Gerald Giam Yean Song
Singapore
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. The focus of my supplementary question will be on the film classification guidelines, which currently state that, quote, "Chinese films meant for theatrical release should generally be in Mandarin, in line with the Speak Mandarin Campaign.”
“Mr Speaker, we cannot allow physical infrastructure expansion to blind us to the shifting digital geography of global trade nor should we allow frontier technology to reduce the economic agency of our transport workers.”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his replies. I understand the difficulty in getting the exact numbers. But is there an order of magnitude that the Government can provide as to how many such fees were collected and what is the total quantum? Just an order of magnitude, does not have to be an exact number.”
“Sir, I thank Mr Ng Chee Meng for acknowledging my OJT proposal. I am aware of the work of CTCs, but my proposal goes beyond what the CTCs currently provide. First is the depth of the wage support, and second is the structural design of OJT.”
“I thank the Minister for responding to my question just now. I am glad to hear that there will be more precise matching with the help of SWDA's the integrated intelligence function. But can I ask if this function will be provided to all jobseekers who approach SWDA or its agencies, like e2i, to seek for job assistance?”
“Sir, can the Minister elaborate a bit more about how SWDA will enhance the job search assistance programme? Specifically, will career counsellors move beyond basic resume editing and portal referrals to leverage real time vacancy data for proactive matching and advocate for candidates?”
The complete record
Every one of 984 lines we hold for Gerald Giam Yean Song, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 20.
“Mr Speaker, we cannot allow physical infrastructure expansion to blind us to the shifting digital geography of global trade nor should we allow frontier technology to reduce the economic agency of our transport workers. We must instead make it our goal to ensure that as our infrastructure and machines grow more capable, our citizens grow more secure. By implementing these targeted worker safeguards and digital asset strategies, we can ensure that technological progress serves the dignity, economic agency and long-term resilience of every Singaporean.”
“First, we should update the subsidiary regulations in the Workplace Safety and Health Act to mandate that workforce management and dispatch algorithms used in critical transport hubs explicitly factor in human physiological constraints. The code must include safety buffers for ambient heat stress, which is vital for Singapore's tarmac and port environments, alongside a mandatory human-in-the-loop override. This will give terminal safety supervisors and operations managers the clear statutory authority to adjust AI targets via safety buffer during peak operational strain or adverse weather without incurring penalties. Second, we should introduce algorithmic transparency and explanability requirements under the Employment Act to give workers a statutory right to explanation. Any automated tracking platform used to grade performance, allocate split shifts or determine contract renewals must provide employees with a clear, plain language breakdown of its underlying metrics. This ensures workers have open accessible administrative channels to contest unfair automated penalties caused by network disruptions, hardware glitches or system errors. Finally, we should consider implementing a transport sector digital dividend framework. When transport logistics and aviation operators which achieve major productivity breakthrough through the use of AI, those productivity gains must be shared. Instead of squeezing headcount or expanding workloads, operators should be required to pass these gains down in the form of structured wage increases or compressed human-centric working hours with no loss in base pay.”
“In advanced logistics networks across the world, we are already witnessing these technologies being used in ways that constrain worker autonomy and intensify the pace of work. For instance, the report highlights automated postal and distribution networks, where algorithms generate precise hyper-optimised itineraries, giving workers compressed exact time slots for each delivery. These machine-generated instructions can become so detailed that they leave minimal space for human judgement or physical adjustments. The report also underscores cases of asymmetric accountability and glitch penalisation. Workers are uniquely vulnerable to connectivity issues and system failures. The report found that when software scanners freeze or experience network disruptions, automated systems can register these technical errors as drops in worker efficiency. As a result, workers risk being unfairly held accountable for mistakes originating from computer errors rather than human errors. The report found that the introduction of digital tools had a positive impact on job quality in some more developed countries but a negative impact in some developing ones. The authors attributed this to differences in institutional and regulatory frameworks. Businesses in Singapore have to use digital tools to improve productivity and efficiency, but we must also ensure that these changes will benefit workers rather than harm them. We must remain firmly pro-innovation. Our goal should not be to ban automation or to turn our backs on technology, but to govern it so that productivity gains are equitably shared with workers rather than extracted solely from their physical and mental well-being. To achieve this, I wish to make three policy proposals.”
“By securing direct ownership over these foundational digital assets across international trading jurisdictions, we can protect our economic independence and collect licensing rents globally. This allows us to successfully reduce our reliance on absolute volatile physical cargo throughput, ensuring our national revenue is buffered even if global trade patterns shift away from our shores. We do not just need a more competitive hub. We need a structurally resilient one that owns the software of global trade, rather than just the concrete that sits on it. This strategic resilience must also extend to the second pillar of the Motion, which champions the use of frontier technologies to anchor good jobs. While automation drives corporate efficiency, we must build a system that governs these tools to protect the daily working conditions of our workers. If we do not actively govern the code running inside of our transport infrastructure, frontier technology can inadvertently lead to the extraction of productivity solely at the expense of human well-being. This is not a theoretical anxiety. A 2024 report titled "Algorithmic Management Practices in Regular Workplaces – Case Studies in Logistics and Healthcare" by the International Labour Organization and the European Commission's joint research centre provides empirical evidence of what happens when algorithmic management is introduced in regular transport and logistics workspaces. The report notes that competitive pressures related to cost efficiency and timely deliveries have driven an increased centralisation of control and monitoring through corporate governance structures, shifting the power balance within organisations heavily towards management.”
