Sharael Taha
Singapore
“L, link regional ecosystems. O, we orchestrate with AI and frontier technologies. And W, we win by creating greater economic value, better jobs and better lives for Singaporeans. For the past 60 years, Singapore mastered the movement of ships. Then we mastered the movement of aircraft. Today, we are mastering the movement of data.”
“This is a test of our social compact, a compact that must now be renewed for a new era where businesses commit to not just profits but to people, where workers commit to not just jobs, but to lifelong growth, and where the Government continues to stand with both, ensuring that no one is left behind.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I would like to thank Minister Tan for sharing the dual fuel nature of our power plants. My supplementary question is how quick is this switching? Can it manage the volatility, especially this unprecedented volatility? And do we need to re-optimise our power plants to manage our energy generation resilience?”
“Thank you, Chairman. Chairman, the Rail Reliability Taskforce has set out clear recommendations – accelerate renewal of ageing core systems, including train signalling and traction power, strengthen backup and resilience measures, improve asset management and spare part planning, deepen workforce capabilities and enhance commuter communic…”
“Thank you, Chairman. I thank the Minister and the political office holders for their comprehensive response. I have a few supplementary questions. I believe the Minister did not get an opportunity to address my cut on the role of NAIC. What precisely is its role?”
“Okay. Mr Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Minister Josephine Teo, Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How, Minister of State Rahayu, Minister of State Jasmin Lau and the Permanent Secretary of MDDI, and the whole MDDI team for the responses and the great work that they do.”
The complete record
Every one of 500 lines we hold for Sharael Taha, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 2 of 10.
“Mr Speaker, many Singaporeans and businesses I meet share a common concern. The ground feels less certain. The global order is fragmenting. Supply chains are shifting. Technology is advancing at a pace few governments and even fewer companies can confidently predict. Recent developments reinforce this. The US has announced potential tariff increases. As Deputy Prime Minister Gan noted earlier this week, if exemptions are not secured, Singapore's exports, such as pharmaceuticals to semiconductors to advanced manufacturing, could face higher duties. For companies, this means tighter margins. For workers, wage pressures. For investors, greater caution. We cannot control geopolitics. But we can strengthen our resilience. Budget 2026 is delivered in a changed world. Prime Minister Wong has described it as the first step towards securing Singapore's future in this new environment. A changed world it is. Our MDDI GPC, across this term and the last, has consistently championed six themes. Firstly, strengthening Singapore's AI value proposition; second, building deep and broad digital capabilities; third, ensuring ethical governance; fourth, uplifting vulnerable groups through technology; fifth, investing in infrastructure and cybersecurity; and sixth, building a high-trust digital society. Together with fellow PAP MPs, including Ms Tin Pei Ling, Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Alex Yam and Ms Hany Soh, we filed a Motion with 13 Calls to Action in the last term. I am encouraged that many of these themes that we have championed for are reflected in this Budget. But alignment must translate into decisive execution and measurable outcomes. Our response must rest on three pillars: competitiveness, inclusive growth and digital for good.”
“I seek clarification on how long external partners may retain this data shared, how proper care, retention and eventual secure deletion of data would be enforced, whether responsibility for ensuring data wiping rests with the individual Ministries or centrally and whether Ministries are adequately resourced to manage these audit trails over time. Mr Speaker, in the context of extending data sharing beyond direct government control, the key policy question is not whether standards exist. They clearly do. The question before us is how equivalence is assured, how compliance is enforced and how accountability is maintained when trust is delegated. These clarifications are intended to ensure that we scale data sharing not just efficiently, but responsibly – delivering the best public good while safeguarding the data, privacy and trust of Singaporeans. Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“A risk-based, tiered approach; matching partner requirements to the nature of the data, could reduce unnecessary burden on partners while maintaining strong safeguards, and allow our data sharing ecosystem to remain nimble and responsive. At the same time, while standards, audits and controls are necessary when data is shared with external partners, they must be implemented in a way that is administratively efficient and not overly onerous, while still meeting the intent of safeguarding data. And most importantly, this framework must be operationally resourced. Assurance cannot rest solely on self-declaration, especially when dealing with sensitive data. It must be supported by credible, enforceable oversight that keeps pace with the scale and the sensitivity of data sharing. Third, on partners that deliver strong public outcomes but may lack the digital maturity. We must not lose sight that the ultimate objective of this Bill is to deliver strong public outcomes. Some social service organisations, for example, are exceptionally effective at engaging vulnerable seniors or families in need; yet, may not have the resource or technical capability to immediately meet stringent digital standards. Their digital limitations should not diminish their ability to deliver public good, nor risk unintentionally excluding those who need help most. In this regard, I seek clarification on whether the Government would consider providing support through targeted funding or capability-building programmes to help such partners strengthen their digital resilience. As we approach the Budget period, this may be a timely area for consideration, ensuring that trust and inclusion advance together. Fourth, on data retention and disposal.”
“As we extend data sharing to external partners, what equivalent standards will be required of them? In particular, I seek clarification on the standards that will be imposed; the audit rights Government will retain and the intended audit regime or frequency; whether partners will be assessed through self-declaration, pre-project assessments, or ongoing assurance; on how risks arising from subcontractors engaged by these partners will be managed; and how liability and breach accountability will be clearly structured in contractual terms. Which brings me to my second point: data classification and proportionality. Information technology (IT) practitioners will recognise that the safest way to manage risk in this scenario is, in theory, not to allow data sharing at all. But the clear benefits of responsible data sharing; seen in schemes such as GSTV, Workfare and employment credits, and all the examples cited by Minister of State Jasmin Lau earlier, show that this is not a tenable position today. Avoiding risk entirely comes at a real cost to citizens. Our residents have asked for greater integration across Government services, and our lived experience in assisting with appeals shows both how far we have come and how much more we can still do to make lives better for our people and businesses. That said, not all data carries the same level of risk. Some data may be aggregated or anonymised; some may involve businesses or economic information; and other data may involve personal information or touch on critical infrastructure. Can there be differentiated standards based on the classification and sensitivity of data shared?”
“Mr Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] There have been many benefits brought by the Public Sector (Governance) Act in strengthening the Government's service delivery. This Bill seeks to extend those benefits through data sharing with external partners, namely organisations outside the public sector. In this endeavour, it is important for us to enhance our capability to share data securely, protect the data of Singaporeans and ensure that the selected external partners comply with the same high standards that citizens expect from the Government. In this regard, the MDDI Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC), together with the People's Action Party (PAP) Members of Parliament, seek several important clarifications. These clarifications are not intended to slow progress, but to ensure that when data sharing is extended beyond direct Government control, we continue to uphold public trust in our digital systems, while further enhancing its benefits to citizens and businesses. The core of this discussion is not merely about data or systems, but about people's lives. It is about how data is used to facilitate transactions for Singaporeans, expedite assistance to those in need and ensure no one is left behind – while at the same time, allowing us to safeguard the security, privacy and trust that citizens have placed upon us. (In English): Mr Speaker, allow me to elaborate on my own clarifications. First, on assessing the readiness and capability of external partners entrusted with public data. Within Government, agencies are required to meet established standards such as Instruction Manual 8 (IM8) compliance, secure hosting environments, robust incident-response capabilities and many others and these are regularly audited.”
