Indranee Rajah
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, I would like to make a clarification in relation to two written answers on childcare leave issued by the Prime Minister's Office on 25 September 2025 and 3 February 2026 in response to Parliamentary Questions filed by Members of Parliament Ms Cassandra Lee and Ms Valerie Lee respectively.”
“Based on Year of Assessment (YA) 2025 data, about 9,500 working mothers claimed a lower amount of Working Mother's Child Relief (WCMR) under the fixed-dollar basis than they would have under the previous percentage-based basis, for children born or adopted on or after 1 January 2024.”
“We regularly receive feedback on enhancing child-related leave provisions, including the Member's suggestion. In recent years, parental leave provisions have been significantly enhanced, such that parents now have 30 weeks of paid leave, including 10 weeks of Shared Parental Leave.”
“The Government does not have data on the number of transactions involving multiple units on a single residential title that have not been subdivided. Such properties are treated as a single property for Additional Buyer's Stamp Duty (ABSD) purposes when it is bought, so no ABSD is foregone.”
“The Government publishes data on personal income tax, which is publicly available on www.data.gov.sg. This includes data on the number of course fees relief claimants and the amount of the relief granted. The Member may refer to the website to access the data for the first three questions.”
“In considering the duration of leave, we will look at the need. In this case, as I have explained, there is a difference between those who give birth physically to a child and those who adopt.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,520 lines we hold for Indranee Rajah, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 18 of 51.
“MAS and ACRA, together with the Singapore Exchange Regulation (SGX RegCo), continually review and enhance the relevant regulatory and penalty regimes. For example: (a) MAS and ACRA set up a joint forum in 2019 to strengthen coordination for the review and enforcement of disclosure breaches, as these may be intertwined with accounting issues; (b) SGX RegCo established a dedicated whistleblowing office in 2020 to address feedback regarding listed companies’ compliance with the listing rules. In 2021, it introduced requirements for all listed companies to have whistle-blowing policies; and (c) Since 2021, SGX RegCo has also enhanced accountability for the audits of Singapore-listed companies’ financial statements, by requiring all primary-listed companies, including foreign-incorporated ones, to appoint a local auditor registered with ACRA. MOF and ACRA are, currently, reviewing the fines that can be imposed on directors of companies due to the failure to prepare and table annual financial statements in compliance with the prescribed accounting standards in Singapore. MAS, SGX Regco, ACRA and CAD will continue to thoroughly investigate acts of corporate malfeasance and take appropriate actions to ensure our regulatory system remains fair and robust.”
“No penalties were imposed under the Companies Act as the Companies Act provisions only apply to Singapore-incorporated companies and NGL is not a Singapore-incorporated company. With regard to the key former directors and managers of NGL, the information that could be obtained was insufficient to prove that NGL’s offences were attributable to the neglect of any particular individual. Second, as to NRI, investigations revealed that the two directors were following the parent company NGL’s group accounting policy in approving the financial statements. Importantly, there was no suggestion from their auditors that the accounting treatment was incorrect and there was no intention to cheat or defraud on their part. As such, stern warnings were issued to them. Third, with regard to NRI’s auditors, Ernst & Young Singapore, it was found that while their audit work did not reflect a competent application of accounting principles for the long-term marketing agreements, the audit issues they had to consider were not straightforward. They had abided by the firm’s processes to consult technical experts on the accounting treatment, which involved professional judgement, and the technical experts concurred with the accounting treatment. They were thus issued orders for their audit work to be subject to peer review and training to remediate the identified audit deficiencies. Ernst & Young Hong Kong which audited the parent company NGL, does not fall within the regulatory jurisdiction of our authorities. MAS has shared information regarding the case with the Hong Kong regulator and will work closely with them as needed. Measures to enhance regulatory oversight and enforcement.”
“NRI’s financial statements were audited by Ernst & Young Singapore. Clean audit opinions were issued in both cases. Ernst & Young Singapore had, in fact, concurred with the accounting treatment for the marketing agreements. Notwithstanding the clean audit opinions, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA) and Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) continued to gather and review information to establish a basis to probe deeper into the case after allegations of accounting irregularities in NGL’s financial reports surfaced. In 2018, MAS, ACRA and CAD commenced formal investigations into NGL and NRI. Upon the conclusion of the investigations, the regulatory authorities took action against the relevant parties in accordance with the respective requirements of their Acts, based on the facts and circumstances of the case and the culpability of the involved parties. First, in respect of NGL, a civil penalty of $12.6 million was imposed under SFA for publishing false or misleading financial statements. Under SFA, a civil penalty sum not exceeding three times the amount of profit gained or loss avoided by the company, or $2 million for each breach, may be imposed on a company that fails to meet disclosure requirements. In this case, the incorrect recognition of future fees from the marketing agreements presented an artificial picture of NGL’s financial position but did not translate into actual monetary gains by the company. Hence, the applicable maximum civil penalty quantum of $2 million for each breach was applied. This quantum was arrived at after considering key factors, including the number of breaches and the cooperation rendered during investigation.”