“However, next-generation hyper-efficient aircraft, such as a long-range narrow body Airbus A321XLR, completely disrupts this model. This aircraft allows airlines to establish economically viable, long and thin direct routes between secondary cities without requiring physical stopovers or refuelling hubs like Singapore. As a result, Changi Airport may face the risk of capital expansions outpacing the growth of traditional transit passengers. To hedge our exposure to physical trade volatility, Singapore must pivot from being just a physical gatekeeper to also becoming the sovereign digital architect of global trade. By anchoring the financial, legal and operational code of international shipping lines within Singapore's data jurisdiction, we secure a stronger position of leverage. Even if mega alliances berth physically at regional competitors ports, the critical financial transaction layers and supply chain networks running those operations will still run through digital nodes owned by Singapore. We must therefore rebalance our long-term capital spending. For every dollar spent on pouring physical concrete for Changi T5 or the Tuas berths, a fixed percentage could be redirected towards strategically acquiring, centralising and developing next-generation supply chain software patents under Singapore's sovereign control, such as automated customs clearing platforms and predictive route management networks. As my hon friend, the MP of Hougang, Dennis Tan, highlighted, Singapore must shift from being an outstanding adopter of foreign technology to a creator of our own proprietary systems if we want to capture high margin value.”
“Mr Speaker, I support the spirit of reinforcing Singapore's long-term economic competitiveness as a globally connected, aviation, maritime and logistics hub. The Government's traditional playbook focuses heavily on building world-class infrastructure like Changi Airport T5 and the Tuas next-generation port. However, focusing too much on physical infrastructure carries structural risks in a changing global economy. As my hon friend and MP for Aljunied, Kenneth Tiong, pointed out earlier, a neutral hub port holds traffic only by staying competitive and a port cannot pick its carriers because carriers pick their ports. We saw the reality of this structural vulnerability when Maersk shifted its transshipment hub to the port of Tanjung Pelepas (PTP) in the year 2000 and again in 2025, when the Gemini cooperation shifted the bulk of their joint shipping volume to PTP. If we do not own the shipping lines or control the underlying cargo movements, relying solely on massive, physical infrastructure leaves our economy exposed to a sunk-cost dependency risk. The global trading system is under threat from protectionism and geopolitical rivalries. In addition, there is a possibility that an opening of the Northern Sea route through the Arctic or the creation of a land bridge across or a canal through the Kra Isthmus will divert maritime traffic away from Singapore. The massive fixed cost of our expanded port may become a fiscal drag if shipping volumes fall short of the Government's projections, The long-term justification for Changi T5's massive capacity relies on historical hub and spoke models where long-distance traffic requires consolidated transit nodes.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. The focus of my supplementary question will be on the film classification guidelines, which currently state that, quote, "Chinese films meant for theatrical release should generally be in Mandarin, in line with the Speak Mandarin Campaign. Films with dialect content are allowed on a case-by-case basis." For the past 40 years or so, has the Speak Mandarin Campaign not been geared more towards encouraging English-speaking Chinese Singaporeans to speak Mandarin, instead of changing the language speaking habits of dialect-speaking Singaporeans? If so, why do the film classification guidelines still hold on to the past focus of this campaign by restricting the screenings of dialect films in Singapore? And be that as it may, can case-by-case basis in the guidelines be interpreted as allowing certain dialect films a general commercial release, without restrictions on the number of screenings?”
“Sir, I thank the Minister for his replies. I understand the difficulty in getting the exact numbers. But is there an order of magnitude that the Government can provide as to how many such fees were collected and what is the total quantum? Just an order of magnitude, does not have to be an exact number. And secondly, given the difficulty, is the Government prepared to refund these fees which were illegally collected? And is Government prepared to provide at least a window of time for the claimants to make a claim for these fees which were not correctly collected?”
“Sir, I thank Mr Ng Chee Meng for acknowledging my OJT proposal. I am aware of the work of CTCs, but my proposal goes beyond what the CTCs currently provide. First is the depth of the wage support, and second is the structural design of OJT. While the CTC grant can support training fees and process redesign, its primary lever still remains project-based capital expenditure. It does not provide the aggressive six-month salary subsidy required to derisk the transition for an employer when a worker's productivity temporarily drops because of intensive AI training. And many SMEs currently lack the internal capacity to design effective structured OJT, so my proposal provides the necessary, what we call, "design brains" through a dedicated pool of expert OJT consultants to ensure that the mastery that they achieve is both practical and is not just administrative.”
“Thank you, Sir. My response to the Minister, yes, I definitely believe Singaporeans have the ability to chart this future for themselves. But the Minister has offered a choice of two visions in his response to my speech; and I thank him for reading it carefully. But I do not agree with his characterisation of my proposal as a resignation to displacement. The National AI Equity Fund is not about a compensation for failure. It is about providing the security required for assurance and success. And I would like to remind him that the proposal I put forward has actually got two limbs. The first provides a direct stake in our prosperity. The second, which utilises nearly half the fund, is a direct investment in the skills and competencies of our workers. It provides a wage support and technical expertise that companies, especially SMEs, need to conduct on-the-job (OJT) training that is fully relevant to their workers. And earlier, Minister of State Jasmin Lau said gains from AI must translate into greater security for all Singaporeans. Can the Minister elaborate on how the Government intends to ensure workers receive a direct and tangible share of AI productivity gains beyond just more training? Specifically, what is the Government's plan to move from discretionary spending to a structural sharing of AI wealth to protect the economic agency of our workers?”
“Let us make it our goal to ensure that as machines grow more capable, our people grow more secure. By acting now, we can ensure that technological progress serves the dignity and economic agency of every Singaporean. Sir, I support the Motion.”
“It ensures our reserves provide more than just financial stability, but also the long-term economic agency of every Singaporean. As we look toward the future, we cannot simply assume that displaced workers will transition smoothly into new roles as they have in previous technological revolutions. The steam engine did not replace human judgement, but AI may do just that. That is precisely why passive reskilling is insufficient and why the financial security of a social dividend is needed. Workers shifting towards less automatable roles in entrepreneurship, care work, the skilled trades, sports and the arts do not just need training, but time and security to make that leap. Certainly, new jobs will emerge that we cannot yet imagine, but we must build a system robust enough to support our people even if that emergence is slower or more unevenly distributed than we would otherwise hope. The National AI Equity Fund provides a financial buffer for Singaporeans to make these transitions with confidence. During this year's Committee of Supply Debate, I proposed a Youth Wage Credit Scheme – a targeted wage subsidy for employers who hire younger Singaporean workers. The National AI Equity Fund extends that logic into a broader longer-term framework for all Singaporeans navigating the AI transition and other technological disruptions. Mr Speaker, the National AI Equity Fund is a renewal of our social contract for the digital age. We cannot allow AI to become a wedge that fractures our society. Instead, we must use it to become the greatest equaliser our nation has ever known. By establishing the social dividend and the mastery fund, we give every Singaporean a direct stake in our digital prosperity and the resources to stay ahead of the curve.”
