He Ting Ru
Singapore
“When our researchers develop AI system that work across Southeast Asian languages, we create tools that can be deployed in our own service sectors, our hospitals, our schools. When our companies lead in AI adoption, we generate demand for new skills, new roles and new industries that our workers can be trained into.”
“Thank you, Sir. I would like to ask the Minister for further colour about the longitudinal tracking of bullying incidents, as in my Parliamentary Question, both in terms of perpetrators and how does the Ministry actually track that.”
“Mr Speaker, while I am supportive of the Government's zero tolerance approach towards stamping out vapes, we should also be holistic and mindful of the socio-economic and even possibly psychological undercurrents that give rise to vaping.”
“With decisions like periodic increases to tobacco duties, I hope we are seeking to maximise the sin tax impact instead of considering its revenue impact. Similarly, we should be doing more to curb the health impacts of public smoking, for instance, by tackling smoking while walking.”
“Sir, I would like to once again thank our Parliamentary staff for their work in ensuring the smooth running of the various functions of our Parliament. And with that I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“For instance, during a debate on the Online Safety Bill, we proposed that OSC submit annual reports detailing the number and categories of reports received, directions issued and findings of online harms trends.”
The complete record
Every one of 636 lines we hold for He Ting Ru, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 13.
“Mr Speaker, I will focus my speech today on concerns that I have on Part 3 of the Law Enforcement and Other Matters Bill, which deal with the apprehension of persons. Clause 13 of the Bill amends section 7 of the Mental Health Care and Treatment Act 2008, or MHCTA, by reducing the threshold requirement for a police or special police officer to exercise the power to apprehend a person. This amendment supersedes the interpretation of danger by the General Division of the High Court in Mah Kiat Seng vs Attorney-General and Others. In that case, the Court held at paragraph 48 that the use of the word "danger" implied a degree of imminence, that is, that without the Police officer's intervention, such behaviour is likely to occur within a short time, which the Judge stated that he would consider to be a matter of hours rather than days. In addition, the Court clarified that there must be a reasonably imminent risk of physical harm to the person apprehended or others. The new amendment proposed in this Bill supersedes the High Court's interpretation by empowering Police and special police officers to apprehend a person, P, if they believe that P may endanger peace or any other person's life or personal safety. It would also introduce a new sub-clause (2), subsection (aa), which provides that it is sufficient that the danger to life or personal safety is only reasonably likely to occur and need not be imminent and actual harm is not required.”
“Can I ask whether the reports will eventually be made available in full for the public, because I understand that sometimes these are only made available in a redacted form. So, can I ask whether these will be made available in full?”
“I thank the Minister for his reply. I have a couple of supplementary questions. First is, in terms of the previous environmental impact assessments that were done, which found a significant ecological connectivity between the Keppel Club site and also the Southern Ridges and Labrador Nature Reserve site. The EIS for the nearby Keppel Club site found that even with mitigation measures, redevelopment could have major residual impact on biodiversity due to permanent habitat loss and fragmentation. In light of this, can the Minister clarify what specific plans are in place to designate sizeable core habitat patches and green corridors within Gillman Barracks to maintain landscape connectivity between the Labrador Nature Reserve, the Southern Ridges and the Greater Southern Waterfront? If there are no such plans, how does the Government intend to prevent critical ecological linkages from being irreversibly compromised? I also heard the Minister mention earlier that the existing tenants whose leases will run out progressively until 2030, will not be affected if the plans to redevelop the site goes ahead at Gillman Barracks. However, I anticipate that there will be some new tenants who might come in and can the Minister confirm whether the leases will run beyond 2030? And also, will help be given to these tenants who come in a bit later, especially during the rejuvenation period? Will there be help given to them to find new leases elsewhere if the redevelopment plans actually do go through? And finally, my last supplementary question is, I think the Minister mentioned earlier that there will be certain heritage and environmental impact assessments also carried out and that these will be made available.”
“Thank you, Speaker. I have two quick clarifications. The first is, I thank Senior Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam for saying that the amendment supersedes the ruling in GCP vs Public Prosecutor. I acknowledge that amendment supersedes the court sentencing framework. However, I am not clear about the use of the interpretation of meaning of risk of disclosing HIV. So, I would like to ask for further clarifications about that. What specifically in particular are the persons living with HIV are supposed to do in that context. The second point that I wanted to seek further clarifications on is that I do not believe that there is any local study on the effectiveness of criminalisation of HIV non-disclosure on reducing HIV infection rates, albeit this time where we are talking about a reduced group of people that this applies to. I am just wondering what can MOH do to address the potential stigma that might arise from this continued criminalisation.”
“In that case, the Judge held that even though the accused had only been informed by the Public Health Officer working at the National Public Health Unit that he was required to disclose his HIV-positive status to his sexual partners, the Public Health Officer's opinion of the law was not conclusive. Instead, the High Court held that the plain language of section 23 means that a person must communicate the risk of contracting HIV and not merely one's HIV status. This judgement has caused confusion among people who are subject to the disclosure obligation under section 23 as to what would satisfy this requirement to communicate the risk of contracting HIV. What steps have or will the Government take to clarify the ambiguity in section 23? Finally, under section 23(2) of the IDA, persons who have reason to believe that they have been exposed to a significant risk of contracting HIV similarly have a legal duty to disclose the risk of contracting HIV to their sexual partners or take other precautionary steps before engaging in sexual activity. Can the Government provide an update on the number of complaints it has received and the number of investigations it has conducted under this law since it was introduced in 2008? Can the Government also confirm if, in light of medical advances, the reasonable precautions under section 23(2)(c) will include the correct use of pre-exposure prophylaxis, also known as PrEP? If so, would the Government consider amending this sub clause to remove the phrase during the sexual activity and or explicitly recognise the use of PrEP as reasonable precaution? If not, can the Government explain why not?”
