Alex Yeo
Singapore
“Sir, I thank the Minister for her answers. I just wanted to ask the Minister, for outages, as we have spoken in this House, consumers and businesses are most affected.”
“In the premises, I invite the Minister to share with this House, if the Ministry has plans to review the means testing threshold for civil legal aid and if the Ministry will consider a tiered approached to means testing for legal aid in areas of law, such as probate-related and/or deputyship applications to allow more Singaporean families…”
“As we see ASEAN taking proactive steps to establish itself as a noteworthy regional platform, can the Minister share more on the continued relevance and importance of ASEAN to Singapore and the region as a whole and Singapore's role in the efforts to strengthen ASEAN integration, particularly as Singapore takes on the ASEAN chairmanship i…”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Mr Andre Low for his clarification. My position is a simple one. When I say that fair comment is unnecessary, I mean that there is no example in my mind, given the definition of fair comment.”
“In this context, I would ask the Minister of the Government’s views and plans to address the complexities and nuances of online harms suffered by children or youths in the digital world and, if there are plans to augment the Office of the Commissioner for Online Safety with the necessary support, such as a professionally trained team of e…”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for his answer to the Parliamentary Question. Can I just ask a supplementary question to the Minister of State?”
The complete record
Every one of 50 lines we hold for Alex Yeo, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account.
“Before I conclude, I wish to support the proposal by NTUC Secretary-General, Mr Ng Chee Meng, for the setting up of a market intelligence and foresight system contextualised to the Singapore market. We can appreciate how useful it would be to draw insights from information, data points, analysis and the research of tripartite partners to sense-make for early signals, coordinate responses and provide proactive early intervention, where necessary. That said, while supporting our workers to retrain and move on to different roles to prevent displacement is important, we should also explore the possibility of using information from the same system to identify how the Government can incentivise AI startups to create new jobs and opportunities for our workforce. For example, it has been reported that AI movie production startups in China are supported with incentives and financial support. They are reported to have pioneered micro-dramas or vertical dramas that is a new entertainment format making waves globally. Sir, if we are to leverage on AI as the next phase of Singapore’s economic development, we must transform, not only our economy but also the lives of every worker, every Singaporean. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Motion.”
“Prof Er Meng Hwa, in a recent Business Times article advocating for deeper learning, gave the example of Micron Singapore, whose in-house AI upskilling initiative did not stop at awareness but allowed employees to use AI tools to extract insights faster, analyse risks better, automate route tasks, plan projects more effectively and improve decision-making. How do we persuade more businesses and organisations to devote the time and precious resources to obtain these objectives together with us? Upskilling our workforce to ensure that they have the necessary credentials and knowledge may get them past the door, but it is no guarantee that businesses and organisations will employ and train workers in the way that will build on and optimise their AI capabilities. This Government has been deliberate in focusing our policies on long-term advancement rather than on short-term gains. I am therefore confident that the AI National Council, led by the Prime Minister, will lay out plans and initiatives on the same basis. In fact, we already have, within our system, the ability for the Government, unions and employers to collaborate closely to achieve the long-term objective of ensuring that our workforce is effectively equipped with the knowledge, skills, deep understanding and practical application outcomes. Our tripartite model, where all three partners, having built trust, mutual respect and equal partnership over decades, working hand in hand through this new phase of AI adoption, will help us to ensure that our workers, our businesses and our economy can seize new opportunities and advance together.”
“The idea is to embed AI fluency and literacy as a part of life, be it in creating a simple e-greeting card with an AI tool that creates moving graphics or building a billion-dollar company using bots. Only then can we envision an entire people advancing collectively together in an economy with AI-enabled growth. If embracing AI is a national strategic move, then we should roll out a national AI literacy and fluency programme for all Singaporeans. Second, supporting workers to become AI fluent should be more than just providing them with the AI tools and the know-how on using them. We must also equip and afford workers the time and ability to learn how to apply the AI tools in their workplaces. Getting young graduates past the door, and securing older workers and PMEs in new roles are imperative, but if AI is to transform our economy, we must ensure that our workforce learns effectively through deeper learning while persuading our businesses and organisations to create workplaces and systems that allow our workers to test their new skills, learn from mistakes and improve. Learning must be coupled with building capability. At its broadest and most pervasive use as a tool, AI can generate content, summarise and answer in seconds. We need a workforce that not only can use the AI tool to obtain these outcomes, but to work with AI as a collaborative partner while applying judgment, reason, creativity and context to drive high-impact value – the human elements.”
“Organisations and individuals who manage a head-start or transition well, will benefit exponentially, while those who do not, will be left behind. For years, we have proactively anticipated a disruption like this, by investing and imbuing in Singaporeans the value of lifelong learning and the need to regularly upskill through programmes, such as SkillsFuture. This has put us in a good starting position as we push hard on AI adoption, like the National AI Impact Programme that aims to support 10,000 enterprises and help 100,000 workers become more AI fluent. However, AI fluency and literacy among the general population is also equally important. On this I would like to raise two points. First, you will recollect my personal anecdote at the start of my speech. Fluency with any tool, be it computers or smart phones in the past or AI today, is about building confidence. Mr Lim Boon Heng, a former NTUC Secretary-General shared with me, his experience with the Government's computerisation efforts in the 1980s. It was a strategic decision at the time, but workers were afraid of computers. So, the Government designed computer appreciation courses that were rolled out by the NTUC, using early Apple computers. Familiarisation with the use of the keyboard and for those who remember, playing games like PacMan. Workers slowly got past the fear and embraced the familiarity. Importantly, the key message must be, this is a tool that can help you do a job, better, faster. Now, that new tool is AI. While it is vital that we upskill our workers to leverage on the AI tools that are relevant for their respective workplaces, AI fluency and literacy should be a national endeavour that is available in our schools, our Community Clubs and even our Active Ageing Centres.”
