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 26 of 51.
“For the children who are without family support, the teachers in the schools are especially mindful to make an extra effort for these students. These students also have access to the limited services available. So, I would just like to reassure the Member that every effort to ensure that these students are supported.”
“Many of you do not see this behind the scenes but when HBL was first announced, the teachers had to come together very quickly to put together the packages and the resource kits. What was heartwarming from this that we have learnt from the feedback from the schools, is that those teachers who were familiar with technology started to help those who were less familiar. Some of the older ones who were very experienced teachers but not so familiar with technology were learning from some of the younger ones. So, altogether it was an experience where people shared their different knowledge; the teachers shared different resources; some of them were just putting together DIY kits, building on MOE resources that were available. But altogether moving in the same direction with the sole purpose of making sure that the children were adequately equipped, and also trying to ensure that the parents were supported in this task of home-based learning. And for the students who need support beyond lessons, obviously, the teachers also have been trying to engage them in other ways. And for the ones who have other issues, the school counsellors and the social welfare officers have reached out to them, again, either by telephone calls, video calls, emails, but just trying to make sure that they stay in contact with the students so that they are supported.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her question and for her very obvious concern for both parents as well as the teachers. Let me start by saying that home-based learning has been a learning process for all – the schools, the parents and the students. That said, it has gone on much better than we had hoped but not without challenges. So, what are some of the challenges? Some of the challenges are obviously from the parents' view point: some had to get familiar with the resource kits, some had to learn how to use the software, others were okay with the resource kits and the software but they had to work from home or they had more than one child who was also doing home-based learning. There were some, and for them this is particularly challenging if they had a child with special needs and other children who are also doing home-based learning. So, what the schools and the teachers have tried to do is to ensure that they maintained a contact with the parents, talked through the issues that the parents have and together tried to work at various solutions. And this is also bearing in mind that no two children are exactly alike. Some have taken to the home-based learning very well but some others need more offline learning; and the parents have had to adjust and cope with that as well. So, I would say that the initial period – certainly, the first week – there was quite a lot of adjustments that had to take place and learning on both sides. But a couple of weeks on and now we are at the fourth week, things have more or less stabilised. But I rather suspect that the school holidays commencing tomorrow will be a welcome break for all. With regard to teachers, here I really would like to salute the teachers for the tremendous effort that they made.”
“Mr Speaker, copies of the Bill have been provided to the Clerk, who will distribute it to Members now. [Handouts were to hon Members.]”
“Mr Speaker, I have the President's recommendation for the introduction of this Bill. I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to make Supplementary Provision to meet Additional Expenditure for the Financial Year, 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021". [(proc text) Bill read the First time. (proc text)]”
“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)]”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has come to certain resolutions. [(proc text) First resolution to be reported, (proc text)] [(proc text) "That the sum of $45,437,344,500 shall be supplied to the Government under the Heads of Expenditure for the public services shown in the Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021, as amended, contained in Paper Cmd 27 of 2020." (proc text)] [(proc text) Second resolution to be reported, (proc text)] [(proc text) "That the sum of $2,328,555,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the Heads of Expenditure for the public services shown in the Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2020 to 31 March 2021, as amended, contained in Paper Cmd 27 of 2020.” (proc text)]”
“Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated to Head Z of the Main Estimates be increased by $4,000,000,000." The increase is for additional Special Transfers as announced in Deputy Prime Minister's Ministerial Statement on 6 April 2020. Of the increase, $2.9 billion is for the enhancements to the Jobs Support Scheme; and $1.1 billion is for the one-off Solidarity Payment to households during this period. [(proc text) Question, "That the total sum to be allocated to Head Z of the Main Estimates be increased by $4,000,000,000", put and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) The increased sum of $21,592,925,000 for Head Z ordered to stand part of the Supplementary Main Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated to Head V of the Development Estimates be increased by $200,000,000." The increase is for further enhancements to the Temporary Bridging Loan Programme, Enterprise Financing Scheme, or EFS – SME Working Capital Loan, and EFS – Trade Loan, as announced in Deputy Prime Minister's Ministerial Statement on 6 April 2020. [(proc text) Question, "That the total sum to be allocated to Head V of the Development Estimates be increased by $200,000,000", put and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $591,980,000 for Head V ordered to stand part of the Supplementary Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The increased sum of $2,298,555,000 for Head V ordered to stand part of the Supplementary Development Estimates. (proc text)] Head Z – Financial Transfers”
“I do not have the specific timeline for this case in question. However, what I can reassure the Member is this – the schools and teachers take such allegations very seriously. Parents would be encouraged to speak to the teachers and the schools to highlight such cases. In this particular instance, when MOE looked into it, we were satisfied that the school had acted appropriately. So, I think at the end of the day, the key thing is this – to bring it to the attention of the teachers in the schools as soon as possible. From the MOE side of the house, we want to make sure that the schools respond appropriately and quickly and in time, and also to make sure that we have the appropriate peer support culture. So, in this particular instance as we have said, measures were taken and the matter has been resolved. But, we will also continue to make sure that going forward, for this particular case as well as for other students in other schools, any allegations of bullying would be addressed appropriately and in a timely fashion.”