“Sir, I support the amendment to section 23 of the IDA, which contains provisions dealing with sexual activity by persons with HIV infection. For too long, the law has lagged behind medical developments and the proposed amendment to section 23 will recognise the recognised principle "U equals U", or undetectable equals untransmittable. However, I am concerned that the proposed amendment to section 23 does not go far enough to assist in our journey towards the UN AIDS 90-90-90 targets for 90% of people living with HIV knowing their status, 90% of people living with HIV who know their status being on antiretroviral therapy and 90% of people living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy achieving viral suppression. As Asst Prof Dr Rayner Tan from the National University of Singapore (NUS) Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health argued in a recent CNA commentary, stigma and a lack of access to prevention methods stand in the way of an HIV-free future. The 2023 Global Update by the Joint United Nations (UN) Programme on HIV and AIDS has also found that punitive laws are more likely to drive people away from seeking HIV support and services and may be counterproductive to public health efforts. In light of the consensus among public health experts on the ineffectiveness of criminal law in ending HIV, does the Government plan to eventually do away with section 23? If so, can the Government explain its decision to tweak section 23 instead of entirely repealing this law? Sir, I also wish to seek the Government's clarification on the duty of disclosure under section 23 in light of the Singapore High Court's decision in GCP vs Public Prosecutor.”
“Thank you, Chairman. To close, I would like to thank Parliament staff for their work in ensuring the running of the various different functions of Parliament, which range from the official Parliamentary business, like ensuring that Sittings go smoothly, coordinating visiting dignitaries and overseas visits, and also, the often unseen work in ensuring the functioning of areas, such as security, research, communications and facilities management. Our current Speaker reminded us, upon his election last year, of our own fragility and mortality. He said that we are all too human, and as individuals we may fail, while rules and institutions, which apply without exception, do not. This brings to mind something that Thomas Paine said a few centuries ago, in which he reminded us that there can never exist a Parliament which will last forever, nor capable of commanding forever how to govern. So, given that our time on earth and this Chamber, is temporal, I hope that all of us can look deep within ourselves to think about the part that we can do in the here and now, to maintain an institution that can be rightfully called a strong Parliament that future generations can look up to. Chairman, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $48,684,900 for Head F ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $6,676,000 for Head F ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Where information is shared, it has to be on the basis of full disclosure unless circumstances dictate otherwise. Maintaining the principle of parliamentary transparency and openness can only encourage and advance more participatory democracy and better governance, and I hope that all of us here will play our part in enabling this to happen in a world that is getting increasingly unpredictable and volatile. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Select Committees for Ministries”
“To build respect for Parliament as a lynchpin of our democracy, we have to ensure that as much as possible, our policy, law-making and accountability processes flow through our Parliament first and foremost; and the chosen means to discuss important matters of public interest in Parliament, also matters. For example, questions about Ridout Road and the initial announcement of former Transport Minister S Iswaran being investigated by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) were taken by way of Ministerial Statements in July and August 2023 respectively. A Ministerial Statement only allows for Members to ask short clarifications and the Standing Orders expressly prohibit Members from having a debate thereon. While a full Motion means that any Member wanting to make their views known on the matter have up to 20 minutes to make a speech, not including clarifications, a means through which Parliament obtains regular and better dialogue and input from the public is by the use of Parliamentary Committees, which my colleague Gerald Giam will speak on. In short, having members of the public, experts and different interest groups provide evidence, like was the case during the Select Committee on Deliberate Online Falsehoods, can ensure more voices are heard and lead to interested parties being able to watch the proceedings and thus understand the complexity of the issues being considered. We have to keep working to keep Parliament as accessible to our people as possible with increased openness; reduced secrecy – whether perceived or real – to promote the man in the street's understanding of the actual process of legislating and making queries of how their taxpayer dollars are being spent.”
“Some ways in which jurisdictions have approached this, include having the Speaker not take part in votes in the House, as is the case of Germany's Bundestag retaining party membership, but no longer participating in national party caucuses and also, in the case of the Speaker of the House of Commons in Canada. Or even a system of rotation and the election of a Speaker or amongst their deputies between major parties like we see in countries like Austria. The Speaker as presiding officer is also responsible for ensuring that Standing Orders are followed to ensure that public business is conducted in a decent and orderly manner, balancing the government of the day's need to get its business through Parliament and the oppositions' responsibility to debate and scrutinise that business. The Speaker may thus be called upon to make rulings and decisions on points of order from time to time and it will be helpful for these to serve as precedents to govern future proceedings. What advisories are helpful, having easy access to past Speaker's rulings can also help Members better understand and thus abide by the Standing Orders. Next, on why an accessible Parliament is important. In order for Parliament to properly represent and hold the respect of our people, it must not be seen as a cold tower which operates independently and heedlessly of our constituents' everyday lives. Our people must believe that Parliament is a place where the people's concerns are debated and for their voices to be heard.”
“Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head F of the Estimates be reduced by $100." In our country's governance, Parliament is where the authority of the Government stems. It is also the body which the Government is ultimately accountable to. However, while Singapore has a strong reputation for strong Government, can we equally say that we have a strong Parliament? In Singapore, we talk a lot a lot about the executive but Parliamentary work is the reason why voters put Members in this House. I would like to share some thoughts on entrenching the Office of the Speaker and its key principle of impartiality before looking at the importance of ensuring that Parliament is relevant and accessible to the wider citizenry through the principle of openness. The Inter-Parliamentary Union, of which our Parliament is a member, states that parliaments must be representative, open and transparent, accessible, accountable and effective. It notes that, "Parliaments are constantly evolving in order to meet new challenges and expectations and crucially that parliaments can always improve, like democracy itself." Thus, the Speaker presides over the Sittings of the House and enforces rules prescribed in the Standing Orders of Parliament and during Sittings, is responsible for regulating and enforcing the rules of debate. In order to do so, it is imperative that the Speaker is and is seen to be impartial at all times. This is the reason why the Speaker does not take part in debates and thus the saying that the Speaker may do anything except speak. Many jurisdictions have enshrined the principle of the Speaker's impartiality in their rules.”
“Sir, on the topic of creating a sustainable workforce, can MOM ensure that if migrant workers lose their job after filing a complaint, the worker will have at least one month to look for a new job before they are repatriated? Workers sometimes face retaliation by employers when they make a complaint. Employers can cancel work permits and repatriate the worker. This repatriation can take place virtually overnight. This applies to domestic workers, too. Currently, employers can decide unilaterally whether to send a domestic worker home or to allow a transfer. Reform of these rules will help Singapore utilise available labour quickly in a tight labour market as well as retain workers who are already here and have the language and work skills to fit in. After all, workers who have fallen out of favour with one employer may be well-liked and seen as productive by another. Workplace Safety and Health”
“Sir, how is the Government ensuring that insurers are adequately compensating injured workers under the Work Injury Compensation Act (WICA) which applies to both local and migrant workers? Insurers obtain premiums paid for by employers and have incentive to keep costs low by limiting insurance payouts. Yet, insurers, instead of MOM, are now in charge of adjudicating work injury claims, unlike in the past. Can the Government release the code of conduct for insurance companies for transparency, including whether there are procedures for workers to hold the insurance companies accountable and the timelines for their claims. How long have insurers taken to process claims, for example, and how many claims have been rejected? Empowering SEPs to Proritise Workplace Safety and Health”
“An employer should be exempted from this prohibition only if such information is a genuine and reasonable job requirement, a concept already used in the Committee's final report. The burden should be on the potential employer to explain why such personal information is needed when requesting the information. Finally, for reasonable accommodation, the Tripartite Committee recommended that this be covered by an advisory instead of legislation. However, many countries already recognise the right to reasonable accommodations and the UN CRPD has also called on Singapore to adopt legal provisions to recognise the denial of reasonable accommodation as a form of discrimination, not just in the employment context, but in all areas of life. 2.00 pm Enhancing Wage Support and Retirement”
“This also extends to the mandatory mediation and Employment Claims Tribunal. More needs to be done to ensure that workers who face barriers are able to access justice if they have been discriminated against at the workplace. The Committee further recommended an expansive approach to prohibit all acts done to victimise an individual who has reported their employer for workplace discrimination. However, are workers protected from retaliation for reporting forms of discrimination that are not prohibited under WFL? Can MOM clarify if the WFL's prohibition against retaliation would also protect employees who report their employers to TAFEP for forms of discrimination that are not prohibited under WFL? Next, on the gender pay gap, I was disappointed that WFL does not include any mechanism to address this. Other developed economies have taken steps to legislate salary and transparency to address the gender pay gap. I reiterate the WP's manifesto's call, that employers with 10 or more employees should be required to report to MOM the gender pay gap for the same job description. This information must be made publicly available in aggregate form. Only with such publicly available basic data on a regular basis could we have a better idea of the problem and move to close the gender wage gap. On information to be provided by jobseekers, MOM has accepted the Committee's recommendation to prohibit the use of words or phrases in job advertisements that indicate a preference for a protected characteristic. But we can include the prohibition of asking for other information, such as last drawn salary, relationship and NS PES status.”
“Sir, the upcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation (WFL) will be important in ensuring that certain groups do not experience discrimination at the workplace. I would like to share views on several key areas. First, the Tripartite Committee recommended that WFL only cover direct discrimination. This means that workers may still be exposed to indirect discrimination, discrimination-related harassment as well as discrimination by association and perception. The laws of many countries already prohibit all these forms of discrimination, and the Tripartite Committee's recommendations are inconsistent with our obligations under international law, including Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) and Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD), which require us to prohibit all forms of discrimination. The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP), which is meant to run alongside WFL, also do not address the types of discrimination mentioned above. As a first step, will it be made clear that all of these different forms of discrimination are prohibited under the guidelines? Will MOM also commit to a timeline to update WFL to protect Singaporeans from all forms of discrimination at the workplace in the next five years? On grievance handling, the processes in WFL must be inclusive and accessible to all who may face barriers when seeking redress, whether workers have disabilities or have difficulties navigating a perceived intimidating tribunal system in a language they are not familiar or comfortable with, MOM must pay attention to their particular needs to ensure that they are able to exercise their rights under WFL on an equal basis as others.”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have a couple of clarifications for Minister Gan. I think I heard Minister Gan mention earlier about precision medicine. So, I just wanted to ask for a bit more details about the Ministry's assessment of what sort of potential that precision medicine can have as a growth area in relation to the Singapore economy. The second point relates to whether MTI is currently working with agencies like the Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Health Promotion Board (HPB) in relation to addressing some of the concerns around precision medicine, because at the moment, it is quite prohibitively expensive. I am just concerned about accessibility to those who might not have a high income. So, whether they can share details about the work that is being done with MOH or HPB in relation to addressing some of these concerns.”
“For example, alongside how much has been disbursed for green grants, we should state how many tonnes of emissions have been mitigated per dollar spent, so that the public, civil society and Members of Parliament can be sure that these taxpayer-paid subsidies are working; and to measure how they have achieved their goals. Other commentators have noted that the lack of standardised measurement in reporting standards have made the environmental, social and governance (ESG) compliance efforts challenging for SMEs. Finally, a conversation article reproduced in the Business Times last year also stated that workers and managers in SMEs often have less resources and know-how to understand and properly tackle mental health challenges, partly because most research about mental health and well-being at work is usually undertaken in larger organisations. I hope that we would study how to tackle mental health and well-being at work in the context of our smaller enterprises in order to understand the particular challenges that they face and to ultimately develop interventions that are targeted to work to raise the well-being of our workers in SMEs; and see if any interventions can be made beyond those which currently form part of MOM's Total Workplace Safety and Health programme. 1.15 pm Cut Energy Efficiency Grant”
“Sir, the enhancement of the Enterprise Financing Scheme and the Energy Efficiency Grant is welcome. Incentives and grants are critical in providing seed support and are crucial in driving SME growth and are important signals in the industrial strategy we are developing, especially for our green transition. Yet, a DBS survey found that 63% of SMEs in Asia identified as their top challenge transitioning to a sustainable business model. In a survey reported in the Singapore Business Review last month, 58% of small and microbusinesses polled are less confident about prospects in 2024. The survey also said that apart from grants, SMEs feel they need more support in areas ranging from subsidies for talent and acquisition schemes, indicative of the tight labour market, more support for international expansion and rental assistance and rental support. The same survey also found that a streamlined grant application process was on the wishlist. We should continue to simplify the adoption process for grants and in particular, green grants. For many SMEs, daily operations are a priority and not grant applications and associated administrative work. Perhaps, one way to improve the system would be for Enterprise Singapore to provide a one-stop web page offering advice and guidance to SMEs on how they can green their business and what the associated grants are. Also important, are the money itself and the time value of money. Could the Government provide some of these grants on a cash rather than a reimbursement basis, to help firms who would not normally look at environmental matters in their cashflow planning? Additionally, in order to properly understand whether our grants are properly supporting our SMEs, we should publicly announce how we track their success.”
“I note the response to a Parliamentary Question last year that we are considering facilitating direct recruitment channels for returning workers. Are there any updates? It is also said that we have no legal jurisdiction to influence the recruitment fees migrant workers pay in their home countries. But are MOM and MTI engaging with source countries on the recruitment fee issue, given the impact that it will have on MNCs' supply chains in Singapore?”
“Our policies relating to recruitment fees have an impact in Singapore's ability to attract investment and business, particularly in sectors like the maritime industry, where companies have to employ many migrant workers. What are the reputational and legal risks for companies in the development of the Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) policies and allocation of resources for enforcement? Agreement has been reached between the European Parliament and Council and we are likely to see further progress on rules enforcing labour rights in global supply chains soon. These are seen to foster a business environment with legal certainty, a level playing field and sustainable competition that does not benefit from worker exploitation. Germany has already enacted similar laws. In 2019, the International Labour Organization (ILO) governing body approved the definition of recruitment fees and related costs, emphasising that recruitment fee should not be borne by workers or jobseekers, as workers must not be required to pay for access to employment or it takes time for workforce structures to change. There are international standards ready for adoption by EU legislators and EU-based MNCs. Migrant workers continue to pay high recruitment fees of up to $12,000 to have the opportunity to work in Singapore. This is an area of concern, given the risk of debt bondage to workers' rights as well as their practical ability to make economic decisions, such as a choice to leave a job with poor working conditions. Specifically, what are our recruitment fees? The Workers' Party reiterates our call for the creation of a Government jobs' portal that advertises all open positions for migrant workers to cut fees workers pay to agents in Singapore and overseas.”
“Sir, today's world is increasingly uncertain and contentious, not least because of growing United States (US)-Chinese competition. With these, come greater risk of Singapore facing economic coercion. Not necessarily because of anything we may have done but because major powers and others believe that it is possible to force us into certain positions. We have seen US limits on technology transfers helm in some of the world's ability to export. During the Trump Administration, Singapore was placed on a list of potential currency manipulators that could face sanction. China has published a list of countries from Australia to Czechia from Canada to Japan and South Korea for acting in ways that it does not like. Economic coercion can be arbitrary and sudden. This may get worse of shifts and domestic politics in China and the US. What are the concrete efforts being taken to prepare for and mitigate economic pressure that may come our way, both on our own and in conjunction with partners? After all, any such plans must involve active public and business participation, sooner rather than later, to be effective. Reputation Risk for Singapore Companies The European Union (EU) is currently proposing a law, which requires larger companies to identify actual or potential negative impacts on human rights and their supply chain; and to prevent, mitigate and remedy these impacts. This is on top of existing laws that already require large companies to perform due diligence on supply chains to ensure that they have a plan of vigilance to identify risks relating the labour practices, health and safety or environmental issues.”
“I would like to ask about the resilience training conducted by MINDEF, for example, under the SAF Centre of Excellence for Soldier Performance and whether an assessment tool has been added to assess the psychological fitness of our military personnel, like what we already do for physical fitness through the IPPT. Such assessments should not only be focusing on weaknesses or pathologies but instead, would also be focusing on identifying strengths that will increase resilience.”
“Sir, the complex landscape of modern warfare makes it imperative that we not only equip our forces with physical prowess, but also invest in their mental and moral strength. True preparedness extends beyond physical weaponry. It involves cultivating a resilient and balanced force that can withstand the rigours of duty and adapt to adversity in the complex dimensions of a modern conflict. Interventions that emphasise optimism, resilience, well-being and proportionate behaviour should be incorporated early to empower our servicemen and women to navigate the challenges of their duties with an approach to allow them to not only endure but thrive. With this in mind, the United States (US) Army developed the Global Assessment Tool (GAT) to measure psychosocial well-being of their soldiers in the domains of emotional, social, family and spiritual fitness. The GAT is confidential and is an annual requirement for soldiers and is linked to the ArmyFit online training platform, which provides training based on the GAT results. It has been taken by over one million soldiers and researchers have found that it appears to be a sound psychometric measure of competencies as well as leadership and character traits that are essential to army life. To bolster this, the US Army also has a 10-day Master Resilience Training Programme in the core competencies of self-awareness, self-regulation, optimism, mental agility, strength of character and connection. This enhances unit cohesion, decision-making and overall mission success, and provides skills that will undoubtedly be helpful beyond their time in the Armed Forces.”
“Properly regulating lobbying activity and addressing potential conflicts of interest reduces chances of excessive influence by certain groups and a shorting of political processes. It is an improvement on the current absence of formal regulation. Some may find allowing more public scrutiny onerous. Building public trust in increasingly complex situations also comes with those in positions of authority trusting the public, not just calling on the public to trust authority. This not only must be done but must be seen to be done. Asset Declaration for Ministers”
“Sir, trust between elected officials and public servants on one side, and the public on the other, is important for a well-functioning political system. It is important to maintain and enhance this relationship. Yet, ties between state and society do not exist in a vacuum. As Singapore becomes an ever more important commercial and financial hub, more money and interests will flow into Singapore. They will have interests to advance and protect. Doing so may involve lobbying. It may involve the appointment of sitting Members of Parliament to boards or the hiring of former Members of Parliament and senior public servants to advise on the shaping of policy and legislation. We often see events by industry associations and others attended by elected officials. Lobbying happens in all systems. Yet what is important is how a system regulates lobbying to ensure that the proper political process is not circumvented, and there is no undue disadvantage given to different groups in society, especially those with less money, access and voice. To this end, how can we improve oversight on lobbying activities given Singapore’s changing circumstances? 4.45 pm Specifically, what prevents Singapore from passing legislation on lobbying? Such a law could include publicly available registers of lobbyists, lobbying contact with political appointees, Members of Parliament, and very senior public servants, as well as board memberships of Members of Parliament. Some of this information is already provided by political parties under legislation governing political donations and the recently enacted Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act, or FICA. Some will say that such a move is not foolproof. Nothing is. The perfect cannot become an enemy of the good.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, just a quick clarification. Earlier on, in my speech on the SkillsFuture framework, I mentioned utilisation rates of around 50% in 2022. It was my mistake. What I meant was training rates of around 50% in 2022.”
