Penny Low
Singapore
“These amenities will offer recreational choices and also prevent traffic congestion to the new town when it is built. Will MND look into these suggestions favourably and also work with MOT to prevent congestion?”
“Going forward, the quality of our lives will also depend on how well we can integrate knowledge with technology and creativity to find solutions with daily, social and economic concerns. What plans are there to encourage people to act responsibly, dream up new ideas and design for a better world?”
“Let us navigate the sea of change with mastery of seafaring skills, guided by the light of the stars and not by passing fancy ships. Only then can we continue to be that extraordinary little red dot the world envies; only then will we know that the future generations will continue to be world-beaters and make their families proud.”
“These considerations should be part of the MediShield Life design so that it is holistic, it incentivises the desired behaviour and it improves the overall health outcome of our Page: 122 nation.”
“Thank you, Deputy Speaker. Clarification, Sir. The Minister mentioned that MediShield premium payments can be paid for by immediate family members.”
“Mdm Speaker, there have been more reports on the increase in rodents lately and I am wondering whether NEA has done any study to discover the reason for such an increase, or is it that there is just more visibility of rodents in, especially, housing estates.”
The complete record
Every one of 773 lines we hold for Penny Low, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 16.
“What in the world is this Population White Paper about? Is it about how many people we should have in Singapore by 2030? Is it just about the economy? Or is it about the well-being of Singaporeans in 2030? Upon closer examination, I realised that some one-third of the Paper deals with issues of jobs, family, environment, living environment which are the basic quality of life issues – the same issues that concern us all. Hence, to be fixated on the 6.9 million figure is simply missing the wood for the trees. But then, why such strong response from the residents? Politics aside, there is a real concern if our tiny island of 500 square metres of developable land can actually accommodate 6.9 million people comfortably. Already, there is congestion on the road, overcrowded public transport and hawker centres, rising housing prices and cost of living. These are clear and present challenges that residents are frustrated with today, so adding more people just does not feel right. Ironically, as the Government reiterated many times, it is precisely the responsibility to plan ahead of demand, and avoid the present day problems, Page: 36 that a planning figure of 6.9 million for 2030 was proposed. Hence, I rise in support of the White Paper and Mr Liang Eng Hwa's amendment to the Paper – first we must place priority to resolving the current day and current strains on physical and social infrastructure. Do it now and if we over-project the number for 2030 by some margin, it is still much better than the overcrowded situation now. Let us have some buffer as all these projects have a long gestation period – a situation we are struggling with today. However, this Paper cannot be cast in stone.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for her answer. I have been very encouraged by the growth of the social sector. Two supplementary questions. First, the Minister of State mentioned that there is no strict definition of non-profit sector in Singapore but I remember that the John Hopkins University once measured the combined net worth of the NPO sector and put it to a figure of one-fifth of the global GDP. If the same is to be applied to Singapore, it would mean that this is a huge sector that is also developing very quickly and having a lot of social and financial impact in Singapore that might be worth measuring. My point is what gets measured gets done. Can the Ministry consider including or coming up with a set of key performance measurements to better track both the financial as well as the social impact of this sector? The second point is that if this is done properly, it would serve not only to encourage the social sector but also increase transparency, give more faith and increase professionalism and plug the gaps, since the gaps do start to show. Can the Ministry consider that?”
“If we are looking at a large-scale event like the Arts Festival or the Biennale, I would say we are probably not ready to do it yet, simply because I think unless that group has a proven track record of smaller scale events, ramping it up, scaling it up, being able to curate it properly, getting the audiences to be interested and recognising how it plans to grow and develop the venture. I think it would be difficult. I would say, first of all, to start on a smaller scale. We are prepared to do more of this at the community as well as the district level. For example, if Members want some of these groups here to organise a community arts festival within your constituency, we are prepared to lend some support. But if you are talking about a national event as a first step, first jump into this venture, probably a little difficult.”
“Mr Chairman, the Minister has partially answered my question but I just like to seek further clarification. In my cut about the New Social Compact, I asked whether the Government would support people-initiated and local events and ventures. The Minister gave the assurance that indeed there has been such a support. But both the examples the Minister gave of the Biennale as well as that of the museum event were Government-led or Government agency-led events, which I have stated, would be endowed with both the Government funding and machinery to help it come to fruition and scale up and, in fact, give Singapore quite a lot of international attention. My question really is, would the same kind of help and investment be given to a people-sector event or initiative that did not originate from a Government agency or Government initiatives. So that is the first question. Secondly, is that the Minister was also my visiting Minister at Punggol 21. In the midst of building the Punggol 21 CC, we negotiated with an arts group to co-locate there, but the plan did not work because they did not have adequate funding. So my question to the Minister is, whether he would also then consider funding this particular group and co-locate it in our CC? On the scheme that he has announced, can he announce more details on how they would be reaching out to the Arts School to get them to apply and what are some of the criteria? RAdm [NS] Lui Tuck Yew: I think I am going to stop making Ministerial Visits to the constituencies. If I visit mine, as I always do, maybe I also would deserve one of these. But let us look at that separately. On people-initiated local events, I think what we do fund more of, for example, specific ideas, items under the Arts Creation Fund.”
“Sir, the Government cannot know all or do all, but it must eye-ball the changing rules for a new social compact and the new rules require that the Government be more people-centric, create support frameworks that incentivise and facilitate people to be at their best. Ultimately, people have to be responsible for their own future. This would be the most sensible and effective way of ensuring that we build a cohesive social compact that cultivates in the inter-dependence, resilience, active citizenry to provide the peace and prosperity in nation-building. Sir, the more we celebrate locally, and people-originated events, enterprise and ventures, the more there will be to celebrate. Cool Singapore”
“The top-down approach, whether Government plans and procures all things from MNCs to IOs to global events, takes care of citizens from cradle to grave, has its own limitations. While we enjoy imported top chefs and glitzy events to the tune of tens of millions of dollars, people are not content being mere consumers anymore. Singaporeans are better educated and self-confident today. They want to be producers and need bold support to develop and scale Singapore and people-oriented events and ventures. Perhaps, the Government will urge that it has supported major local events, and I agree. However, a closer look will tell us that many of these events originated as Government or agency-led events. While it serves its industry purpose, it does little to build the new social compact. Some observed that the Government appears to be less patient with local dark horses and too eager in bringing in foreign brand names. Undeniably, imports are quick wins but can be passing fancies. The former, however, will add buzz to the Singapore scene more permanently, cultivate a sense of achievement, pride and appreciation amongst Singaporeans and, at the same time, grow an exportable sector that will bring both financial gain and reputation to Singapore. I urge the Government to channel bold support towards people sector initiatives that can potentially shine on the regional and global stage. Go beyond that of financial support, facilitate with know-how and network and build a pipeline of people/public sector success stories that has its heart rooted in Singapore even as they spread their wings and Singapore's interest and Singaporeans along.”