“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 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)]”
“I thank the Member for her clarification. The Member is correct that the parents are actually a very important part of this, and our teachers do engage the parents, especially when the teachers find that their child has a mental health issue. So, the plan to engage parents is very much a part of it. When the Member refers to a suicide prevention strategy, actually, that strategy is the peer support network or the programme that I talked about. Because in my speech, I had outlined how it is actually a whole eco-system. If a child is depressed, worried, the first people to pick it up will be the friends, the friends are the first ones. And if it is not too big an issue, the friends can provide support, then that is great. But if it needs a little bit more than that, then you would want to bring it to the attention of the teacher. And the teacher can resolve it, that is fine, but if not, you may have to go to the professional counsellor. And then, from the counsellor, you may have to go to specialised external service providers. So, you can see that it is one layer after another layer, but all to have a protective environment around a student who has got mental health issues.”
“I think what Ms Denise Phua wants to do is to sort of lengthen the runway. So, one step at a time. I think we have spent the last decade or so really ensuring that SPED is strengthened, that we have got good quality in terms of the content as well as the teachers and those who can provide the programmes. And you can see we are now taking the next step, which is helping them to transition beyond school and those who can go to open employment. So, I think I can say this – we agree that that is certainly an area that has to be looked into, for those who cannot go into open employment. Work in progress, and we will be very happy to partner all the stakeholders in this space to come up and see what is the best thing for them. It may or may not be retaining them in school. It may be something else. But what we really want is that no matter what it is, when you leave SPED school, you also want those with special needs to be able to live lives which are as productive as possible, and which also gives their care-givers a sense of assurance, that their loved ones with special needs are engaged and have something to do, and are in an environment which is conducive for them.”
“But I agree that there is much more that we can look at, to see how we can support those who leave school. So, let me just take them in turn. The first thing is, MOE has already started in the SPED schools a school-wide process of transition planning for all the SPED students at the Secondary age. The school has developed an individual transition plan for each student, working with the students, the care-givers and the family, and the idea is really to help them to be able to cope when they leave school. So, that is the first thing, and this will apply to all the SPED students, irrespective of whether or not they may be able to go into open employment, or not. So, that is number one – prepare them all for when they leave school. Number two, we have the School-to-Work Transition Programme in all the SPED schools and that is to offer customised training pathways cum work options for the students, who have diverse disability profiles, who may not benefit from the vocational certification but they are still capable of work. The School-to-Work Transition Programme begins in the student's final year of schooling, when he or she is referred to SG Enable and matched to a suitable employment or training pathway, and the programme continues for one year after he or she graduates, during which he or she is supported by SG Enable. While on the programme, the students receive customised job training, job support from job coaches to prepare them for eventual employment. That said, I think Ms Denise Phua's concern really is that there may be some who are not able to do open employment and her appeal is, can we keep them in the school system? But even if we did that, even up to age 21, there are still some, who, after age 21, still cannot cope with open employment.”
“I need to respond to Ms Denise Phua's many supplementary questions. The first clarification Ms Denise Phua had was – how come it is $5,000 for the SEN Fund for those with social and behavioural conditions instead of $25,000? Currently, under the SEN Fund, eligible students with physical impairment can tap up to $5,000 on the SEN Fund. So, it is pegged to that. Eligible students with visual or hearing loss can tap up to $25,000 and that is because for those with visual or hearing loss, the expenses are higher for them in terms of the assistive devices, that is one; as well as the services. So, for example, for the assistive devices, they may need an assistive learning system, talking calculators, reader pens. Those are generally more expensive than other types of devices. And also, supporting services. For example, hearing loss. You may need somebody to do sign language and then you obviously have to cover that. And for the blind students, sometimes you need note-taking services. So, it is scoped depending on the need and basically, for hearing loss and visual impairment, the cost of the devices and support is higher. Do not forget, we have just extended the SEN Fund to students with learning and behavioural needs, and this is just a start. So, the high-needs category may not be so applicable to them. But this much I can assure Ms Denise Phua, which is that MOE will continue to work with our IHLs and we will review the SEN Fund periodically. Our ultimate aim is to ensure that the students with SEN are adequately supported with the necessary devices that they need. Ms Denise Phua also made a passionate plea for us to keep some of the students in the SPED schools for longer, up to age 21. Well, there are two things that we are doing, which will partially address that.”
“We estimate that more than 300 students could benefit from this pilot. Sir, in conclusion, to ensure that education remains an uplifting force for all, regardless of starting point, we will need the collective contribution and conviction of every Singaporean. I hope that what I have shared today will inspire more individuals and organisations to step forward and partner with us. Together, we can ensure that every Singaporean is cared for and supported to become the best that they can be. This is how we will build a society of opportunities for all. [Applause.]”
“At the Secondary school level, we have set up after-school programmes in over 70 schools under GEAR-UP, benefiting more than 3,000 students. These programmes focus on befriending and mentoring by trusted adults, peer support and interest-based activities to engage the students. We are on track to scale up GEAR-UP to 120 Secondary schools this year. School-based support in SCCs and GEAR-UP can be complemented by community-based programmes like academic coaching, drop-in services and parenting support. However, schools may not always know about these programmes. Likewise, community organisations may not always know which students and families need help. To close this coordination gap, UPLIFT has worked closely with MSF to pilot a solution. I am happy to update Members that since January, we have embarked on the UPLIFT Community Pilot, appointing an UPLIFT Town-Level Coordinator in the Social Service Office of three towns – Woodlands, Kreta Ayer and Boon Lay. The Town-Level Coordinator will help integrate school-based and community-based support. Where students have emerging attendance issues and needs that can be met by community-based programmes, schools will refer them to the coordinator. The coordinator will identify the needs of the students and their families, source for suitable resources and programmes offered by the local community partners, and then connect them to the students and families. By improving coordination, we can set up protective factors around the students and their families faster, and address underlying causes of absenteeism earlier. The UPLIFT Community Pilot will pool together the collective wisdom and resources of schools and the community, to better support vulnerable families.”
