Chee Hong Tat
Singapore
“The National Parks Board (NParks) resumed crow shooting operations in March 2026 across nine districts, including Yishun. These sites were prioritised based on several factors, including the volume and severity of public feedback on crow-related issues, as well as the technical feasibility of conducting shooting operations safely at each…”
“To drive sustainable construction and reduce reliance on conventional diesel generators, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) has required the use of battery energy storage systems (BESS) or synchronised generator set systems at Build-to-Order construction worksites for all building tenders called since February 2025.”
“The Housing and Development Board (HDB) tracks resident feedback on maintenance-related issues, including spalling concrete and structural cracks within HDB flats. Such issues are much less common in younger flats, compared to older flats above 30 years old.”
“The Building and Construction Authority (BCA) provides resources on its website to guide building owners and Management Corporations Strata Title (MCSTs) on lift modernisation.”
“Private retail developments sold through the Government Land Sales Programme are intended to complement the commercial offerings in public developments undertaken by agencies, such as the Housing and Development Board.”
“The National Parks Board (NParks) is reviewing both the Animals and Birds Act and the Code of Animal Welfare (COAW). The former will include pet sector businesses and the latter will include and start with pet groomers.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,840 lines we hold for Chee Hong Tat, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 33 of 37.
“] I am heartened that business owners and workers across various sectors have been working hard to raise productivity and transform their enterprises. Take our homegrown F&B company Jumbo Group as an example. Last year, I went on a tour of Jumbo's new central kitchen facility and saw how the company has automated its production of sauces and soup bases. Besides reducing Jumbo's labour requirements, this has allowed for better quality control in the production process. Jumbo also developed a mobile app to facilitate short-term job placements, which has helped to alleviate manpower shortages during peak periods. Heartland shops can also adopt technology solutions with support from ESG. Ngee Soon Jewellery is an example of a company that has managed to do so successfully. In 2014, Ngee Soon implemented a Radio-Frequency Identification (RFID) system, which allowed them to reduce the amount of time taken for daily stocktaking by more than 50%. The system also minimises human error and improves the accuracy of stocktaking. Ngee Soon’s staff can, therefore, devote more time and attention to serving customers and generating sales. All companies, no matter big or small, modern or traditional, have to transform to increase their competitiveness. The Government and industry associations will walk this journey together with our companies. This is our commitment to the business community. Let us stand united, press on in the face of any challenges and work together to build a pro-enterprise, pro-worker Singapore. (In English): Sir, I would now like to respond to some of the points from the Workers' Party Members of Parliament. I may need a little bit more time, Sir. 7.27 pm”
“We will also extend enhanced support under the PSG and EDG, keeping the maximum co-funding by the Government at 70% to support enterprise transformation. Under MTI’s Pro-Enterprise Panel, we work with industry associations and companies to review Government rules and regulations, to support new business ideas and look for ways to reduce licensing costs. Using this approach, we made several rule changes over the past months which have been welcomed by our enterprises. There are more changes in the pipeline, including a project to simplify the licensing requirements for food services companies. We will be launching the pilot system for beta-testing in May. So far, we have managed to consolidate the number of forms that businesses need to submit from 14 to 1, reduced the number of data fields required from 845 to 130, slashed licensing fees by up to $500, and shortened the processing time by two weeks. My colleagues and I are working hard on rules review because we believe it supports entrepreneurship and innovation, which are critical elements to achieve our economic transformation goals. We understand that the transformation journey for our companies can be a daunting and difficult challenge. Government agencies and industry associations will walk this journey together with you – this is our commitment to our companies. If you want to transform and you are willing to put in the effort to do so, we will help you. Let us work together to have a pro-enterprise, pro-worker economy, where we can continue to achieve economic growth to provide good jobs for our workers and a good life for our people. Mr Deputy Speaker, please allow me to say a few words in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.”
“What I shared above are the average numbers for each industry. We can expect some companies to be above and some companies to be below these averages. But the outcomes show that our productivity measures are producing results. The key now is how to spread these efforts and benefit more companies, and for the more successful ones to eventually scale up and expand overseas. I agree with business leaders and Members like Mr Seah Kian Peng and Ms Jessica Tan who cautioned that technology is not a silver bullet and cannot completely replace the need for human workers, especially in customer service roles. Technology is a tool and an enabler, and what results we achieve ultimately depends on how well we use the tool. But we also know that in the current operating environment, it is important for all companies – big or small, traditional or modern – to have a good understanding of technology and what it can do to improve their products, reduce costs and enhance service quality. Otherwise, you risk being overtaken by your competitors. To paraphrase a Chinese saying, "科技不是万能，但不懂得用科技就万万不能". Technology is not everything, but if you do not make good use of technology, there are many things you cannot achieve. Sir, the Government will continue to help our companies and we will increase our efforts in these areas. I thank Mr Douglas Foo and our TACs for their partnership. We will work with industry associations to reach out to their members and enhance the support we provide to companies that want to transform their operations. For example, we will be enhancing the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG) to include a new subsidy of up to $10,000 for employer-led training.”
“We knew it would be painful for the affected companies, and we agonised over this difficult decision during our many rounds of inter-Ministry discussions. On balance, we decided that it was better to make a move now to moderate the overall number of foreign workers in Singapore before the problem gets out of hand. As the Zaobao editorial said, the DRC tightening is necessary bitter medicine, "治本的苦口良药". We are aware that many companies in the Services sector are facing labour constraints, and some have started to invest in productivity improvements by adopting technology and re-engineering their processes. Ms Denise Phua and Mr Douglas Foo spoke about this. Our economic agencies like ESG and the Singapore Tourism Board have been working closely with the companies and industry associations. I attend regular dialogues with our companies, including sessions organised by NTUC in my capacity as Adviser to U-SME. My colleagues and I also visit Services sector companies and witness first-hand how they have been working hard to implement productivity measures and upskill their workers through SkillsFuture training. The hard work is starting to bear fruit and we need to keep it up. If we look at the real value-added per actual hour worked from 2013 to 2018, which is one measure of productivity, it has increased by 4.4% per annum for the accommodation industry, 3.2% per annum for retail trade and 1.4% per annum for food services. In the accommodation industry, for example, total manpower declined by about 1% between 2013 to 2018, even though total room stock increased by 4% during the same period. These positive results were due to our companies’ efforts to innovate, upskill their workers and adopt progressive work practices.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Members for their speeches on the economy, workers and jobs. It is important that we focus on economic growth as this is linked to our ability to create good jobs for Singaporeans, generate resources for our social and security needs, and provide opportunities for future generations. The Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) and MOM will address these issues more fully during our COS debates. Today, I will explain why the Government had to make the difficult decision of tightening the Dependency Ratio Ceiling (DRC) and the S Pass sub-DRC for the Services sector in 2020 and 2021. This will impact industries like accommodation, information and communications, food services, retail and professional services. I will also discuss how the Government, employers and workers can jointly tackle the challenges going forward. Let me start by commending our mainstream media for their insightful and balanced pieces on the DRC issue. In particular, I want to highlight a well-written editorial by Zaobao on 22 February, which presented the tradeoffs clearly and explained why the tightening is necessary. The number of S Pass and Work Permit holders in the Services sector has increased by 34,000 in the last three years. In fact, the S Pass numbers are the highest we have seen in the last five years. The editorial hit the nail on the head by observing that if the total number of foreign workers rises too quickly, it will affect the employment outcomes of local workers and lead to sociopolitical problems in Singapore. We have seen this happen in other countries. Indeed, this is the key reason why the Government proceeded with the DRC tightening.”
