Saktiandi Supaat
Singapore
“I have two supplementary questions. For my Parliamentary Questions that the Senior Minister of State answered earlier, I thank him for answering them because those are questions that my dialect-speaking seniors in Toa Payoh East and their families have raised to me.”
“As the Review Group has recognised, there is no "silver bullet", a holistic ecosystem-wide approach is required. The implementation of these recommendations appears to have been phased, with announcements across February, July and November 2025.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Three questions. First, given that the Section 301 actions can sometimes be broad-based, how is Singapore engaging with our US counterparts to ensure that our firms are not inadvertently affected by measures aimed at other economies?”
“Many of them do not openly express their difficulties. This is why social and emotional support must go beyond the occasional event. It must be sustained, trusted and easily accessible.”
“Would the Government consider developing a National Master Trades Accreditation framework – a national tiered certification that recognises advanced trade mastery, similar to chartered professionals in other sectors and create a new avenue for career switchers and career transition for segments of our workforce?”
“When the scheme is implemented in 2028, how will the Ministry measure success in terms of participation rates, risk-adjusted returns and improvements in retirement adequacy outcomes for CPF members?”
The complete record
Every one of 992 lines we hold for Saktiandi Supaat, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 1 of 20.
“I have two supplementary questions. For my Parliamentary Questions that the Senior Minister of State answered earlier, I thank him for answering them because those are questions that my dialect-speaking seniors in Toa Payoh East and their families have raised to me. My first supplementary question is: as Singapore's population ages, does the Government regard original language Chinese dialect films as supporting active ageing, social inclusion and in particular, inter-generational bonding? If so, how is this reflected in IMDA's policy? The second supplementary question is: has IMDA assessed audience demand for original language Chinese dialect films, particularly among seniors and younger Singaporeans, and if not, will such an assessment inform any future policy review?”
“What safeguards are in place to protect, in particular, seniors from scams or financial exploitation during this transition? Even broad contours would help provide reassurance. Eighth, market behaviour and outcomes. Sir, I would also like to understand how members are responding. Could the Minister share how many SDS holders have sold their shares since the announcement and how many have withdrawn proceeds in cash versus retaining them within CPF? This will help us better assess behavioural outcomes. Sir, lastly, ensuring policies benefit the many. Sir, this Bill also raises a broader principle and I think this is the most important point to me in my speech. When designing policies, we must ensure that they do not result in windfall gains for a narrow group while the majority do not benefit. Singapore's approach has been, use market mechanisms for efficiency while ensuring broad-based participation and inclusion. This balance is critical not just for economic outcomes, but for maintaining trust and fairness in our system. Sir, this Bill is a sensible and timely amendment. It modernises a legacy scheme and gives members greater control over their assets. But its success will depend on clear communication, strong safeguards and ensuring that all Singaporeans, especially those less familiar with such matters, are able to benefit. More importantly, it prompts us to think about how future policies can continue to enable Singaporeans to share meaningfully in our nation's growth. With these considerations, I support the Bill.”
“Sir, if I may, I would like to highlight three practical implementation areas, together with one point on timelines. First, on those who may be unaware. There may be individuals who do not respond to letters or may not even realise they still hold these shares. Could the Minister share how many SDS holders have not engaged with outreach efforts so far and what additional measures are being taken to reach those who may be unaware of their holdings? Additional touchpoints, such as Singpass notifications or CPF statements, may help ensure no one is left out. Second, on ensuring real understanding. These are not simple concepts. Could the Minister elaborate on how the Government is ensuring that key concepts are truly understood, beyond translation into different languages? Understanding is not just about language. It is about making the unfamiliar, familiar. Third, on behavioural inertia. The default option is to do nothing. Has the Government assessed whether this leads to optimal outcomes or whether some form of guidance or simple decision frameworks could help members make some informed choices? Sixth, Mr Speaker, timeline and flexibility. Sir, on timing. How long do SDS holders have to decide whether to sell or keep their shares? If they choose not to act now, can they still do so next year or later without losing flexibility? And after the transfer, will they continue to have full flexibility to hold or sell their shares at any time? Clarity on this will be important as many members may prefer to take time before making a decision. Seventh, Sir, safeguards and scams. Many Members have shared this. I will just keep it short. Sir, with greater flexibility also comes greater risk.”
“As the SDS were issued back in 1993 and 1996, SDS holders may be younger than the age of 55. What is the reason for not applying the general rule that assets in the CPF system can only be withdrawn after the member has set aside the Full Retirement Sum at age 55? Following the outbreak of the conflict in the Middle East, the increase in prices and in overall uncertainty exacerbating my concern over the retirement adequacy of Singaporeans. What is the policy rationale for this, especially for members below age 55? In today's uncertain global environment, this could have implications for retirement adequacy, which remains an important concern. More importantly, does this risk sending an unintended signal for holders to sell rather than hold? Since the First Reading of this Bill, the news headlines have been dominated by articles analysing whether individual SDS holders should sell or keep hold of their shares. Should we be concerned with the market signals that are being sent out by this present Bill? What discussions has the Government held with Singtel in that regard? Fourth, ensuring no one is left behind. Sir, beyond policy design, execution will be critical, especially since many SDS holders are older. Allow me to speak briefly in Malay. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, a large proportion of SDS shareholders are seniors. For them, these changes may be hard to understand. We must ensure that no one is left behind. Information must be clear, easy to understand and delivered through appropriate channels – including face-to-face outreach. What matters most is that every citizen is able to make a confident and informed decision. (In English): Fifth, Sir, practical implementation points.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill has a relatively narrow purpose – to transfer Singtel SDS from the CPF Board to the direct ownership of individual Singaporean holders. I support the Bill, but I have a few clarifications and suggestions. First, giving Singaporeans a stake in growth. Sir, the SDS scheme has been an extraordinary success story. It gave more than 600,000 – in fact, about 615,000 Singaporeans today – a direct equity stake in our nation's economic growth. For many, the value of these shares has increased several-fold over time, even before accounting for dividends and loyalty shares. This was not just a financial scheme; it reflected a broader principle – that Singaporeans should have a stake in Singapore's success. That principle remains relevant today. So, I would like to ask, first, why have we not seen much more initiatives since then? And as we invest in new growth areas, such as AI, digital infrastructure and emerging sectors, will there be opportunities for Singaporeans to participate in these national growth engines? Second, the rationale for the current change. Sir, I welcome the move to transfer these shares to individual ownership. It simplifies the structure and gives members direct control over their assets. However, I would like to seek clarification. First, what triggered the need for this transfer at this point in time? Were there specific limitations or inefficiencies in the previous trustee arrangement? For those without CDP accounts, how many SDS holders fall into this group? What will be the practical experience for them under the designated accounts? Third, waiver of withdrawal conditions. Sir, I also note that withdrawal conditions have been waived, allowing proceeds to be taken out in cash.”