“Mr Chairman, what does the Facebook, Wikipedia, YouTube and the Egyptian revolution have in common? They are all phenomenal – first growth, user-led movements that re-defined the rules of engagement between the private, public and people sectors. While top-down centralised institutions and initiatives still have their place, the distributed preferential network of people-oriented and people-originated initiatives, linked by shared interest, strengthened by the pervasiveness of social media and open borders, are gaining ground. Interestingly, the recent ground-up Egyptian revolution was led not by political groups but shared-interest groups. Today's local leaders are at the heart of their communities. They inspire communities, let them decide what makes sense and galvanise groups for collective action. This presents tremendous risks and opportunities for the Government. A case in point: the Egyptian revolution although successfully overthrew the entrenched Mubarak regime, offers no clear solution or leaders to Egypt's problems. Its people continue to suffer. We must not let this happen to Singapore. We need to understand this new phenomenon and urgently close the gap between the people and the public sector. So, how do we close the gap? Simply up the collaboration quotient between the public and people sectors. Invest heavily in people sector events and initiatives. Help them scale up and scale overseas, just like we did with the private sector. The good news here is that we do have that experience with the private sector and we can transfer those know-how and skill-set to the people sector as well.”
“It could be that the family is poor and needs the student to help with family expenses or at least earn enough to fund themselves through the university. Or it could be that the student's subjects of preference are not offered or not offered to him or her at public universities. Or quite simply, the person was a late-boomer. Private university degrees are expensive and the demand is great. At a rough estimate, there are more than 30,000 students enrolled in recent PEIs in Singapore who receive no Government subsidies. Students in PEIs form an integral part of our scarce human capital. For many, PEIs are also a route to social mobility. Can we invest in them as well? Conversely, what is the academic and social cost for not investing in them? Most certainly, not all PEIs are made the same and I agree that there should be clear distinction between the good, the bad and the ugly. MOE, through the Council for Private Education (CPE) has set up a quality framework for PEIs. Can MOE go further to do a comprehensive review of the sector, set up clear eligibility criteria for PEIs students who are Singaporeans? And, further, these guidelines can help students to be more discerning in their choice of studies and, at the same time, send a positive signal to PEIs to move towards high quality university education. Teaching scholars”
“Sir, I declare my interest as a member of the SIM governing council. To ensure that our global competitiveness and social mobility is in place, education takes centre stage in our lives, from kindergarten to lifelong learning. Its importance is also reflected by the budget allocated to MOE. This investment should support as many Singaporeans as possible as every talent counts. In the past, students who could not get into their autonomous universities would have to go overseas, which mostly only the rich could afford. Some never come back, thereafter resulting in talent leak. Today, the higher education landscape has evolved. Several of the US Ivy League universities, the US Russell Group and the Australia Group of Eight, have partnered established local private education institutions (PEIs), such as the Singapore Institute of Management (SIM) and the LaSalle College of the Arts. Yesterday, a Sunday Times' article highlighted high-flying students from SIM Global Education (GE), who achieved excellence in academic, arts and sports. In another example, SIM GE's tie-up with the University of Manchester ranked 30 in the QS World University Rankings and the most recent batch of 64 graduands have achieved three first-class, 21 second upper-class, 36 second-lower and four third-class honours. Graduates from the programme have proven themselves in their careers. One of them, Ms Dulcie Cheong graduated from the programme and was recently promoted from executive secretary to assistant manager at the National University Heart Centre. She improved her income and social mobility through the PEIs. Singaporeans may enrol in PEIs for many reasons.”
“Sir, the Senior Minister of State said that all innovations, whether academic or social, will ultimately benefit the user. I fully agree. As such, can the Minister also clarify why do we then continue to use language and focus on products or supply or services-centric and specific innovations rather than cause-specific? As we hear on Radio FM93.8, "change your perspective and change your life". Otherwise, outcome may be just incremental improvements rather than real innovations. The second clarification is on collaborative innovation and funding schemes. The Senior Minister of State repeatedly mentioned public and private sector collaborations. I cheer that but the end-user, the people sector, is conspicuously missing from his entire speech. This serves the point I made earlier on in my speech that the $16 billion fund is very much supply-side-centric but most transformational innovations today are driven by demand-side innovations. I wonder if the Senior Minister of State can clarify if there would be more schemes to look into demand-side innovations and push it to the limit and transform some of the thinking and paradigms that we have today and heavily include people and the people sector in the entire innovation drive.”
“In so doing, open sourcing solutions and mass distribution lower costs, increase efficiency and create a value system that is different and KPIs that will truly transform our society. Sir, higher economic profits and social dividends –”
“Government should also support existing platforms that focus on peer-to-peer, 3Ps and intra-industry collaboration, including that in the social sector. One such platform – and I declare my interest here since I also help to create this platform – is the Global Social Innovators Forum, which is a locally created, internationally recognised annual event that brings together change leaders from the 3Ps and academic circle to build a more inclusive, sustainable and better world. Perhaps, the Government can also think about developing a social Silicon Valley where the 3Ps can come together to solve Singapore's most pressing concerns. One such park also called the Social Innovation Park is found in Spain. They visited Singapore's SIP, took our ideas and found great government support, and is now abuzz with many cross-sector collaborations and host more than 50 international companies and associations. Can we do the same? Fifth, innovation in distribution. Just as central planning has become less efficient, distributed periphery network gains weight. Local smart grids, step-down care, telemedicine are some examples. Can we also incentivise the creation of new infrastructure, or adapt old ones to expand into a more efficient distribution centre? All of these would also need a new legislative vehicle, a regulatory architecture and investment flow to unlock these systemic changes. Sir, in conclusion, where innovation in the private sector is designed to reserve benefits for financial gains and those who can pay for it, social innovation is structured to favour the rapid diffusion of an innovation rather than keeping it private.”
