Choo Pei Ling
Singapore
“Technology can process information. People decide what matters. Technology can recommend options. People weigh competing priorities. Technology can improve efficiency. People decide when resilience is worth the additional cost. Technology should never be seen as replacing Singaporeans.”
“Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Minister of State for the response. I have three supplementary questions. First, as a small country that cannot take energy security for granted, could the Minister of State share whether Singapore may increasingly move towards designing future developments and estates to be more solar ready from the ou…”
“Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Minister for the response. Building on the earlier response, could the Minister share whether Singapore's workforce planning approach is being further adapted for a more persistent state of structural uncertainty, where workers may face overlapping disruptions from trade fragmentation, technological cha…”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you to Senior Minister of State for the response. In Tengah, many residents have approached me on EV charging infrastructure. Tengah residents who already own EVs have shared that having charging points closer to home would make daily life much more convenient.”
“If we want better outcomes, then we must think ahead in how we structure this wider ecosystem, with clear roles, clear standards and clear accountability. Because good professionals matter, but the system around them matters just as much.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Minister for the reply. I have three supplementary questions. The first one, beyond awareness, what does the Ministry see as the key reasons why couples are not taking up PREDICT?”
The complete record
Every one of 68 lines we hold for Choo Pei Ling, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 2.
“Technology can process information. People decide what matters. Technology can recommend options. People weigh competing priorities. Technology can improve efficiency. People decide when resilience is worth the additional cost. Technology should never be seen as replacing Singaporeans. It should increase the value that Singaporeans bring. This also changes how we think about jobs. Too often, we ask which jobs technology will replace. Perhaps we should ask a different question. What expertise should Singapore be known for? Our ambition should not simply be to create more jobs in transport. It should be to create the jobs where the most important decisions are made. The jobs that design supply chains rather than merely operate them. The jobs that coordinate regional operations rather than simply execute instructions. The jobs that combine technology with judgement. These are the jobs that will command higher wages because they create greater value. These are the jobs that global companies will choose to anchor here. These are the opportunities we must prepare Singaporeans to seize.”
“Yesterday, Singapore's role may be to ensure that its cargo moved quickly through our port or airport. Tomorrow, our ambition should be greater. We want its regional operations, supply chain planning and risk management teams to be based here, not because the cargo stays in Singapore, but because the decisions do. That is a much stronger position to hold. It is also one that cannot be replicated simply by building another port or another airport. Mr Deputy Speaker, why should those decisions be made here? Because Singapore offers something that has become increasingly valuable in an uncertain world – trust. Trust did not appear overnight. It was built patiently over decades through stable institutions, predictable rules, openness to the world and a reputation for keeping our word. When global supply chains came under strain, Singapore kept trade moving. We honoured our commitments. We remained a dependable partner when certainty was in short supply. Trust is often spoken of as a virtue. Today, it is also a competitive advantage. When businesses decide where to invest, where to establish regional headquarters and where to coordinate operations, they are ultimately deciding where they have confidence in a system. Trust has become part of Singapore's economic infrastructure. That is why investments in Tuas Port and Changi T5 are so important. They are not simply investments in capacity. They are investments in Singapore's relevance for the next generation. But infrastructure alone will not determine our future. Technology will continue to transform aviation, maritime and logistics. AI, automation and digital systems will make transport faster, safer and more efficient. But these technologies will become increasingly available. Judgement will nonetheless remain scarce.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, at first glance, this Motion is about transport. But at a deeper level, it is about how Singapore creates value in a changing world. For decades, Singapore earned its place by connecting the world. We built one of the world's leading ports, one of the world's best airports and a logistics network that businesses around the world came to rely on. Although we are a small island with no natural resources, we became relevant because we connected people, markets and opportunities better than almost anyone else. That strategy transformed Singapore. But every successful strategy must evolve with the world around it. Today, supply chains are being redesigned. Trade patterns are becoming less predictable. Businesses are balancing efficiency with resilience. Technology is changing how goods, services, capital and information move across borders. In this environment, connectivity remains essential. But connectivity alone is no longer enough. The busiest hub is not always the one that creates the most value. The question is no longer whether goods pass through Singapore. The question is whether the decisions behind those goods are made in Singapore. That, I believe, is Singapore's next opportunity. Increasingly, the greatest value is created long before a container reaches a port or an aircraft leaves the runway. It is created when businesses decide where to source, where to manufacture, where to manage risk and how to respond when disruption strikes. Those decisions matter more than ever because uncertainty has become a permanent feature of the global economy. Singapore should therefore aspire not only to move trade efficiently, but to become the place where those decisions are made with confidence. Take a company managing operations across Asia.”
“Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Minister of State. I have three supplementary questions. One, given the increasing sophistication of scams targeting seniors, including cross-border and multi-step operations, could the Minister of State share how Singapore is strengthening its overall system design to stay ahead of rapidly evolving scam typologies rather than responding only after patterns emerge? Two, could the Minister of State also share how coordination across banks, telecommunication companies (telcos) and enforcement agencies is being further optimised to shorten the critical time between scam detection and intervention, including the freezing of funds or disruption of scam flows, given how quickly losses can occur once victims are engaged? And three, beyond systems and enforcement, could the Minister of State share how Singapore is further strengthening safeguards against increasingly sophisticated social engineering tactics that exploit trust, urgency and fear, particularly among our seniors, so that we can better protect vulnerable individuals before irreversible financial harm occurs?”
“Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Minister of State for the response. I have three supplementary questions. First, as a small country that cannot take energy security for granted, could the Minister of State share whether Singapore may increasingly move towards designing future developments and estates to be more solar ready from the outset, so that we strengthen our long-term resilience rather than rely on retrofitting later on? Second, could the Minister of State also elaborate on whether there are opportunities for closer collaboration and coordination across agencies involved in energy planning, urban development and building design, so that solar deployment can be integrated more systematically upstream in future developments? And third, as Singapore scales up solar deployment over time, how is the Ministry strengthening our local ecosystem of manpower, technical expertise and supply resilience to support this transition in a sustainable and long-term fashion?”
