Elysa Chen
Singapore
“Thank you, Speaker, and I thank Minister also for sharing the very interesting example of how AI is used to teach creative writing in schools.”
“I hope that as we build this new agency, we hold fast to a simple measure of success: that more Singaporeans, especially those who feel anxious today, can say with confidence that even if they stumble in their climb, they are not alone and they are able to rise again. I support the Bill.”
“Thank you, Chairman. I wanted to ask MCCY, given the encouraging utilisation of the SG Culture Pass and the good outcomes that we have achieved thus far, whether the Ministry has considered extending the SG Culture Pass to every child rather than limiting eligibility to those aged 18 and above, given that early exposure to the arts and he…”
“Thank you so much. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the answers as well. I wanted to ask whether the Ministry will consider more deliberately integrating peer support structures into the tiered care model for mental health, so that peer supporters in the community and workplaces are clearly recognised as part of the national menta…”
“Thank you, Speaker, and I would also like to thank the Minister for acknowledging the additional risks faced by vulnerable groups. With the current haze persisting since late-January and doctors flagging out the elderly, children and those with pre-existing respiratory conditions as disproportionately affected, has the Inter-Agency Task F…”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his response. It is heartening to know that MOE is already taking good steps in this direction. I wanted to ask the Minister, does the Minister agree that in a world with artificial intelligence (AI) disrupting the learning of content in a nation of smaller family sizes, it is even more important that childre…”
The complete record
Every one of 93 lines we hold for Elysa Chen, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 2.
“Are there long-term plans for mind sports and e-sports associations to receive the same level of institutional support as National Sports Associations (NSAs) in traditional sports? Thirdly, in transparency in accreditation and certification. The Bill grants SportSG new powers to establish codes of practice for coaching, training, equipment and facilities – and to accredit or certify compliance with those standards. This is a regulatory function, not just a developmental one. What mechanisms will ensure transparency and accountability in the issuance of coaching accreditations, facility certifications and training programme approvals under the amended Act? Will there be independent review panels for contested decisions? Will accreditation criteria and outcomes be published annually? Lastly, this Bill also expands SportsSG's remit with regard to planning and promoting physical fitness activities alongside sports, fostering research into physical fitness and establishing codes of practice, guidelines and standards for wider coaching, training and equipment. How will SportSG coordinate with MOE and the Health Promotion Board (HPB) to avoid duplication or conflicts in physical fitness education, coaching standards and public wellness initiatives? Are there plans to dovetail initiatives or align longer-term policy changes where there are overlaps in governmental remit? Mr Speaker, I support this Bill because it reflects a step forward for our sports sector. Competitive sport forges excellence and resilience in our athletes while anchoring Singapore's global reputation; we cannot be a thriving nation without champions.”
“Strong institutional safeguards now will protect both athletes and public trust as the organisation evolves. When we task institutions with the holistic development of young athletes, overseeing not just their training but also their academic curricula and well-being, we are asking them to act in loco parentis. The Safe Sport framework exists and the Safe Sport Commission has made progress since its launch. I would like to ask the Minister: what governance structures will be put in place to ensure these new or consolidated institutions are accountable not just to SportSG, but to the Parliament and to the public? Will their performance indicators, safeguarding records and funding utilisation be reported to this House annually? Second, on eligibility and support for e-sports and mind sports athletes. The Bill expands the definition of sports to include mind sports and e-sports. This is welcome. But definitions alone do not open doors. What matters is whether athletes in these disciplines will have the same access to funding, facilities and national representation pathways as their counterparts in athletics or football. The Singapore Esports Association has announced plans for a national training centre. Chess participation has grown by 20% since 2022. These are encouraging signs. Just over the weekend, we launched an e-sports hub in Bishan Community Centre that is purpose-built for seniors. Perhaps one day we might field an inter-generational team to represent Singapore in our community in e-sports competitions! Are there plans for e-sports and mind sports athletes to be eligible for Scholarships or the High Performance Sport system grants?”
“Mr Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill. The amendments before us expand SportSG's remit in ways that reflect how Singaporeans actually engage with sport today. Chess, bridge and e-sports are no longer just recreational pastimes but are competitive disciplines that demand mental rigour, fill stadiums and attract global audiences in the millions. This Bill's inclusion of mind sports and e-sports in our definition of sports signals that Singapore recognises competitive excellence wherever it emerges. The Bill also empowers SportSG to establish institutions for elite athlete development, to accredit coaches and facilities, and to support athletes beyond their competitive years. These are practical expansions that will strengthen our sporting ecosystem from grassroots to podium. But as we broaden SportSG's mandate, we must also sharpen our oversight. Expansion without accountability risks diluting impact and eroding public trust. So, I raise four areas for greater clarity. Firstly, on governance and protection in new training institutions. The Bill grants SportSG authority to establish institutions for developing and training sportspersons. This formalises what already exists in practice. Entities like the Singapore Sports School and the Singapore Sport Institute have been nurturing athletes for years. The consolidation of these institutions, announced earlier this year, is happening alongside this legislative change. Building on the Auditor-General's Office's constructive observations in its recent report regarding procurement, grant management and revenue contracting, we have an opportunity to establish clear governance frameworks that will serve SportSG well as it takes on new responsibilities.”
“This Bill strengthens NCSS’s ability to play that role. NCSS should conduct the sector and not dominate it. For these reasons, Mr Speaker Sir, I rise in support of the Bill.”