“I am very encouraged by the number of people who have come up to me to say, "I want to be part of UPLIFT, how can I help?" It is not just individuals; community organisations and companies have come forward too, approaching the schools directly, or working through the UPLIFT Programme Office. One such company is Singapore Press Holdings’ Chinese Media Group or CMG. Last year, CMG worked with New Town Primary school and Qihua Primary School to start a Chinese reading programme called "Reading with You". Leveraging their student publication, "Thumbs Up Junior", CMG staff including journalists and radio deejays engaged the students in enrichment activities and conversations, with the support of volunteers from the Chinese Development Assistance Council (CDAC) and Ngee Ann Polytechnic. Apart from immersing students in a Chinese Language-rich environment and improving their fluency and confidence in the language, the journalists also shared about current affairs and their experiences, serving as positive role models for the students. The students enjoy these interactions with their big brothers and sisters. Over time, we hope such programmes can help students hone their strengths in their Mother Tongue Languages. As relationships deepen, the volunteers can also play a role in shaping the students’ aspirations. Such mentorship opportunities can be valuable for students from disadvantaged backgrounds, as the mentors inspire them and broaden their worldview in a natural, informal setting. Another key focus area of UPLIFT is tackling long-term absenteeism. Early upstream intervention is critical to prevent occasional non-attendance from becoming long-term absenteeism. Earlier, I spoke about upcoming enhancements to SCC provisions for Primary school students.”
“In Boon Lay Garden Primary School, our pilot outreach efforts helped four siblings – let us call them Nadia, Adam, Sofia and Danial – to enrol in their school’s SCC. The four siblings received limited support at home, as their mother was busy taking care of three other younger siblings. I think we are all familiar with cases like this. Adam and Danial, in particular, had longstanding difficulties with completing homework on time. Since joining the school’s structured SCC environment, Adam and Danial have improved their time management skills and now manage their homework more confidently. As the SCC at Boon Lay Garden is run by Big Heart Student Care, a joint venture by the four Self-Help Groups (SHGs), the brothers also enjoyed plug-in programmes run by the SHGs, like the "Backyard Science Workshops" run by MENDAKI. The oldest sister, Nadia, also benefited from the SCC staff’s reinforcement of positive values and habits taught by the school. In recognition of her improvement, Nadia was awarded the school’s "Good Progress Award" last year. With Nadia, Adam, Sofia and Danial progressing well in the SCC, their mother no longer needs to worry about them completing their homework when they return home. Given the positive outcomes such as these, MOE will be implementing this enhanced outreach approach in all Primary schools. This will enable us to support more students from different backgrounds and further strengthen social mobility. Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about UPLIFT’s progress in partnering with community initiatives and how such initiatives could link up with UPLIFT. Since the Taskforce was set up, UPLIFT has been supporting collaboration between schools and the community.”
“Second, we will engage the community to help address each family's challenges in a holistic and targeted way. Some families are referred to the Social Service Offices or Family Service Centres to help with childcare for their younger children, so that older ones can attend school and SCC, instead of having to look after their younger siblings. Finally, we will make the enrolment process and application process for SCFA more user-friendly. For example, teachers will walk families through the various documents that they have to submit and guide them through the process, if needed. For families with complex circumstances, schools will exercise judgement and be more facilitative in the enrolment of children into the SCC. 12.00 pm We piloted this outreach approach in a few Primary schools in July last year, because we wanted to see whether it would make a difference. I was struck by the passion I saw in our teachers, who went out of their way to engage families, understand their challenges and work with the community to address them. They visited the students’ homes – multiple times in some cases. They conducted tours of the SCC for the students and induction sessions for parents, because we want to get the parents on-board to make sure the parents send their children to the SCCs. And I am most heartened to announce that we successfully enrolled 87 of the 100 students that we identified for the pilot. After these students were enrolled, schools brought in community partners to engage them through targeted programmes to strengthen motivational support, resilience and holistic development. And, within the short span of six months, we have already begun to see progress in our students.”
“With more places in SCCs, we are now stepping up efforts to identify, enroll and provide support to students who would most benefit from SCCs. Over the past year, MOE worked closely with the community and MSF to study ground feedback, and walked the journey with these students and their families. We identified the main challenges that these families faced in enrolling their child in a SCC, and together, we developed solutions to address them. One major challenge is affordability. Today, children from low-income families attending MSF-registered SCCs receive fee subsidies under the ComCare Student Care Fee Assistance (SCFA) scheme. However, some students on MOE's FAS still pay more than $120 per month after SCFA subsidies. Making SCCs more affordable for low-income families is an important step towards getting these students into the SCCs and into the right environment for them to do well. Senior Parliamentary Secretary Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim will share more about this in his speech for MSF later this week. Beyond affordability, families face other challenges. For example, some may require their children to head home after school to look after their younger siblings or grandparents. Others may need help with the documentation needed to apply for financial assistance. Such complex challenges can only be surfaced and addressed through deeper, more personal, engagement with these families. Recognising this, we have developed a more comprehensive, proactive approach to reach out to families and tackle challenges together with them. First, schools will proactively identify students who would benefit most from the SCC environment and then go the extra mile to engage and build trust with their families, encouraging them to enroll their child in the SCC.”
