Desmond Lee
Singapore
“The Leadership, Enrichment, Achievement, Participation and Service (LEAPS) 2.0 is a framework for recognising student participation and achievement in secondary school co-curricular programmes.”
“The Ministry of Education (MOE) is mindful of the impact that rising temperatures may have on our students, teachers and officials taking part in the National School Games. Matches are scheduled only after students have had the time to train and become progressively more heat acclimatised.”
“As shared in Parliament in March 2026, the proportion of students with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools has remained stable, at around 7% of the overall student population. This stability is observed across both primary and secondary schools.”
“The Ministry recruits and assesses applicants based on merit and suitability for the teaching profession, regardless of gender. We look for individuals with a passion for teaching, a belief in the potential of every child, and who possess the values and character to make a positive difference in students' lives.”
“Over the past five years, an average of 750 teachers resigned from the Education Service annually, representing a resignation rate of around 2%.”
“MOE has also progressively strengthened open access within the Primary 1 Registration Framework through Phase 2C, which is open to students regardless of whether they have prior connections to the school. MOE had increased the number of reserved Phase 2C places from zero to 20 in 2014; and from 20 to 40 in 2022.”
The complete record
Every one of 3,698 lines we hold for Desmond Lee, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 53 of 74.
“There is a range of financial services and schemes available to special needs children and their families. The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) set up the Special Needs Trust Company (SNTC) about 10 years ago to better support caregivers in planning for financial and care arrangements for their loved ones upon the caregiver's demise. SNTC is a not-for-profit trust company that provides subsidised trust services. The social workers at SNTC work together with the caregivers to develop a care plan and estimate the amount of funds to set aside for the long-term care of their loved ones. The care plan takes into account the care, medical and accommodation preferences of the beneficiaries and their caregivers. Apart from administering the trust services, SNTC also administers the Special Needs Saving Scheme (SNSS) developed by MSF in partnership with the Central Provident Fund Board (CPFB). Under SNSS, caregivers can nominate their loved ones to receive monthly disbursements from their CPF savings after their demise. Caregivers can also consider other financial instruments, such as regular savings plans and insurance products, to build a financial safety net for their dependants. One example is the Dependants' Protection Scheme (DPS), a term insurance scheme provided by CPFB that is automatically extended to eligible CPF members. The DPS benefit will be paid out if the insured caregiver passes away or suffers from terminal illness or total permanent disability.”
“Some of the sellers may have themselves bought the flat off the market and the flat would perhaps at that point in time have already been impacted by the Ethnic Integration Policy. As for whether every flat is sold lower relative to the neighbours, that depends again on the attributes of the flat, the location, the height, the facing and its linkages to other amenities.”
“The positive outcomes from this, and other community events, cannot all be quantified. For example, our community partners also felt that the Singapore Bicentennial commemoration provided a meaningful platform to showcase their community's history and origins, as well as to examine different aspects of Singapore's past. Many of their events engaged new audiences. Much of the new content created has also made different aspects of our longer history more accessible to the public, and will enrich our archives for future generations of Singaporeans. We would like to thank our community partners and volunteers for their support throughout the Bicentennial year.”
“The Singapore Bicentennial commemoration was a success. There were more than 250 events held in 2019, mostly organised by the community. The total visitorship was more than nine million, with many attending more than one event. We also worked with 340 community partners and more than 3,500 volunteers, reflecting the broad support for the commemoration. Expenditure on The Bicentennial Experience at Fort Canning was about $35.5 million, of which $23 million was for the original run, and $11 million for the three-month extension due to overwhelming public demand. Just under $1.5 million was for conferences and books that explored Singapore's longer history. The commemoration also leveraged several existing annual events, for example, iLight Singapore Bicentennial Edition and Singapore Night Festival, which were enhanced to feature the Bicentennial themes. We received positive feedback from those who attended the various Singapore Bicentennial events. Many visitors appreciated the importance of reflecting on our past, in order to glean lessons for our future. Response to The Bicentennial Experience was particularly good. It was the first time that a large-scale exposition on Singapore's history had attracted such strong interest from over 760,000 visitors. In particular, younger Singaporeans, including almost 20,000 full-time National Servicemen and 105,000 students and preschoolers, came on learning journeys with their school teachers. More than 96% rated The Bicentennial Experience "Good" and "Very Good", reflecting the breakthrough in storytelling that benefits the visitors and offers lessons for other institutions to reference. About 93% said that it had increased their knowledge of Singapore’s history, and offered lessons for our future.”
“More frequent checks may be conducted as needed, for example, to look into feedback and complaints received, and where the SCC has weaknesses identified in previous audits.”