“Second, on Ministerial directions and information requirements. While oversight is important, NCSS plays a unique bridging role, translating sector feedback into policy refinement while balancing government priorities. What measures will ensure that NCSS retains sufficient professional independence and capacity to surface gaps in funding models, workforce sustainability and unintended policy consequences so that it remains a trusted voice for the sector rather than a purely operational arm? Third, on financial oversight. While the application of the Public Sector (Governance) Act strengthens accountability, key instruments such as the NCSS Endowment Fund and the ComChest direct significant resources across the sector. Will NCSS continue publishing annual accountability reports that set out major financial decisions, reporting metrics against its expanded mandate, and audit findings relating to these funds? Mr Speaker Sir, with its strong track record and the challenges that lie ahead, NCSS will remain a cornerstone of Singapore’s social sector. To fully step into its role as a sector developer, it must continue to act as a central coordinator, enabling agencies to support vulnerable communities, persons with disabilities and other at-risk groups in a cohesive and complementary manner. I appreciate Prof Kenneth Poon for recognising the close-knit network that the social service sector has grown into. If our social service sector is much like an orchestra made of many skilled and committed players, then NCSS is not meant to play the loudest instrument. Rather, it is the conductor, setting the tempo, ensuring harmony and allowing each organisation to contribute its strengths at the right moment. When the conductor does its job well, the music belongs to everyone.”
“Over the next two decades, the resourcing landscape will continue to evolve, with charities facing tighter fundraising conditions and manpower constraints, exacerbated by competition with the healthcare sector and regional labour markets. These pressures place a high onus on NCSS' role as an anchor institution for the sector. As this Bill seeks to formally entrench NCSS' position as a sector developer, I would like to raise several queries that relate to its long-term strategic alignment and governance. I appreciate that sections 5(3) and 15(3) of the Bill allows employees of NCSS member organisations to sit on the Board, which would ensure that ground experience and practice wisdom is brought to discussions at the board level, ensuring greater diversity and optimising the skills, experience and capabilities of the Board. However, regarding Council appointments under sections 5 and 5F, while Ministerial appointment may strengthen strategic alignment, NCSS has historically maintained close relationships with frontline agencies and smaller charities. I would like to ask the Minister: how will the new framework ensure that frontline perspectives, particularly those of smaller agencies serving high-need or emerging communities remain meaningfully represented? What mechanisms will ensure that policy direction continues to be informed by lived realities on the ground rather than predominantly top-down considerations? On oversight, what are the “prescribed requirements” for sector-nominated members of the NCSS Council? Will these criteria be publicly gazetted or tabled before Parliament? And will reasons for rejecting sector-nominated candidates or removing Council members be communicated to nominating organisations or made publicly available?”
“Between 2015 and 2025, NCSS introduced the Social Service Institute to build professional capability, launched the ComChest integrated fundraising model and developed sector-wide capability frameworks in areas, such as digitalisation, volunteer management, governance, fundraising and programme evaluation. In 2022, NCSS also introduced the 4ST Strategic Roadmap, guiding the sector towards more collaborative, user-centric service delivery. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to briefly centre this in a practical example from the ground. At CampusImpact, NCSS support has gone beyond funding alone. Through various capability-building and programme grants, NCSS enabled us to articulate our theory of change, develop service standards for our flagship programmes, adopt digital solutions to improve our productivity and strengthen our organisational processes, while hiring talent to strengthen our management team. Just as importantly, NCSS officers worked closely with our team to help us navigate policy parameters, refine our proposals and think through implementation challenges. This combination of financial support and professional guidance helped a smaller agency like ours translate intent into effective delivery. It is this role, as an enabler, connector and capacity-builder, that makes NCSS more than an administrative body to the sector. While much has been achieved, the sector faces significant challenges ahead. By 2035, Singapore's ageing population and the shrinking size of intergenerational households may necessitate a fundamental rethinking of care models.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak on the NCSS (Amendment) Bill. Before I proceed, I declare my interest as the Executive Director of CampusImpact. It is a registered charity and social service agency serving children from lower-income families, and we are a member of NCSS and also a close partner of NCSS. Over the past few decades, Singapore's social sector has made significant strides, not just in the breadth of social provision but in the intentionality and foresight of how we plan for social needs. In recent years, we have seen deliberate shifts across multiple sub-sectors toward more preventive, community-based and person-centred models of care. I would like to highlight three examples. For lower-income families, ComLink+ has moved beyond short-term financial assistance towards long-term family coaching, bringing together Government agencies, charities and the community to support families on sustained pathways towards stability and social mobility. In eldercare, the Age Well SG model and the development of Active Ageing Centres islandwide have embedded preventive care and social connection within our heartlands. In the disability space, the Enabling Masterplan 2030 charts a forward-looking vision centred on inclusive employment and lifelong learning. These efforts are supported and enabled, in part, by NCSS, which strengthens the charities and social service agencies that undergird much of our social impact work. Established in 1992, NCSS has progressively widened its remit to strengthen the social service ecosystem.”
“I thank the Acting Minister for sharing the very good news that we are seeing more athletes supported, with younger athletes and as well as CPF top-ups. Just wanted to ask two supplementary questions. First is whether the Ministry has assessed the effectiveness of current funding models in translating investment into medal outcomes, and if so, what adjustments are planned to better support athletes' competitive readiness for future regional tournaments? Second, whether the Ministry has plans to expand the SportCares Bursary and financial support coverage for youths from underserved communities to access and represent Singapore at the national level in sports such as aquatics, football and athletics?”
