Seah Kian Peng
Singapore
“I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. Just a few supplementary questions. Given the decline in volume and given that I can understand SingPost having their challenges, how does the Ministry ensure that there is no degradation of services that are provided by SingPost?”
“Yet, violence, domination, pain, harm and abuse also occur within the walls of a family. We need to be vigilant and sensitive in our approach. Hard rules and automatic application of these rules are a poor response to the challenges that we face today.”
“Both parents and schools have a role to play in shaping our children in the way they should go and I agree with Mr Don Wee that it is important for families to have open conversations about these matters.”
“Just a quick supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. First, I must say I am surprised but happy that the number of cases has gone down. Having said that, we need to also pay attention to the number of unreported cases. Personally, I am sure we have heard from many residents who come to us for these cases.”
“Second, we propose to put in place new processes to prevent the misuse of the MPA by parents who have abandoned, abused or neglected their children and did not fulfil their parental duties. In so doing, we also protect and spare their children from unnecessary distress.”
“The way we feed ourselves will not be the same. The way we live and the way we work will also be different – telemedicine, work from home, online learning and the need for insurance. But there are other things which will remain the same – resilience, unity, and a single-minded commitment to our joint future.”
The complete record
Every one of 752 lines we hold for Seah Kian Peng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 16.
“As we continue to build the society that Singaporeans want to see, we can take heart that we are moving forward from a strong foundation. From the Forward Singapore (ForwardSG) conversations that have been ongoing for some time, I would like to ask the Minister to share what he feels are the critical pillars that need more attention to strengthen our social compact going forward. [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] 5.15 pm”
“First, social spending now accounts for over half of the Government's Budget. We have a population that is ageing, that is facing many social pressures in a world that is increasingly uncertain. We have become more generous, in giving subsidies, employment and other forms of welfare. In fact, in terms of the depth and reach of social spending, "welfare" should not be a dirty word. In fact, Singapore has a chance to establish a new form of the welfare state – where generous subsidies are as targeted as practically possible to keep faith with a progressive structure. At the same time, for areas, such as preventive health, which we just debated, the Government has shifted to a more generous "subsidies-for-all" regime, as can be seen in the vaccination programme. The Government also strives to provide subsidies in a way to achieve welfare without eroding the work ethic. That is the first element of our social compact – that the most go to the people who have the least, so that their lives would be free from precariousness and be rooted in dignity. Second, with the Government Budget that is more than 18% of our gross domestic product (GDP), Singapore is still below the United States (US) and France. But these two countries are also among the most highly-taxed populations. Singapore tries to keep both Government expenditure and taxes low by targeted subsidies and a progressive tax regime. The second element of our social compact, therefore, is that the market stops where social needs arise, and that the tax burden falls most heavily on the rich as a form of public duty and equity. The third element of our social compact speaks about opportunities – in our investments in innovation, employability and progress for every worker.”
“Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Estimates be reduced by $100". Singapore's success, resilience and unity are built on the foundation of a strong social compact, which has been built up by generations over the years. Our social compact is anchored in the strong partnership between individuals and families, the community and the Government. It is the shared understanding of the various roles and responsibilities that different stakeholders play. In this compact, instead of an exercise of raw might and power, where the strong prosper and the weak perish, we have a society where we all agree on a set of rules, that distributes resources and ensures opportunities in ways we all think are fair and just. As Singapore develops, both economically and politically, our language has become more alive with contests of values, and consensus about public goals is harder to achieve. Both developments are, to me at least, great virtues of a small and vulnerable state like Singapore. We have nothing but good ideas, and these can only come through vigorous, honest debate and a commitment to Singapore. I stress "honest" because, often, the policy problems that we deal with are highly complex and require not just a deep recollection of history, but also a willingness to invest time, mental and emotional energy into a topic. At the same time, it is important for those of us who do want to, or have a duty to, take part in debates on public policy issues, to be willing to make commitments to honest, high integrity debates and to work for the good of Singapore. I had said in my main Budget speech that this Budget breaks away from the past and, hence, gives a new shape to our social compact. Let me say why this is so.”
“Recently, we had an extensive debate on the need to keep housing affordable and to do so in a way that is fair to future generations. Two things struck me in the debate. First, public housing in Singapore is not just about providing a home for individuals or even families. The HDB realises many objectives including upholding our multiracial society, ensuring the family unit is kept intact, by way of proximity grants, retirement planning and saving, by way of the financial schemes. Second, because of this, housing issues are often complex and require not just deep cognitive effort, but also knowledge of our political history. Minister and his colleagues have already corrected some of the mistaken claims and calculations presented earlier, so I shall not repeat them. I bring these points up to show both the salience and the complexity of housing issues and to thank the many public officers in HDB and MND for their effort. I would like to ask Minister if there are more measures to help first-timers starting their families and first-timers with children in securing a Build-To-Order (BTO) flat as soon as possible? There is a larger grant for resale HDB flats, but this does not solve the problem of a tight BTO supply in the short run. Is there a way to give some priority in the queue for these two groups?”
“Since June 2020, more than 130,000 seniors have gone through the Seniors Go Digital Programme. Making digital and online services a way of life is not a one-off effort. It requires constant tending. How is the Government ensuring that people who are less digital savvy are not left behind in our drive towards a Smart Nation? I have two suggestions and one request. First, can we consider more resources to provide peer support to trainers? That is, for seniors to train one another in learning how to communicate and transact online. Given their similar life experiences, they understand how best to keep each other safe from scams. Second, has Government carried out any surveys among seniors on their most urgent needs, in relation to digital inclusion? And what proportion of the elderly require such help? And my one request is a very simple one, and it is to ensure we never have an only digital programme, at least not in the short term. We need to bring everyone along. Enhancing Digital Services Experience”
“I just wanted to ask the Deputy Prime Minister. We all know that the NIRC contributes towards half of our Budget — Yes, the point I want to make is that what is very clear is that returns from investments are uncertain and yet our needs will always increase – be it for healthcare, education, defence. Given this too, in a scenario where the returns are coming down, could Finance Minister Deputy Prime Minister share with us how can we ensure that our spending and the programmes that we have are kept on an even keel?”