“As the Review Group has recognised, there is no "silver bullet", a holistic ecosystem-wide approach is required. The implementation of these recommendations appears to have been phased, with announcements across February, July and November 2025. Now that the final report has been published, will there be a more structured and coordinated roadmap for implementation? Are we seeing measurable outcomes from the earlier initiatives and what review timelines are in place to refine or recalibrate policies? Finally, as we strengthen our capital markets and attract global listings, how will the Government ensure that these reforms translate into tangible opportunities for Singaporean investors and market participants, not just in attracting listings, but in deepening liquidity, research, intermediation and broader participation? In other words, a bit more other than what Minister Chee has already alluded to earlier in his opening speech. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding the clarifications sought, I support the Bill.”
“It broadens access and allows more inclusive participation, which is positive. However, at early stages, information is still evolving, disclosures are not finalised and retail investors may be more susceptible to sentiment or incomplete narratives. The question I have is: how will MAS ensure that retail investors are not unduly influenced by preliminary or incomplete information? And will there be enhanced investor education or disclosure safeguards to help retail investors better understand the limitations of such early-stage information? Next, Mr Deputy Speaker, it is on Sponsored Depositary Receipts (SDRs). The clarification on SDRs is a sensible and important step. By placing responsibility on the issuer of the underlying securities, the Bill aligns legal accountability with economic substance and reduces ambiguity for investors. That said, I would like to better understand how MAS intends to operationalise this in practice. How will MAS ensure that disclosure standards for SDRs remain fully aligned with those expected of primary listings, so that investors are not exposed to uneven information standards? Further, given the cross-border nature of such instruments, how will MAS ensure effective enforcement and accountability where the underlying issuer is based overseas? Will there be sufficient safeguards to ensure that Singapore investors have clear avenues of recourse in the event of misconduct or disclosure failures? And does MAS see SDRs as a transitional pathway towards fuller listings, or as a parallel structure that could grow in significance over time? Mr Deputy Speaker, ultimately, the GLB is but one of many recommendations by the Equities Market Review Group.”
“As we expand such cross-border arrangements, how will MAS guard against regulatory arbitrage, where issuers may structure offerings to benefit from the most lenient aspects of different jurisdictions, and ensure that our standards of disclosure, governance and enforcement are not diluted over time? Mr Deputy Speaker, while the Bill would enable MAS to make regulations to streamline procedures and allow issuers to use the same offer information and timelines to achieve simultaneous listings, the detailed regulations will be pivotal to the success of such arrangements. Is there a timeline by which such regulations will be ready, so that the dual listing bridge can be operational? I would commend the explicit power under the new section 309G(2) to incorporate foreign securities laws by reference. This reduces administrative burden and allows us to leverage established regulatory frameworks. However, may I clarify whether foreign precedents and case law would guide the interpretation of these provisions locally, or whether Singapore will retain full autonomy in applying these rules within our own legal context? There is also the issue of compatibility with broader legal frameworks. For instance, the US market is supported in part by class action mechanisms that enable investor recourse, which are less developed in Singapore. Will we be reviewing such areas as part of strengthening investor protection, in line with the Equities Market Review Group's recommendations? Related to this, in cases involving cross-border misconduct, where key management, assets or evidence may be located overseas, how will MAS ensure effective enforcement and accountability? The move to allow earlier engagement with investors, including retail investors, is a notable shift too.”
“If there has not been firm commitments or interest by companies to come onboard, what specific publicity avenues are being planned so that we can attract issuers to utilise this new mechanism? Would there be further incentives to stimulate issuer interest? More broadly, beyond the number of listings, how will MAS assess whether dual listings will translate into sustained liquidity and meaningful price discovery in Singapore, rather than trading activity gravitating primarily to the larger overseas market? I hear Minister Chee's opening remarks just now and he has alluded to the ancillary services benefiting and others, but this is a more specific question in terms of price discovery and sustained liquidity. Next, the new Part 13A has also been drawn up in a non-exhaustive manner, as MAS may prescribe other tie-ups with overseas exchanges as Dual Listing Boards. One essential safeguard is that the overseas exchange must operate in a jurisdiction whose securities laws are consistent with IOSCO principles. Can the Minister clarify if the SGX-Nasdaq tie-up is intended as a pilot exercise, whose outcomes will be assessed before further dual listing arrangements are pursued? Or are we already in advanced discussions with other exchanges to broaden this network? Next question is whether the proposed legislative provisions is sufficiently flexible to facilitate listings across three or more exchanges in future, for example, a triple listing involving SGX, Nasdaq and an European exchange, or would further legislative amendments be required?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, first, I would like to declare that I am working in a foreign bank in Singapore. Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill primarily seeks to introduce the GLB for new IPO candidates and existing Nasdaq-listed issuers to simultaneously list on SGX and Nasdaq Global Select Market (Nasdaq GSM). It is part of the suite of recommendations by the Equities Market Review Group, chaired by Minister Chee Hong Tat, in its final report issued in November 2025. The recommendations are a timely intervention to revitalise our equities market by capitalising on our strengths in connectivity and a high starting base of robust regulation. I, therefore, speak in support of the Bill. It has been announced that the dual listing bridge is targeting companies in Asia with market capitalisation of $2 billion and above to simultaneously access growth capital and liquidity across the US and Asia. This can allow us to capture smaller- and mid-sized enterprises which are not well served by the US markets alone, as those markets are driven by mega-cap firms. Just as a sample size, may I ask the Minister how many Asian companies had a market capitalisation of at least $2 billion in each of the last 10 years? By way of illustration, what are some examples of the "smaller- and mid-sized enterprises" that we are looking to attract? May I ask also: have there been engagements with specific companies to come onboard the SGX-Nasdaq dual listing bridge once it goes "live"? Being a novel mechanism, attracting notable companies to list as "poster child" listings could have a significant effect in encouraging issuer and investor interest.”
“This shows that AI can be a catalyst for social mobility – if we ensure that access and opportunity are widely shared. But not everyone starts from the same point. Some have access, a supportive environment and the time to learn. Others face constraints – whether in terms of time, family responsibilities, or self-confidence. That is why our approach must be inclusive. Training must be accessible, relevant and practical, so that every individual has the opportunity to adapt and progress alongside these changes. Ultimately, success in the AI economy is not measured by technology alone, but by how well we ensure that every citizen can move forward with confidence and hope. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, AI will bring both disruption and opportunity. If managed well, it can raise productivity and expand opportunities for all. But if left unmanaged, it can widen inequality. We must ensure that AI drives not just growth, but inclusive growth. If we get this right, AI will not divide our workforce, it will strengthen it. And in doing so, we will renew this compact for AI-enabled growth. One where every Singaporean, whether working with code or with their hands, has a place and a role and a future in our economy. I wholeheartedly support this Motion, Mr Speaker.”