“What capabilities must partners possess before data is entrusted to them and how do we ensure compliance is robust, yet not overly onerous? In our deliberations, the GPC recognises that there are many types of data; ranging from anonymised and aggregated data, to business and economic, and sensitive data relating to personal data and critical infrastructure. How do we adopt a tiered, risk-based approach that balances control with efficiency? Mr Henry Kwek, Ms Jessica Tan and I will speak further on this. At the core of this Bill is the objective of delivering public goods better and doing so safely. There could also be a group of partners who have demonstrated a strong track record of delivering positive public outcomes but may need assistance in strengthening their data infrastructure. The GPC will propose supporting such external partners to mature their digital system so that they can continue to serve residents better. Fourth, governance and oversight. Who approves data sharing arrangements and what safeguards are in place? When data is shared with external partners, how do we ensure transparency on what is shared and the processes it goes through? Mr Yip Hon Weng will share views on this, including proposing possible oversight mechanisms such as reporting or periodic reviews. Fifth, ongoing cybersecurity assurance once data exchange is operational and protection against cyberattacks. Mr Cai Yinzhou and I will touch on this. Finally, accountability when things go wrong. As the cybersecurity community often reminds us, it is not a question of if a breach occurs, but when. How are external partners held accountable should a breach occur on their end, particularly in the context of PSGA and PDPA? Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Henry Kwek will address this.”
“Singaporeans recognise the significant benefits that the PSGA has delivered within Government. This Bill seeks to extend those benefits by enabling trusted data sharing with external partners. As we do so, it is essential that we scale securely, protect the data of Singaporeans and hold external partners to the same high standards that Singaporeans rightly expect of the Government. It is against this backdrop that the MDDI GPC and fellow People's Action Party (PAP) MPs seek clarifications across several key themes. These clarifications are not raised to slow progress, but to ensure that as we extend data sharing beyond direct government control and unlock further benefits for our people and businesses, we continue to uphold the trust that underpins public confidence in our digital systems. Allow me to briefly outline these themes before elaborating on my own. Firstly, how does the Government determine what data may be shared, and under what circumstances, with external partners? What thresholds, what principles and public-interest considerations must be met before data move beyond the public sector? GPC and PAP MPs Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Henry Kwek will elaborate on this. Second, the scope of data sharing, particularly in relation to healthcare data. This Bill is being debated ahead of the HIB, which focuses on safeguarding health data for healthcare delivery. The interaction between these two Bills raises important questions on scope, safeguards, accountability and how the amended PSGA interfaces with other legislation governing data use. My fellow GPC Member Ms Choo Pei Ling will address this. Third, once data-sharing is deemed appropriate, how do we appoint and assess external partners?”
“For those of us who regularly assist residents with appeals, we also see both how far we have come and where more can still be done. Even today, we sometimes wish for deeper integration, so that residents in need do not have to navigate multiple applications or repeatedly submit the same information. And we can no longer imagine a Public Service where backend systems are fragmented, because we know the administrative inefficiencies this would create and, more importantly, how easily people could fall through the cracks simply because the system was too complex or too burdensome to access. Singaporeans intuitively understand the value of data sharing when it is used to meet real public needs, whether to deliver services more smoothly or to reduce administrative burden on businesses. But as we scale these capabilities, the central issue before us today is no longer just governance efficiency or administrative accountability. It is about trust. Trust that data is used responsibly and only for its intended purpose. Trust that it is protected, not misused or manipulated to the disadvantage of individuals or businesses. And critically, trust that can be sustained as data sharing extends beyond direct Government agencies to external partners and ecosystems; introducing, inevitably, more points of vulnerability that must be carefully managed. This debate marks an important evolution: from managing boundaries within Government, to how we build, safeguard and scale trust in a digital state that increasingly operates beyond its traditional reach. Mr Speaker, the MPs of the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) stand in support of this important Bill.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. Mr Speaker, when the PSGA was debated in this House in 2018, Members raised thoughtful and legitimate concerns. Much of that debate centred on how to strike the right balance between central oversight and the operational autonomy of Statutory Boards; how to enable effective whole-of-Government coordination; how to provide a clear legal basis for data sharing across agencies; and how to apply governance standards consistently across public bodies. Members also raised deeper questions that remain relevant today: where accountability sits in an increasingly digital state; how we build a data-driven, yet citizen-centric public service; how we break down agency silos; and how governance frameworks can enable, rather than constrain, our Smart Nation ambitions. At its core, the 2018 debate was about governance and boundaries: managing risk, clarifying authority and ensuring accountability as the public sector transformed. Eight years on, we can see clearly how the PSGA has enabled many of the milestones set out in the Digital Government Blueprint. Whole-of-Government services, integrated digital platforms and the "once-only" principle are no longer abstract policy aspirations. They are lived realities for our residents and businesses. We see this in the seamless sharing of information at the backend: whether in the delivery of the Goods and Services Tax Vouchers (GSTV) and Workfare Income Supplement, or in businesses applying for schemes such as the Enabling Employment Credit and Senior Employment Credit to support vulnerable workers, and many more examples shared by Minister of State earlier. These are not just efficiency gains; they translate directly into people receiving help more quickly and with less friction.”
“The Bill before us today is not a standalone measure, but part of a long-term journey; one that combines education, legislation and compassion to safeguard every user, especially the most vulnerable. This, Mr Speaker, is the spirit of our digital future – a connected society that is also a caring one where freedom of expression is matched by responsibility and where justice online is real and reachable as justice offline. I stand in support of this Bill and the shared goal it represents: to build a safe, responsible and inclusive digital Singapore for all.”
“We already have POHA, OHCA and IMDA guidelines to ensure digital platforms behave more responsibly. Many PAP MPs have also conducted programmes such as Digital Well-being and Safety, and at M3 Pasir Ris, we organised M3 Goes Digital to educate citizens about cybersecurity. This new Bill complements those efforts and provides greater protection to victims. With that, I would like to seek three clarifications. First, how do we determine online harassment and when will the remaining categories of online harms be implemented? Second, the importance of support for victims, including counselling assistance and guidance that can be coordinated by the OSC. Third, ensuring this law does not bring about an excessive litigation culture, especially against the bigger firms that have the ability to intimidate victims with high legal costs. This law must ensure swift action and immediate relief to victims, so that justice can be achieved expeditiously. Our goal will be to build a safe and responsible digital space for all Singaporeans. (In English): Mr Speaker, Singapore's online space must be a place of opportunity, not harm. The Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Bill represents another important step in our collective effort to make our Internet a safer and more trusted place for all. This Bill builds on more than a decade of sustained progress and advocacy from the ground-up initiatives by community partners, PAP MPs who have championed digital well-being and online safety, to key legislative milestones, such as POHA and OCHA, and many others. Together, these efforts reflect our continued commitment to protect Singaporeans from online harm while promoting a culture of digital responsibility.”