“Regulatory framework for financial statements and disclosures is multi-layered and robust Singapore’s regulatory framework governing the financial statements of and disclosures by Singapore listed companies places obligations on various stakeholders. Companies listed on the Singapore Exchange (SGX) and their directors are subject to robust disclosure requirements under the Securities and Futures Act (SFA) and SGX’s Listing Rules. Companies incorporated in Singapore and their directors must comply with the Companies Act, which requires them to present their financial statements in accordance with prescribed accounting standards. Meanwhile, external auditors are responsible for conducting audits in accordance with prescribed auditing standards, to ascertain if the financial statements are a true and fair representation of the company’s performance. The Noble case is a complex one involving multiple parties within and beyond Singapore. The parent company, Noble Group Limited (NGL), was incorporated in Bermuda, headquartered in Hong Kong and listed on SGX. As a company listed on SGX, NGL and its directors are subject to SFA. However, as it is a Bermuda-incorporated company, its financial statements and audit requirements are not subject to the Singapore Companies Act. Noble Resources International Pte Ltd (NRI) is the Singapore-incorporated subsidiary of NGL. As a locally-incorporated company, NRI and its directors are subject to the Companies Act. NGL, acting through NRI, entered into long-term marketing agreements and applied an incorrect accounting treatment to these marketing agreements. This had the effect of inflating NGL’s and NRI’s reported profits and net assets. NGL’s financial statements were audited by Ernst & Young Hong Kong.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Ensuring Housing Needs of Singles and Singaporeans are Met 6.19 pm”
“First, the Government had initially set aside the loan capital in FY2020 in anticipation of a tight credit market. But, eventually, the loan capital was not needed as MAS provided low interest capital to participating financial institutions for ESG loans through its Singapore dollar facility. Second, we had some under-utilisation in public health spending. We had set aside resources for public health capacity to cater for potential downside scenarios but did not have to fully utilise these resources. The safe management measures and the cooperation of Singaporeans helped to avert severe public health outcomes. These under-utilisations were offset, however, by additional funding for the various support packages rolled out to support Singaporeans and businesses over the heightened alerts and stabilisation phases from May to November 2021. With these resources, we were able to save lives and livelihoods. Members can refer to MOF's occasional paper titled "Assessment of the Impact of Key COVID-19 Budget Measures" which was published in February this year. An interim assessment was also published in February 2021.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her supplementary questions. With respect to the first supplementary question, for COVID-19, the Government had put in place a number of measures to mitigate fraud risks, such as pre-disbursement checks, anti-gaming framework, ex post analytics and post-disbursement audit checks, to identify potential abuse or conflicts of interest. These measures have been effective in managing the risks involved in large-scale crisis operations. As mentioned in my main reply, drawing from the lessons learnt, MOF is working with agencies to strengthen the adoption of good practices and minimise financial risks during emergencies. These measures include: (a) adopting system checks on grant eligibility, including data verification at-source, to reduce the risk of errors from manual processing; (b) using practical methods to assess price reasonableness for crisis buys, such as applying a percentage mark-up from non-crisis prices or actual costs incurred by suppliers; (c) ensuring proper documentation of key decisions, such as policy changes and approvals across the lifecycle of a transaction; and (d) conducting ex post checks, for example, through the use of data analytics, to detect potential irregularities. With respect to her second supplementary question on what is the actual total COVID-19 expenditure for FY2020 to FY2021, our actual COVID-19 expenditure in FY2020 and 2021 was $72.3 billion. Of this, $13.4 billion was for our public health measures; $50.6 billion was to protect jobs through support for workers and businesses; and $8.3 billion was for direct household and social support. The total amount was lower than the $100 billion committed earlier due to two main reasons.”
“As mentioned in my reply to a similar Parliamentary Question from the Member last year, many factors affect the employability of working parents. We currently have no plans to conduct such studies as it would be challenging to isolate the impact of childcare leave alone on employability. When considering proposals for increasing childcare leave, we work with tripartite partners to seek feedback from employers, who often cite concerns over the impact of leave provisions on business costs and operations. Empirically, the utilisation rates of existing leave provisions indicate that there remains social or workplace norms that prevent more working parents from benefiting from these leave provisions. We expect that these same employer concerns and workplace norms may impact worker employability, and it is more important to address these barriers directly. We have taken a more balanced approach where childcare leave provisions are complemented by encouraging employers to adopt progressive workplace practices, such as Flexible Work Arrangements (FWAs), which can support the diverse caregiving needs of employees including parents with young children. Such workplace practices can also strengthen businesses’ employee value proposition and operational resilience. We will continue to work with stakeholders to promote family-friendly workplace practices, and over time build a more sustainable work environment, where employees can better manage their work and family commitments.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Appreciating and Supporting the Well-being of Educators in Singapore 6.45 pm”
“[Please refer to "Clarification by Leader of the House", Official Report, 12 September 2022, Vol 95, Issue No 67, Corrections by Written Statements section.] By some accounts, she wore this brooch more than 20 times, most recently at the opening of the Elizabeth Line in May 2022 for her Platinum Jubilee. The Queen’s association with Singapore continues to be marked in and around our city. Queen Elizabeth Walk, along Marina Bay, and Queenstown, Singapore’s first satellite town, were named to commemorate her coronation in 1953. Places and roads in Queenstown are named after places in Scotland where she spent time during her childhood, such as Strathmore, Forfar and Stirling. Princess Elizabeth Primary School in Bukit Batok was also named after her. We have kept these place and school names. They record part of our history and reflect our continued high regard for Her Late Majesty and our enduring friendly relations with the United Kingdom. The passing of Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II marks the end of an era. On behalf of this House, I would like to extend our deepest condolences to His Majesty King Charles III and the Royal Family and to the people of the United Kingdom on the passing of Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Mr Speaker, Sir, as a mark of respect, I propose that the House observe a minute of silence. 12.39 pm”
“During these visits, she enjoyed the unique sights, sounds and experiences of Singapore. Beyond the formality and ceremonials involved in State Visits, The Queen took the time and effort to get to know ordinary Singaporeans better. In 1972, she visited Toa Payoh where she met Mr Thomas Pung and his family in their HDB flat. They graciously invited her into their home and offered her a drink: a glass of 7Up. Thirty-four years later in 2006 on her third State Visit, she visited the Pungs again. On her second State Visit in 1989, The Queen visited Ang Mo Kio, where one young girl was photographed presenting her with a bouquet of flowers. Her name was He Ting Ru and she is now a Member of Parliament. Although she did not visit in the last decade, The Queen would also be a familiar figure to our younger generations, many of whom have studied, worked or holidayed in the United Kingdom. During her long reign, The Queen received countless gifts from around the world. Members will be happy to note that at least a couple from Singapore appear to have meant something to her. On her first State Visit, she visited the Rollei factory at Kampong Chai Chee, of which we were very proud. They presented her with a small gold-plated 35mm Rollei camera made in Singapore. The Queen was quite a keen photographer and made good use of it. We learnt this only when she celebrated her 70th wedding anniversary, and BBC carried an old photo of her using the distinctive camera, which some of us were old enough to recognise and remember. The second gift is a gold and diamond Peranakan brooch, referred to by Buckingham Palace as the Singapore Shield Brooch, which was presented to her on the occasion of her Diamond Jubilee in 2012 by the late President SR Nathan.”
