Denise Phua Lay Peng
Singapore
“Sir, as Singapore ages, disability and ageing will increasingly overlap. The line between disability services and elder care services will blur. Many adults with disabilities face similar challenges as seniors in varying degrees, but at a younger age.”
“But the SPED schools are run by a lot of the other professionals as well such as occupational therapists, speech pathologists, psychologists, coaches and so forth. And I ask for MOE, as it always looks at SPED educators, to also focus on this other very important group; because retention is capacity.”
“Are there other strategies that the Prime Minister will consider, like easier adoption procedures to have more people adopt, more of us Singaporeans adopting? The second is, in terms of immigration as well, to bring in people who are of the right profile and suitable profile to grow our Singaporean population?”
“Enterprise grants should include accessibility compliance requirements. Inclusion cannot rely on goodwill alone. It must be systemically built-in. And finally, move five: on strengthening intermediaries and social service agencies (SSAs). Sir, if AI is to be whole-of-society, then SSAs cannot be left behind.”
“When SSAs become AI-enabled, the most vulnerable of us benefit. In conclusion Sir, Budget 2026 sets an ambitious direction: AI ecosystems, SkillsFuture strengthening, innovation hubs such as Lorong AI and the future AI Park at one-north. Ambition is necessary, but it is execution that determines whether progress is shared.”
“I thank the Minister of State for her assurance, assuring the House that there are indeed alternative identification methods available for those who are unable to use facial recognition. Just a couple of supplementary questions. Number one, are these measures systemic and applicable for all fully digital or not fully digital banks?”
The complete record
Every one of 1,094 lines we hold for Denise Phua Lay Peng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 22.
“It is timely, therefore, to explicitly codify into law the employer's positive duty to provide reasonable accommodation – and to recognise that failure to do so is an act of discrimination. Employers should also be guided by a clear, illustrative list of accommodations: for a wheelchair user, not just a ramp, but also an adjustable desk; for a worker with visual impairment, screen-reading software and braille safety signs. By legislating this duty, we move the workplace culture from a defensive "Why should I?" to a collaborative "How can we?" – unlocking the full potential of our diverse and capable workforce. Lastly, Pillar 4 for improvement: prevent harm – conduct proactive fairness audits. A fair system should stop discrimination before it happens – not fix it after people are hurt. We should ask all medium and large employers to carry out regular Workplace Fairness Audits. These audits should look at how employees are hired, promoted, retained and developed across groups such as age, gender and disability, and publish anonymised findings. The purpose of this is to build a culture of transparency and trust, not fear. It helps companies spot and correct hidden biases early, so disputes become a last resort instead of the only way to seek fairness. It shifts our approach from punishing unfairness to building fairness right from the start. In conclusion, Sir, the Workplace Fairness Bill represents a historic step toward a fairer Singaporean labour landscape. By consolidating dispute resolution into a single, statutory pathway, it aims to provide clarity and accessibility. However, Bill does not fully level the playing field; it merely provides a better-defined one on which the inherent disadvantages of the vulnerable employee still play out.”
“Yet today, the burden still falls on the employee to request reasonable accommodation – and for many, that very burden becomes the barrier that excludes them. Sir, the current response by Government to call for a clear roadmap on mandating reasonable accommodation has been to "focus on education – to strengthen understanding and support first." But education has already been ongoing for nearly two decades. The Open Door Fund, for example – now the Open Door Programme – was established as early as 2007. SG Enable and the Enabling Employment Credit have done extensive work to educate and support employers to hire persons with disabilities. Singapore has had years of employer education. It is now time to take the next step – to legislate the duty to provide reasonable accommodation. Many employers have already demonstrated what inclusion in action looks like. At the Art Bar, a collaboration with Starbucks, two employees with autism, Salihin and Caleb, have worked as skilled baristas for almost a decade. Clear signage, visual support, structured routines help them carry out their tasks confidently and independently. Some of you here, including our Senior Minister, was already a customer had witnessed their skills. Another example, Siew Leng, who is deaf and blind, has been with her organisation SG Enable for over 12 years. She uses a refreshable braille display to read documents and emails, and her colleagues assist with phone calls when needed. These same accommodations enable her to remain productive and valued. There are many, many more examples – across both blue, white new collar jobs, silver jobs – documented by the various organisations such as SG Enable and their Job Placement and Job Support agencies, partners such as SPD, ARC and MINDS.”
“" By simplifying the process, we can transform what is now an intimidating and legalistic system into one that is clear, compassionate, and navigable – empowering every worker, especially the most vulnerable, to take that first step towards fairness and dignity with confidence. Pillar 2 for improvement: empower the voice – introduce an "Appropriate Adult" scheme in the process. No vulnerable worker should ever have to face their employer alone in a formal setting. The imbalance of power in such situations can silence even the most legitimate claims. We must give them a voice and ensure that their dignity and rights are protected throughout the process. To achieve this, we should legally entrench the right for vulnerable workers to have a trained, independent advocate present during all proceedings – from internal meetings and mediations to hearings throughout the resolution process. This advocate, modelled after the successful "Appropriate Adult" scheme in the UK and in a sense, also implemented already in Singapore for the disabled could be a union officer, a social worker, or disability specialist equipped to support the worker appropriately. The advocate's role is not to speak on behalf of the worker, but to ensure that the worker is heard. The advocate helps prevent coercion, translate complex language and provide emotional and procedural support. In doing so, we balance the scales of power and make the process fairer, more humane and more inclusive for all. Pillar 3 for improvement: mandate inclusion – legislate the duty for reasonable accommodation. Merely banning discrimination is not enough. That is a passive act. True inclusion requires proactive effort.”
“Mediation is also a high-pressure process. Vulnerable workers who lack independent advice are at a clear disadvantage. They may feel compelled to accept unfair settlements or give up valid claims because the process feels too difficult or intimidating. Concern number three: the burden of proof. It is the employee's responsibility to prove that discrimination occurred. This is often quite difficult, especially for vulnerable workers who may not have the resources or skills to collect evidence – such as emails or witness statements – when facing a well-resourced, more resourced employer. Next, let me propose four pillars for improvement, for a truly accessible Workplace Fairness Act. Sir, to ensure this Bill is a transformative tool for justice and not just a procedural formality, we must build it upon four foundational pillars. Pillar 1: simplify the path – make the grievance process truly accessible. Today, the grievance process remains a maze of complex forms and legalistic language. For a vulnerable worker, this maze can feel like a solid wall standing in the way of justice. We must tear down this wall and make the path to redress more accessible. To do so, employers should be required to provide grievance procedures written in plain and simple language and made available in needed multiple languages and accessible formats – including large print, braille, and audio versions. MOM and TAFEP should also work together to design clear, user-friendly complaint forms and visual flowcharts that guide workers step by step, helping them answer a fundamental question: "Have I been treated unfairly, and what should I do next?”