“This concern is even more acute when victims face large, well-resourced companies or global platforms. Such entities could exploit the prohibitive cost of legal action to deter victims from pursuing justice. Many may simply give up, unable to sustain long or expensive proceedings. Hence, I support the approach of limiting appeals, to ensure that relief remains timely and accessible. If every dispute were taken into lengthy court processes, many victims would refrain from seeking help altogether, something which Minister Tong has shared earlier too. Justice must never depend on one’s capacity to afford it. That said, I urge the Government and the OSC to monitor the use of statutory torts closely, ensuring that they empower victims rather than intimidate them; promoting fairness, accountability and confidence in our online safety framework. Mediation and conciliation should be encouraged as first-line remedies, and the OSC could monitor the civil actions to ensure the law remains fair and accessible to all. Ultimately, this Bill must empower victims, not overwhelm them, making justice attainable, not intimidating; strengthening accountability without fostering a culture of fear or excessive litigation. Mr Speaker, allow me to provide a summary in Malay please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, this Bill is extremely important because the digital world is now integral to our daily lives. Online spaces bring about many benefits for learning, working and networking, but it also comes with harms such as cyberbullying, sharing of private images without consent and doxxing, which can cause profound emotional impact. All this while, the Government and our people have worked to protect online users.”
“So, when a victim files a report with the OSC, could there be an automatic prompt or offer for counselling support, so that help is not just available but actively extended? This small change could make a big difference, ensuring that victims receive structured, compassionate and timely support at the moment they need it most. Working with the Ministry of Social and Family Development, Ministry of Education, the Institute of Mental Health and social service providers, the OSC could establish a Victim Support and Assurance Framework comprising a confidential helpline or online portal for guidance; access to counselling and trauma-support services; and collaboration to track and prevent recurring patterns of online abuse. Being victim-centric means more than punishing offenders. The law must deliver justice but beyond that, it is must also help victims rebuild confidence and trust in our digital space. With such a framework, the OSC can be not just a regulator but a guardian of digital well-being for all Singaporeans. Mr Speaker, while the statutory torts clarify duties of online actors, we must be alert to unintended effects. Clearer legal rights may lead to more frequent or premature litigation, as victims, intermediaries, or even platforms resort to the courts as a first response rather than a last. We must guard against creating a more litigious society, where disputes are too readily taken to court. This would only make it harder for victims, many who are already distressed, who may hesitate to come forward because of the financial, emotional and psychological toll of litigation, and the pain of having to relive their trauma. Some may also fear losing a civil case and being burdened with legal costs.”
“Can the Government clarify what qualifies as an "online service provider"? Will this extend to closed group or platforms such as WhatsApp, Telegram and WeChat? Many Singaporeans are administrators of private chatgroups among friends, colleagues, classmates or even strangers such as in Build-To-Order chatgroups. Some of the most hurtful cyberbullying can occur within such closed platforms. How will the Bill handle cases arising from private or semi-private groups, where the boundary between personal and public communication is slightly blurred? Mr Speaker, while the Bill rightly focuses on timely and accessible relief, a truly victim-centric approach must not only enable victims to act against perpetrators but also help them recover from the harm. Victims may take civil action through a statutory tort and claim enhanced damages in serious or malicious cases, a clear message that accountability applies equally online. However, the Bill does not address psychological and social support, especially for victims of cyberbullying, doxxing, or image-based abuse. The emotional scars often outlast the digital content itself. The OSC can also play a broader and more supportive role in caring for victims of online harm, acting as a one-stop point of contact that connects them to counselling services, community partners and social agencies that can provide the help they need. In Handout 2, it is also noted that counselling support today is self-initiated by victims at the point when the harm is experienced. But we know that, for many, this is often the most difficult time to reach out, when the victims may feel alone, frightened, or unsure of what to do next. Can I suggest for the system to be a bit more proactive?”
“While this provides a sound foundation, I seek clarification on how the threshold will be determined for online harassment? Will it depend on the number of incidents, the severity of content, or the type of platform involved, something to which Minister of State Rahayu alluded to. How will the OSC determine what breached the online harassment threshold and how will we compare one versus the other? I would also like to seek clarification about the timeline and criteria for introducing the remaining categories. Also, if a victim experiences a form of harm covered only in a later phase, will the OSC have discretion to act on the case? For the law to be effective, the OSC's investigations and directives must be swift and timely. Hence, may I ask, what is the expected case load under the first five categories? In Handout 2, which was distributed earlier, on the USC User Journey, what is the expected time between "a file reported to OSC" to when the "OSC may issue direction against the communicator, administrator and platform?" In the earlier speech, Minister of State Rahayu shared that victims can file a report after reporting to the online platform where the harm is occurring. How do we ensure that this proactive reporting is not abused? Who will be the case workers? How will OSC case workers assess the incidents? Will they be doing it manually and how do we scale it up quickly? The key point I am trying to make is, how do we adequately resource the OSC with the expertise, the manpower and the technology required to ensure that victims can get effective and timely relief? We need to set the OSC up for success. Lastly, the Bill empowers the OSC to issue directions to the communicator, administrator, or online service provider involved.”
“Globally, jurisdictions such as the UK’s Online Safety Act, the EU’s Digital Services Act, Australia’s Online Safety Act, Canada’s proposed Online Harms Act and New Zealand’s Harmful Digital Communications Act are grappling with the same question: how to protect users while preserving legitimate expression? Online harms evolve rapidly. To remain effective, our laws must first and foremost protect victims, provide quick and accessible recourse, for in the digital age, harm spreads faster than healing; and ensure that justice is fair, balanced and proportionate, shaping a safer and more respectable online space for all. I therefore stand in support of this Bill, which takes a pragmatic and, as both Minister Teo and Minister Tong described as a "victim-centric approach," something which I agree. It focuses on timely relief, clear accountability and shared responsibility across all stakeholders in the digital ecosystem. That said, I would like to raise three areas for clarification: firstly, the definition and application of OSRA; secondly, how we can provide better support for victims of online harm; and thirdly, the possible unintended effects of the Bill. Mr Speaker, the Bill defines 13 categories of online harms, of which the first five – online harassment, doxxing, online stalking, intimate-image abuse and image-based child abuse – will be implemented first. Minister Teo shared that the remaining eight will be followed progressively. The Bill defines online harassment as the communication of material that a reasonable person would consider threatening, abusive, insulting, sexual or indecent, and likely to cause harassment, alarm, distress, or humiliation to the victim.”
