Kwek Hian Chuan Henry
Singapore
“Deputy Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister of State for this comprehensive response. I would like to check whether MND is open to providing more funding to AVS. Ten years ago, I made a speech on NParks, and I noted then that NParks' annual budget is less than half of that of an acute care hospital.”
“Chairman, I have three short clarifications. Given that condominium prices and wages have risen over time, can MND share a timeframe or timeline when the income ceiling review will be concluded? Is it in a matter of months, or is it when some threshold conditions are met?”
“Chairman, I thank MND for responding to our cuts and I seek leave to withdraw my amendments. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $8,640,058,800 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.”
“Our Public Service Media companies are our national assets. I hope MDDI can share how it plans to secure our future. I notice I have 18 more seconds, so I want to add in a final point. I noted we are asking MDDI to do a lot of cybersecurity, national Public Service Media on IT services and AI development.”
“As the Bill empowers OSC to identify users and disclose that information to purported victims, what safeguards are there to prevent misuse of that disclosed data for reverse doxxing? In closing, Speaker, Sir, this Bill makes our online space safer, especially for our youths.”
“Mr Speaker, I support this Bill and the suite of changes it makes. Given its breadth, I will focus my remarks on three areas: one, tackling global scams and online crimes while protecting innovation; two, a calibrated approach to accountability for 14-to-17-year-olds; and three, improving proportionality by resolving the inflexibility of…”
The complete record
Every one of 459 lines we hold for Kwek Hian Chuan Henry, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 10.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I will start with our response to the COVID-19 crisis. First, most Singaporeans are heartened by the speed and scale of our initial economic response. The pressing issue now is effective implementation of the short-term economic package and a dynamic response as the crisis unfolds. Effective implementation requires all parties to partner one another in the spirit of SG Together. We must also respond dynamically as events unfold. A prolonged U-shape economic situation is becoming more likely. Why? When major societies manage the pandemic in a decisive, clear and transparent way, the economic impact is limited to a short-term supply shock as well as deferred demand, all leading to a V-shape rebound. On the other hand, if major economies fail to implement containment and mitigation efforts, widespread fear and uncertainty will trigger a second level economic impact leading to a U-shape scenario. Governments will need to coordinate economic responses within and beyond their borders. And if a coordinated economic response fails, in an extreme scenario, global economic contagion could happen. The global financial markets are starting to price in a U-shape scenario. Investors are beginning to wonder: in the US, with the upcoming Presidential elections, can the Democrat-held House of Representatives and the Trump administration partner effectively on healthcare and fiscal responses? And also, if Northern Europe can mitigate a pandemic more effectively than Southern Europe, will the former want to bear the burden of a large EU fiscal response? It is still too early to tell. Nevertheless, businesses, and many of them from my constituency, would like to contribute ideas on how we can implement effectively and respond dynamically.”
“In conclusion, the central focus of the Bill of transforming waste into resources is a wise move. It is a manifestation of our national spirit, of turning adversity into opportunities. I hope that the three areas that this Bill proposes will be the start of many more concrete and practical steps covering more areas. And if we succeed in doing so in Singapore, we will not just live up to our duty as part of humanity, but also, over time, what we do in this small part of the world can also influence and inspire similar acts beyond Singapore. With that, I support the Bill.”
“Third, I am heartened to hear that we are targeting food waste. As a nation, we waste a tremendous amount of food. I recently met with the voluntary welfare organisation, Food from the Heart. Through a fantastic logistics network driven by dedicated staff and volunteers, they do outstanding work to bring food to people in need, food that would otherwise be wasted. They have recently decided to do substantial collaboration with Kebun Baru to help our needy. And, for that, I am very grateful. And I think that, as a nation, our effort to reduce food waste will benefit a lot if we consult food-based organisations, like Food from the Heart. Lastly, I hope that the Government can spur efforts to look at another area beyond what is mentioned in the Bill today, and that is the area of fast fashion. Fast fashion clothings can last for a mere few months, but its impact can be long and destructive. And to compound the challenge, consumers have difficulty gauging the impact of their actions. This is one clear area that our Government can work with environmentally conscious citizens. For example, if the Government can take the lead to work with other international organisations to help break down the environmental impact, perhaps by materials or the manufacturing process, this will help inform our passionate citizens who can then make a case to the rest of Singaporeans on the importance of moving away from fast fashion. When I visit regions and countries like Japan and Northern Europe, I realise that they are very conscious of the negative impact of fast fashion. The key is public education and advocacy. I hope that, on this issue, with some sufficient hard work down the road, we can encourage Singaporeans to buy in and be more thoughtful.”
“However, we must give careful thought on how we implement this or we will see a noticeable increase in cost of living or reduce consumer choice. One way to ensure careful implementation is to get the inputs from international environmental experts as well as major packaging companies, retailers and logistics players on what is practical and what can be reasonably done because sometimes there are real tradeoffs involved. For example, many fresh products that we see in Singapore from Malaysia are prepacked into smaller packs prior to them being sent to Singapore. However, if we take the view that we should reduce packaging and discourage smaller packs from being imported, then we have to do the bulk-breaking in Singapore. And given our high cost of labour, it will mean higher cost, which the consumers will end up paying for. Also, for some brands that sell well in Singapore, there is ample scope for us to work with them to reduce packaging. But for smaller brands, it may not be practical for Singapore to ask them to change the packaging just for Singapore because if we insist on doing that, we may end up reducing consumers' choices. So, we have to strike that balance there. While I agree that many consumer products are over-packaged, we have to understand that companies have a natural desire to compete and differentiate, and that brings me to my final point about packaging which is that when consumers speak with their wallets, businesses have no choice but to listen. In fighting packaging waste, one of the strongest possible ways for us to strike the right balance is for the Government to support and, if necessary, fund consumer ground-up efforts to change consumer preferences for simple but effective packaging.”
“And investing in better insulation and airflow design is not just impactful in reducing emissions, but it even pays off financially, factoring in the investment cost. In financial terms, it is Net Present Value positive. And even better if Singaporeans can think about how to minimise the use of air-conditioning. I hope more ground-up support, especially from the public, can be focused on these most impactful ideas to save our environment. Our efforts must be rooted in facts, impact and practicality. If we overreach, we risk undermining public support from the broader population across successive generations. And it is in this spirit that I would like to share feedback from the ground on how we can judiciously implement the good ideas that we have in this Bill. First, the call to recycle large electrical and electronics equipment is a good move. These may not be a very large source of waste, but they contain very toxic components. I agree with the Government's effort to focus on larger sellers, get service providers to provide recycling service and to provide our businesses with sufficient time to adapt. The definition of larger sellers seems to be focused on larger retailers with more than 300 square metres of space, and this is a reasonable definition. However, I would like MEWR to clarify whether large business-to-business sellers who carry a lot of volume directly to the businesses even though they do not have much retail space, do they qualify as large retailers? And whether large online sellers, such as Dell, Lazada, Alibaba or those e-shops within these platforms, are they included in this? Because it is not fair to put all the burden on the retail sellers. Second, reducing packaging is a good move.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of the Bill. Let me first declare my interest as Advisor to the Federation of Merchant Association, which represents SMEs, especially micro and heartland SMEs. Fighting global warming and environmental destruction is humanity's greatest test and, as the custodians of the earth, our greatest responsibility. Sad to say, mankind has yet to pass this test or to rise up to our responsibility. I am heartened by Singapore's affirmation of the Paris Accord. I am even prouder to know that when Singapore signs up for international agreements, including the Paris Accord, we have every intention and ability to abide by our commitments. Like many other things, unfortunately, Singapore is a price taker in the larger world. With our small carbon footprint, even if we cut emission to zero, the train on global warming has already left. Nevertheless, we have to do our right and fair share, even if it does not tip the global scale, because we are a part of humanity and we share humanity's burden. At the same time, fighting global warming and resource depletion is a grueling marathon, one that will test the resolve of successive generations. There are real tradeoffs impacting real lives today. Therefore, we must be practical in implementing it, focus on the most impactful ones, instead of the most fashionable. For example, there is much discussion about banning plastic bags or straws, despite Singapore's unique ability to deal with the negative impact. On the other hand, there are many other issues which are even more critical. For example, one of the largest uses of global energy is for heating and air-conditioning.”