“There are also reservations about having courses exclusively catered to PwDs, such as those through the Enabling Academy, which many in the community feel may be well meaning but ultimately, exclusionary. Finally, I hope that priority will be given to sectors and areas where our social needs are strongest, when it comes to deciding where the $4,000 top-up for SkillsFuture Credits can be spent rather than focus only on industries that seem to have strong economic growth potential. This would include care skills and training programmes in the wake of the accelerating needs of our ageing population, and also training in the fields of mental health, such as psychology, psychotherapy and counselling, and towards building a sustainable and strong contingent of the newly announced family coaches, whom MSF will deploy to work with vulnerable households. To conclude, I hope that more than half a century of nation building means that we have now arrived at a stage where a diversity of views has a place in our society and that respect for disagreement is a hallmark of trust that is a two-way street. Greater transparency and more meaningful in-depth discussion may mean that we may take a more deliberative approach to public policy, which, in turn, should be seen as a means to improve. It is this approach to transparency and accountability, together with measuring our progress beyond GDP, that will ultimately help better inform our public policy debates and co-creation.”
“It includes in educational indicators as well as measurements on not just life but healthy life expectancy. In line with an increasingly VUCA world – that is, more volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity – there is now rightfully more emphasis on lifelong learning and enhancements to the SkillsFuture movements are undoubtedly welcome for those who are considering pursuing midlife or mid-career training. Increasingly, we are also hearing about how paper qualifications should and will become increasingly obsolete. However, I hope that policies to encourage ongoing training do not inadvertently perpetuate an emphasis on paper qualifications. Additionally, I hope that the SkillsFuture framework continues to work towards being more attractive and inclusive for Singaporeans across a broad spectrum. It is clearly an area which needs more work, as can be seen by utilisation rates of around 50% in 2022. In short, we have to address structural barriers that may be preventing Singaporeans from making use of the schemes. After all, many workers have cited issues, such as the lack of time and the opportunity costs associated with attending classes, and have expressed reservations about forfeiting annual leave entitlements or the need to forego hourly wages to do so. Calls, such as those made by NTUC, for paid learning leave can go some way to addressing these structural impediments to workers taking up useful training programmes. Additionally, there have been concerns raised about the inclusivity of SkillsFuture clauses raised by non-governmental organisations (NGOs), such as the Disabled People's Association, which ask that more can be done to get training providers to provide reasonable accommodations to enable PwDs to attend courses.”
“Additionally, the Forward Singapore report also lists a variety of ways and means which policy can better support informal carers, such as enhancing parental and infant care leave, allowing more flexible work arrangements, and also financial support in the form of the Home Caregiving Grant and defraying early intervention costs for families with special needs children. What strikes me, though, is that many of these policies have an underlying assumption that informal carers want to and are able to stay in some form of paid work as much as possible. Likewise, there is also little public information to measure the amount of unpaid domestic labour and voluntary work being undertaken in Singapore to formally acknowledge and incorporate the contributions that are being made to the nation. Measuring the value of involuntary work was a call made by a 21-year-old undergraduate in the forum pages recently, which I quote, "We should do so, in order to give a fuller picture of how our economy is performing." Having an annual figure of measuring unpaid work should also allow us to directly see if there are any effects that external shocks and events have. For example, whether and how the amount of informal care is affected by an economic downturn, which segments of the population are more affected by it and to allow the public to measure on a regular basis – the impact that our policies are having to support unpaid work. Moving to our people; our only natural resource. This is another way of measuring how we value and consequently invest in our citizens. The New Zealand Living Standards Framework measures this as an integral part of the wealth of the nation in the form of human capability, defined as knowledge, physical and mental health and cultural capability.”
“First, unpaid work, that is what which does not receive directly remuneration but which nevertheless has an impact on our economy. This is usually broadly divided into informal care and domestic work, unpaid reproductive labour and voluntary work. For informal care, in particular, the Forward Singapore reports states that the Government will give more assurance to Singaporeans that they will be taken care of. This is particularly important to probably understand the often unpaid and unsung work and needs of our carers who are already delivering on our nation's collective responsibility. In 2020, I called for, among others, time-use surveys to be conducted to better understand the work being done by our informal carers. Since then, the National Council of Social Service (NCSS) has published a survey in 2022, which aimed to better understand issues surrounding quality of life for carers. This comes after the 2013 survey of informal caring in Singapore. While it is good that we are paying attention to the topic by having periodic in-depth surveys on specific issues relating to the provision of informal care, what these surveys do not contain is a regular and easily quantifiable measure of the contribution that is being made to our society and also indirectly to the economy. Various academic papers have pointed out that the lack of a measurement of the total value of informal care giving in Singapore makes it challenging to inform and guide public policy. Although, in 2021, the Duke-NUS team estimated an annual cost of caregiving time of between $2.5 to $3.5 billion in informal care being provided for seniors aged 75 and above who need human assistance of daily activities. This is clearly a non-trivial amount.”
“We must regularly quantify, measure and publish details on how we are doing and to ask that our policies formally consider the impact that they are having on these indicators, and whether or not our various policies and initiatives are successful in improving our collective well-being. I would therefore like to reiterate the call I made two years ago, for Singapore to have a dashboard with measurements of how we are doing beyond GDP measurements. This is already not a new idea, and we can take a leaf out of New Zealand's living standards framework dashboard. The New Zealand treasury publishes details about the measurement to use and for ministries on priorities for informing well-being, and it is fully disclosed to the public for transparency. The indicators show trends over time, distribution across population subgroups and, importantly, give the Kiwis a direct chance to view how their government is doing in improving their country's well-being. While the specific details of what should be included in Singapore's dashboard would be subject to input from public bodies and the wider community, I believe the key areas that should be covered include the measurement of unpaid work, natural resource use, specifically, our people, externality cost in a form of environmental sustainability footprint, leisure value and our collective and individual well-being. Earlier this month, during the Motion to debate mental health, I had spoken about our collective and individual well-being and what we can do to develop our strengths to protect against ill mental health and to promote flourishing. I had also, in 2022, spoken about issues relating to our environmental footprint. Thus, I will focus today on the areas of unpaid work and investing in our people.”
“Its findings on issues, like abortion, helped inform a referendum on the issue, with some praising the process for being depoliticised, bringing logic to a divisive issue and providing a space for listening, understanding and empathy to differing opinions. Further exercises, similar to Forward Singapore, can thus bring in more independent expert testimony to provide evidence to participants, and these experts can and should have conflicting views. Exercises could then be designed to accurately reflect Singapore's demographics. Just as importantly, the Government should take up the task of responding directly to the findings and explaining what recommendations it would sign into policy and which it would not. There should be periodic independent public reviews of the extent to which goes out and such exercises have been met. It is only with building our trust in the public can we meaningfully move forward to build a shared future together, which means proper transparency and accountability. To bolster this, we need to properly measure our progress and to measure things that matter to us. For many years, both within this House and without, we have heard proposals of how important it is to measure how our country is doing beyond gross domestic product (GDP). However, periodic reassurances during Budget, Election and national conversation times that we are looking at Singapore's other factors of development apart from GDP are not enough. Measuring progress beyond GDP has to be part of our DNA.”
“The OECD also states that we need to use a different measure to measure wealth inequality, and I believe that this can apply here, too. However, data on the distribution of household wealth is not easy to come by. The Government previously said in 2018 that its Gini coefficient calculation needs to reflect the full range of Government policy interventions that are unique to the Singapore context. This is broadly true. Singapore does have unique policy interventions, given its small size and open economy. But this rationale, this focus on insisting that there is a right context, should not be justification to block the publication of data that people would like to see. Trust is a two-way street and the lack of trust from the Government in not providing data to debate certain topics will breed the distrust in it in some quarters. On tackling inequality, aside from what specialists with an economics background tell us, I can only express what my constituents say and feel. If the public sees a gap in the information, then public agencies should, within reason, fill the gap with the correct information rather than say that there is no need to fill the gap. My third point is that the Government should probably trust citizens to co-create. Forward Singapore is a good start. But we can take reference from the concept of citizens' assemblies. A well-known example of this is in Ireland, where the Irish parliament directors established a citizens' assembly in 2016 to deliberate several socially contentious issues. Ninety-nine citizens, demographically suited to representing Ireland's electorate, were chosen to deliberate the issues, with experts also brought into the forum to provide testimony and discuss case studies.”
“Legal instruments, such as formal right-to-know legislation, will help define what can and cannot be published. But the right to know is not accountability for accountability's sake. It helps us to have debates in good faith. If the Government sees that it has already been held accountable, then it debates with different views in good faith, which is the second point I would like to make. With the Gini coefficient, for example, the Government has said that there is less inequality than other countries in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) before taxes and transfers, but does this feel like the case when we speak to our residents? And if not, why? Perhaps, it is because Singapore's Gini coefficient cites income from work while OECD countries count income from all sources, and commentators have also pointed out that household expenditure survey data has shown that income from non-work sources has been increasing in Singapore or, perhaps, it is because Singapore's Gini coefficient covers only Citizens and Permanent Residents (PRs), unlike other countries, and does not reflect that much of our essential but lower-paid blue-collar work, which is performed by our total foreign workforce of 1.5 million individuals. With over one in four Singaporeans marrying non-residents, some of these workers are also integral parts of our families here in Singapore. But perhaps, a more significant contributor to this feeling is that there is another way of looking at our wealth, namely, wealth inequality. The UBS' Global Wealth Report indicates that Singapore's wealth inequality in 2022 is 78.8, substantially higher than Taiwan's 69.8, Korea's 67.9 and Japan's 65.”
“While official secrets are a concern whenever we talk about the military, is there really no middle ground in offering detail on the expenditure? Likewise, in the case of the Police expenditures contained in the estimates, where projects named "Arapaima" and "Aegis" are allocated hundreds of millions of dollars each but the public are not provided even with a one-line description. How does one debate whether this spending is economic, efficient, effective or even enough? Furthermore, with the Enterprise Support Package and a myriad of other schemes announced in the Budget, would there be publicly available targets published as to how many firms are reached and how the money is being put to use? How does the public know if schemes such as these, which is spent out of the public purse, are successful? Do we measure policy success by how much is spent or is success a measure of its outcomes? The WP called for the creation of an Independent Parliamentary Budget Office three years ago, but what is more fundamental is the willingness to publish details. In 2012, then-Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam said, "Trust and transparency are two different parts of a system of accountability". While there are admittedly security concerns, which means full transparency is not always possible, the solutions that WP has brought up in the past, like the Independent Budget Office, disclosing more information to Standing Select Committee members with secrecy safeguards can help negotiate this often difficult balance. The Government needs the err on the side of transparency, publishing as much as possible, and it needs to agree to publish what is asked for, balanced against security interests.”
“Mr Speaker, the title of this year's Budget, "Building our Shared Future Together", is one which all of us should strive for. In the WP 2020 Manifesto "A Singapore For All", we outlined our vision for Singapore, which has a place for each and every one of us. It is a positive development that we have agreement across aisle for ideas, such as supporting involuntarily redundant workers financially through a difficult period as they look to find their feet again. As a nation, we should be proud to see such good policies come to fruition because they work towards making sure that everyone benefits from our nation's progress. To take the next step forward in Singapore's development, we should work on our expanded vision of progress and this vision can only truly and meaningfully be expanded if we have trust. In other words, we need to trust others with different views from us that they, too, are acting in good faith, even though they may differ in perspective. In particular, apart from asking people to trust our public institutions, we should ask ourselves if we trust our people. If not, why not? How do we work to ensure that trust is a two-way street? I will highlight some examples showing how trust is not yet a two-way street in Singapore, and try to explain why and how we should make it a two-way street. The second half of my speech will speak of how we measured dividends we will reap if we achieve this mutual trust, and I will set out what this expanded vision of progress could look like. First, what does the public know and what should the public know? The yearly revenue and expenditure estimates are a good place to start. This year, military expenditure is a single line $19 billion expenditure without further breakdown, despite making up 17% of the Budget.”
“In some of these cases, there are intermediate solutions which could pave the way and ready the public for regulation. For instance, ensuring that the National Stadium and other event venues do not prohibit visitors from bringing in their own water as a good start. The Land Transport Authority could also fit all Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) stations with water coolers in a quick and meaningful intervention – given that people in Singapore are the biggest spenders on bottled water in the world on a per capita basis, according to a United Nations (UN) think tank report in 2023; and this is even though our tap water is highly drinkable and well regulated. This will go a long way in helping outdoor workers, such as delivery riders and construction workers as well as the general public, stay hydrated in a warming Singapore. Every day, our environment gets hotter is a pivotal day for our country. This is not to say we should try and build a weather machine or an air-conditioned dome. But what we are doing well, we should do as quickly as we can; and what we are doing wrongly or are planning to do wrongly, we should do differently – so that we are not locked into bad choices that our children will pay for.”
“In Singapore, the Singapore Green Building Masterplan has set a 2030 target for 80% of buildings to be Green Mark-certified – 80% of new developments to be super low energy and an 80% energy efficiency improvement from a 2005 baseline. Since 2021, all new and existing public sector buildings undergoing major retrofitting, are required to attain super low energy certification. While this is a substantial improvement from previous targets, the Government should accelerate plans to retrofit all public sector buildings in line with the super low certification as part of its commitment to having the public sector take the lead on sustainability. Particular focus should be placed on ensuring new buildings and building retrofits, near residential areas, meet super low energy certification in order to reduce heat emissions. The Green Mark certification could also be updated to take into account the direct impact of buildings on their surroundings, in terms of heat, to incentivise shade and discourage excessive asphalt and concrete. Third, and finally, I would like to make the point that regulation plays an important role in tackling our problems with heat in Singapore. We need to leave no stone unturned. These can be new things that we have not done yet, like considering the development of legislation that makes easier for condominium Management Corporations Strata Title (MCSTs) to install solar panels, which shade buildings and reduce demand for fossil fuel powered electricity. We can explore the need for climate change impact assessments for new infrastructure and potentially require food and beverage (F&B) establishments to serve hydrating and healthy tap water for free.”
“With many peripheral and non-core forests designated for development in the Urban Redevelopment Authority's (URA's) 2019 Master Plan and leaving aside the impact to biodiversity and carbon emissions, we should be doing our best to retain as many of these as possible – possibly in the form of parks because it takes decades and significant costs to re-establish such green spaces should authorities decide to reintroduce green spaces in the future. In view of this, how does the latest URA Master Plan Review treat the retention of green cover? Does it give such considerations high or low priority? There are also social economic impacts with property prices near green spaces higher than those further away. One study led by PhD student, Teo Hong Chen at the National University of Singapore's (NUS') Centre for Nature-based Climate Solutions found that in the 2010s, prices for a HDB flat rose by about $553 for every 1% increase of tree cover within 200 metres of the flat. Teo noted that with declining green areas across the country, buyers tend to value greenery near their homes a lot more. While this contribution could be partly due to the perceived aesthetic and mental health benefits green spaces bring, what is evident is that such trends disadvantage those who can afford to spend less on their property. Perhaps URA's plan, for every household to be within a 10-minute walk from a park by 2030, should take into account such considerations. For instance, the five regions listed as having very high urban heat vulnerability – in the urban heat vulnerability analysis – could be given additional attention, with green spaces retained and created around denser and lower income neighbourhoods.”
“Not only are these groups least able to adapt to climate change, they typically have contributed least to climate change causing carbon emissions. The second point I want to make is the importance of acting quickly. When I refer to tackling urban heat quickly, I do not mean disregarding or recklessly accelerating measures from research and development (R&D) to roll out. What I mean is to carefully take into account pathway dependency or the constraints past decisions imposed on later decisions. For instance, the pilot study of the 130 Tampines HDB blocks coated with heat reflective paint is a good example of a project that takes a preventive approach to increasing temperatures. Sengkang Town Council will be closely following the results of the project, which is expected to conclude later this year. Given that this type of paint costs more, we hope that there can be subsidies given to roll this out to rental flat blocks if the results are promising. While many mitigation and adaptation concepts have only been tested in wealthier cities outside the tropics, some concepts should, theoretically, be feasible for trial in Singapore. The Dutch city of Arnhem, for example, has aimed to reduce asphalt cover by 10%, as part of its climate change adaptation plan and has begun digging up asphalt in areas of low vehicular traffic. In the Chinese city of Fuzhou, called a new furnace city for severe stress from the urban heat island effect brought about by urbanisation and climate change, a study of 31 urban parks found that they cool surrounding environmental land surface temperatures by an average of 2.9°C in summer. While the precise impact of parks in Singapore are less well studied, Bishan Park can be up to about three degrees cooler than residential blocks in the city.”
“For instance, subsidies can be added for fans or blackout curtains. Also, could the existing Climate-Friendly Households Voucher Scheme be expanded beyond the 300,000, qualifying 1- to 3-room flats to support vulnerable residents living larger households? While the Housing and Development Board (HDB) already designs HDB blocks and towns with wind flow and thermal comfort as considerations, it should also pay special attention to inequality and heat resilience when designing HDB blocks. Residents in rental flats and smaller flats should be prioritised in efforts to ensure thermal comfort and wind flow. An interim solution could be to offer rental flat residents living in the warmest blocks of flats ready access to public air-condition venues in their immediate neighbourhoods during the hottest times of the day for much-needed respite. Also, I understand that many old estates with rental flats were built when such high-quality modelling was not readily available. Could the Government develop quantifiable targets to retrofit old estates to deal with Singapore's heating? The built environment industry transformation map has set some standards for future buildings. I suggest we apply some of these goals to older buildings instead of waiting for leases to run out. It is important to tackle these issues because the impact of urban heat on mental health, sleep quality, heat stress and physical health, for example, heat being a trigger factor for conditions, like asthma, on vulnerable groups is tangible and compounds other challenges they already face. But beyond what is necessary, vulnerable groups should also be accorded a decent living standard with regard to heat.”
“While dormitory standards for migrant workers were updated in 2021, there are many exemptions, including dormitories with leases expiring before 2034 and those with six beds of fewer. The new standards also introduced requirements for an adequate number of fans, but it appears that these requirements may be more COVID-19-related than heat-related as there are no temperature requirements. With many such dormitory residents operating heavy machinery or driving large vehicles, should we not be paying particular attention to sleep quality? Research has also indicated that apart from having a greater impact on older people's sleep quality, heat also affects their mood disproportionately and other less thought about ways. For instance, some medicines for chronic diseases affect the body's ability to regulate body temperature. The Minister for Sustainability and the Environment recently said in a supplementary question response that she would take up my suggestion to provide air conditioning at Residents' Committee venues and study rooms during prolonged and severe heat waves. I hope that if and when implemented, this offering can be integrated into NEA's new Heat Stress Advisory so that residents who need this, particularly older people, are aware of this offering. But perhaps the most obvious is the impact that urban heat has on those who are less well-off. While better-off Singaporeans can simply turn on their air-conditioning or even afford to live in passively cool buildings, one of the few options available to the less well-off is to cool down with pool showers. The Home Improvement Programme (HIP) and Climate-Friendly Households Programme could be good foundations for encouraging householders to take up heat- resilient efforts.”
“Secondly, if we do not do this now, we are just kicking this problem down the road for our children to live with and with the result that they will be the ones who will have to pay much more as a result of path dependency. And we can do this because there are proven ways of doing so now and new ways in the future that I am optimistic we can develop with sufficient attention and investment. In 2019, the Government announced that it may spend $100 billion or more to protect the island from rising sea levels. While spending of this scale is unlikely to be necessary for heat mitigation, mainly because many interventions can be made through regulation and private sector participation, I believe Singapore's strategies to mitigate and adapt to urban heat have to better take into account socio-economic issues. They also need to be accelerated and need to be given regulatory teeth. First, I would like to point out some social economic dimensions to the urban heat problem that would help us identify principles and priority areas to work on. Last year, the Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) and National Environment Authority (NEA) introduced a new Heat Stress Advisory for the public as well as introduce rules to reduce heat stress risks for outdoor workers. These are important developments in Singapore's workplace safety journey. But I believe the next step would be to tackle indirect but heat-related safety issues. It is a well-studied phenomenon that humid heat exposure significantly increases thermal load during sleep and affect sleep quality. Alongside the adverse impact on mental health and other physical health effects that heat can cause, poor sleep quality paired with long work hours, are also known to contribute to a higher risk of workplace injury.”
“Mr Speaker, living in Singapore, it can sometimes seem that climate change is a concept that is remote to us in our daily lives. After all, it is not something that you immediately see or feel when you look out the window, unless you are outside in Ang Mo Kio on 13 May last year where Singapore's daily temperature hit 37°C for the first time in 40 years. It will also not escape our attention that we have now gone from daily torrential downpours suddenly being replaced by the dry and hot weather. And when I speak to older constituents, one thing that often comes up is how much more comfortable our climate seemed to be in the past; and the data backs it up. The latest Meteorological Service reports says that the 10-year period, from 2013 to 2022, was Singapore's warmest on record with the man-made urban environment as a significant contributing factor. The number of very hot days where daily maximum mean temperature exceeds 35°C has also increased over the last few decades and according to the third National Climate Change study, will continue to increase depending on how fast Singapore and the world decarbonises. In fact, my constituency of Sengkang is one in five regions listed as having very high urban heat vulnerability in Cooling Singapore's 2020 urban heat vulnerability analysis. But I do not want to just focus on doom and gloom today. Instead, we can frame the problem we face in another way. While we cannot, on our own, stop the climate from getting hotter, we can reduce the impact global warming has on the immediate environment around us. Reducing this impact is not just a matter of what is nice to do. It is a must-do. We have to work to mitigate higher temperatures because, firstly, there are substantial social and economic costs if we do not do so.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. I have a point to ask: whether the Ministry has done any cost analysis to find out, as the Senior Minister of State has talked about, the onerous addition of cost burden. Just wondering whether any engagement has been done with all these food manufacturers to ask what the increased cost burden would be. This is because, ultimately, food wastage also adds to our food resilience and has a negative impact on food availability.”
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. It is just that we have received feedback that there is sometimes confusion caused by the use of "use by" and "best before" because it is not clear whether it relates to food safety or it is just freshness and "best before" in terms of optimal freshness. The question is, whether there is anything else that can be done to ensure that we minimise confusion; whether it is in terms of consumer education and to explain the difference, whether or not the food is safe to be eaten or whether it is just a matter of a best-case scenario that it should be sold by this date. So, I wonder whether the Ministry would consider piloting partnerships with supermarkets to promote two standards? When the supermarkets have control over these foods, for example, house brand meat, vegetables and also packaged foods, whether there can be a campaign to promote a more standardised approach? I think there might be interest from supermarkets and producers to partner on this, because they do have control over the packaging. I also noted that, for example, the nutri-grade standards that have been introduced, the food producers do not have issues complying with this. So, can we tag on to that as well to try and get the point across?”
“All of us have a role to play in working to improve our own well-being, and given that happiness spreads more easily than depression, the hope is that increased well-being can continue to ripple and spread to the wider community, so as to increase flourishing for all. With that, I support the Motion.”
“Setting up a regulating body with input from bodies, such as the Singapore Association for Counselling and Singapore Psychological Society, will ensure a universal standard of care and quality of care in the provision of such services to support mental health, and to ensure that there is at least a baseline level of training, expertise and ethical practice that underline the provision of such services. We should also look to establish safeguards, such as requiring those who work with children to be subject to mandatory background checks, for the protection of vulnerable minors. Finally, I would like to reiterate a call made in my Cost of Living speech last November. I hope that the Government would consider allowing the use of MediSave to access mental health services in other practice settings aside from purely psychiatric settings, particularly in the private sector. It would not be a big step to use our 3Ms framework to better improve access to mental health treatments and interventions, as MediSave is already being approved for use for mental health services at places like IMH and polyclinics. To close, although we have experienced headwinds in recent years and are rightly focusing on how to support increasing incidences of poor mental health, it would be remiss of us to not look more holistically at how to increase well-being. We have to build on research about how positive interventions at the personal, community and policy level can have a protective factor through challenging times, and also to look at how our nutrition can better support us in our quest for good mental health.”
“Small initiatives such as offering fruit and nut instead of sugary snacks and biscuits in the office pantry, providing more accessible storage and food preparation areas, providing access to water in more places and having regular healthy eating weeks or events to help employees understand how to incorporate eating for a healthy mind and body into their daily lives can go a long way. Lastly, to further enhance mental health support and break down the social stigma, we can do more to continue removing barriers to mental health support and therapy. In respect of the upcoming guidelines for insurers to adopt fair and responsible practices towards persons with disabilities and those with mental health conditions, our regulators should ensure that guidelines prohibit insurers from declining applications on the basis of their disabilities or mental health conditions. Any differential treatment of persons with disabilities and mental health conditions should also be justified by accurate and relevant actuarial or statistical data, and there should be a mechanism by which insurers justify this. Insurers should also be required to make transparent their grounds for differential treatment or rejection of applications from persons with disabilities or mental health conditions. This will go a long way in ensuring that no one gets left behind. The current lack of regulation of mental health workers is another area which warrants more attention. While it is undoubtedly the case that there are many dedicated and committed workers in the mental health space that are doing amazing work in raising the well-being of our society, we have to move beyond providing guidance on professional and ethical conduct for psychologists, counsellors and therapists.”