“At Persatuan Ulama dan Guru-Guru Agama Islam Singapura (PERGAS), AI training equips asatizah with digital skills through programmes such as Diversity-driven Upskilling for Asatizah, the AI Accelerator Challenge, and AI for Asatizah Entrepreneurs. At the Association of Muslim Professionals, for working professionals, the "Learning Circles: All About GenAI" programme will be held this month. It will explore how generative AI is reshaping the way we work and how professionals can begin applying it meaningfully in their daily roles. At MENDAKI, the MENDAKI Achievement Programme, or MAP, now uses AI tools such as Khanmigo and KiteSense Luminee to enhance the learning outcomes of students from less privileged backgrounds. This reflects a commitment to ensuring that technological progress serves as a catalyst for social mobility and inclusive growth within our community. Mr Abdul Kadir bin Abdul Rahman, a veteran educator in science and mathematics, is a fine example of how three decades of deep experience can be combined with present-day innovation. Now a trainer in the MAP programme, he is a strong advocate for using AI technology to improve learning quality. He has noted that one significant change is students' increased willingness to ask questions – fostering a more interactive and supportive learning environment. In addition, MENDAKI's Langkah Digital initiative provides AI-Ready workshops, hands-on training and upskilling programmes to help individuals understand and apply AI in their lives and work. MENDAKI has partnered with institutions, such as SUTD, opening up opportunities in AI, design and application-based learning – so that our community is not merely a consumer of technology, but capable of mastering it.”
“PMETs in particular are beginning to ask: are my skills still relevant? Can I adapt to these changes? The fundamental question is: Does this AI economy have a place for me, or will I be left behind? As co-chair of the Economic Resilience Committee alongside Dr Wan Rizal, our focus is clear – to build and strengthen the economic resilience of our community by embracing the AI transition with openness and readiness. We want growth that creates opportunities and empowers workers, not replaces them. We will assess the implications of the economic shifts that the Economic Strategy Review Committee will outline, identify new sectors and growth opportunities and understand how we can encourage broader participation from the Malay/Muslim community in these areas. At the same time, we are developing targeted strategies to strengthen community involvement in economic transformation initiatives, so that participation can be deepened across all segments – from youth to professionals and entrepreneurs. Within the Malay/Muslim community, this work has already begun and must be strengthened through the M³, now known as M³+. Allow me to share some examples of efforts being undertaken by Malay/Muslim institutions to raise AI literacy among our community. We are seeing encouraging initiatives. At Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS) (or Islamic Religious Council of Singapore) and the mosques, AI literacy programmes help the community understand the responsible use of technology. The IftaSG initiative uses AI for Fatwa research. Programmes encouraging thoughtful AI integration have also been made available to asatizah, to enable richer and more meaningful Islamic learning experiences.”
“While it can be on a voluntary "opt in" basis, like BCA's Green Mark Certification Scheme or TAFEP's Fair Employment Badge, the accreditation can be tied to certain other benefits or quotas to incentivise companies to come forward. Like existing voluntary schemes, this could be linked to incentives to encourage broader participation. Fourth, we must support those with traditional employers, tradesmen, lower-wage workers and platform workers. AI can act as a personal assistant, enhancing productivity and income. For example, tradesmen can use AI tools to generate quotations, invoices and customer responses; lower-wage workers can use AI for scheduling and financial planning; and platform workers can optimise routes and jobs across platforms, increasing autonomy. Is there scope for the Government to invest in such tools and provide time-limited access, so these workers can experience their practical benefits? Finally, we must recognise that not all workers have equal capacity to adapt to AI. Time constraints, caregiving responsibilities and life-stage challenges affect participation in training. We should move forward towards flexible learning; integrate training into work; and strengthen cross-sector mobility. This ensures our workforce remains agile, mobile and inclusive. Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to now to speak in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] We want every worker to receive the support they need to upskill and not be left behind as AI continues to progress. Through my interactions with Malay/Muslim workers, many see AI as an opportunity, but also worry that they cannot keep pace with this rapid technological advancement. This concern is valid. AI is transforming the way we work.”
“For underserved Malay/Muslim workers, as an early step, MENDAKI and NTUC's e2i jointly piloted Langkah Digital AI workshops in community settings, with plans to scale further this year; and I plan to attend some of these workshops. Taken together, these deliberate employment-linked interventions will help to ensure that productivity gains from AI do not result in jobless growth, but instead, equip Singaporeans, across life stages, to adapt, remain employable and progress with confidence, supported by NTUC, its partners and the wider Labour Movement. So, I encourage our community to take advantage of these initiatives to upskill. Second, we must focus on the infrastructure that enables AI. Singapore has invested in strong digital rails. Systems, such as Singpass, already allow secure transactions, including legally binding processes, such as the Lasting Power of Attorney. The next step is to enhance interoperability through application programming interfaces (APIs), so more services can be integrated seamlessly. When services are integrated, AI can significantly enhance efficiency and user experience. At the same time, we must calibrate data-sharing frameworks and safe harbours, so that data can be used responsibly without stifling innovation. Third, we must ensure employers redesign workflows to embed AI meaningfully. Member Mark Lee has mentioned that. Training alone is not sufficient. While the Enterprise Workforce Transformation Package provides useful support, it tends to reach large firms that are already inclined to transform. We need to go further. One possibility is to launch an "AI Bilingual" accreditation, for employers and not just for workers and jobseekers.”
“Against this backdrop, I would also like to acknowledge the Government's efforts to support workers through an AI-shaped economy, with employment remaining the central outcome and address job anxieties. As such, it is important to recognise, for example, that employment outcomes for the Malay/Muslim community under M³ and Focus Area 4 (FA4) have been delivered at both scale and through targeted support. Between 2022 and 2025, Workforce Singapore and NTUC's Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) assisted over 29,000 Malay/Muslim jobseekers, with more than 19,000 placed into jobs. At the same time, through community-based pathways under M³ and FA4, over 6,000 jobseekers were engaged, with more than 500 securing employment, including those requiring more sustained support. This reflects both the breadth of our national employment system and the depth of our community-anchored interventions. Building on this, FA4 workstreams will sharpen their focus on supporting workers through an AI-shaped economy, with employment remaining the central outcome. I am glad that NTUC will work closely with MENDAKI through NTUC's e2i to strengthen job transitions, particularly for young adults transiting from campus to career, who may be entering the workforce amid heightened uncertainty about job relevance and AI-driven displacement. This includes strengthening early career pathways by partnering IHLs and integrating engagements with e2i's career services, job matching and employer networks, so that fresh graduates are better prepared for a changing labour market.”
“While I welcome the provision of temporary access through Government and NTUC initiatives, we must think ahead about what happens after this initial phase of subscriptions. Many of the more capable AI tools require ongoing subscriptions. Over time, this may create a divide between those who can afford to use these tools regularly and those who cannot. If left unaddressed, we risk creating a new form of inequality between AI "haves" and "have-nots". Because access to AI tools directly affects productivity, learning and income potential, unequal access will translate into unequal outcomes. We should therefore consider how to ensure sustained and affordable access, especially for lower-income workers, freelancers, tradespersons and small businesses. Possible approaches include a baseline level of subsidised access, similar to digital connectivity, tiered or group-based pricing with industry partners, shared access through community centres, libraries and training hubs, and ensuring employers receiving AI support also extend access to workers. Mr Speaker, Sir, if AI is to be a force for inclusive growth, access cannot be a privilege, it must be broadly shared. And in the digital age, access to AI may become as fundamental as access to the Internet. We must ensure no Singaporean is priced out of that future. One way to drive adoption is for the Government to be the "first customer" of useful AI tools and to mitigate AI transition-related concerns. AI-enabled systems can provide faster and more practical responses to citizens navigating Government services. As AI systems consistently deliver useful outcomes and quick advice to Singaporeans, confidence in AI and AI adoption will grow.”