“There are more than 400 Student Care Centres (SCCs) registered with the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) to administer the Student Care Fee Assistance (SCFA) scheme under ComCare. These registered SCCs provide around 42,000 student care places, with some 32,000 children enrolled in them. While actual demand varies across areas, enrolment is below capacity in all towns. Besides these registered SCCs, there are also other centres providing student care services that are not registered as SCFA administrators. Of the appeals and feedback received from parents relating to SCC, about half, or 43%, concern particular SCC-specific issues, such as hygiene and child management. About 5% of feedback relates to affordability and 6% relates to capacity. The remaining feedback covers a range of issues from the enrolment process to the requirements imposed on registered SCCs. MSF provides guidelines to registered SCCs on recommended educational qualifications and training for their supervisors and staff. For example, MSF recommends the Workforce Skills Qualifications Introductory Student Care Centre Course, conducted by Ngee Ann Polytechnic, for new SCC staff. This course trains SCC staff to provide a safe, challenging, positive and developmentally appropriate physical environment for SCC students. All registered SCCs are required to meet stipulated standards in the areas of supervision, physical environment, operating hours, safety, health and hygiene, and provide a structured daily programme. MSF conducts audits on registered SCCs, which may include surprise checks, at least once every two years to ensure compliance.”
“One of Government's key priorities is to ensure that parents have access to quality and affordable preschools for their children. This is to provide a good start for every child. To this end, the Early Childhood and Development Agency (ECDA) facilitates the development of childcare centres (CCCs) in and near residential estates, community premises and at workplaces where there is demand. Around two thirds, or 980, of all CCCs are located in Housing and Development Board (HDB) and private residential estates, with a total capacity of 107,000 places. One third, or 510, are located at or near workplaces, including commercial premises, Government buildings and industrial estates, with a total capacity of 64,000. A small number are located in community premises, such as community centres. Of all these CCCs, 15%, or 210, are located in or near transportation hubs, that is, bus and Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) interchanges, with a total capacity of 26,000. The large majority, or about 95%, of Anchor Operator (AOP) childcare centres are located in residential estates, as families have generally expressed a preference for childcare services close to their homes. The remaining 5% of AOP centres are located at or near workplaces. The Partner Operator (POP) scheme extends the range of affordable, quality options for families, with 60% of POP centres located in residential estates, and 40% located at or near workplaces. A small number of AOP and POP centres are also located in community premises. Of all these AOP and POP centres, 15% to 20% are located in or near transportation hubs. ECDA will continue to expand the provision of quality and affordable Government-supported preschool places to cater to parents' needs and preferences.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Why Fear the Fear of Failure? – Imperatives for Refining our Education System 6.47 pm”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, "That the debate be now adjourned." [(proc text) Resolved, "That the debate be now adjourned." – [Mr Desmond Lee.] (proc text)]”
“Sir, if HDB or URA identify these vehicles in the car parks, as I have said, they will clamp or tow them away so that the owners have to step forward and settle these outstanding fines. And now with this rule where they can be prevented from entering Singapore, I think they will take it very seriously indeed.”
“Sir, I thank the Member for his concern. HDB exercises flexibility allowing delivery drivers, whether they are alone or even with some accompanying colleagues, time to do their deliveries. That is why they have bays. Understandably, deliveries will take some time.”
“Persons who seek legal protection from family violence may apply at the Family Justice Courts (FJC), for a Personal Protection Order (PPO) under the Women's Charter. Based on the most recent complete dataset, FJC received 2,811 PPO applications in 2016, of which 203 applications (7%) were filed by foreign wives against their husbands. One hundred and one orders (50%) were issued, while the remaining applications filed by foreign wives in 2016 were mainly withdrawn, dismissed or struck out.”
“We are working with the Family Justice Courts and the Syariah Court to collate the data and will share this when ready.”
“Under the Government-Paid Child Care Leave (GPCL) scheme, employers pay for the first three days of leave taken by their employees, while the Government reimburses employers for the fourth to the sixth day of leave taken. We, therefore, track take-up of the scheme by the number of people who take four or more days of leave. This is to strike a balance between collecting data for analysis and avoiding excessive burden on employees and employers to submit more data than is necessary to qualify for childcare leave. As employers only claim reimbursement from the Government for employees who take four or more days of leave, we do not require them to submit information for employees who only take one to three days. We also do not require employers to track the number of children that employees taking childcare leave have, as employees are eligible for childcare leave as long as they have at least one citizen child under the age of seven. As further data analysis would better help us understand the needs of working parents, we are continuing to refine our methods to gather more accurate and complete data for policy purposes, including matching datasets across agencies, and surveying parents to better understand their use of childcare leave. We seek to do so without burdening employers and employees with excessive data submission.”