“Thank you, Speaker, and I thank the Minister for the response. Building on the earlier response, could the Minister share whether Singapore's workforce planning approach is being further adapted for a more persistent state of structural uncertainty, where workers may face overlapping disruptions from trade fragmentation, technological change and sectoral restructuring, which may occur concurrently over their careers rather than as isolated transitions?”
“Would the Ministry consider issuing illustrative guidance, not fixed thresholds, but examples of what constitutes material influence in practice and what types of infrastructure or systems may be treated as essential resources in a converged media ecosystem? Because interpretability affects not only compliance, but also investment timing and market entry decisions. Finally, tighter approval requirements will inevitably affect transaction timelines. That is a trade-off the system is making. In that context, would the Ministry consider over time, publishing non-binding guidance or anonymised aggregated decision patterns, particularly around recurring assessment factors and common risk indicators? This would not reduce discretion, but it would improve predictability where regulatory patterns are already structurally consistent. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin, "竞争让市场保持活力，但真正让系统长期稳定的，是信任与透明。两者缺一不可。" (In English): "Competition keeps the market dynamic, but what truly ensures the long-term stability of the system is trust and transparency. Both are indispensable." Mr Speaker, Singapore is now managing a new form of concentration risk, not only in ownership structures, but in dependency relationships embedded across platforms, infrastructure and digital distribution systems. Regulation must therefore do two things at once: remain firm enough to intervene early and remain clear enough for good actors to navigate confidently. That balance between firmness and legibility is what this Bill begins to strengthen. I support this Bill.”
“This reflects a necessary recognition that market influence today is not confined within sectoral boundaries. Capital is cross-platform, strategy is ecosystem-based and influence can be indirect but still structurally significant. The key implementation question is this: how will IMDA distinguish between capability-enhancing investment, competitive concentration risk and longer-term dependency creation within the ecosystem? These effects are often not separable at the point of approval; they emerge over time. Mr Speaker, the transfer of structural separation powers to the Minister is a significant institutional design choice. This is not routine competition enforcement. It is an exceptional intervention that can reshape market structure itself. The question is therefore not only about authority but about regulatory signalling. Will the Ministry set out broad guiding principles on when structural separation is considered appropriate? Not to constrain discretion, but to strengthen predictability in a domain where investment confidence depends on clarity of risk boundaries. On the reconsideration mechanism, I note the "either-or" structure between IMDA reconsideration and Ministerial appeal. Could the Ministry clarify the policy intent behind this design? Is the primary objective speed, finality, or avoidance of parallel processes? Because the structure of review pathways ultimately shapes how regulatory legitimacy is perceived, not just how quickly decisions are resolved. The Bill adopts broad, technology-neutral definitions of "control" and "essential resource". That is appropriate in a rapidly evolving environment. But flexibility must still be operationally legible.”
“Mr Speaker, this Infocomm Media Development Authority (Amendment) Bill responds to a structural shift already underway: the convergence of broadcasting digital platforms and telecommunications. At one level, this is a technical update to thresholds, approvals and enforcement tools. But at a deeper level it is about how Singapore regulates market power in a system where influence is increasingly exercised through dependency, not just ownership. That distinction matters because in a converged digital ecosystem, control does not always appear at the point of acquisition. It can accumulate quietly through minority stakes, infrastructure dependencies and control over distribution systems that sit beneath what consumers actually see and once embedded, these structures are difficult to reverse. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The media regulation we face today is undergoing a crucial shift. In the past, we understood market structure primarily through the lens of "who owns the company." However, in today's digital ecosystem, influence often stems not from ownership itself, but from "dependencies" within the system. When a platform, infrastructure, or data distribution channel becomes irreplaceable, market power may already be concentrated within the system, even without obvious monopolistic practices. Therefore, the key shift in regulatory thinking is: not just looking at "who owns," but identifying "who is becoming irreplaceable" earlier. If we only intervene after problems emerge, we often miss the opportunity to adjust the structure. (In English): I support the extension of IMDAs prior approval requirement to any acquisition crossing the 30% threshold in regulated media entities, including non-licensees.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you to Senior Minister of State for the response. In Tengah, many residents have approached me on EV charging infrastructure. Tengah residents who already own EVs have shared that having charging points closer to home would make daily life much more convenient. And others are keen to make the switch, but are waiting for charging infrastructure to become more accessible. As Tengah grows, this will only become increasingly more important because residents want to embrace greener living. I have two supplementary questions. First, could the Senior Minister of State share how feedback from estates such as Tengah is operationally translated into changes in the planning and sequencing of EV charging deployment? And second, what adjustments have been made in inter-agency coordination to improve implementation in newer estates such as Tengah?”
“If we want better outcomes, then we must think ahead in how we structure this wider ecosystem, with clear roles, clear standards and clear accountability. Because good professionals matter, but the system around them matters just as much. Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill reflects how our society has evolved and how expectations of care have grown. But the real measure of its success will not be in what we pass today. It will be in what people experience tomorrow. Because, in the end, how we treat animals says something about us. But how we organise care, that says even more. I support the Bill and I look forward to the Minister of State’s response on these points.”
“And we should think carefully about who is entrusted to train others, because who we allow to train matters – that is how standards rise or slip. In healthcare, supervision is not a formality. It is a safeguard and that principle applies just as strongly here. The fourth is continuing professional education. This is essential. But it is also where intent and implementation can diverge. If it becomes a matter of ticking boxes rather than strengthening practice, then we risk losing its purpose. So, as this framework develops, it will be important to ensure that it remains meaningful, relevant and reflective of how practice continues to evolve. Mr Deputy Speaker, let me return to something residents raise often. It is not simply that veterinary costs are expensive. It is not just that care is expensive. It is that people do not know where it will end. Once they say yes, they feel like they have to keep saying yes. And that is a difficult position for any family. Not because they do not love their pet but because they are unsure. And over time, that uncertainty changes how people feel about the entire system. While pricing may sit outside the scope of this Bill, transparency is something we can strengthen. Clearer communication, better upfront estimates and a more consistent approach across the sector would go a long way. Because when people do not understand the costs, they begin to question the care. And that is something that we should not allow to take root. Finally, this Bill also points to the future of veterinary care. Care today is no longer delivered by one person alone. It is delivered by teams – veterinarians, nurses, rehabilitation professionals and many others.”