“The process is even simpler for families on ComCare assistance. Students in our schools, Polytechnics and ITE, whose families are on ComCare assistance will be automatically granted MOE financial assistance without the need for any more documentation. Despite our best efforts, we recognise that there are still some students who struggle in our education system. Each of these students has a unique set of challenging circumstances. We believe that these can be overcome with the right support and that is why we set up UPLIFT – the Uplifting Pupils in Life and Inspiring Families Taskforce. Mr Murali Pillai, Ms Cheng Li Hui, Mr Charles Chong and Dr Lim Wee Kiak have asked about UPLIFT's work. Let me provide an update. A key focus area of UPLIFT is strengthening after-school care and support for students. This is done through school-based student care centres (SCCs) in Primary schools and after-school programmes in Secondary schools. After-school support is especially important for students who do not have conducive home environments to return to after school. Providing these students with a structured and supervised after-school environment gives them the opportunity to develop good habits, routines and skills that will help them to succeed later in life. Last year, I said MOE would expand our current provisions for after-school support, so I am very happy to announce that we have achieved our target of opening an SCC in all 185 Primary schools this year, up from 170 last year. Since we started expanding school-based SCCs in 2012, we have increased the enrolment from 3,000 to about 27,000 this year. We monitor demand for our SCCs closely and will work with the service providers to expand their capacity, but without compromising programme and service quality.”
“Beyond this, from April 2020, students from low-income families will also benefit from a full fee subsidy, in addition to an enhanced cash bursary of $1,500. This is for NITEC and Higher NITEC students from families with gross household income of $2,750 and below, or per capita income of $690 and below. We expect around 19,000 students to benefit from the enhanced ITE bursaries. Students within the top 10% of GCE "N" or "O" Level entrants in each Higher NITEC and NITEC course receive the Community Development Council/Citizens' Consultative Committee-ITE Scholarship. These scholars currently receive a cash award of $1,600 a year. From April 2020, the scholarship will be enhanced to also cover their fees fully. Around 1,400 NITEC students and 1,200 Higher NITEC students will benefit from this. We will also rename the scholarship to ITE Community Scholarship to better reflect its purpose. It is also easier to remember. With these enhancements, we will spend around $28 million a year on bursaries and scholarship for full-time NITEC and Higher NITEC students, an increase of around 20% from today. To ensure that students can easily access financial support schemes, we agree with Mr Lim Biow Chuan that the application process should be simple, without causing any embarrassment. In MOE schools, teachers and staff keep a lookout for students who may require financial assistance. When approaching students, they take care to do so sensitively and discreetly. MOE also partners with Self-Help Groups to support students and families who need additional assistance beyond MOE. In our IHLs, information on financial aid and application processes is readily available online or can be obtained at the institution's financial aid office.”
“First, we will enhance the MOE FAS, which supports Singaporean students at the Primary, Secondary and pre-University levels. Recognising increased transport costs, from April 2020, we will raise the public transport subsidy from $10 to $15 per month, for Primary up to pre-University levels. For Primary school students who take the school bus, we will also enhance the school bus transport subsidy to 60% of monthly payable fees, up from 50% today. This means that for parents paying a school bus fare of $110, out-of-pocket fees will drop to $45, which is down from $55 today. Next, we will enhance the school meal subsidies for Secondary school students from April 2020 to $2.90 per school meal, up from $2.50 today. The meal subsidy for Primary school students will remain at $2 per meal. Finally, to strengthen support for pre-University students, the pre-University bursary will be increased from $900 to $1,000 per year. These FAS enhancements will be similarly applied to students in the lowest income tier of the MOE Independent School Bursary. MOE will also extend applicable aspects of the FAS enhancements to SPED schools. Similar to last year, we expect around 52,000 students from the Primary to pre-University levels to benefit from the enhancements. This will cost around $52 million each year, a 20% increase from today. Second, MOE will increase support for full-time NITEC and Higher NITEC students in ITE, which Mr Ang Wei Neng, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Zainal Sapari asked about. Today, MOE subsidises over 90% of the total cost of NITEC and Higher NITEC courses. Lower and middle income students can receive further assistance through a cash bursary. MOE will enhance the cash bursary by between $50 and $200.”
“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)]”
“One further clarification because I think I recall hearing a statement that the Town Council would do what it needs to do. The Motion calls on the Town Council to do certain things. So, the Motion, if passed, this Parliament is not forcing the Town Council to do anything, but it is calling upon it to do something. The response of the Town Council will, of course, be its own responsibility. But let us all be clear about what we are asking in this Motion, which is calling upon the Town Council to do what we think is right. The Workers' Party's Members of Parliament, of course, may have a different view.”
“Mr Speaker, that is just such a classic sort of, you know, when there is something happening here, "Oh quick, I point you, look there, look there" because that is a distraction. Let us just have a look at something else and not pay attention to this. We are talking about something else which is simply this: when you have somebody in a public position, if a Court has found that they have done something wrong, there has been a breach of fiduciary duty, lack of integrity, that they have not acted with appropriate candor, should that person remain in position whilst those findings are there whilst they still stand and whether or not an appeal is pending? It is a question of what is the standard of governance and what is the appropriate conduct? What is very clear is that the Workers' Party's standard of governance and conduct is very different from that of this Government's. That much is clear.”