“Can we make upskilling a compulsory component in evaluating companies’ eligibility for tax relief, while providing complementary training grants for companies to send workers for training? Can we also increase avenues for companies to obtain local accreditation for specific skillsets and improve funding support? With a vibrant and strong SME sector, we will be able to ensure opportunities for all. We see more fully why this Budget is such a big step forward. These are three big ideas that form the bones of our new social compact, a greater distribution of welfare and duties among all of us who live on this tiny island, so as to ensure new and continued opportunities for us all, that we may achieve happiness, prosperity and progress as a nation. With this, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I support the Budget.”
“Yes, SMEs occupy a special place in my heart, which is why in the last Budget Debate, I also spoke about them, and today, I want to say a few things about them. Many of our SMEs are dealing with a myriad of challenges. There is added pressure all round as SMEs face higher operating costs, be it rental, energy, manpower, financing and so on. Vendors may also artificially increase prices, which can in turn negate the costs offsets by existing grants that SMEs have applied for. More specifically, it is the lack of manpower and challenges in hiring local workers that is worrying for many of them. SMEs with labour shortages are occupied with day-to-day operations, and constrained in planning for longer-term business transformation and digitalisation. Hiring local workers with relevant skillsets is made more difficult if the sector is unattractive to locals, for example, retail, F&B, manufacturing. As a result, SMEs in these sectors have called for an increase in foreign worker quotas or to relax the criteria to qualify for foreign worker quotas to ease their labour shortages. NTUC has called out to Government for enhanced support to offset these higher costs, to boost local hiring and productivity for our SMEs. We ask Government to enhance the level of and the range of support to companies to offset high operating costs and manpower challenges, step up productivity and digitalisation initiatives. Can the Government offer loans with lower interest rates and review eligibility criteria for grants, such as removing the 30% local shareholding requirement and to allow more SMEs to qualify for the Productivity Solutions Grant? We also ask for the Government to support SMEs in hiring local workers and their training efforts.”
“But the price of the COE they pay, in the "open category", is the same. Can the Government consider a special category for such "super cars" such that the COE market is competitive within this special class? This will have little impact on the majority of Singaporeans, who own only one, and relatively moderately priced, car. In general, however, this year's Budget shows that the socialist heart of policy-making is still beating strong, from housing, to workers' welfare, to specific social groups. The fourth financing principle of the Government outlined by Prof Lee is that all Government revenues go into a consolidated revenue account, which is that the Government does not tie revenue to specific expenditure items. This principle remains, but since 1996, one major change is that the Net Investment Returns Contribution (NIRC) today accounts for the majority of our Government funding. This is possible only because of the judicious and careful husbandry of public funds and wise investments over the last 57 years. In these years, we have resisted over-spending, maintained a strong sense of self-reliance and continued giving all workers opportunities for training and progress. These were all ingredients of the current strong financial position that we are in today. How do we ensure that, with greater welfare provision, that the self-reliance and ambition of our pioneering years remain strong? First, it is important to keep our debates both vigorous and honest so that we know when and where subsidies are truly needed. Second, to keep opportunities open and plentiful for us all is by growing our Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) which collectively provide the most number of jobs to Singaporeans.”
“Her example was on hospitals, and she said, “If you want the comfort and privacy of an "A" Class ward, well, you pay hotel prices.” This principle certainly holds for the upper end of the market, but increasingly, not for the lower, especially in this Budget. The Assurance Package, the increases in CPF housing grants and subsidies for the elderly, they all show that we are not slaves to the market and in fact, we are going quite far in the opposite direction. In large sectors of our economic life, in fact in the biggest ticket items, most Singaporeans get far more than what we pay for. I shall say more about these two principles in my cuts during the Committee of Supply on Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF). The third principle, Prof Lee Tsao Yuan says, applies to the provision of three public goods – health, education and housing – and is that of progressive subsidisation. In this, I would like to say that this Budget shows clearly that the progressive element, both in our tax and subsidy, remains core to our financing philosophy. It is a political, not mere fiscal, commitment – one which goes to the provision of all Government spending, not just social spending. And this is because of political origins of the PAP Government, born of our socialist beginnings, that those who have the most should carry the heaviest tax burdens in order to benefit those who have the least. And in this, I would like to make a point about tax on cars and how we can improve our current COE system to make it even more progressive. There are cars which cost upwards of a $1 million – the Ferraris, the Lamborghinis, and the McLarens; and even more exotic ones that could cost up to $6 million. The tax that they attract is certainly higher than those cars which cost say $100,000.”
“The Budget is the most binding version of our social compact because it allocates resources that put these big ideas to work for the future of Singapore and Singaporeans. Budget 2023 is an inspired political statement that spells out duties for the rich, welfare for the poor and opportunities for all. In many ways, it is a decisive break from the past. To show how and why, let me contrast this with the political language and financial principles outlined in 1996 by the person who first used the words “social compact” – and this was by Nominated Member of Parliament and economics Prof Lee Tsao Yuan. In her speech that year which argued for increased subsidies for transport, she said, “Education, health and housing have, from the very beginning of the PAP Government, been treated differently. To me, subsidy is not a dirty word. Making basic health, education and housing affordable is and always has been, the social compact between this Government and the people.” She then outlined her own ideas of four financing principles used in the provision of public services by the Government. First, she argues, and I quote her again, “There is no such thing as a free lunch. A price tag is put on almost everything in Singapore by the Government.” In the 1990s where there was a wave of experiments on privatisation, this could be true. Indeed, it is still a principle of good fiscal prudence to understand the price of things. However, Budget 2023 with its high focus on redistribution, especially for those most vulnerable among us, shows that there are free lunches for those who need them. The second principle is: "You get what you pay for". Again, I quote her on that.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, with all this talk about social compact, it may be useful to note that while the concept was born hundreds of years ago in 17th century political philosophy, in this House, it was first used only in 1996 in a debate on the White Paper introduced by the Minister for Transport on "A World Class Land Transport System”. Since then, it has been used in almost every Budget debate in recent years, and certainly the last few speakers. A social compact is essentially an exchange of promises – each of us give up our freedoms to pursue selfish interests in an unfettered way in exchange for a stable, ordered, fair society in which we all have an equal chance to flourish. In the founding days of Singapore, these ideas were front and centre in all that Mr Lee Kuan Yew and his colleagues did. An examination of records around Singapore’s Independence would show that Mr Lee and his colleagues were very clear in their purpose. “My business is the people’s happiness”; this is what Mr Lee Kuan Yew said on 27 May 1965 in the Malaysian Parliament. “My business is the people’s happiness”. And “happiness of the people” appears in the Proclamation of Independence on 9 August 1969. And the word “happiness” is enshrined in our National Pledge. All these formed part of the social compact that he and his team forged with the people of Singapore. Over the years, our social compact was not lost on successive Prime Ministers and their teams, from Mr Goh Chok Tong, Mr Lee Hsien Loong and their teams. So, I am very glad that Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong called this out in his Budget Statement last year and that this year’s Budget had many good measures which will certainly help strengthen our common identity and social compact.”