“From the early days of Singapore's digital journey, we have always been mindful of the risks that come with greater connectivity and many have played their part in building a safer online space. At the ground level, numerous organisations have been promoting digital well-being and online safety education and many of my fellow People's Action Party (PAP) MPs have also done so in their constituencies. In Pasir Ris East, we began our Digital Well-being and Safety lessons in 2020 and later expanded them through the M³ Goes Digital programme to reach more members of the minority community. At the legislative level, Singapore has taken progressive and steady steps to strengthen online safety. We enacted POHA in 2014, introduced the OCHA in 2023, and updated the Broadcasting Act and IMDA Codes of Practice to hold online platforms accountable for harmful content. A safe and responsible digital environment has long been a key advocacy point among PAP MPs. In 2024, our Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Communications and Information, then chaired by Ms Tin Pei Ling with Members Ms Hany Soh, Ms Jessica Tan, Mr Alex Yam and myself, filed a Motion titled "Building an Inclusive and Safe Digital Society." Together with more than 10 PAP MPs, we called for stronger safeguards against online harms such as cyberbullying and urged platforms to do more to protect users. Hence, our MDDI GPC welcomes the Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Bill, which builds on these foundations – from ground feedback, to action, to legislation and now continued advocacy in this House. This Bill strengthens the framework to ensure that victims of online harm can receive swift, effective and meaningful relief, while reinforcing the responsibilities of platforms and perpetrators alike.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. Mr Speaker, for many in my generation and those before, we remember life before the Internet when communication meant pagers and for some lucky few, tumbler handphones and the familiar sound of a dial-up modem. Some may recall an even earlier time, where snail mail is just known as mail. But for today's generation, our children, students and younger workers, they have grown up knowing only a world that is integrated with online. For most of us, the digital space has become inseparable from daily life. It is where we learn, we create networks, we work, and forms part of our identity. While the digital realm has brought immense good in connecting us, empowering creativity and expanding opportunity, it has also become a space where real harm can occur. Over the years, we have seen painful examples right here in Singapore that remind us that what happens online can wound deeply offline. In one tragic case, a teenage student took her own life after enduring prolonged cyberbullying from classmates on social media. Hurtful messages and ridicule in the digital space compounded the pressures she faced in the real world. There was also the incident of a National Serviceman sentenced to jail after uploading his ex-girlfriend's private images onto a website, tagging her name and social media handle. The images spread within hours and, despite takedown efforts, the victim continued to face humiliation long after. There are many more examples of online harms and these are not isolated incidents. They show that online harms are not just virtual. They are real, they are lasting and they are deeply personal.”
“Our goal is not merely to penalise discrimination after it occurs, but to prevent it from taking root; so that we can build workplaces that are fair and inclusive for all. (In English): Mr Speaker, the two Bills that bring the Workplace Fairness Legislation together marks a significant milestone in Singapore's journey towards a more equitable workplace. They show that while we value competitiveness and meritocracy, we also value compassion and justice. They affirm that every worker regardless of race, gender, age, religion, disability, family status or any of the protected characteristics deserves to be treated fairly and have equal opportunities to thrive. As we implement these Bills, let us focus not only on the enforcement, but also on the education, the empowerment and the empathy, for fairness is not just a rule to be followed. It is a value to be lived every day in the workplace. Mr Speaker, I support the Bill.”
“It builds trust, it attracts talent and strengthens social cohesion. Mr Speaker, in Malay, please. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, last January, this House debated the first part of the Workplace Fairness Bill. In that debate, I shared my personal experience of encountering racial prejudice in the workplace. Although the situation today has changed and improved significantly, workplace discrimination remains a concern for many Singaporeans. Sometimes, such discrimination is not overt. It can happen subtly — during promotion opportunities, or the way performance appraisal is conducted. Some also occurs through work culture or subconsciously, such as conversing in a foreign language that is not inclusive. Although not always visible, its effects can be deeply painful and affect a worker's dignity and confidence. That is why the Workplace Fairness Bill is so important. Together with the Dispute Resolution Bill presented today, it demonstrates our nation's commitment to ensuring every worker is treated fairly, respected and given equal opportunities. However, for the legislation to be truly effective, most disputes should be resolved at an early stage — through internal grievance processes and joint discussions. If all cases continue to be brought to tribunals, workplace relationships could become tense and unhealthy. Therefore, my clarification today focuses on how we can strengthen these first two stages — so that every worker feels protected and safe to speak up, and every employer has a fair way to resolve discrimination issues. Mr Speaker, laws can establish fairness, but laws alone cannot build a sense of togetherness. That requires culture, leadership and empathy.”
“These are often the most vulnerable workplaces where HR structures are informal and power dynamics can be more pronounced. I, therefore, seek clarification on how workers in these smaller companies will be protected. For example, can these workers still seek recourse through TAFEP or mediation if they experience discrimination? Will there be a transitional assistance or advisory services to help smaller employers adopt fair practices without the same administrative burden as large firms? Something which was shared by many Members. Could the Ministry consider a phased approach or incentives, such as grants or toolkits, to help businesses build fair employment systems over time? And will there be plans to include these smaller businesses into the legislation? It is important that our national commitment to fairness is not dependent on company size. Every worker, regardless of where they work, should feel protected from discrimination and be treated with dignity and with respect. Mr Speaker, laws can mandate fairness but they cannot create inclusion alone. That requires culture, requires leadership and requires empathy. Our goal must be not just to punish discrimination after it occurs, but to prevent it from taking root. We can do so by helping employers and workers to recognise unconscious bias, to build inclusive hiring practices and to foster workplaces where diversity is seen as a strength. In this regard, I am heartened that the tripartite partners of MOM, NTUC and SNEF have consistently worked together to promote fair employment through TAFEP. The success of this legislation will depend greatly on how well we continue that partnership and how effectively we communicate to both employers and workers that fairness benefits everyone.”
“Many large firms already have HR departments or diversity leads who can manage such cases. But for smaller organisations, HR may be one person juggling multiple roles or the business owner themselves. Without clear procedures or adequately trained staff to manage discrimination complaints, employees may be reluctant to raise concerns, either out of fear of retaliation, a perception that nothing will change or concern that a poorly handled process could further strain relationships at the workplace. Hence, I would like to ask the Ministry: how will it support firms in developing fair and transparent internal processes for handling grievances on discrimination? Will there be standard templates or model grievance frameworks provided to guide companies, which many in the House have talked about so I will not belabour on such an approach. Will TAFEP or Workforce Singapore offer training and certification for HR personnel or line managers in managing discrimination complaints sensitively and fairly? And how will the Ministry ensure that outcomes of internal grievance handling are properly documented so that employer and employee are protected from misunderstanding or misuse? Beyond compliance, grievance handling must be done with empathy and professionalism. It should not be seen as a box-ticking exercise, but as a way to rebuild trust, heal relationships and strengthen the workplace culture. Thirdly, I note that the Workplace Fairness Legislation currently applies to employers with more than 25 employees. While this covers the majority of workers, about close to 18% of companies in Singapore employ fewer than 25 people. This includes many start-ups, family-run firms, social enterprises and small contractors.”