“Therefore, I hope that MSF and the compulsory education unit within MOE can work together to explore whether, in extreme and only extreme circumstances, can we put the children and our youths into mandatory therapy to deal with this online addiction. In all likelihood, the online addiction may be rooted or compounded by other behaviours, emotional or even mental issues. But a mandatory therapy will give us a chance to diagnose the situation and do the necessary course correction. One may argue that this may not constitute as severe self-harm in the traditional sense. But in this day and age, if a child or young person is not able even to complete his basic education due to online addiction, in my view, I believe his or her future will be seriously compromised. In conclusion, based on the feedback that I hear from various VWOs, this Bill is progressive and balanced. I would also like to thank MSF and the officers from the various VWOs for their tireless work to care for our vulnerable children and youths. With that, I support the Bill.”
“On the ground, I see some cases of grandparents from the sandwich class who want to adopt their grandchildren because the parents are not able or available to provide care. And the legal cost takes precious resources away from the grandparents. Lastly, under CYPA, we have expanded on the definition of "emotional harm" to include "danger to oneself or to other persons", and "severely withdrawn, anxious or depressed". I welcome this move. In this context, there is one particular group of children and youths I would like to talk about, that is, those with extreme online addiction that has handicapped their ability to cope with life. On the ground, I have seen a few of these cases who suffered such situations. Recently, I had a distressed parent coming in regarding this person's son who has suffered severe online addiction issues. The secondary school youth has stopped going to school, has gone beyond parental control and has started exhibiting violent behaviour. The youth's school and parents were not able to persuade this youth to go back to school. Yet, because this youth has not committed a crime, has not yet done something that is deemed as traditionally high risk, the mandatory intervention mechanism could not kick in. In this case, for this resident, what I did was we brought in a volunteer who was a game developer and we tried to go in and persuade this person that if he likes to game, maybe he can be a game developer one day and, from then on, we try to encourage him to go back to school. We are making some progress. But I would like to see whether there is a systematic way where we can deal with this emerging issue.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I rise in support of this Bill. First off, on behalf of foster parents, I would like to thank MSF for allowing foster parents to benefit from childcare leave. This is something that many in the VWO space, including myself, have asked for. Second, over the years, we are aware of good progress that MSF and our VWOs have made to resource our homes that serve our vulnerable children and youths. As such, I would like MSF to comment on the current state of affairs. Can MSF share on the progress made? On average, how many of our children are currently based in home-based care, such as Government and VWO-based orphanage, as well as in boys' and girls' homes? Have we seen a decrease over the years? Most of us will agree that family-based care is a better model compared to home-based care for children and youths, as long as the foster or adopted parents have the means and the care and concern for them. Therefore, can MSF share whether we have been able to put more of these children and youths into family-based care situations, such as through adopted and foster parents? Thirdly, can MSF share on how more we can encourage more people to move forward as foster parents? I understand that there is a certain number of Singaporeans who would like to adopt children. Is there room for us to encourage them to consider fostering instead? Next, is there a way for us to streamline the adoption process so as to reduce the cost of adoption? For the needy, there is of course the free legal aid. But adoption cost goes into thousands of dollars and this is a big cost to the sandwich class who are trying to adopt.”
“Does this mean that an intermediary can choose not to comply and invoke the defence, if it hurts their profits to comply? Lastly, I would like to end by suggesting that Singapore actively contribute to the global discourse on how we deal with deliberate online falsehoods. Indeed, there are many legislators all over the world watching our deliberations today. Deliberate online falsehood is something that affects all societies and does not automatically and neatly stop at any borders. In the long run, our best bet is to shape the larger environment in a positive way. Let me conclude. In my speech on the Motion on this matter last year, I quoted the Washington Post's motto, "Democracy dies from Darkness". Democracy cannot survive and thrive without a public discourse informed by facts, truth and transparency because public discourse is the means for our society to reflect collectively. Therefore, I support the Bill. It strengthens our framework of responsible speech. It seeks to root out merchants of mistruths or special interests and, worse still, foreign influence that seeks to deliberately manipulate and destabilise our society through fake news. But we must go beyond crafting this excellent legal framework. We must communicate clearly and simply to our people what responsible speech entails, factoring our unique circumstances as a small multicultural, multi-religious and multiracial city-state. Because what matters is not just ensuring that fake news has no place in Singapore, but also to ensure that our laws do not unintentionally curtail healthy and necessary discourse or diminish the marketplace of ideas that healthy democracies, like Singapore, require. With that, Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“What people do not understand is that there are several laws, each targeting different kinds of harmful speech with remedies that vary in strength. These laws include (a) POFMA and POHA; (b) the Penal Code, sections 298 and 298A; (c) Sedition Act: sections 3, 4; (d) Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act: section 8; and (e) Contempt of Court: sections on scandalising of Courts, and subjudice contempt. These laws are complex to understand by themselves, and it is even harder for most Singaporeans to understand how it works altogether. Therefore, it is very important that we unpack for our people, in simple terms, what constitutes responsible speech: (a) the various laws; (b) the principles behind these laws; (c) our unique circumstances and vulnerabilities; and (d) who are these laws meant for? Now that there is considerable public attention on responsible speech, let us ride on this wave of interest and share more on this topic. When people understand better how the different laws work, their powers and limitations, then they can see that the Government does not have blanket power to take down whatever news they do not like. Only certain types of speech that are harmful to society can be dealt with according to the law. A good place for this to start is our schools, especially at our tertiary institutions, where there has been much discussion about this law today. I have seen a deep conviction by MinLaw to create our overall framework for responsible speeches. I hope we can see a whole-of-Government effort, including MOE, to communicate that clearly to our people in a simplified manner. Next, I would like MinLaw to clarify on one matter. Under the law, there is a defence of "reasonable excuse" for the Internet intermediaries.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I stand in support of the Bill. I spoke to many residents and there is consensus that fake news has a profound effect on the world. The question now is how best to deal with this issue. And it is this: how can our society best balance our individual desire to free speech, with our desire to be protected from the tremendous impact of irresponsible, or even worse still, deliberate falsehood, weaponised by the speed and reach of social media? Many of us in this Chamber are aware that there is no single silver bullet to combat fake news, online or offline. The best we can do is to create laws, so as to create an environment for responsible speech, anchored by an informed citizenry. Indeed, when the demand for fake news diminishes, no supply of fake news, no matter how large the supply, can seriously harm society. Our desired outcome should not be just to weed out irresponsible speeches that diminish our society. We must also ensure that responsible speech thrives in society, because healthy private and public discourse is the means for people and society to reflect and move forward. And that brings me to my main point today. After our robust debate today, we must do more to communicate to our people what constitutes responsible speech. A fair number of my residents have seen the various news articles, WhatsApp messages, and even Michelle Chong’s recent interview of Minister K Shanmugam. But there is still a much-needed desire for clarity on what this entire framework of various laws means. For example, POFMA does not target opinion. It is clear from what the various Government officials and Ministers have said. But at the same time, certain offensive and divisive speeches are restricted using different laws.”
