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 44 of 45.
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, since the start of COVID-19, over 15,000 workers have been placed into public sector or Government-funded short-term –”
“In 2020, 79.4% of full-time security officers in private security agencies worked more than 44 hours per week, where overtime is payable under the Employment Act for eligible security officers. The mean and median hours worked per week were 56.4 hours (that is, 12.4 overtime hours) and 60.0 hours (that is, 16 overtime hours) respectively1. Previously, before the implementation of the Progressive Wage Model (PWM) in the security sector, many private security agencies relied on overtime exemptions under the Employment Act, so that their security officers clocked more than 72 hours of overtime per month. In November 2017, the Government accepted recommendations from the Security Tripartite Cluster – comprising representatives from the unions, employers, service buyers and the Government – to remove Overtime Exemption for the security sector from January 2021. This meant that security agencies would only be able to deploy their security officers for a maximum of 72 overtime hours per month (or 16.6 overtime hours on average per week). This reduces excessive overtime hours worked by security officers, improves their well-being and avoids compromising their alertness. In 2020, through the Security PWM, security officers saw an increase in their base salary by 12%, even though their total working hours are capped. This ensures that most would not be adversely affected due to a reduction in overtime hours. The three-year implementation lead time allowed security agencies, service buyers and security officers sufficient time to adjust. In 2020, about 30% of security officers still worked more than 72 overtime hours per month2. With the implementation of the PWM recommendation to remove overtime exemptions in January 2021, this percentage is expected to decline further.”
“The questions have been addressed by the Ministerial Statements delivered by Minister Ong Ye Kung and Minister Tan See Leng on 6 July 2021. [Please refer to "Free Trade Agreements and Foreign Manpower", Official Report, 6 July 2021, Volume 95, Issue No 32, Ministerial Statement section.]”
“Companies can also proactively implement measures to manage floor safety and reduce STF accidents, including through the use of technology solutions. In fact, promoting technology-enabled WSH is also one of MOM’s WSH 2028 strategies. Today, measurement of slip risks can be performed using slip meters which are simple to use. Readings for slip meters supplement risk assessments especially at locations where STF near misses or accidents are caused by contaminants requiring specific chemical clean up. For real-time monitoring of STF incidents and hazards, MOM, together with the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) and Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA), worked with a local technology firm to develop a solution using vision analytics and wearables in the Facilities Management sector. This solution is currently being trialled in other sectors including the F&B sector.”
“We recognise that COVID-19 border restrictions have resulted in manpower challenges in the food and beverage (F&B) industry, but it is unclear the degree to which these have contributed to the increase in workplace injuries. In fact, slips, trips and falls (STF) have been identified to be the main driver for rising injuries in the F&B industry over the past few years, even before the COVID-19 pandemic started. In the past five years, there have been close to 1,200 STF injuries in the F&B industry, including one fatal injury in 2019. The STFs in the F&B industry have been increasing by an average of 12% a year from 2016 to 2019, and only reduced slightly in 2020 due to COVID-related work stoppages. Based on MOM’s data, STF accidents in the F&B sector are more likely to occur due to wet or slippery surfaces and near steps, as compared to uneven or cluttered surfaces. These trends are indeed becoming an area of concern. This is why MOM, together with the Workplace Safety and Health (WSH) Council, are strengthening our efforts on this front. The WSH Council recently worked with industry associations, including those in F&B, to launch a national STF prevention campaign on 17 June 2021. The campaign educates employers and workers on how to prevent STF injuries by taking simple steps, such as wearing non-slip footwear on wet or oily surfaces, always holding handrails, and cleaning spills up immediately. The campaign has reached almost 1,600 members of F&B industry associations. For companies that need help on learning to be safer, WSH Council also provides free guidance visits to eligible companies, such as through the StartSAFE programme to help employers identify WSH risks and implement good WSH practices.”
“When CPF members turn 55, savings from the Special Account (SA) and Ordinary Account (OA) are transferred to the Retirement Account (RA) to form their retirement sums. The retirement sum provides the members with monthly CPF payouts to meet retirement expenses. To help members plan ahead, members who intend to reserve their CPF OA savings for housing payments beyond age 55 may submit a request to CPF Board before the monies are transferred to the RA. For members who still face difficulties financing their housing purchases, the CPF Board and HDB will continue to exercise flexibility on a case-by-case basis.”