“The mastery fund should be made available to all business entities and societies that are founded and based in Singapore, including micro enterprises. The use of funds should be closely monitored to ensure that it genuinely contributes to AI mastery within each firm. I estimate the annual cost of the mastery fund to be approximately $1.42 billion. Let me set out the financing details. The first source is a marginal increase of two percentage points of the corporate income tax rate for firms with annual profits exceeding $100 million. By focusing on these companies, we capture the automation surplus from those best positioned to drive growth through AI rather than headcount. Whether global tech firms or traditional giants, these enterprises are at the forefront of decoupling revenue from labour. This tax increase will generate an estimated $1.5 billion annually, ensuring that gains from record-breaking efficiency are recycled back into the National AI Equity Fund for the benefit of all Singaporeans. The second source is a targeted increase in the utilisation of our investment returns. I propose raising the maximum net investment returns taken into the Budget from 50% to 52.5%, with this additional 2.5% flowing directly into the fund. Based on current estimates, this would raise approximately $1.45 billion annually. Our sovereign wealth entities, GIC and Temasek, have been early movers into the AI space, investing in foundational firms like Anthropic and committing billions to the AI infrastructure partnership alongside Microsoft, BlackRock and Nvidia. As these global Investments profit from the automation of labour worldwide, it is only right that we recycle a modest portion of those gains back into our own workforce. Relocating 2.5% is not a radical request.”
“An argument could be made that the Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers already do this, but those are entirely discretionary. The social dividend I propose is a structural entitlement – a function of receipts rather than what the fiscal mood of the moment happens to be. That distinction matters enormously for a family planning its future. The other portion of the fund will be dedicated to a mastery fund, which will be an employer-led, on-the-job training (OJT) model that moves training out of the classroom and into every enterprise. I propose that the mastery fund provides a mastery apprentice wage covering 50% of the gross salary, capped at a median wage for six months, for any Singapore citizen entering or transitioning into an AI-augmented role. This rewards the worker's effort in adapting while lowering the barrier for firms to hire, train and retain talent in this volatile market. Recognising that many SMEs lack the capacity to design structured OJT programmes, I propose that the fund also finance a pool of expert OJT consultants. These consultants experienced in OJT design will rotate between firms to structure OJT blueprints tailored to each firm's specific needs. This will help SMEs fill their talent gap while also addressing the need to create new steps in the ladder of training and apprenticeships for new entrants into the marketplace. Furthermore, I suggest a mentorship credit be provided to employers to compensate senior staff for the time they spend on structured mentorship, turning our workplaces into true academies of mastery and ensuring that skills remain relevant to the actual needs of the economy.”
“These programmes enrich training providers while leaving workers with skills that have little economic value. This misalignment risks creating a two-speed economy where capital owners and tech-integrated firms leave behind those stuck in the slow lane of traditional employment, leading to a fundamental erosion of social cohesion and increasing the risk of long-term structural unemployment. To address this, I propose the establishment of a National AI Equity Fund. This fund is a necessary safeguard to maintain the integrity of our social contract. It is a strategic surplus transfer from enterprises which benefit immensely from AI back to Singaporeans to facilitate our collective stability. I will elaborate on the precise funding mechanisms shortly after I explain the uses of the fund. I propose the fund be organised in two distinct pillars. The first is a social dividend where revenue is distributed as a direct payout to every adult Singapore citizen. I propose an initial citizen dividend of $500 per adult citizen, scaling upward as fund contributions grow. This is modest by design. It is not meant to replace income, but to provide a tangible signal that every Singaporean has ownership in our shared future. Based on our current citizen population, this would cost approximately $1.5 billion annually – or less than 10% of last year's Budget surplus – and provide a meaningful return to every Singaporean household. This would serve as a social floor, ensuring that the gains from national digital prosperity provide tangible peace of mind and dignity for all. This dividend will provide an additional cushion for families as the nature of work evolves. It also allows Singapore to reap the full productivity benefits of AI without overly exacerbating social inequality.”
“As a small, open economy with a highly educated workforce, strong institutions and well-capitalised sovereign wealth funds, we have the tools to act swiftly and structurally, compared to many large nations. But that window of opportunity will not remain open indefinitely. While cost arbitrage makes offshoring attractive, AI could erode that advantage – not by bringing those jobs back but by enabling small teams of skilled Singaporeans to do the work that once required hundreds of offshore workers. The opportunity is not in reshoring in a traditional sense but the concentration of higher-value orchestration and oversight roles here at home, where trust, institutional quality and proximity to decision-makers matter. AI's equalising potential extends beyond white-collar work. A blue-collar worker who struggles with English could dictate in their mother tongue and have AI render as professional documentation in real time, freeing them to focus on their craft rather than their grammar. AI should be an equaliser that elevates the technical master, not a wedge that stratifies our workforce. AI tools can also power a new breed of local startups by enabling small hyper-efficient teams to create immense value and scale, achieving global reach with minimal manpower. Singapore must therefore be at the forefront of this shift while ensuring that benefits accrue to all citizens. This will require workers and entrepreneurs who are trained, skilled and adept at harnessing AI tools and innovations and empowering their employees to do the same. Our current efforts to reskill Singaporeans are often hampered by the trap of low-utility external training programmes which produce certifications that lack real-world currency in an AI-driven economy.”