“For example, when I visited SportsSG Woodlands Stadium some time ago, I realised that they encourage entire families to keep fit every Friday, by ensuring that there was something for everybody – whether it is yoga, frisbee, running, soccer, gym exercise, swimming, even gardening. Another example is the many more ActiveSG Sports Academies and Clubs, including the new Masters Club for seniors. Major regional sporting facilities have also been introduced at My Tampines Town Hub, as well as new ones planned at Punggol and Sembawang. At the same time, our national athletes continue to do very well at various games and competitions. All these are the direct results of SportSG's Vision 2030, our national blueprint for sports launched in 2012, which calls for helping Singaporeans to be future-ready through sports, ensuring sports in Singapore is accessible and inclusive and bringing people and community together through sports. Our plan also calls for evolving our sports ecosystem and communities to support these objectives. Therefore, I would like MCCY to provide a comprehensive update on the plan. What are some of the key achievements in the past seven years? Have Singaporeans become more active over this period? What can the public expect from our sports facilities and programmes going forward? Vision 2030 Review”
“We have the established and well-loved icons from the National Gallery of Singapore to the Botanic Gardens. A new generation of musicians represents Singapore on the international stage, from Wong Kah Chun for classical music, to Joanna Dong for pop music, At the same time, both Singapore and the world have changed dramatically over the past decade. New tensions and fault lines have emerged. But so have new possibilities. Therefore, it is heartening that MCCY meets these challenges head-on through the 2018 Our Singapore Arts Plan, which recognises that arts do not just inspire and express the Singapore spirit. Art can also bring diverse communities together and bridge societal fault lines. Last year, MCCY also launched our first five-year masterplan for heritage. In a world that is increasingly fluid, our arts heritage anchors our national identity and inspires us to collectively adapt to the changing world. Therefore, can MCCY share on, moving forward, how the insights from the Arts and Culture Strategy Review as well as how our Arts Plan and our Singapore Heritage Plan will collectively shape our arts and culture sector? SportSG Vision 2030 Review Mr Chairman, sports is important for Singapore, and rightfully so. Sports help Singaporeans to be happier and healthier. Through sports, our people learn about character, leadership and the spirit of winning. And sports bring people and communities together. Over the past few years, SportsSG launched many exciting developments and introduced new ways of doing things. Our people at ActiveSG evolved from being sports facilities operators to becoming community organisers and coaches for exercises and sports.”
“Mr Chairman, we are living through rapid and profound societal changes in how we work, live, communicate and perceive reality. Traditional hierarchies are being replaced by networks with multiple connections. People now behave more autonomously, shaped by a greater sense of individuality. Therefore, it is not surprising that our youths today have aspirations and values that may differ from those of the previous generations. From what I have observed, our youths take a keen interest in not just issues that concern their future from education and employment, but to broader issues like climate change and environmental sustainability. Our youths also want their views to be heard and to be taken into account in policymaking. Some of our more passionate and proactive youths want to be involved, here and now, in coming up with solutions, and perhaps even implementing these solutions for the benefit of our people. This is a good development. As our youths are our future, we need to tap on their youthful energy and enthusiasm. We must also empower them to shape the future, which is very different from today. Therefore, MCCY's efforts to encourage youths and engage youths must make sure that they can participate meaningfully. As such, I would like MCCY to provide an update on the Youth Conversations, which informs our youth and help them forge consensus from differing viewpoints, as well as plans to give youths a bigger voice in the design of our policies and programmes. Arts and Culture Strategic Review (ACSR) Launched in 2010, the Arts and Culture Strategy Review sets the long-term direction of arts and culture in Singapore. As we reached the halfway mark, we see many successes. Art and culture have become pervasive.”
“Mr Chairman, can I take my three cuts together?”
“Chairman, physical and non-physical connectivity has traditionally underpinned Singapore's success as a Global-Asia node of technology, innovation and enterprise. As ASEAN and the larger Asian region continues to grow, they are also becoming better connected to the world. Across the world, technology is also changing the way people and business connect with one another, as well as shortening and shifting supply chains and value chains. Therefore, it is essential for Singapore to constantly review the current and future plans for both our physical and non-physical connectivity, so that we can stay ahead of the game and tap on new opportunities. As such, can MTI share our plans, moving forward to strengthen our ports, airports, logistics and customs clearance as well as data connectivity? Can MTI also share how we are building up our non-physical connectivity for Asia and ASEAN? In particular, can MTI provide an update on how we have strengthened our footprint in Asia through the Global Innovation Alliance, share details of the upcoming Global Ready Talent Programme and provide an update on how we can help our companies internationalise through various ESG programmes?”
“In fact, the US and DPRK held their second Summit in Vietnam over the past two days. However, despite the stated optimism for both sides to achieve an agreement, no deal was concluded when the summit ended yesterday. Many Singaporeans, including myself, welcome the positive developments on the Korean Peninsula and hope that the dialogue and efforts towards lasting peace and prosperity on the Peninsula will continue. Could MFA provide its assessment of the developments on the Korean Peninsula, and what role is Singapore playing to support diplomatic efforts towards a peaceful and de-nuclearised Korean Peninsula? Engagement with PRC Leaders”
“Chairman, our bilateral relations with China are excellent, and has been described as "progressive, forward-looking and strategic". In the joint statement issued during PRC Premier Li Keqiang's official visit to Singapore last November, both sides also reaffirmed the principles of mutual respect, sovereign equality and non-interference in each other's internal affairs. At the same time, both sides also continued with frequent high-level exchanges and enjoy good cooperation in diverse fields. We will celebrate the 25th anniversary of the China-Singapore Suzhou Industrial Park this year. We celebrated the 10th anniversary of the Sino-Singapore Tianjin Eco-City Project last year. During the same visit by Premier Li, both sides signed several memorandums of understanding (MOUs) covering areas ranging from trade, finance, cooperation on the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), culture and the environment, among others. Notably, we signed the China-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (FTA) Upgrade Protocol, MOUs on Chongqing Connectivity Initiative – New International Land Sea Trade Corridor and the elevation of the China-Singapore Guangzhou Knowledge City to a state-level bilateral cooperation project. Can the Foreign Minister provide an update on the state of our relations with China? How is the progress of our government-to-government relations? Developments in North Korea Singapore hosted the first US-Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) Summit in June 2018. The choice of Singapore as the venue of the Summit reaffirmed our reputation as an impartial, reliable and safe country. The Joint Statement signed by the US and DPRK in Singapore is an important first step forward. Both sides have since kept up dialogues and exchanges.”