“It is my earnest hope that the work of the Legislative Assembly under the New Constitution will be blest with every success.” Throughout her remarkable life, The Queen was the epitome of duty, stability, wisdom and grace. Above all else, she embodied duty and service before self, in an unbroken thread through the decades. On her 21st birthday, she dedicated her life to the Commonwealth in these words: “I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service.” Her life was indeed long, and she more than fulfilled that pledge – quietly, steadfastly and humbly – in the service of her country and the Commonwealth. She showed her humility in the less often quoted next sentence of the speech, “But I shall not have strength to carry out this resolution alone unless you join in it with me, as I now invite you to do”. The Queen continued to discharge her duties right to the end, including meeting with and appointing The Right Honourable Elizabeth Truss as her 15th Prime Minister just two days before she passed. However, beyond duty and public service, Queen Elizabeth was also loved because of her personal touch and the warmth, sincerity and graciousness that she displayed to people from all walks of life. She was charming, witty and disarming, with an intrinsic ability to put someone immediately at ease. I can personally attest to these attributes, having had the privilege of meeting her as Singapore’s representative at the Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference held in 2002, the year of her Golden Jubilee. Between The Queen and Singapore there has always been a reciprocal relationship of warmth and affection. She made three State Visits to Singapore: in 1972, 1989 and 2006.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the Singapore Parliament, I would like to pay tribute to Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II who passed away on 8 September 2022. I would also like to acknowledge Her Excellency Kara Owen, High Commissioner of the United Kingdom to the Republic of Singapore, who is here with us in the House today, in the upper gallery. Her Late Majesty was not only Queen of the United Kingdom but also the Head of the Commonwealth, a family of 56 nations across the globe, of which Singapore is a proud member. Queen Elizabeth had a unique role in Singapore’s history. She was Queen during Singapore’s transition from a crown colony to an independent state, including when the fledgling legislature that would eventually become this Parliament was born. After the landmark general election of 1955, at the inaugural session of the Singapore Legislative Assembly, the forerunner of this Parliament, she sent a congratulatory message that was delivered in this House on 22 April 1955, which said: “I am glad at the opening of the first session of the Legislative Assembly under the New Constitution of Singapore to express to my people in Singapore my great satisfaction at the significant advance in their constitutional progress which is marked by this occasion. The Council of Ministers will now have to deal with the many problems of Government and upon them will fall the chief burden of responsibility for the continued advancement and prosperity of Singapore and for the welfare and safety of its citizens. I look forward with every confidence to the faithful discharge of this trust for I am sure that those on whom this responsibility falls will carry it out with foresight, courage and honesty of purpose.”
“We are reviewing a whole range of things in support of marriage and parenthood. This, obviously, would be one of them. My response to the Member is that we will do it as soon as possible. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." (proc text)] Adjourned accordingly at 6.50 pm.”
“We have not studied the correlation between parents’ socioeconomic status and their maternity and paternity leave utilisation. Generally, parental leave utilisation may be affected by factors such as nature of the job and workplace norms and practices. For example, even as employers are required by law to provide maternity and paternity leave, parents in jobs that require physical presence such as those in frontline roles, or whose income is dependent on the number of hours clocked at work, may find it more difficult to tap on these leave provisions. Our focus group discussions and interviews with parents have reflected that workplace support is key across all types of jobs and companies. Where supervisors are supportive and colleagues are willing to support covering arrangements, parents are more likely to take paternity or maternity leave. Therefore, we encourage parents to discuss their paternity or maternity leave plans with their employers early so that employers can start planning for covering work arrangements. At the same time, we also encourage employers to adopt progressive human resource practices and design flexible solutions which balance support for both employees and business needs, such as allowing parents to take the leave over different days, instead of over one continuous period, within their child’s first year. A whole-of-society effort is needed for parents to feel supported in taking time away from work to care for and bond with their newborns. We will continue to work with our stakeholders to encourage companies to build a more supportive workplace culture, to enable parents to better benefit from our parental leave schemes.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, a point of order, what the Standing Orders require is for a Minister to answer a question that is put. In this case, Mr Leong Mun Wai had put a couple of questions. Mr Edwin Tong had answered the questions. I think the fact that Mr Leong does not understand the answer does not mean that the question has not been answered.”
“So, we will do as much as we can to tighten the process, but bearing in mind that you must also give some time to the residents to be able to update their records. And then in terms of the action taken to recover, what is the timeline? As soon as possible. The Member asked if I have the exact figures now, how many have been recovered or not? I do not have the exact figures at the moment, it is still in process, but I think the Member can have the assurance of knowing that we are doing this as soon as we can.”
“I thank the Member for her supplementary questions. Let me deal with the last one first because she asked, are we just taking it at this figure? As I mentioned in my reply earlier, the eligible households number was taken at a particular date and then by the time the AGO audit was conducted, that would be a subsequent time and the databases would have been updated. So, it is essentially comparing what was the database as at the cut-off date, with the updated database. So, I think, that sort of circumscribes the numbers and that is how we were able to arrive at these numbers. The other question she asked was, given that there is a clawback and it can be stressful for families, are there steps which can be taken to prevent this from happening? We would obviously do our best but perhaps it would be useful for Members to understand the process. The process is the agency that has the information on living status, whether you are born, or whether you have passed on, is ICA. And ICA then passes that to HDB, who will then check who is the owner living there, whether it is a tenancy occupier and then they pass the information to MOF. So, the initial part is ICA receiving the information. And really, that information comes from the family. Even if we want to speed that up, you also have to be sensitive to the family because you cannot say, "Your family member is dead. Please go and file your documents now". That would not be sensitive either. So, I think we do have to be sensitive to the families and bear in mind that it may be unavoidable that there is a bit of a time lag. Of course, we will remind them as soon as possible. And, of course, if it comes to the attention of HDB or any of the agencies we would likewise remind them.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, as a general rule, the rebates are given or credited into the households' accounts in the months that they are disbursed. So, if there are specific instances like this where that is not the case, then I would encourage the Member or other Members who encounter this, to raise this with us and we will see what is the cause. I mean, sometimes it could be, for example, that the resident opened the account after the crediting date, things like that on the ground, but those will be dealt with by appeal.”