“Similarly, a study published in the Quarterly Journal of Economics by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Danielle Li and Stanford's Erik Brynjolfsson found that generated AI tools boosted worker productivity by nearly 15%, with the greatest gains among the less experienced workers, thus suggesting AI can be a ladder, not just a trapdoor. It should be noted that these studies examined early and controlled deployments. As agentic AI scales across entire industries simultaneously, the distributional consequences may be more severe and swifter than early productivity research would suggest. We cannot be certain which trajectory Singapore is on. The asymmetry of risk demands that we prepare for the harder scenario, not the easier one. This concern is shared by the very architects of the AI revolution. In 2021, OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman predicted in his blog post "Moore's Law for Everything" that AI would shift power from labour to capital, positing that if public policy does not adapt accordingly, most people will end up worse off than they are today. Crucially, Altman was not fatalistic. He argued that the proactive redistribution of AI-driven wealth, including giving citizens equity stakes in the economy, could make this a broadly prosperous transition. Similarly, Dario Amodei, the CEO of Anthropic, has observed that the health of a democracy is premised on the average person having leveraged through creating economic value, a view he expressed in his 2024 essay, "Machines of Loving Grace". The erosion of that leverage is a deeply concerning prospect that requires a bold and structural policy response. Singapore is uniquely positioned to lead this response and to capture the genuine economic opportunities AI presents for our people.”
“I declare my interest as the owner and director of a company that provides software to training providers. Mr Speaker, we face a structural threat to our workforce. For decades, Singapore's economic model has been built on the premise that a highly educated and skilled workforce would hold the keys to a prosperous future and be a buffer against economic storms. However, we are now in the midst of a paradigm shift where AI is not only augmenting human capability, but in many ways replacing it. Unlike past economic cycles, where such turbulence could be written off as an episode of creative destruction, AI promises to be a harbinger of a fundamental shift in our economic and social relationships. Taking this concept further, it would even impact the roles that the Government plays in mediating between the individual and society. Today, we must recognise that the very nature of labour's economic power is changing. Failure to address this issue, even as productivity soars, will lead to an entrenched lower and middle class with the loss of economic agency. This concern is articulated by Jasmine Sun in an opinion piece for the New York Times, where she identifies the San Francisco consensus, a growing recognition that the hiring of young workers in highly AI exposed occupations is already in decline. She reminds us of the risk of a resulting permanent underclass, where the gains of technology are concentrated in the hands of a very few. Not all the evidence points towards catastrophe. A 2025 US National Bureau of Economic Research working paper found that tasks with higher AI exposure do experience reduced labour demand. However, overall employment effects have so far been modest as productivity gains offsets some displacement.”
“I thank the Minister for responding to my question just now. I am glad to hear that there will be more precise matching with the help of SWDA's the integrated intelligence function. But can I ask if this function will be provided to all jobseekers who approach SWDA or its agencies, like e2i, to seek for job assistance? Because it would not be helpful if only a small proportion of jobseekers get to benefit from it, while the rest are just provided with the resume touch-ups or referrals to portals.”
“Sir, can the Minister elaborate a bit more about how SWDA will enhance the job search assistance programme? Specifically, will career counsellors move beyond basic resume editing and portal referrals to leverage real time vacancy data for proactive matching and advocate for candidates?”
“If we are reversing a decade's old policy in the name of deeper synergy, the Government must ensure that this synergy actually translates into tangible, measurable resilience for Singaporean workers. Sir, notwithstanding the concerns I raised, I support the Bill.”
“By doing so, we ensure that every public dollar spent genuinely contributes to a successful job placement or career advancement. SWDA should be required to publish these outcome-based figures annually. Second, the percentage of subsidised training enrolments in courses mapped to documented Shortage Occupation List occupations. Parliament should be able to see year-on-year whether the public's training dollars are flowing towards gaps our economy has already documented. Third, median time to employment following SWDA-assisted job searches, broken down by age band, professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) versus non-PMET status and by individual service providers. The Government now publishes aggregate figures for these. These aggregated figures will better hold the agency and its service providers to account. These are not novel metrics. They are the logical extension of data that SWDA will already hold. The integration the Bill promises makes these metrics achievable. The question is whether the Government is prepared to track and publish them. Mr Deputy Speaker, ultimately, this merger must amount to more than just a mere reshuffling of bureaucratic boxes. Administrative neatness means little to the displaced mid-career worker stuck in a job search black hole or the young student pressured into an educational path they have no passion for. The true test of the SWDA will not be how smoothly it integrates its backend systems, but its courage to embrace transparent KPIs, its willingness to proactively champion our job seekers and its agility to move at the speed of our economy.”
“While the Bill successfully merges functions that currently sit in MOM and MOE, the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) remains an underlying driver that sets the industry transformation maps (ITMs). The agency has been described as a job skills integrator. However, the roadmap for our industries is set by the ITMs under MTI. Will the Minister explain how this new agency will coordinate work with MTI to ensure that it harmonises its ITMs with training curricula in real time? Will the Minister be able to address the potential risks that by merging MOM and MOE functions, we are simply creating a new larger silo that is disconnected from MTI's strategic planning? Secondly, the Community Development Councils (CDCs) have launched the Jobs Nearby @ CDC initiative to help Singaporeans find jobs closer to home. Would the agency be tracking the performance of this initiative and help train the job ambassadors? Mr Deputy Speaker, good intentions do not survive without good measurement. Without clear published performance indicators, this merger risks the same fate as the 2016 separation – celebrated at the inception, reversed a decade later. I would therefore suggest the Ministry consider the following KPIs for the agency as a starting framework to ensure better accountability. First, the proportion of public training subsidies going to courses that yield documented employment outcomes within six months. Public expenditure must be rigorously tracked against its economic purpose. We must move beyond simply tracking whether a jobseeker found any employment. The agency should expand the existing training quality and outcomes measurement surveys to measure whether workers are actively applying the newly acquired competencies in their roles six months after they complete the course.”