“This Motion is therefore a timely one. It recognises that harnessing AI to grow, is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, while AI can be a driver for the next phase of Singapore’s economic development; on the other, if its development and deployment is left unfettered, it can lead to societal ills such as job displacement and widening inequality. As the Prime Minister pointed out during his Budget Statement, AI is but a "tool". How we harness it and manage its deployment will shape our economy, our jobs, our lives. Our approach to AI-enabled growth, as the Motion states, therefore, must be anchored in fairness, resilience and opportunities for all. The Motion resonates because it is about putting people at the centre of Singapore's approach to AI-enabled growth. Growth must be inclusive and benefit our people. We cannot have jobless growth at all costs. Sir, awareness of AI's disruptive nature to the workplace and to our workforce is extremely high. The anxieties and concerns of our workers and PMEs across industries are not hypothetical. They are real, even quantifiable. A recent NTUC survey found that more than half of our PMEs feel an urgent need to upskill just to stay relevant. Nearly a third are actively anxious about being replaced. Other studies have shown that half of Singaporeans fear that their roles could be automated, and many are concerned that AI will benefit the bottom-lines of corporations more than it benefits the everyday worker. Our young graduates entering the workforce for the first time face a daunting reality. As AI automates routine execution, employers are raising the bar, demanding higher-order critical thinking and AI collaboration skills from the outset. Left on its own, the AI disruption could very well lead to unfair outcomes.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, AI can be scary. I recall the first time at work when I received a draft legal submission from my younger colleague who had some content generated by AI, the alarm bells went off in my mind. "Is the content reliable? Am I going to be taken to task by the Court for submitting this?" I was anxious and worried even though the content had been verified and put together with considered "human"-generated legal analysis. This incident made me recollect what happened when I first joined the legal profession. I would find written memos on my desk with instructions on matters from a particular Senior Partner. When I asked once, whether an email might be easier, I was told that an email was not reliable and that with a written memo, he was assured that I would receive the message. We all know better than to argue with our bosses but eventually, the written memos did move onto become emails, perhaps with the realisation that the email instructions would reliably reach me, even after office hours. As with each industrial and technological transformation in history, be it the steam engine, electricity, digitalisation with personal computers, connectivity with the Internet and now AI, change and transition always bring with them anxiety and the fear of the unknown. Humans are wired to be untrusting of that which we cannot control – and maybe even rightly so. With AI, we feel this acutely in Singapore. Many Members in the House have spoken about these concerns and the anxieties felt by Singaporeans from all walks of life. As the adage goes, "change is the only constant". Fear of the unknown is a natural reaction, but we should use it as a galvanising force to re-think old ways, learn new ones and as a result, seize new opportunities and grow.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his responses. I have two supplementary questions. The first one, if the assessment is made that the affected students of a bullying case is not suited to remain in the same learning environment or should be separated, either in the same class or school, what are the measures the school will take to ensure that the final outcome is fair, equitable and in the best interest of all the affected students? Second, I just wanted to clarify my Parliamentary Question No 9 on cyberbullying. Actually, what I wanted to seek clarification on is that in the instances of cyberbullying, unlike the Australian Online Safety Act, which differentiates between cyberbullying material targeted at a child and cyber abuse targeted at an adult. Our equivalent does not have that. And while I agree that the OSC will be a good platform for parents, students and even schools to refer such instances to, the thresholds may not be the same. What we constitute as cyberbullying to children, many online harms to adults may not be the same. And if the Online Commissioner is not in a position to intervene, then how would the schools deal with such cyberbullying cases?”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for her answers. I just wanted to ask the Minister, for outages, as we have spoken in this House, consumers and businesses are most affected. One of the things that, if we hear from the ground, is that there is no real-time live information on how long the outages are going to be, what is the reasons for it and so on. I understand, like in Australia, they have a live outage register. Would the IMDA consider mandating telcos to provide real-time live information whenever any of these outages occur, rather than for consumers and businesses to wait for them to issue a press statement before finding out more information about these issues?”
“I would like to seek an update from the Minister on the progress in including Care Protocols for Dementia and Osteoporosis under the Healthier SG Programme, including the timelines of the roll-out of the screening assessments and whether they will cover all seniors above a certain age. Second, according to the National Population Health Survey 2024 conducted by the Health Promotion Board, 54.7% of Singapore residents in the oldest age band, 60 to 74 years, were least willing to seek help from healthcare professionals, while 70.9% of those aged 30 to 39 were the most willing to do so. Our seniors can face loneliness, grief, loss of purpose after retirement and the anxiety of declining health and independence. They also belong to a generation that may not often have the vocabulary to convey their mental well-being needs. In the Committee of Supply 2025 debates, it was announced at that Healthier SG care protocols for major depressive disorder and general anxiety disorder would be rolled out. With the increased emphasis on mental wellness, I would like to enquire on the status and ambit of this roll-out, particularly for our seniors and whether it would expand to other mental ailments. Relatedly, I would also like to ask the Minister if he can provide our Active Ageing Centre Teams or even our Silver Generation Ambassadors, structured training in basic mental health first aid, so they can be first responders for emotional well-being in the community. Video Calls with Doctors”
“Sir, in my speech during the debate on the Motion of Thanks for the President's Address last year, I had highlighted that, while we now live longer, the years that we live in good health is on average 10 years shorter. Ideally, our life-span and our health-span should be closer. The concern that we live long but not well, is real. Preventive healthcare is therefore vital to help our seniors reduce years of bad health and increase their quality of life in retirement. The Healthier SG Programme was launched to address this. However, I wish to advocate for the Ministry to do more and expand the range of preventative healthcare for our seniors. I will address two areas related to the Healthier SG Programme. First, based on 2023 data, 11% of those above the age of 70 have dementia and 16% above the age of 70 have osteoporosis. We can expect the numbers to have increased and continue to increase in our ageing society. Dementia is both debilitating and scary for seniors. Poor bone health on the other hand, leads to deteriorating mobility and overall health in seniors, especially after a fall. Both conditions take a tremendous toll on caregivers in the family. Pre-dementia screening and Bone Density Tests allow for: one, early detection; two, timely intervention which can slow down the progression; and three, better long-term planning, which gives our seniors and their families the time and opportunity to make necessary adjustments. I had asked a Parliamentary Question in September 2025 on whether the Ministry had plans to include as part of the Healthier SG Programme, screenings for pre-dementia and osteoporosis. I was heartened when the Ministry had indicated that Care Protocols for Dementia and Osteoporosis were being developed under Healthier SG.”
“In the premises, I invite the Minister to share with this House, if the Ministry has plans to review the means testing threshold for civil legal aid and if the Ministry will consider a tiered approached to means testing for legal aid in areas of law, such as probate-related and/or deputyship applications to allow more Singaporean families to benefit from legal assistance for such legal matters. 8.30 pm Expanding Access to Justice”
“In the premises, I invite the Minister to share an update with this House on the proposed enhancements to the civil enforcement process, including the proposed introduction of Civil Judgment Enforcement Officers, and the progress and outcomes of the Maintenance Enforcement Process. Access to Legal Aid and Justice Legal fees can be daunting for families and individuals. The pressure is aggravated when it involves family-related legal matters that are impossible to avoid. At COS 2025, the Minister shared that the means testing criteria for civil legal aid were revised in 2024 to ensure legal aid continues to be accessible to Singaporeans who need assistance. Currently, criminal defence aid under the Public Defender's Office is pegged at around the 35th percentile of resident households by per capita household income. Civil legal aid, however, remains roughly at the 25th percentile. In the area of civil law, based on experience at our Potong Pasir Community Legal Clinic over the past 12 years, less privileged families often reach out to seek assistance in probate matters such as the procurement of letters of administration or deputyship applications under the Mental Capacity Act when a member of the family, often a senior, suffers from mental capacity medical conditions. These families are often slightly above the threshold for legal aid but face financial challenges to retain lawyers to advise and deal with these matters on their behalf. There are aspects of these matters that could result in frustrating and trying issues for families if left unresolved. Deputyship to act on behalf of a senior in the family, for example, is important for families to make decisions for the senior and to have access, and be able to manage his or her assets.”
“Mr Chairman, I declare that I am a lawyer in private practice for both my cuts. Disputes are distressing but an inevitable consequence of personal and commercial interactions. If unresolved, some disputes end up before the Civil Courts or tribunals for resolution. If you are an individual, legal proceedings can often be a frustrating and stressful process. And yet, even after you obtain a judgment in your favour, it does not necessarily mean that you have succeeded. There is still the matter of enforcing the judgment. The enforcement process can sometimes be an equal, if not more, trying process. It requires a successful litigant to invest more time and resources with no guarantee of recovery. It was therefore heartening when the Minister announced during COS 2024 and 2025 that the Ministry was studying potential enhancements to the civil enforcement process, such as giving the Courts greater powers to identify the assets and means of judgment debtors in order to help the judgment creditor make an informed decision on whether and how to enforce the judgment. This included proposals for Civil Judgment Enforcement Officers who can assist to better locate debtors' assets. These reforms were slated to also apply to tribunals such as the Employment Claims Tribunal and Small Claims Tribunal. In the domain of family disputes, the Maintenance Enforcement Process is a major step forward. Operationalised in January 2025, with progressive expansion in phases, we now have Maintenance Enforcement Process officers who can obtain financial information, facilitate conciliation and provide reports to assist judges.”