“Put another way, we want to downshift and tap on the brakes to contain inflation, but pumping on a wee bit of gas with limited government spending that helps keep the engine from stalling. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I appreciate that much of this speech has been relatively technical and we all want to go home. To some extent, this is inevitable; the nature of macroeconomic policymaking is often technical in nature. Nevertheless, it is possible to summarise my main suggestions in a few sentences. Strengthen the Singapore dollar, because a strong currency makes the stuff we import cheaper. Buy long bonds, because this will dampen speculative investment and keep a lid on asset prices. [Please refer to "Personal Explanation", Official Report, 12 September 2022, Vol 95, Issue 67, Personal Explanation section.] Spend to support those among us that are hurting most for a temporary period and finance this by rebating any windfall tax gains. But avoid wage indexation at all costs. We need to battle inflation proactively and we have the tools to do so. Let us use them.”
“I also believe that we can roll out a temporary increase in CPF interest rates of around two percentage points for a six-month period, consistent with the increase in inflation. This can be funded by the returns paid on Special Singapore Government Securities, or SSGS. The higher returns on SSGS can, in turn, be made up from higher nominal returns that would accrue from financial assets that are marked to market. Macroeconomic policies are often viewed as blunt instruments: they affect the economy on the aggregate; and hence, we may be concerned that pushing these levers may be too disruptive for an economy that is already on a tentative road to recovery. On the contrary, my contention is that it is precisely because the effects of macro policy are wide ranging that we wish to consider applying such tools at this time. For starters, a number of the policies that I discussed associated with interest and exchange rates, have the benefit of being fast to implement. Budgetary measures take time to draw up and disburse. In contrast, interest and exchange rate policies can be rolled out once the decision has been made. Moreover, the suggestions I made are complementary in nature. The monetary measures deployed to cool inflation are contractionary, as they should be, by design. To limit the risk of derailing a still-fragile economy and recovery, we should offset this effect with fiscal measures that are modestly expansionary. The Government’s support package is consistent with this, but this risks being unwound by the impending GST hike. Instead, what we want is a macro policy stance that is broadly neutral, which is what is appropriate for our economy at this stage of the business cycle.”
“Yet, the announced package only amounts to $1.5 billion – a fraction of this revenue increase. One important example of policy that follows these principles is to make adjustments for Singaporeans on fixed incomes. For such people, inflation can be devastating. An elderly person spending $20 a day may now only be able to buy one prata instead of two for breakfast, may be forced to skip their afternoon tea or order two instead of three items of "cai png". What is worse is that this diminished consumption will be with them for the rest of their lives even when inflation has returned to normal rates, because elevated prices do not automatically come back down even when inflation disappears. Inflation of 3% above the historical average would mean that their retirement funds now buy 3% less. In practical terms, this means adjustments for those that rely on ComCare and CPF. We have to remind ourselves that while financial markets can and do adjust returns to reflect higher inflation, this is not the case for those locked into a fixed income stream. For retirees, CPF returns have remained unchanged thus far, even as higher prices mean that whatever these retirees have set aside in savings will now buy less. For Comcare, the announced increase for Long-Term Assistance is surely welcome, but it is unclear why a comparable degree of support is not extended for short- and medium-term assistance, since inflation hits both types of households in much the same way. I believe that Comcare assistance should be permanently and universally increased, by a margin that reflects the excess inflation experienced by families for this year.”
“First, we should subscribe to the general principle of being timely, targeted and temporary. I have already outlined why support is needed now. So, it is timely, given how a souring of the global economic environment means that we must rely less on global growth tailwinds to support our economy. Targeting specific groups and keeping the policy temporary will also minimise the budgetary footprint at a time when we have already drawn liberally from our reserves and the economy is on track towards a self-sustaining recovery. Second, our fiscal balances should not be building up excess surpluses at this time. This means that increased revenues resulting from higher collections of various taxes and duties should, as far as possible, be rebated back to citizens. This ensures that our Government does not enjoy a windfall gain, while our citizens suffer. Finally, it is important that we avoid the temptation to index economy-wide wages to inflation. While tempting, since it automates the process of wage adjustment to rising inflation, the experience of emerging markets in the 1980s and 1990s is a testament that this well-meaning policy can end up institutionalising inflation. While the package announced last month by MOF is based on three somewhat different philosophies, it also embeds some of the principles that I have mentioned of being temporary and targeted and relying on better than expected fiscal outturns from the prior fiscal year. But we can probably do more. Revenue for the previous fiscal year, FY 2021, was $74.8 billion – $13.4 billion higher than the fiscal year 2020 and $7.1 billion more than two years ago, before the pandemic. The jump in property stamp duty alone was $6.8 billion even as personal and corporate income taxes have fully recovered.”
“After all, multinationals based here can manage their foreign exchange rate risk through hedging as long as plans for doing so are telegraphed in advance. In the long run, a stronger currency may provide the impetus for our local firms to finally upgrade their operations to reflect higher productivity and quality rather than competing solely on low prices and cost-cutting. There are, of course, reasons for caution on this front. Even casual students of international economic history will have encountered the Plaza Accord, an agreement struck between then leading nations to intervene in currency markets to strengthen the Japanese yen and the German Deutsche Mark relative to the US dollar. The result was a success but some observers have argued that the concerted intervention set in motion the Japanese real estate and stock market bubble and the economy's subsequent Lost Decade. We do not want that here, but even so, there is ample evidence that we can afford more strengthening of the Singapore dollar. Standard metrics for comparing the under- and over-valuation of our currency suggest that the Singapore dollar is, indeed, significantly undervalued. There is latent demand for the Singapore dollar as an attractive safe haven currency in these tumultuous times. Hence, paradoxically, we may not even need to spend that much to prop up our currency. It may be as simple as ceasing interventions that restrain our exchange rate and allowing foreign exchange markets to work more efficiently. This is a luxury that precious few countries can afford but one that we can leverage now. These monetary and exchange rate moves should occur alongside fiscal policy. I would suggest three general principles that guide our thinking on this matter.”