“Students should be exposed to different careers earlier, ideally starting at lower secondary level when they will be choosing their GCE "O" and "N" level subjects. This early intervention will steer students away from simply settling for subjects or courses they have no genuine interest in because they do not know any better. Would the SWDA work directly with schools to provide systematic and regular career guidance or exposure to students? This would shift the burden of career guidance away from teachers and allow students to have some exposure to industry experts as they decide on what career best works for their individual goals and talents. This would not only lead to better personal outcomes but also yield better long-term workforce outcomes. To complement this early intervention, will the Government encourage university and polytechnic admissions officers to further expand their quotas for aptitude-based admissions? We must shift the admissions waiting towards an applicant's demonstrated passion and aptitude for a specific field, rather than relying too heavily on relative academic grade cut-offs. Furthermore, will the Government work with the IHLs to afford students greater flexibility to make mid-stream switches in their educational journeys without the fear of having to start from scratch? This will go some way in creating a workforce of the future that is adaptable, brave and agile. Ultimately, these measures will minimise the systemic waste of public and private resources that occurs when graduates abandon courses and careers they were never genuinely interested in pursuing. Next, I turn to the harmonisation with other partners. First, economic planning.”
“Will the Government commit to a more intensive assistance in the job search process, particularly for those who have experienced persistent structural unemployment despite their most earnest efforts? Let me set the scene. Today, many jobseekers apply for dozens of jobs daily without customising their resumes to the specific job descriptions. In parallel, organisations utilise automated tracking systems that filter applications strictly by their degree of match with the job description, sometimes discarding all applications did that that do not meet at least a 90% keyword match. Consequently, many qualified applicants may not get a call-up for the interview. Will SWDA require job assistance programmes to guide job seekers on such technical skills? Will SWDA officers take on a more active role in bridging the gap between employer needs and candidate profiles? For instance, if the agency identifies a candidate whose profile closely matches a job description, will officers proactively pitch this candidate to the employer and advocate for them to be considered for an interview? While the onus ultimately remains on the candidate to prove their worth during the interview, this active matching by the agency would at least help jobseekers get their foot in the door. Job assistance programmes should also actively bridge skills gaps in networking and help jobseekers leverage professional connections. Such skills are critically important and often not taught in formal schooling. The Bill in clause 68 specifies the transfer of properties, rights and liabilities, which inherently includes the vast network of educational initiatives and career guidance programmes.”
“Yet, no current political office holder spans both Ministries. Does the Prime Minister intend to appoint a bridging political office holder, such as a Minister of State for Manpower and Education? The Bill's Explanatory Note states that the Bill will not involve the Government in any extra financial expenditure. But surely, the cost of this re-merger will not be zero. Could the Minister enumerate the actual cost associated with this restructuring, including the budget set aside for rebranding efforts, the updating of physical and digital collateral as well as the integration of various IT and payroll systems, among other things, across the merging entities? Would the Minister share how this compare to the costs associated with separating these agencies in 2016? The Bill specifies that the agency will provide for or facilitate the provision of career advisory and employment assistance services. Would the SWDA be providing job search assistance directly under this new integrated agency model? Currently, the Government relies heavily on third parties, such as the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) and other private career matching providers. If the SWDA were to directly provide these services, it would be able to leverage its access to MOM data regarding labour market mismatches and real time hiring trends to adapt assistance in a more timely fashion to rapid economic shifts. How would the Government ensure performance accountability of the job search assistance provided by these external partners? Job search assistance should not merely involve resume touch-ups and pointing job seekers to employment portals.”
“I declare my interest as the owner and director of a company that provides software to training providers. Mr Deputy Speaker, the SWDA Bill officially consolidates career and employment services with skills training under a single administrative mandate. This is a welcome integration. First, it has the potential to eliminate institutional silos. This lowers the risk of skills development and training occurring without an active alignment to available job frequencies. Second, it could prevent fragmented journeys of jobseekers, reducing the friction for Singaporeans. Who previously had to navigate disparate digital platforms and physical agency locations for career coaching and skills upgrading. Third, it could resolve data administrative silos by integrating the training records formerly held by Skills Future Singapore, with employment and placement records held by WSG. This integration has the potential to empower career coaches to provide holistic data-driven interventions. The Bill fundamentally reverses the 2016 policy decision to bifurcate the then Workforce Development Agency into SSG and WSG. The Minister just explained that WSG may remain under MOM to focus on strengthening employment facilitation services and programmes, while SSG moved under MOE to enable it to work more closely with our IHLs to drive the skills future movement. It is not clear to me why WDA had to split in order to achieve this. How will the Government measure the success of this merger compared to the 2016 separation? Specifically, what key performance indicators (KPIs) will the new agency use to meaningfully tackle structural issues in labour mobility and skills development? The new agency's functions straddle both education and manpower.”
“I thank the Minister for her reply. I agree that we should not assume any of these things and we should not assume that just because someone is security cleared, therefore they are safe to continue using the systems. But in this age of cybersecurity threats and Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs), should we not consider that aligning the security clearance of our CII personnel, especially those with access to sensitive systems, with public servants? Because our all public servants have to go through this standard security vetting. Why not we extend that to CII personnel as well?”
“I thank the Minister for the reply. I am asking more in terms of dealing with the issue upstream, in terms of vetting personnel. And given that many technical experts in our telco and energy sectors are foreign nationals, what specific assistance does the Cyber Security Agency provide to private CII owners to verify the backgrounds of such individuals? And could the Ministry introduce a tiered vetting system, where personnel with super user or administrator access rights to our sensitive core areas of our CII must undergo Government-led G50 security clearance, just like public servants and vendors who access our Government systems?”
“Sir, in light of the conflict since 28 February, has the Government detected any uptake in opportunistic or geopolitically-motivated cyberattacks targeting our critical energy or information infrastructure? And will it be stepping up our cyber defence stance above the baseline level during this period? Secondly, during the Prime Minister's recent meeting with his Australian and New Zealand counterparts, the focus was on securing long-term LNG supplies. Given that 43% of our gas still comes via regional pipelines, has there been a similar high profile public Ministerial level mission to Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur, to specifically secure these essential energy lifelines? And if so, has Singapore received formal assurances that existing piped natural gas export contracts will be fully honoured, despite escalating domestic industrial demands?”