“This must be coupled with continued public education across all segments of our society, especially parents and young persons, on digital safety, so every child and young person can explore, learn, create and connect safely. Mr Speaker, Sir, when there is a fire, we do not delay while the flames spread. Online harm spreads in the same way a fire does: fast, invasive and devastating, and every second counts. With this Bill, we are ensuring that when victims cry out, the system answers not with delay, but with decisive, immediate protection. A law is only as strong as its capacity to be enforced. Let us ensure that this Commission has the teeth, resources, and clarity to deliver justice by providing clarity on how legal pathways work together, guidance that helps everyone understand proportionality, robust international cooperation, adequate resourcing, appropriate oversight, seamless inter-agency coordination, balanced platform responses and comprehensive protection for children. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.”
“Today, the Code of Practice for Online Safety covers six designated social media services and the new Code of Practice for App Distribution Services, effective 31 March 2025 and introduces important age assurance measures. Building on this strong foundation, I hope we might explore opportunities to extend these protections even further. Our young people are creative and curious, exploring online spaces we might not immediately think of as social media. Games like Roblox, Minecraft and Fortnite bring children together but include private messaging functionalities where risks can emerge. Messaging platforms, like Discord, WhatsApp and Telegram enable connections but can also expose young users to unwanted contact and harmful content. Would we consider extending privacy safeguards and age assurance to gaming platforms, messaging apps and other services where young people gather by requiring these platforms to implement similar protective features such as disabling unwanted messages, restricting profile viewing, disabling location sharing, and empowering parents to guide the content their children access? Furthermore, as our young people increasingly engage with generative AI services and chatbots, I hope we might consider whether age assurance and safety features should extend to these emerging technologies. Children approach AI with trust and curiosity. We should ensure these powerful tools are designed with their safety in mind. The Broadcasting Act amendments and Codes of Practice represent genuine progress. I hope we can continue this important work, advancing "safety by design" principles across the entire digital ecosystem our children and young people inhabit.”
“When agencies work seamlessly, victims would not need to repeat their trauma at multiple doors, ensuring that the system itself becomes a source of healing, not exhaustion. Fifth, on potential over censoring by online service providers (OSPs) and administrators. OSPs and administrators may over censor content to avoid risks. They may err on the side of caution and may remove content upon receiving any purported online harm notice that superficially appears to have some basis, unnecessarily silencing voices. Unlike the Commissioner's decisions, which can be reconsidered or appealed against, their decisions are not statutorily subject to reconsideration or appeal. While there is a statutory tort available to OSPs and administrators against people sending frivolous or false notices, people adversely impacted by their decisions have no statutory recourse. In most cases, there will be an imbalance of power and resources such that those impacted will have little or no means to pursue recourse. Can we avail to people whose content have been removed by OSPs and administrators, statutory torts similar to sections 91 and 94 if OSPs and administrators fail to respond reasonably to online harm notices by unreasonably removing their content? Would the Ministry consider mechanisms for recourse, a form of appeal or review, to ensure that fairness applies not just to victims of online harm, but also to users who are wrongly penalised by overzealous moderation? I would like to end off this speech by calling for comprehensive online protection for our children and young people.”
“The Appeal Committee has been granted powers to affirm, revoke or vary decisions and directions, providing an important internal check on decision-making. Given the significant powers being granted to the OSC, including directions carrying criminal consequences and orders with substantial penalties, I believe that clear accountability mechanisms will strengthen public trust and confidence in the system. I would like to ask if the decisions of Appeal Committees regarding the Commissioner's reconsidered decisions may be further appealable to the courts. Judicial oversight by direct appeal would ensure accountability, fairness and transparency and thus strengthen the credibility of the OSC. To address concerns of ensuring swift and low-cost resolution for the relevant parties, there can be prescribed short timelines, standard forms and low court fees. This would be a similar approach to that under POFMA. Fourth, on inter-agency collaboration. I appreciate that section 5(1)(e) requires the Commissioner to collaborate with IMDA and other public agencies, and section 24(4)(d) allows appropriate referrals. This reflects understanding that protecting Singaporeans online requires coordinated effort across Government. Many situations, including doxxing with intent to harass, non-consensual sharing of intimate images and image-based child abuse, constitute both harm under this Bill and criminal offences requiring Police involvement. How will the Commissioner's actions and investigations coordinate with possible Police investigations into potential criminal offences arising from the same online activity? Will there be a framework to automatically refer certain types of online harm cases to the Police?”