“The point is that when you have a Court judgment with these findings, what do you, as the head or the Chairman of the Town Council do? He also referred to the 2015 General Election and he talked about the fact that the residents have given a mandate to Mr Low Thia Khiang and to Ms Sylvia Lim in 2015. That is true. The residents of Aljunied did give them a mandate to be their Members of Parliament. They gave them a mandate to run the Town Council. They did not give them a mandate to breach their fiduciary duties. They did not give them a mandate to act dishonestly and they did not give them a mandate to act with a lack of integrity and candor. So, what you have is that in 2019, you have a Court judgment which has made these findings and the issue is, as my colleague Mr Desmond Lee has highlighted, what do you do between now and the time of the appeal? What is the correct thing to do? So, no one is suggesting that they should stand down as town councillors. All that this Motion asks is that they do the appropriate thing, which is to recuse themselves from all matters relating to and oversight of financial matters in the Town Council pending the appeal. This goes to transparency, accountability and good governance. So, if, as the Workers’ Party says, they stand for transparency, accountability and good governance, then there should be no objection to this Motion. But likewise, objecting to this Motion also speaks volumes.”
“How many times in this Parliament, when an incident has happened, have Members of Parliament stood up, calling for action against public officials? Calling for action to be taken even before inquiries have been completed, even before judgment has been given? Very often, interim measures are taken to make sure that not only is something properly done, but it is also seen to be done. Members of Parliament are elected public figures, and so are Opposition Members of Parliament. So, the question is: what sort of governance do you hold to? What makes you different? Why do the same standards of conduct not apply to you, as to others? If the position that the Workers' Party has advocated is the standard of governance, then, what it would mean is this. Imagine if you had a Workers' Party government, if there were to be a government official that has been found liable for something, does that person stand aside when there is an appeal pending? The answer would be no – you just carry on, business as usual. What kind of tone does that set for the government? What sort of signal of governance does that convey? What sort of Parliament endorses that? Because it also says something about us. What it also means is that the next time there is any incident and there is an inquiry pending, the Workers’ Party has no moral authority to ask for any official to stand down or stand aside whilst the case is being heard, or whilst the matter goes for appeal. No moral authority at all. Mr Faisal Manap says, when asked what he would do with respect to the Court judgment, that he has belief in his colleagues. I understand that. I appreciate that he has belief in his colleagues. But that is not the point.”
“So, in response to Ms Anthea Ong, this is not sub judice because we are not making any suggestion that the findings were right or wrong. In fact, what this Motion does is accept the findings as they are and it asks, between now and the time where it may or may not be reversed or upheld, what do you do? What is the standard of conduct? Do you simply disregard what the judgment says, or do you say that, pending the appeal, and whilst there is a cloud hanging over the heads of these town councillors, do they stand down? Do they wait, and then see what the Court of Appeal says? Or do they say, "Well, in the meantime, it does not really matter if there is a judgment, I carry on as usual"? That is the issue. Why is this important? It is important because the Workers' Party's response to this important issue will tell you what are their values and what do they regard as good governance. Supposing you were to apply this attitude to this Government. Supposing a Government official was found to have acted dishonestly and in breach of duty. Would we say, "It is fine. Let him or her remain in place, because he is appealing. It is okay. It does not matter if it is a civil servant, if it is the Head of Civil Service, if it is the Commissioner of the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF)". It is a finding of dishonesty, of lack of candour, lack of integrity. Do we say, "Yes, it is okay, you can keep that person in place"? Under our rules of governance, it is equally important to ask what you do in the meantime, even if there is an appeal? And very often, even before you get the first judgment, we will interdict. You do not allow the person to stay in place whilst there are issues hanging over that person. That is not what we are even asking here.”
“I understand. As I understand the position, Ms Anthea Ong is not saying that an appeal precludes a discussion of this. It is just that feeling of discomfort with all the discussions going on. Okay. That really brings me to what this Motion is about. Is it about the facts and the Court judgment, or is it about something else? Well, this Motion is about the standards of integrity and accountability to which Singaporean Members of Parliament are held, and that applies to all Members of Parliament. It is about what do we regard as the appropriate standards for accountability, transparency and good governance. So, what has happened is this. You have a High Court judgment. The High Court judgment has found that Ms Sylvia Lim and Mr Low Thia Khiang acted dishonestly, in breach of fiduciary duty, that their conduct lacked integrity and candour, and that they were fully aware that their conduct was of questionable legality. That is the High Court finding. That is not the finding of any of the Members here. That is a conclusion that the Court reached after looking into the matter in detail and seeing all the documents. So, you have a High Court judgment with these findings and the question now is this: what do you do in the interim period? I appreciate that Ms Sylvia Lim has said that they will be filing an appeal, as, indeed, that is their right to do so. That is not disputed. But the question is, between now and the time that the appeal is heard, what is the appropriate thing for a Member of Parliament to do? What is the appropriate thing for a town councillor to do? As all the lawyers in this room know, a judgment, once given, until and unless overturned, the findings stand.”
“I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I think the point is that such decisions should not be made on the basis of personal views because different individuals may have very different personal views. IHLs and other like institutions provide public spaces. When you have public spaces, you must ensure that your spaces are safe spaces for your audience, and your audience and the people attending those spaces will have many different views, be of many different persuasions, whether it is race, religion, sexual orientation and so on. So, the key thing is to work within the parameters that I have outlined, which is, that they have to be respectful of our social norms and laws and they do have to exercise appropriate judgement and sensitivity, which means that there is an element of discretion. That element of discretion should not be decided based on just your own personal belief but from the view point of, "This is common space", you want people coming into the common space to be comfortable, and to take the decision appropriately. So, it depends on your audience. Some audiences may well be able to be much more accommodating, others may feel a little uncomfortable. The institutions will have to take that call.”