“But if we are serious about trust, then we must also be very deliberate about how we design it. The first is the Veterinary Council itself. The Council will shape standards, oversee conduct and influence how the profession evolves. It must be credible to the profession and it must be trusted by the public. That means having the right mix of expertise across different areas of practice and processes that are clearly fair and impartial. It also means that where serious disciplinary findings are made, that they are communicated with sufficient clarity, so that both professionals and the public understand what is expected. Because if people cannot see how standards are applied, they will not feel assured that they exist. The second is clarity in qualifications and titles. For most people, trust begins with what they see – a name, a designation, a title. And the reality is this: most people will not know the difference between one qualification and another, but they will live with the consequences. So, what matters is not just how qualifications are assessed, but how clearly they are understood. There should be transparency in what is recognised, how specialist titles are determined and what these mean in practice. Because a title can reassure, even when it should not. And if we are not careful, that reassurance can be misplaced. The third is how we approach restricted practice. Such pathways serve a purpose. They allow entry into the profession while maintaining safeguards. But we must be careful, because if we are not careful, what starts as a pathway can quietly become a standard. So, there must be clarity on scope, on progression and on how competence is assessed over time.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to declare that I am a registered allied health professional in both Singapore and the UK, regulated by the Allied Health Professions Council and the Health and Care Professions Council, as well as a member of the Singapore Physiotherapy Association and the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy in the UK. So, this Bill speaks to something I have seen very clearly in healthcare. How trust in a profession is built – and how easily it can be eroded if we are not careful. In Tengah, many of my residents are young families and many have pets. They tell me they want more places to walk with them, to sit with them after a meal, to let them run safely. It reflects something simple: that pets are part of everyday life. But when something goes wrong, the conversation changes. One resident told me she hesitated when her pet needed treatment – not because she did not care, but because she was not sure what she was agreeing to. And I think many people will recognise this. Because when something goes wrong, it is not just the bill that people worry about, it is whether they are making the right decision at all. And that is why this Bill matters. Because at its core, this Bill is about trust. But in practice, people do not read regulations. They read people and they trust what they see in front of them. So, if we want to build trust, we must make sure what they see is clear, consistent and credible. That is why the direction of this Bill is the right one – establishing a Veterinary Council, strengthening registration, requiring continuing professional education and putting in place a clear disciplinary framework. These are not just regulatory changes. They are the foundations of a profession that people can have confidence in.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Minister for the reply. I have three supplementary questions. The first one, beyond awareness, what does the Ministry see as the key reasons why couples are not taking up PREDICT? Second, whether the Ministry has considered if earlier touchpoints, such as at the point of the Registry of Marriage or Registry of Muslim Marriages applications may be more effective in reaching couples? And if not, whether this is something the Ministry would consider? Third, whether the Ministry has considered what role incentives could play in improving uptake?”
“In Tengah, I often hear young parents say that their biggest worry is not fines, but whether their children, out of momentary curiosity, will embark on a path of no return. This Bill is not simply a tobacco control measure. It concerns the health of the next generation, the peace of mind of families and the bottom line of society. Protecting youths is a principle we cannot compromise on. (In English): Mr Speaker, law alone does not shape norms. A law is strongest when ordinary people understand it and can comply without fear or ambiguity. As duties are placed on premises owners and responsible persons, guidance must be clear and practical. Frontline staff must know what steps to take if they encounter suspected use or storage. Enforcement communications must reinforce that detection is real and consequences are certain. A firm law, consistently enforced, shapes behaviour long before it punishes it. Singapore has always taken a clear stance against substances that undermine public health and social stability. That clarity has protected generations. In confronting the evolution of vaporisers into vehicles for psychoactive substances, we must be equally resolute. Firm against exploitation. Compassionate toward recovery. Disciplined in implementation. Because ultimately, this Bill is not about devices. It is about safeguarding the next generation. The measure of a society is how firmly it protects its young, especially when the threat evolves. I support this Bill.”
“I would welcome the Senior Minister of State’s clarification on how agencies will prioritise dismantling organised supply networks and measure disruption of these channels, so that enforcement impact is visible and sustained. At the same time, deterrence alone cannot be the entire answer. Nicotine and psychoactive substance exposure affect impulse control and judgement, particularly in adolescents. Early experimentation can escalate quickly. I therefore welcome the structured rehabilitation orders introduced in this Bill, including community-based rehabilitation and family involvement. Enforcement stops the spread. Rehabilitation stops the cycle. The credibility of this framework will depend on timely and consistent implementation. For eligible first-time youth offenders, intervention must be swift, structured and supported by access to cessation and counselling pathways. I would be grateful if the Minister could elaborate on how agencies will ensure that diversion to rehabilitation is operationalised quickly, so that intervention is meaningful rather than delayed. Mr Speaker, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Chairman, protecting youths is not just a matter of law enforcement; it is the responsibility of our entire society. Vaporisers today are no longer just nicotine products. Some have even become carriers of psychoactive substances. If a small device can subtly alter a young person's mind, we cannot afford to be complacent. We must come down hard on those who supply these products for profit. But we must also promptly intervene to help young people who have gone astray. Strict measures are to cut off the source. Care is to save the future.”