“Sir, the International Energy Agency (IEA) requires its members to ensure oil stock levels equivalent to no less than 90 days of net imports. While we are not an IEA member state, this is a widely recognised global benchmark for an emergency on energy resilience. Could the Minister confirm if Singapore's oil stock levels meet this international standard to provide greater assurance for Singaporeans and businesses? And I will note that I am not asking for us to reveal all our cards, but just our adherence to this international standard.”
“I thank the Minister for the replies. Sir, the fines paid by telcos for service disruptions go into the consolidated fund, so they do not directly benefit affected consumers and businesses. The $5 to $10 goodwill rebates given out by Singtel and GOMO are not legally mandated, and these amounts may be small compared to the losses suffered by customers. I understand that in some European countries, consumers actually do have a legal right to compensation in the event of service failures. If the Ministry will not mandate compensation, what accessible recourse is available to consumers and small businesses to recover financial losses due to these network failures, given that legal action may be prohibitive? How will the Ministry ensure that financial penalties for service lapses are high enough to act as a genuine deterrent, rather than a cheaper alternative to investing in network reliability, especially at the higher end of the reliability range? And next, given the recent history of state-sponsored cyberattacks on our telcos, did IMDA and the Cyber Security Agency (CSA) conduct their own independent and thorough cybersecurity investigations beyond Singtel's internal investigations to arrive at their own conclusions and if so, did they uncover anything new?”
“Even in non-prohibited outdoor areas, a smoker walking ahead of a crowd creates a smoke trail that everyone behind is forced to inhale. This requires greater public education and clearer guidelines on pedestrian etiquette and social responsibility. In summary, Mr Speaker, while this Bill provides the necessary tools to control vaporisers and psychoactive substances, we must take this opportunity to protect residents from second-hand smoke. We must pair enforcement with a tobacco cohort ban to meaningfully reduce our national disease burden. By addressing gaps in residential smoking and committing to a clear end game for tobacco, we can better safeguard the health of all Singaporeans. Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.”
“I would like to emphasise that this does not further restrict the smoking rights of existing smokers. I was glad to hear Minister of State Rahayu Mahzam say during the Committee of Supply debate on 5 March 2026 that the Government remains open to a cohort smoking ban and will study its effectiveness and how it can be applied to Singapore's context. I hope we can move forward on this expeditiously. In fact, a crackdown on vaping without equally aggressive cigarette controls risk inadvertently pushing our youths towards smoking. We would not want this Bill, which curbs vaping, to cause a resurgence in cigarette smoking by young people. Therefore, anti-vaping strategies, which I support, must be structurally linked to a definitive tobacco phase out. Next, we must examine the chemical composition of tobacco products on the market. Nicotine is the primary driver of smoking addiction, and by restricting its concentration, we can reduce the pharmacological hook that makes it so difficult to quit using these products. Under clause 6 of the Bill, which introduces the new section 14, the Minister is granted the power to set maximum allowable amounts for substances within tobacco products or their emissions. I urge the Minister to exercise the powers granted under clause 6 of the Bill to set a stringent cap on the nicotine yield in the smoke of all tobacco products. I understand that in the European Union and the UK, the maximum emission level is strictly limited, and the nicotine yield cannot exceed 1.0 milligrams per cigarette. Can I ask the Senior Minister of State what nicotine yield limit he intends to prescribe for this for Singapore under the new section 14? Finally, I hope the Government can also address the harm of second-hand smoking on the move.”
“Currently, the authorities are only empowered to provide guidance to smokers to be more considerate. In response to a Parliamentary Question on 10 September 2024, by my hon friend, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment said that the exhalation of cigarette smoke to the open air outside of the Housing and Development Board (HDB) flat is not a violation of the Smoking (Prohibition in Certain Places) regulations when the individual is smoking within the flat, as smoking is not prohibited in residential homes. While smoking within five metres of a of an HDB void deck is prohibited, smoking at home and blowing smoke in that same protected space is allowed. This highlights a gap in how we protect the air in and around our homes. Clause 37 of this Bill defines smoking as both inhaling and expelling of tobacco smoke. This specific focus on the expulsion of smoke suggests that the impact of these emissions on neighbouring units can fall within the Bill's regulatory ambit. I urge the Minister to utilise the powers under clause 21 to set standards for the use and emissions of tobacco products, ensuring that private enjoyment does not result in the involuntary consumption of secondary emissions by neighbours. Beyond residential smoking issues, we must move beyond managing the prevalence of smoking and start legislating for its eventual elimination for future generations. I reiterate my call from 5 March 2024 and echo my hon friend, Ms He Ting Ru, regarding a cohort tobacco ban. This would make it illegal to sell tobacco products to or for them to be used by anyone born after a specific year. This will ensure that younger generations of Singaporeans never start smoking, creating a smoke-free future for our children and our children's children.”
“Mr Speaker, the Tobacco (Control of Advertisement and Sale) (Amendment) and Other Matters Bill marks a shift in our approach to drug-laced vaping and the persistent harm of tobacco smoking. Renaming the act to the Tobacco and Vaporises Control Act 1993 rightly reflects a focus on modern delivery systems for nicotine and psychoactive substances. I support the amendments in this Bill, which control the purchase, use, possession, import and supply of vaporisers and specified psychoactive substances. However, I would like to address in my speech the use of tobacco products in the form of smoking. Smoking remains a primary driver of preventable disease and death in Singapore. According to a Global Burden of Disease study in 2023, Singapore saw 2,043 deaths from tobacco and 660,152 disability adjusted life years, which are the years of life lost and years lived in disability. These statistics represent thousands of families whose lives are upended by chronic illness, disability and premature death. Our objective should not be to merely regulate a harmful habit, but to systematically dismantle the structures that allow it to persist in our society through successive generations. Crucially, the Bill broadens the regulatory landscape by amending the long title to explicitly include the control of tobacco product use. This transition from regulating commercial transactions to overseeing actual product usage provides a necessary legislative basis to address how these products impact the immediate environment of our residents. The expansion of smoking bans in public places could have unintentionally pushed smokers into their homes to light up. I have received numerous complaints from my residents about smoke drifting into their homes from nearby units.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. For the persistent dead zones that have been remain unrectified after six months, does the Ministry impose any escalating financial penalties on the providers in order to ensure that there is a stronger commercial incentive for them to resolve the issues more speedily? And second, does IMDA track whether certain mobile operators have a higher proportion of these long-term dead zones and will this track record of non-compliance be factored into the pricing or allocation of future spectrum allocations or spectrum options?”