“Chairman, as a member of the MINDEF Advisory Council on Communal Relations (MINDEF ACCORD) for the past three years, I have witnessed first-hand how MINDEF successfully build broad support from society, from businesses, schools and various communities. In particular, I would like to commend MINDEF on its successful engagement of Singaporeans through NS50 in the past year. Nevertheless, in the wake of the recent training incidents, there is much work to be done to strengthen our people's support for NS and defence. We have also just introduced a new pillar for Total Defence. As such, what are MINDEF's plans in the year ahead to engage the community and grassroots leaders to understand and support the importance of NS, as well as our broadened concept of Total Defence? Total Defence”
“Chairman, MINDEF recently announced the intention to purchase the F-35, a 5th Generation multirole aircraft, which can perform air-to-air, air-to-ground and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) missions. More importantly, the F-35's stealth capabilities can help us maintain air dominance and overcome sophisticated air defence. At the same time, the F-35s can fuse sensors and information from different sources, thereby networking our 4th Generation aircrafts and SAF assets together. In short, the acquisition of F-35s can level up the Republic of Singapore Air Force's (RSAF's) capabilities significantly. And despite earlier concerns of the F-35 programme, it has achieved initial operation capability in several countries, including the US. At the same time, given the unprecedented complexity of F-35 as a programme, we can expect it to evolve and mature over time. In other words, the cost of the F-35s can differ, and perhaps decrease, as the F-35 programme becomes more mature. Therefore, it is important for us to purchase the appropriate number of F-35s, with the appropriate capabilities, at the appropriate time. As such, can MINDEF share on how we can best ensure our announced F-35 purchases will be cost-effective, while delivering the required capabilities to keep Singapore secure? Cyber Defence and Security”
“Chairman, it is important for the Government to achieve value for money in purchases, especially in the face of anticipated rising public expenditure. There are many ways to achieve that. Let me provide two examples. First, large projects, especially infrastructure projects, have a long tail to their project life. We are at the cusp of funding some truly large infrastructure projects and adjusting reducing manpower intensity of our economy. Could the Government adopt a lifecycle approach to evaluate more projects? Second, our Budget has increased from around $40 billion in 2007 to around $80 billion this year. Therefore, I suggest that various Government agencies, when the need arises, be able to tap on even more industry experts to achieve excellent design and savings. At the same time, given the Government's role as one of the largest procurers of services, it can play the role of supporting innovation and enterprises, including from startups, which will benefit both citizens as consumers of these services, as well as the overall economy. Therefore, it is important for the Government to be able to manage the balance between innovation and enterprise versus value for money. Can MOF share on how, moving forward, the Government intends to achieve this balance?”
“I hope our Government can foster more conversations for our people to air their views, listen to differing opinions, understand the realities that constrain Singapore and achieve a nuanced and shared understanding of our common future. Mr Deputy Speaker, to conclude, the commemoration of our Bicentennial allows us to reflect on the Fall of Singapore in 1942. Singapore today is safe and prosperous. Nevertheless, there is a Chinese saying "居安思危". Even in peace and prosperity, it is essential to plan for and act on, the turbulence and uncertainty ahead. Budget 2019 is best described by the same phrase, "居安思危". With that, I stand in support of the Budget.”
“If we fail to grow our savings over time, when a major storm hits Singapore a decade or two down the road, we may find our financial anchor insufficient to stabilise our economy, which would have grown larger by then. At the same time, in this House, we frequently say that we are not done building Singapore. But as non-discretionary spending forms a larger percentage of our Budget, there is less room for major shifts to respond to a changing world, less room to build a better Singapore across generations. The third and final lesson is that a successful society requires its people to have shared beliefs rooted firmly in reality. The British Empire had an unworkable defence plan. Over two decades, her electorate and leaders failed to robustly debate on whether it was realistic and whether there were sufficient resources to backstop the plan. Singapore's success to date depends on our people's consensus on what it takes for Singapore to succeed. But the world is increasingly diverse and our people's views mirror this increasing diversity. To meet tomorrow's challenges, we need to strengthen our shared beliefs in many areas. For example, how can we balance giving our youths with the best we can afford, while ensuring that they remain hungry and curious for new opportunities? How can we persuade our people that keeping Singapore open to the world is to our best collective interest? How can we continue the unfinished business of tackling inequality while maintaining the core promise of meritocracy? How can we best represent the causes and values of some, while enlarging the common space for all? The answer lies in more robust conversations not just between the Government and the people, but also among people of differing viewpoints.”
“In the case of the British Empire, while it thrived in the First Industrial Revolution of steam engines and weaving looms, it failed to transform its economy and fell behind America and Germany in the Second Industrial Revolution of chemicals and cars. Its misguided monetary and fiscal policy led to deflation and depression. It accumulated significant debts because of WWI. For an empire where the sun never sets, it never built a diverse and sustainable tax base to pay for its defence. In short, the world changed dramatically for the British Empire, but it ran out of money to adapt to the changing world. That was then. How about our world today? Henry Kissinger recently said, "We are in a very, very grave period for the world", and the current times can only be marked as an "end of an era". I am more optimistic. While there are major global uncertainties ahead, there are ample opportunities for a nimble Singapore. But this requires us to sustain our economy and maintain our fiscal discipline. We are in good shape today. The past year's GDP growth is strong, unemployment and inflation are both low, and median wage increases are high. But what about our economy in 10 years' time? No one can guarantee that our companies can continue to thrive in the face of technology disruption and global competition. Therefore, our companies and people must tap on various programmes and grants, and press on relentlessly to transform. On maintaining our fiscal discipline, there are many voices asking for more Government spending, and to dig deeper into our Reserve income. Many of them are for deserving causes. But our Reserves must anchor our economy through turbulent times.”
“They defeated the British at Jitra to win Northern Malaya, overran and dispersed the British at Slim River, outmaneuvered the British at Muar to win the crucial fight for Johor, and reached the gates of Singapore, all within 55 days. After a seven-day fight for Singapore, the divided and demoralised British army, still 100,000 men strong, chose to surrender. So, what can we learn from the Fall of Singapore? The obvious answer is that we can only count on ourselves to defend Singapore, regardless of security arrangements with others. But there are at least three other lessons. The first lesson is sustained and sufficient defence spending is necessary. In the case of the British Empire after WWI, they faced a rapidly changing world order with the rise of Japan and Germany. The rise of air power, use of combined arms, shift from battleships to carriers, all required major investments. When the British woke up to the reality in the mid-1930s, it was too late to reverse two decades of military neglect. The situation for Singapore today is vastly different, but some lessons are still worth noting. The most advanced militaries today grapple with major challenges, such as adapting to fifth generation aerial warfare, contending with cyber and hybrid warfare, dealing with disruptive innovations from drones to AI. These reserves require major and sustained investments. Therefore, I am heartened that 30% of our Budget this year goes to defence, security and diplomacy, because history shows there is no substitute to deterrence. The second lesson is that a nation's security depends on a strong economy and ample fiscal resources to deal with the changing world.”