“In particular, we should consider whether we need Industry Training Continuity Maps alongside our ITMs, to ensure that even as AI takes over more routine tasks, we continue to sustain a strong pipeline of deeply skilled human workers especially in roles where mastery, judgement and hands-on expertise cannot be replaced. Today, this is less visible in skilled trades. This is why I have also proposed a National Master Trades Accreditation framework during the last Committee of Supply, to recognise progression, reward deep skills and integrate AI competencies. If we get this right, AI will not hollow out middle-skilled jobs, it will elevate them. This will also help elevate further the skilled graduates from our Institutes of Technical Education (ITEs) and polytechnics. Mr Speaker, Sir, given the immense opportunities and risks, AI as a growth engine requires sound policies that benefit workers and citizens. Countries, such as the United Arab Emirates and Finland, have adopted coordinated national AI strategies combining government leadership, enterprise adoption and workforce development. Here in Singapore, we have taken important steps. Budget 2026 announced the establishment of a National AI Council led by Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, alongside incentives for businesses through the Enterprise Innovation Scheme and support for workers via SkillsFuture and the TechSkills Accelerator. I would like to offer some suggestions to equip workers and enterprises more effectively, so that no worker is left behind. First, we must normalise AI as a way of life. We must go beyond training pathways and time-limited access to AI tools.”
“Routine clerical and processing roles are most exposed, while hiring is shifting towards higher-skilled roles in data, AI, cybersecurity and governance. At the same time, regulation is sustaining demand for oversight roles in risk, compliance and audit. But crucially, more complex work still requires human judgement. Handling nuanced customer issues, managing relationships and making judgement calls cannot be easily automated. As a result, many roles are not disappearing but evolving. For example, credit officers are moving towards interpreting and oversight while contact centre roles are shifting towards experiential, escalation and trust-building. So, what we are seeing is not wholesale job replacement, but a reconfiguration of tasks within jobs. Mr Speaker, Sir, while much of the AI discussion focuses on PMETs, we must not overlook skilled tradespersons and our blue-collared workers. Our electricians, technicians and maintenance workers are essential. AI cannot repair lifts or maintain MRT systems on its own. As our economy becomes more digital, these roles will become more sophisticated, not less. They are, in fact, high-mastery professions. If AI raises the premium on skills, we must also raise how we recognise mastery. But beyond recognition, we must also rethink how mastery is built. As AI reshapes how work is performed, we must also rethink how skills are transmitted. Today, many of our industry transformation maps (ITMs) guide sectoral growth and workforce development. But they were largely designed for a pre-AI world. There may be merit in updating these frameworks to explicitly account for how AI is changing apprenticeship and on-the-job training pathways. This issue has been raised in this House before and it deserves renewed attention.”
“Besides the redistribution measures that we have implemented through tax measures and targeted assistance, we must cultivate a sustained mindset to ensure AI-enabled growth is inclusive. Usage of AI has raised concerns for many workers. For example, will AI take away my job? Will it lead to jobless growth? Based on the NTUC's survey on economic sentiments in Singapore, which it conducts yearly, the fear that AI would replace their job or current role is more pronounced for professionals, managers and technicians (PMETs) and entry-level jobseekers. For non-PMEs and lower-wage workers, the lower level of concern could be because they do not use AI tools as extensively and are unaware of how AI would impact their job opportunities and not because there is no AI-disruption risk. These concerns are reinforced by news of job restructuring globally, as well as uneven adoption of AI across sectors and occupations. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me illustrate this unevenness with a concrete example from our own financial sector, of which I am working in. In banking here, AI is no longer emerging, it is already deeply embedded and a core driver of productivity. Across the sector, our local banks are deploying automation in operations and customer servicing, particularly in labour-intensive and repeatable processes. These are not experimental use cases; they are transforming how work is done across the value chain. AI is now used in operations, such as processing, settlements and compliance, and in credit evaluation through machine learning models that support faster and more consistent underwriting. It is even beginning — well, I would not say beginning; it is already playing a bigger role in hiring, particularly in initial screening. But the impact is not uniform.”
“Mr Speaker, before I begin, I would like to declare that I am working in a bank, a financial institution in Singapore. I am also an advisor to the Union of Power and Gas Employees (UPAGE) and the Logistics and Supply Chain Union (SCEU). Mr Speaker, I would like to thank, foremost, the Secretary-General of NTUC and Member, Mr Ng Chee Meng, for moving this important Motion and for setting out the need for a new compact for AI-enabled growth, one that keeps workers at the centre of our transformation, anchored in fairness, resilience and opportunity for all. I will focus on how we can build a more inclusive AI economy, where growth is not only strong, but broadly shared. AI is no longer emerging; it is already reshaping how we work and live. Beyond well-known AI tools, I saw this first-hand during engagements with the UPAGE, SCEU and, recently, Manpower Government Parliamentary Committee's learning journeys to SMRT, NTUC Finest at Punggol and Chye Thiam Maintenance Pte Ltd. In different sectors, power and gas, supply chain, transport, retail, food and beverage (F&B), cleaning and facilities management, all of them embedding AI, autonomous vehicles (AVs) and robotics into workflows, raising productivity, creating new jobs and redesigning roles for existing workers. There is now a global race in AI innovation and adoption. And there is a growing belief that those economies and companies that move early and decisively will capture the greatest value. But Mr Speaker, Sir, as this House has consistently emphasised, economic success must be inclusive. Economic success is not just growth, but how widely its benefits are shared. Uneven growth is not a model Singapore should follow.”
“While our institutions have done well to update programmes periodically, there may be scope to move towards a more dynamic and iterative model of curriculum design. For instance, could the Minister elaborate on whether SWDA will play a more active role in feeding real-time industry insights into curriculum development, so that the course content, modules and skill pathways can be refreshed more frequently and responsively? This would help, importantly, ensure that our students graduate not just with qualifications, but with skills that are immediately relevant and adaptable to the needs of employers and are not redundant in five years. In this regard, will there be structured mechanisms for closer and more continuous engagement between industry, training providers and MOE, so that we can better anticipate skills demand rather than respond to it after the fact? Mr Speaker, in conclusion, this move to consolidate our efforts to uplift our training, career and employment services ecosystem holistically is welcome. Amidst rapid technological advancements, such as AI and geopolitical shifts that are getting more uncertain and unpredictable, change is the only constant. We must continue to keep our world-leading and maturing workforce nimble, so that we can capitalise on the opportunities that spring up and capture value and good jobs for Singaporeans today and tomorrow and for our students still in school, in our IHLs, at the moment. Mr Speaker, Sir, notwithstanding the clarifications sought, I support the Bill.”