“I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Sir, the Land Transport Authority's (LTA's) 2018 Transport Impact Assessment guidelines reflect a shift to prioritise mass transport and active mobility, which includes walking over private transport modes. Can the Minister of State give some examples of how this translates into shorter pedestrian wait times and more pedestrian priority, other than the Friendly Streets initiative, which only covers a few intersections in a few towns? Does the Government intend to give greater priority to pedestrians for all intersections, including the older ones? And secondly, the Minister of State said that the maximum time is 140 seconds? That is almost two and a half minutes. Does the Minister of State agreed that a wait time of almost two and a half minutes in Singapore's hot and humid climate, can be a bit too long and can the maximum time be reduced further, as much as to 60 seconds? And thirdly, do most signalised intersections currently use a fixed time signal, or do they change according to demand? And the last question is very fast one: does pressing the green man button, does that shorten the wait time, or does that just signal that the pedestrian is waiting at the junction?”
“I thank the Acting Minister for the reply. Just two supplementary questions. First, is there any chance that it can be brought forward, so that commuters do not have to be inconvenienced for so long? Secondly, a 10- to 20-minute delay in a trip translates to about two and a half hours of extra travel time per week for commuters along the Circle Line who go to and from work, and in view of this time loss and the extra distance travelled in fares for alternative routes, has the Ministry considered requiring operators to provide fare rebates or discounts for commuters affected by these service adjustments, as a form of accountability for the inconvenience caused and reimbursement for the extra cost incurred for this, and also for future Mass Rapid Transit rail renewal works?”
“Sir, I repeat my call for MOH to extend coverage for all chronic diseases under the Chronic Disease Management Programme and not just the 23 approved conditions. This would ensure any condition requiring long-term management can be subsidised under CHAS and paid for via MediSave. 7.30 pm Even for conditions on the Chronic Disease Management Programme list, the MediSave 500/700 withdrawal limits can be restrictive. I last raised this issue in 2021 and the Senior Minister of State argued that the risk of overconsumption necessitates these caps. However, how does this apply to public healthcare institutions, where salaried doctors follow strict protocols? The real risk is not overconsumption but undertreatment. When patients are forced to choose between their cash and their care, some may choose to skip medications or appointments to save money. Self-rationing today can lead to a massive bill tomorrow and emergency hospitalisation. This is a tremendous cost to both the individual patients and the healthcare system. Has the Ministry assessed the clinical cost of medical non-compliance caused by rigid MediSave withdrawal limits? Singaporeans want to be self-reliant and not have to appeal for subsidies or medical assistance. The Ministry should allow for more flexible MediSave withdrawals at public healthcare institutions for patients over 60, especially for those with significant MediSave balances. Funding and Supporting Mental Health”
“Sir, I am glad to hear that the Acting Minister wants to reduce the long travelling times on public transport. But he would appreciate that time is not the only factor contributing to a good commuting experience. A one-hour plus commute standing all the way is not easy on the back and the legs. And since the binding constraint as Senior Minister of State Sun said, is not buses, but bus captains, can LTA deploy more double decker buses or bendy buses on heavily utilised routes, especially during peak hours, so that commuters can get a seat during their commute, or minimally do not miss their bus because it is full.”
“Sir, walking along our footpaths should be a stress-free experience, yet many pedestrians, especially the elderly and parents with children, often feel they must be on permanent alert. Some cyclists ring their bells persistently on crowded footpaths, as if expecting pedestrians to step off the path to make way for them. I have personally experienced this and many of my residents have shared similar stories with me. LTA needs to reinforce that pedestrians always have the right of way. Public education must clarify that bells should be used only to alert, not to demand a clear path. We must also educate pedestrians to keep left and avoid sudden changes in direction, for their own safety. Residents frequently encounter cyclists zooming through bus stops, endangering passengers as they alight. Similarly, those exiting lifts at their flats face risks from cyclists speeding past. At night, the danger increases without illumination. Between 2023 and 2025, 167 summonses were issued for missing lights, but these were mostly on roads, not footpaths. This indicates a safety gap on footpaths. Why is there not more active education and enforcement of light requirements on footpaths? Furthermore, while footpaths next to cycling paths became pedestrian-only in July 2025, the converse is not true – pedestrians are not prohibited from walking on cycling paths. If a dedicated pedestrian-only path exists, why is it not mandatory for pedestrians to use it? Mixing users increases accident risks. Will the Ministry reconsider a legal prohibition for pedestrians to use cycling paths, where a dedicated alternative is provided? Barrier-free Infrastructure and Commuting”
“Sir, I think I do want to request a bit more clarity on what are the operational costs that went down more than more than expected. Is it due to things like lower take-up rate of salary enhancement schemes or is it because of other aspects that might have led to longer waiting times for patients? Because we would have expected that because of an ageing population, operating costs should have gone up and if anything, it would have exceeded the expectations and the budgeted amounts rather than decrease. So, is patient care compromise in any way because of this?”
“I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Can I get more clarity on what the operating costs that were lower than expected were?”
“Sir, I think the Senior Minister of State for his reply. In view of the 10.3% prevalence rate for Internet gaming disorder among young adults in Singapore, will the Government take more urgent measures and more strictly regulate the gaming industry? For example, will it mandate game developers to have ethical design features and implement real world currency mandates, cool down periods, and regulate gacha and pay-to-win mechanics, while protecting skills-based competitive gaming? This will help curb predatory dark patterns without stifling the e-sports industry. And second, could the Senior Minister of State provide an assessment of whether the current intervention, such as generic cyber wellness talks, are effective and well-received by young people and their parents? Will the Ministry consider holding more technical workshops that shed light on how algorithms actually work and engineer addiction, so as to foster more genuine digital literacy by both gamers and their family members?”