“Sir, we want to look at how do we help our workers to achieve the necessary skills that are relevant for their careers. Because the resources that we have are limited. So, when you divert resources into one area, it means you have less resources for another area. So, it depends on where you want to put your resources into. And in our case, a decision has been taken to, say, let us focus on helping workers who need to go through training because they are switching careers or they are displaced from their original jobs, to look for a new job. We also want to look at how to help people who want to upgrade their skills, say, they have a National ITE Certificate (Nitec) or Higher Nitec, and they are going for a polytechnic diploma. Or, if they have a polytechnic diploma, they are going for a degree, how do we help them, in areas that are relevant to their work, to be able to do so? For someone who is going for something that actually benefits an individual more, for example, if you are going for postgraduate degrees or you are going for your second or third degree, it is not that we do not fund you, but I think the funding will have to be calibrated, depending on the competing needs for different groups of individuals.”
“So, when there are new requirements, there are new skills required, there will be new courses that will be added to the list and new courses that can be funded as part of SkillsFuture. So, it is an ongoing thing. It is something which I think we will continuously look at to see what we can do to continue to support our workers.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Ms Denise Phua for raising this very important question. Indeed, we want to provide opportunities for adult learners who want to switch careers and who want to pick up a new skill, to be able to go through such lifelong learning and skills upgrading programmes. So, what we have provided are various schemes under the SkillsFuture movement. For example, we have the SkillsFuture Mid-Career Enhanced Subsidy which provides up to 90% subsidy for Singaporeans aged 40 and above. And, in addition, mid-career individuals who wish to reskill and switch careers can tap on the Professional Conversion Programmes under the Adapt and Grow initiative, which provides training and salary support of up to 90% to the employers for the duration of the training. So, these are all different schemes that the Government has provided to help our workers who need to pick up a new skill to be able to transit to a new career or, sometimes, just to pick up additional skills to do their current jobs in their current industries – do it at a higher level, do it better. So, we will look at such ways to support. CET, even if you do not do it as part of one of these enhanced programmes, we still provide generous subsidies of up to 70%. If you join one of these programmes, there will be additional subsidies up to 90%. It also depends on the profile of the employer and the profile of the worker. Older workers, as well as workers who are working in SMEs, we do provide more funding support. So, to answer Ms Denise Phua's question, the evolution of these various courses has to move in tandem with what the economy requires.”
“We also need the employers to be on board and that is why the Government, together with employers and union, we will continue to work on this. Because this is, as the Member said, a lifelong pursuit, changing the culture, making lifelong learning part of our DNA.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his questions. The Member is right that the culture of lifelong learning does not stop at learning in school or in the IHLs. After the individual has left the IHLs, left school, we want this learning to continue for life. And that is why the lines between education institutions and workplace need to be further blurred so that for someone in school, in an IHL, we want to bring workplace requirements and workplace experiences into our schools and into our IHLs. Internships, job relevant skills – these are elements which we want to be able to bring into our schools and our IHLs. The other way is equally important. We want to be able to bring our workers who have already started work, who have already left school, to go back and do further upgrading of skills, lifelong learning. This is why the direction that MOE has taken in recent years is to encourage our IHLs to not only focus on providing PET but to also look at being providers of CET and make that a core part of their mission. So, if we can do it this way, we are then able to have this two-way flow – what the workplace requires in terms of skills and experience, bring it into the schools and IHLs, and to be able to also bring our workers back to reskill, to upskill. Sir, one very important enabler to allow this to happen is actually our strong tripartite partnership in Singapore and this is something which is not found in many other countries. But here, we have it. We want to continue to nurture and treasure this very strong partnership that we have built up over the years because it is very helpful. When it comes to retraining, we need the workers to be onboard, the Labour Movement.”
“We also provide more support to training of workers in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and older workers. Other training programmes may be funded at up to 70% to help defray the cost of training that can help a company or worker derive individual benefits. While this is the broad consideration, the division between PET and CET is never neat. For example, adult learners may decide to attend full-time Nitec or polytechnic diploma programmes, while an individual who did not attend many years of formal education may undergo CET programmes as part of his formative education and skills upgrading. The integration of SkillsFuture Singapore into the Ministry of Education (MOE) has raised the awareness of these complexities. By and large, the system is conceptually sound, and we will iron out the arrangements over time.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, pre-employment training (PET) is often referred to as education. It is a formative experience, to equip our young with a meaningful and carefully designed body of knowledge and skills, to help them become independent, contributing members of society. The focus is on values, civic consciousness, foundational skills like literacy and numeracy, and certain domain expertise to kickstart a career and a journey of lifelong learning. Continuing Education and Training (CET), often referred to as training, is to build upon PET, to upgrade skills and knowledge, keep up with technology and changes in the industry, or even to pick up another set of domain expertise. The focus is on competencies at the workplace. Sir, in general, policymakers throughout the world put more public resources on PET, because it influences children and the young, and has profound impact on nation and society. CET, on the other hand, is often more beneficial to the individual as it imparts skills and competencies which he can use at his workplace. Singapore is one of the few countries in the world that takes a lifelong learning approach and organises this within one Ministry. For PET, most primary and secondary schools require minimal co-payment of school fees. Higher education at the Institutes of Technical Education (ITEs), polytechnics and autonomous universities also attract significant funding. Students who need additional help can further apply for bursaries and financial assistance. CET is also funded substantially, but with greater gradation depending on the context and outcomes. For example, for a Professional Conversion Programme, which we are placing a displaced worker into a new industry, we fund it most generously, including wages, while he is undergoing training.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, Government economic agencies regularly engage businesses and monitor feedback on the cost of doing business. This includes costs arising from both external and domestic price developments. As overall business costs include components, such as labour and rental, the costs of water and electricity constitute a small percentage of total business costs for most companies. The rise in water price since July 2017 is estimated to increase total business costs in the chemicals industry by 0.1%, general manufacturing industry by 0.12%, accommodation industry by 0.17%, and the food services industry by 0.26%. Government agencies have been working with our industry partners to help companies reduce their water usage, which will reduce their water bills. For instance, the Economic Development Board and the Public Utilities Board (PUB) are working with businesses to implement water efficiency measures and to tap on alternative sources of water, such as seawater, for process cooling. The Singapore Food Manufacturers' Association is exploring a partnership with the Waste Management and Recycling Association of Singapore to adopt food waste digesters for water recycling. Businesses looking to improve water efficiency can tap on PUB's Water Efficiency Fund to implement water saving measures. For more customised capability building solutions, including the adoption of water efficiency standards, businesses may tap on Enterprise Singapore's Capability Development Grant, which defrays up to 70% of qualifying project costs. Sir, I encourage businesses to use the available schemes and adopt measures to save water and improve productivity. And if you are successful in achieving cost savings, you can then share some of these savings with your workers and customers.”