“Thank you, Sir, for allowing the third Jalan Besar MP to speak consecutively. Speaker, Sir, the Workplace Fairness Bill 2025 provides a more robust shield against discrimination than what previously existed. For many, the Bill's greatest gift is clarity and a structured, state-supported initial pathway for dispute resolution. The anti-retaliation clause and the focus on mediation are foundational steps that can genuinely encourage more individuals to step forward. I would like to speak up for the vulnerable. The proposed law, while empowering in theory, however, does pose significant challenges for employees who are vulnerable; such as those with disabilities, those who are of advanced age, or with low education. There are challenges that could prevent some of these vulnerable employees or potential employees from accessing its protections. For the law to be truly effective, it must be made accessible, enforceable and empathetic. Let me list a few key concerns here and propose four pillars for improvement. Concern one: inaccessible process for some. Under this Bill, the grievance system may be complex and inaccessible for some. Vulnerable employees may struggle to navigate procedures, articulate complaints, or understand their rights, creating a gap between the law's existence and its practical use. Concern two: the tribunal hurdle. The ECT is meant to be simple and accessible but still remains a legal forum. Legal representation, already often costly, is not allowed, and only union members can be represented by their unions. For many, handling their own cases is unrealistic. Tasks such as preparing claims, collecting evidence, digital or otherwise, conducting cross-examinations can be overwhelming for those without legal knowledge or digital skills.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for the response. I first want to thank all the agencies' officers on the ground, from the Police from SLA, from the National Environment Agency (NEA), from MSF, and even the grassroots who look after the ground there. Because indeed the area that is along the Waterloo Mall, where lots of temples are, is a very popular place for peddling, legal or not legal, and also for begging as well. But because of the bullying and assault episodes, they often involve the vulnerable, both bullies and the bullied. SPF tends to adopt a light touch, I guess for worry of public criticisms. I just want to know what can the Ministry do more of to support these officers so that we can protect the interests of especially those who are bullied, and also seek the understanding of the public, even if the bullies are themselves vulnerable or disabled. Bullying is bullying. Assault is assault. So, I wonder if more support and understanding for things that can be done to seek more support from the public so that the police officers can do their job even more effectively.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State. My supplementary question is this: whether the Ministry and other Government agencies as well would seriously adopt the principle of universal design in the designing of services and their products and other offerings as well? The old model of design is really to accommodate, which is to design, for example, a standard vehicle, for average, then, after the pilot, add on as an afterthought, features for special groups, which can be costly and also can be clumsy. The universal design mindset really suggests that from day one, designers, policy-makers and operators actually consider a larger audience, the overall users and then add in features – accessibility and inclusivity features – that will benefit, in this case, not just the disabled and the elderly, but also users with baby prams, heavy luggage or even trolleys. So, my supplementary question is therefore, would agencies, including Ministry of Transport, SMRT already does quite a bit of that, adopt this mindset and philosophy of universal design?”
“I thank the Minister for her response and for mentioning that the survey findings are based on perceptions. Indeed, perception, sometimes, they say, is reality unless we clarify or correct them. So, I have two supplementary questions and based on the remarks that are made by the directors from IMD. One is under the pillar of investments and development. I am baffled why the report cites that we have low education investment, when education is actually known to be one of the highest items in our Annual Budget. And especially, I wonder if the report has considered factors, like the hefty investments that we have made in adults' continued training and education in SkillsFuture, and so forth. And also, at the same time, a director from IMD mentioned that Singapore has done more than enough, despite the so-called "relatively low" education investment. So, that is one. The second supplementary question pertains to the pillar of appeal. The report also cited that, because organisations are relocating to relatively low-cost countries in, especially near our neighbouring countries, it claims that companies, therefore, could get a similar quality workforce for a much lower price in these countries. And I would like to hear the Minister's comment on this, whether that is, indeed, true or is it just a comment on Singapore?”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State. I am not sure if there were actually proactive preventive maintenance, even before COVID-19, but I will trust the Senior Minister of State for her answer. But first, I want to express my gratitude to HDB's rental headquarters department at Sims Drive for being really supportive to all my appeals so far. But as I – and I think other Members of Parliament as well – conduct house-to-house visits, I often see rental flats in conditions that are concerning: jammed gates, spoiled windows, bad peeling paint, and so on. And I wonder if there can be some urgency and to provide also more resources to the HDB rental team so that they can expedite their plans to provide more proactive, preventive maintenance for these rental flats.”
“I thank the Minister of State for the direct answer. I was asking this question on behalf of a resident and members of the Breast Cancer Foundation. I am not sure if what the Minister of State has just said is actually communicated and also practised on the ground. So, I will appreciate if that could be done, so that they have less concerns while already going through a lot of anxieties due to their medical conditions.”
“It is shaped by the agenda and the choices that we make as the people of Singapore. We have done this before and we will do it again, and together we will move from a society of fear to a nation of hope.”
“I have seen this approach work brilliantly also for non-special needs kids in home-based education systems. With AI, we can extend this to every Singaporean through a personalised learning plan that guides lifelong growth far beyond the classroom, into every stage of life. And third, ensure equal access to lifelong learning. Today, students with special needs benefit from our strong special education schools thanks to our political and Government leaders. But when they graduate, many face a devastating learning cliff. We have the school-to-work programmes, but they are transitional steps that last only a few years – a good, sincere attempt by SG Enable will need more visioning and resources. Ahead of our citizens with special needs, lies 50 to 60 years of life too often without structured opportunities to keep growing and learning, not acceptable for an inclusive society. We must re-imagine and revamp the continuum of learning, ensuring that they, too, have access to personalised and future-ready skills through lifelong learning centres. Sir, by building a skills-based economy, personalised learning with AI and ensuring that no one is left behind, we can supercharge a culture of lifelong learning for all. Finally, in conclusion, Sir, I began my speech today by sharing some common fears of Singaporeans. These fears are real, but they are not our fate. I have suggested three ways we can turn these fears into hope, by ensuring that AI remains a servant to humanity, by updating our safety nets for a new age and by supercharging lifelong learning. But let us be clear, we are not passive bystanders in this era of change. We are its architects. The future does not simply happen to us. It is built by us.”
