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 5 of 22.
“Some purchase private properties after their Minimum Occupation Period (MOP) and rent out their HDB flats as a source of passive rental income. We have even heard of instances when HDB homes were sold in the market immediately after MOP and advertised to be "hardly lived in" or "as good as new". The popularity of mature estates: Sir, I believe that the popularity of mature estates is the elephant in the room. The returns appear to be even higher for those who are lucky enough to procure an HDB flat in or closer to the city or mature estates, the more popular places. The popularity of mature estates has led to excessive demand, longer wait times and a reluctance to consider other locations. It has also led to some uniquely Singaporean behaviours of courting couples in Singapore. Whilst applying for an HDB flat used to mean a serious intent to settle down for marriage, it is not always so now. I know of couples who apply for an HDB flat within a few months of courtship, citing the long waiting times for a matrimonial home. Yet, others who are more serious in their relationships decide that they would delay marriage and having children until they procure their permanent housing. I commend the Government for having the political will and courage to implement the latest Prime Location Public Housing (PLH) programme, with features, such as the longer MOP, tighter rental restrictions and recovering of additional subsidies. This is helpful to those, especially my residents in the Central District, who want to buy with the interest to stay, especially in the prime locations and mature estates.”
“Sir, the success of Singapore's public housing programme is world-renowned. About 80% of citizens own their own homes today, one of the highest home ownerships in the world, and 80% of Singapore's resident population live in HDB public housing. The original public housing policy intent: the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew, founding Prime Minister of Singapore, has placed public housing as a key pillar of the People's Action Party (PAP) mandate to improve the living standards for its people. Ensuring that citizens have a roof over their heads, and later, promoting home ownership, is the paramount priority of the PAP Government. Over the years, as Singapore progresses, HDB flats also evolved to meet the changing needs and expectations of residents. We see the building of beautiful housing landmarks, such as The Pinnacle@Duxton and Punggol 21. Some of them are comparable to, and even look better than private leasehold developments, and at less than half the prices. Our CPF relaxation also means that many times, there is no cash outlay and one can tap on CPF to pay one's mortgage. Such is the success and appeal of Singapore's national housing programme. But is Singapore a victim of its own successful public housing policy, some asked. Many Singaporeans now see owning an HDB flat as a rite of passage and even an entitlement. The initial goal of HDB to provide a home for every Singaporean has long been surpassed. In an effort to accommodate the changing needs and aspirations of residents, HDB has now given owners the flexibility to both own HDB and private properties, and even renting out their HDB flats while living in private properties. It is, thus, not a surprise that a number of Singaporeans see an HDB flat as an investment vehicle to make a windfall profit upon sale.”
“I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the response. I am well aware that MinLaw and MHA are already stepping up in terms of awareness and supporting people with disabilities in the prosecution processes and even in Police investigations. But I have still have a lot of families whose children – and some of them are adults now – who committed offences. They seem to be, at the first instance, very, very worried at the start of the process. So, I wonder if the Government can do something to assure the disability community and the families, and also to educate further the Government agencies involved, to assure them that the Government is not heartless and that many of these steps are put in and things will just get better. It is just to allay the fear. There are lots of anxieties and worries when their children who have less mental or social capacity commit offences. And that kind of anxiety is just all over the social media or in writings to us as Members of Parliament.”
“More importantly, the current strategies may not sufficiently address critical motivation and training gaps of Singaporeans, such as the middle-aged workforce, such as the disabled, such as those who should, and can, take up better jobs. The adult education and training market needs to be further studied and further streamlined. There must be found better ways to design, organisation and re-allocate resourcing of learning at all ages and levels. More dialogues and actions for SSG and its trusted partners to bring the SkillsFuture movement to the next height. The five Community Development Council (CDCs) are looking forward and ever ready to support SSG also, to help build and develop learning communities at the ground level. Sir, I fully support the Bills. I thank the Ministry of Education (MOE) and the SSG for their tenacity and hard work in equipping Singaporeans for the future. Kudos.”
“With more than 1,000 training providers and 25,000 SSG-supported courses, no number of SSG-appointed inspectors will be enough to ensure better governance. Besides a better whistle-blowing practice, for example, SSG should appoint credible training partners, such as National Trades Union Congress (NTUC), or SSG's larger Queen Bee partners, or the Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs), larger industry partners to assist it, in not just curating or developing training solutions, but also help build systems to strengthen self-monitoring in their respective specific market segments. Another piece of work that I feel is cut out for SSG to do would be to review the SkillsFuture ecosystem for stronger impact. Sir, I started my speech on what Education Minister Chan Chun Sing had recently articulated on the future of education, the future of work. The future of work and education will be a landscape characterised by mass customisation, by tighter industry academia tie-ups and by spreading education resources throughout one's lifespan, and not only front-loaded in the first 15 years. With more resources expected to come through the education space throughout one's lifespan, SSG cannot afford to do things in the same way. Its initial open and flexible strategy, for example, to encourage as many training and training providers as possible – and that is what Assoc Prof Jamus Lim is trying to encourage – this may be necessary in the first instance, but it has also led to SSG's support of a number of less than competent, and worse, dishonest training providers, due to the sheer size of the market that was created.”
“Should SSG consider the provision of guidelines, rules or templates to better guide training providers, their marketing agents or advertisers in what constitutes acceptable and non-acceptable marketing practices, since prevention is indeed better than cure? Are there means by which potential trainees can protect themselves, by referring to a repository of SSG-supported courses and information for validation before one registers for courses? On to the next feature of the Bill. The Bill will grant an expanded scope of powers to SSG-appointed inspectors to investigate the added offences and provide for a series of power to do so. In addition to that provided in the Bill, do the powers of these inspectors grant them access to information stored, for example, in the cloud, in view of the rise of cloud storage sitting in, perhaps, external parties? How will SSG tap on the use of technology, example: Artificial Intelligence (AI), to detect discrepancies routinely? And as white-collar crime investigations require a high degree of specialised expertise – how does SSG plan to access this body of expertise? How will SSG groom homegrown forensic experts to carry out this newly expanded scope of duties? Finally, the Bill will also involve the Government in "extra financial expenditure, the exact amount of which cannot at present be ascertained". I am keen to know when and how the sum of this extra financial expenditure will be determined. And instead of only budgeting for the capacity and capability needed to carry out the additional regulatory powers of this Bill, I strongly urge SSG to work on the following two pieces of work for its future plan. One, to strengthen self-monitoring as a feature of the ecosystem of the landscape.”