“There are many reasons why this may be the case, not least because the US dollar has been exceptionally strong, even compared to other currencies. But the reality is that the Singapore dollar is, today, weaker in terms of the currency that global commodities like oil, gas and agricultural products are priced in, which is the US dollar. This translates into higher prices here as higher import prices pass through into domestic inflation. The efforts of MAS are demonstrably too tentative. What is worse is that we will risk falling behind the curve even further as the Federal Reserve recently moved to hike interest rates more aggressively, which will further fuel appreciation of the US dollar unless we act more aggressively ourselves. Sure, such a policy will entail winners and losers. We would be concerned about what the effects of a strong exchange rate could mean for exports. But there are reasons to believe that currency appreciation need not be that problematic in our modern Singapore economy. We should not forget that our entrepreneurial model and natural resource scarcity mean that our producers often import raw materials and other intermediate inputs to production, which all benefit from a stronger Singapore dollar. Our economy is also less reliant on manufacturing than before. Indeed, a number of our tradeable services in finance, information and communications technology (ICT) and professional services have pricing power, which allows them to be more resilient to exchange rate fluctuations. By the same token, capital inflows may also remain unaffected by currency appreciation and could even potentially increase.”
“Madam, I appreciate that the legislature is seldom a place for in-depth discussion about as esoteric a topic as the appropriate level of the exchange rate. I am also keenly sensitive to how MAS operates best when left with relative free rein over how they conduct the more technical elements of monetary and exchange rate policy. That said, as I shared with this House earlier this year, while the execution of policies is, indeed, best left to experts, the choice of what policy we pursue falls appropriately within the domain of politicians, who are best positioned to debate the relative merits or trade-offs that affect the welfare of the people we represent. It is with this in mind that I am broaching the issue of our exchange rate. I believe that we can do more to strengthen the Singapore dollar. This will reduce the cost of imported goods and services. Since much of what we consume is imported, a strong Singapore dollar can, in turn, lower domestic inflation as well. As Minister of State Alvin Tan shared with this House two months ago and again yesterday, MAS is aware of this and had already tightened monetary policy thrice since October last year. But it is unclear how much this effort to strengthen the Singapore dollar has succeeded. This is because, of the three moves, only the most recent one was sufficiently aggressive, involving an adjustment of not just the slope but also the midpoint of the policy band, while the other two were more limited. Ultimately, the proof is in the pudding. On 14 October, the day of the first MAS announcement, the exchange rate between the US and Singapore dollar was 1.35. As of mid-June, after three separate efforts, this was 1.40 – getting close to 4% weaker than when the exercise first started.”
“Regardless of whether one agrees with this approach – I, for one, do – it is also well understood that, having adopted such a target, we can no longer control inflation via traditional interest rate hikes. But, thankfully, this does not mean that there are no other tools in MAS' toolkit. One strategy, developed in recent decades, is to intervene in markets for financial assets. Some of us may be familiar with the process of quantitative easing, or QE. The central bank makes large-scale asset purchases to keep long-term interest rates low. The objective of QE is to stimulate the economy in the face of interest rates that are close to zero. Over the past decade, QE was applied by major developed economies' central banks, such as the Bank of Japan, the Bank of England, the European Central Bank and the US Federal Reserve, with some success. Quantitative tightening, or QT, is essentially the opposite. Central banks would intervene in markets to sell longer-term government bonds. This will beat down their prices and, conversely, raise their yield. Thus, even though MAS does not directly seek to increase the Singapore cash rate – currently at 0.7% – it could, nonetheless, influence interest rates for Government bonds maturing 10 years or later. Whether via QT or other means, it strikes me as eminently reasonable that MAS attempts to elevate such long rates so that the real interest rate – that is, the interest rate, net of inflation – would no longer be negative, as it currently is. This would represent a genuine tightening of monetary conditions, which is what is necessary to contain inflation. Of course, the most direct approach to controlling inflation in the context of our current policy framework is to have MAS target a stronger Singapore dollar.”
“The experience of advanced economies that are around a half-year ahead of us in confronting the price dragon suggests that inflation may, like the last drunk uninvited guest at a party, hang around longer than we would like or appreciate. Their central banks have already abandoned rhetoric that the phenomenon is transitory. None other than our own MAS has pointed out that only a third of the increase in core inflation is due to external sources, with about half due to domestic drivers. With the source of inflation emanating domestically, it behooves us to act locally. There are genuine consequences for failing to act. In addition to the real cost borne by various segments of the population, refraining from decisive action now could allow inflation to become even more entrenched in expectations of our households and businesses. This runs the risk that inflation becomes more permanent than temporary. The role of macroeconomic policy is to stabilise the economy. While the Government has announced a suite of measures in an off-Budget fiscal package, I believe more can be done at this juncture from a big picture perspective. In most economies, the first line of defence against inflation is the central bank. But as explained yesterday by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, our nation's central bank, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), does not operate as a traditional central bank relying on short-term interest rates to manage price pressures. Instead, it subordinates the policy rate to exchange rate considerations consistent with our open economy and considerable exposure to international trade and financial flows.”