“While these air bases were close to the South China Sea and the Thai border – areas that they expected the Japanese to invade from – they were situated in indefensible terrain. And after all this hassle, the British incredibly never found the money to deploy an air force large or sophisticated enough. All these meant that the under-strength British Army now had to defend not just the empty naval base in Singapore in the south, but also the under-equipped airbases in the north. In short, the Singapore Strategy was nothing more than a "Strategic Illusion", a plan that could never work against a determined enemy, a plan one hopes will never be tested. But hope is not a strategy. After the attack on Pearl Harbour, the British stood alone in Malaya and Singapore. In the final years before the Japanese invasion, the British did build up the Malayan army to almost three times the size of the invading Japanese army. But decades are needed to build and sustain a strong defence. Many historians, including Frank Pike, concluded that the large British Malayan army was only capable of fighting fixed-piece battles of WWI, and while there were some good units, even the British official historian Woodburn Kirby concluded that most of these units were raw and unfamiliar with how to fight in the tropics. Lastly, the British army lacked comprehensive intelligence on the Japanese and, therefore, were complacent. In December 1941, when the Japanese swept down from the north, they destroyed the small obsolete British air force in the north within 100 hours and sank the only two major British ships in the Far East. They then proceeded to destroy the British Army dispersed throughout Malaya, piecemeal.”
“Despite her military weakness, the British must convince Australia and India, then part of the British Empire, that the Far East can be secured, especially so since Australian and Indian troops were needed to protect their Empire's interest in Europe and the Middle East. Yet, the British could not afford a Far East navy to counter Japan. To make the impossible possible, the British came up with the "Singapore Strategy". In the event of a future world war, Britain will concentrate its entire navy to defeat its European enemies, and then sail the main fleet down to Singapore to counter the Japanese. Therefore, in 1921, the British cabinet approved the building of a new naval base out of Singapore to host its main fleet. And Singapore must be defended until the arrival of that fleet. The idea was sound. But the implementation of the Singapore Strategy over the next two decades can only be described as fundamentally unsound, as a 20-year sleepwalk towards disaster. First, according to historian Brian Farrell, the British never found the money to build a big naval base. The British knew they need most, if not all, of their fleet to contend with the Japanese. But surprisingly, the naval base in Singapore was never designed to hold more than 20% of its fleet. Secondly, knowing no fleet in the Far East, and knowing that they needed to defend Malaya and Singapore from a land invasion from the north in 1936, the British turned to their air force. Unfortunately, the British air defence plan was fundamentally unsound as well. The British air force built a string of airbases to the north without consulting their army.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, on 15 February 1942, General Percival met his fellow generals at Fort Canning. Bukit Timah had fallen, along with crucial military supplies. The water supply was on the verge of collapse. Thousands of soldiers wandered aimlessly through the city, dazed and confused. Collectively, the generals decided that counterattack was impossible. They went against their orders, to fight to the last man. They decided to surrender. The surrender marked one of the biggest military defeats in British history and a big military mystery. How could the British, after 20 years of planning for Singapore's defence, with an army of 130,000 troops, be defeated by a Japanese army of roughly one third its size? As we commemorate our Bicentennial, it is a good time to reflect on history. A close reading of history showed that Singapore was lost not on the defence in the battles of 1941. Singapore was lost on the planning tables since 1921. After World War One (WWI), the British Empire was stretched financially. The British returned to the gold standard at a high exchange rate, which triggered deflationary monetary and fiscal policies. Wage did not adjust downwards due to union pressure, and British exports became expensive. For most of the 1920s, the British suffered a depression. The British military defence budget was cut very deeply until 1935, and her military failed to modernise. And after WWI, America and Japan competed for dominance in Asia. In 1922, America forced the British to choose a side. Britain chose to side with America over Japan, its former ally. With that, Britain faced a dangerous Japan with a formidable navy.”
“Indeed, to roll out the Merdeka Generation Package is a good opportunity for us to review our country's senior-related policies. The Merdeka Generation laid the foundations of the independent and modern Singapore with their can-do spirit and resilience. Now is a good time for Singapore to empower our Merdeka Generation and all our seniors to pursue an independent and active life in their golden years, filled with purpose and dignity. Getting Singapore and Singaporeans prepared for successful ageing requires long-term planning. This is our strength and we must leverage it. This requires us to develop the necessary policies and mindset beyond today and tomorrow. PAP.SG believes that the Government can enact appropriate policies to address long-term ageing issues. But PAP.SG also believes that all of us, wearing different hats, whether it is employers, employees, unions, social workers and seniors, must all come together and play our role. No single group can succeed without the others moving together. Ultimately, we must endeavour to be the best place in the world to age in place. Our seniors deserve nothing less. And one day, we ourselves will age, and we, too, deserve nothing less.”
“Thank you. And Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mayor Teo Ho Pin both shared that as chairpersons of their Town Council respectively, they took extra effort to take on older workers. I shared Kebun Baru's comprehensive programme to take care of frail and socially isolated seniors through befriending, medical attention, free-meal deliveries, healthy communal meals and stepped-up Police patrols. I also shared on our SAC and church gathering points serving all seniors, our cancer peer support network and efforts to build a dementia-friendly Kebun Baru. Now that I have summarised our discussion, let me thank Senior Minister of State Amy Khor, Senior Minister of State Sim Ann, Senior Minister of State Edwin Tong, Minister of State Sam Tan, Senior Parliamentary Secretary Low Yen Ling and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Sun Xueling for providing a comprehensive response on behalf of the Government and for taking on some ideas immediately. In my conversations with Senior Minister of State Amy Khor, she frequently described our whole-of-Government plan for active ageing as a "Living Document", one with ample room for new good ideas. Indeed, her comment reflects the open-mindedness of our Government. I am confident that our Government will review our ideas closely and take in many of them in good time. At this juncture, I would also like to thank retired Members of Parliament, Mdm Yu-Foo Yee Shoon, Assoc Prof Koo Tsai Kee and Dr Chiang Hai Ding, who, in the best tradition of PAP.SG, passed down invaluable knowledge on senior policies from earlier generations of PAP Members of Parliament to current Members of Parliament, such as Ms Joan Pereira and myself. Let me now wrap up the Motion.”
“Mr Murali Pillai shared about how his volunteers assist caregivers to seniors with mental issues, such as dementia. He also built up a team of health peers for residents. A team from Kembangan-Chai Chee, where Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin serves, partners AIC and IMH to also help families with mental illnesses. Speaker Tan also partners VWOs to serve food to the nearly 450 needy families, 24/7, 365 days a year. In Henderson-Dawson, where Ms Joan Pereira serves, residents work with Willing Hearts to provide daily meals to neighbours in need, including many seniors. Dr Lily Neo shared on how her grassroots rolled up their sleeves to create a social enterprise to provide affordable AL services to more than 500 of her residents. Mayor Teo Ho Pin shared on the very comprehensive programme that Northwest District has implemented to keep our seniors active and healthy. Er Dr Lee Bee Wah shared that in Nee Soon South, there are two cafes where seniors gather, and this makes it easy for VWOs to engage them. Nee Soon South also has a free volunteer-run aromatherapy and massage centre for caregivers and is building a dementia-friendly community. Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mayor Teo Ho Pin both shared that —”
“Members also spoke about seniors in need of financial support. Of course, in any society, there will be those who fall through the cracks. Therefore, Mr Faisal Manap also touched on the issue of elderly suicide and asked for a closer look at this issue. He also questioned whether we could do more for frail seniors who feel compelled to work, doing tasks, such as cardboard collecting. One of the ways to help seniors in need is to strengthen the retirement adequacy of seniors. Mr Ang Wei Neng, Dr Intan Mokhtar and myself spoke about gradually raising CPF for older workers to levels similar to those of younger workers, when the economic conditions allow for it. We note employers' concerns on rising cost, and the Government can help by not withdrawing their support for grants for older workers and senior retirees. I also spoke about better incentives so that seniors can choose to defer their CPF payout withdrawals and also on the importance of strengthening financial literacy. Collectively, Mr Ang Wei Neng, Mr Patrick Tay and myself asked for an extension of the Special Employment Credit, Silver Support Scheme and WIS. Assoc Prof Walter Theseira spoke about finetuning the CPF to provide a basic retirement payout, incentives to improve contribution rates and better returns on investments. Beyond supporting our seniors in need through financial assistance, local programmes also help multiply and deepen the impact of Government policies. And Members today spoke at length on the various ways, as leaders of this nation in various capacities, we collectively coordinate local efforts for seniors in need. For me, this is the most inspiring part of our debate because needs express what words cannot.”