“I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the answer. I just have a few supplementary questions. First, for the avoidance of doubt, I certainly support all the measures that we have introduced over the years. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary mentioned that the attribution for the increase this year is due to pent-up demand because the previous year, we had COVID-19. Therefore, by that, do we expect that in the coming year, this will normalise and it must necessarily see a reduction. My first supplementary question will be, what are the indicators we will look for before we feel that this is something that we need to introduce more measures for or find other measures? The Senior Parliamentary Secretary also mentioned that we will look at Singapore Pools' online betting to see what the trends are. But that is just one avenue. We know that there is a lot of betting which takes place not through Singapore Pools. So, my second question is, how do we monitor such trends? It is certainly not easy. Finally, I have said this before, in measures such as these, I would prefer that we err on the side of caution and therefore, it is better to impose more than less measures.”
“Just a quick supplementary question for the Minister of State. I raised this Parliamentary Question because I have more and more residents coming to me to say that in the places that they go to, for those who are physically immobile, they are finding it sometimes not so easy to find the lots that they have. Obviously, we do know that more of us are ageing, more of us do need these aids and, therefore, planning parameters do need to change. I recognise that the next review is next year, in 2023, as the Minister of State just said. I hope that, in the review, we will do with a more future-back kind of lens because I think this ageing trend is taking place very, very quickly. And it is better to plan ahead and have a little bit of buffer, rather than having to do a bit of catch-up. Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question and also the suggestions. We will look into these in our review.”
“Question No 7. The Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, from 2019 to 2021, about 12,800 divorcees bought a resale flat or booked a new flat, either with their children or on their own. Of these, about 60% were females and about 70% of them were below 50 years old. As HDB does not track individuals after the sale of their HDB flat, we are unable to determine if these divorcees sold a matrimonial flat previously. Divorcees who are unable to afford an HDB flat may consider renting from the open market or staying with family or friends. If they have no housing options and family support, they may apply for public rental housing. From 2019 to 2021, HDB approved about 2,800 requests from divorcees for public rental flats. Divorcees may also approach HDB if they require further assistance or advice on their housing options.”
“Just a quick supplementary question to the Minister. I think the importance of LPA is obvious and certainly more so for the seniors, the elderly. My supplementary question to Minister is whether, currently, is he able to let us know how many of us have already done our LPAs? Whatever the number is, I think it is not enough. So, my question is, how can we accelerate this and bring this to a much higher level? And it should really start at a much younger age, where possible. And maybe at certain appropriate milestones, we can incorporate this to increase the adoption.”
“I just want to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, the war for talent is felt in all industries and the healthcare industry is certainly not spared. In the review of our current policies, I want to ask Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether it includes what other countries are offering because, as I said, nurses are in short supply worldwide amongst other things. So, I hope our review takes into account who we are up against and how we can deal with them.”
“I thank the Minister for his answers. First, we fully support what the Ministry has been doing. All of us in this House would have spoken to or know many teachers who are in the service. Teachers love to teach. What they do not like is the administrative part of things and my first supplementary question to the Minister is that we continue to focus more on the relentless effort to reduce their administrative duties because less is always more. I am also happy to note that the Minister talked about how parents can help in this. This is one area which I hope that, for the many parents out there, beyond saying what parents could help, maybe we could consider drawing clear boundaries on where parents should not or cannot do because I think many teachers that I spoke to also said that one of the things that stress them is what parents are imposing on them, either directly or indirectly. So, could the Minister consider drawing up a very clear set of rules on what can and cannot be done, as far as parents are concerned, to the teachers?”
“Just two supplementary questions for the Minister. First, Minister mentioned that the current 60% infection does not accord us "herd immunity". I would just like to ask at what level would it be considered that we have "herd immunity"? My second supplementary question relates to the seniors. I am concerned that there are 80,000 of our seniors who either have not gotten their second vaccination or have not had the booster jab. Eighty thousand seniors is a lot of people. I know we are still trying to reach out to them through our mobile vaccination teams. I think that will take too long; we have been trying that for quite a while. I think to cover the entire 80,000 will take a long, long time. So, my question is: what other solutions are there beyond the current mobile vaccination teams?”