“That vision of the school for the future is important. But there are now, a few ways that we can do to reach the lifelong learning ecosystem that is fit-for-purpose for the future. One, build a true skills-based economy. A broader definition of success means valuing skills and competence as much as, if not more than academic qualifications. We need to review the current playbook in this space. As long as academic qualifications or certificates remain the default currency for school entry and hiring, Singaporeans, parents will rationally contribute or continue to chase them; to chase these paper qualifications and the pressures will cascade down into high-stakes exams. How many times do you have the experience that I have, when I ask a parent, "How old is your child?" And the parent says, "PSLE year." I have spoken long about through-train, 10-year through-train and whether PSLE is still relevant or not, many times in this house, but again, that is for another occasion. Today, coming back to building a skills-based economy, we need to create a labour market where employers, including the public sector, recognises competencies and experience and pay for them. And that includes recognising the value of jobs, what they call blue-collar jobs, such as our plumbers, our technicians, our rail technicians and our MRT technicians, our repair technicians and other blue-collared workers. Next, on supercharging a lifelong learning culture. We should personalise learning for every citizen. AI can now make personalised learning possible at scale, providing rich and timely feedback. This principle is not new. Special education has long used individualised education plans (IEPs) to tailor learning to each child.”
“We should conduct a comprehensive review of the Silver Support scheme, too, to ensure its parameters align with the original objective of providing a safety net. This review must account for contemporary economic pressures, such as inflation and longer life expectancy, to guarantee that that the payouts remain sufficient. And third, to install an affordability assurance body. Rising costs are on everybody's mind. Think of this affordability assurance body like the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) for essentials: monitoring daily cost of food, utilities, healthcare, transport and triggering automatic action when thresholds are crossed. Move from reacting after the fact to at least guarantee or ensuring affordability upfront. Sir, by innovating more boldly, Singaporeans can be more assured that no matter the disruption the basics of life will remain within reach. And lastly, on supercharging our culture of lifelong learning. SkillsFuture was a visionary beginning. But now in its 10th year, we must propel it beyond a Government programme into a lifelong habit embraced by every Singaporean. This vision resonates with the direction outlined by Minister Desmond Lee at MOE's Work Plan seminar recently, where the Minister spoke not only about AI in schools, but also about creating a lifelong learning ecosystem, fostering a broader definition of success and meeting the needs of learners who are different. Visionary Chinese education thinker, Prof Zhu Yongxing argues that the school of the future will, in fact, evolve from what is the traditional classroom into a network of open, flexible student-centred learning centres, breaking down the barriers of time, space, age and institutional structures. I will talk about that hopefully in a speech next year.”
“These have served us well in an economy where jobs were relatively stable, careers linear and disruption more gradual. But technologies, like AI, change that equation. AI has not only automated tasks, it will reconfigure entire industries. The churn will be faster. This is an economy and age where work is fragmented, transitions frequent and inequality risks are sharper. A safety net in this new age must be more than a cushion. It must be portable, following workers across jobs and platforms; preventive, addressing health and skills before crisis strike; and adaptive, responding as automatically as possible to economic shocks. The task before us is not to abandon the pillars of CPF, MediSave, SkillsFuture and all the good things, but to adapt them for an economy such as this. Two suggestions on how we can start. One, on expanding protection. Let us protect those who are most vulnerable to economic shifts – our freelancers, our gig economy workers and those in non-traditional employment. Their contribution to the new economy must be matched with a commitment to their security. For the larger population, accelerate the move towards portable benefits, like healthcare and insurance. They are tied to the individual and not the employer, providing a foundation of security in a world of fluid work. And second, enhance retirement adequacy. The CPF LIFE system, which I think is brilliant, provides a secure retirement for members with substantial savings. However, a segment of the population, particularly those with irregular employment histories, remains financially vulnerable in their old age. We should develop targeted measures to augment the CPF savings of individuals who are not on track to meet their retirement needs, not just those who qualify for Silver Support.”
“Can some businesses deliberately choose not to automate every routine job, but instead preserve some roles for older workers and persons with disabilities? These are ways by which they can continue to contribute meaningfully, earn a livelihood and even engage socially outside their homes. L'Oréal, a renowned cosmetic powerhouse company, once operated a special packaging and assembly facility in Taiwan dedicated to employing people with disabilities. That primary mission was social, not purely commercial and industrial. It is to provide meaningful, stable and supportive employment for people with various physical and developmental disabilities. It was a counter-intuitive move for business, I know. But L'Oreal set its own agenda and did it their own way. That programme was later successfully merged into a larger facility to expand its impact and also promote greater inclusivity. And to the community, I say this: volunteer your expertise, advocate for accessibility. People like Mr Peter Ng, an IT specialist in Kreta Ayer-Kim Seng, for instance, have for years, coached seniors like his mother and her neighbours on using smartphones and the common apps that they should know. That sustainable, community-driven help is the model that we should commend and need. Therefore, the is not if AI will advance, but what kind of society we will become. So, we must intentionally choose inclusive progress. Let us ensure AI is a lifeline for all, and a landmine for none. Second, on updating our safety net for this new age. Singapore has built one of the most admired social safety nets in the world, anchored on the Central Provident Fund (CPF), MediSave, housing subsidies, transfers, SkillsFuture and progressive social transfers.”
“We can set our own agenda, based on our value of inclusive progress, to always put aside a buffer resource for Singaporeans who are in that transitionary generation. We can intentionally: one, fund human-centric services, maintaining in-person assistance when it is needed – phone hotlines and even printed CDC vouchers, as long as there are citizens in our midst who cannot catch up. These measures are not regressive. They are a vital lifeline of inclusion, especially in essential services like healthcare, security, transport, legal and so forth. And two, we should mandate inclusive design, require that every public-sector AI system complies with the highest accessibility standards. I saw the Government Technology Agency (GovTech) doing that as there was an exhibition at the hall, in Parliament last year. We can adopt universal design at the start and not as an afterthought. I have raised questions in this House on the ways Government agencies what measures they have for those who are not digitally-savvy. The responses have been inconsistent, practices more inconsistent. And recently, I found out that autonomous shuttles are designed without wheelchaired users in mind. Sir, we can do better and mandate inclusive design. But closing this gap is not the duty of the Government alone. To businesses, I say, adopt inclusive design, universal design at the start. Proactively ensure your services are also accessible. Create solutions that blend technology with the human touch. For example, banks that still provide personal counter services for seniors should not be rare exceptions. They should be commended. These should be the industry standard until there is no need for it. And here is a challenge.”
“Sir, allow me to propose three steps we can take: one, ensure that AI serves humanity and not the other way around; two, update our social and financial safety nets for this new age; and three, supercharge a culture of lifelong learning. First, to ensure AI serves humanity and not the other way around. The sword of AI is double-edged. There is no denying the breathtaking opportunities it presents. Yet, we must also confront the risks with equal honesty. Automation is already displacing routine-intense jobs. I know this because I am always looking for jobs for some of our disabled and elderly. AI is also hollowing our middle skills and creating barriers for those less digitally-literate. Today, this exclusion is starkly visible in Singapore. We see it as Neighbourhood Police Posts are shuttered and replaced with digital kiosks. We see it as services in public and private sectors close their customer-facing counters, forcing transactions online, leaving the less digitally-literate to find their own way. I was recently told by a healthcare worker, a volunteer of mine, that medical follow-ups must now be booked exclusively through an app. For many, this is not convenience; it is a barrier. In our economy, this fracture manifests in the rapid automation of routine jobs, leaving behind seniors and persons with disabilities who struggle to navigate a world increasingly alien to them. The Government can and must lead this mission with compassion and foresight. Technological revolution is not new. It is a constant of human progress, in every generation. But every such revolution risks marginalising a segment of the population. But as a Government, we do not have to decide that it is just too bad for them.”
