this disease and reducing its impact. But we must have factual communication. We see this impact of negative communication overseas. People who decry the use of masks, expounding conspiracy theories figures, fake cures, false advisories, even scams, during this period of time. It is therefore, no better time than now to improve digital inclusion and media literacy, especially amongst our elders those who are most vulnerable during this period of time. All this depends also on the most fundamental pillar of Total Defence and that is our psychological defence.”
“Some have also shared that they had fears initially, but have found that once they take the plunge, it became so much easier. Changes, therefore, are necessary. But, at the same time, we cannot ignore the fact that change will bring with it some discomfort. It heightens differences as well. Our social defence is, therefore, also at stake. COVID-19, as we have seen in the rest of the world, has exacerbated inequalities, built up tensions in communities. We see this in various forms, for example, as we work from home and also in home-based learning during our circuit breaker. It is not unapparent that most of us who can work from home, perhaps, can claim to be better off. It is those who cannot, who are on the ground, who have to be physically present, that are feeling the true brunt of this crisis. Home-based learning also shows up the differences in access to technology. Different family situations give rise to starkly different learning outcomes during the circuit breaker. In as much as we try to provide more equal access, yet, different circumstances still lead to different learning outcomes. All this comes back perhaps to a word that we use very often in our discourse – meritocracy. Meritocracy underpins so much of our social structures in Singapore and we can justifiably be proud of how we provide equal opportunities for everyone in Singapore. Yet, today, equal opportunities, perhaps, is insufficient. It is also about ensuring that we have equitable outcomes, not equal outcomes, not as what Dodo in Alice in Wonderland says at the end of the caucus race, "Everyone wins and therefore everybody deserves a prize". We must have equitable outcomes because, if we do not, then it is even worse than not having meritocracy.”
“Our MTI colleagues have been on the front lines as well, perhaps less unseen than the rest, to ensure that we have sufficient and constant access to food, supplies, resources. They have ensured that our stockpiles are replenished, our sources are diversified and local production increased; all this despite global disruptions in supply chains. Our reserves, which has been spoken so much of during the course of this debate, are also an important weapon and armament in our fight against COVID-19 and its effects. They have staved off the enemies of joblessness and economic stagnation. But we, the people of Singapore, must also do our level best. COVID-19 has accelerated many trends in our economy – driving automation, reconstruction of value chains, e-commerce, logistics, all sectors that are now growing because they are new norms in our COVID-19 world. This is perhaps the best impetus for us to change. And as a people, we must not fear adaptation to explore new areas of growth, to re-skill and upskill. For us, for our families, for our nation, we must remain fearless, relevant, not only to ourselves but also to the world. This is not the time to hide away, or to say that if only we could just turn back the clock, because we cannot. But there are bright moments and there is a lot of motivation as well. Just recently, the five CDCs held our SkillsFuture Festival, the first fully online festival, and we had very encouraging participation. Over the course of the week, we had over 7,000 people taking part in various courses. We had almost over 20,000 people taking part in our online interactions as well. And many, in their feedback, have said that they have learnt something new and they have enjoyed that process.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, needless to say, we are facing a crisis of a generation. Across the world, there is economic chaos, business foreclosures, job instability – perhaps more painful and poisonous than just economic disruption – and a healthcare crisis, its divisions, strife and an "Us versus Them" dialogue. In Singapore, we have been lucky so far. We have our reserves, we have strong Government, we have a united people, and we have avoided most of the communal upheavals that others have experienced so far. Yet, we cannot and must not assume that the worst is over. The cases of COVID-19 infections may be coming down, may be stabilising, but the economic storm is still yet to hit us fully. And with that, our societal fabric will be strained, perhaps fray, and may well start to tear as well. That we have come through a General Election where passions have been aroused is perhaps a symptom of the times. Today, more than ever, we need to re-emphasise the importance of coming together, a message that perhaps is both important and well encapsulated in Total Defence. Even if the enemy that we are facing today is unseen, even perhaps unknown, we can see clearly where our military and civil defence have been important. At this point, it is perhaps apt to recognise the work of our SAF, the SCDF, our healthcare workers and many frontliners, who have been serving with great passion, dedication and also compassion during these difficult times. But just as the Prime Minister said in February 2020, the real test of this pandemic is our social cohesion and psychological resilience. In economic defence, the challenges we have met them so far with our various COVID Budgets.”