“If that condition holds, I would say there is much that the Bill can stay silent on and allow the circumstances of each specific case to be examined on its own merits, whether the single parent marries here or overseas and what the family unit, eventually, comprises. I end with two specific points on regulating institutions. First, how do we ensure or strengthen the assessment process for prospective adoptive parents? Can we ask for more testimonials and references to attest to the parents' character, as well as for specific performance indicators? In this case, I opine that more is better. Second, in ensuring that assessments are current and also recognising that the entire process can take some time – potentially up to three years – the current proposed change is to put the onus on the applicants to notify authorities of any material change in their circumstances. I agree with the placing of the onus, but I would like to add that we might want to impose annual affirmations and declarations on the part of applicants. This reduces the chances of declarations being overlooked and removes an excuse of forgetfulness for applicants. Again, in this case, it is better to be safe than sorry. Mr Speaker, Sir, in some ways, the adoption of a child may seem to be open to more checks and scrutiny than the birth of one, because we see our duty to the adopted child as a joint and a public one. To some extent, this is a duty which extends to all persons who are vulnerable. It is our collective duty to care for those who are unable to care for themselves and to put up rules, both for private conduct and in our institutions that work towards the flourishing of children within families. Sir, I support this Bill as a means of doing so.”
“I have a related point, however, on how this relates to the wider point on the protection of children. Our duty of care towards the child must be of the same level when it comes to birth parents. As I had indicated earlier in my speech at this year's Committee of Supply debate on MSF's budget, we must be as prompt and forceful in separating a child from birth parents or families where they are deemed to be "harmful" to the child. Can the Minister say how this is provided for, if not in this Bill, then in other legislation relating to oversight and responses to child abuse and how parents who have committed serious offences are dealt with insofar as their ability to continue their parenting duties? As much as I support this Bill for what it makes explicit, I would also like to point out an important provision of this current Bill and what it leaves implicit. This Bill allows for single parents to adopt. I have, over the years, spoken quite a few times on the status of single parents and how our definition of "family" should expand to include these parents. As a result of this provision for sole applicants, one question may arise for single parents who subsequently marry. Specifically, what happens to a child if the sole parent goes on to legally marry someone of the same gender overseas? This issue is one which opens itself up to strong debate, but I would say, as far as the issue of adoption is concerned, the "overriding consideration" that I spoke of at the start of the speech still holds – which is, the centrality of the child and for every adopted child to have a good home and a family to love them.”
“Mr Speaker, this Bill addresses two important matters relating to the policy on adoption: first, regulating the behaviour of individuals; and second, regulating the structure of institutions. We need both to work seamlessly together in what is, essentially, a very private and emotional affair – the birth of a family. Sir, in the adoption of a child, the overriding consideration must be, as what the Minister has described, the centrality of the child. Our dream is for every adopted child to have a good home and a family to take care of and to love them. I shall now make a few points about the Bill. First, one proposed change is to prioritise applicants with stronger ties to Singapore. In this case, I would like to ask if the threshold of "strong ties" is sufficiently high. My question lies in the case of joint applications, which are allowed as long as both applicants are Permanent Residents (PRs). If the test is that of ties to one's country, should not one applicant, minimally, be a Singapore Citizen? Yes, PRs do have some degree of permanence, but they do move on when circumstances change. For example, there are those who renounce it after the first term, or there could be others who have had their PRs, subsequently, not renewed or approved. Second, the change of default to disqualifying applicants who have committed serious offences, rather than allowing all applications and then reviewing on a case-by-case basis. I agree with this as a matter of efficiency and also as a signal of how high we set the bar for qualifications. At the same time, even as we have safeguards to disqualify applicants with certain prescribed offences, we do allow exceptions if the Court is satisfied that these individuals have reformed. I am supportive of this.”
“Okay. First one: the Minister mentioned that SILE has since put in additional safeguards. Of course, we could say we are smarter in hindsight, but my question is, why were some of these safeguards not put in place in the first instance? If some of the trainees in previous examinations – which is the question I filed – have subsequently been practising, may I ask the Minister whether the LawSoc has found any misconduct amongst any of them in that group? These are the earlier cases. Were there any similar cases of examinees that cheated in the past? My second supplementary question is: earlier on, we were concerned about second chances. Given that the names of these candidates are now revealed, what can we say about giving them second chances?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have three supplementary questions for the Minister.”
“But we should pause and think if such asymmetry is something that we should be proud of. Mdm Deputy Speaker, social norms are set by all of us, men and women. We become a better society when women are more equal. That women should have an equal place in society is right in itself. So, let us keep climbing and working together. Enough with the talking and let us put all these into practice. Mdm Deputy Speaker, I support the Motion wholeheartedly.”
“The workplace is one of the most important spaces where such equality can be observed, can be measured and can be improved. Within the NTUC Enterprise group that I work at, I am proud that, in our leadership team, about half of them are women. The female representation on our board of directors is about 34%, already exceeding the targeted minimum guidelines that the Singapore Institute of Directors is advocating for all boards. We need to further improve on this. Mdm Deputy Speaker, the next part of my speech is a little harder to measure and quantify. It has to do with the way we think, speak about and to women. How many times have we interrupted women as they speak, explain to them matters which they already know – sometimes better than us? Maybe, most times, better than us. How many of us do this to women more than men? How is this okay? "Mansplaining" – in fact, Minister Ong Ye Kung also referred to it – is so common that there is a name for it, but this has not made it less frequent. We must not only refrain from openly disrespectful behaviour, such as those that I have listed above, but also patronising ones. For example, I am sure all of us would have – well, I certainly have – experienced some senior corporate leaders, including senior civil servants, thank a male emcee by name and the female emcee by referring to her as "the beautiful young lady". In a recent article in the newspaper – in fact, just slightly more than a week ago – a male editor wrote, "Frankly, many women prefer generous husbands and would think poorly of partners who expect them to share household expenses equally like how some couples split dining bills when they are dating." This is truly astonishing. There is a temptation to brush these off, not to take offence too easily.”