“I rise to support the Motion of Thanks for President Tharman's address. My topic today is moving our society from fear to hope. But first, let us acknowledge the fears of our time. At work, many of us worry: will technology especially AI threaten our jobs? Will it displace more jobs than it creates? Will we be qualified for the new "good" jobs? What happens to those who cannot catch up – some of the elderly, the disabled and those who are less skilled? As a small nation, our survival depends on global stability and open trade – the rule of law. But what now, as these foundations weaken? As we live longer, will our savings last? For households already stretched, how will they endure the next disruption? At home, the questions get more personal. What if my child does not do well in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE)? Who will care for my ageing parents? Will our children have the same, or better, opportunities? Parents of children with disabilities ask: who will care and provide for them when we are gone? These fears are not weaknesses. They are signs that we care deeply for our future and the home we have built. They mean we are invested and not ready to quit. We can let these fears turn us inwards, making us suspicious of change and leading to paralysis or blame, or we can choose a different path. We can choose, as spiritual thinker Henri Nouwen urged, to move from fear to hope. We must not let the world set our agenda. We must decide as a people. What questions do we want to answer? What values will guide us? Our shared destiny surely must be built on our shared values. A central part of this is AI. How do we turn collective anxiety into collective agency and how do we build the bridge from fear to hope?”
“Last word. Autism Resource Centre's high model at the Enabling Village. What is the continuum?”
“And second is, is there a continuum from the work front, or what are the continuum of working models from sheltered workshops like —”
“Thank you, Chairman. I am very thankful for all the good work that is done by the Ministry. And I can see that our society and Government is one with heart. Two questions. One is regarding the many people with good intent who support the ground, whether grassroots or donors or volunteers, and so forth. So, I find that on the ground, many of them pounce, in a positive way, on especially families in rental blocks, with food, service, bags, school shoes and everything. But is there a way that we can better coordinate all these efforts on the ground without discouraging them but encouraging them as well? So, that is my first question. My second one is to do with adults with disabilities. I think at a macro level, as I have mentioned in my Committee of Supply speech, there is really a need to clarify, develop and communicate a continuum of the models, whether in living, working or learning. Mainly because it is just such a diverse spectrum of population. I know that some work has been done, but instead of mentioning things that are maybe more programme-centric, we can really show the community that there is a spectrum and there is a way by which people can be more proactive in assessing their needs, deciding on what models they do, and maybe even work together to develop these models together. So, on that note, I would like to ask Senior Parliamentary Secretary because he talked about sheltered workshops and day activity centres for those with higher support needs. I just want to know how many have participated in these centres. Number two, what is the progress and outlook of these centres, knowing that they are catering to higher needs, and it is not so porous, not so easy to progress.”
“The Ministry should also clarify and communicate the continuum of employment models available to PwDs, their families and other stakeholders so as to enable them to make informed decisions about the most suitable employment model. Lastly, expand beyond the School-To-Work scheme. While the School-To-Work scheme by MOE for recent SPED school graduates is a good initiative, the earliest SPED graduates and mainstream graduates with special educational needs are often overlooked. I urge the Government to allocate resources to address that gap and ensure that no one is excluded. Finally, I just want to thank MSF, all its agencies and all its partners as well for their good work. The "cliff effect" is not inevitable. I look forward to serving with you to support the disability community. Strategy for Inclusive Employment”
“During the recent Workplace Fairness Bill discussion, I proposed the creation of a job accommodation network – a resource to guide employers in implementing reasonable accommodations and to empower PwDs themselves with self-advocacy skills. This would help them balance their needs with employers' business constraints. While MOM may have other priorities, I really urge the Ministry to work with its partners to take the lead on this initiative. Two, extend job placement and job support for PwDs. The current Job Placement and Job Support Programme provides support for only one year. This is not sufficient as PwDs often require long-term assistance to navigate workplace challenges. Stopping support after one year is akin to removing eyeglasses from someone with myopia, leaving them unable to see clearly. Some of these groups really need longer support. Three, develop a SkillsFuture masterplan for PwDs. In a rapidly changing job market, relevance is key. Jobs that exist today may disappear tomorrow and PwDs must be equipped with the skills to adapt. Sir, I urge the Government, its Job Placement and Job Support Programme partners and industry leaders to develop a SkillsFuture masterplan for PwDs – a robust framework to help them upskill, reskill and remain competitive. Four, include sheltered workshops as part of a continuum of employment models. Sheltered workshops hold strong potential as a viable employment model. It is actually less costly than the Day Activity Centres and it offers a more focused and purposeful alternative to Day Activity Centres, which can be costly and lack an emphasis on work. So, more sheltered workshops should be established.”
“Instead, we need a spectrum of residential models to suit different archetypes. On learning, on the learning front, the situation is also equally urgent. When asked about continuing education for PwDs yesterday, the Ministry of Education (MOE) has indicated that MSF and SG Enable will take the lead, citing the diverse and complex needs of this population. While this is understandable, the reality is that many Government-funded Special Education (SPED) students stop learning altogether after leaving school, largely due to that proverbial "cliff effect". This abrupt decline in structured training opportunities leads to skill loss, reduced independence and increased burdens on families and society. The problem is compounded in a world where technology is rapidly disrupting all our lives. Lifelong learning, therefore, is not a luxury, but a necessity. I urge the Government to commission a comprehensive study to address this "cliff effect" and consider adopting a top-up funding model for adult learners with special educational needs, closer to the support that they receive pre-age 18. Additionally, I propose the establishment of lifelong learning colleges for major disability groups, partnering with social service agencies that have a proven track record in this space. Disability – Inclusive Employment On work, why work matters. Work provides dignity, identity, financial independence and purpose. With proper training and support, PwDs can contribute meaningfully to workplaces and society. Sir, I wish to propose five actions for the Ministry to promote inclusive employment. One, prioritise reasonable accommodations at work.”