“In addition, will there be mechanisms beyond Board representation, such as advisory panels or sector-specific councils, to systematically capture and incorporate these industry insights into policy design and programme implementation? For public servants that are currently serving under SSG and WSG, may I ask how would their roles be restructured or reorganised after the merger? While clauses 69 and 70 of the Bill seek to transfer every SSG and WSG employee to the new SWDA and present their employment terms, I do not suppose the intention is for every such employee to retain their current portfolios in the new and enhanced SWDA. The Prime Minister's Budget 2026 speech also announced that the new SWDA will be jointly overseen by the MOM and the MOE, some of the Members before me have already mentioned this. When the proposed WSDA Bill refers to "Minister" without specifying his/her portfolio, for example at clauses 1, 4 and 7, does that refer to the Minister for Manpower or the Minister for Education? It may be helpful to have a simple, graphical representation of the allocation of Ministerial responsibility, so that it is clear to members of the public, or even us Members of Parliament, on who we should be raising specific SWDA-related issues to. Mr Speaker, Sir, building on the point about the joint oversight by MOM and MOE, I would like to seek clarification on how SWDA will work more closely with our ITEs, polytechnics and universities to ensure that curricula remain aligned with rapidly evolving industry needs. Today, the pace of change in areas, such as AI, advanced manufacturing and digital services, is accelerating. Skills that are relevant today may become outdated within just a few years.”
“Beyond organisational structure, the effectiveness of the SWDA will ultimately depend on how quickly it can translate industry signals into skills development and training outcomes. Clause 9 of the Bill provides that the new SWDA will consist of seven to 15 members. What is the role of these members and what kind of knowledge, skills and experience would these members be expected to possess? Would this be a tripartite group in and of itself, or is it expected that the new SWDA will continually engage with and partner NTUC and the Singapore National Employers' Federation (SNEF) in devising and executing its plans? How is the relationship between the new SWDA, NTUC and SNEF expected to be like on a working level? Could the Minister also elaborate on the intended composition of the SWDA Board and the types of knowledge, skills and experience that these members are expected to bring? Given the fast-changing nature of the global economy and labour market, it would be useful to understand whether there will be strong representation from the private sector, particularly senior HR practitioners and business leaders at the managing director level and above from multinational corporations and leading local enterprises. Such practitioners are often at the frontline of hiring, skills transformation and workforce planning, and are therefore well-placed to provide timely insights into emerging skills gaps and evolving job roles. Their perspectives could help ensure that SWDA remains closely attuned to real-world industry developments and is able to respond more quickly to shifts in demand.”
“More fundamentally, this brings up the question of how we have been measuring the success of our skills and jobs transformation efforts? What metrics are being used? A few years down the road, what objective and subjective indicators can we rely upon to tell us whether the SWDA has been a true force multiplier, or merely an administrative combination of SSG and WSG with no real value add to outcomes? Second, costs and drawbacks of the merger. There may be some perception that the merger is unnecessary wastage since we had split the WDA to create SSG and WSG in 2016, and now we are bridging it under one umbrella agency again. From my reading of the Hansard, I do not think there is any inconsistency between the rationale behind creating SSG to create better synergies with MOE and education institutions, and the SWDA's objective of a unified strategy for the training, career and employment services ecosystem. But perhaps the Minister could help to assuage any such concerns. What are the estimated costs of bringing the SSG and WSG together as one SWDA? I expect that some costs will need to be expended for rebranding, including on materials and collaterals. In addition, has there been any assessment of the costs of the increased size of the organisation, along with any associated externalities? Notwithstanding the vesting provisions at clause 68 of the Bill, I presume there will also be administrative costs in reflecting changes to the bank accounts, property and funds held by the respective agencies. Third, operational issues. Finally, my last group of clarifications relate to operational issues of the new SWDA.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, it is essential that the skills upgrading of our workers is more closely mapped to our economic needs and there are good jobs for our workers. In that regard, I therefore support the Bill to merge and form the SWDA, but I have some clarifications on some of the underlying principles, perceptions and operational issues. First, merger as a force multiplier. There is an obvious synergy between the educational and training work that is currently spearheaded by SSG, and the workforce design and transformation that is supported by WSG. After all, both agencies were restructured out of the WDA that was set up in 2003 to focus on CET to mitigate against job displacement of Singaporeans. Even after they were housed under different Agencies, SSG and WSG, they collaborate to work together to build a robust and integrated jobs and skills ecosystem. So, when we look at the functions of the new SWDA under clause 5 of the Bill, what are the new thrusts that go beyond the existing functions in the SkillsFuture Singapore Agency Act 2016 and in the Workforce Singapore Agency Act 2003? It would be helpful for Singaporeans to understand that this is not merely a bureaucratic combination, but a transformational change where one plus one gives you more than two. Post-merger, how would existing initiatives and programmes be continued and/or enhanced? This is especially with the skills and jobs initiatives and workgroups that have only been rolled out in the past 12 months or so, such as AfA-ACES and the Tripartite Workgroup on Human Capital Capability Development (TWG-HC). May I ask whether the Minister can share how the continuity of these initiatives, programmes and workgroups will or will not be affected by the establishment of SWDA?”
“As I have stated earlier, inflation pass-through is of utmost importance.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have three clarifications related to the first set of questions, Mr Speaker. My first supplementary question: Singapore is a price-taker. I am very concerned about inflation pass-through. With the Middle East situation, there are unknowns. I would like to ask the committee and Government for their view about the risk of export restrictions of energy supplied by our partners, especially in the region. Second, can the Government share its view on food resilience, especially with some concerns about seafood and fish supply, with the risk that diesel shortages for fishermen in the region may affect supply? The concern is whether seafood is regarded also as an essential in the Government's definition. Third, I noticed that our measures, as the Senior Minister of State has shared earlier, are calibrated in some ways. For now, it looks very sound. It is also a testament to our long-term focus in terms of macro policy mix. My question is, our macro policy mix to address this supply shock is very clear, but what is the likelihood of the inflation pass-through continuing into 2027 and even into 2028, and if there is a need for off-Budget measures where further tranches are needed? I think the Senior Minister of State mentioned there is always a possibility and ability to do that, but what is the possibility of off-Budget measures coming? Lastly, on our ability to maintain our strong Singapore dollar policy to mitigate imported inflation. That has always been the case, but I think going forward, I am aware that MAS will be releasing its policy statement in April later on. But I think it is very important for us to continue to maintain our strong Singapore dollar policy to control inflation pass-through.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. Three questions. First, given that the Section 301 actions can sometimes be broad-based, how is Singapore engaging with our US counterparts to ensure that our firms are not inadvertently affected by measures aimed at other economies? The second clarification is, given Singapore's role as a regional base for multinational corporations, has the Government observed any early shifts in investment decisions or supply chain strategies arising from these developments? And lastly, beyond tariffs, could the Minister of State comment whether firms in Singapore actually face increased compliance costs or increased administrative burdens arising from such investigations now or going forward? And how are we supporting them, possibly in the future, in navigating these complexities?”