“I would like to thank Mr Chua for his question. His question is whether the projects will continue after two years, and whether A*STAR will continue to support the companies. The answer is yes. We will consider the outcome of these cooperation projects. These are not one-off efforts. The Government is investing in R&D and collaborating with companies to commercialise the R&D outcomes. We want to help SMEs to transform and improve their competitiveness, so that they can compete more effectively in overseas markets. We will continue to support these projects and carefully evaluate the outcomes.”
“This helps companies make better-informed decisions in their firm-level innovation strategies, including decisions related to R&D and IP. It also identifies potential R&D partners within and outside of A*STAR who can work with the SMEs. A*STAR aims to achieve 400 OTRs from FY2017 to FY2020. Since 1 April 2017 to 31 July 2018, a total of 178 companies had joined the programme. Second, many SMEs are not familiar with managing and commercialising IP. The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) has put in place several initiatives to help our SMEs grow their enterprise through intangible assets, including IP, from A*STAR and other sources. This includes complimentary legal and business clinics, where SMEs can receive advice from IP consultants and lawyers. Around 600 companies have benefited from the programme since its launch in 2015. To expedite the commercialisation of IP, the Singapore National IP Protocol for Publicly Funded R&D was updated in April this year. The enhanced IP framework will facilitate collaborations between industry and public sector researchers, including research spinouts, joint labs with industry and industry-academia consortia.”
“Mr Speaker, the Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR) supports our small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in technology commercialisation in several ways. First, SMEs license intellectual property (IP) from A*STAR for deployment and commercialisation. Under the Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2020 (RIE2020) programme, the number of licences taken up by SMEs grew from 129 licences in financial year (FY) 2016 to 178 licences in FY2017. This builds on A*STAR efforts under RIE2015, where A*STAR issued 627 licences to SMEs from FY2011 to FY2015. Second, technology transfer to SMEs also takes place through the attachment of A*STAR researchers. Under the Technology for Enterprise Capability Upgrading (T-Up) scheme, A*STAR seconds its researchers to SMEs to help build inhouse research and development (R&D) and technical capabilities. Since the launch of the scheme in 2003, A*STAR has seconded 769 researchers to SMEs, and this has benefited 678 SMEs. SMEs can also tap on A*STAR capabilities and facilities without owning or licensing the technologies. Under A*STAR's Tech Access programme, SMEs can make use of A*STAR equipment and technological know-how to prototype new products, qualify new processes and test out new applications. Since the launch of the scheme in 2017, 30 companies have been supported under this programme. Sir, the challenges faced by our SMEs in applying and commercialising technologies are two-fold. First, many SMEs lack the resources to make full use of technology in their existing business strategies. To address this, A*STAR provides assistance to our SMEs to help them develop their technology strategies through the Operation and Technology Roadmapping (OTR) programme.”
“And this safeguard, in a way, is to prevent them, if there are additional surpluses, that they will take the entire amount. So, this formula of saying, we share – 50% goes to the insurer, 50% goes back to the policyholders through a rebate – you need to specify it upfront because, otherwise, the insurer would not subsequently agree to give it back to policyholders if you do not spell it out clearly. But for CareShield Life, it is different because the Government is going to administer it. All the returns, all the additional balance amounts will stay within the fund for the benefit of policyholders, that it is not for profit, there will be no disbursement out of the fund. So, that is one key difference. The second key difference is that the current ElderShield scheme, the payout is fixed. So, there is no way to return something to policyholders, except through a rebate. But for CareShield Life, because the payouts are designed to gradually increase over time, you can actually have more parameters that you can use to return some of these, if you have some additional balance amounts that you return it to policyholders, you want to benefit policyholders, there are ways to do it. So, we are not ruling out rebates. That is one way. But another way will be to give them a higher payout or reduce the premium increases associated with the higher payouts. And the last question that Mr Leon Perera raised about CPF investments, we will discuss with CPF Board on what is the approach that they will use. But certainly, the nature of the fund is such that you want to go for stable returns. So, this is an important consideration for long-term sustainability.”
“Sir, I thank Mr Perera for his supplementary questions. His first question about the disclosure of information by the Council on the model and their assumptions, I think I have explained that in my speech that there are many factors and we will discuss with the Council and the actuaries on how best to share the information, the details and assumptions of CareShield Life in a meaningful way. And I think it is important to discuss with the experts because it is a technically very complicated complex scheme. For example, I think loss ratio, for example, is not quite applicable for a scheme that is prefunded. Loss ratios are actually more applicable to schemes like MediShield Life where it is year by year. So, you can look at what the total amount of claims versus the premiums that you have collected – claims plus expenses – versus the amount of claims you have collected. So, that is more applicable for a scheme like MedisShield Life where you collect premiums in one year to provide coverage for that year. But for prefunded schemes like ElderShield and CareShield Life, actually, loss ratio does not quite apply. So, I just wanted to give this as an example to say that this is highly complex and, therefore, we will discuss with the Council and the actuaries on what is the best way to share the information in a meaningful manner. On the second question that Mr Perera raised about premium rebates, again, allow me to clarify. There is a difference between CareShield Life and the previous scheme, ElderShield, because ElderShield, first, is administered by private insurers and they are social entities. So, embedded in their calculations, there will be a profit element.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to highlight that we have done the calculations. As I had shared in my earlier example in the speech, for the future cohorts of Singaporeans, the premiums that they have to pay using the MediSave for both schemes like CareShield Life as well as MediShield Life should be enough to pay for the premiums without them having to fork out cash. But, of course, we know every situation is different. There will be individuals who will need more help and that is why we have other support schemes that they can apply for, including Additional Premium Support.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I thank Er Dr Lee Bee Wah for the supplementary question. The reason why we do it in phrases is because for a scheme involving so many people, we need to make sure that the information technology (IT) systems and the support systems are ready. So, if you look at the mandatory cohort, which the scheme will apply to first in 2020, we are looking at 11 cohorts, those aged 30 to 40 in 2020 – close to 600,000 people. So, we want to make sure that we have a system that is stable and we can manage the scheme efficiently for this mandatory cohort because they will have to come onto the system in 2020. And then, once that is done, then we will extend it to all the other Singaporeans from the existing cohorts, and the numbers are much larger. Earlier, Dr Amy Khor shared, potentially, two million. But of course, we do not think all two million will all join at the same time. But two million people potentially could be applying to join the scheme. And that is why we want to stagger it to make sure that the administration of the scheme and the systems are done properly.”
“We have to take steps to prepare for this ahead of time when we are still young and healthy. This is what we want to achieve with long-term care insurance schemes like CareShield Life. Together with Government subsidies, personal savings and family support, CareShield Life will further strengthen our social safety net and provide Singaporeans with better protection and greater assurance when we grow old. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Motion.”