“In the spirit of the song, I do urge the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance to reassure the House and Singaporeans that we really have not spent too much. I believe that we can never do too much for our citizens during this crisis. Better too much than too little. But do we have enough? And as we project ahead, as the crisis continues – not just in Singapore but across the world – do we have enough? I also ask that our agencies take the gentlest possible touch with citizens during these unprecedented times in listening to those who feel that because of their circumstances, they have too little and will need much more. We are all in the same choppy oceans now but, perhaps, we are all in different vessels. It is not just about having a great captain on every boat or lighthouse to provide comfort. We need all hands on deck. We need the coast guard, lighter boatmen, pilots, pilot boats to help the different vessels. We have different needs and are in different situations. Many hon Members before me have raised examples like housing agents, car salesmen who have been facing difficulties over the years, F&B operators, casual workers, low-income families, persons with disabilities. We can never be too late. If not, even if we spend too much, it will truly be too little for some and too late for Singapore. The chorus of the song goes, "Too much, too little, too late to ever try again. Too much, too little, too late, we knew it had to end." It is a nice sentimental chorus for a song, but it will be a tragedy if we ever have to sing about this, about our Singapore. So, let us not be afraid to do much more for our citizens. It is never too late to do more and we can never have too little heart as we work to save lives and livelihoods in Singapore.”
“But there is one point worth clarifying on the accusation of being too late, that we did too much in tracing and testing, resulting in too much an increase in numbers; that we did too little, resulting in high daily numbers for our migrant workers; that it was too late, resulting in the explosion of numbers. I am not medically trained, but I believe that the transparency of our system in identifying every risk – isolating and putting the workers in quarantine – is far better than classifying some while ignoring others, just so that our numbers may look better. Some expound conspiracy theories, saying that it is a mess in the facilities, that is why there are so many cases. Again, I am not a medical professional, but I believe cases do not just burn themselves out. It is not just a medical 21 days of being in isolation and, therefore, there are no other cases. We just need to ask ourselves. At home, let us say, you have a family of five people. One of you gets the common cold. You get home. It does not mean that all four other family members get the common cold instantly. Perhaps, not all will get it even. Maybe your wife will get it the next day. Your kid? Maybe a few days later. And maybe your kid did not catch it from you but caught it from your wife, not you. So, it is not as simple as saying 21 days have passed, something must be horrendously wrong and, therefore, we have so many cases. But what we must know is that we must never be afraid that just because we do so many tests, resulting in too high a number, because, as I have mentioned earlier, it is far better for us to be transparent, cautious and safe than to regret later and say, really, it was too late. If not, we will really be accused of doing too little, too late.”
“Even if some believe that we have too much reserves, it is not wrong too, to use whatever we have to save lives and save jobs, to not use too little during this crisis and that we did not wait till it was too late for us to do so. It is also not wrong to ensure that the keys to our reserves ensure that we use it prudently, wisely, rightly. In the same song, the lyrics in the rift say, "Somewhere we lost the key, So little left for you and me and it's clear to see." We have a responsible Government and we have a second key – in the hand of our elected President. In taking prudent decisions, we are able to save wisely, spend prudently and put it to the best use possible. There are still others who talk about other issues that have arisen during COVID-19. For example, migrant workers have been a hot topic for a number of weeks. Some say that too much is being done for migrant workers, too little for the rest of us, too late in reacting to the high numbers. Still more also say: too much talk over the years, too little done in the past, too late to try again. Even more may exclaim: too much reliance on foreign workers, too little investment in our local workforce, too late now for Singapore. Is it really too much, too little or too late? We can all admit that we can do much more to improve living conditions but we are certainly not housing our migrant workers in slums. We can all admit that we must not pay too little attention to building up local capability, especially in construction in our built sector, but there are certainly sacrifices that we must all make. And it is certainly never too late.”