“Chairman, I thank our Prime Minister for signalling his support to look into the needs of persons with disabilities (PwDs), especially after formal schooling. Why does the community especially families, feel such despair, especially post-age 18? The answer lies in the lack of continuity in support systems – what is often termed as the "cliff effect" in the disability sector. Families are left to navigate a fragmented landscape. So, how can we shift families from a place of helplessness to a place of hope? The solution lies in creating a continuum of support models across living, learning and working – three key pillars of life. I am pleased that the Ministry has introduced three key initiatives: the Enabling Services Hub, the Enabling Business Hub and the Enabled Living Programme. These programmes aim to make community, employment and living support more accessible to PwDs. Both the Enabling Services Hub and the Enabling Business Hub have been operational for some time. I urge the MSF to provide some updates on their current status, achievements, challenges and future plans. I also seek MSF to share the progress of the Enabled Living Programme. Next, the truth is that the needs of adults with disabilities are diverse. Some require intensive round-the-clock care while others need much less support to build independent living skills. This diversity therefore calls for a continuum of support models tailored to individual needs. On living, one of the most pressing gaps is the lack of long-term residential options for adults with disabilities. While I applaud MSF's openness to exploring an Enabled Living Programme for those with mild to moderate needs, we must move beyond programme-centric approaches.”
“Sir, through-train school models from primary to secondary school levels are not new concepts and if run well, can be successful. So, I accept that Singapore's starting point and our culture are different. And I know MOE had mulled over my suggestion. But with due respect to the Minister, what is it about Singapore that a through-train school model, without PSLE – we have such good features like Full Subject-Based Banding and regular assessments already – cannot be adapted or adopted and scaled in Singapore? What is so special about us that we cannot do this so that we can free up more time for the development of the 21st century skills that MOE proposes?”
“Madam, on physical wellness education, MOE's Desired Outcomes of Education emphasise healthy habits and physical activity for primary and secondary school students, with post-secondary students expected to "pursue a healthy lifestyle". However, many healthy habits formed in school, if at all, do not carry over into adulthood. Could MOE clarify if there are metrics to measure the success of physical health education? If so, what are these metrics and outcomes? If not, are there plans to strengthen the link between school physical health education and healthy adult lifestyles? On mental wellness education, over the past years, we have constantly spoken in this House about supporting the mental health of Singaporeans. This is important because we have seen that Singaporeans consistently rank one of the highest in stress levels around the world. Besides families, schools play a part in addressing this issue. I am concerned that our schools might take a "medical model" approach to mental health, in which students' mental health struggles are seen as problems to be fixed quickly rather than fostering lifelong stress management skills, with our varied personalities. Could MOE provide an update on mental health education in schools? What are the expected outcomes and what future plans are being considered to strengthen mental wellness education to achieve these outcomes? Parenting for Wellness”
“— GeBiz, or Demand Aggregated Vendor Lists to reduce their administrative burdens and improve efficiency? So, in conclusion, Madam, Singapore is at the forefront of creating a future-ready education system that empowers every individual. If any nation can turn this vision into reality, I believe, it is Singapore. So, thank you, MOE. PSLE and Class Sizes”
“How can stakeholders like the mainstream schools, IHLs, MOE's own special needs department, special education needs department and disability-focused SSAs and SPED schools even, improve knowledge sharing and best practices to strengthen support? Let me also talk about SEN students in SPED schools. SPED students often need more time to master foundational skills for living, learning and working. Their need for lifelong learning is critical as technology transforms our world. However, the "cliff effect" – where support drops drastically after age 18 – stops progress for many of the adult learners with disabilities. This leads to skills loss, reduced independence, and increased burdens on families and society. Can the Government commission a study to seriously address – study this "cliff-effect" and address the gaps thereof – and even adopt a top-up funding model for SEN adult learners, mirroring what was given before age 18? Additionally, SPED leaders face overwhelming administrative workloads due to numerous policies and reporting requirements. While I appreciate MOE's increased support over the years, and I really think they are very good people in MOE for this, I urge a review to limit policies and reports to only the essentials and also to streamline processes. Could SPED schools tap on public-sector systems – the good ones, like Form.gov.sg —”
“For adults, could every Singaporean gain access to formal skills development planning and coaching, not just those who are job-seeking? Could we also adopt achievable targets, like the 10,000-step health goal, to cultivate a habit of continuous learning? For instance, some multinational corporations (MNCs) I know set self-driven training goals, in terms of hours or programmes for their staff. Could this be explored and also scaled nationally? Barrier two – on new literacies. A future-ready education must address technological disruptions, especially by artificial intelligence (AI). Nations and companies are already leveraging AI to transform education. So, I seek MOE's clarification on two points. What is the new literacy curriculum for learners in this age of rapid technological advancement? Two, how can we ensure that our learners become originators of ideas, not just consumers or managers of AI outputs and risk undermining development of their own critical and creative thinking skills? Barrier three – on students with special educational needs (SEN). First, let me talk about SEN students in mainstream schools and IHLs. Over 80% of our students with mild to moderate SEN are in mainstream schools, necessitating robust support systems. Beyond academics, they need life skills to navigate living and working, especially post-school. So, while initiatives like SEN officers and learning support offices are very commendable and I really appreciate it, current support does seem to fall short. So, may I ask MOE what feedback has been received on the current support model for SEN students in mainstream schools and IHLs? Are there gaps to be addressed? What is MOE's future plan in this space? What does it look like?”
“Madam, Singapore's MOE has made remarkable progress in building a future-ready education system for all. No other country has invested so heavily or innovated so rapidly in education. Minister Chan Chun Sing himself has painstakingly championed a broader definition of success and lifelong learning, but three significant barriers could hinder this vision. Barrier one – on mindset. Despite MOE's efforts, many parents remain fixated on academic excellence or results, particularly excelling in exams, such as the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE), to secure spots in what they perceived as, "better" schools. Similarly, adults are also under-utilising SkillsFuture programmes. The greatest challenge lies in shifting mindsets to value diverse pathways to success and prioritise lifelong learning. Minister Chan Chun Sing himself has rightly pointed out that systemic changes alone are not sufficient without cultural shifts. But since MOE has done as much as it deems possible, systemically, what additional plans are there in place to foster a mindset shift? Or is such a shift even possible? Could removing the PSLE, a high-stake examination, and introducing a 10-year integrated programme from primary to secondary school level help to remove one hotspot or hotpoint, and maybe free time to also work on other important attributes and skills that support our future education model? I have brought up this topic of removing PSLE and through-train integrated programmes for years now. But I think we need a deeper dive on this. It is no longer a question of removing PSLE or not, through-train or not. May I ask MOE to share what operational obstacles do exist, and are these obstacles insurmountable?”