“He said that the first 15 years of one's education are important; but what happens to one's education in the next 50 years will make or break one's future career, and collectively, I believe, Singapore's future. The adult CET landscape will see further growth. SSG, therefore, cannot afford to spend too much of its attention on fending off abuses and frauds, so that it can direct resources to focus on its core business of designing and delivering lifelong learning nationally. Notwithstanding my support, I seek clarification for specific provisions of the Bills, most of which are in clause 15, which inserts a new section 57. First, the Bill will make it an offence for anyone to enter or facilitate an abusive funding arrangement. An errant party guilty of the offence would be punished in three ways – pay a penalty equal to the amount of the wrongly obtained funding; or fined not exceeding $10,000; and/or imprisonment for not exceeding three years; and/or ordered to repay the wrongly obtained funding. My questions are these: one, do the penalties in fines and/or imprisonment commensurate with the size of the offence? For instance, is a fine of $10,000, plus imprisonment, sufficient to deter a potential gain of $10 million? Should there, or ought there be, heavier penalties, as suggested during public consultations? What interim measures can be taken by SSG whilst potentially long investigations are ongoing? And in the event that the errant party who is guilty, is an entity, to whom will the punishment be meted – the staff, the management or the director? Next, the Bill will make it an offence to knowingly publish or distribute any false or misleading advertisement. Does the onus to ensure accuracy fall on the advertising agency or the content provider?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I wish to speak specifically on the SSG (Amendment) Bill. The amendments tabled in this Bill are urgent and deserve the full support of the House. The SSG plays an important role to drive and implement the national SkillsFuture movement, to promote a culture of lifelong learning through skills mastery by the people of Singapore. There has been an increasingly complicated developments of abuse of SSG fundings, I guess because of the rapidly expanding and CET market and the seduction of the funds. The most infamous abuse is that of a criminal syndicate in 2017, who cheated SSG of $40 million in training grants, through a series of complicated financial arrangements and forged documents. Then, there are people, the individuals who submitted false claims without taking any courses. Then, there are some employers are known to falsely submit names of trainees who are not really employees, with the intent to just access SSG grants. In addition, some training providers also knowingly market their courses through misrepresentation of information, such as free courses when they are truly not; or untrue learning outcomes and untrue training durations. Persons guilty can be anyone in the value chain of training, it can be training providers, marketing agents, employers, employees and even training participants themselves. The issue has to be urgently resolved; lest SSG be wrongly perceived as a toothless agency and abuses and frauds become rampant. But there is a more important reason, in my view, for quickly resolving this and for our support of this Bill. Just a few days ago, Education Minister Chan Chun Sing delivered a brilliant public speech on the future of the education landscape of Singapore.”
“When we hear of such feedback, we will enhance the enforcement and work together as well with the operators. We will continue to work with the Member and we will see how we can manage these together and, at the same time, bring all the agencies together to help address the issues.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I filed this Parliamentary Question on behalf of quite a number of my residents who are affected by this phenomenon. But I truly appreciate the good groundwork by our ground partners, such as the Neighbourhood Police Posts from Rochor, Marina Bay and Kampong Java and also agencies like NEA. But they seemed to be quite constrained in their work on the ground and I wonder if MHA and other relevant agencies can review and take more effective upstream measures to contain this noise disamenity that comes as a result of night entertainment operators, such as ensuring that before allowing operating, that soundproofing and other measures are put in place first and that the decibel limits are actually looked into, whether it is really effective, that it does not affect the residents, such as restricting or disallowing licences in residential zones and also perhaps studying and granting the Police and agencies like NEA and LTA more power to enforce more effective measures against the errant operators. Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. I would also like to thank the Member for working with our agencies in managing some of these issues. Essentially, what we do is that when they apply for such licences, we will do a thorough assessment, looking at how the area is and the feedback received, and there are certain requirements that we also make them fulfill. For example, they must soundproof their unit and also, in their operations, their windows must all be closed and doors as well, unless there are people going in and out. They may also be required to install sound level meters to monitor such noises.”
“I thank the Minister of State for his response. It is not uncommon for Members of Parliament to receive requests to live alone or to transfer to another flat and they are usually frustrated tenants who find it very hard to get along with their assigned co-tenants. So, while I know it is costly to have only one tenant live in a whole flat, are there any other models also, beyond the partitions, that will decrease tensions of strangers living together, for example, reducing co-living spaces with shared facilities and so forth? I am just looking at other models that are a bit more out of the box and not so traditional. Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, essentially, as I shared earlier, we provide on a flat-sharing basis as this allows us to accommodate more low-income Singaporeans. Nevertheless, as I shared in my answer, we will continue to explore new models and ways to improve the lived experiences of singles in public rental flats. In fact, we are looking at alternative typologies and will share more details soon. 1.30 pm”
“I thank the Minister of State. I first want to acknowledge the wonderful support that is given to my division and our GRC as well, from the HDB Branch Office and the HQ rental division. They are very conscientious people. On my house visits, though, even before COVID-19, I noticed that the preventive maintenance for issues, such as spalling concrete, peeling paint on the door gates and so on, I do not think the preventive maintenance happens annually or regularly. There could be a difference in perception leading to a lot of reactive kind of complaints for us at the Meet-the-People sessions by our residents. So, I wonder what the cause of this is. If, indeed, the constraint is resource or maybe such duties need to be outsourced, then could the resources be granted to the people on the ground? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I assure the Member that we do the proactive annual inspection. Wherever we can, we will help as much as possible. Nevertheless, those areas, for example, what the Member shared, the gate and also relating to maintenance and repairs of internal walls, fittings, fixtures, including doors and gates, these are where tenants are responsible for. What we do for exceptional cases – for example, for elderly tenants – is we will work with community organisations, just like the grassroots organisation in the Member's area, to see how we can partner and work together with them and see how we can help these tenants.”
“I thank the Minister for the comprehensive reply. I have no doubt that MOE and NIE are doing their very best. I ask this question because we all know that the future of education, the future of work, now require very different competencies of the educators – now and in the future. On top of what the Minister has just mentioned – and he gave a hint of all the things that they have to do – educators now take on the role of content curators and even developers, and they have to design learning experiences, they have to deliver on different platforms. And on top of that, are expected to even be life coaches for their students. So, I just wonder what kind of manpower and resources – how does NIE do it? And are they given sufficient resources like money, manpower and even in terms of mindset, to do so, to meet these demands of the future?”