“(proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Ms Indranee Rajah]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“These fund managers will be able to have their funds registered as VCCs on the day that the VCC framework is launched. The programme will commence later this month. Interested fund managers and service providers may approach MAS to find out more about participation. While there are currently no plans to introduce any modules relating to VCCs in the local tertiary curriculum, MAS will study whether this is necessary once the VCC framework is launched. Mr Patrick Tay also asked about the number of jobs created and the impact of the VCC framework on the Singapore economy. It is estimated that the VCC framework could create over 1,000 new jobs for service providers in the first two years of its introduction. We will monitor its impact on the Singapore economy once the framework is launched. I would add, however, that the introduction of VCC is one important piece, but not the only piece in our plan for Singapore to be the leading pan-Asian hub for fund domiciliation and management. The Government continues to work in tandem with the industry to refine our existing schemes and introduce new initiatives to foster the development of the asset management industry. Mr Speaker, let me conclude. I would like to reassure Mr Patrick Tay and all interested parties that the Government is putting in its best efforts to ensure that there is maximum take-up of the VCC structure once it is launched. The Government will continue to work with the industry to ensure that all players in the industry are fully apprised of this new structuring option and are equipped to take advantage of its features as well as the new business opportunities that it can provide. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to.”
“These include providing greater flexibility in the use of capital, allowing fund managers to consolidate certain administrative functions to achieve cost efficiencies, and allowing for funds domiciled in other jurisdictions to redomicile to Singapore as VCCs. Since last year, MAS has continued with its engagements with the industry to familiarise it with the features of the VCC framework. MAS participated in various industry-led events and seminars, including the Seminar on the VCC Act organised by the Law Society of Singapore in April this year. MAS continues to conduct regular engagement sessions with fund managers and other service providers to ensure that they are kept abreast of the developments and timeline for the implementation of the VCC framework. MAS has also recently concluded two promotional trips to North America and Japan to encourage fund managers and investors to consider the VCC as a viable structuring option for their investment funds. During these overseas trips, MAS also met with fund service providers to familiarise them with the VCC framework, so that they can, in time, introduce the VCC as a structuring option for their clients. MAS received positive feedback on the VCC framework, and many of the stakeholders that were engaged are keen to explore domiciling funds in Singapore when the framework is launched. In addition, MAS officers continue to participate in panel discussions and seminars in New York and London to educate the local asset management community about the features of the VCC framework. To familiarise the industry with the VCC framework and to allow fund managers to provide feedback on the registration process for VCCs, MAS will be running a pilot programme for interested fund managers and service providers.”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Member, Mr Patrick Tay, who has spoken on the Bill and for his support. I would like to like to clarify that whilst the VCC Act was passed in Parliament last year, the VCC framework is not yet operational. The Government is working on the Subsidiary Legislation which sets out the operational framework for VCCs and their sub-funds. The tax treatment for VCCs will also be introduced, which I have just dealt with in my speech earlier. With these components in place the VCC framework is anticipated to come into operation at the end of this year. As such I will begin by addressing Mr Patrick Tay's second question on reception of the VCC structure, and the plans to prepare the industry and the educational institutions for the launch of the VCC framework. The response to the VCC framework from the asset management industry both in Singapore and abroad has been positive, with the VCC being hailed as a "game changer". It has been welcomed as a positive step to enhance the suite of fund structuring options in Singapore with a structure that is fit for use as an investment fund vehicle. It is also an important step to ensure that Singapore remains competitive with other long-established fund domiciles, such as Luxembourg and Ireland. MAS has been actively promoting the VCC framework to three main groups: first, the fund managers; second, investors; and third, service providers, including lawyers, accountants, tax advisors, fund administrators and custodians. When I moved the VCC Bill last year, I mentioned that MAS has been working closely with industry associations, local service providers and consultants to familiarise them with the value proposition and features of the VCC framework.”
“Receiving an AL6 for the fourth subject does not automatically disqualify a student from accessing a particular course or his first choice secondary school. For example, a student obtaining two AL5s and two AL6s will get a PSLE score of 22 and will still be eligible for the Express/Normal (Academic) option band. So, when we did the simulations, they indicate that, by and large, whether under the current system or whether under the new system, a similar proportion of all MTL-exempt students will be able to qualify for Express or the Express/Normal (Academic) option band and that is about 40% of these students. So, by and large, it would not be very different. Even now, you do have to assign them a score because there are MTL-exempt students today. I think at the end of the day, the key thing for the parents to ask is: some parents may be concerned about their children who do very well. They may get one for English; one for Mathematics; one for Science and then you get six for your MTL. You are well within the Express range. So, for those who are at the margins, when it comes to the choice of a particular school, there is always the DSA option. And I would ask, at the end of the day, for the parents to work with the teachers to consider what is the best thing for the child because we do want the best pathway, the best option for the child and, especially children with SEN. That, MOE will certainly not compromise on because we want to make sure that whichever path they take, they have good opportunities in order to be able to achieve their aspirations. 2.00 pm”
“So, the ones who are exempted are actually a very small percentage. And for the SEN students who take MTL at PSLE, about 40% of them offer Standard MTL and 30% offer Foundation MTL. So, there is actually already a very large group of students with SEN who do MTL and they compare together with the others. Then, for those who are exempted, I think Ms Denise Phua asked: can an exemption be an exemption? The exemption is an exemption because if we followed the existing rule, what it would mean is that the student who, for medical reasons or otherwise, if you held very strictly to the rule, it would mean that that student has to take MTL. And we have given the exemption in recognition of the fact that such students may, because of SEN or for medical reasons, have great difficulty in coping with MTL and, therefore, have been exempted. So, an exemption is given and they do not have to do MTL. But the difficulty comes, as I explained, with posting, because with posting, it is necessary to see how that child compares with other children. And, if you apply it very strictly, then given that you did not take MTL, the correct score should actually be zero, meaning that you have the worst possible score, and we did not want to do that. So, to be fair, we have to assign a score, and we do that by taking reference from their peers, including those who take Foundation MTL. So, actually, the range of scores for those who take Foundation MTL, by and large, falls within AL6 to AL8. And AL6 is actually not a low score. It translates to up to 64 marks. So, do not be mistaken: AL6 is not a low score and it is still possible for these children to be able to get a place in the Express stream.”