“But the MNCs know that here in Singapore, we care for our workers, we care enough to pay a significant part of their salary, so that in the future, the company, the MNCs remain and thus, the jobs also remain. We are not in a dichotomy of one or the other, all livelihoods that we can preserve, secure, retain are worth the investment in. And we cannot wait until it is too late to do so. On the other hand, for the COVID-19 Support Grant (CSG) or SIRS for self-employed people, these are unprecedented as well. A serious commitment of this Government to Singaporeans. There are others, who are worried. Worried about our health, also about money, worried about how we are using our reserves. Some say that this is too much, too generous. Others say it is too little left for the future or too late to reverse the positions that have already been made. Yet, there are also others who say that there is too much in the reserves. There is too little that is being spent on us and it is too late to make a difference. Is it really too much? Or too little? Or are we too late? But, it can never be too much to do whatever we can to save lives, to save jobs. We cannot, in the biggest existential crisis that we are facing since the withdrawal of the British in 1967, to do too little too late. What we can be assured of, and I have had a few video conferences with fellow legislators, friends from overseas, that even if we are accused of spending too much, we are not borrowing it, we are not spending money that is not ours. This is money that we have saved over the years. So, that the decision on maintaining our reserves has been the right one. We can be comforted that it was not wrong.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, in 1978, the number one song on the "US Billboard Hot 100 pop chart" was a comeback duet by Johnny Matthis and Deniece Williams. Many of you may remember the title of the song as being "Too Much, Too Little, Too Late". It spent 18 weeks on the charts. Incidentally, this past Tuesday marked 18 weeks since the first confirmed case of COVID-19 in Singapore on 23 January 2020. For a song, 18 weeks is a good run on the billboard. For us in Singapore, these have been 18 very long and extraordinary weeks. Here in Parliament, we have also witnessed unprecedented times. Since the first Unity Budget 15 weeks ago, we are now into our fourth Budget, almost one Budget per month and almost $100 billion committed to save lives and to save livelihoods. But there have been varied reactions to our commitment, much like the title of the song. A small number say: "Too much for them, too little for me, too late for us." One example is the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS). Some say that "you have given too much to MNCs, they are profitable at the end of the day, give less to them, because there’s too little for me. And even if you do, it may be too late for us." Is it really true? That more for them means less for us and therefore, less for them means more for us? To me, it is a misinterpretation of the intent. It is not "for them", the MNCs, but for "us", the jobs that they provide. We are preserving the jobs, the jobs that could easily go somewhere else at a moment's notice. This is an investment, an investment for jobs, for jobs to remain here. Yes, some of the MNCs have already decided that they do not need the JSS. They have returned it, they have donated it.”
“Mr Speaker, two questions. One is related to the personal protective equipment (PPE) that our medical staff use. Can I ask if we still have sufficient supply in Singapore and stockpile? And related to that, we spoke at the last Sitting on upping local production capabilities for some of this equipment, could the Minister update the House on the progress on this? Secondly, for home-based businesses (HBBs). I note that for F&B related HBBs, they will be allowed to restart on 12 May. Some other HBB residents have written in to me asking if there was a reason why they, who do not run F&B HBBs but take similar precautions in dealing with delivery men, are not similarly allowed to continue, if the risk for both groups are the same.”
“And for us, we must constantly reach out to one another to assure each other that we are in this together, and only by being together, can we continue to be Singapore strong, that we can overcome. And I hope that with the Unity, the Resilience and the Solidarity Budgets – URS – yours, yours! Your Budget will be all that we need; that we do not need to dip in once again, that we can come out of this crisis as soon as possible and reduce the impact on Singapore and Singaporeans.”
“And I told him that I really hope that that will that he wrote, and perhaps, that many other healthcare professionals have decided to do so, would not be put to use anytime soon, that they would have a long and healthy life ahead of them; and he would be able to spend many more happy years with his wife as well as his young daughter. For many of the people who have come to our Community Clubs (CCs) over the last few days to apply for the Temporary Relief Fund, I spent two days at my CC, speaking to some of them helping to process the documents as well. And a few of them looked shell-shocked. Tthey never expected to be in this situation, to feel a sense of loss to feel that there is nothing for them to look forward to daily or worrying about how they are going to feed their families. My constituency is not particularly low income but the number of people who came with large; some perhaps to try it out, but the vast majority were people from different sectors who did not expect to be so affected by this crisis. And for many of them, they had never planned for this this rainy day. So, whatever we do for them now, may be a temporary stop-gap measure. But what is more worrying is the impact on their mental health over the long term. So, we need to do a lot more not just during this crisis so that Singaporeans have a leg-up, so that Singaporeans know that they are not forgotten, but we also have to be prepared for the long term impact that this COVID-19 crisis will have on Singapore and Singaporeans. It will have an economic toll over the long term. It will have a toll on family life over the long term as well.”