“I thank the Minister of State for his answer. I wanted to reflect this ground feedback from employers and bosses of lower-income workers. They are telling me that when they increase the pay of the workers, for example, through compliance to PWM, some of the lower-wage workers were very worried, that, one, they will not be eligible for HDB rental flats because although it is mentioned that $1,500 is a guideline, I think, to many of them, from the official document, it does not sound like it is a guideline; it sounds like that was an income criterion for rental eligibility. That is one. Secondly, they are also worried that their HDB rental will increase. In some of these cases, we have seen higher than the rate of salary increases. So, I hope that there can be found a way to communicate and assure, both the workers and their employers, that indeed what Minister of State Faishal has said, that there will be flexibility, that HDB will align the increase in wages for these lower-wage workers and the eligibility criteria for such important and useful benefits, like housing and other relevant social benefits. Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the feedback. I will take it back to the Ministry. I just want to assure the Member that in fact, over the last five years, about 2,700 applicants whose household incomes exceeded $1,500, were offered a rental flat. So, we will look at it holistically. We want to assure the Member that we will continue to do so and we want to help as many people as possible to have that housing option.”
“I thank the Minister. My questions are directed towards promoting the national objective of marriage and parenthood. Would MND consider, one, a different type of BTO, a "Build-then-Order", instead of Build-to-Order scheme, so that flats can be built in advance for registered married couples, for example, applying for the first time, in order to encourage marriage and parenthood? I know that building in advance creates stock inventory and it might be costly, but if we could ringfence this for marriage and parenthood, on which the nation is already spending quite a bit of money, it might be well worth it. So, that is my first supplementary question. My second supplementary question is whether the Minister would consider helping young couples beyond the "between $7,000 and $14,000" bracket, which is the eligibility for applying BTO flats, to help them get a rental flat on an interim basis. This is, again, based on what we know about the market that many young couples are renting flats before they get their BTOs. If they live with their parents, they might also be delaying parenthood. So, again, all the questions are directed towards promoting marriage and parenthood. For consideration, please.”
“I understand that children with special needs sometimes attend, not just their daily kindergartens, whether MOE or the anchor operators – like PCF, My First Skool and others. That is usually daily. But some of them also, because of their need, they attend the EIPIC programme, some specialised classes, and that is like once or twice a week. So, it is a combination of both. I was recently told by some residents that the policy is such that if they receive EIPIC, which is early intervention support, then if they go to the kindergartens, which are also funded by MOE, then they would not receive support in the preschools. So, my question to the Minister of State is, is that true? And if that is true, could we consider looking into support for these children, so that they can receive an effective intervention and support on a daily basis?”
“Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. Two supplementary questions for the Minister of State. Firstly, does MAS require the banks or the financial institutions to notify their customers should there be regular and/or big sums of withdrawals or money movements from their accounts? I know some banks do it, some banks do not, but I wonder if there is actually a regulation, practice or policy regarding this. Secondly, I know that MAS is working very hard on the framework and so forth to ensure loss-sharing and recourse like that. But I wonder what the interim recourse is for the scam victims. I have a resident, for example, who lost his life savings of almost a quarter million dollars and he did the right thing – make a Police report, wrote to the authorities, wrote to the banks and so forth, but still extremely distraught and distressed. So, I wonder what is the recourse for victims like this.”
“I thank the Minister for his comprehensive reply. Let me declare that I am a volunteer at several people sector charities and helping out in special schools as well. Recently, when the announcement for MOE teachers or Education Officers was made, it created quite a bit of ripple amongst the special education sector and also in the rest of the people sector where organisations take in students who graduate from the special schools. When announcements, such as this, are made unilaterally, it does affect the others. Sometimes, the approach or the methodology by which these compensation reviews are made, are either not known or perhaps could be missed out when the original announcements were made. I think it is always good and would MOE consider that when it makes announcements of such nature, especially in terms of compensation, that it be not announced unilaterally and that mention be made of the rest of the sector who are also serving the children, the young people or the older people of Singapore in education? So, that is one, that announcements will also make some mention of the rest of the service providers. Number two, I would like MOE to consider and communicate to the SSAs – either special schools or disability organisations – the philosophy by which their salaries are computed or decided upon. Because for some of the positions – such as the educators, psychologists, therapists and so forth – both sectors, the people and public sectors, are recruiting from the same pool. The competitiveness is quite important because you want to serve such persons throughout their lifespan. So, the philosophy is quite important because they could be recruiting from the same pool. So, I would appreciate that MOE would consider some of what I have shared.”
“What would be needed to facilitate residents, as Dr Tan just mentioned, who are not tech-savvy, to use apps like Healthy 365, so that this group indeed is not left behind? On performance indicators – the selection of performance indicators – whether process or outcome indicators, whether lagging or historical or leading indicators – this selection is never an easy task, even in the world of usual management and leadership. What gets measured gets done, as they say. But what gets measured and paid for, gets done even more. Badly selected measures lead to unintended bad consequences. Resident enrolment rate or health plan completion rates can easily be ramped up through aggressive marketing, without regard for quality or follow up. So, I urge a further scrutiny and discussion on the White Paper's proposed key indicators. In conclusion, Sir, I highly support the intent of the Healthier SG White Paper. Many countries have done it, many developed countries have tried with varying degrees of success. I have raised issues and concerns from my own lived experiences trying to coordinate ground efforts and from those who are serving in healthcare and the community. I hope the Ministry will seriously consider my inputs. A transformation of this nature is complicated. But I believe that if any country can succeed in nurturing a healthier people, Singapore would be the one. Sir, I support the White Paper.”
“My experience is that although the different parties are all good community assets, with good hearts, many of their efforts are usually not well coordinated and they are not quite motivated sometimes to really work together. They sometimes even "compete" for the same clientele. Situations of, example, elderly residents being repeatedly served, because they are the ones who are more forthcoming, some are under-served or not even served. Situations like that are quite common. What would the regional health system player each in charge of about 1.5 million residents do differently? How can they improve the situation? How will they, as integrators, better organise ground efforts without losing the passion and the resources of these precious community partners, for a Healthier SG? With so many partners and touchpoints, what would the typical experience of an enrolled resident to Healthy SG or the system or a "customer" look like in his healthcare journey? Some clarity would be reassuring. Lastly, on setting up enablers for Healthier SG. Sir, I find it hard to imagine the size of the beast or the initiative based on just looking at the White Paper. For Singaporeans to appreciate the big shift and the need for greater investments – I think the Minister had just announced as $1 billion for a start and I think $400 million for recurring costs. To justify that, I seek more clarity on the following levers. One, on human resources. What are the types of jobs, in detail, what are the skills pre-requisites and number of persons required to realise the vision of Healthier SG? On technology, beyond the one-time grant to assist clinics, if they do convert, to convert to an appropriate IT system, how would the maintenance and upgrade costs be treated?”