“Travellers arriving from the same country have the same risk of incubating COVID-19, as reflected in the country’s COVID-19 situation. The granting of entry approval is, therefore, calibrated based on the risk levels of countries and regions that the applicant has travelled to. Dependant's Pass (DP) holders accompany the Work Pass holder, who is here to work. If the family of a Work Pass holder is not approved to enter, it is likely that the Work Pass holder will also choose not to enter. There are also DP holders who have been separated from their family members due to the border restrictions since 2020. A policy that prevents DP holders from entering Singapore until all other Work Pass holders have been able to enter, will likely lead to Work Pass holders choosing to leave Singapore in order to be reunited with their family. The fact remains that our entry approval process, carried out to safeguard public health, has resulted in a sizeable backlog of existing Work Pass holders and dependants who are outside of Singapore, and who have yet to obtain approval to enter. Businesses understand the need for these measures and support them, even though it comes at considerable disruption to them. We should, therefore, not adopt approaches that cause more disruption than necessary.”
“I do not want to sort of go down a prescribed route today because we are exploring the entire universe. I hope that answers your question.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Leader of the Opposition, Mr Pritam Singh, for his question. We are reviewing our existing frameworks. The suggestion that he talked about, the position he had alluded to, in terms of legislation and all that, it is not something that has just come out from the Workers' Party. If you go back in terms of the past proceedings, I believe that quite a number of the Labour Members of Parliament, including Mr Patrick Tay and even non-Labour Members of Parliament, such as Mr Louis Ng, have also raised it at different times. The assurance that I want to give to the House – to everyone who has raised it and who is concerned about this – is to allow myself, together with the team, together with the tripartite partners, to go deep, look at all the different implications, look at also the various options that we have to see how we can strengthen it. As I have alluded to in my speech, Mr Pritam Singh, I think you will appreciate the fact that given where we are today, it is a very tight rope that we are navigating. On the one hand, we want to continue to strengthen, to tighten. On the other hand, businesses have the competing interest of asking us to be a bit more lax. One of the reassurances that our Ministry wants to give to Members of the House here is our consistent focus on – and we have never diverted our attention away from it – developing the Singaporean Core. We are fully cognisant of the angst, the fears, the worries about making sure that there is fair, there is equal opportunity in terms of capability development, capability transfer, fair hiring, promotions and so on and so forth. All those things, we will be reviewing in order for us to strengthen that framework.”
“The only difference of course is the overtime charges and so on. But I think that is another sort of thing altogether. To the Member's point about the education system, I just want to share one bit. In the early 2000s, our Universities, our Institutes of Higher Learning, the number of IT students that they produced at that particular point in time, today, we are training about four times more what we used to be training before. The entry levels, in terms of the grades, the credits and so on, that are required for the students to make it to get into the Universities are also significantly higher. So, I guess the point of this is that every single initiative, every single policy, we can always do better. And that is something that I have acknowledged. But the point is this, we are not that far worse off. Today, if you look at the absolute PME growth numbers, three quarters are our local PMEs in good jobs; one quarter are filled by foreign work pass holders. Our glass is not even half full; our glass is three-quarters full. And we are looking at it from that perspective. Are you saying that we should even adjust that? Of course, we should try to bring it up to 90% or 100% full. But let us also be mindful of the sentiment, the worries and also the hard work of the other three-quarters in that glass that is three-quarters full. I look forward to a robust debate with Mr Leong and Ms Poa. I think when they can put up questions which I do not struggle so hard to follow, that would be very welcoming. Thank you very much.”
“So, I guess to his point about the fact that why is it that we did not do this and so on, I think in the last 15, 20 years – and he has sort of pointed out the fact that I have been from the private sector; perhaps, I have not been in the Government long enough – if anything at all, for the last 20 years, change was the constant. Change is a constant and change will be a constant. We will continually face disruption, we will face transformation. So, to his other point about why is it that we are not able to have all this workforce ready in spite of all of our education upgrades and so on, I think if we all had a crystal ball 20, 30 years ago and we could gaze so clearly into the future, perhaps, even for himself, as a CEO of a private equity firm, I think all the necessary investments made would have been perfect and spot on. But, perhaps, I think, hindsight, like what they always say, is perfect. To the other point about private sector and how we package the CPF into it, indeed, I can share with you. Perhaps my experience is very limited; I have just been in healthcare all my life. I do admit that I lobbied at that time, five, six years ago, for an increase in the number of S Passes because of the fact that I needed to deliver a certain level of nursing care. I just could not hire enough healthcare personnel, for example, nurses, to come in and help us. While we do not pay CPF, the overall costs of bringing them in is higher because we have to package in housing and other allowances. And, really, because the employer part of it is imputed into our cost, I can tell you with conviction, because I have done it for many, many years in my life, that that package that we pay out is higher than what we do pay to locals.”