“This Bill, therefore, introduces a three-step framework for handling discrimination grievances and this staged approach is consistent with Singapore's long-standing tripartite model: one built on trust, mutual respect and the shared responsibility between the Government, employers and workers. However, for the legislation to be truly effective, most disputes should ideally be resolved within the first two steps: the internal grievances process and mediation. If every case goes straight to adjudication, we risk fracturing workplaces, relationships and creating an adversarial climate that benefits no one. Hence, my clarifications today will focus on how we can strengthen these first two steps to make them more accessible, fair and effective for both employers and employees. Firstly, may I seek clarification on the total number of workplace discrimination grievances that have been raised since the passage of the first part of the Bill earlier this year. Having such data, even in aggregate, would allow us to monitor trends, identify common types of discrimination and understand which industries or sectors are most affected. For instance, are most cases related to gender, age, race or disability? Are they concentrated in certain job functions or company sizes? Having this insight will help us to fine-tune future policies and training resources. It would also be useful to understand how many of these cases were successfully resolved at the internal or mediation stage before, now, queuing up for adjudication. This would give us a clear sense of whether the grievance handling process is working as intended. Second, how can we better assist companies, especially small and medium enterprises, to manage the internal grievance handling process effectively?”
“Mr Speaker, in January this year, this House debated the first part of the resolution process on the Workplace Fairness Bill. In that debate, I shared my own personal experience of encountering racial prejudice in the workplace and how, while the situation has improved significantly over the years, workplace discrimination remains a concern for many Singaporeans. Discrimination today may not always be overt. It can be subtle, in hiring decisions, in career progression opportunities or in the way performance feedback is given. It can appear in informal networks, in workplace culture or in the unconscious biasness that shape decisions. These experiences may not always make the news, but for the individuals involved, they can be deeply painful and affect their dignity and confidence. That is why the Workplace Fairness Legislation is important. Together with the Workplace Fairness (Dispute Resolution) Bill before us today, it sends a strong signal of our national commitment to fairness, respect and equal opportunity for all workers in Singapore. Mr Speaker, I support this Bill because it establishes a clear, fair and balanced process for resolving discrimination disputes, one that seeks to balance justice with harmony in our workplaces. The framework recognises that while legal redress is important, the best outcome is not always found in the courtroom. It is often better for both worker and employer to resolve disputes early through open communication, internal processes and mediation rather than escalation and litigation.”
“We must ensure that environmental responsibility does not inadvertently erode our competitiveness as an international hub. Instead, it should become a source of differentiation and trust. Finally, Mr Deputy Speaker, as we move toward increased sustainability, we must also ensure fairness in implementation. The proposed levy applies different rates by flight distance – $3, $6 and $16 depending on short-, medium- or long-haul flights. But, within each flight, passengers pay vastly different fares across the different classes of flights. Will the levy be applied proportionately across the different passenger classes, so that it does not disproportionately burden economy class travellers? Likewise, how will the cargo sector be factored into this framework, given its integral role in Singapore's hub competitiveness? And what about private flights? How will it fit into this framework? Ensuring fairness and transparency will be critical to maintaining public trust and broad-based support for this important transition.”
“This is in addition to the levy that has already been imposed. Based on 2024 Changi Airport passenger volumes of 67.7 million passengers, this could generate at least a minimum $210 million annually; a meaningful start. But will the fund be sufficient to not only procure SAF, but to also develop local production capacity, support R&D and also diversify feedstocks? How will this fund be aligned across agencies, like CAAS, the Economic Development Board and Enterprise Singapore, to build an end-to-end resilient SAF supply-chain that creates new green industries, good jobs and regional leadership for Singapore? This transition is not merely about SAF. It is also an economic opportunity to secure Singapore's place as a leader in sustainable aviation innovation. Mr Deputy Speaker, on my second point. The global aviation race is intensifying. KLIA's Aeropolis Master Plan aims to handle over 100 million passengers a year. Bangkok's Airport is expanding through a US$4 billion project. Incheon Airport and Hong Kong International Airport's Three-Runway System will each soon handle up to 120 million passengers annually. Against this backdrop, Singapore must remain vigilant. The proposed SAF levy, in addition to the levy that was already introduced, though small in absolute terms, could affect our price competitiveness, especially for transit traffic and air freight if neighbouring hubs delay similar moves. Has the Ministry assessed the potential impact of this levy on Singapore's attractiveness as a transit and cargo hub? And what mitigation strategies are being considered to preserve our competitiveness, while sustaining our leadership in sustainable aviation?”
“I wish to raise three clarifications: firstly, how Singapore will ensure SAF supplies stability and manage price volatility while investing sufficiently in future production; secondly, how we will safeguard Singapore's competitiveness as an air hub amid regional expansion; and thirdly, how we will ensure fairness and equity in how the cost of transition is shared across passengers and industry stakeholders. Mr Deputy Speaker, it has been noted in this debate that SAF currently costs three to five times more than conventional jet fuel, while global supply makes up less than 1% of total aviation fuel consumption. Decarbonising aviation is essential, but the transition must also be economically and operationally sustainable for airlines, passengers and industry players. Singapore has taken an important first step. Neste's expanded refinery in Tuas now produces more than one million tonnes of SAF annually, making it one of the largest facilities in the world and positioning Singapore as a key node in the regional SAF value chain. However, other countries are rapidly increasing capacity too. In our region, EcoCeres Renewable Fuels and Petronas are developing similar facilities targeting about one million tonnes per year. With rising global demand and new mandates, such as, in France, Sweden and Japan requiring 10% SAF blending by 2030, we can expect increased competition for feedstock and price volatility. Hence, my first clarification: how will Singapore manage this volatility? What measures will ensure stability in ticket pricing and airline operations, especially when market fluctuates? Clause 5 of the Bill introduces section 25D, creating the SAF Fund, financed by a levy estimated at $3 for short-haul, $6 for medium-haul and $16 for long-haul flights.”
“They reflect how deeply aviation is woven into our economic fabric. A strong aviation sector anchors growth, attracts investment, drives innovation and creates good jobs. Supporting it is not only an economic policy, it is a strategic necessity for Singapore's continued prosperity. Mr Deputy Speaker, it is estimated that the aviation sector contributes about 2% to 2.5% of global CO2 emissions. The industry recognises this challenge and is taking major steps to reduce its environmental impact. New-generation aircraft, such as, the Airbus A350 powered by Trent XWB engines, achieve up to 25% lower fuel burn and CO2 emissions through better aerodynamics, advanced materials and efficient propulsion. And the fleet renewal is supporting this transition. Another key lever is SAF. Under the ECLIF3 programme, Airbus, Rolls Royce and the German Aerospace Centre successfully tested 100% SAF on both engines of an A350, demonstrating its compatibility and emissions benefits. Here in Singapore, CAAS' Sustainable Air Hub Blueprint sets out our roadmap towards net-zero aviation emissions by 2050, focusing on SAF adoption, electrification of ground operations and renewable energy deployment. These efforts show that aviation growth and sustainability are not mutually exclusive. As a leading global hub, Singapore can prove that responsible aviation growth and climate stewardship can go hand in hand. Mr Deputy Speaker, I support the Bill, which strengthens Singapore's leadership in sustainable aviation and continues our commitment to global decarbonisation efforts. However, as we advance this important goal, we must take a balanced approach, recognising both its strategic advantages and practical implications.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, I would like to declare my interest as an authority member of the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore and as one of more than 50,000 proud workers in our aviation and aerospace industry. Mr Deputy Speaker, aviation has always been and remains one of the key pillars of Singapore's economic success and competitiveness. Globally, air passenger traffic is projected by IATA to double by 2040, driven by a growing middle class and rising regional connectivity. Asia Pacific will lead this expansion and as a major global air hub, Singapore is well placed to capture a significant share of this growth. With Terminal 5 coming online in 2030s, Changi Airport's capacity will increase by 50 million passengers annually, bringing total throughput to nearly 140 million passengers per year. This will reinforce Singapore's position as a leading global air hub for the future. This growth will not only strengthen air connectivity, but also catalyse growth across tourism, logistics, hospitality, retail, e-commerce and urban development. It will power our aerospace sector, a key pillar of our manufacturing base. Today, Singapore accounts for over 10% of global maintenance, repair and overhaul (MRO) output, and for engine MRO, it accounts for close to 20% of global market share; a position earned through decades of trust and capability. Singapore's aviation ecosystem, encompassing our airlines, airports, air navigation service providers and logistics partners, contributes about 5% of our gross domestic product and supports more than 190,000 jobs. When we include its wider economic impact through supply chains and tourism, aviation sustains about 529,000 jobs across our economy. Mr Deputy Speaker, these are not just numbers.”