“Ms Rahayu Mahzam spoke about having more group homes with AL facilities in both public and private housing, and more flexibility and compassion in assessing eligibility in our rental housing programmes. In today’s debate, Members noted that Singapore has undergone one of the most aggressive healthcare and healthcare financing system expansions and transformations in any developed country in recent memory and we can continue to build on that. Therefore, Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked MOH to exercise more discretion regarding CHAS eligibility to factor in changing income and family circumstances. Mr Melvin Yong asked for a review on the funding model for nursing homes and cautioned against a race to the bottom. Mr Darryl David asked for a whole-of-Singapore effort to active ageing and healthy living, a point he made so passionately. Dr Intan Mokhtar spoke about encouraging more Singaporeans to practise medicine, especially to serve our seniors. Members also spoke about making our transportation more senior-friendly. Mr Faisal Manap asked for an update on the implementation of Silver Zones so that seniors can commute with peace of mind. Miss Cheryl Chan asked for an innovative transportation mode in private estates for seniors, a point that I also agree with. Members also spoke about the importance of individual responsibility. But as family nucleus continues to shrink, Ms Joan Pereira asked for a holistic policy review to remove obstacles for extended families to provide support for seniors should they choose to. Members also discussed how to help seniors to be digitally ready. Ms Tin Pei Ling stressed the importance of designing to include. Mr Darryl David spoke about partnering IHLs to promote digital literacy and creating affordable senior-centric smartphones.”
“Members, including Ms Joan Pereira and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah shared that many seniors want to contribute and not solely be beneficiaries. Ms Joan Pereira called for hospitals, museums, schools and VWOs to recruit more senior volunteers. Members also asked both public and private organisations to help our seniors stay integrated with society. Mr Terence Ho made compelling points about ageing well through the arts and asked for more support for the whole of Singapore in getting seniors to do art. Mayor Teo Ho Pin called for HPB to provide a dedicated endowment for CDCs to fund active ageing so that this national movement has more legs. Mr Ang Wei Neng suggested PA to take a harder look to explore more "work-based" activities that naturally attract more men, given that grassroots volunteers attract largely women. And Mr Mohamed Irshad called for more intergenerational bonding so that we can harness the collective wisdom of our seniors. There is a saying that, "We shape the building, thereafter the building shapes us". Members spoke at length about housing and affordable assisted living (AL) services. Dr Lily Neo spoke about not just the importance of affordable AL services, but also her own experience building such a service in Tanjong Pagar. Ms Joan Pereira spoke about SACs that serve seniors beyond rental flat residents. Miss Cheryl Chan spoke about more flexibility for seniors to tap on CPF RAs for housing so that they do not become cash-poor after selling their lease back to the Government. She also spoke about more flexibility in rental flat eligibility to help more seniors facing diverse needs and putting in key aspects of the Lasting Power of Attorney and Will into our HDB processes.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank all the Members who spoke today for supporting both Motions and for the 17 Members who spoke on the Motion on Ageing with Purpose. Your passion and thoughtful remarks are much appreciated. Let me sum up the collective belief of our Members with regard to our Motion. Today, we spoke about boldly reframing our narrative to a positive agenda, because while ageing brings a set of challenges, it also brings many exciting possibilities. In fact, Mr Mohamed Irshad mentioned that 70 is the new 60. Also, given the diverse and evolving generations of future seniors, we call for the Government to continue engagements and dialogues, especially through the spirit of Our Singapore Conversation. Members are also in agreement that most seniors find purpose through work and bring much to the table. And according to Mr Patrick Tay, seniors are treasure troves of experience and expertise. With regard to employment for seniors, Members noted that we are generally in a good position. Ms Rahayu Mahzam and I suggested adopting a sector-based, tripartite approach to create more full and part-time jobs and to help seniors better access freelance opportunities. Mr Patrick Tay suggested extending the Career Support Programme, especially since PMETs' unemployment and underemployment are a concern. He also suggested a top-up of the SkillsFuture Credit. Mr Zainal Sapari recommended employers adopt proper rest areas at worksites and environmentally-friendly equipment and technology so that work becomes safer and easier for seniors. Dr Intan Mokhtar asked to raise the retirement and re-employment age. Beyond work, volunteerism is important. Our seniors, especially the Merdeka Generation, possess a wealth of knowledge and energy.”
“For seniors with medical needs in Kebun Baru, we have recently started a cancer support network, so that cancer patients and their family can get the right information and peer support from their fellow residents, some of whom are cancer survivors themselves. We are also working with the Alzheimer's Dementia Association to build a dementia-friendly Kebun Baru. Moving forward, we would like to work with Active SG to bring in more communal sports, especially for our senior men. I look forward to hearing about other local efforts from Members of this House. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, I have spoken about boldly reframing Singapore's narrative on ageing and establishing a positive agenda. I also spoke about creating work opportunities and strengthening retirement adequacy for seniors. Lastly, I spoke about how effective local coordination can help us better care for and empower our seniors. Ultimately, I hope that all Singaporeans can realise that we can collectively build Singapore up as one of the best places in the world to age. Dr Chia Shi-Lu will now put forth a Motion about supporting our caregivers. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“As we all know, cases involving families with mental health issues are usually complex. They also frequently involve seniors. It takes time and many partners to collaborate on each case, but the volunteers there press on to do the necessary. In Henderson-Dawson where Ms Joan Pereira serves, residents also work with Willing Hearts to provide daily meals to fellow residents in need, including many seniors. Let me now share about what we do in my constituency, Kebun Baru. For our frail and socially-isolated seniors who need help, our team of volunteers from Project Starfish are able to assist every single of them through: (a) regular befriending by well-trained volunteers who work with agencies and VWOs to meet the needs of seniors. They are supplemented by parents and students from our local schools. This is on top of what Community Network of Seniors and social workers do; (b) regular free meal delivery service through our partner Mummy Yummy; (c) regular, healthy, communal meals through the Health Promotion Board's (HPB's) Share-a-Pot programme; (d) comprehensive medical attention through our free medical clinic, which has the organisational and nursing support from Mount Alvenia Hospital; and (e) stepped-up patrol by the Police to the houses of the most frail seniors living alone. Next, for our seniors at Kebun Baru who are looking for a place to bond and do exercise, we have set up a Senior Activity Centre through the kind assistance of Methodist Welfare Services. Two local churches have also opened up communal spaces for our seniors.”