“Mr Speaker, I must admit that, notwithstanding the fact that this is my first Ministerial Statement, I actually struggle to follow Mr Leong's line of reasoning. I guess it is because of the fact that, for quite a number of the issues, I think he is looking at it, first and foremost, from a hindsight kind of perspective: why is it that we did not do this, why is it that we did not do that? If you look at the entire thing – and I am going to take a bit of time on this, to try and gather my thoughts and to connect his thoughts together which, like I said, I am struggling with. So, please be patient with me. I think what is important is that, if we look at the evolution of our industry, how we started in the 1970s, in the very early part of my speech, at that time, our GDP was about S$20 billion; I think we are at S$454 billion now. We started with a very conscious effort in the 1970s to go and build heavy industries. So, we developed Jurong Island. There were all these heavy industries that we built up. Our Pioneer founding generation leaders under former Minister Mentor Mr Lee Kuan Yew, Dr Goh Keng Swee and so on, I think at that time when we first started, we were very, very heavily invested in these heavy industries. We went on then into manufacturing. In the 1980s, we went into electronics. We did disk drives, wafer fabrication and then, eventually, in early part of 2000, we went into services, we went into bio-pharmaceutical, life sciences and so on and so forth. And now, we are into tech, we are into infocomm and we are into finance. Every 10 to 15 years, we have seen fairly dramatic transformation. I think it is inconceivable that you would expect that policies that you enact do not get refined, do not get tweaked and do not get adjusted over time.”
“I thank the hon Member Mr Louis Ng for his suggestion. As I have shared in my speech earlier on, we are looking at refining and strengthening not just TAFEP, but also the Fair Consideration Framework. Give us a bit of time. We are reviewing it with the different parties because it is of a tripartite nature. And in the months forward, I should be able to come back and update this House again.”
“Over the past year, we have been hard at work dealing with the many challenges posed by the pandemic. At this juncture, I hope that we will stay united and uphold the Singapore Spirit. The Government will work together with Singaporeans to overcome the difficulties ahead, emerge stronger from this crisis and build a better future for all.”
“Last year, we also raised the Employment Pass (EP) minimum qualifying salary twice to ensure the quality of foreign professionals brought in by companies. At the same time, we have invested heavily in developing the skills of Singaporeans to ensure that they can maintain their competitive edge in the global market and succeed. Second, we want to ensure that Singaporeans are treated fairly at work. We have been progressively enhancing the Fair Consideration Framework and stiffened penalties for discriminatory employers. MOM has also been exploring how to further refine the EP framework. As the saying goes, "Life is like the waves on the sea, with occasional ups and downs. Whether in good times or bad times, we still have to work hard." (In English): Somehow, it sounds different when I speak in Mandarin. [Laughter.] It is supposed to be sung in Hokkien. I think even Mr Pritam Singh knows that it is a Hokkien song. (In Mandarin): Over the years, Singaporeans have gone through many ups and downs and never bowed to any challenges. After all, we believe in "working hard to succeed". In the face of this crisis caused by the pandemic, Singaporeans have upheld the spirit of selflessness and adaptability of our forefathers. This shows that Singaporeans are willing to work hard, but we also care about being treated fairly. This requires the effort and cooperation of many parties. Companies must continue to innovate and transform to create more jobs that attract Singaporeans. At the same time, Singaporeans should continuously upgrade their skills and keep an open mind when looking for job opportunities. The Government will provide comprehensive assistance to help Singaporeans tide over this difficult period and maintain a fair and just society.”
“] We have always put Singaporeans at the heart of our economic policies, and have always strived to create good job opportunities for Singaporeans and improve their livelihoods. Singapore's open economy has contributed to our strong economic growth over the past few decades. We have not only attracted many multinational corporations (MNCs) to invest and set up regional headquarters here, but also helped many local enterprises seize opportunities to expand and venture into overseas markets. Foreign companies, especially those in specialised or emerging sectors, will inevitably need to bring in foreign professionals to complement the local workforce with skills that are currently in short supply. Nevertheless, such specialised capabilities can be transferred to local workers as these companies grow and develop. Over time, local workers will acquire new skills which will in turn raise their competitiveness. I understand that the presence of such foreign professionals has caused some anxiety to Singaporeans. Some Singaporeans may feel that they face stiffer competition for jobs compared to the past, or that they have been treated unfairly when applying for jobs. Others may worry about whether Singapore's social fabric will change. I understand the concerns of our Singaporeans. I would like to give the assurance that as we promote sustained economic growth, the Government will always continue to safeguard the livelihoods of Singaporeans. This is our firm commitment to Singaporeans. Our strategy to achieve this is two-pronged. The first is to ensure that our local workers can continue to have access to good job opportunities. Over the past few years, we have been progressively tightening quotas for foreign workers, especially at the S Pass level.”