“When I explored further, I found that this programme is not just about religion, but it also provides life guidance like taking care of one's health, and for caregivers and their family members, as well as how we can prepare for our golden years. I see it as a very good platform for us to extend our outreach. Therefore, as I mentioned, I have instructed MUIS and PA MESRA to look at how we can support this effort so that we can reach out to more members of our community and help them age gracefully. So I agree with what Mr Saktiandi said earlier, and we will expand this approach. I am very grateful to everyone who started this programme, because they started small, not knowing its potential, but we can see that it is able to generate interest as well as provide development opportunities for the seniors. I also heard about this programme from my wife. She told me her friends enjoyed attending it, getting support from the community. I have also heard about the one at Masjid Darul Ghufran and attended it, where I could see its very positive impact. So we will work hard to take care of our seniors.”
“As shared, the programme is spearheaded by Minister of State Rahayu "Langkah Digital" is another area where it gives us another opportunity to expand our outreach in a way that can help the community. I also am very heartened that not only the programmes done by MENDAKI are reaching out to the people, but the professional networks that we have developed over the years have really grown significantly. A few of us or all of us may have attended some of the programmes of the professional networks. I was very heartened. I attended one on the aviation sector. Professionals in the past were not there to be part of the engagement. Today, they are there and they provide the additional impetus, support. This also goes beyond funding. I think in the way we develop our community, we have to bring in as much resources as there are out there. Especially those who have done well, to come back, give back, and mentor and nurture and provide the impetus for each and every one of our children, even those who are still working, to have that aspiration to develop further. On the first point. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] On the first point, the Santunan Emas programme is a ground-up programme that is also holistic. But what is interesting about this programme is how it collaborates with organisations or agencies, like Agency for Integrated Care and NHG Health. When I heard about this programme, I received feedback that it is very engaging and sparked the interest of our seniors. They told me they want to hear religious sermons or words of encouragement from Ustaz Fatris, and I can see this is something very appealing.”
“Chairman, can I ask my first clarification in Malay? (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Chairman, caring for our elderly is not just about programmes – it is about strengthening values like respect, responsibility and compassion in our families and communities. So, I welcome the holistic approach the Minister described for helping our elderly. I would like to ask whether this programme's budget and resources can be given some kind of stimulus to cover infrastructure costs at mosques and other venues, because Singapore is ageing so rapidly that it is crucial we improve these facilities. Secondly, will the Santunan Emas assistance consider the caregivers in our community, especially the "sandwich generation"? (In English): The second clarification, Mr Chairman, the Minister mentioned about the MENDAKI Achievement Programme about helping AI exploration and robotics. I was wondering if the Minister can share a bit more, whether we can enhance and increase the budget and resources for MENDAKI, so that these efforts can be increased, especially when the Government, in this year's Budget, has been talking about AI Missions and AI Champions. So, whether within the Malay/Muslim community, we can get extra budget for this course as well? 2.30 pm Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. Relating to the second supplementary question about enrichment, if you look at the MENDAKI 2030 Workplan, you will see that there are elements of, not only about education, but about how we want to support workers on this journey of AI and preparing our community for the future.”
“Many of them do not openly express their difficulties. This is why social and emotional support must go beyond the occasional event. It must be sustained, trusted and easily accessible. First, how are we strengthening befriending programmes for seniors, peer support and community touchpoints so that seniors remain socially connected all year long? How can we bring back that "kampong spirit" amidst today's modern housing environment? Second, what can we do to support caregivers within the Malay/Muslim community – especially those in the "sandwich generation" balancing work and parental care? Are there accessible support networks and early intervention channels to prevent caregiver burnout? Third, aside from the number of programme attendees, what indicators do we use to measure actual impact – like reduced isolation, improved emotional wellbeing and stronger inter-generational engagement?”
“(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Chairman, part of our AI transformation strategy must ensure that our children and youth are equipped not only to use technology, but are also able to create value with it. In Toa Payoh recently, I met a Secondary 4 student who told me he was interested in AI. However, when asked further, he said he had never coded before and was not sure how to start. What he lacked was not aspiration, but exposure and guidance. First, how do we assess the effectiveness of efforts to strengthen foundations in literacy, numeracy and digital confidence – especially for Malay/Muslim children who may lack learning support at home? Second, how are programmes for Malay/Muslim youths aligned more closely with growth sectors – such as applied technology, advanced manufacturing and digital services – so that their participation truly opens pathways to good jobs? Finally, beyond participation numbers, what outcome indicators are we tracking – such as participant progress and converting industry training into permanent employment – to ensure lasting impact? Strengthening Support for Malay/Muslim Seniors (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Chairman, in our Malay/Muslim community, the family has always been the primary caregivers. Many of our seniors are supported by their children and grandchildren who provide companionship, financial help and daily assistance. But as family structures evolve and working lives become more demanding, we should ask how do we sustainably support our seniors' social and mental well-being? On the ground, we see seniors who are widowed and living alone, elderly parents who hesitate to burden their children, or caregivers quietly managing both work and eldercare responsibilities.”
“Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister of State for her answers. I have one supplementary question. Usually, after section 122, it usually proceeds with section 301 and 232 investigations, and the concern is whether bigger tariffs may come in later. So, the question I have is: given that sort of situation that section 122 is temporary and may be followed by further investigations or additional trade measures, as President Trump has indicated, to 15%, could the Minister of State elaborate on how the Government is preparing Singapore businesses for the possibility of more persistent tariffs or sector-specific measures? Which I have raised many times, my concerns about sector-specific tariffs or measures. And whether Singapore has a clear contingency playbook. I know the Minister of State has mentioned about the SERT and BizAdapt, which is very good, and I hope we can do even more to help our businesses. But the question is on a broad level, a macro level, whether Singapore has a clear contingency playbook should global trade conditions deteriorate further, and on top of that, the additional concern that we are facing out of Middle East, and with the Strait of Hormuz and other possibilities that may arise?”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman, for seeing my hand. Mr Chairman, I got three clarifications. One is with regard to Minister Tan's speech earlier about GRIT and OMIP. If Minister can actually share a bit more about the reception of GRIT from graduates thus far, I think Minister mentioned that there is room to expand the scheme in view of the increased uncertainty over the new tariffs and geopolitical tensions. Can Minister share a bit more about that? We already have 400 GRIT capacity. Whether there can be more that we can, or what is your view in terms of expanding beyond that 400? The second one is I am happy to hear just now about the Overseas Markets Immersion Programme. It is very important as Singapore tries to internationalise. Can Minister share a bit more about how much more we can do to create spaces for the Overseas Markets Immersion Programme? Second question is with regard to my question on the skilled trades. I hear Minister mentioned just now about the sectoral move to create the electronic or electrical trade framework. In my cut, I suggested to do a national master trade accreditation framework. Why not do that? Why not do that national rather than a specific sectoral, because I think we may be too slow if we do on a sectoral basis. I do not know, maybe can hear from Minister his view on that, given that the medium- to long-term manpower projections for critical skilled trades might be in need. The last question I have is in terms of the life-cycle investment scheme. I asked a question in my cut, whether the scheme will allow for flexibility in selecting target retirement dates as we extend working lives and members may retire later than age 65. Whether there is some flexibility in terms of that?”
“When the scheme is implemented in 2028, how will the Ministry measure success in terms of participation rates, risk-adjusted returns and improvements in retirement adequacy outcomes for CPF members? And given the long lead time to 2028, has the Ministry considered piloting or phasing in elements of the life-cycle investment approach earlier, so that members can begin benefiting from it sooner? Strengthening Career Health of Our Workers”
“While the glidepath structure, reducing risk as members age, is sensible in theory, we must ensure members understand that: first, returns are not guaranteed; second, market downturns can occur close to retirement; and third, a shorter runway limits recovery time. Communications, especially to older members must be careful, balanced and transparent. Since CPF already offers a risk-free interest baseline, how will CPF Board ensure that the trade-offs of each option is sufficiently explained against their potential upside? Will there be clear scenario illustrations or simple decision-support tools, such as prompts based on age, years to retirement and risk tolerance, to guide members through the three alternatives? Third, safeguards and governance. On product design, how will CPF Board calibrate the glidepath between growth and capital preservation? Will there be more than one glidepath option to reflect different risk appetites? The scheme also mentions phased liquidation before the target retirement date. How early will this begin? And how will liquidation be managed during periods of heightened market volatility? Will the scheme allow flexibility in selecting target retirement dates, as we extend working lives and members may retire later than 65? On fees, the objective is rightly to keep costs low and simple. Will there be an all-in fee cap, including management fees, platform costs and transaction expenses, so members see one transparent figure? How will providers be selected and what weight will be placed on long-term track record, risk management capability and operationalised resilience? Lastly, in his round-up speech, the Prime Minister did mention that the roll-out of the life-cycle investment option is slated for 2028.”
“Mr Chairman, I would like to declare that I was a member of the CPF Advisory Panel. Mr Chairman, every Singaporean deserves a secure and adequate retirement. In Budget 2026, the announced low-cost life-cycle investment scheme provides a new option to manage one's CPF funds. I support giving members more options, but I would like to emphasise three principles that should guide our design of the renewed system – complementarity, suitability and safeguards. First, complementarity. The new scheme must be clearly positioned as an additional option and not a replacement for CPF's risk-free interest framework. For many Singaporeans, especially older workers and those prioritising certainty, CPF's guaranteed interest remains highly attractive. CPFIS already exists for members who wish to actively invest. The new life-cycle scheme sits in between, for members who want some market exposure but prefer a professionally managed, automatically rebalancing portfolio. Our communications must allow all CPF members to appreciate the differences in the three options and to ensure that each option still serves the needs of a significant demographic of CPF members. Even with this new life-cycle scheme, we should continue to refine the CPFIS. The trends are worrying because the majority of CPFIS investors have been underperforming the CPF's risk-free interest rates since 2016 when the CPF Advisory Panel that I sat on studied this issue and first proposed the LRIS. Is this a result of the restricted products that can be invested in through CPFIS or some other reason? The second principle is suitability. CPF members are not homogeneous. A 30-year-old with a long investment runway has very different risk capacity from a 58-year-old approaching retirement.”
“Would the Government consider developing a National Master Trades Accreditation framework – a national tiered certification that recognises advanced trade mastery, similar to chartered professionals in other sectors and create a new avenue for career switchers and career transition for segments of our workforce? How is MOM working with IHLs and industry bodies to develop a clear and transparent trade career ladder with indicative wage benchmarks, so that progression from apprentice to senior specialist is clearly structured in responsibilities and in remuneration? 2.45 pm Support for Workers in a Changed World”
“Mr Chairman, in Toa Payoh recently I spoke to a lift technician servicing one of our older blocks. He shared that the systems today are far more complex than before. His job is no longer just mechanical repair, it requires interpreting system data, troubleshooting hybrid systems and ensuring safety standards are met. That is not low-skilled work but applied technical expertise. Even the most advanced AI systems cannot repair lifts in our Housing and Development Board (HDB) blocks, maintain our Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) trains and tracks or service precision manufacturing machinery all by itself. As we automate more processes, we need highly competent technicians who complement AI. We must invest adequately in skilled trades, so that we do not have high-end innovation without sufficient operational depth. Does the Ministry track medium- to long-term manpower projections for critical skilled trades, especially those supporting digital infrastructure and the green transition? Are we detecting any emerging gaps? From a wage and productivity perspective, if trade careers do not offer clear progression and competitive earnings, young Singaporeans would be discouraged from entering these sectors and local core would weaken over time. Are there already signs of wage compression in middle-skilled technical roles and how might this affect the attractiveness of these careers to Singaporeans? True trade mastery takes years of apprenticeship, repetition and accumulated experience, which ought to be rewarded with a good and stable living.”
“Instead of going straight away to say I seek leave to withdraw my amendment, I have to thank Deputy Prime Minister Gan, Minister Tan, Senior Minister of State Low Yen Ling, Minister of State Alvin and Minister of State Gan Siow Huang for answering all our cuts. There were about 21 cuts and 16 Members. But I also thank the Permanent Secretary of MTI and his team, because there were a lot of things that MTI will have to do and will be doing going forward, and I thank them for that. On that basis, Mr Chairman, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment.”
“The last question is to Minister of State Alvin Tan, I would like to thank him for his updates on the Greater Sentosa Master Plan in my cut. My question is, I embedded in my speech, what is the projected economic contribution and job creation from the Greater Sentosa Master Plan besides the transport connection between Sentosa and Brani, how many jobs will be created and how many percent value added into GDP will it add to?”
“Thank you, Mr Chairman. I have three clarifications, Mr Chairman. One is, on hearing Deputy Prime Minister's comments earlier from his speech, I would like to thank Deputy Prime Minister Gan for his quite extensive speech earlier. He mentioned about the reassessment of GDP and inflation. I would like to ask the Deputy Prime Minister, in terms of MTI's assessment of Singapore's vulnerability, in view of the impact of three scenarios. First, is the scenario of potential tariff increases on key sectors, such as semiconductor and pharmaceuticals, that is one. Second is, slowdown in global AI investment flows, if that happens. Thirdly, Deputy Prime Minister mentioned just now about the protracted scenario of Middle East crisis and/or price shocks. My related question is on enterprise support in that segment is, whether the Deputy Prime Minister can clarify whether MTI has defined clear trigger conditions, such as sustained increases in energy costs or trade disruptions, under which targeted and timebound support will be activated? That is my first clarification, Chairman. Second is on our plans to budget for physical energy infrastructure to meet our energy resilience and strategy. I note in MOF's Budget documents that our development expenditure for MTI has increased from about $4.92 billion in FY2025 to $9.24 billion, an increase of about $4.3 billion. Can I ask Minister Tan or Deputy Prime Minister whether the numbers already include some of our plans for energy infrastructure to meet some of the energy resilience and strategy, including, for example, landing points, energy storage and whatever new alternative energy that we are taking.”