“What could be a highly effective combination of "inside-out", or intrinsic, and "outside-in", extrinsic intervention measures to address the needed change in mindsets and behaviours of residents? How does the Ministry intend to address the first target group who are the senior residents above 60, who may be even more rigid in their mindsets and their behaviours? Why is there little mention of upstream interventions when one is younger, such as those in schools, because that is when behaviours and mindsets are shaped? Surely, upstream interventions in schools, through proper eating, proper exercising and emotional management are an important part of developing good health habits for life. And then, for the even more vulnerable, what is the Ministry's recommendation for younger Singaporeans who are disabled, who have special needs and who are prone to earlier onset of chronic illnesses due to a lack of education and care? They are best served by healthcare professionals who are a bit more aware, who are more trained of their conditions, such as, for example, Dr Chen Shi Ling and her doctors at Happee Hearts Movement. Who and how does the Ministry propose to include this group of residents and to fund doctors like Dr Chen? Sir, those are the groups that need to be looked at and the details that need to be considered. Thirdly, on activation of community partners such as the HPB, Agency for Integrated Care (AIC), PA, SportSG and National Parks Board (NParks). I agree totally with the White Paper that "patients' social, mental and physical well-being, are best achieved through community assets and services." My own lived experience on the ground, trying to coordinate all my well-intended service providers, for example, for the seniors.”
“How does the Ministry facilitate the transition, for example, of a GP who sees, say 50 to 60 patients a day, a popular one, to morph into one that is more consultative, holistic and takes a lot more time? Would there be prerequisite skillsets and dispositions that need to be considered? Other than their intrinsic motivation to want to do good for their residents, would the financial incentive that Minister spoke about be sufficient to cover their time and their costs? Many Singaporeans also visit polyclinic doctors as their first port of call. Working Singaporeans also tend to consult their employer's panel of doctors. How do these doctors become one's family doctor, if they may not be the same doctor who regularly attends to one? These questions need to be answered and looked into. The devil is always in the details. Next, on developing individual health plans. Developing health plans for enrolled residents is one thing, but following up to ensure outcomes is another. The White Paper correctly states, I quote, "while doctors can prescribe activities, it will only work if residents take personal ownership of their health and their lifestyles, and follow through with their health plans." The same challenges were also voiced by residents in the White Paper, quotes were given and validated also by many of our own lived experiences. The move to take personal ownership for one's own health is far more complicated than just developing a health plan. There are many theories of behavioural changes from time immemorial. If not thought through carefully, the Healthier SG vision would really just remain a pipe dream.”
“Sir, I stand in support of the direction set in the White Paper on Healthier SG. This plan is a strategic move to transform Singapore's healthcare system from one that primarily cares for the sick to one that proactively prevents sickness. Preventive healthcare aims to prevent illnesses, detect specific conditions early and encourage the promotion of good health. Regular health screens, testing and healthy lifestyle counselling are but common features. Globally, the incorporation of preventive healthcare in national plans is not new. The United States, for instance, publishes 10-year Healthy People masterplans, five iterations now, to identify public health priorities to improve the health and well-being of the Americans. The latest is the Healthy People 2030 plan. But well-written plans may be, many people in the world, including the US, are still afflicted by poor health. For the Healthier SG vision to come to pass successfully, we need to get the planning assumptions, strategies and execution right. I have several concerns to which I seek Ministry's consideration and responses. First, on mobilising a network of family doctors. Sir, the first of the five key features of the Healthier SG plan is to mobilise a network of family doctors. "Lynchpin", as the Minister has just called it. The family doctor will consult, will develop a health plan, will conduct annual check-ins and help residents achieve their health goals. This, in theory, sounds good. But, in practice, most residents only see a GP when they are ill. If GPs are the first to be tapped upon, then their transition from the role of a GP, just addressing someone's immediate needs, chop-chop and go, to that of a family doctor or physician – this transition, this journey cannot be underestimated.”
“I thank the Ministers for the answers. I appreciate that both Ministers have mentioned that there will be a ramp-up amounting to 100,000 new flats, from 2021 till 2025. I think MND must have done some modelling in terms of demand and supply forecast. What is the meaning of these 100,000 new flats versus the demand that has been forecasted for each year, and how does that then meet or mitigate the challenges that we face in meeting the needs, especially, of first-time families and others? So, what does the 100,000 new flats mean versus the demand forecasts that, I am sure, MND has done?”
“I thank the Minister for the heartening responses and for being open-minded in looking at future models. I just want to ask the Minister to consider that the whole special education model does not comprise only of staff who are known as teachers. Actually, the holistic development of our students over in the SPED system especially, really includes individuals like the allied professionals, psychologists, therapists, occupational therapists (OTs), speech pathologists, social workers and other staff. So, in considering and even publicising decisions on salaries and benefits packages of mainstream and other SPED school teachers, we need to consider that the other staff also play critical roles and to also include them as we design future models and future compensation packages for them. So, I would like to ask the Minister to consider that.”
“Thank you. Just two questions on the vulnerable. I was not sure if I caught it. How will the Police actually help those who are above 16 years old with disabilities, special needs or who do not have full mental capacity in, for example, the process of collecting blood samples and so forth. Secondly, on those who are less educated and less tech-savvy, I heard the response that they will be informed to go online but that is exactly how many of them would not be able to do so. So, I just wanted to have some clarification on that. If you are not ready, it is okay, but please look into it and please just look into these two groups, especially.”
“Take, for instance, the Bill’s introduction of tighter procedures for the removal of personal data collected in the Criminal Records Office’s database. Today, the Police are required to immediately remove both DNA and non-DNA data from the database when an individual is acquitted, discharged or the offence is compounded. But with the amendments, such individuals will now have to apply to the Police to remove their data. If rejected, one will then have to appeal to a Reviewing Tribunal. But unless properly advised and assisted, the less-educated and less tech-savvy individuals may not know how to exercise this right to apply to remove their DNA information nor how to make an application even if they know. In conclusion, Sir, I support the objective of this Bill. But I seek clarification on what I feel are important needs to protect individual privacy, personal data collected and to protect especially the vulnerable.”
“Given that so much more sensitive personal data is collected by the state, what are the additional safeguards to ensure that the database, especially of DNA information, is better protected? What is the accountability of the agency should such personal data be leaked or compromised, whether locally or internationally? How will potential volunteers who might come forward to offer their DNA information to the Police be better briefed so that they can better make informed decisions before volunteering? Third, on protecting the vulnerable. It is unclear how the vulnerable are protected in this Bill. For the vulnerable, it is not so clear from the Bill that the Police have a positive duty to inform the individuals. How will the Ministry ensure that the vulnerable will not be at a disadvantage, compared to those who are more able and knowledgeable? I refer especially to individuals who are above 16 years of age and who lack the mental capacity to fully understand the implication of what they say or agree to. Many of those with special needs and disabilities will need a familiar figure to explain and guide them during interrogation, the collection of blood sample and through the rest of the process. At the early phases of the COVID-19 pandemic, there was an outcry on how the needs of residents with special needs were not accommodated. It took much education and convincing of the authorities to change the Government’s vaccination, quarantine and safe management processes to make the needed accommodations. We should learn from those experiences. And then there are individuals who may not be lacking in mental capacity but are less educated and less tech-savvy.”
“Sir, I support the key intent behind the Registration of Criminals (Amendment) Bill. No one can quarrel with the Ministry’s aspiration to strengthen the crime investigation capabilities of the Police for the security of our nation. However, in the pursuit of enhancing Police capability in crime solving, there are three key needs that are important to address. These are to protect (a) individual privacy; (b) personal data collected; and (c) the vulnerable. First, on protecting individual privacy. Sir, the Bill seeks to enlarge the database of criminals for better crime-solving. This is done by granting more power to the Police to collect DNA and non-DNA data of offenders, through a much wider scope of offences; in fact, a list of even less serious offences. Sir, to have one’s personal data, especially DNA information, collected and uploaded to a Criminal Records Office’s database is a grave matter. Even if giving up one’s personal data is the consequence of committing a crime, the state should not over-infringe the bounds of a citizen’s privacy rights. Hence, I feel the Ministry should explain how this additional list of offences is decided upon. What were the factors of consideration when the Ministry decides on which offences are included? How would the new offences be administered? For instance, would even a first-time offender of, say, dangerous driving, be compelled to have his DNA collected? Second, on protecting personal data collected. Advancement in technology means higher risks of hacking and of information being compromised. It is not unimaginable that much more can be done with DNA data, such as creating fake profiles, digital identity stealing, cloning and the like. Personal data, when fallen into wrong hands, can lead to dire consequences.”
“" Another one told me, "After the Home Study Report was done, we did not know where to go to look for the babies." They depended on the luck of the draw, to land the right lawyer to help them, the right social worker and the right adoption agency. Several adoptive parents cited their search of agencies to be daunting and quoted some agencies to be "dubious" and "dodgy". Whilst the new clause 10 of the Bill provides for the Unique Entity Number (UEN), address of the place of business of every authorised adoption agency to be published, one wonders if that is sufficient. Surely, much more could be done to facilitate access to the needed information to help potential adoptive parents make better informed decisions and to cut short the process. Lastly, on the voice of the adoption agencies. It is obvious from the feedback from adoptive parents I spoke to that not all adoption agencies are equally experienced, ethical and effective. How will MSF evaluate and identify appropriate agencies? How can the better ones, that Mr Deputy Speaker spoke about just now, be recognised and engaged? For the sustainability of the good players in the market, whether for profit or not, financial viability is necessary. Therefore, can there be some way to help them? Can there be fee guidelines such as that issued by the MOH for clinics, so that there is an acceptable range of service fees? This will ensure that adoption agencies with good records get to remain in the business and build on their strength to support more families effectively. Sir, the Adoption of Children Bill is overdue and is well worth our support. I seek the Ministry's considered responses to the concerns I have raised for the child, adoptive parents and adoptive agencies. Thank you so much for doing the good work.”
“There are usually two main areas of concern: one, the long administrative process; and second, the unevenness of available information for them to make informed decisions. The process of adoption, currently, involves many steps – from pre-adoption briefing, to home assessment study, identifying an agent, identifying a child for adoption, applying for a Dependant's Pass for a foreign child, getting the approval of the Family Court, sending the Adoption Order to ICA for a birth certificate, applying for Singapore Citizenship and, in the case of China, several post-adoption reporting requirements. "Yen", a happy adoptive mother who adopted a baby from an ASEAN country, had to wait for a Dependant's Pass to be approved before she could spend time with the child, even after passing a very stringent Home Report assessment. That was step seven of, I think, 15 steps in MSF's portal, when I did a search. Mothers, like Yen, ask if the new process would further lengthen the anxiety of bona fide prospective adopters. How do the steps in the new process vary, in terms of the number of steps, quantity, duration and complexity? How can the process be made more efficient whilst ensuring the welfare of the child remains a priority? Whilst essential steps to assess and prepare prospective adopters are made mandatory, which I fully support, are there other steps that can be consolidated or simplified and the flow of information across agencies be better shared? The second concern of adoptive parents is that of the uneven level of awareness amongst them. In the words of one parent who spoke to me, "for us, the official road sort of 'ended' after MSF officially gave us the certification to become adoptive parents.”
“His mother remarried a Singaporean who discovered the option of adoption only after quite a long period of appeals to agencies and through me, the Member of Parliament. Throughout the period of adoption, Weng, the young man, expressed great fear and anxiety of being rejected in this adoption application and being sent back to his home country. Weng really wanted to reside in Singapore with his mother and stepfather and wants to serve National Service when it is time. He wanted to become a Singaporean. I am so glad he is one now. Another young resident, "QH", had to return to China to fend for himself at age 21, whilst his biological mother remained in Singapore with his biological half-brother and Singaporean stepfather. I supported part of his education, because fees were very high for him as a foreigner here and I often wished he could have become one of Singapore's sons. One of my former students, "Boon", is a Singaporean child with special needs who was fostered as a toddler, because he was abandoned, until he was 21, through the Ministry's arrangement. Could Boon have been put up for adoption earlier? He was fostered for more than a decade. How long, therefore, would it take under the Bill, the new Act, if approved, to propose and facilitate the adoption of fostered children like Boon who were abandoned from young? Sir, if the top priority of the Bill is for the welfare of the child, there must be ways found by which the process incorporates the voice of the child to be adopted. Next, on the voice of the adoptive parents. In the process of preparing this speech, I spoke to a number of adoptive parents who have walked the journey.”
“Sir, I stand in support of the Adoption of Children Bill. The last substantial amendment to the Act was in 1985, almost 40 years ago. The recommended increase from 12 sections to 75 sections in the proposed amendments, is a testament to the need to update this legislation. In addition, Singapore's birth and fertility rate has been declining. And adoption is one of the top options for couples who aspire to parenthood. Adoption is, thus a matter of interest to our society. Adoption is clearly a serious matter. An adoption order granted by the Court is, in effect, a termination of the legal relationship between a child and his/her biological parents, and adoption means transferring all rights and responsibilities in caring for the child to the adoptive parents. I wish to touch on matters relating to three key stakeholder groups: the children to be adopted, the adoptive parents and the adoption agencies. First, the voice of the child. I fully agree with the Ministry's undergirding principle behind this suite of amendments in the Bill – that the top priority is to guard the welfare of the child. Many of the stakeholders involved in the adoption process are adults: prospective adopters, biological parents, adoption agency operators. But the person that is most impacted remains to be the child who is up for adoption. My question to the Minister is, therefore, how the voice of the child can be better sought and heard. All the names I use hereon are not the real names of the persons involved, but all of them are people I know. In the case of one of my young teenaged residents, I call him "Weng", the stress and uncertainty he endured during the adoption process was very hard for him. Weng's biological father, in a foreign country, had abused both him and his mother.”
“I really appreciate Parliament Secretary Eric Chua's sincerity in working with us on the ground. I also appreciate Mr Gerald Giam's concern for persons with disabilities. My supplementary question is whether MSF would consider convening a very specific group – either you call it Alliance for Action (AfA) or any action group – that will look into the overall holistic needs of this community. Because to ask for, say, free transport or free schools is not complete. MOE, I computed, spends about $260 million a year – there are some more cohorts coming and there are a lot of adults who do not have services now. So, the amount for education alone is going to be a lot bigger. There are other needs. Rather than asking individually, I do think we need a holistic strategic study of the entire needs of the disabled, then prioritise them, cluster them, size it up, see what is needed and then look at how much can be supported by Government grants, how much can be supported by those who can afford a bit more, and those who are in the community – Temasek Foundation or Temasek Trust for that matter, which have been very helpful – and other foundations. So, look at it holistically, convene a group that will look at it as a whole, size it, compute how much is required and then see how we can actually operationalise the whole thing for sustainability and to meet the prioritised needs.”
“Question No 5. The Second Minister for Trade and Industry (Dr Tan See Leng) (for the Minister for Trade and Industry): Since the start of the year, global oil prices and domestic pump prices have been rising as a result of the Russia-Ukraine tension and retailers here have been adjusting their pump prices periodically. Soon after the war broke out, three retailers raised pump prices further on 24 to 25 February, while the remaining two retailers did not adjust prices. Overall, the increase in petrol and diesel prices reflect the rise in the price of crude oil over the past months. While pump prices are set by the market, the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) keeps a close watch to ensure an open and competitive market. If there is evidence of anti-competitive behaviour, such as coordinated price increases, CCCS will investigate and take firm enforcement action under the Competition Act. Well-informed consumers are also a key deterrent against unreasonable pricing. Fuel Kaki, a retail petrol price comparison website, which is developed by the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE), empowers consumers to compare not just the retail pump prices, but also the effective price of petrol across retailers, based on the various discounts and rebates applicable to them. The Government will continue to monitor price movements in the retail petrol industry.”
“Including the disabled is an important chapter of a Singapore Story that will make us truly human, caring and inclusive. Sir, I urge Government to better organise, instil more rigour and constantly review for better results for the disabled. Seniors' Mobility and Enabling Fund”
“Give the job to people and organisations with track records, who are not only commentators but willing and able to dirty their hands, tap on their networks and influence or empty their pockets to deliver the results expected of the tasks. This EMP4 is not a feel-good exercise to increase the number of volunteers, which is important, but is not first objective, which is to solve the root issues. Four, resource appropriately this EMP4. At the national level, there must at least be a computation of what disability services would cost to meet basic and then aspirational goals. Leverage on mainstream facilities and programmes. MOH and MND have several that we can tap on. MSF ought to be better funded in the national budget for these critical essentials. Partners such as the Tote Board, Temasek and other foundations should be persuaded to address important pain points. Other stakeholders such as families, family caregivers and advocates can organise ourselves better to fundraise, to find regular income streams, to call upon our networks to resource the disability services better! Be part of the solution. Five, set up a EMP4 Executive Council to report and review the EMP4 yearly after the Masterplan is published and to report and review at specific milestones or during major changes. It is naive to think that an eight-year Masterplan would still be relevant in 2030 if we start with just a plan now. Sir, the state of the union in the disability sector is both encouraging and discouraging. A lot has been invested. Government has paid a lot of attention but needs are getting complex and multiplying. Expectations are rising. Demands keep surfacing. Tough as it may be though, we must never give up this space.”
“Will MSF work with MinLaw to start a workgroup to seriously look into: (a) starting a mobile team which can focus on these services for residents and charities; (b) curating a list of experienced medical doctors and lawyers to help them; let fair fees be charged and subsidise applications for the lower-income; (c) developing an effective communication kit readily accessible to residents of different language abilities, education and backgrounds; and (d) training and sustaining a pool of volunteers able to share and guide the applicants. Enabling Masterplan for the Disabled Singapore’s next Enabling Masterplan for the Disabled (EMP4) is in the making. Unlike earlier plans which lasted for five years, this one will expire in 2030, eight years later. To ensure that this plan truly delivers better outcomes for persons with disabilities and the sector, we need to better organise, instil more rigour and constantly review for better results. I suggest the following steps to be taken at the systemic level. One, size the problem and do a better job at communicating all these main clusters of needs to all stakeholders. Two, assess and cluster the needs according to importance, urgency, size of impact, or difficulty of implementation and pay special heed to areas which are highly important, highly urgent, with higher impact on the population; especially obvious pain points highlighted so many times over the years – the dearth of services for adults; the helplessness of caregivers who continue to fret about what happens to their children after they are gone. Some who cannot cope basically take their own lives or their children's lives or worry to their graves. Three, strategically assign task forces to areas of priority. Not just any helping hands.”
“These residents are legally unable to make decisions for the personal welfare or assets of their loved one because a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA) had not been made before. Many of them are shocked that they have to apply to be legally appointed as deputies to then make decisions for loved ones who had lost capacity. If LPAs are not as widespread as desired, deputyships are even lesser known. Another group for whom deputyship is relevant are persons who are born disabled and do not have capacity to make decisions on their own. They require a deputy when their parents or guardians can no longer make decisions on their behalf, after the age of 21. Based on data from the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG), only 873 Court orders appointing deputies were received in 2021. The reasons for this low take-up rate are several: a genuine lack of awareness, difficulty with applications, costs and so forth. There is also a need for knowledgeable medical practitioners who have the experience or ability to write a good enough medical report for deputyship applications. Charities which try to help their clients with disabilities are also crying for help. They are not set up or resourced to facilitate deputyship applications for their clients. One charity head told me about the shortage of in-house psychologists and the challenges of coordinating with legal professionals.”