“We are at a critical inflexion point in our economic development. The pandemic has caused significant economic damage the world over. We face many challenges in the post-pandemic era, but there are also abundant opportunities if we play our cards right. We have distinguished ourselves internationally with how we managed COVID-19 and we have enhanced our trust premium. Many businesses are now looking seriously at investing more in Singapore, which will create good jobs, but only if they can get enough workers, foreign workers as well, to supplement our local workforce. If we can bring them in, we can continue to grow our economy for another five to 10 years. But if we lose this opportunity, we will not only take longer to recover, the impact will be borne by our older workers and also by our youths who will graduate into the workforce over the next few years. This is a golden opportunity for Singapore to pull ahead. But if we turn protectionist and we make it difficult for companies to hire talent from around the world, then we will lose this opportunity. A business hub means being cosmopolitan, having people from around the world, doing business with the whole world and creating more opportunities for Singaporeans. It will bring in competition. But if the competition is not here, it will be outside. The competition would be helping other companies in other countries to beat ours here and displace our workers. Let us work together to continue improving Singaporeans’ lives and building a better future for all. Mr Speaker, Sir, can I just take a couple more minutes in Mandarin, please? (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.”
“We do that by tirelessly building up the Singaporean Core through a world-class education system, through continuous upskilling and reskilling; and we do that through working closely with all stakeholders involved to stamp out discriminatory employment practices and ensure a fair playing field to protect our Singaporean workers. There are careful balances and trade-offs to be made all the time. The Government is intent on keeping this balance right to achieve the goal of creating win-win outcomes for all. MOM will always be both pro-worker and pro-business. This is necessarily a joint effort. The power and the responsibility to make this happen does not lie with the Government alone. Businesses must be fair and progressive employers. They must win the confidence and the trust of their employees and the wider public by investing in a strong Singaporean Core, even as they complement it with a diverse foreign workforce. Workers, too, must adopt a growth mindset and continuously develop their skills. This is the spirit of our Pioneers, who were resilient in the face of challenges and daring in new opportunities. Unions and trade associations and chambers, or TACs, must continue to serve as multipliers of these positive changes. They help to build the bridge between Government and businesses and workers and they have spearheaded important initiatives to help our businesses and workers transform and upskill. And I hope Members of all parties must take their responsibility as representatives of the people seriously and work towards constructive solutions and avoid exploiting divisive fault lines. This tripartite partnership – between unions, employers and the Government – is the real reason why we have managed to succeed over the years.”
“We also receive complaints from the public and we act on them as well. Since its introduction in 2014, MOM has been progressively enhancing this framework. In January 2020, we stiffened penalties further for discrimination cases, so that errant employers can have their work pass privileges suspended for at least 12 months and, sometimes, up to 24 months. Last year, we extended the FCF job advertisement requirements to cover S Passes as well as EPs and we doubled the minimum advertisement period from 14 days to 28 days to give local jobseekers more time to respond to job openings. Mr Liang Eng Hwa has asked about the results of our efforts. Over the past three years, TAFEP has handled an average of 170 nationality discrimination cases arising from complaints annually. The top three sectors making up about half of the complaints are the wholesale and retail trade, administrative and support services and other service activities. These cases are investigated by TAFEP and, where warranted, they are referred to MOM for enforcement. Going forward, we will do more to clamp down on egregious employers with discriminatory employment practices. Several Members of Parliament like Mr Louis Ng, Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Vikram Nair had earlier suggested strengthening our levers to give more bite to our Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices. We take these suggestions seriously and we have been studying various options. Ladies and gentlemen, on a fundamental level, the Government’s goal has always been to create a better life and a future for Singaporeans. We do that through growing the economy, through enlarging the pie so that more locals can enjoy better jobs and a higher standard of living.”
“The majority of the firms are cooperative. They respond positively and they exit the Watchlist. For the small minority that are unresponsive, they can have their work pass privileges curtailed or they can be suspended for a specific time period. And this is not a small penalty. Today, this is an effective process, albeit resource-intensive. We currently have about 400 firms placed on the FCF Watchlist. There are limitations in terms of the reach and the number of firms that we can put through this process. We will be looking to complement, to strengthen the FCF Watchlist with a more scalable approach. As mentioned in MOM’s Committee of Supply (COS) speech this year, we are also exploring further refinements to our EP framework. Today, we rely primarily on salary as a gatekeeper to select complementary talent, because this is easy to understand and administer. But we are also exploring further additional refinements to achieve our objectives of a strong Singaporean Core, complemented by a diverse foreign workforce. I hope to share more details in due course. Last but not least, I want to deal with discrimination. We know that not all employers play by the rules. We have zero tolerance, zero tolerance towards discriminatory hiring practices. All employers are expected to comply with the requirements of the FCF and not discriminate on characteristics that are not related to the job. When it comes to hiring foreign PMEs, employers must first advertise on MyCareersFuture.sg and consider all candidates in the local workforce fairly, before submitting a work pass application. TAFEP investigates potential cases of pre-selection based on proactive surveillance – we use data analytics and AI as well to find out. So, we actually sort of study the data quite aggressively.”