“" But on a more serious note, many of the little comforts that we took for granted in our daily lives will not be possible in the coming months. Habits like going to our favourite coffee shop; for our elders, going down for a chat; mingling, having a beer the end of the day. All these will not be possible. Even spiritual comforts like going to our religious institutions have not been possible for some time. Today is the beginning of Holy Week for Christians. It is the climax of the Christian year, but yet our churches are closed. And this creates a major impact on the mental health of people who see these little things as comfort in their week, in their daily lives. Healthcare workers as well. On Friday, I shared on my social media, a correspondence that I had with a friend who works as a frontline doctor. He told me that he had never at his age considered the need to look at will, to plan ahead for his young family. But he did. He wrote it down. He was worried because he said that being on the frontline, he could see daily, the number of cases that were coming in. He could also see the patients who are not getting better or perhaps getting worse before they could get better. He could see the volume of cases. He could see his co-workers under pressure as well, having spent month after month working to combat this virus. For him and many of the healthcare workers. This is an untold toll on them. To be watching as people grow in numbers, as the infection numbers go up, as pressures on them grow, as the number of deaths may unfortunately increase, despite the best of their efforts. This is something that we have to be conscious about.”
“Just like a trip in the system, we all need to switch off before resetting the circuits, or risk tripping or worst still, shorting the entire circuit. So, every time we leave our house during this month for purposes beyond what is essential, we are literally tripping the system again. That would put the flash light to naught, as a catastrophic failure or ground fault would blow up the circuit, and would cost us exponentially – in economic as well as human costs. That, we can ill afford. So, the answer is, it takes all Singaporeans to reset the circuits. It takes all of us so that the drawdown from our reserves will be worthwhile, so that we do not end up bankrupting ourselves because of irresponsible actions that individuals may take. The next point I would like to make a something that I am glad that Deputy Prime Minister Heng touched on. And that is the long-term mental health impact of this crisis. The scale of COVID-19 is unprecedented and our three Unity, Resilience and Solidarity Budgets are also unprecedented to address the impact of this virus on lives and livelihoods. Yet, we cannot ignore the long-term impact to the mental health of Singaporeans, even after the virus subsides the most recent mental health index, which is a longitudinal study in Canada, showed a dramatic 12-point drop in the overall mental health situation in Canada due to COVID-19 and the lockdown. We also know from SARS that quarantined persons exhibited a higher prevalence of post-traumatic stress syndrome. With the circuit breaker announced, a mother remarked, "Before schools close, my kids had a 1% chance of contracting COVID-19. Now, we have home-based learning starting Wednesday, and us working from home, I have a 99% chance of either going crazy or suffering a stroke.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I usually prepare my speeches well in advance but with the newly announced Solidarity Budget, I have to rewrite, so my apologies to the translators for not having sent my speeches to you. Mr Deputy Speaker, how many people does it take to screw in a light bulb? Or in this case, how many Singaporeans does it take to reset a circuit breaker? When we were first in this House no 18 February, the lights were still on, perhaps, flickering a little bit, but nothing to be too worried about. The Deputy Prime Minister Heng, at that time, introduced the Unity Budget, much like a new starter installed into a flickering light. But we also had plans to quickly move towards LED lighting and solar panelling, to be better prepared for the future. Yet, almost soon after, we had a power trip. The lights went out as COVID-19 cases blew out the lights. We quickly brought in a qualified electrician and a Resilience Budget on 26 March. It turned on the emergency lighting so that Singaporeans would not stumble. Soon after, we realised that the emergency lights only worked indoors. And to get help, we needed to venture out a little further. In came the Solidarity Budget that was announced today, providing Singaporeans, perhaps, with a flash light, so that we can light our way in the darkness, so that Singaporeans who may have to be at home for a month are not left without a path out when the storm passes. We must not, however, overload our circuit, even though we hope to reset it as soon as possible. During this period, we must bite the bullet and adhere to the circuit breaker rules. We need to make sure that our collective actions add up.”
“Thank you. Mr Speaker. The two Ministers, the co-chairs the Multi-Ministry Task Force, thanked many people. But I think we should also thank the members of the Multi-Ministry Task Force for their leadership in the last two months in guiding us through this crisis. Thank you to the Multi-Ministry Task Force team. I have three supplementary questions. The first is, under what circumstances will we consider a complete lockdown of the country. Many people have mentioned this and referred to other jurisdictions. But what are the implications to our country if we should adopt this measure. Secondly, there are many Singaporeans who are still overseas. I know of many who are attempting to come back to Singapore, but with increasing lockdowns and travel restrictions, what assistance are we providing to Singaporeans overseas who are attempting to come back to Singapore? The last question is in relation to the fact that Singapore is a pluralistic society, we are multi-religious and there are four major religious festivals coming up. We have Qingming Festival, Clear Bright Festival, Good Friday Easter, Ramadan as well as Vesak Day coming up on our calendars in the next two months. What are the advice and guidelines that religious institutions as well as believers should follow as we come close to these festivals in terms of gathering together and celebrating?”