“Sir, pandemic or not, many individuals and businesses in Singapore are passionate and concerned about issues such as inequality and caregiving support. Unfortunately, there are still many residents in need who are either over-served or completely missed out. And the impact of giving and volunteerism is not as strong as it should be. Take food or grocery distribution for instance. Although MSF attempts to coordinate ground efforts, there is often repeat giving, wastage, food items that are not healthy or do not meet the needs of the beneficiaries. We usually have little choice. In local caregiver support on the ground, there is either lack of a local network, a local plan or a one-stop hub where a caregiver can approach. How can the Ministry play a more active role to involve the ground better and also direct help to where it is needed? I suggest the following. Set up a Local Co-ordinator Network, much like the ComLink network, for young families in need. And like ComLink, this network can comprise the local Social Service Office, Family Service Centres, other social service agencies and even the CDCs. It can identify, curate, cluster and collate unmet needs; start with the rental estates. Publish and publicise the needs in a user-friendly and accessible way. Set up a calendar of giving and volunteering in each neighbourhood. Educate potential donors on meaningful giving; focusing on needs, allow choice and not trying to create demands. And also equip recipient organisations with better volunteer management skills and tools, that are appropriate to their size and bandwidth. On Lasting Powers of Attorney and Deputyships As a Member of Parliament, it is not uncommon for me to see distraught residents whose loved ones have lost their mental capacity.”
“SPED schools of the future should not be micromanaged and those who are competent and have a proven track record should be given more autonomy and space to innovate, to experiment and to break new grounds, just as how MOE has allowed for the autonomy of schools and IHLs in the mainstream. Lastly, SPED schools of the future must actively partner and enskill family caregivers in the education of their students, of their children. Parents or caregivers will play an active role in the education of their own children. They will not wait till when they or their children become much older to worry about their unpreparedness for life or life after the parents' death. In conclusion, Sir, it is time to lift Singapore's SPED Schools to the next lap. The time is now. Special Needs Education”
“No lip service to SPED basics like person-centred planning, individual education planning and other aspects of disability-specific curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. SPED schools must become truly schools without walls and strongly facilitate learning at home, in the community, at the workplace and care facilities – just in time, self-paced and appropriately paced, bite-sized, with repositories of learning resources which are easily accessible. Three, SPED schools of the future must develop strong thought leadership and practice to the extent that it can guide and inform the support of students with special education needs (SEN) in mainstream schools – in MOE schools. In education systems elsewhere, educators with strong expertise in SPED are better regarded and even better paid. Singapore has only begun its journey in building expertise in special education. With 80% of students with special education needs in Singapore's mainstream schools, SPED schools can become the precious resource to uplift them. To reach this leadership position, the National Institute of Education, NIE, the mothership that now trains special educators, will need to upgrade and update its current service model. Set up a Special Education Academy for that. Four, SPED schools of the future should be led not just by MOE but by a SPED Leadership Council at the national level comprising many strong helping hands, with members who can represent the ecosystem of SPED – the Government, disability and education experts, family representatives and the industry. SPED schools of the future should be trusted. They should not be managed in a cookie-cutter way. They should be trusted to deliver according to the outcomes agreed upon.”
“Sir, there are 22 Special Education (SPED) schools in Singapore catering to about 7,000 students with moderate to high support needs. The Government has invested resources, manpower and funds into the sector and many of us are grateful. There are three compelling reasons why it is time for SPED schools to be elevated, to be uplifted to be more prepared for the future. One is the incredulous pace at which technology has changed lives at home, at work and out in the community. Two, the need for better education outcomes. The prognosis of SPED graduates is not as positive as expected in spite of more MOE funding, more MOE controls, more pay and more seconded MOE mainstream principals and teachers. We need a breakthrough in the SPED education system for higher returns in the form of physical wellness, literacy, numeracy, community living and independent living skills as a result of a SPED education career. Three, the need to continue learning for life and throughout life is even more critical and urgent for students with special needs. SPED school graduands literally stop learning after they leave the school gate. In a complex, rapidly digital, volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world, the Government must facilitate the transit of SPED schools to become better schools for the future. Let me propose five features. One, SPED schools of the future must be scoped to cover lifelong learning – to learn for life and to learn throughout life. Special education can no longer be about frontloading content in the first 18 years of one's life. Learning must extend beyond 18 to avoid the falling off the cliff with no hope of any more education. Two, SPED schools of the future must be masters of their mission.”
“Their mothership, the National Institute of Education, will need to be prepared to raise our educators to find their place in the new enlarged education ecosystem. NIE will have to rethink its traditional modes of management, collaborate and connect with local and global partners, to reframe and to refresh its institution and offerings. Lastly, let us start addressing the challenges of adult learners. Andreas Schleicher, OECD’s Special Adviser, has observed the striking skills gap between Singapore’s younger and older workforce, and he advised the strong need for Singapore to seriously develop our older workers. There are of course challenges – not availability of courses only but likely the motivation to learn or the way by which adult learning is designed and offered. But focus, we must, seriously on our adult and older learners. If we do not, many of them will become Singapore’s future low-wage earners. Sir, the future of education is now. Think big, believe big and let us act now. Review of Summative Assessments”
“Makes a lot of sense, if we think of how every Singaporean ought to prepare for each of the average four to five job changes he makes in his working life. Second, address the restraining forces of change, the often unspoken elephants in the room. The glaring and valid concern of educators in the face of an ever increasingly overloaded curricula; an expectation of the educators to pivot to become content curators, learning designers and life coaches; and then to teach in a way that they themselves had not quite experienced before. What about the less glaring but stronger restraining force that is unseen, below the waterline? The beliefs, the conditioned behaviours and fears of the very people involved in education: our school leaders, educators, parents and employers? Someone once quipped that education is an inherently conservative social enterprise and changing education systems is sometimes like trying to move a graveyard. It will be hard for Singapore. We are a victim of our success. We are so used, for example, to use the academic yardstick in parenting, in hiring and even in judging each other. Three, show it can be done. Be bold. Pick a few strategic pilots and go for broke. For instance, pilot through-train schools without the PSLE – an idea I brought up for years. If PSLE, regardless of what the MOE has tried, is still a sacred cow and if slain, can free time and space for change, then let go of it! The risk is not high. Singapore will not be the first in the world to operate through-trained Primary to Secondary schools. Four, start with the educator of educators. Singapore is blessed to have a teaching workforce that is well regarded, professional and motivated.”