“We call for the Post Office Savings Bank (POSB) and NTUC to consider setting up a Thrift and Loan co-operative for seniors. Lastly, let me touch on enhancing local coordination to serve our seniors. I believe that the frontier of social work in Singapore, including caring of our seniors, lies in helping those in need in a multi-pronged and integrated manner; getting the community to step in when the family nucleus fails, solving issues upstream through policy and community intervention, and shaping societal norms that are caring and empowering. We at PAP.SG believe strong local coordination is critical to achieving these goals. At the local level, because we have a holistic view of the various needs, we can seek both local and national resources to meet these needs. So, today, some of my PAP colleagues will also share on their local efforts. Putting a spotlight on these programmes will, hopefully, create a cascading effect nationwide. Let me first touch on Kembangan-Chai Chee, the constituency that Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin serves. Kembangan-Chai Chee has integrated social work efforts, where their volunteers work with voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) and agencies. Here are two of their many programmes where seniors in need are involved. One, meal delivery for people in need. Volunteers from there work with various organisations to provide low-income families, including the elderly, with meals 24/7, 365 days a year – let me stress again – 24/7, 365 meals a year. As of now, they have more than 450 recipients receiving lunch and/or breakfast. Two, help for families with mental health issues, including hoarding. The team from Kembangan-Chai Chee partners the Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) and the Institute of Mental Health (IMH), and acts as their ground volunteers.”
“In addition, we should also equip our workers from 40 years old onwards with future skills, after which it may become progressively harder to learn radically different skills. A good example is SkillsFuture's TechSkills Accelerator (TeSA) programme, which has recently incorporated future skills, such as deep machine learning. Can we have more similar programmes? Next, retirement adequacy. With longer lives and smaller families, Singaporeans need to save more and plan better for retirement, especially for workers above 55 and SEPs who do not contribute to their CPF Special Account. We have five recommendations. First, the Government can gradually increase the employers' CPF contribution rates for older workers beyond age 55 to levels similar to that of younger workers when the economic conditions allow for it. Some employers have indicated concerns about this. Therefore, a measured way to do this is important. But it is the right thing to do. Second, we support the recommendation by the Tripartite Work Group on SEP to collect MediSave contributions more seamlessly. Over time, we should consider asking SEPs to build up their CPF Special Account. Third, we encourage the Government to give better incentives so that seniors could choose to defer their CPF LIFE withdrawals, giving them bigger future payouts and increased retirement adequacy. CPF’s interest rate is already higher than market interest rates and this is already a natural incentive. But can more be done? Four, we recommend continued support for low-income seniors through the WIS Scheme and the Silver Support (SSS) Scheme. Five, we recommend that the Government accelerate collaborations with community partners to help Singaporeans plan for retirement.”
“Yet, out of more than 6,000 riders that Food Panda has today, only 1% is above the age of 60. Surely, more can be done. We call on WSG, the Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) and the unions for self-employed persons (SEPs) to do more to teach our seniors digital literacy, and direct suitable healthy seniors to these opportunities, including through digital platforms, such as the new National Trades Union Congress (NTUC)-IBM portal. Beyond food delivery, there are many other freelance opportunities, especially in professional services, as well as food and beverage (F&B) industries. For some older workers, the reality is that it will be hard, though not impossible, for them to get full-time opportunities. Therefore, we recommend WSG and e2i to not just position older workers for full-time jobs in their current sectors but also help them identify transferable skills for part-time and freelancing opportunities in other sectors. In addition, the Government and SEP unions can jointly create a positive environment for SEPs through ensuring fair contracting terms, strengthening medical coverage, improving access to training grants and facilitating CPF contributions. We can also do more to remove obstacles for our older workers to continue working. In particular, certification tests are becoming necessary for more jobs. Some older workers fail these tests and have to downgrade to lower-paying jobs. Therefore, we call on the Government to encourage best practices for testing seniors. These can include using larger fonts in tests, providing seniors with more time for computer-based tests, allowing seniors with relevant working experience to take written or oral tests in Chinese, Malay and Tamil.”
“SG further calls on our companies, unions and the Government to study other countries’ experience in promoting FWA, including legislation on "right-to-ask" for FWA. Next, we need to empower our older workers to access freelance opportunities. The rise of the platform economy, also called the gig-economy, creates more freelance opportunities for our older workers. Let me share three examples. One, food delivery services, such as Foodpanda and GrabFood. Just last week, Janice Tai from The Straits Times estimates that there are more than 600 seniors doing freelance food delivery. Two, Thomson Medical Center (TMC). TMC builds on Singaporean women's own experience as grandmothers and mothers and equips them with the latest health and confinement culinary skills and then place them as freelance confinement nannies. TMC is supported by Government training grants. Three, Singapore Consultancy, a new social enterprise. It helps older professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) from the financial sector transit into freelance consultants, board directors and even advisors to charities. It has received support from Workforce Singapore's (WSG's) Professional Conversion Programme, and Singapore Consultancy is a model worth encouraging. We expect the platform economy to grow, but older workers need more help to access these freelancing opportunities. Take the food delivery business as an example. On the ground, I sometimes meet very fit seniors in their late 60s and even 70s who want a job but cannot get one. At the same time, major food delivery companies have no upper age limit, because they do not see significant differences in performance and safety records between younger and older freelance workers.”
“And this approach draws on Singapore’s strength, which is the strong spirit of partnership among our unions, companies and the Government. Next, we call for all companies to adopt flexible work arrangements (FWAs) when possible. This helps older workers who desire to work, but on the terms and at a pace that they are comfortable with. By FWAs, we mean flexible locations, time and load. We have made good progress. The Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) recent Conditions of Employment survey shows firms offering at least one formal FWA increased to 53% from 50% in 2017 and firms offering at least one ad hoc FWA increased to 84% from 75% in 2017, which is a big increase. Still, we should aim higher. We should encourage the vast majority of companies to create many more formal FWA roles. More FWA roles mean more part-time jobs and benefiting our older workers. Adopting FWA helps companies, too. They can retain and hire talented older workers who prefer or require FWA. They will be well-positioned to navigate through our constrained labour market. Also, as Singapore continues to strengthen our social services, we call on the Government to create more part-time opportunities. For example, there can be more part-time roles, such as adjunct teachers, Senior Generation Ambassadors, medical befrienders, community organisers, assistants to visiting nurses and enforcement officers. The Government already does some of this. But we call for a whole-of-Government approach to adopt FWA. It will also free up more young Singaporeans for the private sector. Doing this is not rocket science. We just have to put our heads together and take this to the next level. PAP.”
“But there is always a higher mountain to climb, a higher peak to aspire to. We believe there is room to evolve our approach. Moving forward, the solution is not to solely or even largely depend on putting more legislation compelling firms to hire more seniors. This is not sustainable. Rather, we must create win-win situations so that older workers benefit, companies benefit and Singapore benefits, for both today and tomorrow. Therefore, we recommend a sector-by-sector, tripartite approach to systematically apply the policies to create more full-time and part-time opportunities for our seniors. And we must also help older workers better access freelance opportunities. Let me start by talking about full-time opportunities. Especially within fast-growing industries like information technology (IT), healthcare, logistics and transportation, there is room for more full-time jobs for our older workers. We must put the employment of older workers firmly on the agenda of these industries and have more focus discussions and sharing of success stories at the sector and industry level. And through these focus discussions, we must encourage companies and unions to tap on: (a) Job Redesign+ grants to automate jobs, so that older workers can handle easily; (b) training and internship grants to onboard older workers from other industries; and (c) human resource (HR) grants to implement policies friendly to workers who are older. Over time, we hope that all 23 Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) will do the same. Of course, some will call this approach incremental. But I see nothing wrong with that. Incremental policies, if pursued diligently and intelligently, can yield solid and sustained results.”