“Recognising these limits can help us identify the uniquely human strengths that should shape job redesign. I hope that Singapore can show the way in human-centric job redesign and would like to ask whether the Ministry has plans to develop deeper expertise in this. Let me conclude with a brief illustration. Last year, while attending a conference in Astana, I joined a day tour led by a young guide. He brought me on a short hike to a hilltop overlooking a lake, which was not a typical tourist destination. It was where his grandparents had brought him as a child to play. That personal story and human connection to a place, created an experience that no electronic guide or AI could replicate. This gives me hope that even in an AI-enabled future, human insight, empathy and storytelling will remain central to meaningful work. Supporting the Portfolio Generation”
“This will increase our reliance on foreign manpower for essential roles, while making it hard to fulfil the job aspirations of our young people. The reality is that not all Singaporeans can be professionals or corporate executives in a highly competitive and technologically driven global economy. Many will have to build careers in services and skilled trades. Wages are an important consideration and the pay in these jobs must rise. Yet job attractiveness also depends on whether work is meaningful and how it is perceived by society. My question is whether we can be bolder in redesigning jobs, such as nursing, security and skilled trades, at scale so that they become occupations our young people aspire to pursue, so that AI and robotics take over the tedious aspects of work, while workers contribute to service design, innovation and customer engagement. There should be more jobs, like Advanced Practice Nurses, offering greater professional responsibility with commensurate remuneration and recognition. The aim should be to develop roles that integrate head, heart and hand competencies, making them more resilient to AI and automation as well as more appealing to Singaporeans than single-dimensional jobs. There is a second aspect of job redesign I would like to highlight. As organisations review work processes to harness AI and automation, we need stronger capabilities for human-centric job redesign, ensuring that AI augments rather than replaces human contribution. I remain optimistic about the unique value that people bring notwithstanding the rapid development of more powerful AI models. This is because AI models lack consciousness, they do not have an innate sense of right and wrong, and they are trained based on past or existing data.”
“To address employers' concern of young recruits leaving soon after being trained, the Government could fund an additional 20% of a one-month retention bonus to be paid out only on the first anniversary of employment. I propose that this scheme be implemented for an initial three years period with a robust assessment of its effectiveness before any extension. This scheme would complement the GRIT scheme. However, while GRIT offers temporary three- to six-month placements, it does not guarantee the stability of full-time employment. This proposal encourages permanent hiring from day one. Crucially, while GRIT is limited to just 800 places, this wage credit could support a much larger proportion of the 53,000 or so students graduating each year. The Youth Wage Credit Scheme shifts the focus from temporary trainingships to immediate stable SME employment. By incentivising permanent hires, it buffers against AI-driven displacement and ensures Singapore's next generation enters the workforce with greater security and confidence. Redesigning Jobs Assoc Prof Terence Ho: Mr Chairman, I declare my interest as a senior executive of an educational institute that offers workplace learning and job redesign consultancy services. I worry about the mismatch between jobs that are plentiful in Singapore and the number of local workers who are willing to take them up. With our ageing population, jobs in nursing and healthcare will continue to grow. While generative AI (GenAI) may pose risks to various white collar occupations, jobs which require manual skills or dexterity remain comparatively resilient to automation. Skilled trades like technicians and mechanics are not so easily automated. However, many young Singaporeans do not aspire to careers in healthcare and skilled trades.”
“Sir, Singapore school leavers face a challenging job market. As AI automates many entry level tasks, firms are increasingly prioritising candidates who are immediately productive over fresh graduates. The unemployment rate for residents below 30 was 5.5% in September 2025, almost twice the national resident unemployment rate. Without access to quality roles soon after graduation, many of our youths risk a long-term scarring effect, where early joblessness correlates to lower lifetime earnings, skills atrophy and even social and civic alienation. Before I continue, I wish to declare that I am a director and shareholder of a company which is a small and medium enterprise (SME). To support young Singaporeans in facilitating a smoother entry into the workforce, I propose a Youth Wage Credit Scheme. This initiative incentivises micro and small enterprises to offer the Institute of Technical Education (ITE), Lasalle College of the Arts, the Nanyang Academy of Fine Arts, polytechnic and university graduates their first permanent positions. It will provide a 20% wage credit over the first three months of employment, covering the critical probation and initial training period. The Government could co-fund 20% of their salary with the payout capped at $1,000 per month. This ensures that graduates gain access to quality roles and structured training while the Government offsets the initial costs of onboarding. Targeting these wage credits in micro and small enterprises empowers these smaller businesses to offer more competitive wages, helping them to compete for talent against medium and larger enterprises.”
“Sir, our children are spending more time in sedentary digital engagement. This poses a risk to their physical well-being and cognitive development. Primary schools provide two to 2.5 hours of PE weekly, but logistics can eat into this short duration. This is insufficient to build a robust physical foundation in children, who need at least 60 minutes of moderate to rigorous physical activity daily. Improving fundamental motor skills early enhances movement confidence, cultivates lifelong habits and broadens our pipeline for national athletes and combat-fit soldiers. Better physical fitness also improves academic performance and cognitive focus. For a small nation, our competitive edge lies in the quality and resilience of our human capital. PE is therefore not a break from learning but a critical investment in our collective strength. I propose increasing the minimum PE curriculum time in primary schools to five hours per week. To address manpower constraints, MOE could supplement PE teachers with qualified coaches from the National Registry of Coaches and the National Registry of Exercise Professionals. Not all PE time needs to be conducted by PE professionals. Subject-based teachers could conduct movement-based lessons where science concepts, like velocity, can be taught through active outdoor experimentation, bringing knowledge to life. To overcome space constraints, canteens could be fitted with nonslip flooring and movable furniture to create multi-purpose play areas. Surfaces in schools could be covered with plastic sports tiling to expand usable PE space. By raising the floor of our children's fitness, we can raise the ceiling of what Singapore can achieve. AI-ducation”