“Like Mr Foo Cexiang, I hope the Minister can share how the Government intends to enforce this law outside Singapore's territory other than access blocking and app removal orders. I note that access blocking can be circumvented with technology like VPNs; apps can be accessed by means other than app stores, for example, through web versions. What are the concrete steps for enforcement of directions and orders against overseas actors? Are there plans to expand the available slate of mechanisms and means of enforcement, or if there are any international cooperation protocols for extraterritorial enforcement? Let us build international partnerships that match the borderless nature of the Internet with equally borderless protection for victims. Second, many Members have already pointed out the need to adequately resource the Commission. I will not belabour this point. The Commission's promise is clear – to offer swift relief for those facing online harm. The Commission will also seek to handle reports across 13 categories of online harms, with a phased approach implementing five categories by mid-2026 and others following progressively. Could the Minister share what is the estimated case load expected for the new Commissioner's Office and Appeal Panel, and how resourcing will scale with time? The victims who turn to the Commission will be in their most vulnerable state. Let us make sure the system they encounter is not just efficient, but also humane, staffed by people who listen, understand and act with compassion. Third, on appropriate oversight and accountability. Section 64 establishes an Appeal Committee to review the Commissioner's decisions.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Bill. This legislation is a thoughtful and compassionate response to the growing challenge of online harms, such as cyberbullying, intimate image abuse, doxxing and online stalking. These are not just breaches of privacy, but attacks on dignity and are harms that leave deep scars on victims, scars that are no less real for being inflicted through screens rather than in person. When people experience online harm, every hour of delay multiplies their suffering. That is why we need to act quickly. The establishment of the OSC by the first half of 2026 demonstrates the Government's commitment to protecting Singaporeans in our increasingly digital lives. Our citizens deserve an agency that can act swiftly on their behalf, providing the support and relief they need during what can be a highly vulnerable moment. I am deeply grateful to the Minister and the entire Ministry team for their dedication in crafting this important piece of legislation and I hope to explore several queries where additional clarity and detail would help us achieve our common goal of protecting Singaporeans online. First, on extraterritorial enforcement and international cooperation for cross-border protection. The Bill wisely grants extraterritorial reach, recognising the global nature of online harm. Online harms rarely stop at our shores. A perpetrator in another country can cause immense damage here. I appreciate that the Bill includes important tools, such as access blocking in section 44 and app removal in section 45 and that it establishes calibrated penalties that reflect the seriousness of non-compliance. These provisions show careful thought about practical enforcement.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I also like to declare that I am the Executive Director of Campus Impact. It is a social service agency that works with children, some of whom are child protection cases. I acknowledge and I thank the Minister for sharing about the heavy emotional burden borne by child protection officers and welcome the news of a new social services coordination centre supported by technology to detect, sense make and connect the dots for cases from different touchpoints. I would like to also highlight that it requires a strong culture and process to ensure that data is recorded and input into the system. The issue in Megan's case was about the follow-up action, so the tech system has to do more than sense make, but also ensure that follow up action is clearly flagged to be done with the clear task owners and requiring supervisor clearance in line with the protocols that are being set up. I have three questions. How will the Government measure the success and effectiveness of this new coordination centre in improving child protection outcomes? Are there specific indicators such as faster case detection, earlier intervention or reduce recurrence of child harm that will be tracked? And how will MSF ensure that frontline social workers and community partners benefit directly from the improved coordination rather than being burdened by additional administrative layers?”
“Mr Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill.”
“The Workplace Fairness (Dispute Resolution) Bill is a commendable, intentional and balanced step to building a system that truly serves everyone. I am deeply grateful to the Minister and the entire Ministry team for their dedication in crafting this landmark piece of legislation, and call on all of us to deliberately and intentionally ensure that the provisions made in this Bill continue to build a system that is accessible and fair for all workers. When we train our mediators and tribunal officers in disability awareness, we ensure that persons with disabilities are treated with dignity and understanding. When we enable disability organisations to represent persons with disabilities, we level the playing field and ensure that power imbalances do not predetermine outcomes. When we make our systems accessible – our portals, forms, hearing rooms – we remove barriers that exclude persons with disabilities from seeking justice. And when we design evidence rules that account for the realities of how discrimination operates, we ensure that persons with disabilities do not face impossible burdens when asserting their rights. A workplace fairness system that works for persons with disabilities is a system that works for everyone. It is like a ramp. We build it for those who need it most – persons who use wheelchairs – but once it is there, it helps everyone: parents with strollers, delivery riders, the elderly. Likewise, when we design our workplace systems to include persons with disabilities, we build a Singapore that is more humane and ultimately, more just for all. And when Singapore proves that every person, regardless of ability, can access justice with dignity, we will have built not just fairer workplaces, but a more compassionate nation.”
“They can help persons with disabilities prepare their cases, organise their evidence and communicate their experiences differently. They can identify when workplace "performance issues" are actually disability discrimination disguised as legitimate business decisions. The Bill already contemplates that unions can represent parties in dispute resolution but union representatives, while skilled in employment matters, may not have specialised training in disability issues. Disability organisations bring that expertise. Sir, my third clarification concerns accessibility for the frameworks surrounding the Workplace Fairness (Dispute Resolution) Bill. Would it be possible to ensure that all materials, guidelines and submission portals related to workplace fairness disputes comply with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). These guidelines are not aspirational. They are already mandatory for high-traffic Government websites under our Digital Service Standards, with full compliance expected by 2030. Compliance with WCAG means ensuring that online portals work with screen readers for persons with visual impairments. It means providing text alternatives for all images and charts. It means ensuring sufficient colour contrast for persons with low vision or colour blindness. It means designing forms that are navigable by keyboard for persons with mobility limitations. It means using clear, simple language for persons with intellectual or cognitive disabilities. It would go a long, long way in ensuring that the information and protection provided by the Bill and its guidelines are available to all. Mr Speaker, in this House, we have spoken much about a society of compassion.”
“These calls were neurologically incompatible for him – they were complex, unstructured, unpredictable, filled with incomplete information and confusing technical jargon. They triggered intense stress and made him feel psychologically unsafe. Despite this professional recommendation for a reasonable accommodation, business needs overrode the advice. During one exceptionally traumatic call that pushed him near to an autistic meltdown, my resident made a comment expressing his extreme distress. He did not use vulgarities. He did not make personal attacks. He was simply overwhelmed. But in the debrief meeting that followed, his managers ignored his distress entirely and focused solely on what they deemed "unprofessional behaviour". His managers even threatened to negatively impact his performance appraisal, a form of indirect discrimination since his reactions were directly related to his disability, until a more senior leader intervened. Sir, if my resident had tried to challenge this treatment through mediation or tribunal proceedings on his own, he would have struggled immensely. Sitting across from corporate representatives, he would have difficulty articulating the nuanced context of his disability – why being corrected and reprimanded for a disability-related reaction constitutes harassment, why the denial of recommended accommodations created the conditions for the incident and why threatening his performance appraisal for needing accommodations is discriminatory. Sir, this is why organisations who are trained at working with persons with disabilities must be present at mediations and tribunals. These organisations understand the unique challenges persons with disabilities face.”