“Chairman, I have four supplementary questions. The first one on the Orchard Youth Belt which I believe Senior Minister of State Sim Ann said that Senior Parliamentary Secretary would mention. I am not so sure I caught that part of the answer. Will there be delays because of the current economic situation and what are the broad plans forward? In relation to sports, again to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, yesterday there was quite a stark commentary on the state of sports in The New Paper, written by Leonard Thomas. I echo some of his concerns. I would like to ask what are the plans that SportSG and the Ministry have to increase attendance at sports events, especially for competitive sports, and to raise the support level overall, especially for our traditional sports? I also heard the Senior Parliamentary Secretary say earlier that Ministry and the SportSG does not interfere in the running of the NSAs. Leonard also mentioned in his article that, and I quote, "I can't help but feel some undercurrent of distrust between NSAs and SportSG." So, I would like to ask what is the type of oversight that SportSG has over the NSAs, especially over drafting of their constitutions, rules and regulations on elections and renewal of their management committees.”
“Last year, the Ministry and the National Youth Council (NYC) launched the SG Youth Action Plan, an ambitious effort to envision the future of Singapore in 2025 and provide a platform for Singapore's youths to shape their vision for the country, develop plans for youth, community organisations, businesses and the Government to realise this vision together. With the kick-off in May 2019, can the Ministry provide a progress update on the discussions so far? What are the aspirations and ideas from our youth, resulting from this engagement and what can youths look forward to in 2020 and beyond? The transformation of the Somerset Belt designated as an area with a strong youth focus as part of the longer term plans for Orchard Road is also a key project under the SG Youth Action Plan. What has been the progress of discussions and how will the slowdown in the economy impact its development? Support for Ground-up Partnerships”
“Chairman, I thank the 22 fellow Members who filed a diverse range of cuts, and Minister Lawrence, Second Minister Desmond Lee and Minister Grace, Minister of State Zaqy and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling for their comprehensive replies. We are reasonable people, so I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $3,009,534,100 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $9,992,249,700 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“As we rejuvenate and look towards the future, as we view with excitement the possibilities, we must never lose sight of the purpose of the Ministry of National Development (MND) – to keep to this Government's social contract with Singaporeans, so that every Singaporean will have fair access to affordable homes, accessible workplaces, liveable environments, a future-ready city and ultimately, a better Singapore for all of us and also our future generations. Mr Chairman, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Residents' Viewpoints and Experiences”
“Though much of this will apply to new developments, I ask that the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) and HDB look at how we can push such innovations and apply them rapidly to our existing towns, as this is where most energy wastage is likely to occur with older infrastructure. Our new flats and commercial buildings should also be designed to take full advantage of natural air flows so as to reduce the need for reliance on air-conditioning. Especially amidst the lessons of this COVID-19 outbreak, natural ventilation is better than air-conditioning in reducing the chance of spread. In further light of COVID-19 and the slowing economy, many developers that I have spoken to have found it difficult in the last few months. There have been manpower shortages due to slow return of workers, there have been issues with supply chain and equipment, and all-round uncertainty over the economy. I have further heard from the developers that I spoke to that they project a lean year ahead, with delays in construction as well as potential difficulties in selling their completed projects. I therefore ask the Ministry to consider revamping the Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) temporarily, perhaps to extend the number of years subject to the state of the economy. I also ask the Ministry to help spur the construction industry, especially for small and medium players, by increasing the number of local rejuvenation projects such as Remaking Our Heartland (ROH), Large-Scale Town-Wide (LSTW) projects, Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) projects. Mr Chairman, we are not done building Singapore. I agree wholeheartedly with this statement.”