“In the early 2000s, we experienced a similar situation when the share of PRCs in our foreign workforce increased significantly, before tapering as China’s growth took off. Both then and now, the larger numbers did not go unnoticed and they created frictions within our communities. We understand these concerns, which is why we review and update our work pass policies regularly. We always seek to balance the needs of our economy with the needs of our society. We have to bring in the talent and the skills to keep our economy growing, while tracking that the number of foreigners in our midst stays at a level that we are able to cope with, and manage the social frictions that will arise from time to time. This is a series of trade-offs. It is not going to be a once-off adjustment. It will be a constant balance that we have to continuously monitor and get right. Today, the Government does monitor the concentration of nationalities at the firm level. Mr Leong Mun Wai asked whether the threshold percentage of a company's workforce from a single nationality is a criterion for the Fair Consideration Framework, or FCF, Watchlist. The answer is yes. In shortlisting firms, MOM looks at whether they have a high concentration of foreigners from a single nationality source, in addition to a high share of foreign PMETs relative to their industry peers. However, being flagged in the FCF Watchlist is not evidence that the firm has committed any wrongdoing. Potentially, it could be a sign that some unfair hiring may be occurring. The purpose of this Watchlist is to have the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices, or TAFEP, actively engage these companies to review and improve, where needed, their hiring practices and their human resource capabilities.”
“Our companies, our industries, our enterprises, they are both creators of technology and also adopters of the talent that is needed to create these technologies. Given our relative shortage of manpower, even if the workers do not come from India, they will come from somewhere else. I hope that Mr Leong is not objecting to Indians per se. The point I think we should ask ourselves is this: are they helping our companies? Are they helping our enterprises? Are they helping us to grow our economy and create better Singaporean jobs? The answer is yes. It is not surprising, however, that this increasing concentration has caused some social frictions and anxiety to Singaporeans. In some ways, this is understandable and to some, we may even say that it is expected because these EP holders are transient. They work in Singapore for a number of years and they contribute to our economic growth. Apart from some EP holders who settle down and become PRs or Singapore Citizens, most of them, most EP holders work here for a few years and they either return home or they move on elsewhere. So, it is to be expected that they are different and we do feel that they are different. And this is the challenge of living in our multi-cultural society and a globalised world, as Minister Lawrence Wong spoke about recently. This is something that we will have to, and have been, proactively and constantly monitoring and managing. Indeed, when a single nationality becomes too prominent and that can have a disproportionate impact on our existing culture, our beliefs, it can cause our fellow Singaporeans, ourselves included, to feel less at home in our workplaces and in our neighbourhoods.”
“As every sector seeks to be digitally enabled, their need for tech talent has grown significantly. We do not have enough locals to fill the jobs available. In the infocomm sector alone today, 6,000 jobs currently remain unfilled. Companies can decide which overseas countries they want to bring in their manpower from. Based on their needs and the availability of the required talent, China and India, over the last decade or so, are two of the largest suppliers of tech talent. But you would have read that China has sprouted so many unicorns and the Chinese companies themselves have a huge demand of their own. So, many Chinese talent decide to stay in China to work. I can tell you that these are the numbers that we are seeing across the construction industry amongst the migrant workers as well. I think prior to my coming onboard as the Minister for Manpower, many Members here would know that I deal with the dormitories most of the time. I can share with you the same statistics. India's talent, on the other hand, have continued to look outwards. They also have the advantage of being English speaking. This phenomenon is not unique to Singapore. It is global. Currently, India is the largest country of origin for international migrants; this is in the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UN DESA) Report published in January 2021. In 2020 alone, it accounted for 18 million international migrants, up by 10 million from 2000. India has grown to become the second largest source of immigrants in the US and the third largest in the UK. These two countries are also heavily invested in developing their technological capabilities.”