“The sensory environment of the meetings, the bright fluorescent lights, the hum of the air-conditioning and the unpredictability of the discussion, left him feeling psychologically unsafe and unable to articulate his case clearly. Mr Speaker, Sir, my resident's experience is not unique. This is why my first and most urgent clarification is this: is it possible for HR professionals, TADM mediators, ECT staff and High Court personnel involved in employment disputes, to undergo mandatory disability awareness training. Secondly, can we do more to ensure informed representation? My second recommendation addresses a fundamental asymmetry of power that persons with disabilities face in dispute resolution. The Bill wisely provides for representation at mediation sessions. Employers who are corporate bodies may be represented by officers or employees. In turn, parties may be represented by advocates and solicitors if claims exceed certain thresholds. These provisions are sound. But Sir, is there space for the provisions under the Bill to go further by allowing social service agencies or non-profit organisations working with such groups of people to represent persons with disabilities during mediation sessions and tribunal proceedings? Why is this so critical? Let me illustrate with another story from the same resident. During a particularly stressful period at work, my resident was required to participate in work calls with IT colleagues that his autism job coach from the Autism Resource Centre had explicitly recommended he be excluded from, or at minimum, that someone always accompany him during such interactions.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Workplace Fairness (Dispute Resolution) Bill represents a vital step for employment rights in Singapore. But as I reviewed this Bill, I found myself thinking not just about the legal frameworks and tribunal procedures outlined in its pages, but also people from all walks of life who will need to navigate these systems to seek justice. Among these will be persons with disabilities and special needs, who most often draw the shortest end of the stick. Today, I rise in strong support of this Bill. But I also rise to ask four questions that might help this legislation truly deliver fairness for persons with disabilities. Sir, the Bill before us establishes a comprehensive three-step dispute resolution process: internal grievance handling, mediation at the Tripartite Alliance for Dispute Management (TADM) and as a last resort, adjudication at the ECT or the High Court. This is sound policy architecture. But architecture must be accompanied with the frameworks to ensure that those who need access to its protection can enter. Let me share a story from a resident who came to see me. My resident is autistic. He had been working in a professional services firm when he began experiencing what he believed was discrimination related to his disability. When he tried to raise his concerns through his company's grievance process, he found the procedures overwhelming. The internal HR process required him to navigate dense policy documents he found difficult to understand. When he attended meetings with HR representatives, they spoke rapidly using corporate jargon and expected immediate verbal responses: something extremely challenging for him as an autistic person who needs time to process information.”
“I did, thank you Speaker. I would like to thank the Minister also for acknowledging the increasing complexity of a teacher's work. And to follow up, I would like to ask the Minister what safeguards are in place to ensure that internal workload surveys capture the full range of non-teaching duties, including event planning, meetings and administrative work. And second question: would MOE clarify whether teachers on the teaching track can achieve promotion to General Education Officer 5A and beyond, based solely on classroom teaching excellence, pedagogical innovation and student mentorship, without needing to chair committees or lead school-wide events and nationwide initiatives. Last question: of the teachers promoted to senior teacher or lead teacher positions at the schools, what proportion held non-teaching administrative portfolios, such as committee chairmanships, non-subject Head of Department positions or Year Head roles prior to the appointments, as opposed to solely professional development portfolios?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to ask two supplementary questions. First, whether the Ministry can shed light on the thought processes and data types selecting only the NEL and Sengkang-Punggol LRT for the free off-peak pilot – as you know, Bishan is a very crowded station with two lines as well – rather than other high congestion interchange stations. My second question is to ask the Acting Minister for Transport whether the Ministry has conducted an accessibility impact assessment to determine whether the free off-peak scheme will disproportionately benefit able-bodied commuters who can flexibly adjust their travel timing, while vulnerable commuters such as persons with disabilities, elderly commuters and parents with young children who may have inflexible schedules due to work, school, medical appointments, or childcare constraints, will gain minimal benefit? And whether the Ministry will consider alternative subsidy mechanisms targeting vulnerable commuters with fixed schedules?”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to make a clarification. I said earlier that payouts would grow from $731 monthly in 2026. I misspoke. The figure should be $689.”
“With these questions, I look forward to the Minister's reply and further details on the measures to safeguard the inclusivity and effectiveness of CareShield Life. Notwithstanding the questions I have raised, I commend the Minister and his team for their thoughtful approach to these complex challenges and support the Bill.”