“Now that I have set the context of this Motion, let me spend the rest of my speech on three issues: (a) improving work opportunities for our older workers; (b) strengthening our seniors' retirement adequacy; and (c) enhancing local coordination to serve our seniors. First, work opportunities. Many seniors find purpose in work. Here are some interesting views we have heard: one, does it make sense for companies to value us one day before our 67th birthday, and then write us off the very next day? Two, we want to continue working, because it gives us a sense of purpose. But we hope to do it on our terms. Three, age is just a number. We should move away from age as a proxy for ability. What matters more is health status, our state of mind. At the same time, we hear other viewpoints: some seniors work to stay financially independent, or to supplement their income; others work because they need a certain amount of money to retire with dignity. Given such diverse views, we believe Singapore’s objective must be to create more, and more varied, work opportunities for our seniors, as long as they want, or as long as they are able to. How does reality match up to this objective? The current picture is a positive one. Today, we are ranked 11th among 35 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries for employment of older workers. Our success lies with several broad-based policies. We offset employers’ cost of hiring older worker through the Special Employment Credit. We supplement the income of our older low-wage workers through the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) scheme. We raised the retirement and re-employment ages to 62 and 67 respectively. We have tightened standards for companies to bring in non-Singaporeans.”
“The Government can facilitate the creation of group homes within public and private estates to enrich the housing choices available. We have put our views into a position paper, which we have submitted to the Government. In today’s debate, these 10 points will be elaborated by all of my fellow PAP.SG Members – Ms Joan Pereira, Dr Lily Neo, Ms Tin Pei Ling, Ms Rahayu Mahzam and Miss Cheng Li Hui – as well as PAP Members passionate about senior policies. At this point, let me put forth an important caveat. Our recommendations build on the excellent work already achieved. Indeed, our seniors have been at the forefront of our Government’s and PAP’s agenda. We can see it through at least four ways. One, since 1984, eight Ministerial and White Papers as well as three PAP.SG position papers have been tabled, each calling for and dedicating significant resources to prepare Singapore for ageing. Two, since 2011, our healthcare spending increased by two-and-a-half times, from slightly over $4 billion to more than $10 billion a year, and it will continue to grow. In magnitude, I believe we are undergoing the most aggressive healthcare expansion and transformation in any developed country in recent memory. Three, over the past two terms of Government, we have reforged our healthcare financing, retirement, social and public assistance system to the benefit of our seniors. Four, we have set aside $3 billion for the 2015 Action Plan for Successful Ageing, a plan remarkable for its ambition and scope, which calls for Singapore to be a Kampong and City of All Ages, with opportunities for our seniors. Therefore, our debate today builds on the tremendous work of the respective terms of Government.”
“We must create more and more varied work opportunities for our seniors, as long as they want or as long as they are able to. And the key is to adopt a sector-by-sector approach and to tap on our tripartite partnership. Five, our seniors, particularly the Merdeka Generation, have a wealth of experience. They want to actively volunteer their skills and time and not solely be beneficiaries. The Government can encourage and empower more seniors to step forward, especially through SG Cares. Six, our Government can do more to support ground-up communities of seniors and explore increased use of dialects to better relate to our seniors. We recommend more age-appropriate facilities and communities for our seniors to exercise and do sports. Seven, we must continue to strengthen the retirement adequacy of our current and future seniors, including gradually raising the Central Provident Fund (CPF) for older workers to levels similar to that of younger workers, when the economic conditions allow for it. We can give better incentives so that seniors choose to defer their CPF LIFE withdrawals, giving them bigger future payouts and increased retirement adequacy. Eight, we must strengthen family support for seniors. We recommend that the Government review the definition of families to include extended families. If extended family members want to provide support for seniors, our policies should not be obstacles. Nine, we need to do more to support our caregivers. Dr Chia Shi-Lu's Motion, held concurrently today, will address that. Ten, we can further evolve our housing policies, especially by integrating public homes with affordable assisted living services.”
“How can we achieve all of these when so few societies worldwide have succeeded, in a sustained way, through generations? Over the past six months, Speaker Tan Chuan-Jin, as Chairperson of PAP.SG, Ms Joan Pereira, my fellow Vice-chairperson, our exco members and I did some intense consultation to explore what more can be done. We engaged well-regarded experts in the healthcare and the ageing space, and leaders from both the Merdeka and Pioneer Generations. We sought views from seniors from all walks of life, race and religion. We conducted 15 forums and luncheon discussions organised in the open-ended approach similar to that of Our Singapore Conversation (OSC). We received online feedback and many written submissions. These are our insights. One, while an ageing society brings serious challenges, ageing should not be perceived as a problem that must be solved. Ageing also brings many exciting and positive possibilities for Singapore. Indeed, a society can thrive and age well if it has the political will to put in place the right long-term policies. Given that thinking long-term is a hallmark of Singapore, we should aspire to build Singapore up as one of the best places in the world to age. Therefore, we should boldly reframe our narrative and establish a positive agenda. Two, all of us must own our future and work together – the Government, the people and the private sector. No single group can succeed without the others moving together. We must endeavour to age well as individuals and as a nation. Three, given the diverse and evolving needs of current and future generations of seniors, the Government must continue to engage. We found the OSC approach useful, because it builds trust, deepens engagement and generates ideas. Four, many seniors find purpose in work.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of Parliamentarians from the People's Action Party (PAP) Senior Group (PAP.SG), I beg to move*, "That this House calls for a whole of Singapore effort to ensure that Singaporeans are able to age with purpose and dignity, stay healthy and connected, and be financially stable to look forward to their years ahead." [(proc text) *The Motion also stood in the names of Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling, Miss Cheng Li Hui, Dr Lily Neo, Ms Joan Pereira, Ms Rahayu Mahzam. (proc text)] Mr Speaker, preparing Singapore for ageing is one of the most consequential topics for us. We are not talking about niche policies affecting some people. We are talking about how we collectively care for parents, grandparents and other seniors whom we cherish. We are talking about how we will be cared for when we ourselves age one day. That is why 24 Members of Parliament and several officeholders will be speaking about the Motions on Ageing and Caregivers today. Because the stakes are that high. What do we Singaporeans want? For most of us, we want to see the entry into our golden years as the start of a new chapter, one in which we can age with dignity, purpose and peace of mind; one in which employment opportunities are flexible and that leverage our past experiences. We want to continue to learn new things, contribute meaningfully and are appreciated. We want to take life at a slower pace if we wish to, a life that is rich in meaning and where we can spend more time with the family. We want to have the assurance that our healthcare needs are taken care of, and we know that we can count on the support of the Government and community when we need it. The big question is: how?”
“Singapore businesses which pass through all these processes safely can also get the "Approved by Singapore" mark. Hopefully, over time, our "Approved by Singapore" mark can carry as much clout as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) with regard to drugs, and doing so can also create revenue opportunities for the Singapore Government, as SFA can offer certification services either out of Singapore or onsite in markets like China and India. In conclusion, the creation of SFA keeps our food supply standards high. I also believe that the Agency can create more economic opportunities for Singapore and Singaporeans. With that, I stand in support of the Bill.”