“The Ministry of Social and Family Development has set up an Inclusive Preschool Workgroup (IPWG) involving people, private and public sector partners to learn from the experiences of local and international inclusive preschools. IPWG will develop recommendations on how to better support children with moderate to severe developmental needs within preschools. To support preschool teachers, ECDA works with the National Institute of Early Childhood Development (NIEC) and other training institutes to equip them with the skills to support children with developmental needs within an inclusive environment. In pre-service training, early childhood teachers are taught the basics of identifying and working with children with developmental needs, including where to get additional support if needed. In-service teachers can also tap on subsidised post-diploma training and Continuing Professional Development courses to deepen their knowledge and skills in this area. NIEC also offers the Specialist Diploma in Early Childhood Learning Support and the Advanced Diploma in Early Childhood Intervention (Special Needs) to equip those who wish to take on specialist roles as Learning Support Educators and Early Intervention teachers respectively to support children with developmental needs.”
“Inclusive preschools strive to provide children with developmental needs the opportunity to enrol in preschools alongside their typically-developing peers. Today, many preschools already strive to adopt a more inclusive approach and enrol children with mild to moderate developmental needs. To support this inclusion within preschools, the Government funds the provision of the Learning Support (LS), Development Support (DS) and Development Support Plus (DS-Plus) programmes. Under these programmes, professionals, such as Learning Support Educators, Early Intervention teachers, therapists and psychologists, provide intervention for children with developmental needs in their preschools once or twice a week. They also guide preschool teachers in adapting their teaching methods and activities to better engage and integrate these children in the classroom setting. The DS and LS programmes are currently offered at about 550 preschools. The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) is working with sector partners to increase the number of preschools that offer DS and LS. The DS-Plus programme was launched in July 2019 to offer more intensive support and will be rolled out to more preschools over time. With the extension of DS-LS and DS-Plus programmes to more preschools, we would be able to offer families more timely and accessible support. Currently, the majority of children with moderate to severe developmental needs attend both the Early Intervention Programme for Infants and Children and preschools to ensure that their needs are holistically met. A small number of preschools, such as Kindle Garden and Canossaville Preschool, cater to these children in an inclusive setting.”
“Our strong partnership with the PEERS Network partners has enabled us to reach out to more homeless persons and rough sleepers in need, and to offer our support. MSF will continue to bring together more community partners into the PEERS Network, and support those who are willing to open up their premises as S3Ps for homeless people and rough sleepers. If members of the public encounter any homeless individuals, they can play a part by calling the ComCare hotline at 1800 222 0000, or refer them to the nearest Social Service Office or Family Service Centre for assistance.”
“Rough sleepers can stay at S3Ps until their issues have been resolved, they have been referred to Transitional Shelters, or they have secured longer-term housing options. S3Ps complement existing shelter and residential options, making it easier for the Government and social service agencies to engage homeless people and rough sleepers in a timely manner. There are currently seven S3Ps with space for up to 56 individuals, with two more S3Ps in the pipeline. About one in five of all rough sleepers whom we reach out to on joint night walks with PEERS Network partners has accepted shelter at S3Ps. For the others who decline shelter, MSF and our partners continue to engage them to persuade them to take up shelter. MSF has also strengthened coordination among Government agencies to ensure that all rough sleepers whom we encounter are offered assistance. An inter-agency taskforce, consisting of 11 Government agencies3, was set up in May 2018. It reviews policies, programmes and protocols to address issues faced by homeless persons and rough sleepers. It also looks into upstream measures to prevent those at risk of losing their homes from becoming homeless. The taskforce builds on MSF's ongoing work to strengthen social service delivery, as well as the work of an earlier taskforce which had been set up in 2007 to strengthen inter-agency coordination on rough sleeping issues. Ms Anthea Ong asked about the joint tenancy requirement for the Housing and Development Board's (HDB's) public rental housing. Minister Lawrence Wong will address this in his reply to Assoc Prof Daniel Goh's other Parliamentary Question on this same issue.”
“MSF funds Social Service Agencies to provide shelter and social support at Transitional Shelters2 to homeless persons who require social work intervention to address their underlying issues. Social workers at the Transitional Shelters work with residents on their financial, employment, health and family issues, and help them to secure long-term stable housing. We aim to help residents at Transitional Shelters move into stable long-term accommodation within six months. An extension of stay can be granted if social workers assess that the residents need more time to work on their issues. I would like to thank all our partners for working closely with us to provide better support for the homeless. A small proportion of rough sleepers encountered by MSF have no family support and are unable to care for themselves, and may be considered to be destitute. We offer them care and rehabilitation at Welfare Homes, with the aim of reintegrating them back into the community. Statutory powers under the Destitute Persons Act are exercised only as the last resort in instances where the individual's safety has been assessed to be at risk, or the individual lacks mental capacity to make informed decisions for his welfare. MSF has also collaborated with our PEERS partners to set up Safe Sound Sleeping Places (S3Ps) to provide rough sleepers a safe environment to rest for the night. S3Ps are ground-up initiatives set up with the goodwill of our community partners. They are sited in the premises of our community partners, which are located near to where the homeless persons sleep rough. To ensure the safety of others resting at the S3Ps, our community partners generally require rough sleepers to meet some basic conditions, such as refraining from consuming alcohol.”
“Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and Ms Anthea Ong have also filed questions on addressing homelessness for the next Sitting. I will address them together with this reply. The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) considers a person to be homeless if he does not have access to housing. This includes people who have no home. It also includes rough sleepers who have homes but face difficulty returning for various reasons, such as serious hoarding, or conflict with family members or co-tenants. We seek to assist all homeless people and rough sleepers in need of help to ensure their safety and well-being. Homeless people often grapple with multiple complex issues that require Government and community support. However, some of them may not know where to seek assistance; while others may decline help or avoid contact with social services and Government agencies. Therefore, MSF adopts a community-based social work approach to assisting the homeless. Since late 2017, MSF has been partnering various community groups1 and Government agencies in regular night walks so as to better reach out to and engage homeless people and rough sleepers and share with them that there are shelters and services available. We would refer them to appropriate help agencies that can work with them on their immediate needs as well as underlying issues, so as to improve their circumstances. This collaboration led to the formal launch of the Partners Engaging and Empowering Rough Sleepers (PEERS) Network in July 2019. Partners in the PEERS Network refer homeless people that they have reached out to and befriended to help agencies and shelters to help them attain stable housing and address other longer-term issues, such as employment and family conflicts.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Building a Sustainable and Vibrant Community Arts Ecosystem 7.03 pm”
“I think this application alone will take another three minutes. Mr Deputy Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order 48(8) to remove the time limit in respect of the Senior Minister of State's speech?”
“Such registered student care centres are required to meet stipulated standards in areas of supervision, physical environment, operating hours, safety, health and hygiene, and provide a structured daily programme.”
“Under the Early Childhood Development Centres Act, kindergartens are licensed to provide half-day education programmes of six hours or less per session. As the provision requirements for kindergartens are for half-day education services only, kindergartens cannot provide care services for preschool-aged children. Nevertheless, centres that wish to provide such before or after preschool care services can do so if they are licensed as childcare centres instead. Subject to the Early Childhood Development Agency's (ECDA's) approval, preschools may provide before- and after-school care (BASC) services during their operating hours for older children aged seven to below 14 years. This is mainly to cater to working parents who require after-school care support for their primary school-going children, including those who may have siblings attending the preschool where the BASC services are provided. The BASC programme must be run in a separate space from the preschool programme, and centres can enrol children only up to 10% of the centre's accommodation capacity. The centre must adhere to stipulated safety, health, hygiene and supervision standards, to ensure the well-being of the children. To date, ECDA has not received any applications from kindergartens to run BASC services during their operating hours. Kindergarten operators may also offer BASC services for older children after the kindergarten's operating hours or outside the kindergarten premises. There are currently three private kindergarten operators which provide such services and are registered with the Ministry of Social and Family Development to also administer the Student Care Fee Assistance Scheme.”
“Children and Young Persons (CYPs) may be referred by the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) or ordered by the Youth Court to reside in licensed Homes operated by social service agencies (SSAs). Such CYPs generally continue to attend school and participate in activities in the community. Where there are mental health concerns, these CYPs are supported by school counsellors and/or MSF psychologists, together with the care team of the Homes. There are also multidisciplinary Response, Early Intervention, Assessment in Community Mental Health teams to strengthen the ability of schools and SSAs to identify and support CYPs with mental health concerns and to make appropriate referrals. Where the mental health concerns are more severe, the CYPs may be referred to medical institutions, such as the Child Guidance Clinic run by the Institute of Mental Health, where they may receive outpatient treatment, such as psychotherapy, or be admitted for inpatient treatment. Before the CYPs are discharged, caseworkers in the Homes engage the relevant medical professionals to formulate post-discharge care plans, such as follow-up treatment and safety planning. MSF will continue to work closely with other Government agencies, SSAs, schools and the community to ensure that CYPs in residential Homes are appropriately supported for their mental well-being.”
“To facilitate mobility, SG Enable provides transport subsidies to persons with disabilities through the Public Transport Concession Scheme, Voluntary Welfare Organisation Transport Subsidies, Taxi Subsidy Scheme, and the Disabled Persons Scheme. All these schemes aim to help persons with disabilities to enhance their employability, their ability to live independently and be socially engaged.”