“For example, the engineering and design students team up with VWOs and allow them to empathise firsthand with the disabled's daily struggles, and create meaningful solutions to improve the quality of life for real people. Some of the solutions are so good that commercial interests are found. (ii) Demand-side innovation. Our incentives are heavily supply-side bias. But with the advent of new media, demand-side innovations like crowd sourcing, consumer and social needs-driven collaborative innovation offer unprecedented opportunities to harness global creativity and value-add to our products and services. From Google to Facebook, companies that adopt open and user needs-driven processes to their products and business development have become an integral part of our lives. What are some of the schemes that incentivise our demand-side innovations? (iii) Information innovation. We have an excellent data collection system that unveils latent assets and maps future trends and challenges. Why not make our national challenges known in digestible form in a checklist and then invite innovators to tackle them? Doing so would also allow the frontliners to better understand the issues and users to share visions. (iv) Collaborative innovation. Cross pollination of ideas combining many elements in new ways has been the most transformative. For example, mobile phones combine micro-processors, transmitters, network of masts and applications that create new businesses that satisfy lifestyle needs. To encourage collaborative innovation, the Government can help build trust-creating devices like eBay's peer rating systems or provide public database.”
“Sir, more than $16 billion has been set aside over five years to fund innovation as a key enabler of economic growth, and the way to increase productivity and real income. Bravo! But, Sir, The Economist magazine defines "innovation" as "new products, business processes, or organic changes that create wealth or social welfare", or simply put, "the fresh thinking that creates value." To achieve quantum leap growth, fresh thinking and organic changes – or systemic innovation – is the way to go. Systemic innovation involves changing the mind's eyes to see and think in new ways – from economic assumptions to social arrangements, impacting the demand and supply of basic needs. Often, they are catalysed by crisis, disruptive technology, social needs or cumulative physical and cultural changes. But the mother of innovation usually arises out of needs, and the most compelling needs are those that relate to improving human condition, and not just financial value. Some examples are the spread of education, green and infotech revolution – all of which points not to profit maximisation but to making life better. Perhaps what we need is a systemic paradigm shift from private innovation to social innovation, to yield both economic and social dividends. Sir, what are the schemes that prompt systemic innovation? To this end, I advocate refocusing innovation on the following: (i) A paradigm shift and changing the language from product and service innovation to social innovation, tackling human needs and making life better for Singaporeans. An example can be found in Singapore Polytechnic that adopted humanitarian values as their ethos, changed the curriculum to give meaning to studies.”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. I want to reiterate the point that while childcare is important, disabled care and eldercare is equally important and, therefore, can the Minister seriously reconsider getting the Civil Service to take the lead? Also, the various Ministries to come together to consider fungible benefits relating to tax relief, leave benefits and community infrastructure, which is currently being undertaken by the wellness centre. Make it fungible so that whether you are taking leave for children, disabled siblings, disabled spouses or senior family members, it could be done. That is the first clarification. Secondly, the Minister mentioned that I asked for cash allowances for caregivers. I have not actually asked for that. I asked for matching grant for a caregiver's endowment fund, so that we can create a mutual fund, based on insurance concept, to look after the caregivers who might have exhausted their resources, or those who are being cared for because they could outlive the caregivers.”
“Sir, not enough skills and financial strains are all part of caregiving, but the caring of loved ones can also be satisfying, meaningful and part of our ethos. The job of caregiving often falls on the shoulders of those who are perceived to have a lower academic value or on singles, which sometimes results in a self-fulfilling prophecy. Caregiving is a shared responsibility. We need to create a right legislative and tax framework and supportive environment that makes it easier for the caregivers. Could the Minister consider: (i) higher tax relief for caregivers, especially singles as they will be faced with the same issues when they are old? Can the child-related tax, leave benefits and community infrastructure be extended to caring for other family members? Disabled and eldercare are not less critical than childcare; (ii) general subsidies to help family-based caregivers get technological help; (iii) set up a registry, knowledge-based and support networks for caregivers so that resources and information are readily available; (iv) a caregiver's toolkit, technology and R&D fund; (v) caregivers' one-stop hotline number; (vi) caregivers' drop-in centre; (vii) caregivers' endowment fund with a matching grant to encourage a mutual fund or insurance concept for both caregivers and those being cared for; and (viii) intensify condition-specific skill development courses for professional and home-based caregivers. Parental care leave”
“As this is probably the last Sitting that we would have, I just want to tell the Government in the House that I have learnt a lot in these past one and a half to two years. One of the most illuminating lessons is how hard the Government works at providing for Singapore and I want to take this opportunity to thank the House and to thank the Government.”
“My second and final concern is on the well-being of elderly Singaporeans. I am much encouraged by the news that we will be investing in long-term care. The latest census data shows a growing proportion of single-member and two-member households. This alerts us to concerns that more Singaporeans will grow old either alone or in the company of an aged spouse. To prepare for this, we have to put in place an infrastructure that supports ageing in place. While we will continue to encourage three-generation families, we must also recognise that many older Singaporeans will have to manage growing old and living alone. It is important that we help older Singaporeans live independently and age gracefully in their own homes for as long as possible. I applaud the HDB for actualising the studio apartment concept. This will certainly meet the needs of older Singaporeans in middle-income and below households. Will the HDB consider engaging an "executive condominium" concept to meet the housing needs of upper-middle income elderly, rather than have each of these households exist independently and reliant on a foreign domestic worker to facilitate ageing in place? I think it will be more cost-effective for Singapore if we provide for housing needs of this group of older Singaporeans through the provision of retirement communities. These executive condominium communities will have infrastructure that supports assisted living and will promote ageing in place. Perhaps the Government, through the HDB, will consider planning for "Pinnacle II@Changi" where studio apartments will be showcased in a private estate sculptured to meet the needs of the elderly and where healthcare, security, cleaning and nutrition needs of the residents will be provided for.”