“More can be done, full stop; more can be done with a suggestion; more can be done with a suggestion and something that we do less of. And more can be done not because nothing is being done, but because Members believe more is required. Whether it is in preschool education, youth development, worker upskilling, supporting businesses, addressing the cost of living, or helping young parents and the sandwich generation, or caring for seniors and in providing humanitarian support such as in Gaza as shared by Member Ms Hazlina Abdul Halim. I may have missed it, but I did not hear anyone calling for less to be done. The question then is: if everyone wants more, how do we sustain it, especially as costs rise, from healthcare to infrastructure and social spending? One answer must be in continually growing our economy, so that the pie expands and every Singaporean receives a fairer share, with those in greater need receiving stronger support. Some Members cautioned against “growing GDP at all costs.” From the speeches heard here, this is not what anyone is advocating.”
“Families too were highlighted by Ms Cassandra Lee, Minister of State Jasmin Lau and Ms Valerie Lee, who spoke of the struggles of working parents and the sandwich generation. Ms Elysa Chen and Ms Diana Pang shared the need for stronger support for caregivers. As Ms Valerie Lee memorably said, we must build a society where “caregiving is supported, not merely tolerated.” Ms Denise Phua shared the need for mandating inclusive designs and deliberately designing in opportunities for the special need individuals, one which I also mentioned in investing in inclusive technology. Members also raised wider issues: Dr Hamid Razak and Ms Nadia Samdin on mental health, Mr Edward Chia and myself on SME costs of doing business, Mr Shawn Loh on growing our local MNCs, Mr Victor Lye on hawkers, and Mr Gabriel Lam and Senior Parliamentary Secretary Eric Chua on giving second chances. On sustainability, Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad, Ms Nadia Samdin and Ms Valerie Lee called for protecting our environment and strengthening food and water resilience. Even support for animals found a voice through Ms Lee Hui Ying and others. Mr Speaker, this breadth of voices is worth a mention and it shows that while transformation brings anxiety, it also carries hope. Every segment of our society – the youths, the workers, our special needs individuals, seniors, families, businesses small and large, and even our natural environment – has found representation in this Chamber. That is the strength of our Parliament: no group forgotten, every voice heard. Inclusiveness and care must guide us as we move forward. The third theme is that in almost every speech, as Minister Chan Chun Sing has mentioned, MPs spoke about more can be done, and there are three variants of it.”
“Senior Parliamentary Secretary Goh Hanyan and Minister of State Goh Pei Ming highlighted learning through play, while Mr David Hoe suggested “curiosity credits” to spark exploration. Mr Jackson Lam and Mr Darryl David stressed the need to support marginalised youth and equip them with the skills for the global economy. Together with Ms Jessica Tan, I also called for structured apprenticeships to bridge technical learning with real-world experience. Ms Lee Hui Ying added that even more "senior youths" in their 20s face the burdens of adulting as they enter the workforce. "Senior youths" is a new term that I learnt yesterday. Unfortunately, I no longer fall within the group. For workers, NTUC Secretary-General Ng Chee Meng, Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon, Senior Minister of State Desmond Tan, Minister of State Desmond Choo and Mr Patrick Tay spoke of securing good jobs, upskilling, "skills-first Singapore" and ensuring a "just transition" with AI, automation and leveraging on the wisdom of senior workers. Mr Henry Kwek talked about turning technology disruption into opportunities for all. Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Dr Wan Rizal highlighted the recognition of lower-wage and platform workers, while Ms Gho Sze Kee, Ms Eileen Chong, Ms Poh Li San, myself and others raised support for professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) and young graduates. For our seniors, Mr Alex Yeo, Mr Dennis Tan and Mr Saktiandi Supaat raised concerns on retirement adequacy and dignified living. Mr Cai Yinzhou proposed the formation of the elder corp to leverage on the skills and wisdom of seniors. Ms Choo Pei Ling spoke about healthcare and support for those living with illnesses.”
“Labour MP, NTUC Secretary-General Ng Chee Meng, Senior Minister of State Desmond Tan, Minister of State Desmond Choo and Dr Wan Rizal emphasised that unions will support workers through job redesign, upskilling, and reskilling, ensuring no one is left behind. Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon spoke of the importance of tripartism in making transformation possible. In education, Ms Goh Hanyan and Mr Goh Pei Ming urged a relook at how we raise our children and review our exam system, a call echoed by Mr Darryl David and supported by Minister Desmond Lee. We face huge uncertainty and we must transform to survive. But as Mr Shawn Loh observed, the President's address over the past two decades have consistently emphasised these same enduring themes: global uncertainty, economic vitality, care for an ageing population, building an inclusive society and then, keeping Singapore united. What makes it different today? The key point is this: as a small nation, we will always face these enduring challenges and emerging trends. We must be ready to pivot, ready to adapt and ready to transform as circumstances evolve. Our survival depends on staying agile, nimble and ever ready to renew ourselves. This acceptance of constant transformation is not optional. It is the very foundation of Singapore’s survival and progress. The second theme is the diversity of support across society. While we agree transformation is necessary, Members also recognised that it brings both anxiety and hope. Above all, there was consensus that growth must never come at the expense of leaving anyone behind. For our youths, Miss Rachel Ong, Minister of State Dinesh Vasu Dash and Mr Ng Shi Xuan spoke of creating safe avenues for expression and more community-driven care.”