“Mr Leong and Ms Poa have asked for the nationality profile of our work pass holders and their dependants from China, from India, from the US and from Australia. Ms Poa has asked for even more granular data on the sector and jobs commonly held by these same nationalities. Mr Speaker, Sir, for foreign policy reasons, we do not publish detailed statistics on our foreign workforce, especially by nationality. I am not aware of any country that reports at that level of granularity requested. Nevertheless, we recognise that if misconceptions continue to spread, in spite of all of our attempts to address them in many other ways, even more damage will be done. So, I will share some numbers to address the misconceptions and allow for a meaningful engagement on the issue at hand. The top nationalities that comprise around two-thirds of our EP holders have been consistent since 2005, namely, China, India, Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines and the UK. I believe the interest is really in the Indian EP holders. The proportion of EP holders from India has increased from about one-seventh in 2005 to about a quarter in 2020. In comparison, the proportion of EP holders from China has remained relatively stable across this same time period. Is this the result of more favourable treatment for Indian EP holders due to the CECA? The answer is no. As I have shared earlier, all work pass holders in Singapore have to meet the same criteria before they are allowed to enter our labour market. There is no differentiation based on nationality. Rather, these numbers reflect trends in the global demand and supply of tech talent. The larger increase in Indian EP holders compared to other nationalities is driven by the result of rapid growth and choices of growing our digital economy and finance.”
“These programmes are in addition to long-standing programmes such as Workforce Singapore (WSG)'s career conversion programmes. To make our career matching services even more accessible to locals, WSG has set up in all 24 HDB towns SGUnited Jobs and Skills (SGUJS) Centres. The retrenchment taskforce led by WSG and supported by NTUC's Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) reached out to nearly all retrenched local workers in 2020. Of those who took up the taskforce's employment facilitation assistance, you will be happy to note that more than two-thirds of them have found jobs within six months. Ms Mariam Jaafar asked about the effectiveness of the different capability development schemes in building a local talent pipeline. As of end April 2021, more than 110,000 locals have been placed into jobs and skills opportunities as a result of the SGUJS Package. Within the first three months of implementation, the Jobs Growth Incentive supported 27,000 employers who hired 130,000 new locals. With the support of employers and the unions, the policies that we have put up have preserved jobs for Singaporeans amidst the crisis of our generation. The numbers speak for themselves. Total employment in 2020, excluding migrant domestic workers, shrank by 166,600. Foreign employment took the most hit, shrinking by 181,500. Resident employment, on the other hand, managed to expand by 14,900 in spite of the downturn. We are not quite out of the woods yet and there is more work yet to be done but, ladies and gentlemen, let us also build on what we have collectively achieved so far. A second part on safeguarding diversity. I want to talk about nationality concentration amongst foreign PMEs.”
“In an open and globalised labour market like ours, competition is intense and stiff. There will be some of our fellow Singaporeans who are displaced from their jobs and we need to help them find replacement jobs. This happens not just because of competition from foreign workers but because of other factors like technological change and industries phasing out. This is why the Government invests so heavily in retraining and skills development so that displaced workers can gain new skills and reinvent themselves either by doing a different job in the same industry or transiting to another industry altogether. In fact, for some industries, as they get sunsetted, we have to help workers to pivot and transform even faster. That is really the subject of the 23 Industry Transformation Maps that we have set up over the last couple of years. As Mr Lim Swee Say used to say, in Singapore, we are unable to guarantee your employment but rest assured, we will work very, very, very hard to ensure your employability. Upgrading skills and staying relevant is, ultimately, our workers' best form of protection. We do this through our system of education, through training and that goes beyond formal schooling. We do this via SkillsFuture. We also help displaced Singaporeans through job facilitation and support. COVID-19 has been an especially difficult time for many Singaporeans. Therefore, we have stepped up support. As announced at Budget this year, we have extended the SGUnited Jobs and Skills (SGUJS) Package. MOF has set aside an additional $5.4 billion to support the hiring of 200,000 locals through the Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI) and provided 35,000 traineeships, attachments and training opportunities just this year alone.”
“As shared previously, the vast majority of Dependant's Pass (DP) holders do not work during their stay in Singapore. The number of DP holders who have sought employment in Singapore via a Letter of Consent (LOC) – for DP holders, up to May, if they wanted to work, they needed to get an LOC – this number constitutes only about 1% of all work pass holders. In fact, Members would remember we have already regularised the work arrangements of DP holders in May this year. From May this year, DP holders who wish to work in Singapore can no longer obtain an LOC. Instead, they will have to qualify for a relevant work pass on their own merit. So, they go through the normal work pass routes. There will always be calls from workers to tighten our foreign workforce policies further, just as there will always be calls from businesses to relax them. I can tell you that in my past life, I was also guilty of that. I have also lobbied to relax work pass policies; that was a function of a listed company. It is the tightrope that MOM and MTI have to constantly navigate very delicately amidst highly competitive global markets for both investments and talent. Ladies and gentlemen, there are limits as to how far we can tighten our controls without eventually hurting Singaporeans. With remote working becoming more prevalent, companies increasingly do not need to site their manpower in Singapore. In fact, we may find more businesses simply choosing to move entire business functions offshore if it becomes too difficult, onerous or expensive to operate here. Singaporeans will end up with the shorter end of the stick as well by losing some jobs too. This is precisely why the second prong of our approach – that of ensuring that our Singaporeans can compete strongly – is just as important.”