“It was a singular most important life goal for me at that time, so I was very focused on achieving it. When I met my husband, I immediately knew that he was "the one" and I spent all my efforts in ensuring that he knew I was the one for him. I think we need to inject this sense of urgency in our youths when they consider courtship and marriage. I think too many have conveniently married their vocations. We need to help them navigate their way back to the social realm. We have to address urgently. As the proportion of singles grows and singlehood becomes a norm for youths in their late 20s, it also becomes much easier for singles to rationalise their singlehood status. I believe that the attitudinal barriers towards marriage articulated by many singles – their complaints about expensive housing, no time, etc, these are, in part, rationalisation and justification for their singlehood status. When I met my husband, we had very little amassed. We decided to get married and move to Singapore – with no job offers, not much savings and no home to call our own. But we had each other and we believed we had enough and were optimistic about building our future together. So I believe that the key to our fertility woes really lies in reducing the singlehood figures and helping our youths find their Significant Other because once you have found that partner in life, I think you will believe that you can overcome everything. The data we have strongly suggests that fertility rate is healthy among married couples. I will speak on this further in the COS debate where I will urge the civil service to take the lead in protecting the private time for Singaporeans to engage in an active social life and nurture relationships.”
“From my research, three noteworthy reasons surfaced: they complain of a limited social circle, limited time and they find that they have attractive contesting life goals. When I look at these issues holistically, I think that if I were to look for a solution, my focus would be on the demands of paid work. If we are serious about tackling the concerns with lower fertility which in turn results in a fast greying population, we must address this concern of overwork among younger Singaporeans. To ensure that investment in family will not come at too high an opportunity cost to Singaporeans, I propose that we should relook the performance-based evaluation system, so that we can develop clear, reasonable performance targets for employees in the various job capacities. Currently, we leave to too much to peer competition to determine outstanding performance. This results in a high-stressed situation where employees have to constantly out-compete each other for that elusive "A" grade each year. While this system may result in more efficient output in the short run, there are adverse effects to the long-term stability of a stable Singapore. It results in a high-stressed competitive system in the workplace which encourages setting short-term goals which have to be delivered year-on-year. This leaves very little time and energy for other commitments. The effects can be observed among young Singaporeans in the labour force. While there is a strong tenacity among our youth to achieve their career aspirations and they do this with the sense of urgency, they do not seem to view courtship and marriage with the same sense of urgency. When I was an undergraduate and single, I was very sure I wanted to get married. I wanted to get married and I wanted to grow my own family.”
“If we are able to protect the affordability of basic necessities, it will help address concerns of inflation and enable low-income households stretch their buying power. I hope that many more businesses – especially those involved in provision of essential services like healthcare, food and beverage outlets and grocery will also embrace the philosophy of community service demonstrated by the NTUC. May I move on to emerging trends which require State intervention? There are two areas of concern which I would like to highlight: the growing proportion of singles, and that of older Singaporeans living alone. Last year, in my Budget speech, I shared with the House, developments of my fish pond. Please allow me to give Members an update. I stopped adding the bags of inexpensive small fish because I was getting concerned that I may be overcrowding my pond and polluting the water. Now, all that is left is my reliable catfish, a few lingering small ones, and my nine beautiful kois. Sadly, I have been watching, hoping to bring good news to the House but no baby koi or no baby catfish has emerged. Instead, I just have ageing kois. At this rate, I will probably have to replace the entire population when the fish die off! We must ensure that this does not happen to Singapore. First, Sir, my concern with young singles. The latest census advance release confirmed the growing proportion of singles age 25 to 30 years. This is especially worrying for females, because if we marry only after 30 years, the likelihood of having more than one child is very low. We must look seriously into the structural constraints that may hamper courtship. Why are our young women in that age-group not getting married?”
“I hope businesses in Singapore will rise to the challenge for a higher-skilled labour force will result in greater efficiency and increased productivity – a win-win situation for both businesses and Singapore. I appeal to employers to see the hike in foreign worker levy in tandem with the generous incentives for businesses to level up on productivity. Passing the higher cost of hiring foreign workers to the consumers would hurt both consumers as well as businesses. Instead, I urge employers to play their part in transforming the workplace and level up on the skills of the existing labour pool. Relying on 10 well-trained workers makes better business sense than trying to manage a transient pool of 10 low-skilled workers. My second wish is for businesses to partner the Government in managing the impact of inflation on low-income workers. I am very impressed with the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) for playing their part in keeping basic necessities affordable. Thanks to the lead taken by the NTUC Fairprice, several other supermarkets have come forward to pledge their commitment to keep prices for basic necessities stable. In addition, NTUC Foodfare's pledge to hold off price increases for basic essential beverages is much appreciated by low-income households. In my opinion, NTUC exemplifies good corporate social responsibility. Price hikes on basic necessities hurt low-income households most. Sustained inflation, if not checked will result in entrenching income instability. If we do not address the income gap, we risk destabilising our society. I appeal to businesses to be mindful of the needs of low-income households and to make conscientious decisions to alleviate the stress of price hikes for this segment of our society.”
“While Singapore is not known to be a welfare state, I believe we certainly have one of the most generous governments in the world. Thank you, Minister Tharman. Sir, may I focus my speech on two main themes: the importance of corporate social responsibility in sustainable growth, and the challenges arising from emerging trends that require state intervention. Even as we look forward to the redistribution of achievements from 2010, I am acutely aware that we cannot rely solely on the Government to provide the magic potion that bridges income inequality. This business must partner the Government in this endeavour. Unlike Mr Low, I think it will be short-sighted to think that the Government can do it all alone. The Government has, through its pro-business policies, made Singapore a desired destination for business investments. Businesses that invest in Singapore can rely on a world-class labour force that is endowed with a close to 100% literacy rate and a strong and stable Government led by men and women of the highest integrity, which ensures social and political stability so that investors can conduct their affairs in a conducive environment that is supported by pro-business policies. For long-term sustainability of this partnership, businesses must play their part. I have two items on my wish list for employers. First, businesses must invest in labour so that our partnership can be sustained. I urge employers to take a long-term perspective when they invest in human resource. We must rethink reliance on low-cost foreign labour for that will, in the long run, produce an underclass of Singaporeans and destabilise our society. Budget 2011 has enhanced incentives for businesses to invest in technology and transform the labour force.”
“Yes, Sir. So, I hope that we recognise that there have to be many approaches to increasing productivity, to giving people different options in life and, in fact, doing so by helping and empowering them to do the best that they want to be is the way forward. Sir, in conclusion, we could have been a country made through historical accident but nation building cannot be left to default and accidents. It requires a strong, compassionate and decisive leadership that can lead a young nation through thick and thin and the Budget is both a tool and expression of that leadership. Sir, we cannot take the past effort for granted and, to guarantee future performance, we need to continually ensure a good team in place to build on our success. We need to strengthen our social fabric, hand-in-hand, with our corporate sector. 2.45 pm Assoc. Prof. Paulin Tay Straughan (Nominated Member): Thank you, Sir, for this opportunity to articulate my strong support for the Budget announced. I would first like to thank the Government and the Minister for a very responsible, forward-looking Budget. I am particularly impressed with the Government's commitment to sustainable growth. We see this especially in the return to reserves, and especially in the bold initiatives to transform the labour force. The proposal to raise the levy for foreign workers is not popular with businesses that rely on low-cost labour but I believe it is critical for the long-term well-being of low-income Singaporeans. I am not sure if I understood the hon. Member Mr Low Thia Khiang's arguments that this initiative would not benefit Singapore. The key lesson that is reinforced in Budget 2011 is that we must continue to grow a bigger pie so that there will be more for re-distribution.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I will complete it in a few seconds.”
“Just give me a licence to sell ice cream." I thought her story deserves praise. Not only did she not ask for handouts, she even thought of other people's needs. She tries her best, and I think she is a very good example. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, finally, she got her ice cream selling licence. I met up with her. She came to me completely elated and wanted to give me a free ice cream. Of course, I paid for it. But the case in point is that there have to be many approaches to helping people and it is not just about putting them into square slots. *Cols. 3015-3016”
“When she came in, she would very politely tell me that "I don't need any handouts. I only need a licence to sell ice cream." I asked her why. She said "I have a husband who is a stroke patient, and he is unable to move around and many places will not accept him and give him a job. I have two young school-going children, so I am holding two jobs. My first job is a cleaner's job, my second job is an odd-job worker. I have two jobs so I cannot ask you for a third job. But if I have a licence to sell ice cream, then I can be independent." I told her, "You are so tired, why do you need another job? Why don't you just let us help you? Whatever your children's needs, be it school fees or expenses he needs to go to school, we can help you. If you have any needs in your home, for example, medical fees, we can pay for you. If you don't have sufficient money for household expenses, we can also help you." But she says, "No, I am not here to ask for handouts. We may be poor, have very low income and little education, we have nothing but we still have our dignity. If I ask for handouts from you, then I will not even have any dignity left. I might as well be a beggar." So, even though she is poor, she is full of dignity. What she needs is not handouts, what she needs is to be given a chance to be independent. What she needs is a job, she wants to work hard. Furthermore, I was heartened when she said, "Although I'm poor and life is hard, I still have hands and legs. I can still do a lot of work with my hands. I want to be a good example for my children, so that they will learn from me. I don't want to get handouts and I know that you MPs go through a lot of trouble to solve the residents' problem, to raise funds. I would like to donate this money to other people.”
“And I hope that we could expedite the opening up of such avenues so that there could be greater social mobility and a much more human-centric approach to policy making and giving opportunities to all. Many feel that this is still not happening fast enough. So I hope that given the crowded city that we are, where aspirations are on the ground, standards of living are high and the demands on the city folks, I urge the Government to pump in more resources to actualise and expedite the shift to a more people-centric Government and work with the industry and people to create a new social compact where every citizen is empowered to do more for themselves and for the country. What we need, I think, is a Team Singapore approach. On the Team Singapore approach, I think there is a need to do more in creating shared value and social cohesion. While we keep the traditional methods, we need to examine how we can further cultivate and invest into shared value using social media, people, public, private partnerships, innovative vehicles that blur lines between profit and for-profit hybrid vehicle enterprises that contribute to both financial and social bottom lines. While there are many help schemes out there for residents who need help, not everyone wants a handout approach; not everyone wants to go on welfare. And here I relate a story which touches my heart and I will say this in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A*.] At the Meet-the-People Session, a resident has been coming to see me for the past two-three years. She always came around 10 o'clock, just when I was about to close the door. And when she came in, she was always perspiring and looked unkempt, but still relatively tidy. And her clothes looked rather dated.”
“On people-centric infrastructure and approach, with a global power shift from centralised institution to the distributed periphery network, there are signs that the Government is getting it and beginning to translate them into policy measures. Evidence is seen in many Ministries such as the Ministry of Health (MOH) which has adopted a much more patient-centric care and even many years back started making hospital bills and treatment more transparent. The Ministry of Transport (MOT) not too long ago also announced the need to move from functional planning of public transport infrastructure to human-centric public transport system. And in the Ministry of Education (MOE), learning has also moved from the one-size-fits-all didactic teaching to individual customisation to help the child achieve his or her personal best. This has helped many students and families achieve better social mobility. A very good example was a girl who came to my MPS two months or so ago to update me on her latest progress. She was actually getting married at that point and she wanted to have a flat. She was still in school and she started the conversation by saying: "Miss Low, do you recognise me? I came to you many years ago. I was then an ITE student and I was asking for help to get me into the polytechnic which I had gotten into, and now I am completing my studies in the university." I was very, very proud of her and what really touched me was that she was grateful, she came back and she said "thank you". This is evidence of the sort of social mobility that our students can achieve. In the past, it would have been very difficult for her to get a place in the university if she had gone to ITE, but, today, these avenues are open.”
“As the Finance Minister said, we cannot control external circumstances but we seek to recover faster each time. So, I want to acknowledge the wisdom and the stewardship that has been put in by our Budget Team and, of course, the entire Government for executing them well on the whole. But, Mr Speaker, Sir, while the Government has scored high on economic performance, Government and business efficiency, more needs to be done on people-centric infrastructure and approach, inclusiveness, social cohesion, national pride and the sense of belonging. In the Budget Speech itself, the Finance Minister referred to statistics in the last 10 years which showed great strides in the nominal income growth of our low-income families from the 20th percentile and median household income in the 50th percentile. In real terms, however, the median household outpaced the growth in the lower-income household by quite a lot. We need to improve on this and, as such, Budget 2011's emphasis on real productivity growth is spot on. However, improving productivity should be more wide-based and widely defined to include not just office, shop front or factory-based work but also those who may be working at home, working out of laptops via mobile commuting, working in sheltered workshops, social enterprises, and so on. With changing demographic landscape, changing work landscape, and so on, we need to think out of the box and apply the concept of productivity beyond the traditional workplace. Our policies and funding must catch up with business and social innovation that is already happening in homes and business places to reflect the new reality and enable Singaporeans many roads to success and real income growth.”