“Singapore’s education system, as we know it, will lose its currency and relevance if we do not make some important moves. There are enough evidence and inputs to inform us on what the future of education will look like. The frontloading of education – cramping most of learning before one’s first job – has to change. Traditional content such as basic literacy, English, Mathematics, will need to be updated; adding to them, digital literacy, data literacy, financial literacy and a slew of competencies, attributes and values needed to survive in this age of unprecedented change. Person-centred, competency-based, mastery-based, self-driven, bite-sized, just-in-time, chasing skills, not paper; classrooms without walls, schools without walls – these are all quoted as the future of education. The entire education ecosystem has enlarged. Members of this House have just seen the National Library Board’s latest blueprint that talks about learning marketplaces, learning superstores that serve all Singaporeans. And NLB is not even part of MOE. Sir, the future of education is now. Think big, believe big and act now. Let me propose five ways to begin this exciting journey. First, update and cascade the vision of education so that more Singaporeans are aligned in our end in mind, from K to 12, from young to old. I fully resonate with Education Minister Chan Chun Sing’s views of what education should be – of continual learning, connecting, collaborations and confidence building. Minister spoke about having to stop thinking of educating cohorts and the traditional KPI of "Cohort Participation Rates" and replace it with the concept of "Lifelong Learning Participation Rate".”
“The concept of Total Defence has taken on a different complexion since it was first introduced in 1984 in Singapore. Back then, Total Defence was a national defence concept that rallies all Singaporeans behind the Singapore Armed Forces should there be a military threat. Over the years, Total Defence has evolved and included non-military challenges, such as pandemics, economic recessions and natural disasters. The COVID-19 pandemic has tested Singapore's resilience and unity heavily. Singaporeans now not only have to put up a strong psychological defence in overcoming mental wellness and safety management changes in their daily lives. Economically, supply chain disruptions have affected the access and affordability of essential goods for many. Civil defence was at play too in the introduction of contact tracing and safety management measures. At the same time, other aspects of Total Defence have come into play, such as digital defence, as Singapore becomes more exposed to cybersecurity risks in a highly-wired society. There is also the continued need to emphasise the importance of military defence, especially in the wake of developments as recent as the Russian-Ukraine war. Whilst many Singaporeans are fairly familiar with six pillars of Total Defence – namely, Military, Civil, Economic, Social, Digital and Psychological – not many are aware of exactly how important and relevant each of the pillars is and how each pillar of defence is manifested in the lives of Singaporeans. How will MINDEF further provide clarity so that Total Defence will be better embraced and supported by all the people of Singapore? In the light of Budget 2022, how would resources be differently applied in this regard?”
“Because of the way the programme is currently designed, charities large and small, their behaviour is shaped by how the programme is designed, they are largely driven now to organise, for example, to meet the rule, maximum five campaigns a year, up to $100 per campaign. They have to organise five campaigns in a year if they wish to obtain maximum matching. I feel there ought to be flexibility in the current EFR scheme, so that charities can focus to organise just one large successful fundraising campaign, be done with fundraising for the year, and focus their resources and their energy on the core business of serving their beneficiaries. Another way that Government can facilitate is also to help social enterprises, especially those which are owned by charities themselves. The proceeds do not go to any private pockets, it is back to the charities. If social enterprises owned by charities can be allowed to qualify for fundraising, and then being the arms of job creation and service creation, that will really help as well. So, I really hope Government will help to look at the ways by which charities can be resourced, so that these charities can partner Government even more effectively. In conclusion, Sir, I have brought up the issues of PCR – Principles, Cost of doing business in Singapore and Resourcing of charities by Government. I seek the Minister’s favourable consideration for my suggestions. Thank you for a well-crafted Budget 2022, which I support.”
“Larger charities often fill important gaps where Government and the rest of society have not stepped in sufficiently. There are gaps which are also well-known and highlighted time and again in this House. In the world of disability, for example, these include issues such as the "cliff effect" for many special-needs graduates who literally stop learning after the age of 18; the need for a continuum of residential housing options for especially disabled adults; the pleas for support by elderly parents too afraid to die for fear of what might happened to the ones they leave behind. Some of these programmes such as residential homes and day care centres for the disabled are known to be high-ticket items that cause high operating deficits on charities, in the millions, and often insufficiently covered by Government grants, and these are spaces that only the lion-hearted or the clueless will enter. Government should play an active role in resourcing charities that provide essential services that Government would otherwise have to undertake. Resourcing, of course, can be facilitated in three ways. One, by providing grants, hopefully sufficient grants, to the partnering charity. Two, by strengthening the nexus between top needs and potential top donors. Can local multinationals such as DBS, Singtel, and so on, be persuaded by Government to take ownership or adopt some identified, and maybe unfilled, top needs agreed upon by Government and its charity partners? Three, Government can help by simplifying or facilitating fundraising requirements to help charities help themselves. One case in point is Government’s partnership in this Budget to extend the Tote Board’s Enhanced Fundraising programme, or EFR, to incentivise fundraising.”
“The anecdotes I heard from the ground caused me to wonder if Government has been too blunt in this approach and if the policy intent, in this instance, has been achieved. Some employers claim that the increase in qualifying S Pass and E Pass salaries have pushed up not only the salaries of the foreign talents, but also local staff as well and, hence, cost of business. It is not that bad but there is also this nagging issue that even if firms choose to hire local staff, some candidates are simply difficult to come by. I am referring to candidates for jobs such as preschool Chinese Language teachers, educators, speech and occupational therapists, even cybersecurity and IT professionals who are also in high demand by multinational firms setting up business in Singapore. In this regard, would Government direct a think tank to study the impact of this particular policy and decide: one, if this S Pass and E Pass policy is still effective to deter foreign hires and promote local hires; and two, if ways can be found to increase the pool of local talents in higher demand? So, PCR, and lastly, "R", on Resourcing of charities. I wish to end off with suggestions on how Government can play a more effective role in resourcing charities to build a more caring and inclusive society – one of the strategic thrusts of Budget 2022. The Singapore Government has long adopted a "Many Helping Hands" approach to deliver a range of social services and assistance programmes, primarily, to work with partners who know the ground better. This has been the adoption of this strategy for a long time. There are more than 2,300 registered charities in Singapore. About 200 of these are large charities with more than $10 million in receipts.”