“The number of drug abusers below the age of 20 years old, increased year on year by 7%, while the number of new drug abusers arrested below 20 years old increased by 22%. Notably, six in 10 new cannabis abusers arrested were below 30 years old. Sir, over the years in Singapore, we have always strongly supported the Government's strong stance against drug abuse. We understand and appreciate deeply the damage and detrimental effects that drug abusers can cause, not only to themselves, but also to their family and their loved ones. In recent years, there has been a worrying global shift in views and attitudes towards the use of drugs, such as cannabis. In 2020, the UN Commission on Narcotic Drugs reclassified cannabis and cannabis resin under the 1961 Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs. Thailand, a fellow ASEAN neighbour, became the first Asian country to decriminalise cannabis in 2022. How do we ensure that our youths are not influenced by global trends and attitudes towards drugs, like cannabis? Recently, the Government had to also take urgent steps to address Kpods, which are e-vaporisers or vapes containing the psychoactive substance, etomidate. A significant number of those who abuse Kpods are youths. Anecdotally, I have sure many other Members of this House have as well, I have met many parents of teenagers and youths in the community who are extremely worried and concerned. In the premises, I invite the Minister to share with this House on the Government's plans to address global trends towards liberal drug approaches and how we can better effectively engage our youths on the dangers of drug abuse and substance abuse. 5.30 pm Keep Families Safe on Roads and Online”
“To this end, the establishment of FRONTIER+ in October 2024, a united front against transnational scams comprising 11 jurisdictions, is a landmark initiative that facilitates real-time intelligence sharing, joint operations and coordinated enforcement against transnational scams. I therefore invite the Minister to share if there are plans to the expand the FRONTIER+ grouping, how successful do we think it has been in combating transnational scams and whether there are opportunities for Singapore to leverage on the grouping to recover more scam proceeds that have been transferred out of Singapore. Second, notable steps have also been taken to enact or strengthen legislation to tackle scams, including the Online Criminal Harms Act (OCHA) Code of Practice, the Protection from Scams Act that was passed and operationalised last year, empowering the Police to issue Restriction Orders to banks to restrict the banking transactions of individuals at risk of transferring monies to scammers, the Facility Restriction Framework to tackle scam mules and the Criminal Law (Miscellaneous Amendment) Act which was passed in November 2025 which introduced caning for scam and scam-related offences. In the premises, I also invite the Minister to share whether MHA feels that this is sufficient or if there are also plans to further strengthen legislative levers to tackle scams. Youths and Drug Abuse The recent 2025 statistics on the Drug Situation in Singapore released by the Central Narcotics Bureau raised a worrying trend of drug abuse among our youths. In 2025, 28% of all drug abusers arrested were below 30 years of age. The youngest drug abuser arrested in 2025 was just 12 years old.”
“Mr Chairman, in 2025, the number of scam cases decreased by 27.6% or 14,193 cases from 2024. Importantly, losses from scams also fell by 17.9% or by $199.3 million in 2025. This is a positive development, and due credit must be given to the Police and, in particular, the officers of the Anti-Scam Command for their tireless efforts in combating scams to protect Singaporeans. Nevertheless, with 37,308 scam cases, totalling a loss of $913.1 million in 2025, the situation remains extremely concerning and combating scams must remain a top priority this year. On this note, I wish to highlight two areas for discussion. First, the recovery of scam monies. Understandably, the topmost concern on the minds of scam victims, is whether they are able to recover their monies. In 2025, the Anti-Scam Command successfully recovered $140.5 million worth of scam losses. Importantly, it is reported that through proactive interventions with victims in the various stages of being scammed, the Anti-Scam Command managed to work with its partners to help victims avert potential losses of at least $348 million. This is encouraging news, especially on the Anti-Scam Command's successful efforts in averting potential losses. And yet, if we look at the amounts of monies recovered compared with the total amount lost, recovered monies represent only about 15% of the amounts lost. A large part of the reason for this is because of the transnational nature of scams. Often, scam proceeds are transferred out of Singapore within minutes, if not, seconds, of the victim's transfer. This makes it extremely challenging for the Police to trace and recover the monies.”
“In the premises, I would like to ask the Minister whether MINDEF have plans to better leverage SAFRA's existing infrastructure and network to build stronger ties and raise Total Defence awareness in the community.”
“Mr Chairman, Singapore's Total Defence framework has always recognised that a strong defence system is multi-faceted and goes beyond the military. The six pillars of defence include, the military, civil, economic, social, digital and psychological defence. To this end, while belabouring the point, I would like to join my Parliamentary colleagues, Mr Patrick Tay, and my only namesake in the House Mr Alex Yam, to speak about SAFRA. SAFRA National Service Association is a familiar and accessible platform for NSmen, their families and the wider community to come together to participate in Total Defence activities. Today, SAFRA has seven clubhouses spread across Singapore and more than 475,000 members. With its strong infrastructure and extensive member network, I believe more can be done to mobilise this platform. For example, just earlier this month, as part of Exercise SG Ready 2026, simulated disruption activities and programmes to commemorate Total Defence were held at SAFRA clubhouses for NSmen and their families to learn about readiness for power outages and disrupted digital connectivity. MINDEF could consider working with SAFRA to hold more regular community dialogue sessions on disinformation, resilience workshops and curated content on threats facing Singapore with a focus on engaging the wider community. SAFRA's extensive network of members and suite of infrastructure, present a wealth of resource and opportunities for us to leverage. Its wide reach makes it a potentially formidable tool to strengthen our Total Defence strategy, as a strategic defence engagement platform that can raise awareness and deepen ties in the community.”
“As we see ASEAN taking proactive steps to establish itself as a noteworthy regional platform, can the Minister share more on the continued relevance and importance of ASEAN to Singapore and the region as a whole and Singapore's role in the efforts to strengthen ASEAN integration, particularly as Singapore takes on the ASEAN chairmanship in 2027? Our ASEAN Ties”
“Mr Chairman, ASEAN is important to Singapore because as neighbour states, we share many common interests and when we advocate and present ourselves as a regional bloc, can navigate as a stronger collective force. Amid the cloud of geopolitical uncertainty, ASEAN member states recognise the need for greater unity and integration. In this regard, ASEAN has taken considerable steps forward in the recent year. First, there has been more regional integration, especially in emerging areas such as the digital economy and sustainable energy. The signing of the upgrade to the ASEAN Trade in Goods Agreement will improve market access, transparency and connectivity for Singapore companies doing business in the region. The substantive conclusion of the Digital Economy Framework Agreement (DEFA) is yet another milestone. DEFA is the first regional digital economy agreement and when implemented, will improve rules in key areas such as digital trade facilitation, payments, standards and cross-border business flows, benefitting Singaporeans and Singapore businesses. Second, ASEAN is a platform that can be leveraged to engage widely with countries around the world. The ASEAN Plus mechanisms and Dialogue Partnerships provide Singapore and ASEAN with regular touchpoints with major and middle powers. These include the East Asia Summit, which Singapore played a key role in establishing in 2005. ASEAN has also institutionalised cooperation with other regional organisations such as the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) through the biennial ASEAN-GCC Summit.”
“This could result in vulnerable seniors failing to get the support or timely intervention they need, even with many willing helping hands in the community. I ask if the Government will consider reviewing the Mental Capacity Act and empowering the Public Guardian to intervene directly in such cases? The Public Guardian can work alongside the Public Trustee to manage the assets of such seniors and direct caregiving agencies to administer the care required. I understand that in jurisdictions such as Australia, there exists a legal framework that allows for direct intervention in such cases. Interestingly, Australia also recently enacted the rights-based Aged Care Act 2024 which came into force on 1 November 2025 with a focus on empowering seniors to uphold their rights, needs and personal choices in their aged care. Mr Speaker, as our population ages and the needs of our seniors become more varied and complex, it is vital that our policies evolve with greater clarity and foresight. The concerns I raised today – from retirement adequacy to fair access to support and the vulnerabilities of seniors who live alone – remind us that no single framework can meet every circumstance. As we continue strengthening our systems, let us work together collectively to achieve the objective espoused in this year’s Budget: for every senior in Singapore to age with dignity, security and peace of mind. Sir, I support the Budget.”
“It is abundantly clear to me that they are anxious, worried and unsettled about what could happen to them as they age, especially if they are single or choose to live alone due to complex family dynamics. Let me share an example. A senior lived alone in a home that was in a state of disrepair. Our volunteers in the neighbourhood observed that she needed help. No family member or relative was contactable. She was physically frail. Sadly, her mental capacity was also failing. She missed her bills and had her utilities turned off. She missed her meals, even though volunteers left cooked meals at her doorstep. She was friendly one day and extremely hostile the next. Our grassroots team, the Social Service Office, AIC and other volunteer groups rendered assistance in whatever way possible. Yet they were limited as to how far they could go, and no agency had the authority and or the power to intervene directly. Eventually, after almost a year, we were informed that some action had been taken to have her situation addressed. This may be an isolated case, one with a peculiar set of circumstances. But as the number of seniors living alone in Singapore grows, the expectation must be that more such cases will emerge. Currently, the Public Guardian can only supervise or investigate matters involving LPAs and or deputyships. Under certain circumstances, the Public Guardian may appoint suitable third parties, like social workers or medical care providers as professional deputies. The Mental Capacity Act, however, does not empower the Public Guardian to intervene directly if a senior loses his or her mental capacity and has no viable person who can be appointed as a deputy to make decisions and manage matters on his or her behalf.”
“Perhaps the deeper underlying issue is to consider whether there is a need to review holistically how we assess our retired seniors in the various subsidies and support mechanisms that we have in place. Some of these mechanisms are applied nationally across all demographics of Singaporeans. The means testing regime of PCHI and AV is one. Other mechanisms are senior-centric, like silver support and the Pioneer Generation and Merdeka Generation Packages. For those mechanisms applied nationally, in healthcare for example, some subsidies are tiered, like in hospitalisation ward subsidies, while others suffer a cliff-drop reduction of subsidies, like in the case of residential long-term care services. Sir, if there is a policy imperative that the needs of our seniors, especially those in retirement, should be prioritised, I ask if the Government will consider reclassifying seniors as a separate category for current subsidy mechanisms that apply across all demographics and apply a more nuanced and targeted approach to address the needs of this growing class of retired seniors. The second category are seniors who live alone. This is a growing trend. According to the Department of Statistics, the number of one-person households for those aged 65 years and above has more than doubled from 2014 to 2024, rising from 42,100 to 87,200 households. Based on the overall expectation that one in four Singaporeans will be over the age of 65 by 2030, we can certainly expect this trend to continue to grow. Through my pro bono LPA Programme over the past 10 years, I have had the opportunity to engage many seniors who make conscious choices on a very difficult and life-changing issue of the possible loss of mental capacity.”
“Today, I wish to highlight the concerns of two such categories of seniors. The first are retired seniors who live in homes with higher Annual Value (AV). I had raised the issue of reviewing the use of the AV as a means test for healthcare subsidies in my maiden speech last year. This issue has also been raised by other Members of this House on other occasions. To address this, the Government had reviewed the AV threshold for means testing from time to time and raised it to allow more Singaporeans to benefit from higher subsidies. I agree with the Prime Minister when he explained in his response at the Budget debate last year that there is no perfect means testing regime to test both income and wealth. However, the fact that this issue has been raised on a number of occasions by Members of this House reflects the ground sentiment that an increasing number of seniors living in homes with higher AV are either extremely concerned about their retirement adequacy in the future or already facing financial challenges in retirement. To be clear, the means testing regime of PCHI and in its absence, the AV of one’s residence is, on the round, an objective measurement of one's income and wealth in the distribution of subsidies. I will posit, however, that retired seniors, who need to plan their retirement funds over a longer life span, own and live in homes with slightly higher AV purchased through pre-retirement income, or have residential arrangements that may not accurately reflect their level of wealth, are disproportionately more affected by this means testing regime than any other demographic of Singaporeans.”
“Mr Speaker, I am extremely heartened by the Government’s support of our seniors in this year’s Annual Budget Statement. As the Prime Minister acknowledged in the Budget Statement, with longer lifespans, retirement adequacy is a major concern for our seniors. This is a sentiment that is echoed by the seniors in Potong Pasir. Our life expectancy in Singapore has risen over the years to about 83.5 years. If a senior retired in 2005 at the statutory retirement age of 62 years, he or she would be 82 in 2025 – a long retirement period of 20 years. During this 20-year period, if we use the Monetary Authority of Singapore's (MAS’) goods and services inflation calculator, a basket of goods and services under the food, healthcare and transport categories which, in my view, are three categories that affect seniors significantly, increased approximately between 60% to 80%. For a retired senior, every dollar saved at the time of retirement, for retirement will be stretched with each passing year. Accordingly, the Government has over the years supplemented our seniors in retirement with cash and voucher support in various forms: CPF and MediSave top-ups, Silver Support and the Pioneer, Merdeka and Majulah Packages. In this Budget, seniors can look forward to benefiting from additional subsidies for CareShield life premiums via a top-up of the long-term care support fund, further CPF top-ups and changes to the CPF system to help build up retirement savings. The objective is to ensure that seniors age with dignity, security and peace of mind. However, as the number of seniors continues to grow in the community, as we expect it to, it is inevitable that there will be seniors who fall between the gaps. Others may have to grapple with challenges that extend beyond financial concerns.”
“If a legal dispute arises in the Courts between an insurer and insured, say, on issues relating to the non-declaration of relevant medical history, the Court can order access to a party’s NEHR records as part of the discovery of evidence process. Before I conclude, I just want to make one observation of Mr Dennis Tan’s suggestion to increase the penalties for a breach. I can appreciate the intent. The balance, however, in such matters is between taking a punitive approach or supportive approach, where we work with healthcare providers to strengthen their protocols and processes in order to prevent breaches to re-occur. Mr Tan makes the point that large organisations may take financial penalties as a cost of business. In some cases, this may very well be true. However, in the case of a healthcare provider, the people within – clinicians, nurses, administrators and so on – are well intentioned and want to build a system that better serves patients. When such a breach incident happens, I believe, it impacts not only the organisation but also the personal professional reputations of the people involved. Viewed from this context, a punitive approach may not be the best option. Perhaps we could start with the current approach and review this as the ecosystem takes shape after implementation. Mr Deputy Speaker, notwithstanding the clarifications I have sought, I support the Bill.”
“The excluded clauses are, in fact, what I would describe as blanket exclusions, in that, even if an individual consents or agrees to allow access for these excluded purposes, healthcare providers are not permitted to do so. I appreciate the intent. Individuals should not be compelled to allow access for such purposes. For example, if all insurers in Singapore require NEHR access consent before agreeing to cover an individual under a health-related policy, then the individual is left with no real choice but to agree if he or she wants to be covered by the insurance. However, I believe that there is a case to be made to allow for some relevant healthcare information to be accessed. Let us take the example of a health-related insurance policy. Generally, an insurer decides on whether to extend cover and if so, set the premium payable based on actuarial calculations. These calculations take into account a number of factors, including pre-existing medical conditions and medical history. If individuals can consent to a limited scope of relevant information that is agreed between the patient and in this instance, the insurer, then access can be permitted for that limited scope of relevant information via the healthcare provider. For example, this could be for medical histories of heart conditions or cancers. However, as the Bill currently stands, there is no such option. Even if an individual wishes to consent, the healthcare provider is not permitted to access NEHR for the excluded purposes. It may be useful to understand whether this would impact insurance premium setting and/or insurance cover in the future, if and when the Bill comes into effect. There is also, an instance in which the blanket exclusion can be lifted.”
“This is especially so since the harm or detriment suffered would likely be largely to the individual in the event of a leak or misuse. We have also appeared to have taken a slightly different approach from jurisdictions, such as Australia, which allows patients to choose whether or what medical records to upload onto their system which is called "My Health Record" or to even have a record at all. As I believe, this would be an issue of interest to many Singaporeans, I invite the Senior Minister of State to share the policy and practical considerations behind why the framework governing the NEHR has been set up in this manner. Finally, I would like to share some thoughts about the excluded purposes set out in the Bill. Clause 6 of the Bill sets out excluded purposes. In other words, these are purposes for which healthcare providers are not allowed to access the NEHR. As things stand, these are when accessing the NEHR for: one, employment; or two, insurance purposes which include when an employer decides to employ, promote or terminate an employee and when an insurer decides whether to insure, continue or renew a policy and during the processing of claims. This is a welcomed clause. Speaking from professional experience, it is important to have a clear demarcation of what relevant medical information of individuals should be provided in the context of these employer/employee and insurer/insured relationships, and what is sensitive confidential medical information that could be misinterpreted or inappropriately applied. The Bill also goes one step further.”
“This is vital as it will provide healthcare providers regular and crucial information and feedback on the strength of their protocols and processes and allow them to act in a timely manner to adjust and tighten as required. Given the large number of healthcare providers in Singapore, I would like to invite the Senior Minister of State to share with the House, the Ministry's plans on how these audits would be conducted, including the frequency and parameters of what would be studied, to ensure that the safeguards remain robust and amply protect the personal healthcare information of Singaporeans. I now move on to the point on consent. The notion of patient consent is fundamental in medical practice – serving as a cornerstone in both legal and ethical obligations. Doctors regularly seek patient agreement in instances, such as treatment/interventions or to share medical information with a third party, including family members and so on. Even in the case where a patient has lost mental capacity, legal documents, such as a Lasting Power of Attorney or the legal appointment of a deputy, authorises another to, in effect, "consent" on the patient’s behalf. In the context of healthcare, patient involvement in decisions about their care is an intuitive concept. Set against this background, the Bill however, does not require patient agreement to upload the key health information onto the NEHR. In fact, it makes it compulsory for healthcare providers to do so. This can be a cause for concern for Singaporeans who may legitimately have privacy concerns with uploading their personal healthcare records onto the NEHR. One may ask, why can I not choose not to upload my healthcare information onto the NEHR?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. Before I start, I wish to declare that as a legal practitioner in private practice, I have and do act for insurers and insureds in a variety of disputes. I make this declaration, as I will be addressing certain points relating to the "excluded purposes" contained in clause 6 of the Bill. This Bill will govern the framework of our NEHR to: one, enable more effective clinical care; two, improve coordination; and three, consolidate care across different healthcare settings. In many urgent and emergency medical situations, this could certainly save lives. On the other hand, the Bill also incorporates safeguards, a reflection that in this tech pervasive information age, personal healthcare information, in the wrong hands, used for inappropriate and insidious purposes, can potentially destroy lives. I would like to cover three areas of the Bill briefly: access, consent and excluded purposes. Let us start with access. As we expand the NEHR to include all healthcare providers in Singapore, invariably, the number of access points to the NEHR will increase significantly. Any digital online system with many access points is particularly vulnerable to unauthorised access, inappropriate use and/or a cyber threat. The Bill incorporates stringent access rules and restrictions, with deterrent penalties for breaches. Individuals are also at liberty to place access restrictions and view instances of NEHR access to their medical records via the HealthHub App. The Bill therefore provides safeguards while giving individuals with privacy concerns to decide on who should have access rights. I am therefore glad to hear from the Senior Minister of State that MOH will conduct regular audits to flag inappropriate access to the NEHR.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Mr Andre Low for his clarification. My position is a simple one. When I say that fair comment is unnecessary, I mean that there is no example in my mind, given the definition of fair comment. And I agree with Mr Andre Low, I did not want to list out all four elements and then list out the rebuttal to the defence, and so on, because I did not want it to be too legalistic in my speech. Based on that definition, I cannot imagine that there could be any online communication that would be caught under the definition of clause 9 – online harassment – and that is my point. And if you look at what it is, as I said in my speech earlier, online harassment under clause 9 requires a communication of online material that is threatening, abusive, insulting, sexual or indecent, and causes a victim humiliation – and something else, I cannot remember, my notes are over there – but the point is that, suffice that the point to be made, Mr Deputy Speaker, is that a fair comment would not be caught under section 9, and therefore, it is unnecessary.”
“In this context, I would ask the Minister of the Government’s views and plans to address the complexities and nuances of online harms suffered by children or youths in the digital world and, if there are plans to augment the Office of the Commissioner for Online Safety with the necessary support, such as a professionally trained team of experts to address these issues. Sir, notwithstanding my clarifications, I support the Bill.”
“Only about 8% spoke to their parents about the experience. Of the parents surveyed, one in four parents were not aware of who their child gamed with. This is not unique to Singapore. Studies elsewhere have also reflected the under-reporting phenomenon. In another survey conducted by researchers from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) on how 1,400 youths aged 12 to 17 deal with cyberbullying, 90% of the respondents reported that they did not tell an adult about the incident. The common reasons for this are the belief that they should "deal with it themselves", that is 50%; the fear of losing Internet access or face device restriction, or 31%. In other surveys, embarrassment, shame, fear of judgement or reprisal are also reasons children or youths cite for not reporting cyberbullying. These surveys struck a chord with me. Ensuring that the reporting mechanism is one that provides confidence to our minors and a safe space to share their experiences and fears without judgement, is vital and crucial. There are many reasons why a child or a youth may shy away from sharing cyberbullying incidents with parents or family. A compromising indecent image of themselves, for example. Will there be a reporting mechanism that would allow children or minors to directly report cyberbullying, even in the absence of a parent or a trusted adult? How will we reassure and encourage our children and youths that such a reporting mechanism is safe for their use? To achieve this, it will likely entail a multi-pronged approach led by the Commissioner for Online Safety, involving the entire ecosystem that supports our children and youths from parents, educators, social workers, child psychologists and student guidance counsellors to name a few.”
“Criticism, even if strongly worded, is not online harassment if it does not involve what a reasonable person would conclude is threatening, abusive, insulting, sexual or indecent language, which is likely to cause harassment, alarm, distress or humiliation". It is my humble opinion, Mr Deputy Speaker, that when words such as stupid and flawed are addressed to a child or a minor, it is perceived very differently. And so, when we look at the reasonable person test, we must be mindful that it must be viewed in the context of age and maturity. Mr Deputy Speaker, this is a hypothetical, and I am certain that any future Commissioner will calibrate this accordingly. My only wish is to make the point that there needs to be a distinguishment between how we view online harms between adults and children. Studies have also shown that online harms impact children differently from adults. For example, online harms are likely to have a longer-lasting impact on children. Cyberbullied children experience depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation and self-esteem deficits that persist into adulthood. Secondly, I hope that the Office of the Commissioner for Online Safety could consider a differentiated approach when setting up the reporting regime and the provision of remedies and reliefs when the victim is a child or a youth. Reports and surveys suggest that in the cases of cyberbullying of children or minors, under-reporting is prevalent. In February 2024, the then Ministry of Communications and Information released findings from their youth online gaming survey. The results are as follows: 17% or almost one in five gamers aged 13 to 18 felt that they have been bullied in video games by other players. Out of the 17% who felt bullied, nearly half or 48% did not take any action at all.”
“I will elaborate on each of the above in turn. Under the Bill, most of the classes of online harms depend on the "reasonable person" test. This is the test that the Commissioner will apply to assess and conclude whether the reported online material fulfils the criteria of an online harm. Currently, this is a single, uniform test to be applied to persons of all ages. I accept that the Commissioner is within his or her remit to apply a differentiated standard of the "reasonable person" depending on whether the alleged victim is an adult or a child. This, however, as we can all appreciate, could be an extremely delicate exercise. There is, at present, little guidance provided in the Bill. Other jurisdictions have drawn this distinction in their legislation. The Australian Online Safety Act 2021, for instance, draws a distinction between cyberbullying for children and cyber-abuse for adults. In fact, it appears that the Australian eSafety Commissioner has set up different channels in dealing with a range of different persons: adults, educators, parents, young people, children, seniors and women. I believe that the perception of harm, such as what is threatening, abusive or insulting, between an adult and a child and even between minors of different ages is different. The type of online materials that may cause harassment, alarm, distress or humiliation to an adult as opposed to a child or youth, will also be different. In fact, I thought Minister of State Rahayu had actually — when she shared Handout 4, if I can bring the House to Handout 4, paragraph 7 under (A) Online Harassment says this: "However, if the facts were different and B had disagreed with A, only by calling A's stance stupid and flawed, this is not necessarily online harassment.”
“In my maiden speech, I spoke about the concerns surrounding our children and their exposure to the digital space. Several Members of this House also raised similar concerns. I had shared that, as a father of two Gen Alpha children, one of whom will be a teenager soon, no matter how much we try to regulate their interactions with the digital world, my wife and I worry. Where parents once told their children to beware of the strangers outside of the home, today, we must also guard against "strangers" and dangers lurking within, in the digital world. Even the home is no longer a safe sanctuary for our children. Digital connectivity has dramatically altered the experiences of the growing up years. In the analogue world of the past, if you had an unpleasant experience at school or with your friends, you could go home, get "away" from the problem. You could, in essence, "disconnect". Today, these experiences follow you, everywhere. In fact, they become viral, multiplying and reinforcing the awfulness of the experience or encounter. It becomes the last thing you read or see before you sleep and the first thing you see or read when you wake. For a child or a youth, this incessant barrage could lead to unthinkable devastating consequences. We have all read of such cases happening all over the world. I do not need to raise them here. Mr Deputy Speaker, in this context, I raise two points for clarification. First, how will the proposed Office of the Commissioner of Online Safety distinguish online harms between adults, children or youths? Second, whether the proposed Office of the Commissioner for Online Safety will take a differentiated approach in the reporting regime and the provision of remedies and reliefs when the victim is a child or a youth.”
“It is the communication of online material that a reasonable person would conclude is threatening, abusive, insulting, sexual or indecent, and likely to cause a victim harassment, alarm, distress or humiliation. So, my first observation is this. If we are to compare both definitions of online harassment and fair comment side by side, could a fair comment reasonably constitute as online harassment? Even with the example provided by Mr Andre Low, based on the definitions, is it possible for fair comment to be threatening, abusive or insulting? If the answer is no, then, the amendment, in my opinion, is unnecessary. In fact, I am of the respectful view that a fair comment should be a comment or opinion conveyed in a respectful, civil and courteous manner. I am sure such a comment will not be captured under clause 9 as online harassment. This leads me then to my second observation. As I had shared earlier, my reading of the intent of the Bill is for the Commissioner to make an assessment that is first, victim-centric, how the online communication is received by the victim. Second, focused not on its content, but rather on the nature and manner in which the online communication is conveyed. And third, provide victims with quick and effective relief. To necessitate the Commissioner to make further legal assessment on whether an online communication is fair comment, especially in light of my first observation will, in my opinion, distract from and potentially defeat the purpose of the Bill. Having said that, Mr Deputy Speaker, while I rise in support of this Bill, I would like to take this opportunity to seek some clarifications on how the Government intends to address online harms suffered by a particularly vulnerable class of victims, children or minors.”
“The Commissioner will take a holistic approach in considering each report to carry out his or her duties effectively and in good time. Third and importantly, this Bill should not be seen as an attempt to regulate online content. Over time, it is hoped that this will promote accountable and responsible conduct that moves us towards a safer online environment in Singapore. Mr Deputy Speaker, at this juncture, I would also like to address one aspect of the Notice of Amendments to the Bill filed by the hon Member Ms He Ting Ru. I just like to make two observations to the inclusion of fair comment as an exception in certain clauses. Let us take clause 9 – online harassment – as an example. At the outset, I will say that I appreciate the good intent of the amendment. It is to carve out an exception of fair comment on a matter of public interest so that any such communication of online material will not constitute online harassment. Mr Andre Low, for example, gave an illustration of a public official: a person who made or gave a purported fair comment to a public official that could be perceived as an online harassment. I will, however, make two observations. First, I note that the amendments do not propose a definition of what constitutes fair comment. As such, we have to look elsewhere for interpretation. One possible area is in existing defamation law where fair comment is a defence. There are four elements to the defence. But in simple terms, if the comment or opinion that a fair-minded or reasonable person could honestly made based on facts and importantly, it must be made without malice. With that in mind, let us look at what constitutes online harassment in clause 9 of the Bill.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, the objective of this Bill, if passed into law, is to enhance online safety for all in Singapore. We operate every day in the digital world. It is part and parcel of our lives. While digital connectivity has brought undeniable benefits, a potent side effect has been the proliferation of online harms. Online harms are all pervasive, have the capacity to go viral very quickly and often bring immeasurable harm to the victims. Victims find it difficult and challenging to seek recourse or relief from the mental and emotional toil that online harms inflict on them. For many, there is an innate helplessness in not knowing how to make it stop; how to make it go away. Ironically, even though it is the digital world, they have nowhere to run and nowhere to hide. Many jurisdictions like us are also grappling with this phenomenon. Australia, New Zealand, Germany, the UK, the EU, the US and India have enacted varied legislation to address this. In Singapore, the introduction of this Bill is, therefore, a timely one. I appreciate the policy intent of this Bill and the actionable levers that it seeks to introduce to address online harms in Singapore. I shall highlight three aspects that stand out for me. One, this is a victim-centric Bill. Its main purpose is to provide quick and effective remedies and relief to victims of online harms, through a straightforward and accessible reporting platform, the Commissioner of Online Safety. All 13 classes of online harms are addressed from the victim's perspective. Two, it addresses the pervasiveness of the online harm, by factoring in considerations, such as the number, frequency, nature and circumstances of the online communication.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for his answer to the Parliamentary Question. Can I just ask a supplementary question to the Minister of State? Apart from the investigations with regard to restaurants, have the Police made any headway in their investigations towards the even smaller food and beverage outlets, like the hawkers who had been scammed by these fake bulk orders? And if there is, can the Minister of State share more details about the intent of these perpetrators and who they are?”
“I quote, "To create a space where parents and children can connect, learn and grow, strengthening their bonds and building resilience together. By fostering a culture of well-being, we aim to nurture a new generation of healthy, confident children and resilient, supported parents. We believe that when families flourish, communities do too", unquote. There are many like-minded parents in our community who are prepared to work with us to provide safe and engaging spaces for our youths within the community. I strongly urge the Government to leverage on the interest, resources and expertise in the community to set up such community spaces so that our young have opportunities to spend time interacting with friends, family and grow bonds in the community, the old-fashioned way, face-to-face, in person. Mr Speaker, as we work towards nurturing a "we first" society beyond SG60, we must ensure that we continue to look after our collective well-being. We are only as strong as our weakest link. We have a duty to support our seniors and for the future of the nation, ensure that our young grow up healthy, happy and safe both in the digital and the physical realms. Together with the foundations of resilience, unity and fighting spirit as a people, I am confident that we can overcome our challenges and shape a future in which we will continue to not just survive but thrive. I support the Motion. [Applause.]”
“To me, the movie was an excellent depiction of how our young are growing up socially in a digital world. To be fair, adults also regularly and, as a matter, of course, express emotions through emojis. However, most adults of today grew up in a less digitally enabled time and therefore are more likely to be equipped with strong relationships and real-life experiences with family and friends in the "physical world". I for one am glad that the Government is keeping a close watch on this trend and is prepared to take steps to intervene by introducing the appropriate legislative safeguards to protect our young. But will this be enough to shape behaviours especially when the digital space is all pervasive? Even if we manage to somehow reduce or limit access to the digital world for our young, it is likely to leave a gaping void that needs to be filled. While we use legislative levers to address immediate concerns and shape future behaviour, there is also a need to intervene directly in our communities and facilitate social activities and interactions for our young to fill the void. We have done this successfully for our seniors with our Active Ageing Centres. In fact, we could consider co-locating centres for our children and youth with our Active Ageing Centres. I believe both our seniors, children and youths will benefit from being close to each other with opportunities to interact. I am confident that we will have the support of many parents for such centres. In the Bidadari Estate, I have been approached by parents of young children who are prepared to put in the time to set up and run such community spaces to keep our youths engaged. They recently shared their proposal with me and I would like to share their vision statement with this House.”
“The harmful effects of excessive screen time and social media on the young are well-documented. I am therefore heartened by the plans announced in the Ministry of Digital Development and Information's Addendum to the President's Address, to establish an Online Safety Commission and to promote healthier digital interactions for children and youth, study interventions in other countries, build on existing measures for age-appropriate access and encourage positive norms for digital well-being. I believe, Mr Speaker, that we are at an inflexion point as a society. Aside from online safety, the data and literature on the harm caused to the overall well-being of children and youths, growing up in a digital environment is well-researched and publicised. Many Members of this House would be, for example, well-versed with Jonathan Haidt's book, "The Anxious Generation". We have also all read reports that indicate that while our children are well-connected in the digital world, they remain lonely and disconnected in real life. The 2024 Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy-Institute of Policy Studies' Youth Survey found that more than half of young people find it easier to communicate online and feel anxious when they interact with others in person. Younger respondents also report higher levels of social isolation and loneliness. A CNA-Institute of Policy Studies survey found that youths aged 13 to 19 spend an average of 8.5 hours daily on screens. These are deeply worrying statistics. I recall watching The Emoji Movie with my children. I am not sure if Members have watched this movie. But imagine all the emojis come together, through animation, in a story about young people expressing their inner thoughts through emojis to interact with each other.”
“This is an acknowledgment that public policy is contextual with time and when there are opportunities to refine, address gaps and/or respond to fundamental shifts. We must, as we always have, continue to do so. The shifting demographic and social paradigms mean that there will be more situations like Jeffrey's, each with his or her own unique circumstances. It is in this spirit that I hope that this House can, in this term of Government, consider reviewing and removing the means-testing regime for the application of subsidies for seniors in our public healthcare system. Mr Speaker, our seniors belong to a generation who put the "we" before the "I" in the endeavour of nation building. We have a duty to try to give them the best opportunity to live a life of quality with dignity and peace of mind in their silver years. Sir, I would now like to turn to the second aspect of well-being, which is happiness. At the recent Emmy Awards, the Netflix show Adolescence swept up awards for eight categories. Its grim, yet compelling portrayal of children, smartphones and social media resonated globally because it reflected a reality many of us recognise. As a father of two Gen Alpha children, I wish for them, as all parents do, to enjoy an ideal childhood, like a gentle spring season: fresh, full of promise, and unburdened by the storms of life, a time for imagination, exploration, and forming lifelong bonds with family and friends. Yet, my wife and I worry. Where once parents told children to beware of strangers outside the home, today, we must also guard against the "strangers" and dangers lurking within – in the digital world. Technology offers promise, but it has also dramatically altered childhood experiences, self-worth and social relationships over the past decade.”
“Jeffrey and his wife were in their 60s and, at that time, lived in a larger HDB flat. Jeffrey's father was in his 90s and was previously living in a smaller HDB home in Toa Payoh where Jeffrey grew up. As an only child, Jeffrey had arranged for his parents to move in with him. As a result of this, however, when Jeffrey’s father grew older and had more healthcare needs, Jeffrey realised that his father's entitlement to Government subsidies was significantly lower due to the AV of Jeffrey's home. Given that the household had no income, the added cost caused the family financial challenges. To his credit, in all my conversations with him, Jeffrey did not advocate for universal healthcare nor complain about the financial burden. He however shared that others like him, who had no income but had to care for their aged parents, face similar financial challenges when the ability to afford and the assessment of the level of subsidies was based on the AV of the home that they lived in. He wondered if his decision to be a responsible child, even though he himself was in his 60s and retired, had effectively penalised him and his father, financially. Mr Speaker, we have a healthcare system that is world class and serves Singaporeans well. As Minister Ong shared during the Committee of Supply debates earlier this year, the Government takes a practical approach, balancing the trade-offs in achieving the three objectives of affordability, availability and quality in our healthcare policies. It is, without a doubt, a delicate balance. In fact, the Government had recently revised the thresholds for both per capita household income and the AV criteria to include more Singaporeans within the threshold.”
“By and large, it has been a progressive and fair assessment regime aimed at providing targeted assistance to Singaporeans who need it the most and many have benefited over the years. I wonder, however, if it is time for us to review the framework, particularly the assessment of our seniors' eligibility for Government subsidies, given the changing demography of Singapore and their evolving needs and circumstance. From 1990 to 2024, the median age of Singaporeans grew from 29.8 to 42.8 years. Those above the age of 65, grew from 6% to 18% of the population. As shared widely by other Members in this House, this number is set to become about one in four by 2030. At the same, time, an increasing number of seniors above the age of 65 either lives alone or alone with their spouses. In 2024, this makes up about 38.5% of households with above 65-year-olds in Singapore. Many Singaporeans above the age of 65 years are retired, or nearing retirement, often with a significantly reduced income. Conversely, their healthcare needs increase. One can argue that in the 1990s, around the time the White Paper was released, we were a younger nation, with a vibrant workforce underpinned by a strong growing economy. The general healthcare needs of a smaller pool of seniors could be supported by a larger, younger workforce. Today, however, our demographic has evolved. We have many more seniors with smaller families. They wish to live independently. Using the Annual Value (AV) of a senior's residence as part of the means test may not reflect a senior's means or financial ability. Even where seniors live with their families, financial circumstances can be challenging. Let me share an example of Mr Jeffrey Tan, which I do with his permission. I got to know Jeffrey in the middle of 2024.”
“If this can be created in a familiar environment within the estates that they live in, all the better. I therefore read with great interest, Minister Ong's remarks last month about Age Well Neighbourhoods. I believe that if we succeed in the four areas of expanding our Active Ageing Centres, introducing the Community Health Posts, Home Personal Care and upgrading the physical environment of such estates to suit the needs of seniors, we can create an environment where seniors can live and socialise in surroundings that they are familiar with, stay active with friends and care for their health through easily accessible preventive healthcare programmes. I understand that Toa Payoh has been selected to pilot the Age Well Neighbourhoods. Since Minister Ong is not in the Chamber, but perhaps, I could very humbly, on behalf of the seniors in Potong Pasir, make a pitch for our estate to be next. Sir, to seniors, having affordable healthcare is about having peace of mind. In Singapore, we have a thoughtfully planned healthcare financial assistance framework of S+3Ms, namely, Government Subsidies, MediSave, MediShield Life and MediFund, which provides Singaporeans with support for their medical bills at public healthcare institutions. As set out in the 1993 White Paper on Affordable Healthcare, the framework is premised on providing a sustainable healthcare system, based on the objectives of personal responsibility, avoiding over-reliance on state welfare and providing good and affordable medical services to Singaporeans. To qualify for Government subsidies, means testing applies. This has a two-prong approach. First, the per capita household income (PCHI) is assessed. If the household does not have PCHI, then the annual value of the residence is considered.”
“When Healthier SG was announced in 2023 with its focus on preventive healthcare, including various screenings and fully subsidised flu and pneumococcal vaccinations, it gave me cause to cheer quietly to myself as it meant that we had been on the right track. Unfortunately, Healthier SG has yet to cover screenings and support for conditions, such as pre-dementia and osteoporosis. Dementia is debilitating and scary for our seniors. Poor bone health on the other hand, leads to deteriorating mobility for our seniors, particularly after a fall. Both conditions take a tremendous toll on caregivers in the family. Pre-dementia screening and bone density tests, therefore, allow for early detection, timely intervention which can slow down the progression and better long-term planning, which gives our seniors and their families the time and opportunity to make necessary adjustments. I am, therefore, happy to announce that next month, we will be launching a similar ground-up Community Preventive Healthcare Programme in Potong Pasir for seniors where we will focus once again, on brain and bone health. We are also working on adding other aspects of preventative healthcare, such as vaccination for shingles. I hope that in the near future, the Government will consider expanding the ambit of the Healthier SG Programme, to include screening for pre-dementia, bone density tests, fully subsidised shingles vaccinations and other areas of preventive healthcare so that we can augment and support the efforts of our seniors to remain as healthy as they can be, in their silver years. Mr Speaker, for preventive healthcare to be at its most effective, we must ensure that our seniors age well in an environment that provides the right care, support and amenities tailored to their needs.”
“Conditions, such as cognitive impairment or the loss of any of the Activities of Daily Living, reduce their quality of life significantly, and in the eyes of a senior, his or her dignity. As the Prime Minister shared in the National Day Rally Speech this year, while we now live longer, the years that we live in good health is on average 10 years shorter. Ideally, our lifespan and our health-span should be closer. The concern that we live long but not well, is real. The increasing number of seniors who reached out to me over the last nine years, first in Paya Lebar and now in Potong Pasir to certify their Lasting Power of Attorney (LPAs) on a pro bono basis, is both heartening and concerning at the same time. While on one hand, seniors are making conscious choices with awareness on what is a very difficult and life-changing issue; on the other hand, it is clear to me, that more seniors are anxious, worried and unsettled about what could happen to them as they age. They say prevention is better than cure. Preventive healthcare for our seniors can reduce years of bad health while increasing their quality of life. With this in mind, in 2019, I helped launch the Health and Wellness Programme in Paya Lebar. The Programme provided seniors with fully subsidized flu and pneumococcal vaccinations as well as screenings for pre-dementia and osteoporosis. Many seniors in Paya Lebar benefited from the Programme. We focused on Brain and Bone Health because these are common and potentially debilitating conditions that our seniors increasingly face. The results were concerning. They showed that an overwhelming number of seniors were unaware that they suffered from mild to severe cognitive impairment and/or poor bone health.”
“Mr Speaker. I rise in support of the Motion of thanks for the President's Address. First, I wish to take this opportunity to thank the residents of Potong Pasir for their warm welcome to my team and me. Potong Pasir SMC is almost as old as Singapore. Formed in 1968, it has grown in population size by 2.6 times. The transformation that it has undergone is a fair reflection of a cross-section of our Singapore society. On the one side of Upper Serangoon Road, the mature estate of Potong Pasir with its landmark sloping roofs, rich heritage and a high number of seniors; and on the other side, the young vibrant families of the Bidadari Estate. As I spent these last few months getting to know my residents and understanding their concerns and aspirations, I find myself reflecting on the notion of well-being. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, well-being is defined as, "With reference to a person or community, the state of being healthy, happy, or prosperous; physical, psychological, or moral welfare." Today, I would like to speak a little about being healthy and happy. When I speak with retired seniors in the community, they often tell me that they hope to be physically and mentally healthy. Having led active lives in their younger years, they worry that their silver years could become mentally meaningless, physically debilitating or financially a burden to their families. For our seniors, staying healthy with affordable healthcare is about living with dignity and peace of mind. In a "we first" society, how do we ensure this? Dignity is about the quality of life in a senior's silver years.”