“That year in 2008, we started the year saying that we wanted to create a top quality economy, building a resilient community and, I think, we did quite well despite the global recession registering a real economic growth rate of 1.5%. But, of course, by the end of 2008 we knew that the world was going into quite a turbulent time, so the theme for 2009 was "Keeping jobs, building for the future". We had a negative year – -0.8%. But then we came back very strongly in 2010 with 14.5% improvement and the Budget theme for that year was "Towards an advanced economy: superior skills, quality jobs, higher incomes". And, of course, in 2011, we know that our Finance Minister has themed this Budget "Growing incomes, strengthening our society". What is interesting is also, if Members look at the overall GDP growth in the handout, Members would see the overall GDP growth to be one that only dipped in 2009. If we draw a tangent across the graph, Members will realise that, despite some ups and some downs, it is still an upward growth in our GDP. In fact, if Members look at the absolute numbers, our GDP has almost doubled from $163 billion to $285 billion against all odds, growing every year except in 2009. Translated at the ground level, the lay person experiences a higher standard of living. Personal wants and desires in 2001 like mobile phones, overseas holidays, etc, have now become basic needs in 2011. So, I think, the Government has scored quite well on the whole especially in terms of business and Government efficiency. I do not have time to elaborate, but if Members refer to the handout, they will see that vis-a-vis other parts of the world we have done very well.”
“If Members refer to that, we would be able to see whether our Budget team has been responsive to both internal and external challenges as well as the results of the decisions made in those circumstances. In 2001, we entered the year well and remember that Budget is usually in February or March – the Budget theme for that year was "Entering the new millennium: A place for everyone". Little did we know that in 2001 there was the 911 incident. It sent the real growth down to -1.2% but we recovered very well the next year and the Budget theme for that year was "A budget for a different world", and that was of course post-911. Then, we recorded a growth of 4.2% in real economic growth terms. Then in 2003, coming out from the post-911, we said "Seizing opportunity in uncertainty" and, I think, round about that time we also experienced SARS. Again, although we went into some quarters of recession, we recovered and grew in real terms. And in 2004, our theme was "Building a future of opportunity". Things went well and so the next year we said the Budget theme was "Creating opportunity, building community". This was still very much post-SARS era. And then, in 2006, since we had been achieving a few years of growth, the Budget theme was "Building on our strengths, creating our best home". Then, we achieved 8.7% that year in 2006. In 2007, we came out with the theme "Ready for the future, ready for the world". Little did we know that in 2008 itself we will experience a dip in the economic performance because of, again, global circumstances and the financial crisis.”
“On the whole, I would term this Budget as one that learns from the past. The returning of the $4 billion to the reserve funds, even though there was no constitutional need to do so, is a very big plus and showcases that our Government is a very prudent and responsible one. It is also a Budget that tackles the present challenges, battling the rising costs of living issues, rewarding hard work and sharing the funds of Singapore's labour via the $3.2 billion Grow and Share fund. It is also one that invests in the future via the $3.4 billion set aside for longer-term social investments through transfers to endowment and trust funds as well as more than $6 billion that has been set aside to enhance long-term measures for businesses. "Changing the way we grow", as the Finance Minister put it, through raising productivity by at least 30% over the next decade is not only a good move but one that is necessary, fairer and more inclusive approach. It appears it is a forward-looking Budget. But, Sir, how do we know that it is a good and wise Budget that will work for Singapore? Most policies take time to mature. As the saying goes, we will only know in hindsight. Since this is my 10th year in Parliament, I decided to embark on a journey down memory lane, to take a very quick assessment of our budgetary effectiveness and wisdom in the last 10 years since 2001. The test is a simple one – the criterion is simple. For the last 10 years, are we better off today in 2011 vis-a-vis 2001 – economically and socially? The role of Budget is in sheltering, developing and seizing opportunities for Singaporeans through economic ups and downs while sharpening our saw. I have given some handouts to Members in this House.”
“While MCYS has been supportive, building an inclusive and self-reliant society requires efforts from a whole-of-Government approach, in particular, in encouraging tax regime and legislative framework, like examples from the Community Interest Companies (CIC) in United Kingdom or L3C in United States, or even just tweaking some of the incentives that are given via SPRING, EDB and IE Singapore to for-profit enterprises, could also help the social enterprises and send a much clearer signal. Where the general population – grassroots leaders and residents – are concerned, most people reacted very positively to the Budget calling this a "people's" Budget. They endorsed it as one that is correctly skewed towards taking care of the most needy but not forgetting the middle-income and sandwiched class. Some wish for more generous benefits in childcare-related issues and a greater urgency in tackling eldercare issues. In particular, a resident of mine came up to me and said that his father suffered a stroke recently and was looking for a nursing home. When he went to the nursing home, he discovered that he failed the means test but, at the same time, he cannot afford the $2,500 required by private nursing homes. He asked me what measures are there to help people like himself. I told him that it is in the Budget itself. We have transferred a lot of trust funds and enhanced the trust funds to enhance eldercare and the taking care of our senior citizens, especially patients who need long-term care. I told him to just be patient, akan datang. But he said that every day is a very, very long day for the family. I hope that the Government will expedite on how these funds could be used and tapped on to help families with long-term care needs.”
“Sir, in the last one week, I have been holding post-Budget dialogue sessions in my constituency as well as roundtable sessions in the business community and I would summarise some of the sentiments as follows. In the business community, there is mixed reaction primarily due to the higher foreign worker levy, amidst a very tight labour market. When we explained to them that they should try to innovate and increase productivity so that we can increase the overall competitiveness of the Singapore economy and, at the same time, increase real income by 30% for the next 10 years, it is clear that the real issues are two-fold. One, there is still a need for a paradigm shift which requires more persuasions with real examples given to the industry so that they would know how to go about innovating and changing old habits. Two, there is huge anxiety about the ease in which the various innovation and productivity funds can be tapped as past experience tells us that while intentions may be noble, the devil is in the details. I think my colleague Ms Jessica Tan has spoken about that earlier on. There is also a sense that the agencies need to work together more closely as a holistic Government to be more proactive and to help businesses overcome the inertia and the "how-tos". A specific industry which I have always spoken about is the social enterprise industry. It felt a little left out as there are no concrete measures to help grow the industry that sits between that of a charity and a pure for-profit entity. The question remains – how eager is the Government in encouraging social enterprise whose ethos is in building a self-help and mutual help, self-reliant inclusive society?”