“We will make sure that all Singaporeans who join CareShield Life will not lose coverage due to inability to afford premiums. Singaporeans can also tap on two new schemes to support their long-term care cost. From 2020, severely disabled Singaporeans who are aged 30 and above can withdraw up to $2,400 every year from their own or their spouses' MediSave. The Government is also setting up a new ElderFund scheme to provide up to $250 per month for low-income citizens with severe disabilities. As our society ages, CareShield Life and other related schemes will strengthen our social safety net. These will provide Singaporeans with better protection and greater peace of mind for our long-term care needs when we grow old. (In English): The introduction of CareShield Life will provide better protection and assurance for Singaporeans. All future cohorts of Singaporeans will have sustainable, basic protection for their long-term care needs through CareShield Life. This includes vulnerable groups like low-income families and those who are already severely disabled. Through a universal risk-pooling scheme like CareShield Life, we can offer coverage for everyone in the future cohorts. We also want to encourage Singaporeans from the existing cohorts to join the scheme. Under CareShield Life, the Government will provide Singaporeans with premium subsidies and financial support so that no one will lose coverage if they face financial difficulties and are unable to pay their premiums. For those who are not able to join CareShield Life, the Government will help them through other schemes, such as the MediSave withdrawal for long-term care and ElderFund. As our society grows older, some of us will become severely disabled and require long-term care.”
“We will also partner the grassroots, Silver Generation ambassadors, youth and union leaders, financial advisors, and other Government agencies, such as the People’s Association (PA), CPF Board and the Monetary Authority of Singapore. Mr Deputy Speaker, in Mandarin please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] CareShield Life will provide Singaporeans with better protection for their basic long-term care needs. Under this scheme, monthly payouts will start at $600 in 2020 and increase over time. Upon becoming severely disabled, policyholders will be able to receive lifetime payouts, to support their long-term care cost, until recovery or death. There are various long-term care financing sources, such as Government subsidies and assistance schemes, personal and family savings and community support. The payouts under CareShield Life will complement these financing sources to support Singaporeans with their basic long-term care needs. The Government will also provide support to help policyholders with their CareShield Life premiums. The Government will provide means-tested subsidies of up to 30% for lower- and middle-income policyholders. Additional premium support will also be available to Singaporeans who cannot afford their premiums even after the subsidies. For Singapore Citizens born in 1980 or later, the Government will also provide transitional subsidies of up to $250 for the first five years from the launch of the scheme. For those born in 1979 or earlier and who are not already severely disabled, they can opt to join the scheme in 2021. The Government will provide Singapore Citizens with participation incentives of up to $2,500 if they join within the first two years.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, we have a responsibility to design CareShield Life so that it remains sustainable for generations to come. Singaporeans who join the scheme now and start to contribute in their working years must have assurance that should they become severely disabled when they are old, there will be enough funds to draw upon for their long-term care needs. In addition, we want to ensure that future generations will not be burdened with the cost of financing our long-term care needs when we grow old. Over the past week, since we announced further details on CareShield Life, we have heard feedback that the scheme can be rather complicated, and many Singaporeans find it challenging to understand all the details. This feedback has also been raised by several Members today. We agree with the feedback. There is still some time before CareShield Life takes effect in 2020 for future cohorts, and 2021 for existing cohorts. We will use this period to reach out to different groups of Singaporeans and explain to everyone the details of the scheme and how it can meet their long-term care needs. We will intensify our public education efforts on the risks of severe disability in old age, and what are the available long-term care financing sources that can complement CareShield Life to support the long-term care needs of Singaporeans. These include Government subsidies for nursing home, community care and home care services, assistance schemes like ElderFund, as well as the use of personal savings like MediSave withdrawals for long-term care. MOH will step up our outreach and engagement efforts through mainstream and social media.”
“We agree with Ms Joan Pereira that the council should consider views from social workers, healthcare professionals and insurance experts. The council will regularly review and recommend changes in premiums and payouts, guided by professional advice from independent actuaries, and decide on the optimal investment strategy of the fund. The council’s recommendations will be made public. AIC, which has experience in implementing disability schemes, will work with CPF Board, which has experience in managing insurance schemes, to administer CareShield Life. CPF Board will also be the administrator of the CareShield Life Fund and will ensure that the funds are safeguarded for the benefit of policyholders. The annual financial statements will be made publicly available. Dr Chia Shi-Lu and Mr Ang Wei Neng asked how premiums and payouts will be adjusted. We envision the adjustment framework to work like this: if claims are lower than the amount assumed in the actuarial modelling and calculations, the CareShield Life council could recommend higher payout increases or provide policyholders with premium rebates in subsequent years. Conversely, if claims are higher than what was originally assumed in the actuarial modelling and calculations, the council could recommend raising premiums or slowing down payout increases to ensure the scheme remains sustainable. Sir, I would like to clarify that it is not what Mr Png Eng Huat had said earlier, that CareShield Life premiums will be increased to pay for losses due to risky investments. That will not be the case. The Government will invest the funds prudently to earn stable returns. But what is not possible to predict with full accuracy are factors, such as the frequency and duration of claims.”
“Some factors that they incorporated in their model include the disabled mortality rate, recovery rate, claims continuance rate, mortality rate, improvements to mortality rate, disability incidence, prevalence rate, as well as the risk profile for various cohorts. In addition, premiums for the existing cohorts will need to take into account their circumstances, for example, some are on ElderShield 300, some are on ElderShield 400 and some are not insured at all. We will discuss with the council and the actuaries on how best to share information on the details and assumptions for CareShield Life meaningfully. Mr Zainal Sapari asked about the considerations in having the Government administer CareShield Life instead of the private insurers. Sir, the scheme will be administered by the Government on a not-for-profit basis, where all premiums collected and any returns from investments will remain entirely within the fund and used fully for the benefit of policyholders. I thank Mr Leon Perera for mentioning this point in his speech earlier. It also facilitates the provision of Government subsidies and financial support to Singaporeans and provides greater flexibility for the Government to make future enhancements to the scheme. There will be no change in contractual terms for ElderShield policyholders who choose to remain on their existing ElderShield 300 or 400 schemes. This also applies to their ElderShield supplements. ElderShield policyholders will be no worse off and will continue to be covered by these insurance schemes. The Government will set up an independent council by legislation, comprising people with various expertise and background.”
“ElderShield policyholders are still relatively young, with a median age of 52 in 2017. However, as policyholders grow older and more of them become severely disabled, the balance amount that we see today will be gradually used up to pay for claims. This balance amount is not profit, it is to meet future liabilities. If a prefunded scheme does not have a positive balance when its policyholders are younger, the scheme is actually in trouble. It means there will not be enough financial resources to meet future liabilities, and when policyholders grow older and more of them start to claim, the scheme will have difficulties making the payouts. The balance amounts for ElderShield that are currently with the three private insurers will be properly accounted for. We are working on this with the insurers. Mr Pritam Singh asked about the statistics of one in two Singaporeans aged 65 and above who become severely disabled in their lifetimes. And this is based on a mix of local and international data sources. For example, in 2016, the US Department of Health and Human Services estimated that 52% Americans turning 65 in 2016 would develop a disability serious enough to require long-term care. It is important to remember that the premium calculations are based on a complex actuarial model with many factors, and not just on one number. I do not intend to go through the technical details of the actuarial model in this House. But let me say that a premium pricing model was done by professional actuaries, in line with internationally-accepted industry standards.”