“Thirdly, for those who are excluded, but may apply for coverage, what are the conditions determined by the Minister, and what are the factors and considerations the CPF board will take into account in exercising its discretion under section 6(4B) of the act to grant an approval. Lastly, what transitional provisions or support mechanisms, if any, are in place or contemplated for individuals who no longer qualify because of this legislative change? I am heartened by the Government's commitment that enhanced payouts will grow from $731 monthly in 2026, to over $800 by 2030, providing meaningful relief to families facing the profound and persistent challenges of severe disability. [Please refer to clarification later in the debate.] The streamlined assessment processes and expansion of accredited assessors will, undoubtedly, reduce burdens on families during their most difficult times. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill represents not just legislative refinement, but a reaffirmation of our social compact to care for the most vulnerable among us. It demonstrates that we can strengthen our schemes' sustainability, while deepening our support for those who need it most. The balance between fiscal responsibility and social protection is commendable and necessary for the long-term viability of our social safety nets. In my maiden speech, I describe caregiving as a relentless wind buffeting a tree in a storm. Sir, CareShield Life is like a lighthouse, standing steadfast against the storms of uncertainty that age and illness may bring. Its light must reach everyone, especially those navigating the toughest waters. As we refine the system, let us ensure that no one drifts unseen beyond its beam of protection.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of the CareShield Life and Long-Term Care (Amendment) Bill at its Second Reading. What makes Singapore a truly first world country, having systems in place to ensure we can place those who mean the world to us first. That is what truly makes us a first world society. Thus, I appreciate the Government's unwavering commitment to ensuring that CareShield Life remains a cornerstone of Singapore's social protection framework. The Government's acceptance of the council's recommendations, along with a substantial $570 million commitment in premium support over five years, clearly shows the depth of commitment to protecting Singaporeans. However, as we move forward with these important refinements, particularly the modification of underwriting criteria, I believe it would be prudent for this House to understand the potential implications. While I fully appreciate that these changes are necessary to prevent adverse selection and maintain actuarial fairness, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister on specific areas of concern. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to seek clarification on the following two points. First, how many individuals are projected to fall outside the scope of CareShield Life coverage due to the revised stipulations set out in this Bill? What might be the potential long-term impact of societal and healthcare costs of disability of persons excluded from the scheme? Secondly, can the Minister clarify the precise meaning of performing an activity of daily living without assistance all the time, as stated in the new Fourth Schedule? How would this definition be applied to individuals with temporary disabilities or fluctuating or intermittent medical conditions?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, and thank you Senior Minister of State Murali also, on the affirmation of the importance of positive neighbourly relations. To improve the process, I wanted to ask whether the Ministry is studying ways to further simplify or digitise the evidence submission process for CDRT hearings, to make it more accessible for laypersons.”
“I thank the Minister of State for her response. Several of my residents have shared that the current limit of $300 is too low for their healthcare needs. I have three supplementary questions. The first is to ask the Minister of State whether patients and families are adequately informed of the option to apply for exemptions from MediSave withdrawal limits and what avenues exist for assistance in submitting these applications? My second question: how long on average does it take for individual applications that exceed MediSave withdrawal limits to be processed and whether interim relief is available for patients with urgent medical needs? And my last question: whether there are sufficient safeguards to ensure that lower-income patients are not discouraged from applying for MediSave limit exemptions due to the administrative burden or complexity?”
“I thank the Minister of State for his reply. I have three follow-up supplementary questions. The first, what measures are being taken to strengthen collaboration with other Government agencies to detect and deter illegal employment more effectively? The context for the second question, I did have a whistle-blower coming to my meet-the-people session to share that this was happening in illegal wedding photoshoots and others also saying that this is quite prevalent in the Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) industry. So, are there any specific sectors or industries where cases of working without valid passes are more prevalent? And how is the Ministry addressing these hotspots? My last supplementary question, how does the Ministry ensure that enforcement against illegal employment does not inadvertently penalise workers, who have been misled by errant recruiters or employers?”
“Let us build a Singapore where caregivers are not left to weather the howling wind alone and can instead enjoy the "one more day" they have with their loved ones. Let us build a Singapore where every child is loved; a Singapore where every caregiver is supported; a Singapore that is compassionate, resilient and civilised. And with these efforts, hopefully, caregiving would not be so hard after all. Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Motion. [Applause.]”
“A tree longs for stillness, but the wind does not cease; a child longs to care for a parent, but the parent is no longer here. Caregiving can feel like being surrounded by a howling, relentless wind that never stops. Like the trees, we bend under the strain, pushed to breaking point. We wonder, when will we get to rest again? But this proverb reminds us, caregiving is a responsibility and a privilege. From time to time, I will get asked variations of this question, "If you could have a meal with anyone in this world, who would you want to eat with?" My answer: My father. Watching him fade in hospice care was painful, a man once strong reduced by illness. All I could do was hold his hand and sing to him and yet, even that felt hard. I was preparing for my “O” levels then, and I will be honest, there were afternoons I resented being there. But what I would not give now to have that one more day with him.”
“For starters, streamlining grant applications would enable agencies to spend less time on paperwork and more time serving those in need. The sector has also started to move beyond project-based grants to long-term funding models, thus strengthening ecosystem resilience. Let us keep moving in this direction. Beyond simple matters of funding, we should seek to expand access to skills, networks and mentorships for new and emerging initiatives to strengthen capabilities further. A well-funded and well-equipped social service ecosystem ensures no child, parent or vulnerable person is left without timely care. Empowering changemakers enables them to reach further, respond faster and lift more lives. When we provide effective organisations and agencies the tools and resources to thrive through effective policy-making and design, Singapore’s safety nets can be strong, her communities resilient and her compassion as a nation effective. It has once been said that the sign of a civilised society is a healed femur. The femur is a long bone that connects the hip to the knee. In the wild, wounded animals who break their legs die because they are unable to run from danger and hunt. A broken femur that has healed is evidence that someone has taken time to stay with the one who fell, has bound up the wound, has carried the person to safety and has tended the person through recovery. Helping someone else through difficulty is where civilisation starts. Caregiving is hard work. Again, I say, it is the hardest thing I have ever had to do. Caregiving is risky work. If we stop to care for others, we ourselves may fall behind everyone else who is moving ahead. Yet, it is a powerful sign that Singapore is truly a civilised society. There is a Chinese saying: “树欲静而风不止，子欲养而亲不待”.”