“Related to the littering issue is that of a dog poo issue. There has been a rise in pets being kept in HDB estates and many a time, it is not just the owners who take their dogs out but sometimes the domestic helpers will take their dogs out for a walk and to do the necessary call of nature. They do not pick up after the dogs, leaving not just unsightly poos but also giving rise to hygiene issues. I think for the Muslim population, it could also be quite offensive. So my question to the Minister of State is whether the Ministry has considered some by-laws to nab those who leave dog poo behind and whether they could consider working with MOM in training the domestic helpers in ensuring that they will pick up the necessary poo after walking the dogs.”
“Yes, Sir. They said that the pavilion was bare and it was more dry and statistical than something that really showcases Singapore to the best. So, I wonder if Minister has heard such comments and whether he thinks that we should have done a better job.”
“Thank you, Minister, for your reply. I am heartened to know that the pavilion has been well received from the reports that he received. But the feedback that I got was a little bit more contrary to that. I had both grassroots leaders who had visited as well as international visitors and press who said that –”
“We know they are flood-prone, so, if there is a rainfall of a certain intensity, these places will be flooded. How do we resolve it? Well, the only way is for the level of the roads and the buildings to be raised at the next re-development. We will continue to work with people who are living in the areas which are affected. In fact, we have a drainage upgrading programme for most of these areas to alleviate the flooding situation in those particular areas. The only area that we have uncovered is Orchard Road. I would not consider Orchard Road as a flood-prone area. I think it is a hotspot, we are studying it very carefully to see what more can be done to alleviate the problem as quickly as possible.”
“Mr Speaker, supplementary questions. How does MEWR determine what constitutes flood-prone areas, as outlined in this graph [Member indicated a handout ]? Are these areas identified the same as those identified in previous years? If they are the same, then why was drainage in those existing flood-prone areas not rectified in the first place? And if these areas are not the same, what contributed to new flood-prone areas emerging? Last but not least, this might be slightly unrelated, there was a report about a photographer who was taking pictures at flood-prone areas and was being handcuffed. I just wanted to know whether there is any policy of MEWR to disallow people from taking pictures, and if it is not, I think this is a good opportunity to clear the air. Assoc. Prof. Dr Yaacob Ibrahim: Sir, on the second question, we are only familiar with the case as much as the Member is from reading the reports in the newspapers. There is no policy of the Ministry of the Environment and Water Resources (MEWR) or PUB in terms of taking pictures. From what we understand, the photographer was warned because of safety issues, not because of privacy issues. There is nothing private about a flood. Based upon the report, that was what we understood to have happened that morning. The Member asked how we define a flood-prone area. Flood-prone areas are areas which are below or marginally above the high tide and not served by any pump or drainage system and areas which have been flooded by storms of lower intensity than what it is designed for. For example, in my own constituency, which, unfortunately was flooded over the weekend, there are terrace houses which are well below the level of the Kallang River. These are low-lying areas.”
“Mr Chairman, actually I have got three clarifications. The first is pertaining to the Minister's remarks about singles, perhaps, being a higher risk category. I wonder if he has looked more closely at the data to determine if age, widows or even divorces could be a factor, or that singles are usually the ones left looking after their parents and, therefore, falling into the dilemma of whether to work for an income or practise filial piety. It is a difficult balancing act. Perhaps, he could look more deeper into the issue itself and have wider measures to help singles. Second clarification for the Minister of State. I thank her for her support for –”
“This comprises building a Social Enterprise (SE) culture, improving business advisory, tackling barriers to access to finance and enabling SEs to work with Government. The result? The latest estimates by the Office of the Third Sector suggest there are 62,000 social enterprises contributing £24 billion to the UK economy. In Singapore, we can and must do better. We need a much more systematic and inclusive approach to nurturing SEs, especially in the field of financial fuel and manpower development. Even the social sector itself, a high touched industry could benefit from lifelong learning to improve creativity and productivity. Unfortunately, currently, most of these schemes to support the social sector are tuned towards only those that are charity registered. In other words, schemes like the very good Vocational Capability Fund (VCF) that subsidises training courses of up to 80% of course fees for its members and staff are not applicable to SEs that are not charity registered. Sir, as a result, many SEs that seek to be financially sustainable did their sums and had no choice but to seek lower cost of operation by registering themselves to be a charity and get their IPC status. I have two suggestions. One, can the Minister extend the VCF and all social sector related fundings to SEs, whether they are charity registered or not? And two, whether we could also advise and encourage more SEs and SE Association to work with the Workforce Development Agency (WDA) and Skills Development Fund (SDF) to create such institutions for training? Caring for the handicapped – financial aid”
“Sir, let me declare my interest as the Founder of Social Innovation Park and co-chair of the Social Enterprise Association. (In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A*.] The purpose of running a social enterprise is not to make big money. People in this sector hold the belief that their talents shall be used to benefit humanity. There are many zealous young people who wish to do good for the society but have not been able to get support from Singapore's overall environment. They start with great confidence but soon they find themselves facing many difficulties which keep them awake at night. How to innovate? How to improve? When they get up the next morning, they realise that they have no money nor the network. Ambition is defeated by reality. They have no choice but to opt out and go back to the old path. Hence we lose another champion of the social enterprises as well as an opportunity for innovation. Let me ask: if a social entrepreneur can start an enterprise which enables the underprivileged to become more confident, more ambitious and contribute more to the society, as well as reduces the burden of the Government at the same time, should we not give them greater support? I hope the Government, community and our social enterprises can work together to give the people, especially the vulnerable, a better life and hope for the future. I would like to give an example from the United Kingdom. Let me now speak in English. *Cols. 3923-3924. [Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr Matthias Yao Chih) in the Chair] (In English): A developmental approach to nurturing the social economy, via a four-pronged system.”