“These steps would enhance inclusivity and support for private estate residents. A Vibrant and Liveable Sengkang”
“Chairman, Sir, I look after residents in several private estates in Jalan Besar GRC and wish to speak on their behalf. I appreciate that all Singaporeans, whether residing in public or private estates, benefit from the Government's efforts in national and civil defence, infrastructure, public transport, education, healthcare and other essential services. Housing type, of course, often serves as a proxy for resource allocation, especially for lower-income families with limited assets. However, when addressing issues like ageing, sustainability and recognising citizens' contributions, it is crucial to include private estate residents. I appreciate the Government’s responsiveness to us MPs in advocating for these residents, ensuring their inclusion in initiatives like the Merdeka and Pioneer Generations Packages, Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers, MND's EASE programme, Climate Vouchers and SG60 Vouchers. 6.00 pm Private estate living offers advantages such as higher asset values, greater privacy and renovation flexibility, but it also comes with challenges, including self-management responsibilities. How can MND assist elderly residents in private estates to better age in place? For condominiums managing individual procurements, can MND facilitate sharing best practice in procurements in property management and maintenance? Could a dedicated agency mediate disputes between residents and Management Councils (MCs) to ensure fair and timely resolutions? How can the Government incentivise private condos to adopt sustainable practices, such as energy-efficient lighting or water-saving measures? Lastly, how can MND ensure residents have direct access to updated community news and opportunities to participate in social initiatives for all ages?”
“Chairman, NS is indispensable to Singapore, given our unique challenges as a small nation with no natural resources. The invasion of Ukraine and the current challenges it is still facing, has further underscored the importance of a strong defence. It is through NS that we maintain the peace and security we enjoy today, ensuring that our nation is prepared, capable, and ready to defend our sovereignty when necessary. At its core, the strength of our defence lies in our people. What has MINDEF done to continue to inspire our servicemen in its important mission? What has MINDEF done over the past year to recognise and appreciate the efforts of our servicemen? Additionally, family support plays a vital role in the success of NS. Families provide emotional stability and strength, helping servicemen navigate the challenges of their NS journey. Facilities like SAFRA offer recreational, social, and educational activities for NSmen and their families, fostering a supportive environment and giving them a sense of belonging to the bigger NS family. As we move forward, are there further improvements or enhancements that Singaporeans can look forward to in SAFRA facilities for our servicemen and their families? Making National Service Value-accretive”
“In his SG60 messages, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong has called upon Singaporeans to actively become a part of community solutioning – to care and share, to look beyond themselves. Sir, to better organise and scale community efforts so that more lives can be impacted, positively impacted, I think Government could lend support to establishing a more systematic approach to identify ground concerns and opportunities to serve, to allocate some resources and providing inputs, therefore providing inputs also to policymakers and potential funders. By empowering community-driven solutions and providing some essential support, we can address pressing issues more effectively and inclusively – and not have everything done by Government which sometimes may be good or not so good. In summary, Sir, I have brought up three areas for Government to further deep dive into: one, accelerating upskilling and job transformation in the age of AI; two, better safeguard the vulnerable groups and businesses; and three, empowering and facilitating more community-driven solutions for skill and for more lives to be impacted. Let us draw inspiration from the proverbial giraffe. The giraffe, with its long neck, stands tall, not just to see farther but to reach higher, to nourish its herd and protect those around it. The giraffe reminds us that progress is not just about individual success but also about lifting others as we climb. We, in Singapore, are only as strong as our weakest member. So, let us be giraffes of our time – stick our necks for the common good. I support, Speaker, Sir, Budget 2025.”
“Could carpooling or escort services at the community level help families, for instance, affected by the manpower and cost constraints faced by school bus industry? Elderly with dementia: for elderly residents with dementia who do not require nursing home care yet, but they lack caregivers who might be working, like people to escort them, to accompany them to day activity centres, could community-level solutions be better encouraged and developed and even scaled? Families with special needs children: for caregivers of children with special needs who are emotionally drained and especially those with middle or lower income, could community-based support systems be established instead of just relying on ad hoc, acts of kindness? In my constituency, Purple Hearts, and I know in Ang Wei Neng's constituency as well, a grassroots initiative has been formed, this is in Kampong Glam, to support families of children with special needs – children who maybe young or may already be adults in their 50s. For three years, this group of volunteers have provided home visits, organised activities, invited them to grassroots activities, community activities, organised legal talks to help them, pushed out legal services to support them and fostered a sense of community, reminding these families that they are not alone. However, this initiative was only possible due to a team of passionate grassroots volunteers and a generous sponsor that I found who co-funded the central coordination person, headcount. And this is also done, I think, by Ang Wei Neng. Could these be scaled and looked at even more? Could Government play a part in facilitating these community-driven solutions?”
“It grapples with the high cost of operating a heritage business in a popular historical district. But I am encouraged that Minister Desmond Lee of MND has established a new inter-Ministry task force to support the growth and sustainability of heritage businesses like Wardah Books in Singapore’s historic precincts. This initiative was announced recently during the official opening of the Kampong Glam Ramadan Bazaar, which was organised by the local business community. So, we should establish task forces, focus groups, focused task forces for deeper dive, to assist these identified vulnerable groups and businesses. While the Government has implemented measures to assist these groups and individuals, the outcomes still remain to be seen. To address these challenges effectively, we should really establish focused task forces to conduct deep-dive exercises to investigate the root causes of their challenges, their profiles and develop creative and practical solutions and seek Government policy exceptions if needed. Do this starting with the elderly, the disabled and businesses not so suitable for automation. Key focus area three: on community solutions. I agree with the principle that not all solutions are best originated or implemented by Government. However, the Government can play a crucial role in facilitating worthy community-driven initiatives or, at the very least, avoid creating adding obstacles to their initiatives. We need to better encourage and support organic, ground-up initiatives. I can think of several out of many needs I see on the ground that could do with better coordination and support. For example, school bus logistics and cost were mentioned throughout last year.”
“The rapid use of technology presents significant challenges for vulnerable groups, especially the elderly, PwDs and low-skilled and lowly-educated workers. These groups, already at risk of marginalisation, face further exclusion due to the growing digital divide. For instance, some residents that I see in their 60s and 70s, they still want to work, they do not want to be at karaoke or bingo sessions whole day long. They struggle and they want to work, they struggle to secure employment in the new economy, whether they want to work out of necessity or out of choice. For instance, I filed several PQs and Meet-the-People-Session appeals to different agencies before for seniors who are not proficient in English or matters that are digital and who struggle in accessing essential Government services. Some cannot even read the English language responses that are mailed to them in response to my appeals for them. Some of them actually spend hundreds of dollars or share their Singpass information with parties or sometimes like agents outside the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority office, people whom they think can help them gain digital access to the services they need. These are folks who genuinely need support. SMEs as well – traditional brick-and-mortar stores and low-margin industries are particularly vulnerable. While many of these businesses should be more proactive in taking up the Government grants and schemes to automate, there is a segment of businesses that may not be easily automated or have a reason for sticking to its current business model. One example, for example, is Wardah Books, a beloved traditional bookshop in Kampong Glam, which sells Muslim and Malay books. It faces challenges in its current business model.”