“The grandparent had already passed on. Let us not wait until it is too late. Today, services for caregivers are spread across many agencies and platforms, leaving families to piece things together on their own. We should build a national caregiver hub, both physical and digital, where caregivers can find information, book respite, access financial aid and be guided by trained navigators. Such a hub would not only streamline support for families but also help agencies identify gaps and respond more effectively. Also, although caregivers get financial support under the Home Caregiving Grant, eligibility criteria often exclude non-family caregivers, such as friends or neighbours. However, with family sizes shrinking and caregiving configurations evolving, policies should adapt to and respond to these changing realities. In addition, we should dedicate funding not only to care recipients, but also to the caregivers themselves. Caregiver-first grants can support respite services, peer support groups and training for caregivers to care for their loved ones and themselves. Just as we invest in healthcare to prevent illness, we must invest directly in caregivers’ well-being because when caregivers are sustained, those they care for thrive too. Finally, I hope to see the Government working closer with ground-up organisations and social service agencies to achieve our social policy goals. The aspirations I have outlined cannot be achieved by the public service alone. It requires the partnership of other stakeholders in the care ecosystem. Existing ground-up organisations and social service agencies are small, nimble groups that are highly effective in providing the care and support needed. How can the Government partner better with these organisations?”
“Who knows how much Rachelle’s artistic potential could contribute to society if we continue to support her? Let us close the gap for Rachelle and other post-18 persons with disabilities so that they do not step off a cliff but instead, can make the leap into the next exciting chapter of their lives, where there is still so much more to look forward to. Third, I would like to explore ways to increase respite care options for caregivers. There are over 210,000 caregivers in Singapore supporting an increasing elderly population. Slightly more than half of care recipients are aged 80 or above; one in seven older adults is a caregiver, with nearly half still working full-time and more than half being women. What this means is that our caregivers are seniors themselves, they are still trying to work full-time and the caregiving burden tends to fall on women. Many caregivers – one in five – are also taking care of more than one care recipient at a time. Despite a steady increase in service providers, only 50% of caregivers know about respite care and more than 80% have never used it, due to lack of awareness, accessibility or social stigma attached to seeking help. To make the situation even more serious, a significant portion of caregivers are unwell themselves. More than one in three caregivers are suffering from two or more chronic health conditions, but often neglect their own health to focus on those they care for. Two residents I met told me they could not get respite care for just one afternoon to celebrate their daughter’s birthday with their friends because they had to care for a grandparent with dementia. I replied that I had a contact with Dementia Singapore and could link them up to explore support. Their response? It is too late.”
“This is because there are insufficient DACs and insufficient places offered by DACs. This problem is essentially the result of insufficient funding to social service agencies operating these services, forcing DACs to limit the scale of their services as they are not able to keep up with the fundraising required to keep these services going. Then, there is the problem of affordability for parents. DAC fees can come up to more than $2,000 a month, this excluding the bus fees that parents have to pay to ensure their children can get to the centre. So, parents may be paying more than $20,000 to $30,000 a year, for as long as their child is in the DAC. This is compounded by the fact that most caregivers of persons with special needs have to pay more for recurring medical appointments and therapy needs, which only worsens if there are medical complications along the way. All of these typically start the moment the child is born and continues throughout his or her life. There is also a lack of training and funding for staff in adult disability services, unlike special education, where teachers have a Diploma in Special Education. Staff in the adult disability services do not have a key milestone training. As a result, many DAC staff are not equipped to handle the challenges that come with the care of adult persons with disabilities or they may not have enough staff to deliver their services, which lead them to take in clients with less severe needs. So, where can individuals like Rachelle go? From her story, it seems that there is a gap in our system. If so, we need stronger coordination between MOE and the Ministry for Social and Family Development (MSF) to increase support for people like Rachelle.”
“It shows a person carrying a bunch of balloons with sad faces, but only one happy face in the middle. Explaining her artwork, Rachelle wrote, and I quote, “This piece shows how it feels to carry sadness, like holding a balloon filled with heavy emotions. Even when the tears come, there’s still a reason to keep holding on. Among all the frowns is one small smile, reminding us that even a little bit of hope can lift us. ‘Holding On, Lifting Up’ is about strength during hard times, and how something small, like kindness or a happy thought, can help us rise again.” Does Rachelle not have a truly resilient and kind spirit? Rachelle’s teachers have described her as, “consistently show(ing) a strong passion for illustration and has made significant progress in using her sip-and-puff switch to produce detailed and expressive artwork. Her commitment, creativity, and ability to work with assistive technology demonstrate significant potential for continued growth in this field.” However, Rachelle, at 18, now faces the prospect of having all her hard work go to waste as she needs to graduate from her school in Cerebral Palsy Alliance Singapore and therefore, will no longer get the chance to practise the skills in design using Canva that she has acquired. This is because she cannot get a space in a sheltered workshop, which has a minimum eligibility criterion of being independent in feeding, toileting and ambulation. Rachelle also finds it difficult to be fully engaged by the activities at the Day Activity Centre (DAC) because even though she cannot move her body, she has her full mental faculties. During a visit to a DAC in Toa Payoh, I learned that the wait for a DAC can be more than a year, during which there could be significant regression in the person with disabilities.”