“We are entering a completely new form of society that offers new opportunities to revolutionise teaching roles, content and learning methods that enables our citizens to navigate the highly connected knowledge intensive world. Schools, therefore, will have to seriously rethink their educational value, redesign the educational framework and rebuild the methodologies that will work for this 21st century homo sapiens. But, Madam, on my wish list is that schools will also seriously embed the humanity quotient into education alongside with aspects of culture and history and this I echo my colleagues Ms Irene Ng, Mrs Josephine Teo and Mr Ong Kian Min so that the homo sapiens will not become a disconnected breed that loses the soul of humanity while the world becomes its oyster. Value of learning vs. quantity learnt”
“Harnessed properly, such platforms can also promote mutual understanding and cultural melting pots, thereby averting potential conflicts and clashes. But, of course, the reverse is also true. As our information environment is finally catching up to human capabilities, we are now beginning to see learning environments created to capitalise on our natural and intuitive inclinations – which are all around curiosity, interest-oriented skill acquisition, and project-based implementation. Music, art, sports and common interest that transcends language barriers and promotes creativity will become the new common language and academic driver. In the US, experiments are being done using mobile technology to deliver education. For example, a fifth grade mobile phone learning programme that incorporates the game theory was rolled out as an experiment that has got rather complex information gathering and decision making processes in the game. The findings are summarised by the designer Katie Salen, and I quote: "Games are exceptionally good at engaging kids … They drop kids into complex problems where they fail and fail, but they try again and again." In short, such mobile or video games have outperformed teachers in one key way and that is they command attention for hours and cultivate a new breed of children who are potentially less risk averse and better at absorbing information coming from all directions. 5.30 pm Going forward, the way we design our curriculum will shape not just the organisational gestalts of our children's thought processes but more deeply how they interact with everyone on planet earth to a greater degree than ever before.”
“Madam, when our children have a question, who do they call? Parents – maybe; teachers – maybe; peers – maybe. Wikipedia and Google - probably! The infinite information access at real time means that the highest utility children get out of education today is no longer just pure knowledge, nor skills that revolve around recall and process. Our external online brain does that nicely. What it does not do is to give meaning to knowledge, adapt to fast changing external environment, make sound and wise judgment, so we can combine knowledge with humanity to solve problems. Question: how can schools stay relevant, impart agility, wisdom and value systems that are apt for the 21st century global citizens? Madam, studies have pointed to the emergence of a new human species, called the "homo zappiens" (Gen Z). These are children born into multi-channel, globally connected vatar world, where they are bombarded with a kaleidoscope of multi-channel media from birth. As a result, their brains are wired differently from the homo sapiens to help them learn in a non-linear and visual manner, such that they can genuinely multi-task like an octopus. If this is true, it has huge implications. For one, the connected cyber and real world would truly become the homo zappiens’ oyster. Next, the simple act of multi-player computer games, combined with simultaneous multi-party online chats and calls, can very quickly become platforms for collaborative and creative problem solving. Cyber tracks will blossom in this global playground giving new meanings to relationships, transform the human web as well as reorganise the way we work, live and play.”
“com to get to know their neighbours, organise activities and provide useful information and tips ranging from renovation to neighbourhood safety. And there are many such active digital "kampungs" created by spirited residents. In fact the Straits Times noted that there are at least 10 such "kampungs " serving the various estates. The Government would be happy to support such initiatives and we welcome suggestions on how we can facilitate the process of getting such active community involvement. For a start, the digital "kampungs " can make use of the common map platform to provide map-based services when the platform is ready. This is indeed a good example of the type of collaboration under the Government-With-You approach that we would like to undertake. As regards the question on Social Enterprises, I would like to confirm that we would continue to study the different forms and to see how best we can promote social entrepreneurship here.”
“Sir, I want to thank the Minister for distributing this which I think it is a very good example of how the private sector and the public sector can work together. In conjunction with that, I would like to also get her comments on my suggestion during the main Budget speech on the "Wiki Me" idea which is really a seamless collaboration between the public sector and the people sector. Next, I would also like to seek clarifications from the Minister, first, by thanking her for her support for the SE sector. And I agree with her that many of the SEs are relatively small at this moment. But I wonder if it is a chicken-and-egg question, given that there are a lot of very good, potentially big SEs, that are actually chopped off by the lack of access to finance at the moment. In the past few years, more than 200 SEs have been established in Singapore and more are coming on-stream. Last but not least, on the IPC's tax incentives that are available for charities, the point here really is that most SEs seek double bottomline which means financial sustainability as well as social returns. And because of that, many of them do not want to establish themselves as charities because charities are inherently a handout approach. They want a hand-up approach. By asking them to apply for charity status so that they can qualify for the 250% tax incentive, it would actually be a "slap in their faces". 5.00 pm I wonder if the Minister could consider studying the examples that are given and also think about what could be adapted to suit the local context. Mrs Lim Hwee Hua: Sir, indeed the Wiki-Me could be a useful initiative to build community self-help and bonding. In fact, we note that today some 8,000 residents in Sengkang are already turning to sengkang.”
“Only then, can we build a more inclusive society and have more inclusive growth. Pro-business Government processes”
“To argue that therefore SEs should be subject to the same rules as private sector is to say that perhaps R&Ds too which are good for the long-term socio-economic growth should also not enjoy any financial incentives or tax advantage. In UK, social enterprises are supported with Community Interest Companies (CIC) which carries an asset lock and a community interest test. These funds are empowered with a 5% Community Investment Tax Relief (CITR) given to companies who invest in the Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs), which in turn invest in community development organisations and projects. CICs are limited by shares, but have the option of issuing shares that pay dividend to investors. In so doing, investors can look forward to financial returns as well as motivate the staff to do well. To protect the asset lock, the dividend to private investors is subject to a cap. In US, low profitability limited liability company (L3C) was introduced in 2008, as a profit generating entity with a social mission as its primary objective. It builds on the Programme Related Investment (PRI) scheme to tap on the potential US$6 trillion going to charities. Both schemes direct good money to high impact, sustainable organisations to solve social concerns and encourage sector growth. Match funding is another concept that is worth exploring as catalyst to fuel philanthropic dollars. Sir, what do Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, Jack Ma and Andrew Carnegie have in common? They are all believers in social entrepreneurship and strategic philanthropy. If Singapore is to benefit from the rise of Asian wealth and philanthropy and to develop ourselves as a philanthropy hub, the Government would need to play a more proactive role in developing funds for social concerns.”