“There is no hurry, as the sign-up period only starts in 2021 for existing cohorts. Mr Deputy Speaker, let me now turn to how the CareShield Life scheme can remain sustainable for generations of Singaporeans to come. Minister Gan had explained how long-term care insurance schemes like ElderShield and CareShield Life are prefunded to ensure long-term sustainability. In designing the scheme, we want to ensure that premiums paid by each generation during their working years can support their future claims when they grow old. This minimises intergenerational transfers, so that as our population ages and our families get smaller, claims made by the older generation can be met without having the younger generation shoulder a heavier financial burden. It is an important part of ensuring long-term sustainability, especially when we are facing an ageing society. Ms Chia Yong Yong, Mr Zainal Sapari, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Ms Tin Pei Ling asked why $3.3 billion in premiums for ElderShield were collected, and only $133 million were paid out as claims. Mr Pritam Singh touched on this in his speech, too. Mr Leon Perera and Mr Png Eng Huat also asked how premiums are determined. Allow me to explain. In prefunded insurance schemes like ElderShield and CareShield Life, premiums are collected when the policyholders are younger and working, so that the fund has enough resources to meet their future claims when they grow old and are no longer paying premiums. As Senior Minister of State Amy Khor mentioned earlier, the coverage is for life. It is, therefore, logical and necessary for the scheme to show a positive balance when policyholders are younger and are less likely to be severely disabled. This also answers Dr Lily Neo’s question on why the number of claimants is currently low.”
“We will also provide means-tested subsidies and Additional Premium Support under CareShield Life to policyholders from the existing cohort to ensure no one loses coverage due to financial difficulties. Assoc Prof Daniel Goh asked about auto-enrolment. Sir, in 2021, CareShield Life will auto-enrol current ElderShield 400 policyholders born between 1970 and 1979 who are not severely disabled. These are the younger members of the existing cohorts who are currently on ElderShield 400. Compared to older members of the existing cohorts and those who are not on ElderShield 400, the quantum of their premiums to join CareShield Life will be lower. The purpose of auto-enrolment is to make it more convenient for this group of Singaporeans to join CareShield Life, and policyholders will automatically receive the premium subsidies and participation incentives. They will be given at least two years, up to 31 December 2023, to opt out of CareShield Life if they do not wish to join the scheme. So, it remains optional for them. Auto-enrolment is to make it more convenient, but it remains optional for them. Older members in existing cohorts who are born in 1969 or earlier, including those who have previously opted out of ElderShield, can also join CareShield Life if they are not already severely disabled. We will support them if they wish to join the scheme. And unlike ElderShield, there is no age limit to join CareShield Life. MOH will make a premium calculator available by the end of this year for existing cohorts to find out more details about their premiums. We encourage Singaporeans who are interested to join CareShield Life to take their time to understand more about the scheme and how it can meet their long-term care needs before deciding.”
“Thank you, Sir. Here, we have a family where the husband and wife, Mr and Mrs Koh, are both aged 40 and each person is earning $2,200 per month. They have two children aged seven and 10. So, in 2020, the couple’s CareShield Life premiums would be about $27 per month in total after means-tested subsidies and transitional subsidies, and their aggregate household MediShield Life premiums, including their children, add up to around $67 per month. For this family, the total premiums per month for both CareShield Life and MediShield Life is $94, which is less than a quarter of the couple’s combined MediSave contribution of almost $400 per month. But as Ms Jessica Tan said, MediSave is also needed for other healthcare-related expenses and that is why we have to keep a balance between the benefits and the premium quantum for CareShield Life, while allowing policyholders to purchase Supplements if they wish to do so. I will now move on to describe the support measures for existing cohorts to join CareShield Life. Senior Minister of State Amy Khor had earlier explained why we decided not to make CareShield Life mandatory for Singaporeans in the existing cohorts. We do want to encourage as many Singaporeans as possible to join the scheme if they are not already severely disabled, so that more Singaporeans can pool our risks together and have better protection and greater peace of mind for everyone as we age. Mr Zainal Sapari asked if the Government will support those who convert from ElderShield to CareShield Life. We will do so. The Government will offer participation incentives of up to $2,500 to reduce their premium and encourage participation in the scheme.”
“Let me illustrate with an example. And, with your permission, Mr Deputy Speaker, may I display a slide?”
“We used a similar set of means-testing criteria for MediShield Life. And about two in three Singaporeans will be eligible for the subsidies. Individuals who do not meet the means-testing criteria, but face genuine financial difficulties in paying their premiums, can apply for Additional Premium Support. Their application will be considered on a case-by-case basis. The budget for Additional Premium Support is fully funded by the Government. In addition, we will provide transitional subsides to all Singapore Citizens in the future cohorts for the first five years from scheme launch in 2020. This will help to further reduce the premium amounts for these policyholders. Mr Melvin Yong asked why the transitional subsidies are provided only for the first five years. These subsidies aim to ease transition into CareShield Life for the immediate few future cohorts who will be joining the scheme from 2020. And these are the cohorts from age 30 to 40 in 2020 as well as those turning 30 between 2021 and 2024. Compared to the subsequent cohorts who will join the scheme later, they have less time to prepare for the higher premiums under CareShield Life. The transitional subsidies are intended to cushion the impact for these few cohorts. The amount of subsidies will be gradually reduced over the five-year period. CareShield Life is part of our social safety net and we will ensure that no Singaporean will lose coverage due to financial difficulties and inability to pay premiums. I would like to assure the House that with these supporting measures, most Singaporeans in the future cohorts, including those from lower-income households, can cover their CareShield Life and MediShield Life premiums using their annual MediSave contributions. They do not need to make additional cash payouts.”
“But if he receives $600 per month from CareShield Life and utilises $200 from his MediSave account under the new MediSave withdrawal scheme, he and his family would need to pay around $200 per month from their savings. Through the package of different measures, a nursing home bill of originally $2,400 reduces to $200 of out-of-pocket expenses, or less than 10% of the original nursing home fee. If this person chooses home and day care services under the Integrated Home and Day Care pilot programme, he can reduce his out-of-pocket expenses to almost zero through a combination of Government subsidies, CareShield Life payouts and MediSave withdrawals. Mr Deputy Speaker, we recognise that there are Singaporeans who may need more financial assistance, for example, those who have little savings and those with low MediSave balances. And that is why we have introduced the new ElderFund scheme, to provide further protection for these vulnerable groups of Singaporeans for their long-term care needs. ElderFund will add to the protection offered under existing assistance schemes like MediFund and ComCare. Mr Deputy Speaker, I have explained how CareShield Life is designed to keep premiums affordable for policyholders. Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Ang Wei Neng asked how the Government will further support Singaporeans, including the self-employed or unemployed, in paying their premiums. As Minster Gan explained in his opening speech, the Government will provide means-tested subsidies of up to 30% for lower- and middle-income policyholders living in a property with an AV of $21,000 or less. Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked why this AV threshold was used. This threshold covers about 80% of properties in Singapore, including all HDB flats and some private properties.”