“We support adult persons with disabilities, whether medically diagnosed with intellectual disability, physical disability, sensory impairments or Autism Spectrum Disorder, through a range of services in employment, independent living and care. Adults with dyslexia receive the same support if they have the same medical diagnosis. For job-ready persons with disabilities looking for employment, they can approach SG Enable for employment assistance. SG Enable runs career fairs, internship and mentorship programmes, and works with partner agencies on job placement and support. These are funded by the Government. SG Enable also administers the Open Door Programme Training Grant, which subsidises up to 90% of course fees to support the employability of persons with disabilities. Those who are unable to work in an open employment setting can enrol in Sheltered Workshops, which are also funded by the Government. These workshops collaborate with industry partners to offer job training and enrichment programmes. Those who require long-term care support can enrol in Day Activity Centres (DACs). These centres aim to equip persons with disabilities with community and daily living skills to enable them to live as independently as possible at home and within the community. DAC fees vary depending on the programme that the client is enrolled in, with low-income families receiving more fee subsidies. SG Enable also administers various schemes that support persons with disabilities to live independently in their homes and the community. The Assistive Technology Fund subsidises up to 90% of the cost of buying, replacing and repairing assistive technology devices that help in independent living.”
“Financial assistance from help schemes, such as the Home Care-giving Grant, MediSave withdrawal for Long-Term Care, ElderFund and CareShield Life, will not affect the computation of household monthly income used in means-testing. Household monthly income per person refers to one's basic employment income, trade or self-employed income, overtime pay, allowances, cash awards, commissions and bonuses. However, we will take into consideration various financial assistance schemes when determining eligibility for ComCare assistance and MediFund. ComCare assistance is for those who need it the most. ComCare assistance covers basic living expenses when other forms of financial assistance cannot sufficiently cover these. Where clients are still unable to meet their basic living expenses, which may include medical consumables, we will provide ComCare assistance. We will also refer them to agencies that provide subsidised or free day-care or home-care services if needed. Similarly, MediFund is a safety net for needy patients who are unable to afford their healthcare bills after exhausting other support means. Independent MediFund committees assess each applicant holistically. For disabled persons, the committees take into account their higher healthcare expenses and sources of support, including financial assistance from various schemes. This will help the committees provide more support to those who may not have access to these schemes and ensure that no Singaporean will be denied appropriate healthcare. Each family that applies for financial assistance is considered on a case-by-case basis, to ensure that they receive the assistance that they need for their basic living expenses and healthcare bills.”
“Except, Sir, that the issue of findings of overcharging in terms of amount will be determined by the subsequent hearing, but what I was highlighting are the auditors' reports. I did not mention the Court judgment.”
“I thank the Member for those clarifications. I had said in my speech that the auditors, PwC and KPMG, had all previously found those points about charging. All right. So, they are in the audit report. I would not go into the details on them. They are in the report. I am sure that Member would have read them through and through. As I said earlier, these are examples of why I think, based on the nature of this civil suit finding, there is a need for the affected town councillors to take the necessary action and that, in respect of the extent of damages, if any, it is to be determined in the hearing thereafter. And I have said that clearly. As for case law, I think the Member is really, playing lawyer. Certainly, case law on the legal duties of town councillors are few and far between. This case has generated jurisprudence on the front, but I think the key point is this. The findings of what had happened, being as they are, findings of fact, these findings will stand until they are reversed by the Appeals Court. Given the kind of findings of dishonesty, of subterfuge, of misleading town councillors, misleading the public and so on, found by the Court, what are the duties expected of a person in the shoes of a town councillor? No doubt, this may be novel from a jurisprudential point of view. But I think let us put ourselves in the shoes of Members of this House and members of the public. What do you expect of a town councillor against whom such findings have been made? What kinds of responsibilities and standards do we have to hold ourselves to?”
“I just wanted to get some clarification whether I misheard the leader of the Opposition that after this matter is disposed of on appeal and that the findings stand, the leader of the Opposition, the Town Council, will not vote for the two Members against whom findings of dishonesty stand to recuse themselves from even financial decisions. Am I right?”
“As I said earlier, this is to illustrate the seriousness of the findings and, therefore, why action should be taken in the interim to safeguard public resources until the appeal is heard. The findings in the High Court judgment have now answered some of the key questions concerning FMSS that were raised by various accountants previously. We now know the true story behind the FMSS saga, as clearly articulated by the High Court. I come back to the core of today's Motion, which is: what is the Workers' Party going to do about this in the meantime? If the same had happened in the corporate context, the management would recuse themselves from running the company. In other Town Councils, errant officers step down. The general manager of Ang Mo Kio Town Council had to step down and face the music. He was charged and pleaded guilty eventually to corruption charges. The right and proper thing to do is for the Members of Parliament implicated in this matter to recuse themselves from all financial transactions of the Town Council pending any appeal. Let professionals or other Workers' Party Members of Parliament who are not implicated to manage the financial affairs and transactions of the Town Council until the appeal is disposed.”
“Thank you, Sir. Sir, prior to the Workers' Party taking over, Aljunied Town Council, in fact, enjoyed a surplus. Within the first full year of the Workers' Party's management, AHPETC, as it then was, ran an operating deficit of $1.5 million, which widened to a deficit of $2 million in the second year. In a short span of two years, the Town Council was run to the ground. In stark contrast, Workers' Party's friends in FMSS made $1.5 million in profits in the first full year, which shot up to some $3.2 million in the second year. It bears noting that FMSS had one and only one client, which is AHTC. In other words, all profits came from the Town Council. How is it fair to the residents? How is this protecting the interests of residents and safeguarding public funds? It, therefore, comes as no surprise that the High Court had found the defendants to be in breach of legal duties, including their fiduciary duties of loyalty owed to the Town Council. On that point, I was also surprised when Ms Sylvia Lim mentioned earlier in this debate that this case involved a novel point of law, of fiduciary duty. A town councillor elected by members, by electors, running a Town Council, a statutory entity, looking after public funds, has duties. She says statutory duties. But, in fact, in Court, their lawyers argued that there is nothing that anyone can do if monies were lost, except through the ballot box. It would have been a different story, Sir, if they had ensured that their friends had charged fairly. Given the lack of track record and experience, there was simply no basis for FMSS to charge the same rates as CPG or more. The Workers' Party should have ensured that they charged less, especially in circumstances where no tender was called.”
“I thank the Member for his interest in ensuring that beyond the formal framework of supporting youth offenders in the institutions and in the one-year period immediately post-discharge, what more are we doing. Sometime ago, we ran a pilot, working with the employment agencies in the Government to provide a framework to help at-risk youths and youth offenders reintegrate into the workforce, and to help address any concerns that they may have in doing so. At the conclusion of the pilot, that effort was merged into the mainstream Workforce Singapore (WSG) framework so that employment agencies working with WSG are empowered to provide better support to at-risk youths and youth offenders. We continue to keep a close eye on that front. With the support of the various SSAs in the community, we will partner and look out for youths who start to struggle, even as they attempt to reintegrate back into society and back into the workforce. We would, of course, be very happy if the Member representing the enterprises that he does, is prepared to partner us in some future point in time, to continue this work of partnership to better enable youth offenders to find their place back in society.”
“The Government is committed to protecting and supporting youths-at-risk and youth offenders. This is a continuous work in progress. MSF will continue to work closely with other Ministries and our community partners to steer at-risk youths away from negative behaviours and provide rehabilitative and post-care initiatives to break the cycle of offending.”
“Arrests of youths aged between seven and 19 years old have fallen from around 3,100 in 2014 to 2,700 in 2018, a decrease of 13%. Third, we prioritise community-based interventions to involve families and minimise disruption to the youth's development. Such interventions include probation and rehabilitation outside of residential facilities. MSF employs a family-focused approach to address the root causes of youth offending, such as weak family support. The average three-year recidivism rate of probationers aged below 16 has fallen. A 19.5% recidivism rate for cases closed from 2007 to 2009 improved to 12.5% for cases closed from 2010 to 2014. MSF's Youth Homes run programmes to build our youths’ character and lifeskills. Formal education is a key component as well, and the majority of those who sit for national examinations, such as the GCE "N" and "O" levels, attain passes above the national average. Fourth, we sustain rehabilitative outcomes to better reintegrate children with their families and society. We announced during the Committee of Supply this year that we are extending the period of post-care support in Youth Homes from two months to one year. The longer duration helps youths to sustain good habits and skills acquired during their residence and encourages them to continue their academic or vocational training. The Singapore Prison Service adopts a similar approach for youth offenders in prison, by staging support from the point of imprisonment to their release and reintegration back into the community. In addition, labelling someone as an ex-offender makes reintegration more difficult for him or her. Hence, our recent amendments to the Children and Young Persons Act have also included enhancing the protection of youth offenders' identity and privacy.”
“Mr Speaker, the Government adopts a range of measures to support at-risk youths and youth offenders. First, we intervene upstream to address risk factors before offences are committed. In 2012, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) appointed two Social Service Agencies (SSAs) to run "Youth GO!". Under Youth GO!, youth workers would conduct street outreach to engage at-risk youths and, sometimes, it could be even late at night. Youth GO! workers reach out to around 300 youths each month and engage them in structured activities, which reduces risky behaviours and improves their relationships and lifeskills. MSF works closely with the Ministry of Education to provide the Enhanced STEP-UP (ESU) programme, benefiting more than 600 youths each year. This programme supports youths who are at risk of dropping out and those who have left school, so that they can continue their education or acquire vocational skills for employment. MSF is also working with our partners to pilot a Localised Community Network (LCN) in Jurong West, to improve the coordination among various partners and provide more seamless support to the youths and their families. If this pilot works out, we can look to expanding it. So, that is first, upstream. Second, we divert youth offenders away from the criminal justice system as far as possible. MSF appointed nine SSAs to be what we call "Integrated Service Providers" (ISPs) which support youth offenders diverted away from the criminal justice system. ISPs run programmes to address offending behaviours and have worked with around 900 youths and families so far. On average, more than 80% of the youths satisfactorily complete their programmes.”
“The Government is committed to enhancing access to affordable and quality preschools. To achieve this, the Government funds operators through the Anchor Operator and Partner Operator schemes and runs Ministry of Education (MOE) Kindergartens. The Anchor Operator scheme was introduced in 2009. Government grants are provided to Anchor Operators in return for them adhering to fee caps1 for the preschool places they provide, plus significant demands on efforts to improve quality and invest in teacher development. In addition, Anchor Operators offer Malay and Tamil language instruction, and support enrolment of children from low-income families. There are currently five Anchor Operators. As at end 2018, the Anchor Operators operated about 570 centres and enrolled 60,300 Singapore Citizen children. As the size of Anchor Operators varies substantially, it is more meaningful to look at the amount of Government grants provided for each child. For 2018, the Government provided about $6,000 of grants, on average, for each Singapore Citizen child enrolled in Anchor Operator centres. The highest grant per child was provided for children in MY World Preschool, E-Bridge Preschool, and Skool4Kidz.”
“Currently, when employers submit claims for Government-Paid Child Care Leave (GPCL), we only check whether the employee has a child below seven years old. We do not request information on the number of children the employee has. As such, the information requested is not readily available.”
“Information on the changes to the Home Caregiving Grant has also been widely reported in the media and publicised through social media posts. Detailed information on the Levy Concession and the Grant can also be found on the websites of MSF, SG Enable, MOH, the Agency for Integrated Care and MOM.”
“The Government provides two schemes to help caregivers defray the cost of hiring a Foreign Domestic Worker (FDW), in caring for persons with disabilities for all ages, including those between 16 and 64. The Ministry of Manpower (MOM) offers the FDW Levy Concession to persons with disabilities if they require assistance with at least one Activity of Daily Living (ADL). The levy concession allows caregivers to pay the FDW levy at a concessionary rate of $60 a month, instead of $300. As of 30 September 2019, there were about 2,300 families with persons with disabilities aged between 16 and 64 benefiting from the FDW Levy Concession scheme. Until September 2019, the Ministry of Health (MOH) offered the FDW Grant that complemented the FDW Levy Concession. Caregivers of persons with disabilities who require assistance with at least three ADLs could benefit from the FDW Grant, in addition to the FDW Levy Concession. The grant comprised a $120 monthly cash payment given to caregivers to offset the cost of hiring an FDW. As of 30 September 2019, there were 996 families with persons with disabilities aged between 16 and 64 benefiting from the FDW Grant. To enhance support for persons with disabilities, MOH introduced the Home Caregiving Grant to replace the FDW Grant on 1 October 2019. The new Grant provides a higher amount of $200 monthly cash payment to caregivers and can be used for a broader range of caregiving expenses beyond defraying the costs of hiring FDWs. To publicise these two schemes, the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) has reached out to Social Service Agencies in the disability sector, such as Special Education schools and care service agencies, to provide them with information on applying for the FDW Levy Concession and the Home Caregiving Grant.”
“The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) uses household income to assess whether a family qualifies for means-tested preschool subsidies. This approach looks only at the income of both parents of a child in a household. However, we recognise that for larger families with more dependants, total household income may not capture their financial means. Hence, we have allowed families with five or more members and who have three or more dependants, to have their income assessed on a per capita basis. The per capita approach helps larger families but is more involved, as we have to look into the income of all family members staying in the same residence. Extending the per capita approach to all families is not necessarily more advantageous for smaller households. ECDA has structured the preschool subsidies such that for four-member households, the household income and per capita income ceilings for each subsidy tier are equivalent. What this means is that for a four-member family with household income of $7,500, their per capita income would be $1,875 and they would fall within the same tier for Additional Subsidy regardless of the household income or per capita income approach. For a three-member family with the same household income, their per capita income would be $2,500 and they would then be disqualified from receiving Additional Subsidy as their income exceeds the current per capita income ceiling. In summary, our approach of using household income for most families with the provision for larger families to use the per capita approach, is a pragmatic one of being helpful to larger families without disadvantaging small families or imposing a more involved assessment method on most families.”
“Currently, Assisted Reproduction Technology (ART) centres in Singapore are not allowed to provide surrogacy treatment. We are still carefully reviewing our position on surrogacy, bearing in mind the following considerations. Surrogacy is a complex issue with several ethical, social, health and legal implications. Singapore's public policy encourages parenthood within marriage. Consistent with this, we will generally not object if married couples with fertility problems apply to the Singapore Court to adopt their children born through surrogacy that is carried out overseas. This is provided they are medically assessed to be unable to conceive children, and that the surrogacy arrangement is carried out in a jurisdiction where surrogacy is not illegal or unlawful. The Government does not encourage planned and deliberate single parenthood as a lifestyle choice. Hence, as a matter of public policy, we do not support the use of ART or surrogacy by singles to conceive children and adopt them. We also do not support the formation of same-sex families through adoption. All adoption applications will continue to be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Besides factors concerning the child's well-being, such as parenting practices, family circumstances and available support networks, the circumstances surrounding each application must also be taken into account to ensure that the adoption does not go against public policy. It should thus not be taken as a matter of course that applications to adopt children born overseas and outside of wedlock would be successful.”
“Such collaborations are good examples of the impact the community can make and how the community can partner the Government to support those in need.”
“Whilst the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) does not track the number of Singapore residents specifically experiencing food insecurity, we support low-income households in a number of ways, including with their food-related needs. When people apply to the Social Service Offices (SSOs) for assistance under ComCare, their needs are assessed holistically – finances, food, healthcare, employment, family-relationship issues and housing. When ComCare financial assistance is provided, it includes provision for food. Based on the assessed needs, SSOs may also link families with other Government agencies and social service agencies for other forms of support. One example is the Ministry of Health's Meals-on-Wheels programme, which provides cooked meal deliveries to eligible clients who are unable to buy and prepare their own meals. The community plays a strong role in complementing the Government's efforts on food issues. MSF is aware of more than 20 registered charities and a growing number of informal groups in Singapore providing a variety of food support, including cooked meals, dry rations and perishables, such as bread and vegetables. Apart from such charities, grassroots organisations and religious organisations, such as mosques, churches and temples, also provide free food to those in need. These organisations and informal groups are largely volunteer-driven and collaborate closely with community agencies, such as Family Service Centres, in their food collection and distribution. These community efforts provide support for households to meet their food-related needs, while contributing to food sustainability and reduced food wastage in Singapore.”
“In assessing ComCare applications for financial assistance, we examine applicants' income, owned assets, including personal savings and expenditure. Where applicants need assistance for their basic living needs, such assistance may take the form of cash assistance, assistance with their household bills, and referrals to other agencies for services, such as family services and employment assistance. In considering applicants' savings, the Ministry of Social and Family Development takes into account factors, such as contingency savings for emergency expenses and household size. There is no hard threshold, and Social Service Offices can exercise flexibility taking into account the applicants' circumstances and needs. Table 1 below provides the average amount of cash savings for households receiving ComCare Short-to-Medium-Term Assistance (SMTA) and Long-Term Assistance (LTA) per household member for 2016 to 2018. Data before 2016 is not readily available. Table 2 provides the number and percentage of ComCare SMTA and LTA applications that were rejected due to their household's cash savings from 2016 to 2018.1”
“Under Special Approval, eligible applicants who are not working or who are non-parent caregivers may receive the higher subsidy support that working mothers receive. This includes the working mother Basic Subsidy, as well as the means-tested Additional Subsidy for household incomes that are $7,500 per month and below. Currently, 2,100 applicants receive higher subsidy support under Special Approval. On average, these applicants receive $520 and $950 per month in total subsidies for childcare and infant care respectively. Low-income families who face difficulties paying for childcare even after subsidies may apply for financial assistance.”
“Children in need of care or protection may be referred by the Ministry of Social and Family Development or ordered by the Youth Court to reside in licensed Homes that are gazetted as places of safety under the Children and Young Persons Act. Social workers and other professionals in the Homes provide care to and support the daily needs of residents. The care staff to child ratio (care ratio) varies across the sector as the number of children in the Homes may vary at any one time. The table below provides the median, mean, lowest and highest care ratio in the Homes in December of each year from 2016 to 2018, and August 2019.1”
“Children and young persons (CYPs) in need of care or protection may be referred by the Ministry of Social and Family Development or ordered by the Youth Court to reside in places of safety under the Children and Young Persons Act. CYPs who commit offences may also be ordered by the Youth Court to reside in the Singapore Boys' Home (SBH) or Singapore Girls' Home (SGH), if they are aged below 16. The table below provides the breakdown of CYPs in need of care or protection who were admitted to licensed Homes and subsequently committed offences.1”
“The number of suicides fluctuates from year to year, and the number involving 10- to 19-year-olds in 2017 and 2018 is as shown in the table below.”