“With fuel prices up by a quarter, it is unsurprising that transportation is now more expensive, with price rises in the teens, compared to a year ago. This is not affecting just those who have the luxury of owning cars or getting on planes for the holidays. Public transportation costs are up more than 7%. For families that rely on the occasional taxi or private hire car (PHC) to get their kids to school when they are running late, this option has become that much more difficult. When the prices of what we eat, getting to work and keeping our homes and businesses running are all rising rapidly, this is not an inflation problem any longer. It is a cost of living crisis. It is, therefore, incumbent on policymakers to do what they can to alleviate the pain felt by the people. To be clear, the drivers of inflation are multifaceted. A significant part of inflation is global in nature. For example, the prices of commodities, such as food and energy, have climbed higher since the middle of last year. The war in Ukraine fed further uncertainty and led to spikes in the prices of wheat, corn and sunflower oil. Supply chain pressures, not just in China, where the administration's stubborn adherence to a zero-COVID policy has led to rolling lockdowns, but also globally, have meant more upward pressure on prices for the rest of us. Tight labour markets worldwide have seen wages add their own powerful contribution to the inflation mix. At first glance, such imported inflation looks like something beyond our control since we are a small open economy and price taker in global markets. But it is incorrect to insist that inflation must be a storm, that we simply need a lull time to pass.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Tackling the Macro Picture in Rising Cost of Living Challenges 4.14 pm Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim (Sengkang): Mdm Deputy Speaker, I wish to speak today on how macroeconomic policy can and should play a role in addressing our cost of living challenges. As Members on both sides of this House are aware, the state of inflation in Singapore is not good. Since the start of the year, inflation in the prices faced by consumers has averaged 4.9%. This is more than double the rate of 2.3% in 2021. It is also close to double the average since our nation's Independence. The pain of this rising cost of living is even more keenly felt by the average household and small business. Food inflation is up to 4.5%, more than three times higher than last year. While news headlines and my mother's constant reminders focus on costly chicken and the threat to what most would consider our national dish, chicken rice, prices of all kinds of meat are up almost 6%. Eggs are about 30% pricier and even those choosing a healthier diet face vegetables that are 5% more expensive. Another area where prices have shot up is energy. I am certain I am not the only Member here who has received irate emails from residents who have expressed shock and dismay at their utilities bills. Small wonder. Electricity is up 20% – dearer than it was a year ago – and gas, more than 10%. This not only means that more of us have to think twice before turning the air conditioner on; it also means that our small businesses, already operating on lower sales because of the pandemic, face even thinner margins.”
“With this, an average household living in a 4-room HDB flat will receive utilities rebates covering about five months’ worth of their utilities bills. We will continue to monitor the situation closely, and assess whether further help is needed. The Government remains committed to supporting Singaporeans who want to get married and have children, and will continue to review our measures to build a Singapore that is Made for Families.”
“The Baby Support Grant (BSG) was introduced for parents of Singaporean children born from 1 October 2020 to 30 September 2022. We disbursed $92 million in the first year from 1 October 2020 to 30 September 2021, and $69 million thus far in the ongoing second year. The BSG is a one-off measure to signal our support for families during the COVID-19 pandemic and encourage couples to proceed with their parenthood plans. Apart from the BSG, parents continue to benefit from comprehensive support under the Marriage and Parenthood package, which we have enhanced over the years. Among other benefits, the Baby Bonus Cash Gift, contributions to the Child Development Account, and Medisave Grant for Newborns provide parents with up to $18,000 in financial support for their firstborn, and more for higher birth orders. We recognise that Singaporeans are concerned about the rising cost of living. At Budget 2022, we announced a comprehensive set of measures to help cushion the impact of higher prices for Singaporean households. This includes a $100 CDC Voucher for each household, additional U-Save Rebates, and a $200 top-up to the Child Development Account, Edusave account or Post-Secondary Education Account of each Singaporean child. Last month, the Government further announced a $1.5 billion Support Package to provide additional targeted help, especially for the lower-income and more vulnerable groups. This package includes a GST Voucher – Cash Special Payment of up to $300 for existing GST Voucher – Cash recipients, and a $100 Household Utilities Credit disbursed to every Singaporean household to help offset utilities bills. This is on top of the earlier announced GST Voucher – U-Save rebates that our HDB households will be receiving.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Ensuring Equitable Outcomes in Housing Redevelopment 5.46 pm”
“The Baby Support Grant (BSG) was introduced for parents of all Singaporean children born from 1 October 2020 to 30 September 2022. Single mothers who were lawfully married to their child's father, but are divorced or widowed, are eligible for BSG. We also allowed appeals from parents whose babies were born before 1 October 2020, but whose certified Estimated Delivery Date was on or after 1 October 2020. BSG augments existing Marriage and Parenthood (M&P) support measures for families. It was intended to be a one-off measure to signal our support for families during the pandemic and encourage couples to proceed with their parenthood plans. We have received some queries this year on BSG eligibility period. As the pandemic situation has improved, we have replied that BSG will not be extended beyond the current eligibility period. Parents will continue to benefit from our comprehensive suite of support for M&P, which we have enhanced over the years. For instance, the Government provides parents with up to $18,000 in financial support for their firstborn, through the Baby Bonus Cash Gift, contributions to the Child Development Account (CDA), and Medisave Grant for Newborns. The Government remains committed to supporting Singaporeans who want to get married and have children and will continue to review our measures to build a Singapore that is Made for Families.”
“Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move that the proceedings on the item under discussion be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order 48(8) to remove the time limit in respect of Minister of State Alvin Tan's speech?”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, in view of the very heavy agenda tomorrow, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn to 10.00 am tomorrow." [(proc text) Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to 10.00 am, tomorrow." – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)] Adjourned accordingly at 8.27 pm.”