“We also introduced a higher bar of $5,000 for applicants in the finance sector to take into account the higher wage norms in that sector. We will continue to review and revise these thresholds regularly to ensure that they remain appropriate and they remain in tandem as our economy develops, as our skills, as our income levels, go up. Mr Leong has also previously raised in this House his concern that foreign Employment Pass (EP) holders are cheaper to hire than locals, simply because their employers do not make CPF contributions. I think he fundamentally misunderstands the purpose of our CPF. CPF is set aside for our retirement needs. It can also be used for housing. As foreign PMEs who are not working in Singapore on a permanent basis, I do not think we should be responsible for their retirement adequacy or home ownership needs. Hence, I do not think it makes sense for us to extend our CPF benefits and coverage to them. Fundamentally, our CPF system is designed to benefit our resident workers, not to help attract or deter foreigners. Instead, when reviewing the qualifying salary to maintain a level playing field, we take into account CPF contributions as part of the cost to employers. That is packaged into the cost to employers. Mr Leong did not suggest that employers should pay foreigners CPF too. I think he realises this. Instead, he says he wants to impose a $1,200 levy on EP holders. But as I have just explained, a levy is not the most effective or the right way to manage the population of foreign PMEs. I think that it would be better managed by appropriately setting the right salary level for entry into Singapore. Ms Hazel Poa has asked for numbers on dependants in Singapore. This is relevant insofar as they are competing with locals for jobs.”
“In line with these objectives, at the Work Permit and the S Pass level, we have quotas. And we have levies in place to regulate foreign worker numbers. We have been progressively tightening quotas, we have been progressively raising levies to reduce manpower reliance, spur job redesign, push for quality growth. Over the past decade, we have consistently and steadfastly held our course in spite of numerous calls from businesses to relax our rules. We commit to productivity-led growth because we believe many of these jobs have the potential to be transformed into good jobs that provide higher real wages and rewarding careers for Singaporeans. For EPs, we do not impose quotas or levies because there is fierce competition for global talent and worldwide shortages in areas such as tech and digital skills. A quota would be a hard cap that would limit our ability to compete at the high end of the global economy, while for a levy to have any impact or any effect at all on EP numbers, it would have to be set very high and would substantially increase business costs. Instead, what we have done is that we have focused on setting and raising the quality bar for EP holders through requirements on salary and qualifications to make sure that the EPs who come in are at the right level and they bring the right skillsets, the necessary expertise and experience to contribute significantly to our economy. Last year, we raised the EP minimum qualifying salary in two steps, from $3,600 to $3,900; and then, we raised it again to $4,500. The salary requirement increases with age, it is also on a graduated scale, which reflects the candidate's experience, his length of time in the workforce, in order to provide sufficient protection for our mature workers.”
“If we tell companies which want to invest in Singapore that they can only employ Singaporeans, or first employ Singaporeans who have been displaced regardless of skills, I think the answer will be quite stark. They, I think, will opt not to come into Singapore to invest. All companies will want to hire Singaporeans, but companies will also need to have that flexibility to hire the best available talent from around the world to complement our Singaporean workforce. I understand. I understand what displaced Singaporeans are going through. Rest assured, we are doing our best to help you and your families. But it is important that we go to the root cause of the problem, that we are able to tackle it and we are able to diagnose the situation accurately, and not provide treatment to just treat and relieve the symptoms. Because only when we can identify the right solution, we are able to prescribe, we are able to provide the precise and the appropriate treatment. The fundamental question now is, how do we strike a balance between ensuring that businesses have access to skillsets, to manpower, to grow and succeed, whilst creating opportunities for our local workers to grow and to progress? Our strategy to achieve this has always been two-pronged: ensuring that our workers can compete fairly and can compete strongly. So, the first is to ensure that our local workers can compete fairly. We do this through our work pass controls. Our view, our prevalent view, is that foreign manpower should not come to Singapore just because they are cheaper to hire than locals. They should complement but not displace our local workforce. They should bring in extra skills to help the companies and, at the same time, create more Singaporean jobs.”