“Mr Chairman, our economic environment is undergoing deep structural change, requiring bold and coordinated action rather than incremental adjustments. Resilience without growth is stagnation. Growth must translate into jobs for Singaporeans and openness without anchoring local capability is unsustainable. In a more volatile global environment, fiscal discipline and buffers give us the space to respond to shocks. But ultimately, our long-term competitiveness will depend on how deeply we build, retain and renew capabilities within our economy. I look forward to MTI's clarifications on how it is sequencing these priorities and measuring success, not just in investment commitments, but in sustained capability development and meaningful employment outcomes for Singaporeans. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Nurturing the Next Local Champion”
“It is not sufficient to build capabilities. We must anchor them in Singapore. One key area is the transfer of capabilities from foreign talent to Singaporeans. How effective has the Capability Transfer Programme been in practice? Where foreign expertise is required, are we embedding structured and measurable capability transfer requirements as part of investment conditions? Are firms receiving incentives required to demonstrate progression of Singaporeans into higher-value roles? Sustainable growth must ultimately be driven by the accumulation of local human capital and knowledge. At the same time, skills supply must keep pace with demand. Is the Ministry working closely with our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) to anticipate manpower needs in priority sectors? Given the cross-Ministry nature of this effort, how is coordination being strengthened to ensure timely and aligned talent development? Fifth, Mr Chairman, energy security and economic resilience. As a resource-scarce country, we must accelerate our transition to greener energy to reduce vulnerability to global price shocks, especially in an era of heightened geopolitical fragmentation. Kenya, whose President has expressed an ambition to be the "Singapore of Africa", now generates about 90% of its electricity from renewable sources. How does Singapore compare and how has our progress evolved over time? What is the projected job creation from our decarbonisation push, across renewables integration, hydrogen, carbon management and grid resilience? How do we ensure that our sustainability ambitions are achieved while keeping energy reliable and affordable for households and businesses? And how can this transition catalyse new capabilities and industries locally, rather than simply raise costs?”
“While we focus on tradeable sectors, we must not neglect domestic sectors such as tourism, retail and food and beverage (F&B). Could the Minister provide an update on the Tourism 2040 roadmap? What are the key milestones for achieving "quality tourism"? In an increasingly competitive region, with strong investments by neighbours such as Malaysia and Vietnam, how are we sharpening Singapore’s differentiation while managing the churn in attractions, restaurants and lifestyle offerings? On the Greater Sentosa Master Plan, what progress can be made, and what is the projected economic contribution and job creation? More broadly, are we developing precinct-level strategies, such as waterfront, cultural and lifestyle clusters, in a more coordinated way? A vibrant domestic services sector is not just supportive. It can itself be a source of innovation, productivity and capability development. Third, capitalising on growth and frontier sectors. I agree that Singapore must stay ahead in advanced manufacturing, high-trust services and frontier domains, such as quantum, decarbonisation and space. But how will this translate into jobs? What are the projected job creation numbers over the next five to 10 years and how are these distributed across skill levels? In advanced manufacturing, how are we ensuring that investments deepen local technical capabilities, not just raise output per worker? In trust-based services, such as financial services, arbitration and digital trust, how are we sustaining Singapore’s advantage as global regulatory regimes evolve? And in frontier sectors, what is the realistic timeline for scalable job creation? Growth must not only create jobs. It must build capabilities that endure and diffuse across the economy. Fourth, anchoring capabilities locally.”
“Internally, firms must navigate digitalisation, artificial intelligence (AI) adoption, workforce redesign and sustainability pressures. Government support schemes are necessary. But the key question is whether they are sufficiently deep to drive real transformation. How are our Industry Transformation Maps evolving to move firms up the value chain, rather than simply helping them manage costs? How are we measuring genuine productivity gains, not just adoption of digital tools, but outcomes such as management upgrading, process redesign and business model transformation? More fundamentally, how are we ensuring that firms build internal capabilities, in management, innovation and operations, that generate sustained productivity gains and diffuse across the wider economy? More broadly, we should continue refining how our fiscal tools support transformation. For example, can we design more targeted AI diffusion support for small and medium enterprises (SMEs), tied to measurable outcomes such as productivity improvements, cost savings or new market access? Can we strengthen wage and training co-funding for job redesign, particularly in sectors exposed to global competition, so that firms upgrade jobs rather than displace workers? And given the increasingly volatile global environment, should we consider a counter-cyclical accelerator, pre-approved support that can be activated quickly during downturns, so that firms and workers receive timely assistance without delays? More broadly, our fiscal tools should be fast, targeted and where appropriate automatic, supporting adjustment while reinforcing long-term discipline. Second, strengthening non-tradeable sectors.”
“Mr Chairman, I move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head V of the Estimates be reduced by $100". Mr Chairman, our economy today is less about weathering cyclical volatility and more about navigating deep structural change in the global order. Geopolitical fragmentation, industrial policy competition, supply chain reconfiguration, decarbonisation pressures and rapid technological disruption have fundamentally reshaped the landscape. Recent volatility in global technology stocks also reminds us how quickly shifts in risk sentiment can transmit across financial markets, trade and investment flows. This is now further amplified by escalating tensions in the Middle East, which are already driving energy price volatility, safe haven flows and heightened uncertainty across global markets and can translate into higher inflation, tighter financial conditions and weaker global growth. For a small and open economy like Singapore, these external forces will continue to shape our growth trajectory. In this environment, Singapore’s strategy must do three things simultaneously: strengthen business resilience, move decisively into higher-value growth areas and translate growth into quality jobs for Singaporeans. Ultimately, with constraints on labour and capital, growth must increasingly come from within, by deepening capabilities, innovation and knowledge, in other words, productivity. Both labour productivity and total factor productivity must become our primary engine of growth. First, supporting businesses through structural transition. Externally, trade realignment, onshoring trends and slower global growth are making the operating environment more complex.”
“Thank you Mr Chairman. I would like to be prudent and efficient. First of all, I am convinced that there is discipline just now in the replies on how we spent, rigour in how we evaluate and adaptable in how we design our systems, so I will take this opportunity to thank Minister Indranee, Senior Minister of State, Acting Minister Jeffery Siow and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Shawn Huang for answering all our questions, 14 cuts and 10 speakers. 7.45 pm And on that note, I also would like to thank the Permanent Secretary, MOF, and all the MOF staff behind the scenes who have been helping out to make this possible as well. On that note Chairman, I seek to leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $1,252,309,600 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $68,615,100 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”