“This span geopolitics, the economy, technology and demographics, and they will test us deeply. Senior Minister of State Sim Ann spoke of great power, contestation, rising protectionism and geopolitical conflicts. Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong reminded us that countries are turning inwards while transformative technologies such as AI, coupled with our limits on land, carbon and energy, demand fresh thinking. Ms Tin Pei Ling emphasised the need for Singapore to remain relevant. Ms He Ting Ru cautioned that past performance is no guarantee of future success. The Leader of Opposition pointed to the weight of international and domestic pressures. Mr Yip Hon Weng reminded us that defence and diplomacy are the twin pillars of our survival and Mr Vikram Nair shared the need for allies and self-reliance on defence. This shared recognition of change matters. Transformation begins with recognition of the urgency to change. Knowing we cannot stand still. From the speeches, there is consensus: that transformation is needed in our economy, whether it is jobs, education and social safety nets. Not because they are not working, but because we need to prepare for the challenges ahead. And we must act decisively together. Many Members stressed that the scale of change requires us to rethink fundamentals: our economy, job design, education, child-raising, transportation, housing and senior care. I thank Deputy Prime Minister Gan for affirming the point I raised on strengthening existing industries, while seizing new areas of growth. He spoke of securing footholds in emerging sectors and making Singapore a “home for leading firms.” Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Shawn Huang pointed to intelligent robotics as another exciting frontier.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. Before I proceed, may I first convey my gratitude for the privilege of moving the Motion of Thanks to the President for the speech delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the First Session of this 15th Parliament. It is a great honour to move this Motion and an equal privilege to round up this debate as we begin the new term. I also would like to thank all Members of this House. Over the past five days, 81 Members have spoken in support of the Motion, including our Prime Minister Mr Lawrence Wong; among them were also 32 newly elected Members delivering their maiden speeches. I have been heartened by the depth of conviction and the clarity of purpose in these speeches and together they reflect our collective resolve to improve the lives of Singaporeans and to advance the progress of our nation as one united people, something that was shared by Minister Chan Chun Sing just now. Mr Speaker, the President's address reminded us of the profound transitions of our time, a world in flux, both globally and at home. He set out four key challenges and reminded us that our path forward depends on unity, nurturing a "we first" society built on trust, resilience and a shared purpose. As I listen to the many thoughtful speeches delivered, similar to what Minister Chan has mentioned earlier, it became clear that certain themes resonated strongly. And hence, I had to quickly remove quite a lot of my paragraphs – thanks to Minister Chan. In closing, I will draw out these key themes. Firstly, there is collective agreement from the speeches that the changes before us are not just transient headwinds, but as the President reminded us, they are fundamental shifts in the tide that will shape Singapore's future.”
“Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent to move that the debate be now adjourned?”
“I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for answering questions on AVs. Two supplementary questions from me. Thank you for sharing that AVs must meet the AV safety framework. Can I just confirm that the framework also includes assessment on capability of the system under adverse weather conditions and also redundancy of system, in particular, for cybersecurity? My second question is, and the Senior Minister of State mentioned it earlier, AVs have the potential of helping us serve the quieter areas in towns. One possible area is the area in Jalan Loyang Besar. Can the Senior Minister of State share a bit more about the timeline to scale up these pilots and how can we learn quickly and scale the use of AV in our towns?”
“Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent to move that the debate be now adjourned?”
“Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent to move that the debate be now adjourned?”
“Mr Speaker. May I seek your consent to move the debate now adjourned?”
“Mr Speaker, I just wanted to thank Mr Fadli for citing the good work that our M³ and M³ volunteers do. It is really a good example of a "we first" society. In just over a month, during the month of Ramadan, the M³ volunteers raised $2.4 million through stallholders, individuals, businesses and also through temples. It is a good example of a "we first" society where we can work together towards a common good.”
“Mr Speaker, I would just like to raise a clarification on Mr Fadli Fawzi's speech earlier. He mentioned a fundraiser where more than $2.4 million of funds was released for Gaza and one of the donors was from a temple. Was he referring to the M3 fundraiser for Gaza?”
“Let us work hand in hand to think far ahead, invest in our community, and build pathways with much hope. This is how we transform anxiety into hope and ensure our community continues to progress in the years to come. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, the challenges before us are real. The anxieties of our people are real. The worries of our jobseekers, the struggles of our families coping with costs and the worries of small businesses are real. Yet, so too are the opportunities. In new industries, in new inclusive innovation and in refreshed economic strategies that can bring about better jobs and better ways to care for our society. Let us, therefore, choose to be a "we first" society. A society where success is not just measured by gross domestic product (GDP), but by how much we care for one another, where growth is inclusive, opportunities are shared and no Singaporean is left behind; where quality of life improves not just for individuals, but for families and communities, where Government, businesses, unions, workers and citizens work together in trust. This is how we can turn anxiety into hope. This is how we renew our social compact. This is how we can build a stronger, more united Singapore together. Majulah Singapura. Mr Speaker, Sir, I seek to move. [Applause.] [(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]”
“For some participants, this was their first experience with robotics. It was very moving to see their confidence increase and their eyes light up with these new skills. I would like to congratulate the students from Madrasah Aljunied and children from Muhammadiyah Welfare Home who won first and second place in this competition. Another source of hope is progress for our asatizah. Since 2023, salaries of over 80% of asatizah in mosques and madrasahs have been raised according to Common Salary Guidelines (CSG), with average increases between 5% to 12%. With the implementation of phase three this year, more will be within the CSG guidelines. Asatizah are the pillars of our community, and their work must be recognised and fairly compensated. The establishment of the Singapore College of Islamic Studies (SCIS) is a long-held aspiration of our community. This college will produce asatizah and future leaders, not only for Singapore, but also for the global context. Its adjacent location to SUSS is very meaningful. It opens up cross-institutional opportunities; combining Islamic studies with fields such as social work, Islamic finance, business, and mental health. This will broaden horizons and career choices for our asatizah. Also importantly, SCIS will be funded by the Wakaf Masyarakat Singapura; another initiative of our community. This demonstrates our strength as a united community – a "we first society" as mentioned by the President. Mr Speaker, while anxieties exist about the cost of living, jobs, and uncertainty; there is also much hope. By leveraging on national programmes, strengthening professional networks, elevating the status of asatizah and realising SCIS, we can build a brighter future.”
“Therefore, upskilling and mastering new skills must become part of our lives. In my dialogue with Malay union leaders such as Mr Abdul Samad Bin Abdul Wahab, they emphasised how Unions help workers upskill; by shifting mindsets from merely protecting jobs to protecting workers by providing a better future. I would like to thank them for their efforts. Our community must also leverage on national programmes such as SkillsFuture Credit, WSQ, Career Conversion, Career Transition, and the Tech Accelerator programme. As the Malay saying goes, loosely translated as "no pain, no gain." In Pasir Ris–Changi, we have worked with NTUC to bring these programmes closer to the residents. While changing tides bring a lot of anxiety, they also bring a lot of hope. New industries are emerging; such as advanced manufacturing, robotics, precision engineering, biotechnology, quantum technology, satellite services and many more. All these are new pathways to better jobs and higher incomes. To seize these opportunities, we must first raise awareness. Today, there are 13 professional networks at Mendaki in fields such as engineering, technology, sustainability and finance. Through these networks, opportunities are made available to our community. In fact, just last week, a resident shared that her husband got an engineering job through one of these networks. I strongly encourage more in our community to join them. Additionally, these professional networks also give back to the community. Just last week in Pasir Ris-Changi, the M³ Engineering Professional Network, together with SUTD and Mendaki, organised Robot Wars, where students built AI-based robots, learnt coding, sensors and object recognition. Students from welfare homes also participated.”
“Smart eldercare sensors, telehealth, AI-enabled scheduling, and robotic aids can reduce strain. Scaling these solutions into community care networks, while keeping them affordable, gives caregivers peace of mind and helps seniors live with dignity. We must find ways to adopt them quicker and scale faster to move beyond pilot trials. Mr Speaker, Inclusive innovation is not only about compassion. It is about bringing that opportunity. The Assistive Tech sector, CareTech and the Silver Economy are fast-growing industries. By investing here, Singapore can export solutions and become a trusted hub for inclusive technology. We will build not only a competitive economy, but also a compassionate one where every citizen feel they matter and belong. (In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In my speech earlier, I expressed our thanks to the President for providing a clear backdrop during the Opening of the 15th Parliament. The President reminded us that the world we face today is volatile and he described it not as "transient headwinds" but as "fundamental shifts in the tides." Under such circumstances, two core emotions shape human responses. First, anxiety – the fear of uncertainty. Second, hope – for growth, opportunities and a brighter future. It is through these two lenses that I frame my speech today. Mr Speaker, around the world, the cost of living is rising due to supply chain disruptions, conflicts, and high global interest rates. In Singapore, this situation is further complicated by our dependence on imports and our tight labour market. The reality is that we remain as "price-takers". The sustainable solution is to ensure wages increase faster than costs, through higher productivity and better jobs.”
“Within less than 60 minutes of Pengerang, just 20 kilometres away and Batam, the Northeast Singapore is also strategically positioned to complement Pengerang's oil and gas sector at the Pengerang Integrated Complex and Batam's manufacturing base in addition to its central location and its global connectivity. Together with the Johor-Singapore Strategic Economic Zone (SEZ), this ecosystem can secure good jobs for Singaporeans, boost supply chain resilience and anchor Singapore firmly within the global economy. Mr Speaker, hope must also mean inclusion. Growth cannot be just for some. It must be for all. An inclusive society is one where every Singaporean has the chance to contribute and more importantly, flourish. Technology can and must be used for good and there are ways to which we can use technology towards building a more inclusive society Firstly, through supporting the less able. Assistive technologies, such as screen readers, navigation apps, sensors, provide independence. For example, AI-powered wayfinding tools integrated into Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) stations can help guide the visually impaired. One of my residents lost his sight in his 50s. He travels with his elderly mother in a wheelchair and his special needs sister who is also in her 50s. Each contributes a different sense of touch, mobility, vision, or knowledge as they navigate through the town. He was excited by the pilot of wayfinding tools, such as CityGeni, to help his family move independently. More can be done for families like this. And with a "we first" mindset, agencies and partners can make inclusive innovation a reality. Secondly, through supporting caregivers. While grants like the Home Caregiving Grant help financially, technology can lighten the load.”
“A single agency or a unified user-oriented portal would help simplify the access, enabling firms to focus on transformation and focus on growth. By doing so, we strengthen our enterprises, preserve Singapore's position as a trusted global hub and ensure that the opportunities created at the national level translate into tangible gains for workers and families. Thirdly, we must anchor Singapore's aspiration to remain a global aviation and aerospace hub. And here, I would like to declare my interest as one of the workers in the aerospace industry. Today, Singapore accounts for 10% of the world's global maintenance, repairs and operations (MRO) output. Imagine that our small red dot accounting to 10% of the world's global MRO output. And MRO is one of the key pillars of our Manufacturing 2030 vision, which seeks to grow manufacturing value-add by 50% by 2030. To sustain this growth, we should review the masterplan for Northeast Singapore holistically, from the developments in Changi Terminal 5 to Changi Airfreight Centre, to the Changi East Urban District and Changi East Industrial Zone, to Changi North, Seletar, Punggol Digital District and the reconfiguration of the Loyang Industrial Estate. Together with a rethinking of the Pasir Ris-Changi ecosystem, including preserving the rustic charm of Pulau Ubin, the mangroves and both Pasir Ris and Changi Beach, this entire region on the northeast coast can be transformed into a world-class zone to live, to work and to play sustainably, anchored by future growth industries and seamlessly connected by air through Changi Airport, by sea through Tanah Merah Ferry Terminal and to the rest of Singapore via the Cross-Island and East-West MRT lines.”
“I am encouraged that the Government has formed the Singapore Economic Resilience Taskforce, to help us seize these opportunities and chart our path forward with unity and purpose. In this spirit, I would like to offer a few suggestions on how we can turn this moment of change into one of renewal and growth. Firstly, on growth industries. Opportunities are opening in AI, advanced manufacturing, biotechnology, clean energy, and sustainability. In the Economic Development Board's (EDB's) report, it was stated that AI adoption could enhance productivity across all sectors, notably adding up to $27 billion to manufacturing alone. In its totality, AI is projected to unlock billions in productivity gains across sectors, while advanced manufacturing and robotics will drive high-value careers in precision engineering. Biotechnology is transforming medicine, food, and materials science and clean energy from renewables to emerging technologies like small modular nuclear reactors will strengthen our energy security. Beyond these, niche sectors, such as quantum technologies, space and satellite services, cybersecurity, and the blue economy, they all hold potential for new growth. These industries are not the ends in themselves. They are pathways to secure better jobs, higher incomes and long-term competitiveness for our Singaporeans. Secondly, businesses need clearer, whole-of-Government support to navigate uncertainty. We must refresh our Industry Transformation Maps and align them with the Jobs Transformation Maps, our Company Training Committees (CTCs), our National AI Strategy, our CTO-as-a-Service and all other alphabet soups of support schemes that we have. Many businesses, especially SMEs, find the landscape a bit fragmented and a bit harder to navigate.”
“Instead, let us provide incentives, such as tax benefits or recognition for landlords who adopt these fair guidelines. Transparent rental benchmarks, tied to indices like CPI plus a margin for rent escalations, can prevent unreasonable hikes while preserving fairness. Secondly, we can explore property tax rebates or co-funding schemes for landlords who maintain affordable rents or offer support for landlords who help tenants go digital or improve productivity. Mr Speaker, this is ultimately about trust and partnership. By embracing a "we first" mindset, landlords, businesses and Government can lower costs, reduce uncertainty and give small shops some peace of mind. This might also encourage entrepreneurship and support the startup culture. When our small businesses worry less about survival, they can focus on what matters: improving their services, raising productivity and developing their staff. That is how we keep our communities vibrant, our livelihoods secure and our society coming together. Mr Speaker, growing our economy is not for the sake of growth alone. It is about securing good jobs for Singaporeans, ensuring rising incomes and improving the quality of life for our people. In every strategy that we take, our end goal must always be clear: to create opportunities that uplift our workers, strengthen our families and build a society where every Singaporean can look to the future with confidence. Mr Speaker, while these fundamental shifts in the tide have stirred deep anxieties that we must address, we must also remember that change is not only about disruption. Change also brings renewal, new opportunities, new industries and new ways of living.”