“I would like to urge MND and the National Heritage Board (NHB) to work together to do more to ensure that our heritage as well as the soul of these buildings are not lost. I return to the Minister's emphasis on partnerships. As we work with professionals and stakeholders to build the future Singapore, our towns, our workplaces, I would like to urge for more community involvement in the plans, so that the very people who live, work and play in these areas have a stake in shaping it. For estate upgrading, we have seen a successful example in Tampines Central. How will the Ministry better encourage such efforts? The Lively Places Programme, which was a pilot by HDB last year, has seen enthusiastic response. What projects have come out of this initiative? I would like ask the Ministry to expand on this programme throughout all our towns in Singapore. On a related effort, we are known as a City in a Garden, a vision first expoused by our chief gardener, the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew. Over the last 50 years, we have made much progress in greening Singapore. We have become a Garden City and then A City in a Garden. What are the Ministry's plans for the next bound of he greening of Singapore? How can Singaporeans also be more involved in this effort? Many of our multi-storey car park roof decks, for example, are often empty. I therefore urge that NParks will consider a more ambitious programme to green those roofs and promote more community projects. Related to this, of course, is our national efforts to combat climate change. I welcome the announcement of the Green Towns Programme.”
“For elderly Singaporeans who wish to age in place, some have also indicated that they prefer additional services such as "assisted-living" facilities. Minister Lawrence Wong mentioned last year that MND and MOH are in discussion on this. Can the Minister therefore share if there has been progress made and if there are now firmer plans for the Government to undertake such assisted-living projects? We all know that we are constrained by our physical size in Singapore, but our circumstances have driven us to find innovative and forward-looking solutions to afford us the best use of this limited resource, so that we can maintain a careful balance of responsible and responsive land usage. Amidst a rapidly changing global environment, what are we doing to retain our competitive edge while ensuring that our city remains liveable for our people, even with the changing aspirations? Our city centre is perhaps our most recognisable and visible skyline. However, it is also the hardest to rejuvenate. Last year, the CBD Incentive and Strategic Development Incentive Schemes were launched to promote rejuvenation. Can the Ministry provide an update on the progress made to date? I further urge that we continue to ensure that the Central Business District (CBD) and our city centres are not exclusive enclaves, but accessible and open to all Singaporeans. Another topic that I have been passionate about is how our redevelopment and rejuvenation cannot be at the cost of our heritage. Many of our buildings have been lost over the years in the name of progress and better land use. I applaud the Ministry's efforts in recent years to better protect our built heritage.”
“What more can MND do to help home-seekers access their flats quicker? With the open booking of flats, it has afforded Singaporeans who want quicker options to select and book their flats. Could the Ministry update on the take-up rate so far and what has been the feedback received? I would like to return now to a topic that I have spoken of often – the monetisation schemes and support for our elderly homeowners. I am especially happy that the Lease Buyback Scheme (LBS) has been extended to all flat types. Last year, MND organised an intense round of outreach across Singapore. Many of these roadshows were led by Minister Lawrence Wong himself. This was to raise awareness on the LBS. I would first like to ask what has been the sign-up rate for 2019, and if the roadshows have helped to increased understanding and also encouraged more to take it up. Secondly, what more can the Ministry do to make the benefits of LBS and other schemes better known and perhaps more attractive? Another group that I have spoken about every year has been support for vulnerable families and individuals. I am heartened by the work of the Home Ownership Support Team that Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling announced last year. Can the Ministry perhaps share how many have benefited from the targeted help so that they can achieve home ownership? For singles, the challenge remains that there are many waiting in line. Supply of 2-room flats for singles are still lagging behind demand. Does the Ministry intend to expand on the supply this year? For unwed parents and divorcees with children, which my colleague Mr Louis Ng has championed for passionately over the years, can the Ministry also share how it intends to better support them?”
“Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head T of the Estimates be reduced by $100". At last year's MND huddle, Minister Lawrence spoke about the importance of partnership. Last year also marked the 60th anniversary of the Ministry. We can all see how much our living environment has changed through the decades of careful planning by MND and its agencies. In 2019, the MND has similarly achieved much. Home buyers can now plan better, project sites are now half year ahead of schedule. Balloting time has also shortened. For vulnerable families, more options and support from the new Home Ownership Support Team. Looking ahead, the MND has not just focused on immediate issues but, like it has always been, visioning far head. There is excitement over the future of our city and our home. The Draft Master Plan 2019 offers a glimpse. Chairman, let us first look at the Budget allocation for MND. This year, MND's budget will grow by 22.2%, or $4.46 billion. Increase is mainly attributed to the public housing development programme and higher spending for SERS and upgrading. Can the Minister provide some details on the new projects to be funded? In addition, I note that the CONQUAS score for HDB flats in 2019 saw a drop of 3.5% to 88.5%, compared to 2018. Could the Minister share why there was a drop in the mean CONQUAS, and how MND and BCA intend to promote better quality workmanship? In line with that, can we better promote more local talents in the construction industry? I, and perhaps many Members of this House, have seen fewer cases of residents appealing for flats. Those who do usually have more complex circumstances. It is therefore a reflection of how our housing policy has improved. But there are still some who need more help or better options.”
“Some older hawker centres still use round tables, which are not conducive for the use of trays unlike rectangular tables in newer centres. Beyond COVID-19, I hope that this will promote better hygiene and social norms in Singapore. Socially-Conscious Enterprise Hawker Centre (SEHC) Model”
“Chairman, amidst this COVID-19 outbreak, much has been said about social responsibility and public hygiene. From Town Councils to offices, disinfection and constant cleaning has become the norm. This crisis affords us the opportunity to also reinforce the importance of social norms, such as in our hawker centres. For a number of years now, we have been promoting the concept of tray returns. Gradually, we have seen better response. Yet, we also see many previous innovations fall into disuse. In many older hawker centres, you see automated tray-return belts that have been switched off; coin-return machines that do not work; tray-return stations becoming manual stacking stations for cleaners. At the same time, the role of the tray is also very much temporary. Many remove their trays out of habit and place dishes onto tables. There is also a socially irresponsible behavior, such as the spitting of food waste and bones onto table surfaces, not just during COVID-19, but on any other day. This should be discouraged. Cleaners often do not have the adequate tools nor training to properly clean. Often, the same cloth is used. And one does not need to leave much to the imagination that the same food waste spat out onto tables ends up being smeared across the entire table. I, therefore, ask that MEWR and NEA promote the usage of trays while dining and not remove the tray itself. This way, the tray catches any spillage as well as any food waste or oral fluids. This means that conservancy contractors should also be incentivised to sterilise trays after each use. This reduces the workload of cleaners, promotes a clean hygienic eating environment and reduces the spread of diseases. To further achieve this, the design of hawker centres will also have to adapt.”
“There will be some benefits that we will need to segregate and have some amount of additional help for those who have children but have decided to go back into the workforce but the rest, especially, benefits for the children should be equalised. Mr Chairman, families are the backbone of society. If we do not take care of this backbone, we will not be able to stand straight and strong as a country.”
“She, like other stay-at-home mothers, make a conscious decision, that a sacrifice of her career was weighed and that spending time with the children was worth it. A fellow parliamentarian from Europe, whom I have known for a few years was in Singapore for a conference last year. He made an observation, perhaps a little snidely and a little bit snarky, "The Minister-in-charge of your country's population strategy is the Minister for Manpower? Should it not be the Minister for Family?" I explained to him that our Minister-in-charge only happens to be the Minister for Manpower. She is also a mother, and also a Cabinet Minister, who is deeply passionate about children. But there might be a small grain of truth. Often, we couch our policies on families with the view on our workforce, our dependency ratio, so much so that our culture has been shaped by that; that the true joy and happiness of family is clouded by numbers. So, I urge as I have, in the last three years; for us a return to basics, that we ask ourselves beyond policies, beyond benefits, how can the whole of society help to build a family-friendly culture that is supportive of families in Singapore, that allows stay-at-home mothers to be proud of what they do? And also mothers who choose to continue their careers to have the support that they require. That said, I also wish that we level the playing field and recognise fully the role of mothers. Whether in or outside of employment, mothers play an important role in our society. So, in all our non-tax related benefits such as for early childhood education subsidies, child relief amongst others, I hope that we can have more equity between working and non-working mothers.”
“Chairman, this is Clare. She is 17 days old today. A wonderful bundle of joy. She is our fourth child and our first daughter. Each time the experience is the same. Having lost two of our six children, Peter and Maria, to miscarriages, every time we go through a pregnancy we have an equal measure of worry and joy. Each time our gynecologist says, "She’s doing fine", we let out a sigh of relief. Clare's birth has changed our lives, just as her three older brothers have. The home is a little bit noisier, the floor is, of course, a lot messier and sleep is now even more a luxury commodity at home – but more importantly, the immeasurable joy of parenthood. I do not wish to glamourise parenthood. Like everything else, it comes with its own burdens. But Jocelyn and I believe that it is a burden worth carrying. At the same time, I wish the burden were lighter, not so much with benefits, but for society to be able to reinforce a culture that recognises the family as important. My wife is a stay-at-home mother. For our three older boys, she took care of them herself without any help. And often, I am asked, "What does your wife work as"? My reply was that she is a full-time mother often elicits odd responses. They go along the lines of, "Oh, she is so lucky, she doesn't have to work", or on the flipside, "You have to work harder." Often enough, I respond quite quickly to those statements, as if to justify our situation; that in addition to her love for our children, she also runs a small online business at home that twins her passions. She sews infant clothing and accessories. But it also hits me after that, that there is no need to justify why my wife stays at home.”