“Many of these are women who juggle between home and work. But in so doing, we make no judgement on whether it should be women or men who do this juggling. In the same way, all staff are also entitled to childcare leave and child sick leave. We have "family charity leave", which allows both men and women to either celebrate auspicious occasions with their family or to do charity work and bond with their loved ones. We aim to ensure they are provided with not only competitive remuneration but also a safe and caring environment, a culture of continuous learning and a roadmap for career development so that every employee has the opportunity to develop to their fullest potential. In that case, equality is the result of treating people the same. But in some cases, equality requires us also to treat women differently. In Singapore, SMEs employ about 70% of the workforce and there are more than a quarter million of these companies. According to a survey by NTUC and PAP Women's Wing, 23% of respondents believe there is gender discrimination in the workplace. More women felt they had been passed over for promotion or career advancement, that their companies favour men when hiring. They felt treated unfairly but they were afraid to report it to their management. Clearly, equality here requires us to pay greater attention to providing equal respect for our colleagues who are women. Earlier this year, some SMEs have signed Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with NTUC, which will provide consultants and resources when they set up policies, such as on proper grievance handling procedures and disciplinary actions. The road to greater equality requires us not just to treat women like men, but to pay attention to the unfairness that exists today between them.”
“There is still a gap and the narrowing is slow. But we have made progress. I would like to just speak on two points: equality in the workplace and on social norms. Earlier this year, I spoke on the issue of support for mothers who may be unemployed during divorce. I also asked about support for parents with caregiving responsibilities, including greater flexible work support and other policies for better work-life harmony. For the past 15 years, I have also spoken on the need to support single mothers as part of a broader commitment to single parents. In all these policies, I have often wondered about the lines that are drawn. For example, do we draw a line between the home and the workplace? When we give more support to women as caregivers at home, are we making them better workers and colleagues? Another example, do we support single mothers or all single parents? Do we support just mothers who are unemployed or do we do so for fathers, too, during divorce? When we say "regardless of gender", do we mean we treat men and women the same? Is that not the right thing to do? Well, yes and no. Some answers are easy. For example, we support single parents whether they are men or women. We support all persons who require help during their search for employment regardless of gender. For example, for NTUC FairPrice, our commitment in developing a wonderful workplace is anchored on our human resource practices, which adhere to the principle of equality and equal employment opportunity. We employ on the basis of merit and adopt a non-discriminatory stance on race, religion, gender or age. The Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices require us to provide employment opportunities to all, including part-timers and flexi-timers.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, this White Paper holds many promises for women and, through that, promises for a better Singapore. We become better when women are more equal. Although many of the recommendations in this White Paper will make our job market more attractive, our economy more competitive, our long-term growth more sustainable, none of these justifies our adopting the recommendations. That women should have an equal place in society is right in itself, not because it promotes some other social good. Mdm Deputy Speaker, our journey towards equality has not been an easy one, with fits and starts and, sometimes, we become stuck for a long time. This poem "Mother and Son" written by Langston Hughes, a famous African-American poet, describes the process well. It goes like this. "Well, son, I'll tell you: Life for me ain't been no crystal stair. It's had tacks in it, And splinters And boards torn up, And places with no carpet on the floor – Bare. But all the time, I's been a-climbin' on." For many women today, life is no "crystal stair" and, today, when we see girls and boys in school and safe streets at night, there remains "tacks and splinters". Today, there remains a wage difference between men and women. Caregiving falls most heavily on women. More women are likely to be harassed sexually and there are far fewer women than men on boards of companies. In our words and in our deeds, there remain many injustices and biases in society. One White Paper and one Motion does not make a crystal stair but it is a step up. Over the years, there have been many such step ups, leading to the more equal landscape that we see today. For example, the discrepancy in Singapore's adjusted gender pay gap. This has decreased from 8.8% in 2002 to 4.3% in 2020. We have halved this in 20 years.”
“Chairman, I would first like to thank Minister Masagos Zulkifli, Minister Desmond Lee, Minister of State Sun Xueling and Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua for their responses to our cuts and also their subsequent responses to our clarifications. Renewing and strengthening our social compact to build a fair and just Singapore require the work and support of all of us. Certainly, for those in the social sector, I think they are doing a lot of heavy lifting on this front. So, on behalf of all of us, inside and outside of this House, I want to express our sincere appreciation to all of them. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $3,773,507,000 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $86,845,700 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]”
“Mdm Chairman, I have three clarifications to ask. The first is to Minister Masagos Zulkifli. First, I thank him for reiterating the importance of strengthening family resilience and his articulation of what family means. Recently, Minister K Shanmugam made a statement on section 377A of the Penal Code and the changing societal attitudes towards marriage and family. So, my first clarification to the Minister is whether he could give us the Ministry's position on this. My second clarification relates to single mothers and is addressed to Minister of State Sun Xueling. I know she is very passionate and empathetic to the stresses that single mothers face. She has explained some of the things that have been done for them. I would like to ask whether she could further elaborate on what single mothers could expect, the areas that the Ministry is looking at. 12.45 pm And my third and final clarification is relating to ComLink, either Minister Desmond Lee or Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua could address this. We all know the importance of going upstream and the good results that ComLink has achieved so far. I note that it has already been rolled out to 11 towns and will be rolled out to 10 more soon. My question is, if resource is not a constraint and seeing the good results that have come out so far, I am sure all the 10 towns are looking forward to this. So, how can we roll this out even faster and if this could be shared with especially the 10 towns that are expecting this? What can we do to accelerate this so that we can really make a difference to the families that will benefit from this?”
“Is there more that the Government can do to encourage community partners to step up?”
“Mr Chairman, the community, including social service agencies (SSAs), community groups and corporates, all play a critical role alongside the Government in supporting the social needs of Singaporeans. Indeed, it is the community that has allowed Singapore to pursue a unique welfare model where the state is small, but the work it does is amplified through the effort of community partners. During this COVID-19 period, many SSAs, they had pivoted to digital modes and transformed their service delivery. For many, this has been an opportunity to reap efficiency gains and to magnify their impact. Technology has enabled us to do more than we have done before, to reach more people in the comfort of their own homes and at times, most convenient to them. It has allowed more frequent check-ins and more innovative use of scarce manpower in the social service industry. And yet, SSAs are one of the most high-touch sectors. That is to say, the human connection must be established through real meetings, where we can see and we can hear, not just what is conveyed through the camera and microphone, but in a million ways through body language, the blink of an eye, the crossing of a defensive knee, the discomfort unspoken but to an experienced social worker, as clear as a shout. In short, with digital modes, the gains are clear, but what we lose are less. How will the Ministry help SSAs to be prepared for the future? Can the Minister let us know how SSAs have harnessed technology and how it measures service delivery? Have there been any adjustments that social service professionals have had to make and what has been the feedback from clients? And finally, have we seen an increase in participation and support of corporates in this space?”