“In view of the tradeoffs, the Committee recommended that CareShield Life focuses on supporting basic long-term care needs so that premiums can be kept affordable for all groups of policyholders. Dr Lily Neo and Ms Joan Pereira asked if Singaporeans who wish to have more benefits, such as coverage for less severe disability or higher payouts, and are willing to pay higher premiums, will they be able to purchase additional coverage from private insurers. That is, indeed, the plan. Currently, ElderShield policyholders can use up to $600 per year from their MediSave to pay for ElderShield Supplement premiums. MOH will work with private insurers to adapt the design of their Supplements to complement CareShield Life and continue to allow policyholders to use MediSave to pay for these Supplements. It is also important to remember that CareShield Life payouts are not the only source of long-term care financing. They will complement other financing sources, such as Government subsidies and assistance schemes, personal savings and family support. Singaporeans with mild or moderate disabilities and who need long-term care can tap on means-tested Government subsidies for nursing home, community care and homecare. There are also other Government schemes, such as the Seniors’ Mobility and Enabling Fund, PG Disability Assistance Scheme and the Foreign Domestic Worker Grant. Let me illustrate with an example to show how the different schemes come together to support Singaporean families. If the fee for nursing home care is about $2,400 per month, a lower middle-income Singaporean can receive Government subsidies of about $1,400, which reduces his fee to around $1,000 per month.”
“The Committee has also discussed these ideas and carefully considered the tradeoffs of further increasing the payout amount and lowering the claims criterion, versus the need to keep premiums affordable in a universal insurance scheme that caters to a broad segment of Singaporeans. To illustrate, if we raise the payout amount from $600 to $800 per month, premiums for a 30-year-old male in 2020 could increase by about one-third. If we further lower the claims criteria from three to two ADLs, premiums will further increase by another one-third. So, as a result, if we combine both changes, the annual starting premium could be more than two-thirds higher than the currently proposed premium of $206 per year. If we allow the payout amount to continue increasing for life after a claim is made, premiums would have to increase further, possibly by another one-third. Mr Zainal Sapari and Ms Joan Pereira also asked if premium discounts could be given to ElderShield or CareShield Life policyholders who do not make claims, to incentivise healthy living. Let me explain why this is not feasible in the prefunded scheme like ElderShield and CareShield Life. ElderShield and CareShield Life, being prefunded schemes, policyholders would pay premiums when they are young and receive coverage for life. Hence, one can only confirm that a policyholder is not claiming from the scheme after the policyholder has passed away. In computing the premiums, the actuaries have included the probability that some policyholders will not claim from the scheme because they do not become severely disabled. In other words, this has already been incorporated in the premium quantum.”
“We need to strike a balance, as Mr Christopher de Souza had eloquently explained. We agree with the Committee that CareShield Life payouts should be provided for life, to give policyholders and their family better peace of mind. This is an improvement over the current five- or six-year payout duration for ElderShield. We also agree with the Committee’s recommendation to raise starting payouts from $400 to $600 per month, an increase of 50%. In addition, CareShield Life payouts will increase gradually over time to keep pace with inflation. These features will offer better protection for policyholders, compared to ElderShield, which pays a flat rate of $300 or $400 per month. If we assume that payouts increase by 2% per year, a 30-year-old who joins CareShield Life in 2020 will receive a payout amount of $1,200 per month if he becomes severely disabled at age 67 or older, if we assume 2% increase per annum. This is three times the current amount of payouts under ElderShield 400. And there is no payout duration cap. This policyholder will receive monthly payouts of $1,200 for life if he remains severely disabled, until he passes away. Next, I will explain how CareShield Life is designed to meet basic long-term care needs while remaining affordable. Dr Lily Neo, Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, Mr Melvin Yong and Mr Christopher de Souza asked whether $600 per month will be enough, and if payout increases can continue for life even after a claim has been made. Several Members also asked whether the criterion can be relaxed so that those who are unable to perform at least two ADLs could receive payouts. We understand the rationale for these suggestions, which is to provide more benefits to policyholders.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, let me, first, thank Members for supporting the Motion and for their views and suggestions. I would also want to join Members in expressing my appreciation to the ESRC led by Mr Chaly Mah, and the Secretariat Team from MOH. The Committee’s recommendations on the new CareShield Life scheme are significant measures to enhance Singapore’s long-term care financing and provide a stronger social safety net with our ageing population. Through risk-pooling, CareShield Life will enhance the role of insurance in helping Singaporeans meet our long-term care needs. It will add to the other sources of funding for long-term care, including Government subsidies, personal savings and family support, and financial assistance for the lower-income. I will touch on a few issues in my speech: first, how the features of CareShield Life provide better protection and greater assurance for Singaporeans; second, how the scheme is designed to meet basic long-term care needs while remaining affordable; third, what are the support measures for existing cohorts to join CareShield Life; fourth, how the scheme can remain sustainable for the longer term; and finally, the Government’s plans to explain the scheme and raise public awareness. Let me start with “Better Protection and Greater Assurance”. ESRC had engaged a large group of Singaporeans over the course of its work and received many useful feedback and suggestions. The Committee had to decide which enhancements are most important and how to balance the improvements in benefits with the need to keep premiums affordable. If the benefits are not adequate, the scheme would not provide sufficient protection. On the other hand, if the benefits are very generous, premiums may become too high.”