“Timelines and deadlines are also there for a reason – to enable us to conduct parliamentary business efficiently but also effectively. I, therefore, urge Members to be mindful of this, so that for future debates, we can have all the cut and thrust that we desire but, at the same time, observing all due proprieties. Mr Speaker, I would like to conclude by thanking everyone who has contributed to Budget 2022. Let me begin by thanking Members of this House for their strong support and active participation in the Budget and COS debates. It has been a tiring but rewarding two weeks. The Budget was the product of strong input from Singaporeans from all walks of life; we engaged widely, took in feedback. It reflects our citizens' needs, aspirations and does its best to address their concerns. I would also like to express my gratitude to all of the public servants who have been working so hard on this, on top of their regular work. Many have had to learn on the job, some have taken on additional "COVID-fighting" roles over the past two years or so and then have had to deal with Budget. It has been a tiring time for them but they soldier on, because when they signed up for Public Service, they knew they also signed up to serve, even at personal cost in terms of family time and rest. I would also like to thank the Deputy Leader for covering for me in my absence. On behalf of the House, I would like to thank you, Mr Speaker, and your deputies for presiding over the proceedings with patience and forbearance. We are also grateful to the Clerk of Parliament, the Parliament Secretariat, the staff, the interpreters and translators, all of whom have been working in overdrive these last few weeks. May we show our appreciation for them. [Applause.] 1.04 pm”
“No matter which way you cut it, it boils down to those three things: tax companies more, tax the rich more, or use more of the reserves. From our perspective, it is too early to adjust corporate taxes as it will depend on the evolving rules for BEPS 2.0. And even if we are able to collect more in corporate taxes from the revenues from BEPS 2.0, we will have to use these revenues for additional measures to enhance our overall competitiveness and ensure that we can continue to attract our fair share of investments. On taxing the rich, there are ramifications on whether we will drive away talent and wealth, and that will be bad for Singaporeans. In reality, wealth is mobile, higher taxes on a small group of people at the top who are extremely mobile will eventually lead to higher taxes for upper middle-income or even middle-income groups. Using more of the reserves means leaving less behind for the next generation and imposing higher taxes on them. So, I just lay this out at the end of the day, so that people can reflect, make their own conclusions and see how they wish to view this. But I thought when all was said and done, and the dust settled after the debate, it is good just to crystallise the two different positions, so that people will have a more meaningful insight as to what the different propositions actually mean. Next, with more Opposition Members in Parliament, it is natural that our debates will get more robust. That is par for the course. However, in this session, we are also reminded that whilst robust debate is good, it is also important that Members maintain decorum in their actions, both in and outside of the House. The Standing Orders are there for a reason.”
“And I thought it might be helpful here if I just summarise the difference in approach between the Government and the Opposition, in particular, the Workers' Party, not to reignite the whole debate on this again. But just to summarise what the different philosophical approaches are, so that people can look at it and make their own judgements and determination. On the Government side, the structures that we have put in place are ones we believe are fair and progressive. There is GST; yes, but will not hurt the low-income because of Permanent GST Voucher scheme, and the Assurance Package will help all Singaporean households, not just the lower-income cope with the transition, and the GST Voucher scheme provides permanent assistance. Everyone contributes, but those who have more, contribute more. Those with less also contribute but a lesser amount and receive more in return. Keeping the tax burden manageable for all, including businesses so that there is incentive for all to work hard, do well and enjoy the benefits of their hard work even as they contribute to our revenues. We still maintain the protection of our reserves and we use the income on our reserves equitably – 50% for this generation, 50% for the next. The Workers' Party has a different philosophical approach. They have preferred not not to raise GST. But I do not think there is any dispute that there is a genuine and real need though to fund healthcare, going forward and that there is a need for increased revenue. To achieve additional revenue of $3.5 billion a year, the net effect of their various proposals is to tax large companies more, tax the rich or use more of the reserves.”
“We have continued our educational reforms, reducing pressure and stress so our children can focus on the joy of learning – mid-year examinations for all Primary and Secondary levels will be removed by 2023 and streaming would be removed fully 2024. We are redoubling our efforts to bridge inequality and make sure no one is left behind. Social service delivery will be improved. ComLink will be scaled up nationwide and UPLIFT expanded. There will be more opportunities for the differently abled. We reaffirmed the importance of family – 2022 will be the year of celebrating families and strengthening support for families. All these good things cannot come to pass without funding. To enable them to happen, we enhanced and strengthened our tax structure. We will adjust the corporate tax system to take into account BEPS. We increased the progressivity of our personal income tax. We raised wealth taxes through targeted increases in property tax and tax on luxury cars. And we increased GST with a significant package to buffer its impact and adjusted the timing. Most Singaporeans will not feel the impact of the GST increase for many years because of the support measures we designed. By coupling GST with GSTV, we ensure that the lower income, including many retirees, will continue to pay less GST than the headline rate. We will study further support if the inflation situation worsens. And in Parliament, the Budget process saw robust debate. The value of robust debate is that it helps to crystalise the issues and it lets people see where Members of Parliament and Parties stand.”
“This unique approach is the outcome of intensive effort between the Tripartite partners: the Labour movement, employers and Government. We can now continue to develop a strong and skilled Singaporean workforce while enabling employers to meet genuine manpower needs by hiring foreigners with relevant skills to complement our local workforce, through the increases in the minimum qualifying salaries for work passes and the COMPASS points-based framework. We are speeding up our transition to a greener, more sustainable society with the review of our climate plan and the setting of more ambitious goals, the increase in carbon tax, R&D into sustainability, cutting emissions, energy efficiency, renewable and clean energy and zero-waste. As this is not without trade-offs and costs, Singaporeans will be engaged in this endeavour so that we can all have a clear understanding of what it will take to achieve our green ambitions even as we move forward on them. We have renewed and strengthened our social compact. Cost of living, inflation are very much on people's minds. Almost all Members spoke on this in one way or another. Approving the Household Support Package and other help schemes paves the way for us to help Singaporeans through this tough period. We heard assurance from the Minister for Finance during his round-up speech that the Government would "not hesitate to take further actions to protect jobs, and to help households and businesses deal with increased costs, if need be." We have ensured we can meet and pay for the healthcare needs of our rapidly ageing population. With Healthier SG we have the blueprint for a new model of healthcare of the future, anchored on prevention as well as cure.”