“She works in the frontline and she was helping with contact tracing and temperature taking. Yet, someone felt that, even amidst the heightened alert, that he was entitled to take it out on her and her colleagues, throwing the pen at her and shouting at her colleagues. Because? Actually, there is no need for a because. Another resident confided in me, sending me a Facebook message. I asked for her permission to share this with everyone. She wrote: "Sir, I do not know why people treat us like this. Why is my uniform, which I aspired to and was inspired by others to don, now deemed as a mark of shame? Why do people stand away from me even when I am on the way to work, and not the other way around? Why do people look at me with a glint of horror? Have I committed a crime? It hurts. But I will keep doing what I love. I will keep on saving lives because many Singaporeans are not like them. And when those who shun us arrive in my hospital, I will care for them just the same as the others. With love, respect and to the best of my ability because, just like the Nurse's Pledge I took, I will uphold my integrity.” Mr Speaker, when this crisis comes to pass, when we get back to normalcy, I ask that we commit ourselves to doing something meaningful to recognise our frontline workers. Let us do right by them. Give them back the dignity they deserve and, in the process, earn on behalf of all Singaporeans the forgiveness we all need for shunning them. We salute you, our brothers and sisters. Mr Speaker, I apologise for the lengthiness of my speech because there is a lot of good to say about this Budget. I, therefore, add my voice in support of this Budget.”
“When DORSCON Orange was declared, many banded together to do something for the community. We have heard many examples over the course of the many speeches in this House. My own volunteers in my constituency asked what we could do to encourage our frontline heroes. In three days, we managed to pull together a programme which we called "Cookies for SG Heroes". We started off wanting to bake cookies and progressed to preparing care packs for the staff of Tan Tock Seng Hospital and Ng Teng Fong General Hospital. Within hours of putting the word out, the Girl Guides responded, donating their famous biscuit tins, Hock Hua Tonic responded offering their herbal tea at cost, the Singapore Kindness Movement responded providing encouragement decals, Gain City came on board offering the use of their show kitchens, residents, Singaporeans responded. By the morning, we had so much that we needed bigger bags to pack the care bags. A total of 136 residents came together and we baked close to 11,000 cookies that day. The feeling was moving. One of our baking coordinators, Pey Yng, was interviewed for a video. She had moved out of our constituency a few years earlier but responded immediately when we asked for help. When asked why she wanted to help and stepped forward, she said, almost tearing, "Instead of discriminating, we should be encouraging them." Mr Speaker, these frontline heroes include our medical staff, allied healthcare workers, cleaners, conservancy workers, security personnel, back office staff and many, many others. These are our fellow Singaporeans, our brothers and sisters. We are battling a stealthy enemy that does not discriminate. Yet, a small minority do. Yesterday, a former colleague of mine shared his wife’s experience.”
“Beyond the short to mid term, the Budget also looks far ahead to an existential threat brought about by global warming. The problem is not immediate, but committing an initial $5 billion to Coastal Protection does show our commitment. Mr Speaker, being responsible also means telling the hard truth, even if sometimes unpalatable. Yesterday, it was said in this House that, "If you have nothing good to say, then best to keep quiet." That, Mr Speaker, is the easy thing to do. It is easy to only say nice things. It is easy not to have to make hard decisions. It is easy to be popular and likeable. But being a good and effective leader is not easy. The difficult task is to tell it like it is. The difficult task is sacrificing personal standing to say the needful. And the difficult task is calling out bad behaviour when required. This Government knows that hard truths hurt but does not shy away from it. Without these hard truths and hard decisions, Singapore would not be where it is today. That, to me, is the mark of true leadership and wisdom. When someone takes his or her duty seriously to make hard decisions, that is true responsibility. Credit is due to the Deputy Prime Minister and the Ministry of Finance (MOF) team as well as the other Ministries for being able to respond to this crisis so rapidly. This Budget would have been a long process. But to turn it around in face of a crisis takes mettle. It is, therefore, remarkable because it is responsive. It is also remarkable because it remains responsible. A government that can respond to trouble and not fall to the temptation of being populist in the process, all this is because we also have a remarkable people and a remarkable country. Our common response to COVID-19 is mirrored in the Budget.”