“I thank the Member for her questions. In fact, I think the Member has reflected the concerns of parents who are genuinely worried about their children, especially those with SEN. Perhaps, what I can do is put it in perspective and give the reassurance to those parents that even under the new system, their children will be treated fairly. Let me just outline and explain it. I will take the second question first because Ms Denise Phua asked whether those who are already in-flight might have chosen otherwise if they had known about this, and whether the current system can remain in place for them so that only the new cohorts coming in for primary school will be under the new system. The thing is this: the new PSLE AL scoring system will come into effect for the PSLE cohort in 2021. So, the students with SEN who are exempted and who are taking PSLE in 2021, they, too, as part of that cohort, will need to be posted to a secondary school. When you post, the posting has to be done in comparison with other students. So, all the students in that cohort will be posted under an AL system and you cannot remain under a T-score system. It is not possible to do comparison or to delay it. And that is the reason why you have to do it together. But recognising that you have to do it together, then this is the thought process that MOE went through and we hope that the parents will see that this does not actually disadvantage their children. The first thing to remember is that, actually, more than 95% of our students take MTL. It is 4.5% who are exempted, out of which about 3% includes those who have SEN. Then, out of the ones who have SEN in the mainstream schools, as I mentioned earlier, 70% actually do take MTL at PSLE.”
“The changes to the PSLE scoring, expansion of DSA and journey to Full Subject-Based Banding (SBB) aim to shift our education system away from an over-emphasis on academic results and encourage our students to focus on their own learning. Fundamentally, we want an education system with multiple pathways and opportunities, so that every child can maximise his or her potential and be placed in good stead for the future.”
“The Ministry of Education (MOE) and schools will support existing MTL-exempt students affected by the new scoring system in their transition by providing advice on their school choices, and to also explore DSA as an option. We also recognise that our students with SEN put in tremendous effort to cope with their learning. MOE has increased the resources to help students in Special Education (SPED) schools, and students with SEN in mainstream schools will also benefit from learning support programmes as well as allied educators for learning and behavioural support. MOE is committed to continue working with schools in providing the support needed to prepare our students for the PSLE changes. Members also asked if we could delay the implementation of the scoring changes for current cohorts or consider an alternative PSLE scoring system for students with SEN. Given that we are changing the national examination scoring system, it would not be feasible for a small group to remain under the T-score system or to use an aggregate score of three scores, as their scores would not be comparable with the aggregate scores of other students for purposes of secondary school posting. Ultimately, in grading, scores have to reflect standards, instead of effort or circumstances. Those are relevant factors, but we should exercise that judgement during admission mechanisms like the DSA, instead of compromising the consistency and integrity of the assessment and grading system. Mr Speaker, performance at the PSLE is just one checkpoint in a child's education journey and it is not the final judgement of a child's ability or potential.”
“As the score range for those taking Foundation MTL is AL6 to AL8, it would be difficult to justify to those offering it why another student who did not sit for the examination could be assigned a higher score. Ms Denise Phua asked about the implications of the new scoring system on course eligibility and school choices. Any student who scores 22 or below will qualify for an Express course. Under the current T-score system and the new AL scoring system, the outcomes are similar. Our simulations using the most recent PSLE results show that a similar proportion of students with SEN and are exempted from MTL, would qualify for the Express course under both scoring systems. In any case, by 2024, Express and Normal streams will be phased out. In terms of school choices, if we held choice patterns constant, about 60% of them would secure their first choice secondary school, under both scoring systems. For those concerned about the chances of success to be admitted into specific secondary schools, we have, over the past few years, significantly expanded places in the Direct School Admission (DSA) pathway to better recognise talents and achievements across different domains beyond general academic abilities. Most schools can now admit 20% of their Secondary 1 intake via DSA, up from 10% in 2017, and many schools have yet to reach this proportion. Schools are also admitting more students with different strengths and backgrounds, including those with SEN. For example, we see students with SEN who are talented in Mathematics, Science, sports and performing arts, and admitted via DSA into the schools of their choices.”