“Let us prioritise working on the jobs that might be most at risk of obsolescence and develop action steps for these job families before they are axed. One job retrenched is one too many. District offices like the Community Development Councils are ground partners who can support these efforts, since the Community Development Councils are already running hundreds of SkillsFuture Advice Workshops supporting MOE, SSG every year. Second, let us define literacy for all age groups. For such a time as this, the current definitions and the skills inventory of English, numeracy or Math and Digital Literacy should be updated and widely shared. Everyone, regardless of age, should understand the specific skills they need to acquire beyond our traditional focus on English, Math and Digital Literacy. One of my young volunteers, sitting over there in the Gallery now, even suggested adding empathy and community spirit literacy in our fast-paced, polarised world. So, is it possible for us to create a Literacy #101 Skills Inventory List, complete with suggested key learning solutions for all Singaporeans of all ages? Next, to be more aggressive in driving upskilling campaigns. Let us allocate resources and develop campaigns to compel Singaporeans to take lifelong learning seriously and to proactively self-drive our own developments. The acquisition of new skills and literacies is no longer optional. And, in fact, it is not just a pathway to promotions or career advancement. In this era of AI and job displacement, upskilling has become a critical necessity – essential not only for retaining our jobs but also for navigating our social environments, daily lives and the rapidly evolving world around us. Next, key focus area two: on vulnerable groups and businesses.”
“I remember when I first brought up at a Budget debate like this that MOE should look into adult training as well. The response in this House was muted. But I am glad that SkillsFuture Singapore has been established, put under the MOE and the Institutes of Higher Learning and other adult training providers are now part of the SkillsFuture adult training ecosystem. Budget 2025 initiatives like enhancing the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme for mid-career Singaporeans, adding part-time courses and enhancing employer incentives are commendable. Few other countries have come close to the kind of systematic intervention for citizens that we see in Singapore. However, we must go further. Here are three suggestions. First, accelerate Industry Transformation Map (ITM) 2025. ITM 2025 is our Government’s initiative to refresh and strengthen the Industry Transformation Road Maps over the next five years, focusing on seizing post-COVID opportunities and new strategies for jobs, skills, research and innovation. Five years is way too long. The short shelf life of technology and we can see AI’s impact on jobs and skills is tremendous. The recent DBS announcements of job cut this week due to AI applications and the decision therefore to send 13,000 staff to be upskilled or reskilled in AI and data, is another clarion call for us for urgent action. So, I urge the Government to accelerate the review of the ITM 2025 and to treat the ITMs as living documents to be updated regularly, certainly not once in five years. Let us also go beyond the usual methods of Job Fairs and invest in channels to clearly communicate the required competencies to both current and potential industry entrants and stressing skills development over academic qualifications.”
“So, this Budget is crucial as it addresses how we allocate our national resources, limited resources for the immediate and for the longer term; it is about resourcing a strategic plan to secure our future and it cannot be seen merely as an annual “goodie bag” giveaway but as a support plan to address our persistent challenges. To this end, Mr Speaker, Sir, I propose three focus areas where resources can be further directed to ensure Singapore remains resilient and inclusive in an increasingly complex world. Key focus area one: on jobs and skills in this age of AI. AI is transforming industries at an unprecedented pace. We heard from many speeches before me. While it brings opportunities, it also threatens to displace workers and widen inequality. In Singapore, sectors like finance, healthcare, logistics and customer service are already experiencing AI-driven changes. For instance, the DBS Group recently announced plans to cut 4,000 jobs over the next three years while, of course, adding 1,000 new positions. It is a stark reminder of the urgent need to reskill and repurpose our workforce. The latest World Economic Forum report cautioned that, and I quote: "Without appropriate decision-making frameworks, economic incentive structures and possibly Government regulations, there remains a risk that technological development will be focused on replacing human work. The trajectory of AI adoption could either help us collaborate with machines for outsized gains – or lead to greater inequality and job displacement, depending on how businesses and policymakers respond." In Singapore, Budget 2025 is going in the right direction. The SkillsFuture movement was started 10 years ago.”
“Mr Speaker, this Budget debate marks the final one before the end of this term of Parliament. It also coincides with SG60, the commemoration of 60 years of Singapore’s Independence. Over the decades, we have weathered storms that could have broken lesser countries. From Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in 2003 to the unprecedented challenges of COVID-19, key Government systems in our country from healthcare, manpower, industry to education – and our social cohesion – were tested. Yet, time and again, we have emerged stronger. This resilience is a testament to our collective spirit and the leadership of this Government. Our journey has been marked by bold, creative measures to safeguard businesses, livelihoods and the interests of our next generations. COVID initiatives, probably forgotten by some by now, like the Jobs Support Scheme, Wage Credit Scheme, the SGUnited Traineeship, CDC Vouchers, first started to help the hawkers, to name a few, have provided much-needed relief to Singaporeans. These efforts, together with many post-COVID measures, rolled out consistently, reflect our Government’s commitment to supporting our people. But as we approach SG60, our work is far from over. Our core existential struggles remain. Persistent challenges – like our declining fertility rate, the rising needs of a rapidly ageing population and the disruptive impact of AI on jobs and the economy – still demand urgent attention. Singaporeans look to the Government to lead in navigating these challenges.”
“I thank the Minister of State and I am really happy with that response. I would like to suggest that perhaps the Ministry of Law, and especially LAB, communicate this a lot more to the ground. Because often us as Members of Parliament, even after we make an appeal for legal assistance or aid or advice, and specifying that our our residents are not digital savvy, they are not proficient in English, they are elderly, and so forth, we will still get a template reply to "please refer to the portal". So, I thought, if there are already services available such as these, that we can actually communicate a lot better. And also to the ground, perhaps resource even more the SSOs or the Community Clubs because they are also manned or staffed by public servants and so, the security or privacy considerations are better managed. So, I ask for therefore better communication and really looking to this challenge on the ground.”
“And lastly, on public sector leadership. The public sector must lead by example. I am not asking for targets or quotas. I am asking for whatever is done, we need to scale it. Agencies like the National Library Board, VITAL, GovTech, the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), the Ministry of Health (MOH) Holdings, Singapore General Hospital (SGH) and several more, they have already seriously embarked on inclusive hiring and doing quite well, giving jobs in blue-, white- and new-collar spaces. So, scaling these efforts will set the tone for private sector adoption and aspire a community of practice. So, the public sector should take leadership in this. So, Sir, in conclusion, the Workplace Fairness Bill is a necessary step forward in protecting workers against discrimination. To make a real difference for PwDs, reasonable accommodations must, eventually, be legislated. While readiness concerns are valid, they must not delay progress indefinitely. So, I urge the House to support a clear roadmap that mandates reasonable accommodations by 2030, aligned with the expiration of the current Enabling Masterplan for the disabled. I urge the Government, PwDs and their advocates and employers and families as well, to each take our place and create and support an inclusive Singapore workforce. I support this Bill.”