“Can I ask that the Minister update especially on the opportunity for lower-income youths or youths at risks, to acquire mentors and the impact that these have on them?”
“Mr Chairman, we know that our adolescent years are a big influence in our lives. They certainly shape who we are and can have a profound impact on our outlook in life and our life trajectory. Those young people who do go into further education after they turn 18 will find many mentors within their education journey. Those who enter into the workforce, however, may find it harder to do so. Still, others may not realise the powerful role that mentors play in living a successful life. Mentors help us develop in ways that go beyond the obvious, beyond grades and promotions, beyond financial and social success. Mentors are guides in the journey of life and they are especially useful to young people. Having been a mentor myself, I know that I may not be able to help people avoid mistakes in life and, in fact, some lessons cannot be learnt except through paying for "tuition" in mistakes. But I can help them. I can forewarn them, I can forearm them and I can also help in the recovery. At last year's COS, the Ministry announced the mentoring programme pilot for youths. Can the Minister provide an update of the progress of this pilot and how it will benefit the youths who have participated? Can the Minister also provide some numbers as to the size and impact of the programme? How many young people have benefited from it and what are some of the variables being measured? How do the mentors get into the programme and are there any sorting mechanisms for such mentors who, after all, may be paired with young people who themselves are vulnerable? Are there any lessons or concerns from such programmes? Do we have plans to expand the programme, especially to those young people who have not had access to formal mentors in school?”
“Still, as a society and a government, let us think more deeply about what is required for this group in our midst – how they could live a dignified life and with peace of mind. Of course, in addition to $600, there are many other forms of help and many other partners in the community who do give help. But $600 a month, I think in the present circumstances, is a precarious way of living. Can we do more to help this group of the poorest amongst us?”
“Mr Chairman, given the marked rise in cost of living in recent times, is MSF bringing forward the review of the quantum to be given to eligible recipients of the ComCare and Public Assistance schemes? Also – and perhaps this is a radical idea – does the Minister think that the current criteria are sufficient, or is there a case for us to explain the giving of public assistance to more people? Public assistance is given to the poorest amongst us and it is a long-term assistance scheme, in contrast to short- and medium-term care. Public assistance is bare bones – it is for those who cannot work as a result of old age or illness and have little or no family support. A single person, he or she, gets $600 a month and other help, such as free healthcare. Parents with children receive help in educational expenses. In 2020, there were 4,263 people on the scheme, 3% fewer than the year before. Many of these are elderly men who are not married. Mr Chairman, I have two questions. First, is the number of 4,000-plus on public assistance too few or too many? How do we decide on this? Is there a case, for example, to be made that our qualifying criteria are too stringent? Second, is $600 too much or too little? Can the Minister give an idea of how this $600 was derived and whether it ought to be reviewed in light of recent inflationary pressures? Finally, can I ask the Minister for a deeper review of the idea of “needs-based” funding of public assistance? I know our philosophy is to give adequate, but not generous, welfare. I agree with that. Certainly, for the most part, I agree with this because a bloated welfare state with a high tax burden is something that Singaporeans collectively do not want.”
“Last year, the Ministry announced that the Adoption of Children Act is being reviewed to better safeguard the welfare of adopted children and sought the public's feedback on the proposed amendments to the Act. Adoption is certainly a complex process as, even with the best of intentions, there are many minefields to navigate. And the people who are affected, they include the children being adopted, the adoptive parents, adoption agencies, agencies supporting foster parents, the pregnant mother, lawyers and so on. Some poor behaviour must clearly be constrained, for example, any suspicion of "marketing" children as if they are goods for sale, rather than human beings to be nurtured and loved. Some parents, for example, are tricked into giving up their flesh and blood to strangers. On the other hand, there are those people who are unfit to be parents but, yet, refuse to give consent for their children to be adopted. Whether they have abandoned the child or cannot be found, or have neglected or ill-treated the child, one has to ask if the consent of these adults, who, in my view, are not fit to be parents, is required. There is a case to be made that such parents have no standing as parents. In any case, can the Ministry provide updates on the progress of the review? Can the Minister also provide some background on the state of adoption in Singapore? How many children are waiting to be adopted, what is the profile of adoptive parents and the help rendered to these families by the Government? Second, the review of the Act was motivated, in part, by the need for Singapore to keep pace with international practice. Can the Minister let us know where Singapore lags behind the rest of the world and what can be done in these aspects and how we can do better?”
“Yes, Chairman. Mr Chairman, the Conversations on Singapore Women's Development were concluded in September last year, with the Government promising concrete proposals in three areas. First, more equal workplace opportunities; second, more caregiver support; and third, increased protection for women. What stood out for me was the engagement of many Singaporeans through these conversations, all 160 of them, involving more than 5,700 participants. I know we are all now looking forward to the White Paper which I am sure will draw from these conversations. Can Minister share about some of the initiatives which might be in the White Paper? Can the Minister also share some data and statistics on the size and the type of problems that Singapore women face? Even as the Government puts in place new policies and laws, I would also like to ask if there are specific areas of improvement we must bear in mind relating to our mindsets and attitudes. For example, in the light of the recent attention on sexual misconduct towards women, I note that most Institutes of Higher Learning now have compulsory respect and consent courses. But shifting mindsets must not just be within a section of society but it must involve everyone. Second, this bias is not just a matter of serious misconduct, but of everyday behaviour. Interruptions, patronising explanations and unwarranted assumptions of emotional fragility – I think all these are poor companions to our social life. But these are experienced by many women on a daily basis. What can we all do to promote this mindset shift? Review of Adoption of Children Act All children deserve to grow up in loving families.”