“Companies are desperate to fill these jobs. They would love to take in Singaporeans if they could, because they would be more productive. But these jobs up till now are still not filled. Perhaps Mr Leong would like to think deeply about that and deliberate and offer us some advice. Mr Leong also suggests that doing away with foreigners will reduce the displacement of our older PMEs. I wish that were so, but the private sector and the real economy do not operate this way. There will always be displacement of PMEs, whether older or younger in any economy. Why? Because the business world is never static. Industries change, companies downsize, they expand, they relocate, they pivot, they transform. Regardless of whether you have foreigners or not, that would not change because this is the function of the business world. What matters most for us is whether we are able to find jobs for these displaced PMEs. To do this, we need an eco-system where there are also new companies willing to come and start up in Singapore, new investments, new foreign direct investments coming in and expanding multinational corporations. So far, I think we have done credibly in this regard. New jobs created have far exceeded the jobs that have been lost and our unemployment rate has been kept low. And the re-entry rates for displaced PMEs are high. That said, it is not always easy or possible to find every single displaced PME an equivalent job in the same industry, especially if there is a skills mismatch. An IT sales manager who loses his job may not find a job as a cybersecurity expert. But we do our best to help them find jobs in other growth sectors.”
“In finance, the number of EPs increased by around 20,000, but the number of jobs created for local PMEs was even greater, at around 85,000. This is more than four times. We focus on these two sectors because they bring good quality jobs and Singapore, our beloved Singapore, can carve out an advantage and value-add significantly in these areas. And as a result, there has been significant job creation. As we attract foreign banks, infocomm companies to create jobs here, they will inevitably need foreign workers to complement the Singaporean workforce. I want to deal with a fundamental misconception which lies at the heart of some of the things being misconstrued. When a company decides to come into Singapore to invest and they need about 3,000 people, they may be able to find about 2,500 of these talents in Singapore. But they still need to supplement the 2,500 with the other additional 500 from overseas. If we object and we insisted that the balance of their 500 must all come from Singapore irrespective, then how do we expect that investment to take off? How do you expect an investment to come in? These 2,500 jobs for the locals would be compromised greatly. The simple point is that while we have a good Singaporean talent pool, our pool is not large enough to fulfil all of the needs, the breadth and the depth of these enterprises. Very often, foreigners also bring in skills which complement Singaporeans' skillsets as well. The misconception is that if we said no to the foreigners coming in, these jobs they would have taken would, therefore, all go to Singaporeans. How can this be possible? This is a misconception. How do I know that this is a misconception? Because today, even as we speak, we still have 22,000 PME jobs that are not filled.”
“Manufacturing and construction account for about one-tenth. The rest are in the services sector. If you look at the top three subsectors: infocomm and professional services, these two sectors account for around one-fifth each; while finance accounts for another one-seventh. If you look at the change from 2005, I think that was around the time when CECA was signed, to 2020, the total number of EPs has increased by around 112,000. This was also mentioned in Minister Ong's speech earlier on. Over this period, the total number of local PMEs increased significantly by more than 380,000. There have been questions asked, both inside and outside of this House, whether most of the growth in local PME jobs was accounted for by Singapore Citizens. If you look at our unemployment statistics, we provide the figure for Singapore Citizens. The citizen unemployment rate over the past 10 years has been consistently low, at around 3%. Hence, the answer must be a yes. For those of you who have asked how much of this local PME job growth has gone to born and bred Singaporeans, notwithstanding the divisive intent of this kind of questioning, let me state simply that the majority of this growth over the past decade went to Singaporeans born in Singapore. And as we have also shared in response to a written Parliamentary Question yesterday, 87% of Singapore Citizens were born here. Much attention has been placed on the finance and the infocomm sectors, which alone accounted for 40% of the increase in EP holders. This is significant but what is even more significant is that these two sectors saw even stronger job creation for local PMEs. In infocomm, the number of EPs increased by around 25,000. The number of jobs created in this sector alone for local PMEs was greater, at 35,000.”
“In particular, they are worried about three things: first, that the growth in EP holders has come at the expense of our local PMEs; second, that some workplaces have become more concentrated with a single nationality; and third, that there may be discrimination against local jobseekers and employees. I have come from the private sector, and I understand and empathise with these fears, these concerns and these anxieties. I would like to address each of them in turn, because I want to lay out the facts and also share our approach in dealing with each one of them. I am not suggesting that all of our approaches are perfect. Obviously, we are always a work-in-progress. But we will continue to refine them in the light of our experiences, always with a focused view to having a system that will and can deliver good jobs, good livelihoods and a thriving economy for Singaporeans. Not just for our generation but for our future generations. I hope this will enable us to arrive at a better understanding of the choices and the trade-offs that we constantly have to make. First, on the increased competition from foreign PMEs. In Singapore today, we have one of the best local talent pools in the world. But it is insufficient to meet the breadth, the depth, the needs of investments that generate the quality and the range of jobs that we have today. So, when we bring in new investments, we will sometimes need to attract foreign expertise, foreign talent, while we build up our local capabilities. Ms Hazel Poa, Assoc Prof Jamus Lim and Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked for the breakdown of local and foreign workforce numbers by sector. