Tan See Leng
Singapore
“We are aware of the Singapore Workplace Report 2026, produced by the Singapore Institute of Directors and Gallup, and we are studying its findings.”
“The Taskforce for Responsible Retrenchment and Employment Facilitation (Taskforce) actively reaches out to all retrenched local employees. In 2025, 77% of Mandatory Retrenchment Notifications (MRNs) were submitted at least seven days ahead of the employee's last working day and 73% of MRNs were submitted at least two weeks ahead.”
“From 2022 to 2025, vacancy rates for technical maintenance roles in the real estate services sector, which includes facilities management, have been lower than the overall job vacancy rate, except in 2025 (see Table 1).”
“The Skills and Workforce Development Agency (SWDA) works with sector agencies to determine the courses which are required by the respective industries. The SWDA currently funds more than 100 courses, spanning a wide range of mental health-related fields.”
“In the first quarter of 2026, the profile of retrenched residents aged 50 to 59 was broadly similar to the profile of all retrenched residents, predominantly comprising professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) and were mainly from wholesale and retail trade, manufacturing, financial and insurance services and profession…”
“In 2025, around 4,200 resident professionals, managers, executives and technicians (PMETs) aged 45 to 59 were retrenched, higher than 3,200 in 2024 and 3,500 in 2023. Their six-month re-entry rate remained stable at 48.5% in 2025, compared with 48.9% in 2024 and 50.1% in 2023.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,238 lines we hold for Tan See Leng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 39 of 45.
“Since the start of Circuit Breaker in April 2020, 53 work injury claims have been filed for injuries sustained by employees while working from home. Thirty-two have been admitted as work injuries and three are being assessed. The rest of the claims were not awarded compensation, for various reasons such as the injury being sustained while performing non-work activities at home.”
“The tripartite partners have issued an advisory on Mental Well-Being at Workplaces to help employers identify and implement initiatives to support their employees’ mental well-being. Most of the recommendations in the advisory can be adopted at little to no cost. For example, companies are already required to undertake risk assessment. The advisory advises them to incorporate mental well-being in these regular risk assessments. iWorkHealth is an online, self-administered psychosocial health assessment tool to identify common workplace stressors. It is provided free. Other recommendations such as encouraging more open and regular conversations on mental well-being and form informal support networks amongst employees likewise do not cost much to the company, but still giving due attention to employees’ mental well-being in the workplace. In addition, the Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Council and Health Promotion Board (HPB) have outreach programmes that include mental well-being support. These too, are offered to SMEs free or at highly subsidised rates. Under the Total WSH Programme, providers work with companies to run interventions to address the safety and health gaps holistically, where mental well-being topics are included. Similarly, HPB’s Workplace Outreach Wellness (WOW) package includes mental well-being programmes that strengthen workplace support for employees and help employees manage stress as well as build mental resilience. With the range of free or highly subsidised services, as well as the simplicity of the interventions themselves, there is really no reason for any firm, whether large or small, to wait for some metric or indicator of distress before attending to their employees’ mental wellness.”
“The Member may be aware that since he filed the question, the Ministry of Health (MOH) has lifted travel restrictions on several non-traditional source countries such as Bangladesh, India, Myanmar and Sri Lanka, where many of our migrant workers (MWs) in the Construction, Marine Shipyard and Process (CMP) sectors come from. As I have mentioned in this House on 1 November 2021, we have resumed entry approvals for MWs from CMP sectors to enter Singapore in a safe and calibrated manner from 1 November 2021, on the condition that they must be fully vaccinated before arrival. Firms in the CMP sectors who need their workers urgently may consider on-going initiatives in their industries to bring in workers safely with tightened end-to-end safe management processes. Workers can enter without proof of vaccination provided they complete the full vaccination regime within two months after arrival. Given the evolving nature of the regional COVID-19 situation, any changes to entry restrictions will depend on the prevailing situation.”
“For example, the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) is helping to match employers with hiring needs to experienced foreign workers already in Singapore but who are no longer needed by their current employers. We are also facilitating the safe inflow of new foreign workers to alleviate the manpower crunch. Our priority is to ensure that the risk of COVID-19 importation is well-managed to protect our public health. With the progressive easing of border restrictions, it will also help facilitate the normalisation of foreign worker inflow. The Ministry of Health has recently announced the easing of measures for travellers from various countries, including Malaysia. The Government will continue to monitor the situation closely, we will continue to work with the industry and companies to adjust to the progressive easing of restrictions and the return of demand.”
“Mr Speaker, COVID-19 has had a significant impact on our economy and labour market. In 2020, total employment contracted by 166,600 and this is the sharpest contraction in two decades. Foreign workers accounted for all of the employment decline, with Government support measures cushioning the impact on local workers. In 2021, even as parts of the economy recover, border restrictions continue to constrain the supply of foreign workers to meet the pick-up in demand. At the same time, some foreign workers who were already in Singapore have returned home. In the first half of 2021, the total number of foreign workers continued to decline by another 32,600. All of this had led to increasing tightness in the labour market. The number of seasonally adjusted job vacancies in the overall economy rose to an all-time high of 92,100 in June 2021. The number of vacancies is especially acute in sectors which rely most on foreign workers, such as construction and manufacturing. The seasonally adjusted job vacancy to unemployed person ratio increased to 1.63 in June 2021, exceeding one for the first time since March 2019. The Government has been working closely with companies to support their manpower needs. Firstly, we are helping companies to expand local hiring. Through the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package, we have placed 140,000 locals into jobs and skills opportunities between April 2020 and end August 2021. The Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI) was introduced in September 2020 and has supported 58,000 businesses to hire more than 400,000 locals thus far. Overall, the number of employed residents has risen by 43,500 since the start of 2020. Secondly, the Government is helping companies retain and hire foreign workers.”
“Between 2018 and 2020, MOM looked into an average of 100 complaints per year from work pass holders on the non-issuance of itemised payslips. Some complaints were lodged directly with MOM while others arose from salary disputes between employer and employee. A further 280 cases involving both foreign and local employees were detected from proactive inspections under the Workright initiative each year. In about 80% of the cases, including complaints, employers were formally notified to make the necessary rectifications. For the others, inquiries revealed that itemised payslips were available digitally or were issued late due to a lapse. No further action was taken for these cases. There were no repeat offenders.”
“Between 2018 and 2020, MOM received about 180 complaints each year on excessive working hours in breach of Part IV of the Employment Act. Enforcement action was taken against 65% of the cases, ranging from the issuance of warnings to fines, and prosecution for more serious cases. The rest of the complaints were either issued with an advisory for minor contraventions or were unsubstantiated. Enforcement is also complemented with education to raise awareness of both employers and employees. This is done through the Workright initiative which conducts annual education campaigns through various media platforms and on-the-ground roadshows in the heartlands. The tripartite partners come together to address deep-seated practices which may need to be changed. For example, the security industry used to routinely rely on overtime exemptions. The Security Tripartite Cluster studied this issue and took progressive steps to change industry practices and norms. This resulted in the industry being able to do away with overtime exemptions from January 2021. MOM will continue to undertake both enforcement and educational efforts to ensure compliance with the law and to better the well-being of our workers.”
“In the meantime, TAFEP and MOM will ensure the Tripartite Guidelines continue to be practised and upheld. We thank the Member for his interest in the topic of workplace fairness and ask that Members continue to support the Tripartite Committee’s work and eventual recommendations.”
“The Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness’ deliberations involve defining the scope of future legislation and designing a legal framework that is balanced and in the best interest of Singapore and Singaporeans. This includes a claims process where mediation is the first and necessary step and appearance before the tribunal is a last resort to avoid the unintended consequence of fostering a litigious workplace culture. This has worked well for the handling of salary-related and wrongful dismissal cases. We agree with the Member that anxieties about workplace discrimination can also be driven by perceptions. Not every complaint means that the employer has done something wrong. That is why the mediation process, in itself, is an opportunity for employers and employees to close gaps in their understanding of requirements. Legislation must also go hand in hand with education efforts to change mindsets and attitudes towards inclusive and fair work practices. The reality is that trade-offs will need to be made as we develop an approach that aims to strike a balance between objectives that are in tension with each other. For example, while we want to ensure that claims are thoroughly investigated, which is time-consuming, we also want to make sure that the claims management process is efficient and not over-burdensome on workers and employers. This illustrates the difficult task being undertaken by the Tripartite Committee, which will have to manage such trade-offs. The Tripartite Committee aims to complete its work in the first half of 2022. The Government will then consider its recommendations and, if accepted, start work to prepare legislation and commit the necessary resources for the legislation to be implemented effectively.”
“I thank Mr Giam for his question. The study by SERIS has taken in improvements in technology and it has also factored in new ways of deployment. However, as what the hon Member has also alluded to, technology keeps improving all the time. So, we have allocated a certain proportion of our energy mix – because it is one of our four switches – for renewable energy. And as long as the developments in solar power, in renewable energy continue to improve, that proportion can also continue to flex upwards. So, we are not tied down to a particular ratio in our energy mix. But moving forward, we are going to continue to explore and pursue all of these R&D initiatives relentlessly to become more and more self-sufficient.”
“At the same time, the Government will continue to provide targeted support for vulnerable households to help them cope with higher electricity costs. Mr Speaker, our energy market has served us well for the last 20 years. I would like to echo Mr Abdul Samad’s appreciation for the hard work and the dedication shown by our brothers and sisters in the power sector. My colleagues and I remain committed to building on this strong foundation, working closely with our industry and with our union partners. I would like to thank Members for speaking on this Bill and for the valuable comments provided. This Bill will ensure that EMA, Electricity and Gas Acts continue to remain relevant and effective, empowering EMA with the necessary levers to navigate the energy transition while safeguarding Singapore’s energy security, reliability and affordability. Sir, I beg to move.”
“At the same time, we will also need to press on with our energy conservation efforts and find ways to use energy more efficiently. I would like to thank Mr Speaker, Sir, for raising the temperature by a couple of degrees in this room after my exhortation yesterday, so thank you very much. I would also like to thank Mr Edward Chia for his many insightful suggestions. We will consider all these carefully. Besides technologies and systems, another critical ingredient for the energy transition is human capital. Mr Saktiandi Supaat would be pleased to hear that EMA has been updating and strengthening its capabilities to keep pace with the changing energy landscape over the years, through capability sharing platforms with industry stakeholders and foreign regulators. EMA is also working closely with the Union of Power and Gas Employees to implement upskilling and reskilling courses to empower the workforce with the necessary skills required to support the transition. And I am heartened to hear from Mr Abdul Samad that these courses and programmes have been well-received. On electricity costs, Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Desmond Choo have also raised concerns about electricity costs associated with the energy transition, including for electricity imports. While the cost of generation may be lower, infrastructure enhancements in the form of additional landing sites, subsea interconnections, back-up and grid enhancements will add to overall costs. This is an inevitable and necessary trade-off to address climate change. EMA will continue to work closely with industry partners to explore and develop cost-competitive and secure solutions that will meet both our long-term energy needs and low-emissions targets.”
“But all of these efforts alone are not sufficient. We will need to continue to explore new energy solutions to meet our long-term energy needs and low-emission targets. Miss Cheryl Chan, Ms Janet Ang, Mr Shawn Huang and Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about our efforts to develop low-carbon alternatives, such as carbon capture, utilisation and storage capabilities, hydrogen and nuclear technologies. The Government is investing heavily in research and development efforts and collaborating with like-minded international partners to understand the potential for deploying these low carbon technologies. In reply to Mr Liang Eng Hwa, our current assessment is that hydrogen will only be commercially viable around 2040. However, many countries are investing heavily in lowering the cost of producing, transporting, storing and using hydrogen. So, its viability may well come sooner. MTI and EMA are also actively exploring low-carbon sources of energy which can be produced in Singapore, including geothermal energy, and accelerating the deployment of solar energy, notwithstanding the limited potential that we have. As for nuclear energy, while there have been advancements in nuclear reactor technologies which have the potential to improve the safety of nuclear generation, many of these are still in the research and development phase and they have not begun commercial operations. So, we will continue to monitor the progress of these technologies, while also strengthening our capabilities to understand nuclear science and technology to assess the implications for Singapore. We will need to carefully calibrate our transition to manage its impact on energy security and reliability.”
“Several Members have also spoken about the importance of ensuring the environmental sustainability of the energy sector. We agree that this is very important and we are committed to decarbonising the power sector. Enabling EMA to require licensees to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is an important step. In response to Mr Liang Eng Hwa's suggestions, EMA will use a combination of broad-based regulatory measures and targeted support measures to encourage the whole industry to decarbonise. Mr Louis Ng and Ms Nadia Samdin asked about our timelines for imposition of new greenhouse gas emissions standards. The first iteration of the proposed measures may be released for public consultation as early as next year, that is 2022. In developing greenhouse gas emissions standards, EMA will ensure that these standards are reasonable and realistic, but they are also ambitious. Companies will be given time to transition. The public can monitor our progress in decarbonising the power grid via the Grid Emissions Factor report, or the GEF report, which EMA publishes on its website very year. Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Melvin Yong asked about incentives to encourage the adoption of more energy- and carbon-efficient technologies. Under EMA's First Energy Efficiency Grant for Power Generation Companies, S$37 million was awarded to four gencos to adopt energy-efficient technologies and equipment to reduce their carbon emissions. When completed, these projects are expected to reduce carbon emissions by over 48 kilo tonnes per annum. This is equivalent to taking about 15,000 cars off the roads annually. Earlier this year, EMA launched the second grant call. EMA will review and calibrate the level of grants based on the carbon abatement potential of the projects.”
“EMA will continue to work with CSA and the industry to ensure the robustness and relevance of our cybersecurity governance framework. This is the same for our water supply infrastructure, with a clear framework and regular exercises in place. On foreign influence through financing, EMA will ensure that the expanded borrowing powers to issue bonds do not compromise the security of our energy system. As a general principle, any borrowing by EMA to fund energy infrastructure will not be securitised to the asset. When entering into loan agreements with financial institutions, EMA will also ensure that lenders do not have the ability to influence decisions relating to the energy infrastructure. Let me now address some of the specific issues that Mr Edward Chia has raised on the amendments to enhance the protection of critical electricity and gas infrastructure. The Bill will make it an offence to damage protective infrastructure housing transmission electricity cables that are 66 kilovolts and above. These are high-voltage transmission cables that serve more customers. Damage to these cables will thus have a greater impact on our electricity supply to consumers and businesses. This Bill also clarifies the existing role of SP Services Ltd, the market support services licensee or provider, in carrying out safety inspections of electrical installations in premises to ensure safe and continued operations. This includes testing to confirm that the devices operate as intended and ensuring that the electrical socket outlets are not installed near any water point. The inspections are arranged by the licensed electrical worker engaged by the owner of the premises, with the consent of the owner of the premises.”
“My Ministry and EMA, are fully aware of these risks and we have put in place safeguards to address them. On the cyber health of our energy system, there have not been any successful cyber attacks on Singapore's critical energy installations thus far, but we are not resting on our laurels. EMA has detected a few spoofing and phishing attempts targeting companies in the energy sector in the past few years, but these attacks were on IT and Non-Critical Information Infrastructure, or non-CII, networks. The spoofing and phishing attempts were also quickly contained and addressed. The operation of critical infrastructure, such as our gas and electricity systems, facilities, plants and equipment, was not affected. Nonetheless, as I have said, we are not complacent and we take cybersecurity threats very seriously. The Electricity and Gas Acts and the Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act give EMA and the Cyber Security Agency, or CSA, the mandate to address cybersecurity threats. EMA has developed a cybersecurity governance framework for the energy industry, in partnership with CSA. Under this framework, the energy industry's Critical Information Infrastructure Owners, the CIIOs, are required to meet minimum baseline cyber requirements, such as isolating computer systems from the Internet. Any cyber incidents must be reported to EMA and CSA within two hours, which ensure that remedial efforts can be carried out in a timely manner. This is in line with the reporting requirements for Government agencies with critical infrastructure. EMA also organises regular industrywide exercises and sharing sessions to ensure the sector's resilience and readiness in emergency responses to cyber attacks.”
“For a start, EMA will ensure that these infrastructures are subject to the same stringent standards and requirements as their private counterparts. EMA will put in place governance structures and, if necessary, separate subsidiaries to mitigate conflicts of interest and ensure accountability. Nevertheless, I would like to reiterate that our preference has been, and continues to be, for the private sector to provide and operate the critical infrastructure. We remain committed to facilitating private sector investments in the energy sector. I agree with Mr Shawn Huang that these amendments must benefit the business and household consumers. In the event that EMA needs to intervene and provide the critical infrastructure and services needed, EMA will coordinate closely with industry stakeholders to avoid duplicative investments. Miss Cheryl Chan asked if there are particular aspects that we will focus on to enhance the resilience of our energy sector. The energy sector is a complex network of integrated systems. Every component will need to function well to keep the lights on. Besides ensuring access to energy sources, we also need to progressively upgrade and enhance our grid infrastructure to support rising electricity demand and a more complex power system with diverse and distributed sources of low-carbon energy. EMA is working closely with SP Group to develop a digital twin of Singapore's physical electricity grid, which will make the transmission and distribution more accurate and efficient. We are also conducting testbeds on microgrids to assess their feasibility and ability to enhance grid resilience. Mr Louis Ng has pointed out other threats to energy security, such as cybersecurity and foreign influence.”
“Singapore lies in a region that has abundant renewable energy potential. For example, Indonesia has geothermal and solar power potential. Thailand, Vietnam and the Lao PDR also have good wind and hydropower potential. Beyond that, Australia is also a possible source. We welcome all companies which are keen to collaborate on the development of renewable energy sources to participate in EMA's requests for proposal for electricity imports. The third point, back-up supply. Every source of energy has a risk of disruption. Currently, power generation companies, or gencos as we call them, are required to stockpile at least 60 days of fuel reserves in the event of disruptions to our natural gas supply. When we start to import electricity and harness more solar energy, we will also need to have sufficient amounts of other types of back-ups, including energy storage systems and generators. We plan to work with the private sector to build the necessary infrastructure to diversify and secure our energy supply. However, as Mr Liang Eng Hwa pointed out, what we need may not necessarily be what private investors are able or willing to provide. Should this happen, we must be prepared to provide the infrastructure to ensure energy security and reliability for ourselves. Thus, we are moving legislation to empower EMA to acquire, build, own, and/or operate critical infrastructure. So, this is a very important and critical point. Let me now address some of the specific issues that Members have raised about the scope of these powers. Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Mr Gerald Giam, Mr Abdul Samad, Mr Melvin Yong and Ms Janet Ang have asked how EMA intends to level the playing field between private investments and those that are built, owned and/or operated by EMA.”
“Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Mr Gerald Giam asked about the measures to enhance the security and resilience of our energy supply. During Question Time yesterday, I spoke at length about the actions that Singapore is taking to safeguard our energy security amidst the ongoing global energy crisis. I will now touch on how we can ensure energy security over a longer term. First, diversification in energy sources. From 2013, we have supplemented Piped Natural Gas (PNG) with imported Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG). We have been ramping up solar energy production locally and we are now one of the most solar-dense cities in the world. However, as I have said many times, solar energy alone will not be sufficient to meet our energy needs. Based on a study conducted by Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore, or SERIS, Singapore has a maximum solar potential of 8 gigawatt peak (GWp) and, that is, by 2050. I do not think we can wait till 2050. Even if we are able to harness all of that maximum solar potential, it would only roughly provide about 10% of our future energy needs. So, regardless of the measures that we take through solar power adoption locally, we will still have to import significant renewable electricity from the region. We are also developing and trialling new low-carbon alternatives, like hydrogen, as options for the longer term. I will speak and elaborate more on this later. Second, beyond diversifying the types of energy that we use, we will also diversify the geographical sources of energy to manage our energy risks. This will be an important consideration in EMA's request for proposals (RFPs) for electricity imports. Miss Cheryl Chan asked about the impact of Malaysia's ban on renewable energy exports to Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Members who have spoken in support of the Bill. Members have raised very good clarifications and suggestions which fall into four broad categories. The first category is on energy security and resilience, including the amendments to enable EMA to build, own and operate critical power infrastructure. Second, the amendments to enhance protection of critical electricity and gas infrastructure. Third, provisions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance the environmental sustainability of the energy sector. And, finally, the impact of the energy transition on electricity prices. Before I address these issues, I would like to thank Mr Melvin Yong, Mr Gerald Giam, Mr Desmond Choo, Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Mr Shawn Huang, for their questions and suggestions about the Open Electricity Market or OEM. As I mentioned yesterday, the OEM remains viable but safeguards may need to be strengthened. We are very mindful of the higher electricity bills that households and businesses will be facing. Today, households living in 1- to 2-room HDB flats, typically, benefit from GSTV U-Save rebates amounting to an average of about three to four months of the utility bills. Together with the GSTV U-Save special payments, these households will receive rebates equivalent to about 4.5 to six months of the utility bills this year. This is what I also shared yesterday in my response to the whole series of Parliamentary Questions that were brought up and also the supplementary questions that were directed at us. We will work with MOF to review and assess if more support is needed. My Ministry and EMA will study this closely and we will provide further updates when ready. Let me now first address the first key issue on energy security.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time". The CPF (Amendment) Bill 2021 is linked to the previous Bill in our Order Paper – Retirement and Re-employment (Amendment) Bill 2021. In the debate we have just had on that Bill, I have explained the amendments proposed in both Bills. Members have already raised their questions and expressed their views on both Bills during the earlier debate although they are still welcome to do so now, if there are any additional questions or views. Mr Speaker, I beg to move. [(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. (proc text)] [(proc text) The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. – [Dr Tan See Leng]. (proc text)] [(proc text) Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. (proc text)]”
“I thank the Member, Mr Abdul Samad, for his question. If I can use an illustration. At 55, the member can withdraw a guaranteed sum of $ 5,000, provided he has the money in his CPF account. In the Retirement Account, he is expected to have the Basic Retirement Sum (BRS), which I believe is pegged at $93,000 today. If his property is pledged – and I believe the majority of Singaporeans today would have a property and it is pledged to the CPF – he can withdraw not just the $5,000 at the age of 55, he can also withdraw a sum higher than the $5,000 from his Special Account and his Ordinary Account. That is what is current today. If he has the Full Retirement Sum (FRS) set aside, which is double that of the BRS – I think it is now $186,000; because it is $93,000 multiplied by two – if he does not have his property pledged to CPF, he can withdraw, again the minimum $5,000, and amounts in his Special Account and also the Ordinary Account. So, the Payout Eligibility Age (PEA) set at 65 is really reserved for the amount, the BRS or the FRS, in his Retirement Account to stream out the monthly payout starting from 65. For those who were born on or after 1958, this will go into CPF LIFE and it will be streamed out as an insurance annuity that will be paid out for life every month. I hope that explains the stance. Nowhere in any of the changes that we are proposing today, which I hope that Members will support, would change any of the dynamics whatsoever. The members can still withdraw their money from age 55 onwards, but subject to those conditions that are already in existence today.”
“I thank Ms Sylvia Lim for the question. Indeed, I am aware of the fact that many companies, especially those hiring, those with senior management employees, for instance, have this clause which puts many, many workers on fixed employment contract terms. We should look at it from different angles. At the point of the recruitment, particularly when his tenure, based on the fixed contract, has expired and if he is looking for a job, and if, say, it is within three to five years of the statutory retirement age, no company should deprive him of the opportunity of being employed because of the fact that he is near the statutory retirement age. That is the first point. On top of that, if an employee has been dismissed on grounds of age, and if they believe so, this retirement age allows the employee to appeal to MOM to look into it and to investigate whether there were grounds. To Ms Sylvia Lim's point about many of these contracts being fixed-term contracts, the tripartite committee on workplace fairness will also look into the legislation covering age discrimination in the workplace.”
“Finally, on the raising of CPF contribution rates for senior workers, I thank Mr Henry Kwek, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Edward Chia for their support for our longer-term plans, including the eventual full contribution rates for workers aged between 55 and 60. The Government will support employers through the CPF Transition Offset, which Mr Heng Chee How, Mr Melvin Yong, Mr Gan Thiam Poh and Ms Nadia Ahmad Samdin have all touched on. This will be implemented on 1 January 2022 as part of the Senior Worker Support Package. This is in tandem with the first increase in CPF contribution rates for senior workers. In closing, I would like to thank Members of the House for their support of the Bills. The two Bills will help our members in three main ways: first, by providing members the flexibility to work longer if they wish to; second, by making it easier for members to build up their retirement nest egg; and third, just as important, by making it easier for members to receive their retirement payouts. Together, the Bills will help our members better prepare for and enjoy their retirement. But the work does not stop here. We are confident that further progress on senior worker employment will be made. We will continue to simplify rules; we will continue to improve communications to our CPF members. With the support of Members of the House, businesses, unions and, most importantly, fellow Singaporeans, we will be a more inclusive economy and society. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.”
“CPF Board already reaches out to nominees, including those overseas, once it is notified of a member's death and it disburses the monies within a month, having allowed time for medical institutions to deduct any medical bills from the deceased member's MediSave Account. Nonetheless, CPF Board has plans to continuously streamline the disbursement process for nominated CPF monies and I thank Ms Hany Soh for her suggestion on this. Beyond simplifying policies and streamlining processes, CPF Board will also continue to strengthen its public education and outreach efforts, as Mr Melvin Yong and Miss Cheryl Chan highlighted. This will include educating members on the benefits of CPF top-ups to self and loved ones; nudging members to make nominations; making clear that nominations, like wills, are, indeed, revoked upon marriage; and clarifying the treatment of CPF monies upon members' passing, as alluded to by Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Ms Hany Soh and Ms He Ting Ru, as well as Ms Joan Pereira respectively. We will also explore Ms Hany Soh's suggestion to send notifications to divorcees to prompt them to review their nominations. Several Members of the House have provided feedback on policies which are not quite within the scope of today's Bill. For example, Ms Ng Ling Ling and Miss Cheryl Chan on the allocation of monies across CPF accounts, Mr Yip Hon Weng on the Basic Retirement Sum, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Mr Gan Thiam Poh on housing issues, Mr Patrick Tay and Miss Cheryl Chan on self-employed persons, as well as Mr Saktiandi Supaat on tax-approved group corporate retirement plans. The Government will take all these into consideration as we review our policies from time to time.”
“I thank Ms Yeo Wan Ling for her observations on how decisions could be communicated to CPF members and would like to assure that CPF Board will certainly be mindful of her concerns. To Ms He Ting Ru's point, I would like to clarify that members with reduced life expectancy will, indeed, be able to benefit from the automatic disbursement of Ordinary and Special Account monies that I mentioned in my speech yesterday. On Ms Ng Ling Ling’s suggestion to allow waiver of loan repayments under the CPF Education Loan Scheme for such members, I am happy to confirm that CPF Board already does so today on a case-by-case basis. In simplifying the CPF system, CPF Board will also ensure that implementation is smooth for its members. On the top-up rules and the position of givers, CPF Board will take into account Mr Louis Ng and Ms Joan Pereira’s suggestions. I do believe that Singaporeans top up their loved ones’ CPF accounts out of the generosity of their hearts and to help boost their loved ones' retirement adequacy. This simplification should, therefore, not discourage top-ups. The objective is to simplify things for members, in response to feedback that the existing rules can be confusing. Some top-ups are refunded to givers when their recipients exit the CPF system, while, as Mr Saktiandi Supaat observed, other top-ups are treated as gifts to recipients and not refunded, including cash top-ups made after 2008. Mr Louis Ng, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Ms Mariam Jaafar and Ms Hany Soh spoke about facilitating the disbursement of nominated monies.”
“The current PEA of 65 strikes a balance between timely access to retirement income and providing a sufficient runway for members to build up savings for retirement, especially as Singaporeans are expected to live longer. Members continue to have the option to defer the payouts for higher monthly payouts. In fact, yesterday, I shared that for every year that they defer after 65, the increase could be up to 7% more per annum. Members will also continue to have the flexibility to make lump sum withdrawals from age 55, years before they start their monthly CPF payouts. The banker friend that Assoc Prof Jamus Lim has, and I believe is likely to be as successful as Assoc Prof Lim himself, will be able to withdraw amounts well above the retirement sum at 55. This includes the $5,000 that he can withdraw unconditionally and the amounts in excess of his Basic Retirement Sum, given that he will likely own a property. Similarly, the amendments to section 15 of the CPF Act are only intended to simplify it, and not alter the underlying policies and operational flexibilities. Mr Louis Ng, Ms Ng Ling Ling, Mr Saktiandi Supaat, Miss Cheryl Chan and Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked what constitutes a “significant condition” in the Bill. Today, Members with conditions of any kind, including auto-immune or neurological diseases, can qualify for early withdrawal of CPF savings if they are certified by a doctor as having a reduced life expectancy or being permanently unfit to work, or lacking mental capacity. These are now collectively referred to as “significant conditions”. The Bill provides for these same grounds to be prescribed in the Regulations. Therefore, there are no changes to the qualifying rules for early CPF withdrawal.”
“There are many other areas where the tripartite partners have been working closely on, including encouraging job redesign and flexible working arrangements, which Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Sharael Taha, Mr Henry Kwek, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Mr Patrick Tay, Mr Ang Wei Neng and Ms Nadia Samdin have raised. We encourage the tripartite partners to do more and we will continue to give our fullest support. Even as we make these legislative changes today, we will also continue to work with the tripartite partners to study best practices and review our framework where necessary to ensure its continued relevance. As mentioned by Mr Shawn Huang and Ms Yeo Wan Ling, it is also important for our workers to adopt a lifelong learning mindset. Continuing Education and Training, or CET, is just as important as pre-employment training (PET), as a means for our workers to upgrade their skills, remain relevant and keep pace with global trends and developments. Let me now address Members’ points on the CPF (Amendment) Bill. First, in response to points made by Mr Yip Hon Weng, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Miss Cheryl Chan and Mr Gan Thiam Poh, let me reiterate that the proposed amendments to the CPF Act will not change the rules for CPF lump sum withdrawals or other social support schemes like Silver Support. On CPF withdrawals, Mr Abdul Samad and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim suggested to allow members to start their CPF monthly payouts earlier, while on the other hand, Mr Saktiandi Supaat suggested to start later. First, let me reassure everyone that the Government has not suggested changing the Payout Eligibility Age. The Payout Eligibility Age, or PEA, is not linked to the retirement or re-employment age.”
“As Mr Patrick Tay has highlighted, employers play an instrumental role in this. And we are committed to providing the necessary assistance, including funding support. To Ms Nadia Samdin’s query on the extension of the Senior Employment Credit beyond 2022, we will also study it and update in due course. Members of the House, I have already spoken extensively on the various ways that the Government is supporting upskilling and employment opportunities for senior workers in my response to several Parliamentary Questions last month. So, today, I will just highlight the critical roles that our tripartite partners NTUC and SNEF play in this endeavour. The Company Training Committees, or CTCs, established by NTUC early this year, are making their impact felt. The CTCs bring together the employers, HR and employee representatives to identify gaps and opportunities and develop the necessary training plans to align a company’s workforce to its business transformation roadmap. This ensures that our senior workers’ training needs are correctly identified, to enable them to contribute productively for many more years to come. As highlighted by Mr Sharael Taha, Mr Abdul Samad and Ms Janet Ang, it is also important for companies to have structured career planning conversations with their employees, especially for those in their 40s or 50s. This allows training needs and suitable job roles to be identified early. Employees will also be more motivated to pick up new skills if they have a clearer picture of how they fit into their companies’ future plans. We are working with both SNEF and NTUC to encourage more employers to do so.”
“If the EAP is too high, it may deter employers from hiring jobseekers who are approaching retirement age. If the EAP is too low, employers may too readily offer to pay the EAP. Nevertheless, the tripartite partners agreed to increase the minimum and maximum EAP amounts from 1 July 2022 onwards. This is in tandem with the growth in general wage levels. Ms Ng Ling Ling also asked about the success rate for conciliation of re-employment disputes. After more than 10 years of implementation, we find that the majority of cases are often resolved expeditiously at mediation. This leaves a few cases that need to be surfaced to the Employment Claims Tribunal (ECT) for adjudication. Mr Sharael Taha, Ms Janet Ang, Mr Liang Eng Hwa, Mr Henry Kwek, Ms Yeo Wan Ling, Mr Gan Thiam Poh, Ms Joan Pereira, Mr Yip Hon Weng and Ms Nadia Samdin also highlighted ageism and discriminatory employment practices as a concern. We agree that ageism and workplace discrimination of any form have no place in Singapore. As Members have noted in their speeches, the Tripartite Committee on Workplace Fairness, which I co-chair, is deliberating on the scope of legislation to address workplace discrimination. We are making progress in the discussions and we hope to finalise our recommendations by the first half of 2022. I am glad that Members’ speeches in this House over the past two days also recognise that legislation is not a silver bullet nor a panacea. In this regard, I agree with Mr Heng Chee How, who has very wisely pointed out that strengthening the employability of our senior workers cannot start only when they are near retirement age. There is a need to invest in retraining and employment facilitation not only for our senior workers, but also for the future cohorts of senior workers.”
“The re-employment framework is designed to balance the need to enable senior workers to continue working, while giving employers sufficient flexibility so that businesses can remain nimble and sustainable. Different businesses may also face different challenges. So, we must strike a very careful balance. I thank Ms Janet Ang for sharing her journey and her views towards retirement as a senior executive. Indeed, different individuals have different needs and expectations as they approach retirement. While some may want to stay on in their current roles, others may desire a job role with reduced work intensity or see themselves trying out new roles. This is why the tripartite partners have agreed that employers and employees should be given the flexibility to negotiate adjustments to the job roles, wages and benefits, as long as they are reasonable and based on factors like productivity, responsibilities, skills and the employer’s wage system. Notwithstanding this, the vast majority of re-employed workers continue on their existing contract or a new contract in the same job. More than 95% of workers re-employed in the same job did not experience any cuts to their wages and benefits. If an employer has considered all available re-employment options within the organisation and is unable to identify a suitable job for the senior worker, the firm may offer him or her an Employment Assistance Payment, or EAP, as a last resort. Let me reiterate – this is as a last resort, to help the worker tide over while he or she seeks alternative employment. To Ms Nadia Samdin and Mr Patrick Tay’s queries about the sufficiency of the EAP amount, a fine balance was struck by the Tripartite Workgroup.”
“This is our model: tripartite consultation with stakeholders, tripartite consensus and then tripartite implementation, with legal changes to reflect the plan. We do not rule out future changes to our approach. This model of constructive tripartism will ensure that we are able to adapt and respond to such needs in the decades to come. Mr Sharael Taha, Mr Yip Hon Weng, Ms Ng Ling Ling, Ms Joan Pereira and Ms Mariam Jaafar have spoken on the need to ensure that employers fulfil their re-employment obligations and that re-employment offers are fair. I agree. The system has worked well thus far. Tripartite partners have agreed upon a reasonable set of guidelines, laying out employers’ and employees’ responsibilities. I will just highlight a few guidelines that are more relevant to the situations that Members have raised. First, early communication and discussion are critical to ensure that re-employment offers are reasonable to both parties. The Tripartite Guidelines on the Re-employment of Older Employees make clear that employers should engage employees at least six months before they reach retirement age. Second, on the issue of medical fitness, they should offer re-employment to eligible workers who are medically fit to perform any job within the company, not just the existing job role. Employers are also advised to presume that their senior employees are medically fit, unless there are clear reasons to believe otherwise. To Ms Ng Ling Ling’s concern, having chronic conditions alone cannot be used to justify denial of re-employment, if it does not affect their ability to perform the job.”
“But as Mr Heng Chee How emphasised, the statutory retirement and re-employment age is still important as a floor and safeguard against employers who might not be as progressive. The continued relevance of this approach is borne out by facts. Singapore’s average effective retirement age has risen faster than the OECD average. These considerations, and the data that support them, are captured in the Workgroup’s comprehensive report. I encourage all Members to study the report. On pace of implementation, the tripartite partners negotiated this very carefully before arriving at a consensus. The plan to raise the retirement age and re-employment age to 65 and 70 respectively by the end of this decade is ambitious, but it is achievable. The first increase will take place on 1 July 2022 and it is on schedule. The timing of future adjustments will depend on prevailing economic conditions, but the resolve to stay the course is clear. Mr Louis Ng asked why the range of retirement age that the Manpower Minister can prescribe in the law is being reduced from 62 to 67 years to 62 to 65 years. Members of the House, before 2012, the concept of re-employment had not been introduced yet, so the only lever we had was the retirement age. But since then, we have seen how the concept of retirement age and re-employment age works well in combination. After consultation with stakeholders, the tripartite partners have agreed to continue with this strategy and, beyond raising the retirement age to 65 by 2030, they have also agreed to raise the re-employment age to 70. The proposed legislative amendments thus fully reflect the tripartite consensus on this roadmap.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, let me begin by thanking Members for their suggestions and support for the Retirement and Re-employment (Amendment) Bill and the CPF (Amendment) Bill. There were many points raised, reflecting the wide spectrum of views and the common interest we share in supporting our senior workers and fellow Singaporeans. Allow me to make a few general points before I address specific comments from Members on the Bills. I thank Members for their various suggestions on CPF, as well as our retirement and re-employment policies. We constantly and continually review our policies and we will take Members’ suggestions into consideration. Members recognise that legislation is not everything. The speeches have touched on the need to adjust our culture and our mindsets, both as a society and as businesses. Members also touched on important questions, which the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers had deliberated on extensively. In doing so, they considered the many perspectives which emerged from their public engagements, before arriving at their very balanced recommendations. On the issue of whether a statutory retirement age is still needed, as highlighted by Mr Yip Hon Weng, Ms Sylvia Lim and Assoc Prof Jamus Lim, the Workgroup had considered this very carefully. It looked at the experiences of other countries and found that countries without the equivalent of a statutory retirement age do not necessarily have better employment rates for senior workers, despite some of them having anti-discrimination legislation already in place. Some progressive employers may take the initiative to abolish their internal retirement age and allow workers to work for as long as they wish, and we wholeheartedly applaud them.”
“So, these are all the logistical issues and so on that we had to plan through. Once we were able to smoothen out all of these different gaps and so on, we then moved on to increasing the number to 3,000. The plan, hopefully, in the ensuing weeks and months ahead, is that as we move to this new normal, is not to restrict but to open up even more. At this particular point in time, because we had just started the 3,000 last weekend, just about three days ago, we will maintain and watch it for a while. I hope that answers the questions.”
“We also sought feedback through our survey with the migrant workers to ask them what would be important for them when they go out to visit these community areas. Many of them wanted to go to a religious place of worship. So, our ACE Group then engaged the Hindu temples, the mosques, as well as churches to see how we could accommodate them to let them fulfil their religious needs. We also worked with the shopkeepers and so on. We identified shopkeepers, the retail shops to make sure that social distancing was adequately maintained. We reached out to the churches, the temples, the mosques to get them to support us and we started that pilot visit. We also had to ensure, as we move towards endemicity, at some point, we were concerned about, given the space that they are living in, to ensure that the infection, if it comes into the dorm, it does not spread. So, we took all the necessary precautions in terms of pre-event testing before they left. And after coming back, we also tested them. When we were able to ascertain that the entire visit was safe, that we were able to adequately address the physical, mental and social needs; on top of that, keep them medically well-protected, we then ramped up from 500, increasing it sixfold to 3,000. And we also increased the areas. At each step of the way, there were quite a fair bit of logistical arrangements that we had to make, including arranging for the buses to bring them there; also making sure that the itinerary, the programmes planned for them were adequate. In the beginning, we even had to nudge employers, because even though we opened up 500 a week, we found that, for a while, we were only getting about 50% to 60% of them coming on board. There were also migrant workers who signed up, only to cancel at the last minute.”
“I thank Mr Pritam Singh for his question. The question of easing the restrictions for our migrant workers to go out into the community is constantly on our minds, not just all of us in MOM, particularly the ACE Group. They are also at the back of — well, not at the back of our minds, but on an almost daily basis, we contemplate. We planned for the easing of the restrictions as early as December last year; this was about a month after we formed the DAWN task force. At different times when we planned, with the drawer plans that we have in place, each time, we were hit by different curve balls. You would have read about the Delta variant. At any particular point in time where we try to ramp up, easing the restrictions, there were new and significant turns of events that did not allow us to do so. We then focused on the singular approach of ensuring that all of our migrant workers are protected through vaccination. The vaccination centres were set up and our focus was really making sure that we protect them. When we were able to bring them up to a high level of vaccination within the dorms, again, we tried to work on a mechanism for easing. In my earlier interview with The Straits Times and with the media, I said, "The key thing was finding a safe and a very calibrated manner". And I think that there were obviously subsequent events that have overtaken us. In spite of that, once we have achieved that high level of vaccination, and we also had enough evidence to show that those of us who have received and completed the two doses of the vaccination, the incidence of complications was significantly less than for those who are unvaccinated. With that, we took on that pilot in mid-September to allow 500 to go out.”
“I thank Mr Edward Chia for his supplementary question. Indeed, we approach this training on a very holistic manner because mental health awareness, the ability to be able to identify and escalate very quickly and to do constant surveillance and constant monitoring and engagement is a multi-disciplinary, multi-pronged approach that is needed through the support of dorm operators, by our FAST ambassadors on the ground, by the employers, by the NGOs, the partners and, of course, ultimately, the tertiary healthcare providers, including IMH. We have a multi-pronged approach when we started Project DAWN last year. DAWN is an acronym. "D" stands for depression, "A" stands for awareness, "W" is wellness and the "N" stands for normalisation, how do we help the migrant workers normalise back. The DAWN task force started with seven core initiatives. They are grouped according to primary prevention, secondary intervention and the third part, not really tertiary, but where we help them to rehabilitate back into society. As a result of that, we have got buddies, we have also worked with volunteers. They become the friends of ACE. We call that the FACE network. So, it is a multi-pronged approach to reach out to all of our migrant workers who need help. I am happy to go deeper into the details, perhaps if we have time. But I think, given the amount of Parliamentary Questions (PQs) that we have to cover today, I will leave it at that. I hope it answers the question.”
“MOM will continue to monitor the mental health of migrant workers by working closely with our partners.”
“An earlier study, which was conducted by Yale-NUS on migrant workers' mental health from June to October 2020, showed no notable difference in stress, anxiety and depression levels amongst locals and migrant workers, although there were indications of higher levels of stress amongst migrant workers with movement restrictions. Nonetheless, any easing of movement restrictions will need to be done in a careful and calibrated manner, so as not to trade one stress for another. In particular, as you have heard in Senior Minister of State Janil Puthucheary's Ministerial Statement yesterday about our healthcare system, we have to be mindful that we do not treat the stress of one where there is some restriction of movement for our migrant workers, to overwhelming that of our healthcare system. Since August last year, we have allowed dormitory residents to visit recreation centres, or RCs. We recently increased the frequency of RC visits to thrice or three times a week, up from once a week. We have also removed pre-visit testing requirements for vaccinated migrant workers, which benefits more than 98% of the dormitory population. Concurrently, we are working with RC operators and community partners to introduce programmes and new offerings to make the RC visits more engaging. We have also recently expanded community visits from 500 to 3,000 vaccinated migrant workers per week. We have expanded to include Geylang Serai or Joo Chiat, in addition to Little India. We have also extended the visit duration to eight hours at each time. Members of the House, we remain committed towards caring for our migrant workers' mental well-being through a good support system, as well as to continue to ease measures safely.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as we have shared in our replies to Members Ms He Ting Ru and Mr Louis Ng's questions on migrant workers' mental well-being earlier, the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) is committed to supporting the mental well-being of our migrant workers. We are sparing no efforts to strengthen the mental health support ecosystem for them. Since last November, when we initiated the Project DAWN task force, DAWN has worked with our non-government organisation (NGO) partners, healthcare partners, employers and dormitory operators to develop such an ecosystem to look out for migrant workers, to listen to their concerns, to identify those who need more support, as well as link them with the appropriate care channels. First, we are raising the awareness of mental health issues and we are broadening the outreach of training in basic mental health and psychological first aid, or PFA. Second, we are working with our NGO partners to make counselling and para-counselling more accessible. Third, mental healthcare has been made even more accessible. Any migrant worker identified to have need for or to benefit from mental healthcare will be linked up with the appropriate services, including the counselling hotlines. In particular, an escalation pathway with the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) has been developed to ensure timely care for more severe cases when necessary. Between January and September 2021, 98 work permit holders were admitted to IMH. This was lower as compared to the same period in 2020, but was higher as compared to 2019, during the pre-COVID-19 era.”
“MOM continues to follow up with the remaining workers – about 2,600 – to ask them and their employers to come forward for vaccination under our national programme if unvaccinated or verify their overseas vaccination.”
“Ninety-eight percent of migrant workers in the dormitories have been fully vaccinated, so there is greater assurance that they are protected against the risk of severe illnesses in the event of a COVID-19 infection. MOM also tracks the vaccination rate of the migrant workers across all dormitories closely. Ninety-six percent of the migrant worker dormitories have more than 80% of their residents vaccinated. For workers who have yet to be vaccinated under our national programme, MOM has been working with the relevant sector leads, such as BCA and EDB, to proactively engage the employers and encourage their workers to be vaccinated; or if the workers had been vaccinated overseas, to verify the vaccination status. The vaccination process has been made easy for the migrant workers. MOM currently facilitates by scheduling the vaccination appointments on the workers’ behalf. Workers and their employers can also reschedule the appointments. For migrant workers who may have been vaccinated overseas, their employers would also receive a step-by-step guide to get their workers’ vaccination records verified and updated accordingly. Verification comprises a serology test and evidence of vaccination with a PSAR or WHO EUL vaccine. The vaccination verification by the private healthcare providers is usually completed within a week. In the past three months, over 6,200 workers have arrived in Singapore and reside in the dormitories. Of these, more than four in 10 or over 2,700 have already been registered as fully vaccinated in the National Immunisation Registry (NIR), while another 900 have at least taken one dose.”
“From 1 November 2021, MOM will only allow work pass holders who are fully vaccinated to enter Singapore. This is important to support Singapore’s reopening in a safe and calibrated manner. Those who are medically ineligible for vaccination may appeal for exemption from the vaccination requirement, supported by a doctor’s memo, before applying for entry approval. Upon arrival in Singapore, they will have to get a medical exemption from a Singapore medical practitioner or complete the full vaccination regimen if they are eligible for any COVID-19 vaccine under the National Vaccination Programme. To date, 96% of MOM work pass holders are fully vaccinated. With effect from 1 January 2022, only fully vaccinated employees or employees who have recovered from COVID-19 within 270 days can return to the workplace. We expect more workers, both local and foreign, who have yet to be vaccinated, to be fully vaccinated in the coming months. We will continue to monitor the vaccination rate of the local and foreign workforce, and take appropriate measures to ensure and sustain one of the highest workforce vaccination rates in the world.”
“MOM recognises that there are still many families waiting for approval for their MDWs to enter Singapore, after the temporary tightening of entry approvals for migrant domestic workers (MDWs) in May 2021. As the regional COVID-19 situation improves, MOM is able to give more entry approvals and has scheduled the entries postponed in May. From 15 October, we have opened up new applications for the entry of fully vaccinated MDWs, for entry from 1 November onwards. More MDWs will be able to enter Singapore in the coming months if the COVID-19 situation continues to stabilise locally and regionally. Due to the high demand for entry approvals, we will continue to prioritise families with more urgent care needs. For those employers who are not successful in getting entry approvals within the immediate period, they may wish to access the portal in subsequent weeks for more entry approval slots. MOM will also continue to facilitate the commercial programme by the Association of Employment Agencies (Singapore) (AEA(S)) to bring in more MDWs safely to meet the demand. AEA(S)’ pilot has benefited more than 1,000 families since its introduction. AEA(S) and its partner employment agencies will progressively expand the scheme according to demand. In the longer term, MOM will continue to diversify the sources of MDWs for better resilience of MDW supply.”
“The Member may be aware that since he filed the question, MOH has lifted travel restrictions on countries which have provided the workers for the construction industry. MOM resumed approvals on 15 October 2021 for migrant workers (MWs) from the Construction, Marine Shipyard and Process (CMP) sectors who are arriving from 1 November 2021. While we are allowing more workers to enter Singapore to meet the needs of industries and families, we need to do so in a safe and calibrated manner. All work pass holders, regardless of their travel history, must be fully vaccinated when they enter Singapore from 1 November 2021 unless they have been given prior exemption.”
“For example, no inquiry committee was convened for the PIE viaduct collapse in July 2017 which killed one and injured another 10 workers, nor for the SMRT case in March 2016 where two workers died when they were hit by a train while working on the track. In both cases, despite the multiple causalities, the causes of the accident were not technically complex. The Ministry investigated both accidents thoroughly and liable parties were subsequently taken to task in the courts for their failures. With respect to this tragic accident in Tuas Incineration Plant, investigations so far do not indicate that it is of such a complex nature that warrants the appointment of an inquiry committee. Nevertheless, the Ministry will investigate the case thoroughly as we have always done so. Lastly, I would like to express my condolences to families of the two deceased and wish speedy recovery to the injured worker. I hope our investigation will eventually help to provide some closure for the affected families.”
“The nature of the accident at Tuas Incineration Plant on 23 September 2021 concerned work at the electrical switch room. The relevant safety measures are therefore those that apply to working in that context, and not on the operation of incineration plants per se. Prior to the commencement of any works involving electrical installations or equipment such as high voltage switchgear, a proper risk assessment of the work must be carried out. Associated control measures and safe work procedures that are reasonably practicable must be implemented. Such measures include, but are not limited to: (a) ensuring that only competent and trained personnel are allowed to carry out or supervise the works; (b) ensuring that electrical equipment are isolated, where possible, from the electricity supply before any work on the equipment is carried out; (c) adhering strictly to the engineering controls and safe work procedures recommended by the equipment manufacturer; and (d) ensuring that workers involved in the works don the appropriate personal protective equipment. These measures, if adequately taken, remove or minimise risks faced by persons working with electrical installations. The Workplace Safety & Health Act allows the convening of an inquiry committee to ascertain the causes and circumstances of an accident, dangerous occurrence or occupational disease. We do so when the accident is of a catastrophic or serious nature and is technically complex. Past examples include the Nicoll Highway collapse in 2004 and the fire explosion in Stars Engrg Pte Ltd in February 2021. Not every fatal accident of a serious nature warrants the appointment of an inquiry committee.”
“Each year, MOM carries out about 15,000 inspections, of which about 5,000 target higher risk sectors. Apart from 2020, where suspension of workplace activities reduced the necessity for inspections, the level of inspections has been stable. More than 9,000 non-compliances are detected in the course of these inspections. MOM has employed data analytics to better identify higher risk workplaces in high-risk sectors. In line with this, we detected slightly more non-compliances per inspection (1.95) compared to in 2019 (1.74). The majority of the non-compliances are not major. In about 60 cases annually, the unsafe practices are sufficient to warrant a stop work order. In another 700 cases annually, we issue composition fines. For the remainder, MOM issues notices of non-compliance.”
“Employers can apply for a Letter of Consent (LOC) for foreign spouses of Singapore Citizens on a Long-Term Visit Pass (LTVP) or LTVP+ to work in Singapore. In addition, since December 2018, foreign spouses of Singapore Citizens on an LTVP/LTVP+ who wish to work are granted Pre-Approved LOCs (PLOC). With the PLOC, their employers are only required to notify MOM before the start and end of their employment. As at June 2021, about 13,500 foreign spouses of Singapore Citizens on an LTVP/LTVP+ (or slightly over half) are working on an LOC or PLOC. The LOC and PLOC facilities enable foreign spouses of Singapore Citizens on an LTVP/LTVP+ to seek employment so as to support their families and integrate better into Singapore. Such foreign spouses on an LOC or PLOC are not subject to foreign worker quotas, levies or qualifying salaries. Those who need employment assistance can approach Workforce Singapore’s Careers Connect, NTUC-e2i’s career centres or any of the 24 SGUnited Jobs and Skills Centres to receive basic career advisory and job search assistance. Foreign spouses of Singapore Citizens who are from lower-income households that face financial difficulty can approach our Social Service Offices (SSOs), who will look into ways to support the family. Depending on the family’s needs, our SSOs may refer them to other Government agencies and community partners for support, including employment assistance.”