“Can the Minister also outline some changing trends and the implications for our various social and fiscal policies? [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)] Family as a Building Block of Our Nation”
“Mr Chairman, I beg to move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Estimates be reduced by $100". Chairman, I have for several years now supported the broad principle that the family unit is the foundation of Singapore society. At the same time, I made the call for a wider definition of what a family unit comprise. Such definitions are not mere semantics – they carry with them moral and policy weight – for the Government encourages strong families by way of subsidies, programmes and support. In turn, such families are themselves sources of support for its individual members. Therefore, if I may make a pragmatic point, lightening the load on the state and the tax burden on society. It is thus an important point to consider – what is "family" in Singapore today? Here, I would say, we can be even more inclusive. For many years, together with other Members of the House, we have argued for parity in treatment of single parents, especially single mothers, as a parent of equal standing. What are the current norms on family? We are seeing some demographic trends including increasing singlehood, declining fertility rates and an ageing population. We need to consider more incentives, for example, for singles who have ageing parents, since caregiving duties fall most heavily on them. All these trends have put stresses on the institution of family across different life stages. COVID-19 has made the situation worse. Mental health, which we discussed just now during the COS on MOH, is such a big issue now. These stresses also add to the negative impact on Singaporeans' well-being and Singapore as a society. Can I ask the Ministry what it is doing to promote and to strengthen families so that we can be a more resilient society?”
“Mr Chairman, with digitalisation becoming more pervasive and an integral part of our society, how is the Ministry working with the private and people sectors to bring digital to life for Singaporeans and prepare them for the digital future? Today there is a growing need to pay attention to the livelihood aspect of the digital economy which offers some of the most exciting and high-quality jobs across the different sectors. Under the Smart Nation strategy, we have outlined our ambitions to build a digital economy, a digital Government and a digital society. Can the Minister let us know the progress of this initiative, especially in terms of the whole-of-nation digitalisation effort? Second, Singapore had outlined funding and aims to develop high-tech digital solutions for industry, including being a lab for deploying new technology solutions. Can the Minister let us know how we are doing in terms of translating novel technologies into commercial products and services? Last, part of Singapore's advantage has always been our ability to work across disciplines. Such innovative inter-disciplinary technology solutions give us the power to address complex challenges. It also allows us a special position as a trusted digital innovation hub. Can the Minister give us an idea how Singapore is doing in terms of its ambition to become as honest agent in digital trust? Finally, how will MCI equip Singaporeans with the necessary skills to access the emerging opportunities in the digital economy? Digital Inclusion”
“Mr Chairman, as a small country that must navigate various forces, we must be wary of not just traditional geopolitical realities, but new and non-traditional challenges. Besides cybersecurity and climate change, what are some emerging and salient issues that are currently discussed at multilateral fora and how is Singapore addressing them? For example, interconnectedness through increased globalisation has reshaped threats to the modern state, such as terrorist groups, piracy networks and other non-state actions. We no longer just have a singular focus on military affairs, but we need to also think about non-military threats and also from the rise of non-state groups. Dealing with such threats and risks requires diplomacy and non-military responses. Living through a pandemic today on an island that is vulnerable to rising sea levels as our climate changes, importing all our energy needs, we are a young nation, porous to overseas values and cultural debates which may fracture our historical fault lines. Paying close attention to such issues translates into the way we manage social and moral issues, such as equality and race relations, as well as more pragmatic ones, such as supplies of food and vaccines. Let us not take for granted that as a small country with little geopolitical weight, we were one of the earliest to secure vaccines for everyone living on this island. Finally, can the Minister tell us what are some of these emerging issues and how we have planned to deal with these, not just as a Government, but as a people? Situation in Ukraine”
“Mr Chairman, there are many of us in this House who have once upon a time donned uniforms and held guns. Two years' fulltime, during my time, it was two and a half years, and many years after that, serving our country in the Armed Forces. We have all had friends who have different specialist skills and expertise, but for weeks on end, they will leave their professions and their expert knowledge behind to go to serve during our reservist call-ups as Operationally-Ready NSmen. In March 2019, MINDEF announced that specialised civilian expertise will be harnessed and deployed into new roles. It also has a dedicated deployment centre to oversee the expansion of expertise deployment. Professionals, such as those working in cybersecurity, law, medicine, engineering and psychology, have been deployed. In a small country, facing many complex threats and risks, such deployment offers us a good way to maximise the men and women who are serving our country. Can the Minister tell us how MINDEF/SAF is exploring ways to better leverage the civilian expertise of our National Servicemen to meet the operational needs of the SAF? Overall, can the Minister give us an idea of the expertise-based deployment scheme? How many experts have signed up and in what areas? How do their deployments differ from the usual deployments and have they been able to make an impact? Given the fact that the scheme is fairly new, what lessons have we learnt and how do we compare against citizen armed forces in other countries?”
“This can either be in the form of giving guidance on specific items or tax incentives for doing so. Second, keep looking out for those whose incomes have been lost or reduced during the pandemic and to provide support for those who might fall through the cracks, such as those with limited family support. And related to the second, perhaps it is not just a matter of having more schemes, but helping more people become aware of and applying for such schemes. Yes, we need to extend more help to those less tech-savvy workers to apply for Government schemes. They are often the ones who need it most. Even as we help address their welfare needs, we can also help them see where they need help in terms of upgrading their skills and securing jobs. As Singapore develops, aspirations today are understandably different from the past. We are better educated, technologies have empowered convenience and lifestyles have evolved. But one thing remains: we continue to want the best for our children and for the next generation. In the past, a dollar’s value is measured in its ability to buy a home, to go to school and put a meal on the table. Today, a dollar can already do this for most of us, and we want it to buy more. Mr Speaker, Sir, the challenges have become more complex today – ageing population, maturing economy, sandwich generation, cost of living, climate change, global competition for talents. What we need to buy with our dollar is security for all Singaporeans, to be able to continue our common dream of peace and prosperity amidst rising and uncertain seas. Sir, I support the Budget.”