“The new AL scoring system is based on the level of attainment by the student himself and moves us away from the approach of the T-score system where a student has to outperform his peers to register a high score. However, when it comes to secondary school posting, the student still needs to use his PSLE score to compete with other students in order to be admitted into a school of his choice. Our treatment of students exempted from MTL is aligned with these principles. For purposes of deriving AL scores, he was exempted from MTL, so no assessment of his standards took place and he has no score. But for the purposes of secondary school posting, he needs to be compared with other applicants and so we will assign him an MTL score by referencing his peers. We can and must strike a balance between competition amongst students and self-mastery, but realistically, we cannot remove competition totally, and it is also not a reflection of the real life that we are preparing students for. What is specific to the AL system is that the assigned MTL score will range from AL6 to AL8. We have done this considering the vast majority of students who offer an official MTL either at the Standard or Foundation levels. This includes a significant number with SEN or those who have returned to Singapore after prolonged periods overseas. Currently, about 90% of our Returning Singaporean students study an official MTL, with our schools providing support for their language learning. Seventy percent of students with SEN in mainstream schools also take MTL at PSLE. Many of them take Foundation MTL.”
“Today, more than 95% of our students take the Mother Tongue Language (MTL) examination at the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) at either the Standard or Foundation level. This reflects the centrality of MTL learning in our education system. Learning the MTLs allows us to connect with our communities and draws on our rich ethnic heritage and culture to build our unique Singapore identity. At the same time, we recognise that for a small group of students, such as those with special educational needs (SEN) or who have been away from Singapore for prolonged periods, it may be challenging for them to study one of our MTLs. Hence, upon application, we may grant them exemption from MTL. However, there are many students with SEN or who have been away and who still take MTL, notwithstanding the difficulties they encounter. In any given year, on average, about 4.5% of our students are exempted from MTL. This group of students will take three examinations at the PSLE – English, Mathematics and Science. Hence, they will receive only three subject scores on their results slip. The question then is how to use these scores for posting to the next course of study, given that the vast majority of their peers have a score summed up from all four subjects. That is why for purposes of posting, we assign an MTL score for these students by referencing the MTL scores of other students with similar English, Maths and Science scores, including those offering Foundation MTL. This basic approach will not change when we move from the T-score system to the new Achievement Level (AL) scoring system in 2021. Ms Denise Phua asked about the underlying principles of this practice.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his suggestions and comments. We will take on board at the Bicentennial Office the suggestion about extending it. That is number one; and consider whether or not it could be updated at major milestones. As I said, we have not taken that decision yet because we are reviewing the cost as well as the technical implications, but we will take that on board. With respect to the second question or the second comment, again, that is something that we can consider. The current little survey which asks them to rate which of the three they rank the most important – self-determination, multiculturalism and openness – that was directed at helping people to identify what is the Singapore DNA, to think about who we are and what our 700 years of history have made us. The elements that Mr Christopher de Souza has raised are the future elements about what should our priorities be, and, indeed, those are important as well. So, we will certainly consider that, and I thank the Member for his suggestions.”
“Mr Speaker, the Bicentennial Experience is an interactive exhibition showcasing 700 years of Singapore history and housed at the Fort Canning Centre. The Bicentennial Experience opened on 1 June 2019, and is scheduled to end on 15 September 2019. Response to the Bicentennial Experience has been excellent. More than 300,000 visitors have seen the Experience so far, and we expect to welcome our 400,000th visitor in early September. Over 95% of visitors surveyed have rated the Bicentennial Experience positively or very positively. Many have used words like "inspiring", "moving", "powerful" to describe the Experience, and that it reaffirmed "what it means and what it takes to be Singaporean". I thank the public for their support and encouragement. Since the opening, we have received many requests for the Bicentennial Experience to be extended as visitors felt that more Singaporeans and, especially the young, should enjoy it. Some have even called for the Experience to be made permanent so that visitors to Singapore and new citizens as well as future generations of Singaporeans can be educated on our history. We are reviewing these requests. There are several issues to consider. For example, we need to calculate the additional costs required and work out the technical implications of extending the Experience. We also need to find the right format if we were to make the Experience permanent, as it was never designed as such. The Singapore Bicentennial Office will study the options of retaining the key elements of our Bicentennial year, including not only the Bicentennial Experience but also the many community showcases and publications this year, and share our plans in due course.”
“Precisely because we recognised that these different groups have contributed to the nation, that is why those are not means-tested and are given to all.”
“Mr Speaker, I am not sure what I had done to the Member in my capacity as Senior Minister of State, but that identity seems to remain very firmly fixed in the Member's psyche! We shall try to see what we can do to dislodge that! In the meantime, if I may address the specific question the Member has raised. I can understand how some of his residents may feel. It may be too much of a generalisation, though, to say that there is nothing for them at all in the Budget. Because, for example, education is broad-based and it applies to even those who are in private property. In particular, we also have healthcare. So, for polyclinics and other healthcare services, these are also available to them. And not forgetting things like last year's SG Bonus. That would have gone to everybody, irrespective of the property that they were living in. It is important to look at the specific social scheme. For the GST Vouchers, for example, the idea was really to offset for those who are lower income and have less means. That is the reason why it is structured such that you look at their income and you look at the type of property that they stay in. It is also not fair to be subsidising those who do have some means. I will come back to the basic point, which is that there are schemes which apply to all, and residents in private properties without income will benefit from those. But they may have specific difficulties. We will address those on a case-by-case basis. The assurance we can give is that those genuinely in need will not be left without assistance. In terms of recognition, it should not be forgotten that things like the Pioneer Generation Package and the Merdeka Generation Package were specifically designed to give recognition.”