“The cess collected goes to STB and supplements the Tourism Development Fund to support the costs of the F1 project. Over the years, Government agencies have worked closely with the race promoter and affected stakeholders to improve the race execution. For instance, we have halved the number of days for road closures from 12 days when we first started in 2008 to six days in 2017. The opening of the Circle Line and Downtown Line stations also increased accessibility to the race vicinity during the F1 period. To help tourism stakeholders, including retailers and food and beverage (F&B) outlets, capitalise on the buzz created by the F1 race each year, STB works closely with them to launch the Grand Prix Season Singapore (GPSS). This is a season of lifestyle events complementing the race experience. Businesses have also used GPSS as an opportunity to innovate and testbed new commercial concepts. Beyond F1, we started the Kickstart Fund, with a budget of $10 million, to encourage more ground-up initiatives from the industry to try out innovative event concepts. For instance, the Fund has helped to launch new events, such as the Spartan Race and Singapore Cocktail Festival. We hope to collaborate with the industry to support more events in the coming years. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Mr Chee Hong Tat.] (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“Mr Speaker, I thank Assoc Prof Daniel Goh for his suggestions and giving his support for the Bill. Last September, we renewed the Formula One Singapore Grand Prix for another four years from 2018 to 2021. The decision was made after careful consideration of the projected costs and benefits from a national perspective. The direct cost of organising the race is around $135 million per year, with the Government’s share at 60%. We assessed the overall benefits to outweigh the costs, including indirect costs, such as inconveniences due to road closures during the race period. Over the last 10 years of hosting the race, we have attracted more than 450,000 international visitors, contributing about $1.4 billion in incremental tourism receipts. As Assoc Prof Daniel Goh pointed out, there are also indirect benefits through the international media coverage and high global viewership, which boost Singapore’s image as a vibrant and dynamic city. After MTI amended the Act in 2008, only gazetted tourist hotels needed to pay cess during the period of the Singapore F1 race. These are hotels which cater mainly to tourists. We have not extended cess collection to food establishments and public houses. In making the assessment, we are guided by the principle of our cess policy, which is to ensure that business groups which are likely to benefit commercially from a strategic tourism event would play their part in defraying the costs of organising these events. I agree with Assoc Prof Daniel Goh that any expansion in cess collection has to be done in a judicious manner. The amount of cess collected from gazetted tourist hotels varies each year, depending on the industry’s performance that year. Historically, the F1 hotel cess collected has averaged about $13 million each year.”
“The imposition of cess will continue to be targeted and calibrated, based on the current set of policy considerations. The Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) will consult the industry and stakeholder groups if there are plans in the future to gazette new tourism events or to impose cess on new categories of tourism event establishments. We are also proposing a few amendments to enhance existing administrative requirements. Clauses 5 and 7 will enable the Chief Executive of the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) and other authorised persons to obtain information from any persons for the purpose of providing views to the Minister on the cess policy, and to administer or enforce the Cess Act. Under clause 6, the records retention period will be increased from two to five years, which is aligned to the requirements under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) Act. In the process of amending the Cess Act, MTI and STB launched a public consultation exercise in March 2018 and conducted an engagement session with hoteliers. Their feedback and comments were considered and addressed during the consultation. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“For example, in the context of cess for tourist hotels during the Singapore Grand Prix, the value of the hotel room will be used to calculate cess, regardless of the mode of payment. Whether the customer pays using credit card, cash or vouchers, the hotel needs to pay cess based on the value of the hotel room. The same rationale applies to rooms which are redeemed using loyalty points under the hotel’s membership programme, or those offered by the hotel as part of wedding or corporate packages. The hotel will need to pay cess based on the value of the hotel room. Given the evolving business practices and variety of room packages that are offered by different hotels, this approach will ensure a consistent basis of taxation. There can be other commercial entities which benefit from a strategic tourism event, but are not tourist hotels, tourist food establishments and tourist public houses which are the taxable persons in the current Cess Act. Hence, we want to update the Act so that our laws can be applied fairly as business models continue to evolve, and we see the emergence of a greater variety of products and services that serve similar needs in the tourism landscape. Mr Speaker, the second category of amendments thus seeks to update the scope of the Cess Act to apply to other taxable persons. The changes are proposed under clauses 2 and 4 of the Bill. We are making these changes to the Act to provide flexibility to deal with future changes in business models and industry trends. There are no current plans to include new tourism events or to impose cess on new categories of tourism event establishments, beyond the Singapore Grand Prix or hotels respectively.”
“Mr Speaker, on behalf of the Minister for Trade and Industry, I beg to move, “That the Bill be now read a Second time.” The Singapore Tourism (Cess Collection) Act, or Cess Act, was enacted in 1972 to allow the collection of cess from tourist establishments for the promotion of tourism. When the Cess Act was first enacted, cess was a broad-based tax imposed on sales made and charges levied or collected by tourist hotels, food establishments and public houses. The Cess Act was amended in 2008 to make cess more targeted by linking it to specific tourism events. These refer to strategic events that entail higher staging costs using public funding and would enhance Singapore’s global branding, while bringing economic benefits to the country. Since then, cess has only been imposed on tourist hotels during the period of the Formula One Singapore Grand Prix. In this Bill, we propose three categories of amendments. The first is to clarify the scope of cess, and the second is to update the scope of the Cess Act to keep pace with business developments and industry trends. The third is to enhance existing administrative requirements. Let me start with the provisions that will clarify the requirements under the Cess Act. Our aim is to provide clarity and ensure a consistent basis of taxation for all parties that are liable to pay cess. There is no change to the underlying principle of our cess policy, which is to ensure that business groups likely to benefit commercially from a strategic tourism event play their part in defraying the costs of organising the event. The new definition of “transaction” under clause 2, as read with clause 4, seeks to clarify what is subject to cess.”
“In a recent Straits Times article, Maybank Kim Eng economist Dr Chua Hak Bin said while there should not be a relaxation of the foreign worker policy across the board, there is a need to look at certain sectors which require talent from abroad to support their growth and allow Singapore to seize opportunities and be at the forefront of change. Dr Chua is right, we cannot compete with other top-tier cities in the premier league if we do not have the best talent.”
“I agree with Mr Liang Eng Hwa that the two need to go hand in hand. MNCs benefit from a strong base of SMEs and SMEs can grow and build new capabilities by working with MNCs. We need an economy with strong companies, whether they are local offices of MNCs, large local enterprises or SMEs. To grow our economy, we have to develop Singaporean talent and also attract talent to our shores so that we can compete with other top-tier cities in the world. Ministers Chan Chun Sing and Heng Swee Keat have spoken about this. It is not just about growing our economic capital, but also our intellectual capital. This is why Silicon Valley remains the "centre of the tech universe". Nearly three-quarters of its skilled workers are foreign born. More than 40% of US companies in the 2017 Fortune 500 list were founded by someone who is foreign-born or has parents who are immigrants. Similarly, many of our startups in Singapore have co-founders who are foreign-born. Some have now become Singaporeans, adding to Team Singapore. Besides bringing talent into Singapore, we should also think of ways to tap on the large talent pool in our region. We want to grow a group of regional talent who are familiar with Singapore and whom our companies can work with, both in Singapore and when they expand overseas, not only bringing the region into Singapore but also bringing Singapore into the region. Enhancing such connectivity will provide more win-win opportunities and help our companies to succeed when they expand overseas, when they operate in Singapore. Ultimately, what we want is to strengthen Singapore to benefit Singaporeans.”
“Interacting with our students gives me confidence that our society and our education system have produced many young people with the resilience, resourcefulness and gumption to compete with the best in the world. I recently attended the graduation ceremony at Ngee Ann Polytechnic (NP) where I met Emmett Goh and Lynette Lau. Emmett did well at ITE and earned a place at NP. He won the Tay Eng Soon Gold Medal at the recent graduation ceremony. But it was not all rosy for him from the start. He was once arrested for getting into a fight with schoolmates when he was 16. After that incident, he decided to turn his life around. During his time at NP, he did a six-month internship at Metta Nairobi, an entrepreneur’s club that brings startup communities together in Kenya. Emmett has many dreams he wants to pursue, including joining a private equity firm, running an exotic resort and becoming an inspirational speaker. Lynette’s story is equally impressive. During her time with NP, she did a six-month internship with Grab Indonesia where she travelled across 10 cities to conduct market research for its business expansion. She successfully devised a new method to reduce the backlog of driver sign-ups and increase their productivity. She even picked up Bahasa Indonesia during her internship. Lynette is now running a startup, Pixcels, which provides photobook services and she aspires to own a successful business one day. To maximise the potential of our people, Singapore’s economy must have the capacity to generate good jobs and provide our people access to the best opportunities, the best networks and the best ideas. We cannot rely on MNCs alone to achieve this, but neither should we look inward and only focus on local SMEs.”
“This shows that a differentiated approach is effective in sending the correct signals to companies and incentivising them to adopt good practices that benefit Singapore and Singaporean workers. Mr Deputy Speaker, to be pro-Singapore worker is not just about having safeguards. And it is certainly not about building walls and closing our doors to new immigrants and global talent. With Singapore’s ageing population, such an approach will only hurt the country and our people. To be pro-Singapore worker, I believe the more effective way is to grow our economy, help our companies to do well, so that they can provide better jobs, better pay and better life for our workers. Singapore produces many talented people through our world-class education system. Singaporeans are held in high regard for our work ethic and reliability. Our workers are highly skilled and trustworthy and we have the ability to work in a diverse environment with people from different cultures and backgrounds. The made-in-Singapore Dyson motor is a good example of how our people are collaborating with the best talent in the world. Dyson, a British company which manufactures household appliances like vacuum cleaners, uses its advanced manufacturing facility in Singapore to produce almost all the digital motors for their appliances sold throughout the world. Yvonne Tan, who is Dyson’s research and development engineering manager, has overseen the production of more than 20 million digital motors since joining the company in 2015. We also have Singaporeans holding senior positions in our multinational corporations (MNCs). Linus Lee heads Twitter’s data science team in Singapore. Clarence Chew led Decathlon’s entry into Southeast Asia and Australia.”
“Through hard work, taking calculated risks and learning from initial mistakes, Syafiq has grown his company to where it is today, with more than 60 vehicles and over 100 workers. More than 80% of his employees are Singaporeans. Syafiq also impressed me with his drive to constantly innovate and grow his business. Riverwood has applied technology and productivity measures extensively to boost its competitiveness. Last year, Amazon picked Riverwood as the vendor to deliver their products in Singapore. Syafiq is now looking at supplying halal food products to Japan. I asked him why Japan, the country does not have a large Muslim population. He explained that the Japanese are interested in halal food products to serve the growing market of Muslim tourists and also to prepare for Tokyo Olympics in 2020. So, there is an opportunity for a company like Riverwood to enter the market and apply their logistics capabilities and the trusted Singapore brand name to ensure process integrity and quality assurance for halal food products. Third, we must have the best talent in Singapore. Sir, the Government has rolled out several initiatives over the past few years to calibrate the total number of foreign workers in Singapore and safeguard the well-being of Singapore workers. These include training and skills-upgrading for our workers under programmes, such as SkillsFuture, Professional Conversion Programme and Adapt and Grow. We also implemented the Fair Consideration Framework (FCF) and the Tripartite Standard on the Employment of Term Contract Employees. Companies with unfair hiring practices know they will run into problems and troubles with the authorities. About 150 companies have improved their HR practices and moved out of the watch-list.”
“Singapore companies and workers can compete with the very best in the world and come out on top. To thrive and grow, Singapore companies know they have to sell to the world. To develop products and services for the rest of the world, they have to prove their viability in Singapore. We must give them the opportunities and help them to succeed. The Government will give fair consideration to Singapore companies when we procure products and services, to seek out creative and innovative ideas from our companies; to partner them in our Government projects; to enable them to build up a track record to compete overseas. For example, the Health Promotion Board appointed Activate Interactive, a local SME, to develop the Healthy 365 mobile app and provide the step trackers for the first season of National Steps Challenge. All 100,000 trackers were taken up by our enthusiastic participants. Activate built on this success to spin off another company, Actxa, to venture into the wearables industry. Actxa is now able to hold a place in the wearables market among well-entrenched competitors, such as Apple and Garmin, and it is developing new innovative products and expanding into overseas markets. We have many good local companies run by talented Singaporeans. I met Syafiq Yussoff last month. He is the founder and CEO of Riverwood, a home-grown logistics company. Syafiq dropped out of school when he young as he had to support his family. But he never stopped learning. While working as a personal trainer, he picked up useful business lessons and ideas from his clients. He then started Riverwood, armed with only two vans and four employees.”
“They adopted an engineering approach, building their own fridge to control the temperature settings, measuring the results of different recipes and brewing methods. After some months of trial and error, they produced good quality beer which they then shared with their friends at NTU, not just one variety but seven different types of beer. I have tried their beer; it is very good. Unfortunately, they were not able to continue with their brewing on campus. The students told me that NTU has been very supportive and encouraging and offered to help them to continue while complying with the law. The PEP Secretariat and I have also offered our help. We met the three students over dinner and had a good discussion on how our current licensing regime could be reviewed to lower the barriers of entry for micro-brewers to test out new products during an initial trial period, before applying a more rigorous set of rules when they subsequently scale up their production and sales. My colleagues and I are looking into this proposal and we will discuss with the regulatory agencies. Again, I do not know if we can successfully implement this regulatory change but we will give it a shot. I told Rahul, Abilash and Heetesh that I admire their enterprising spirit, their willingness to take risks and try something different and their dedication in applying their engineering training to perfect the recipes and brewing techniques. These attributes will be valuable for them in future, whichever career path they choose. I hope more of our young people can have similar opportunities to pursue their passion and have support from their families and society to take a less trodden path. Next, we must believe in our enterprises and our people.”
“This encourages stakeholders to experiment within a well-defined “safe” space. Other agencies like the Ministry of Health and Energy Market Authority have also started their own regulatory sandboxes for telemedicine and the energy sector. There is some risk when we embark on rules review and implement regulatory sandboxes. Some of the pilots could fail and some of the new rules may not work well. But we have to try, as remaining status quo and playing it safe is simply not tenable when we have to compete with other cities in the world for ideas, investments and talent. In such an environment, the most dangerous strategy is to make no bold moves. What is important is to learn from the failure and have the resilience to bounce back and try again. Being pro-business in our rules is much more than the economy. It is about shaping our social norms and our social compact. It is about supporting risk-taking and overcoming our fear of failure. In the process of trying something new, we learn and become more resilient and more resourceful. Such changes can have a significant and lasting impact on our societal culture and the kind of society we want Singapore to be. Recently, I met the three Singaporean students who started Binjai Brew – Rahul, Abilash and Heetesh. They are engineering students at the Nanyang Technological University (NTU) and spent a year together at UC Berkeley for their overseas attachment. Rahul did an internship with a brewery in Richmond, California, and that was when they picked up the interest and knowledge to brew their own beer. The three young men experimented with different brewing techniques.”