“00 am at night, many of these mothers found the courage and the confidence to carry their pregnancies to full-term despite initially considering abortion. As its founder, Ms Jennifer Heng, puts it, “We are almost like family members, stepping in where support is missing.” Mr Deputy Speaker, if we want stronger families and more babies in Singapore, we must make sure that every parent has the medical, emotional and community support they need to heal, to recover and to love. Second, I would like to explore support for caregivers of those with special needs. There is a phenomenon that many people who have special needs face. It is called the “post-18 cliff”. I thank fellow Member, Ms Denise Phua, for also raising this in her speech. The post-18 cliff usually refers to the sharp drop-off in support and services that happens when a young person with disabilities turns 18, particularly in the context of education, healthcare or disability support. It is called a “cliff” because there is rarely a gradual transition. It is more like stepping off an edge. Let me illustrate with an example. Last month, a resident came to me at my meet-the-people session, asking if we could appeal for his daughter to be given a chance to continue the good progress she had been making in her special education school. His daughter, Rachelle, is 18 this year. She has cerebral palsy. This is a group of neurological disorders that affect movement and posture, resulting from brain damage or abnormal development. Rachelle cannot move her body from her neck down. Imagine not being able to move your body from the neck down. What can you do? Do you know what Rachelle can do? She has painted artwork that has been displayed in Alexandra Hospital, and one of her pieces is titled “Holding On, Lifting Up”.”
“One in five pregnant women here faces antenatal depression. But stigma keeps most mothers silent. Over 90% do not report their symptoms and many doctors admit that they seldom raise the topic. We are relying on a reactive system, waiting for women to seek help. Too often, they suffer in silence. Mr Deputy Speaker, I propose we make postnatal mental health check-ups a routine part of infant milestone visits. When mothers bring their babies for check-ups and vaccinations, let us also care for the mothers. A simple screening, a conversation, can make all the difference between despair and hope. And yes, fathers too – I see fathers in the Chamber nodding vigorously. They should be given space to talk about their mental well-being, because our children need both parents. I would like to encourage hospitals, clinics and community programmes to involve fathers in postnatal counselling and support. I would also like to review paternity leave and shared parental leave uptake to normalise caregiving as a joint responsibility, not one carried by mothers alone. Beyond medical support, mothers also need community support. Every parent’s journey is different – the single mother juggling work and caregiving, the foreign parent far from family help, the unwed mother or father who faces stigma. We must ensure that parent support groups, community initiatives and counselling are open and welcoming to all. Consider Safe Place, a ground-up group that walks with women facing unsupported pregnancies. They found that many married women, not just unwed ones, considered abortion not because of finances alone, but because they felt alone in caregiving. When Safe Place offered emotional, social and practical support, being available to support mothers even at 3.”
“In the course of the last few months, I have spoken to many residents in Bishan East-Sin Ming and heard their stories. I would like to focus on three types of caregivers today. The first is the sleep-deprived mother, struggling to navigate the complexities of a new family dynamic and the physical demands of ensuring her tiny baby is fed, changed, bathed safely and that every milk bottle is washed and sterilised, all while trying her best to recover and care for herself so that she can function well enough to take better care of her baby. Second, caregivers for a loved one with special needs, who have faced stigma and rejection on top of the daily hurdles they have had to overcome just to lead their lives alongside the rest of us. Third, adult children who are caring for their ageing parents, juggling between work and family, while trying to understand and accept how their parents, who used to be so strong, so dependable, are now losing their mental faculties and their physical abilities. Mr Deputy Speaker, let me begin with the first caregivers each of us have known – our mothers and fathers. After childbirth, a mother carries an internal wound the size of a palm, about 8.5 centimetres across, where the placenta was attached to her womb. Yet, after such a major event, a mother may be given only one postnatal check-up. In contrast, throughout the baby's first and maybe even second year, the child receives multiple milestone checks and vaccinations. Our support systems should look deeper into this imbalance. Mothers' health, physical and mental, is just as crucial as their children's. We know that postnatal depression is on the rise. At KK Women's and Children's Hospital alone, cases increased by 47% in just three years.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to make two declarations. First, I would like to declare my interest as the Executive Director of CampusImpact, a charity that serves children from lower-income families. Sir, the second declaration is that making this speech is the second hardest thing I have ever had to do. I stand in this House, knowing that the opportunity to serve is a privilege and a heavy responsibility. The words spoken in this House are not just words. They carry weight. They shape the policies and culture of our country and touch the lives of many Singaporeans. That is why, standing here, making this speech, is terrifying and difficult. But it is only the second hardest thing I have ever had to do. The hardest? Being a mother. For those who are parents among us, do you remember how difficult it was to wake up at 1.00 am, 4.00 am, 7.00 am for night feeds or when your children cannot stop vomiting and you have to rush them to the hospital? It takes everything you have got to care for a child. While the responsibility of caring for my fellow citizens as an MP is a weighty one, the responsibility of doing so as a parent to my child is even more so. But as difficult as it has been, my journey as a mother has also strengthened my belief in strong, thriving families. This belief drives me, today, to speak up for caregivers, the quiet pillars of our society who hold up our families. As President Tharman said in his speech, Singapore must remain a home where the vulnerable amongst us are not only cared for with compassion but also empowered to pursue their hopes and dreams. It is our caregivers who made this possible – mothers, fathers, children and spouses who quietly bear the weight of love and responsibility.”
“Thank you, Minister, for appreciating that children pick up behaviours from home and other contexts. I also like to ask the Minister if he can share what support measures are in place for students who have been identified as victims or perpetrators of bullying who also experience child maltreatment at home? And also, how does the Ministry ensure that teachers and school staff are trained to recognise signs of child maltreatment linked to bullying cases? My last question: because we understand that each case is varying in complexity, can the Ministry provide an average timeframe for resolution to report to closure in bullying cases that have been reported across schools?”