“We ran similar "Stretch Your Dollar" programmes in 2007 to 2008 during the Global Financial Crisis and again from 2010 to 2011 during the economic downturn. Overall, NTUC’s focus is on ensuring workers in Singapore remain competitive and employable for life, as well as enhancing their welfare. To do this, NTUC strives to help workers of all collars and ages get better jobs and earn better wages. At the same time, NTUC supports workers and their families by moderating the cost of living through various programmes, including sustainable wage increases in the form of PWM, subsidised training, financial assistance schemes and affordable daily essentials and services through the NTUC group of social enterprises. Within the NTUC group, we have various charities and foundations. They include U Care Fund, FairPrice Foundation, Orange Aid, Eldercare Trust and Bright Horizons Fund to ensure those who have less, they are not disadvantaged. In fact, when I group all these together, over $441 million have been given out. Over the years, the NTUC Enterprise group have evolved to be significant industry players today, whilst continuing to take care of the needs of not just workers, but also their multi-generational families, across their different life stages. We strive to play our part to moderate cost of essential goods and services, serving as price benchmarks and addressing underserved needs. Of course, we are not the only ones doing this, and there are many, many helping hands all over Singapore to help those in need. I would like to ask if the Government can consider the following. First, can we on a whole-of-Government and whole-of-society basis, coordinate, encourage efforts which keep basic items affordable, to help cope with the cost of living?”
“Like everyone else in this House, I have no sympathy for them and they should be taken to task. I am sure the Committee against Profiteering headed by Minister of State Low Yen Ling, when the committee is formulating the guidelines against profiteering, will, with the help of the community, step up their vigilance in light of the current situation and ensure that those who use, whether it is “inflation” or “GST” or whatever, to cover a multitude of price increases, will be taken to task. But at the same time, we should not begrudge businesses and SMEs for legitimate and reasonable price increases for the reasons that I shared earlier. Finally, I would like to bring up an "ask" from SMEs – the issue of manpower. Given the important role that migrant workers play in Singapore’s economy, I would like the Government to give some flexibility to businesses and, in particular, SMEs in hiring such workers. Let me now switch to the other group and speak about the cost of living faced by individuals and families. Cost of living is a perennial issue. I am not sure about the rest of you but my grandparents, parents, peers and now my own children, they are also talking about it. I think no one will ever say things were cheap during their time. Our forefathers carried those worries too, but through determination, hard work and with support from various people and the Government sectors, they not only survived but prospered and built the foundation of a thriving Singapore. NTUC was certainly one of those partners. In fact, NTUC FairPrice, "Welcome" then, was born at a time of rising prices in the oil shocks of the 1970s. Just two Mondays ago, we announced the "Stretch Your Dollar" programme to give a 5% discount on 100 essential items every Friday. This will start in March.”
“The current conflict that is taking place in Russia and Ukraine will add further cost pressures to businesses. Amongst other things, Ukraine is a major supplier of sunflower seed, sunflower oil, whilst Russia is a major supplier of wheat, which will impact raw materials supply and cost of wheat-based products. Ukraine is also a major producer of corn. Corn supply shortage may also impact price of livestock feeds where corn is a major ingredient. Indeed, many egg suppliers have told me that their cost has gone up very significantly where energy cost and corn, which is the feed for the chicken, are major cost items for them. In its annual survey last year, the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry sought feedback from more than 1,000 businesses, 92% of whom are SMEs. Many say their costs have gone up quite significantly and, as a result, they have suffered losses. For sure, some 57% of Singapore businesses surveyed saw their costs rise this year. That is nearly double the 28.8% who did so last year. SMEs form an important part of the Singapore economy, including as a source of jobs and meaningful livelihood. And, often, the voices of small business owners go unheard. So, what can we do to ensure that SMEs have a place at the table? For example, trade associations play an important role in gathering feedback, as well as explaining new policies and schemes to its members. Such associations may run on a tight budget, which constrain their effectiveness. Can the Minister consider providing some one-off grants to such associations? On the impact of cost increases, I think some price increase in products and services may be expected. Of course, there are those few errant businesses which may take advantage of the situation to profiteer.”
“Sir, first, let me declare my interests as the Group CEO of NTUC Enterprise and the Fairprice Group. Sir, this Budget looks into the future, even if it runs, for the third year, into the red. The bills come, not just from the price of security and safety today, but for the education and investments of tomorrow. The rising inflationary pressures come from different sources and are complex in nature. The impact, however, is simple and direct – a dollar today can buy more than a dollar tomorrow. I want to speak on two groups that are particularly hard-hit – small businesses and the cost of living for the ordinary men and women. First, cost pressures faced by SMEs. Many SME suppliers are all struggling now to manage the cost increases that are coming from all fronts. Some described it like a "tsunami". Whether it is raw materials, freight, manpower, packaging or cost of energy, everything is more expensive now. Added to that, the headwinds from tough weather, floods and logistical disruptions due to COVID-19 restrictions. For SMEs, in particular, where profits can be razor-thin, it is about cost pressures and stresses of managing rising costs in many areas, and these, sometimes, can appear to be faceless corporate troubles. But when businesses fail, jobs are lost, too. And behind each SME is a group of men and women with dreams and families. One SME owner shared with me that the cost of his raw materials for soya sauce includes soya beans. Prices have gone up by 20%, sugar and salt are up 30%, and the freight cost of shipping raw sugar from Thailand to Singapore has increased from what used to be less than $200 per 20-foot full container load, is now $1,000. That is almost a five-fold increase.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, just a short supplementary question for the Parliamentary Secretary. I wonder whether the Parliamentary Secretary could share with us if the Ministry knows the exact number of rough sleepers who actually do have housing options but for various reasons, prefer to still sleep around these areas as is. I ask this because I am sure in all our respective wards, we sometimes get feedback from concerned residents, and rightly so – why do they see this person at this place for so many days? But we actually know them too. They do have housing options but they prefer to rough it out and stay there. If we all know this, I think this will allow the public to know that sometimes what they see is not a case of them having no options. So, if the Parliamentary Secretary could share with us.”