“I have seven key elements to be included. First, review and enhance the effectiveness and outreach of the existing programmes, such as the Open Door Programme, the Place and Train Programme and the Job Placement and Support Scheme. Two, extend the Enabling Mark concept from beyond employers to service providers, such as job placement agencies and coaches, whether they are Government-supported or not, to ensure better support and quality assurance for employers and PwDs. Third, enlarge and professionalise the pool of job and life coaches. Fourth, to develop a SkillsFuture Masterplan for PwDs for them to upskill and remain competitive and not be left behind. Fifth, develop a joint national service between the Ministry of Manpower and SG Enable under the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF), modeled on the Job Accommodation Network (JAN) in the United States, to guide employers in implementing reasonable accommodations. JAN's online database of best practices, live chat support and tailored solutions is a model that Singapore can learn from and adapt. In fact, Singapore can have our own version of JAN, which should also the education and guiding employees with disabilities so that they can be stronger in self-advocacy, showing also sensitivity to their employers' business needs, understanding what is reasonable on their part and also taking proactive steps that they, like anyone else, can take to support themselves in the workplace. So, let us help PwDs, employees with disabilities themselves, at the workplace to self-advocate. And lastly, to ensure measurement and accountability through annual progress reports on readiness and inclusion metrics, that is, for developing the roadmap for legislation to include reasonable accommodations by 2030.”
“Examples include modifications, like ramps and ergonomic furniture; flexible schedules for medical needs; and assistive technologies, such as screen readers or using visual or appropriate communication methods. The current proposal for a Tripartite Advisory on reasonable accommodations is a good start, but it lacks enforceability. So, legislation is necessary to ensure consistency and accountability. Why does this matter? Because mandatory accommodations will support even more PwDs to contribute meaningfully to the workforce. Successful policies in Singapore, like our Compulsory Education Act, have shown that phase-by-phase legislation following public education can indeed drive meaningful change. So that leads to my third proposal, which is developing a roadmap for legislation by 2030 in this space. Sir, if immediate legislation for reasonable accommodations is not feasible for now, a phased approach should be adopted and a clear roadmap should be established, aiming for full implementation by 2030, which aligns with the expiration of the current Enabling Masterplan. Successful policies, such as Singapore's Compulsory Education Act, demonstrate that phased legislation can drive meaningful change by allowing adequate preparation time for education and capability building. Sir, the decision to delay the implementation of the Act until schools and disability service providers were ready for the Compulsory Education Act until they were better prepared, this was widely appreciated, such that when it was implemented, the landscape was a lot more ready and it was very smooth. So, we can learn from that experience. Sir, while we wait for 2030 and prepare, I propose that the following key elements be included in developing the roadmap to get 2030 inclusion.”
“Sir I would like to put up three proposals for the Workplace Fairness Bill: one, in broadening the definition of disability; two, in mandating reasonable accommodations; and three, developing a roadmap to legislate reasonable accommodations by 2030. I want to thank, also, the individuals and organisations who have put in work by stakeholders, such as the PWDs themselves, employers who are enlightened and inclusive, disability organisations, such as Autism Resource Centre, whom I work with, and the Disabled People's Association. First proposal, broaden the definition of disability. The Bill’s current definition of disability is too narrow, covering only autism, intellectual disabilities, physical disabilities and sensory disabilities. This excludes individuals with learning disabilities, like dyslexia and ADHD, as well as conditions like cerebral palsy, which is more than just a physical disability. The UNCRPD adopts a broader definition, encompassing all impairments that hinder full participation in society. Singapore should align with this inclusive standard. Why is broadening the definition of disability for this Bill important? Because they are under-represented communities. Individuals, especially those with less-visible disabilities, face significant barriers due to stigma and lack of accommodations. There is also economic impact. Expanding the definition of disabilities would unlock a broader talent pool, for example, dyslexia, contributing significantly to Singapore's economy. And that is proposal one: broadening the definition of disability. Proposal two: mandate reasonable accommodation. Reasonable accommodations, which are, basically, adjustments to the workplace enabling PwDs to perform to their potential, are fundamental to equitable employment.”
“For PwDs, it is a bridge to inclusion. It is also a bridge to financial independence, allowing them to move beyond being welfare recipients. Inclusive employment also unlocks economic potential. Research from the International Labour Organization shows that inclusive workplaces can boost gross domestic product by up to 7%. Locally, in Singapore, SG Enable's success in matching over 4,000 PwDs with jobs highlights how inclusion enhances economic participation. Companies like UOB, Deutsche Bank and DBS Bank have shown that neurodiverse employees excel in areas, like cybersecurity and digitalisation, proving that inclusion also drives innovation. Now, with Singapore's ageing population and workforce constraints, PwDs represent an untapped talent pool. With proper training and support, they can contribute effectively across sectors, from blue-collar to white-collar to silver-collar jobs. Despite its importance, inclusive employment comes with challenges. Having overseen job training and placement services for PwDs, I have seen both successes and failures. Success cannot rely solely on goodwill. It requires systemic changes. The key challenges include, one, society's attitudes and bias. PwDs are often misunderstood, especially those with non-visible or neurodivergent conditions. Stigma and lack of awareness hinder their potentials. The second challenge is in workplace readiness. Many businesses lack the infrastructure and knowledge to support PwDs. An SG Enable survey found that over 50% of SMEs perceive hiring PwDs as challenging, due to insufficient accommodations. The third challenge is this, that PwDs themselves have to be ready as well. PwDs often require extended training in both vocational and life skills to be adequately prepared for the workforce.”
“These efforts have actually given many families much needed hope and support. The challenge now is to extend these efforts into adulthood, ensuring that PwDs have meaningful opportunities in the workforce if they can work. Key initiatives, very well appreciated, included the setting up of the following: SG Enable and its job placement partners, such as SPD, MINDS and the Autism Resource Centre, which have supported over 4,000 job seekers with disabilities through job placement and training programmes. The Open Door Programme (ODP), which also funds job redesign, workplace modifications and staff training, has benefitted over 400 companies; Special Employment Credit (SEC) and the Job Redesign Grants, which incentivise businesses to hire and accommodate PwDs, have catalysed changes in the corporate sector employment scene; schemes, such as the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS), and other accessibility grants ensure that PwDs also remain engaged in the workforce; and introduced in 2021, the Enabling Mark recognises businesses for their inclusive practices in employment. As of 2023, the employment rate for working-age PwDs exceeded 32%, it is about 32.7%, with over 600 companies adopting inclusive hiring practices. The latest Enabling Masterplan sets a target to increase this to 40% by 2030. So, I want to thank and congratulate the Government for doing this. But while much has been achieved, there is still significant work to be done. Let me, first, speak on the importance of inclusive employment. Sir, inclusive employment is not just about fairness. It is about unlocking potential at the individual and societal level. With proper training and support, PwDs can contribute meaningfully to workplaces and society. Work provides dignity, identity and purpose.”