“This is the highest level of participation in the last five years despite the reduced number of Members of Parliament able to attend Parliament. Second, this Budget was developed against the backdrop of climate change and climate risk which is becoming more urgent by the day. Third, just as we were about to debate the Budget, the world changed with the situation in Ukraine, reminding us once again that independence, the right to self-determination and territorial sovereignty are precious and should never be taken for granted, and why small countries like Singapore must continue to advocate and uphold an international order that is rules based and principled. Against this backdrop, we debated and approved one of our most transformative Budgets to date, setting ourselves on a path towards becoming a fairer, greener, more inclusive and overall, more progressive Singapore. Let me summarise what we have done by approving this Budget. With this Budget, we will be strengthening our business ecosystem and building stronger Singaporean enterprises. The "Singapore Global Enterprises" and the "Singapore Global Executive Programme" will help us produce companies and Singaporean talent that are globally competitive. Budget 2022 will also revitalise and support our F&B, retail and tourism sectors. We will continue to press on with our digitalisation journey, while ensuring those less comfortable with technology are not be sidelined. This Budget affirms our support for our workers, especially low-wage workers. The Progressive Wage Model, Progressive Wage Credit Scheme and enhancement of the workfare income supplement scheme will support and uplift our lower-wage workers.”
“Mr Speaker, it is customary at the end of the Budget process for the Leader to give a speech, being an acknowledgement to the Chair of the House. We have come to the end of Budget 2022 and the Committee of Supply (COS). Sir, this Budget has been both unusual and memorable for a number of reasons. First, although we have been battling the pandemic for over two years, this is the first time that it reached the Chamber. Some Members of Parliament (MPs) were close contacts of those who were COVID-positive and took leave of absence out of an abundance of caution even. Special seating arrangements were put in place, so they could feel at ease about still attending. A number of MPs, myself included, contracted COVID-19 and had to sit out of the proceedings for a while. The virus was not discriminatory. Members of the Ruling Party had it; Ms Sylvia Lim, Ms He Ting Ru from Workers' Party got it; Prof Hoon, a Nominated Member of Parliament got it as well. So, it reached everyone. But I would like to thank colleagues for their care and concern and expressions of support for all those who were ill. Let me especially thank Mr Louis Ng, who gave the most encouragement and support, primarily because he wanted me to get well in time to answer his Parliamentary Questions (PQs). He did add as an afterthought that he was concerned for my health as well. Thank you, Mr Ng. Despite this, we did not allow COVID-19 to disrupt our work: 66 speakers spoke over the two and a half days of debate on the Budget Statement; seven days COS in which 639 cuts were filed; we spent a total 73 hours debating the fiscal policy of the Government and the Ministries' Estimates of Expenditures. Approximately 130 PQs were taken in the past two weeks.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Third time." [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Third time." [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his clarification or supplementary questions and I commend him for his concern for vulnerable single mothers. I would say this: we too are committed to supporting single mothers. In terms of specific tax measures and how they operate, it is important to remember that certain tax measures were designed originally with a certain social objective. We must be careful not to just transplant or think that a measure that is for one social objective can just be transplanted or extended to meet another social objective. I think what I can say is this: we will do our best to ensure that single mothers are supported. I am happy to note that the situation now is, in fact, much better than it was 16 years ago when I spoke about this. And we will continue to make it better for them, without, hopefully, distorting the lines too much in terms of where our society feels comfortable in terms of societal values. I think the takeaway the Member should have is that we will not forget single mothers, working or otherwise. We will make sure that the child is definitely given every opportunity to be supported and we will support the mothers as well. The specific question that the Member had about the application of the measures, I will check that and we will respond to him. I just want to make sure that the response that is given is accurate.”
“Mr Louis Ng had asked a similar question at the Committee of Supply in 2020. As MOF explained then, all Singaporean children receive substantial benefits that support their growth and development from the Government, regardless of their parents’ marital status. These include: (a) Child Development Account benefits, including the $3,000 First Step Grant and matched co-savings from Government; (b) $4,000 in MediSave Grant for Newborns; (c) MediShield Life coverage from birth; (d) over $180,000 of education subsidies by the time they turn 16 years old, including pre-school subsidies; and (e) Government healthcare subsidies. Working mothers, regardless of their marital status, are also entitled to: (a) 16 weeks of Government-Paid Maternity Leave; (b) six days paid Child Care Leave per year for children aged below seven years, or two days for children aged seven to 12; and (c) concessionary Migrant Domestic Worker Levy. In this way, we support all parents, including unwed working mothers, to give their children education opportunities and good healthcare, so they can realise their fullest potential in life. The Working Mother’s Child Relief and Parenthood Tax Rebate were instituted to encourage women to continue working after their marriage and childbirth, and to support parenthood within marriage and should be seen in that context. These policies also reflect the prevailing societal norm and values in Singapore. The Government will continue to work with our community partners to support vulnerable single parents. Those in need of assistance can approach their nearest Social Service Office.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, "That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions." [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Resolutions accordingly agreed to. (proc text)]”
“It is better for your organisation if you support fathers to take paternity leave, and, of course, mothers as well. This is something that we need to work with the tripartite partners on. Mr Louis Ng can be reassured that this is an area of work we will continue to look at.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, I thank the Member for his clarifications. I would say that we agree that it is very important for fathers to be involved, especially at the early stage when the children are just born, for them to bond with the children and to be there for the wife and the family. As I had indicated at COS and earlier, we will continue to work with the tripartite partners to review the scope for more parental leave provisions. I think the key adjustment that we need to make is a mindset change. It is a mindset change partly on the part of fathers, partly on the part of employers. Employers are key. We have found, for example, if we look at the statistics for the taking of parental leave, that there has been an improvement, but it is still not where we want it to be. For example, in 2016, the take-up rate was 47%; in 2017, it was 53%; in 2018, it was 53%; in 2019, it was 55%. You can see that it is improving, but it is not where we would like it to be. Firstly, we hope that more and more fathers will see themselves playing a vital role when their children are born and take up the paternity leave. The second part of the equation is also how the employers respond. This is very important because if someone applies for paternity leave and you find that the supervisor is not supportive or the colleagues are not willing to cover, it makes it very difficult for the father to take that paternity leave as well. That mindset shift is something we are in transition because we see more fathers wanting to be involved; employers need to be on board. Which is why both at COS and now, I am reiterating, as indeed Mr Ng is, that it is actually better for your organisation if you are family-friendly.”