“Mr Speaker, what began as a so-called "safer alternative" has, in some cases, become something far more dangerous. This is no longer a debate about lifestyle. It is a public safety issue. Devices that resemble vaporisers are now being used to deliver psychoactive substances. What is marketed to youths as flavour and novelty can conceal sedation, dependency and real harm. When a device can fit in a pocket yet deliver chemical dependence, the state must respond clearly and decisively. I rise in strong support of the Bill. First, I support the move to future-proof our legislation. Industries innovate to evade regulation. If we regulate only what we already know, we will always be one step behind what arrives next. The expansion of definitions to capture nicotine analogues and the creation of a Specified Psychoactive Substances framework ensure that enforcement can respond swiftly as substances evolve. If enforcement is reactive, exploitation will be proactive. This architecture signals that Singapore intends to stay ahead of the curve, not chase it. Second, deterrence must be sharpest where harm is multiplied. Young users are visible, but organised importers and distributors are the engines of this problem. The strengthened penalties for import and supply, the presumptions preventing easy denial of knowledge and the duties placed on owners and occupiers to prevent storage and distribution draw a clear hierarchy of culpability. The law must be firmest where profit meets exploitation. Singapore is a trade and travel hub. We must anticipate concealment methods, storage networks and cross-border sourcing. Targeting upstream syndicates protects downstream youths.”
“Mr Chairman, I thank the Minister for his comprehensive response. In Tengah, Singapore's newest town with many young families, something quite remarkable is happening. Since last year, I have met 19 sets of twins among residents there. It reflects the stage of life many couples in Tengah are in as they begin building their families. As the Minister noted, healthcare needs for younger population are often episodic. But towns, like Tengah, also gives us a rare opportunity to start prevention early. Could the Minister share how MOH is working with other agencies so that preventive health can be built into new towns, like Tengah, right from the start, rather than introduce only when populations have already aged?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you to the Minister of State for the reply. Beyond seeking exemptions and supporting affected businesses, how is Singapore strengthening the resilience of our trade model, in light of these new US tariff measures? Additionally, how can Singapore continue to position ourselves as a trusted and reliable economic partner, amid rising trade tensions?”
“As we scale AI and rehabilitation technologies, we should continue embedding functional indicators – mobility, independence, caregiver burden, re-admission reduction and return-to-community participation – alongside utilisation metrics. Technology should improve outcomes that patients feel, not just metrics we report. Mr Chairman, Singapore's strength has never been blind adoption of new tools. It has been discipline in the implementation. In healthcare, that discipline means scaling technologies that demonstrably improve independence, strengthen professional capability and remain financially sustainable in a super-aged society. As Singaporeans live longer, our ambition must be clear – not merely to extend years of life, but to extend years of mobility, confidence and participation. Because ultimately, the goal of healthcare is not activity, it is dignity across the life cycle. If we deploy technology wisely, we will ensure that Singapore's healthcare system remains advanced and not only that, but also humane, resilient and sustainable.”
“It is social stability and fiscal resilience in an ageing nation. Second, from labour intensity to capability amplification. Healthcare will always be human, but our professionals today face rising clinical complexity alongside administrative burden and coordination demands. Generative AI can assist with documentation. Clinical decision-support systems can synthesise complex patient histories. Digital triage tools can prioritise risk more effectively. In rehabilitation, sensor-guided therapy systems and carefully deployed robotic technologies, including exoskeleton-assisted gait training for selected patients, can increase therapy intensity safely and consistently, particularly in early recovery. This allows therapists to focus on assessment, clinical reasoning and patient engagement rather than repetitive supervision. Technology must give clinicians back time, not take professional judgement away. If technology reduces cognitive overload and unnecessary administrative friction, it sustains morale, protects professional standards and helps us retain the workforce our system depends on. A sustainable healthcare system ultimately depends on a sustainable healthcare workforce. Third, from throughput to meaningful outcomes. Healthcare systems often measure performance in terms of waiting times, bed occupancy and utilisation volumes. These indicators are important for operational management. But patients measure success differently. Can I climb the stairs to my flat? Can I return to work? Can I care for my grandchildren? Can I live independently without becoming a burden to my family?”
“Mr Chairman, in healthcare, technology is often discussed in terms of speed, scale and innovation. But for patients, it is much simpler. It is about whether they can return home. In stroke rehabilitation, I often meet patients who ask a single question, "Will I be able to walk independently again?" They are not asking about algorithms or processing power. They are asking about dignity and whether their lives can resume some sense of normalcy. As Singapore becomes a super-aged society, the question before us is not whether we embrace technology in healthcare. The question is whether we deploy it in ways that strengthen independence, reinforce our workforce and preserve sustainability in the long term. Three shifts will determine whether technology becomes transformational or merely incremental. First, from extending lifespan to extending healthspan. Singaporeans are living longer, but longevity without independence places strain on families, caregivers and the system itself. AI-assisted imaging, predictive analytics under Healthier SG, earlier risk stratification for cardiovascular disease and remote monitoring of chronic conditions allow us to intervene before deterioration becomes crisis. Fall-risk modelling can prevent fractures. Early detection can reduce severe complications. Predictive bed management can smooth demand pressures. But the true measure of progress is not technological sophistication. It is whether fewer seniors lose mobility, whether fewer families experience preventable emergencies, whether more Singaporeans can age confidently in their own homes. When we predict earlier, we intervene earlier. When we intervene earlier, we preserve independence longer. That is not only clinical progress.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you to the Senior Minister of State for the response. Beyond expanding training capacity and recruitment, how is the Ministry redesigning care models and workforce structures so that productivity gains translate into more sustainable workloads? Beyond that, how are we strengthening retention of experienced mid-career and senior healthcare professionals whose institutional knowledge is critical to long-term resilience? And finally, as demographic and disease trends evolve in the next decade, how is our workforce planning being aligned with broader healthcare transformation efforts to ensure that sustainability is present beyond immediate capacity expansion?”
“If retraining does not shift progression pathways, workers will hesitate, regardless of subsidies. Training must change trajectories, not just transcripts. In a changing economy, every Singaporean who is willing to adapt should be able to see a clear path forward. If implemented well, this reform will strengthen trust in upward mobility for the next generation. 7.15 pm SkillsFuture Taster Sessions”
“Chairman, when I speak with students and working adults, the question is rarely about the number of courses available. It is this: "If I invest time and effort in learning, will it genuinely move me forward?" In Singapore, we have long believed that effort should open doors, that hard work, not background, determines opportunity. That belief is central to our social compact. The merger of SkillsFuture Singapore and Workforce Singapore is therefore significant. Careers are now longer and less linear. Support must feel integrated across skills acquisition, job transitions and progression. A fragmented journey erodes confidence; a coherent one strengthens it. But integration alone will not secure trust. Lifelong learning must translate into real mobility, not just participation. First, outcomes should increasingly focus on sustained progression. Beyond enrolment and initial placement, what ultimately matters are longer-term wage growth, employment stability and the quality of skills-job matching. It is not enough to move someone into a job quickly if that job does not reflect their upgraded capability. When effort visibly leads to advancement, confidence strengthens naturally. Second, a clear framework should be set for policy decisions. A single agency simplifies the journey for the learner, jobseeker and worker. But sometimes, policy priorities diverge. For example, in resource-constrained segments, should employment-driven outcomes or longer-term career development training needs take priority? As the new agency will report to both MOE and MOM, how can decision-making gridlocks be prevented? Third, incentives must align. Lifelong learning succeeds only when employers signal that skills are recognised in promotion, pay and job redesign.”
“For high-impact deployments, institutionalising testing, explainability where needed and independent review where appropriate will strengthen confidence without stifling innovation. Trust is not a by-product of innovation. It is an asset we build deliberately. 4.00 pm Third, bilingual talent at scale. We will need more than AI engineers. We will need people fluent in both domain and data, professionals who understand context, model limits and risk. The future workforce must be fluent in both code and context. If we build value, trust, and bilingual talent, Singapore will not merely adopt AI. We will shape how it is deployed and ensure that our growth is resilient and inclusive. I welcome the Minister's reflections on how MDDI will drive these disciplines through the National AI Council and the AI Missions.”
“Mr Chairman, in my work with stroke survivors, we use brain imaging and machine learning to understand how the brain reorganises after injury. A single scan can produce thousands of images. Algorithms help us detect patterns we would otherwise miss. But no responsible scientist relies on a model blindly. We validate it rigorously, test for bias and examine when it breaks, because a wrong conclusion does not stay in a journal. It affects a person. As Singapore accelerates our AI ambitions, we should bring that same discipline to national deployment. Budget 2026 sets a clear direction: a National AI Council chaired by the Prime Minister and national AI Missions to drive real outcomes across advanced manufacturing, connectivity, finance and healthcare. This is the right posture: AI – not as a buzzword, but as an economic strategy. To make AI translate into growth that Singaporeans can feel, three disciplines matter. First, value capture, not just adoption. Budget measures, such as expanding the Enterprise Innovation Scheme to support qualifying AI expenditures can spur uptake. But uptake is not impact. The jump from "trying tools" to "redesigning work" is where productivity is won. We should help firms, especially SMEs, cross that gap with mission-linked sector playbooks, reference workflows and practical benchmarks. AI must generate enterprise value, not just technological activity. Second, trust architecture as a competitive advantage. In a fragmented world, Singapore's brand is that we are a place where serious systems run reliably. As AI systems move from assisting decisions to shaping outcomes, assurance cannot be informal.”
“If we steward this investment with discipline, anchoring value and renewing talent, Singapore will not merely participate in technological change. I would welcome the Minister’s thoughts on how RIE2030 will continue strengthening value capture and structured renewal pathways as we move into this next phase.”
“This includes attention to IP anchored locally, enterprise growth driven by domestic innovation, productivity gains linked to publicly funded research as well as high-skilled opportunities created for Singaporeans. We cannot compete on scale. We compete on focus, execution and value capture. This is not a change of direction. It is disciplined refinement. It ensures that our accumulated research depth translates into sustained economic strength. Excellence in research must translate into consequence for our economy. Innovation ultimately depends on people. Singapore has built strong institutions, attracted global expertise and expanded our local research base. These are significant achievements. As our ecosystem matures, renewal becomes as important as accumulation. Strong systems endure when experience and fresh perspectives reinforce one another. We can continue strengthening renewal by providing meaningful leadership opportunities for emerging innovators, recognising mentorship and leadership development within our institutions, designing mission-based programmes with structured progression pathways. These refinements build on existing strengths. When younger Singaporeans see that frontier ideas can be pursued and realised here, and that leadership pathways are real, confidence in our innovation ecosystem deepens. Renewal is not about replacing experience. It is about ensuring succession. Innovation policy is not about funding levels only. It is about incentives, institutions and value capture. What we measure influences behaviour. Who we empower influences direction. Where value is anchored determines national strength. The Government has taken a bold and necessary step with RIE2030.”
“Mr Chairman, the Prime Minister has laid out clearly the realities of the world we face. It is more uncertain, more fragmented and more competitive than before. In such a world, innovation is not optional. It is central to Singapore’s long-term economic strength and strategic resilience. The Government’s $37 billion commitment under Research, Innovation and Enterprise 2030 (RIE2030) Plan reflects foresight and discipline. It is a deliberate investment in deepening our capabilities so that Singapore remains competitive, relevant and able to create real opportunities for our people. As we move into the next phase, I would like to focus on two priorities that will determine whether this investment delivers its full impact. First, anchoring and capturing value from innovation. Second, sustaining renewal within our talent system. Singapore has built strong research and innovation capabilities over decades – in semiconductors, advanced manufacturing, biomedical sciences and AI. These were the result of sustained and deliberate choices. As our ecosystem matures, the emphasis must increasingly shift from building capability to anchoring value. In a small and open economy, we will always participate in global value chains. Participation in global value chains is not enough. We must anchor higher-value segments here in Singapore. Anchoring value means retaining intellectual property (IP), scaling Singapore-headquartered enterprises and creating high value roles for Singaporeans across the innovation chain. Traditional research indicators – publications, patents and grants – remain important measures of quality. But as investment scales up, it is appropriate that we continue sharpening how we track economic impact.”
“Stable chronic conditions, prevention and recovery are often better supported closer to home, through our general practitioners (GPs), community teams and integrated networks. This is not about reducing care. It is about delivering care more appropriately so that access remains protected over time. Embedding strong primary and community care early in all estates is how we prevent avoidable strain as our population ages. If we manage demand wisely today, we protect access tomorrow.”
“They are simply borne elsewhere – by taxpayers and future generations. Budget 2026 reflects that balance investing where necessary, strengthening fiscal structures and our financing mechanisms, and ensuring that our system remains strong not only for this generation, but for the next. Mr Speaker, healthcare waiting time is often where policy becomes personal. It is the elderly resident sitting quietly outside a specialist clinic. It is the working adult taking leave to accompany a parent. It is the anxiety of waiting for clarity. In Tengah, residents share these concerns with me. They are not asking for extravagance. They are asking for reassurance that care will be timely, accessible and sustainable. Rising waiting times do not happen in isolation. Singaporeans are living longer, chronic conditions are more prevalent and mental health needs are growing. Medical advances also mean we can treat far more conditions than before. Demand is rising partly because we are doing more and doing it better. That is progress. But progress brings pressure. Waiting time is the visible symptom of rising demand in a more capable system. Budget 2026 recognises this structural shift. It continues to invest in hospital capacity and manpower. It strengthens primary care under Healthier SG. It expands community hospitals, step-down care and long-term care capacity. These are not short-term fixes. They are long-term adjustments. But capacity alone cannot secure sustainability. Capacity is necessary, but sustainability also depends on managing demand appropriately and delivering care in the right setting. Hospitals are best focused on acute and complex care.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I begin, I would like to declare that I am an assistant professor in imaging neuroscience at the Singapore Institute of Technology, and I am a registered member of the Allied Health Professions Council. Healthcare affordability is not simple. It is a shared equation. In mathematics, we assume that one plus one equals two. It seems obvious, straightforward. But even something as simple as one plus one only works when the foundations are sound. Healthcare is like that. Many Singaporeans ask, "Can healthcare be more affordable? Can waiting times be shorter? Why does it feel more expensive?" These are valid concerns. But when we look beneath the surface – at ageing, chronic disease, medical inflation, workforce pressures and rising expectations – we see that healthcare is not a simple sum. In this Budget, the Ministry of Health's (MOH's) operating expenditure is about $20 billion. Over the past decade, healthcare spending has more than doubled. As more Singaporeans live into their eighties and beyond, demand will continue to rise. This $20 billion is not just a number. Behind it are countless hours of system design, workforce planning, infrastructure development and careful budgeting by our policy-makers, healthcare leaders and civil service. It represents: subsidies that keep care accessible; investment in hospitals and community facilities; expansion of long-term care; and training and retaining of healthcare professionals. Healthcare is a system that must be carefully balanced. And like any equation, the outcome depends on how responsibly each part is managed. Affordability therefore cannot mean only what an individual pays today. It must also mean what the nation can sustain tomorrow. If costs are not shared responsibly, they do not disappear.”
“Thank you, Speaker, and Senior Minister of State. I have three supplementary questions. First, as reliance on satellite-enabled systems grows, is there a role for strengthening domestic capabilities in satellite cybersecurity monitoring, threat detection and attribution? My second supplementary question: given that satellites are difficult to repair once launched and may rely on legacy or unpatched systems, what is the Government's assessment on the resilient risks? My third supplementary question: and how are these mitigated over their life-cycle?”
“But as always, the true measure lies in implementation, in enforcement, in fairness and in infrastructure. I support the Bill and I look forward to the Minister's clarifications.”
“As part of their work, they prescribe wheelchairs and mobility aids for persons with disabilities, and they work daily with patients to help restore movement – to stand, to walk and to carry out their ADLs with dignity and independence. For residents already under physiotherapy care, requiring a separate doctor consultation for certification may create duplication and inconvenience. Could the Minister of State explain the rationale for excluding physiotherapists from issuing Certificates of Medical Need, particularly for patients already under their care? The exclusion warrants reconsideration. For continuity of care, patients already receiving physiotherapy should not require separate consultations solely for certification purposes. Doctors diagnose, but physiotherapists help people move again – to stand, to walk and to live. Additionally, while these measures improve safety, infrastructure remains a concern. Shared paths of two metres are dwarfed by roads spanning 18 metres. If active mobility is to grow, will the Government commit to expanding pedestrian‑only path infrastructure proportionately? Safety is not just about rules; it is also about space. ERP 2.0 represents a fairer, usage-based model, charging only for actual road use. That principle is sound. But fairness must be felt across income groups and vehicle types. How will lower‑income families who rely on private‑hire vehicles for essential transport be protected from disproportionate burdens under future distance‑based models? And while decriminalising missed payments is sensible, shifting liability from drivers to vehicle owners may create complications for shared vehicles. How will these be addressed? Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill advances safety and modernisation on our roads. It is a step forward.”
“And how can we ensure that online marketplaces take responsibility, so that unsafe devices are not just removed from our paths but from our homes altogether? PMAs are essential for those with genuine walking difficulties. But misuse by otherwise mobile individuals can create new problems. Over-reliance on mobility scooters may lead to muscle wasting, loss of balance and reduced independence. Instead of preserving mobility, unnecessary use can erode it. This is why the prescription requirement, through a Certificate of Medical Need issued by doctors or occupational therapists, is so important. It ensures that PMAs remain tools of necessity, not convenience, protecting both the safety of our shared paths and the health of our residents. The reduction of PMA speed limits from 10 kilometres per hour to six – the pace of brisk walking – is a welcome move. It directly addresses concerns in towns with young children and seniors. Dimension limits of 120 centimetres by 70 centimetres, harmonised with public transport standards, will prevent oversized devices from dominating shared paths. Yet, enforcement on the ground remains the challenge. In Tengah, residents have raised concerns about riders whizzing past pedestrians, with near-miss collisions involving young children along Plantation Plaza's retail street. With our ageing population, we can expect more PMAs on our paths too. Doctors provide the vital role of diagnosis, ensuring medical conditions are properly identified. Physiotherapists, however, are the movement experts, the mobility experts. They specialise in biomechanics, gait analysis and functional rehabilitation.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to declare that I am a registered member of the Allied Health Professions Council, and my work involves accessing, treating and educating on disability. This Land Transport and Related Matters Bill is important for its impact on safeguarding lives and preparing our transport system for the future. Speeding remains one of the leading causes of fatal crashes. The mandatory speed limiter regime is necessary. I commend EnterpriseSG for stepping in with support, covering 50% of eligible costs for small and medium enterprises through the Productivity Solutions Grant. Yet, as of early January, more than 140 lorry owners had not complied. This is not a trivial figure. It points to real challenges in implementation. I would like to ask if the Government has identified the obstacles faced by these lorry owners. Where genuine difficulties exist, can more assistance be rendered? Safety should never be compromised because of affordability or administrative hurdles. Mr Deputy Speaker, fire tragedies involving AMDs have been unfolding in our estates, sometimes right at the doorsteps of our neighbours. Between 2022 and 2025, over 70% of such fires involved uncertified or illegally modified devices. The Bill rightly prohibits even the possession of non-UL2272 e-scooters. Yet, enforcement will be the true test. With thousands of devices in circulation and illegal spare parts easily available online, accountability must extend beyond users to the platforms that enable such risks. The question before us is this: how can enforcement be scaled sustainably across our estates? How can agencies work with communities to build awareness and vigilance?”
“Thank you, Speaker, and thank you to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the response. I have one supplementary question. Would the Ministry consider establishing benchmark ranges for agency fees based on prevailing market practices to prevent excessive charges and ensure affordability for families?”
“Thank you, Speaker. I have three supplementary questions. The first one, does the Ministry have dedicated outreach teams to proactively check on rough sleepers and follow up on reports from the public, so that timely assistance can be extended to the homeless? Question two, how does the Ministry assess whether there is sufficient shelter bed capacity and what mechanisms are in place to allow expansion when needed? The last question, what measures are in place to ensure that homeless individuals, particularly youth and young adults, are supported not only with housing, but also with employment opportunities, skills training and mental health services to sustain long-term stability?”
“Thank you, Speaker. And thank you, Senior Minister of State, for the assuring responses. I have one supplementary question. Tengah is Singapore's first town built entirely anew in over 20 years. Timely access to life-saving equipment, like AEDs, is critical. May I ask, what further measures can be implemented to strengthen emergency preparedness in Tengah while awaiting full AED deployment?”
“Finally, Mr Speaker, let me turn to the issue of data protection. Trust is the currency of healthcare. Patients must feel confident that their most sensitive information is safeguarded. Healthcare providers must report data breaches to MOH and affected individuals if the breaches result in significant harm. This is sensible for large-scale incidents. But what of smaller breaches, affecting 50, 100 or 200 people? May I seek the Minister's assurance on four points. First, all breaches, regardless of scale, must be assessed and remedied. The MOH's enforcement will take seriously even breaches affecting small numbers of people. Two, patients should be notified of significant breaches affecting any number of individuals. Three, repeated smaller breaches that reveal systemic vulnerabilities must trigger decisive corrective action. Four, patients should be able to view access logs for their records and flag suspicious activity to MOH. Citizen monitoring can be a powerful supplement to regulatory oversight. Mr Speaker, the HIB is a decisive step towards integrated, secure, patient-centric digital healthcare. With targeted support for community practitioners, robust data transition frameworks, enhanced support for AHPs and clear safeguards for smaller data breaches, this Bill can deliver genuine benefits while protecting patient privacy and maintaining trust. If we succeed, this Bill will not only strengthen our healthcare system but also deepen the confidence of Singaporeans in it. I support this Bill.”
“This would extend data sharing arrangements beyond public institutions, strengthening care continuity across the entire healthcare ecosystem. AHPs – physiotherapists, radiographers, occupational therapists, speech and language therapists and radiation therapists – play indispensable roles in patient care and should have access to relevant NEHR information. In particular, AHPs are crucial in managing chronic conditions, rehabilitation and preventive care in the community and outpatient settings. They need access to medication histories, adverse drug reactions, recent investigations and relevant diagnoses to deliver safe and effective care. For them, access to relevant NEHR information is not optional. It is essential. Yet, the stakeholder feedback indicates concerns about whether all AHPs will have equal access rights and whether sufficient safeguards exist to ensure they access only clinically relevant information for their specific roles. The Bill provides role-based access controls, ensuring AHPs can only access data relevant to their duties. This is appropriate. But I urge MOH to go further. First, establish clear practice guidelines for each AHP profession, specifying what NEHR data is relevant and when access is clinically justified. This removes ambiguity and supports professional judgement. Second, ensure that AHP associations are active partners in training and upskilling of their members on NEHR use, medico-legal responsibilities and safeguards. The MOH will publish guidelines on appropriate use of NEHR to address medico-legal concerns, but professional bodies should help manage implementation through their own continuing education programmes. If we want integrated care, we must empower every professional who contributes to it.”
“For them, NEHR integration can feel like a burden, even if its clinical value is clear. The Bill rightly provides support mechanisms: whitelisted NEHR-compatible systems and funding packages to defray onboarding and cybersecurity costs. These are welcome. However, as we move towards mandatory participation, we must ensure that implementation timelines are realistic. The Bill takes effect from 2027, providing healthcare providers time to adopt support measures and comply with requirements. But for some GPs and smaller practices, this may still be a tight timeline for them. I urge MOH to adopt a calibrated enforcement approach, working collaboratively with GPs to resolve technical challenges rather than defaulting to penalties. This is crucial for building a genuine partnership with community practitioners. May I ask how MOH will ensure it has sufficient technical professionals and resources on the ground to assist clinics in implementing these changes on time? The Bill rightly seeks to enable seamless data transition between Government hospitals and community healthcare partners. This is vital for the continuity of care as patients move from acute to community settings. This framework is sound. However, we must ensure that the data transition process is not merely technically compliant, but genuinely supportive of community-based practitioners. When a patient is discharged from a Government hospital, the community GP or AHP taking over care should receive comprehensive, timely, clinically relevant information. Further, as private community healthcare organisations mature in governance and systems, they should be progressively included in the Fourth Schedule of the Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to declare that I am a registered member of the Allied Health Professions Council, and my work involves accessing, treating and educating on disability. The HIB before us is a landmark piece of legislation. It establishes a robust legal framework for secure health information sharing across our healthcare ecosystem and this will shape the way Singapore delivers care for decades to come. This Bill is not just about technology or compliance. It is about trust – trust between patients and providers, between Government and citizens, and between institutions and the professionals who serve in them. It is essential for our transition from hospital-centric care to community-based care, particularly as we confront the twin challenges of an ageing population and the rising burden of chronic disease. Today, I would like to focus on these four areas: one, supporting community healthcare practitioners and GPs in onboarding to the NEHR system; two, improving data transition between Government hospitals and the community sector; three, strengthening support for allied health professionals (AHPs); and four, addressing patients' concerns about data protection thresholds and breach safeguards. The vision of "One Patient, One Health Record, One Care Journey" is compelling. But to realise it, we must ensure that practitioners outside hospital settings, especially GPs in smaller, independent practices, have adequate support to participate meaningfully. Today, most primary care clinics already contribute to NEHR. This is commendable progress. This is driven by Healthier SG's integration requirements. Yet we must acknowledge the realities. Many GPs operate with lean teams, limited administrative bandwidth and modest technical capacity.”
“To further enhance trust, I propose that the Government jointly maintain a public register of all use cases where health data has been shared under PSGA for non-health purposes. The register should specify the authorising Minister, the external partner, the general purpose and the categories of data shared, without disclosing sensitive operational details. Such a register, updated regularly, would reassure Singaporeans that health data sharing beyond healthcare delivery is tightly controlled, exceptional and subject to public oversight. On future-proofing safeguards, could Singapore explore privacy-preserving technologies, such as anonymisation, differential privacy or federated learning, to enable data-driven insights without exposing raw health records? These technologies are increasingly adopted worldwide to balance innovation with privacy. The PSGA amendments empower the Government to partner effectively with community organisations for public benefit. With robust safeguards – Ministerial authorisation, cybersecurity requirements, criminal penalties and mandatory consent for sensitive uses – health data can, indeed, be shared responsibly where genuine public interest exists. But transparency, accountability and public trust must remain at the heart of this framework. I support this Bill.”
“The Bill provides three layers of safeguards for data sharing with external partners – Ministerial authorisation, terms of use which impose data protection requirements and criminal penalties for misuse. The general concern is execution – how usage and safeguards are implemented on the ground. Safeguards on paper must translate into practice. Are agencies sufficiently resourced with trained personnel, secure infrastructure and modern cybersecurity tools to enforce these safeguards? We seek the Government’s assurance that appropriate funding and resources are allocated for talent, hardware and software. A particularly sensitive area involves requests for health information by public sector agencies for employment or insurance purposes. It is comforting to know that when public sector agencies request health information from MOH for employment or insurance purposes under PSGA, they must first seek consent from individuals and conduct a Personal Data Protection Impact Assessment. These requirements cannot be waived without consulting MOH. This is essential. The HIB prohibits NEHR access for employment or insurance purposes to prevent discrimination. It would undermine public trust if agencies could bypass this by requesting the same information under PSGA. I note that the Bill requires individual consent and a Personal Data Protection Impact Assessment for such requests, with MOH oversight. These are critical backstops. But I urge the Government to go further – commit that such requests will be rare and exceptional, subject them to close scrutiny and independent review, and publish annual reports detailing the number and nature of such requests to ensure transparency and accountability.”
“Mr Speaker, I rise to speak on the Public Sector (Governance) (Amendment) Bill, with particular focus on its interaction with the forthcoming HIB, and the implications of health data being used by public sector agencies and external partners for non-health purposes. The PSGA establishes the overarching framework for data governance across public agencies, including provisions for sharing health data beyond clinical care – for policy planning, service delivery and community outreach. In contrast, the HIB is designed to safeguard health data primarily for healthcare delivery. The intersection of these two regimes raises important questions about scope, safeguards and accountability. The foremost concern among Singaporeans is the extent to which sensitive health data will be shared under the PSGA and whether safeguards are sufficiently robust to prevent misuse. Residents want assurance that their most personal information – medical histories, disabilities, mental health records – will not be casually accessed or repurposed. The Government has rightly identified legitimate scenarios. For instance MSF may share health risk indicators and demographic data with SG Enable and SSAs to proactively reach out to people with disabilities for job-matching and to our seniors for caregiver support. Such proactive outreach is commendable – it improves lives, strengthens preventive care and ensures that vulnerable groups are not left behind. Yet, these examples also underscore the sensitivity of health data being used for social policy, community outreach and service coordination. The line between beneficial use and overreach must be carefully guarded.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Acting Minister for his response. Tengah is Singapore's first town built entirely anew in 20-plus years and ensuring strong connectivity is key to its success. As residents settle in, improving road access, even on a trial basis, these can greatly enhance daily convenience and support a smoother transition as longer-term transport infrastructure is built. My supplementary question is, would the Ministry consider implementing a pilot scheme to open Tengah Link during selected off-peak hours, with close monitoring of its impact on both traffic flow and bus service efficiency?”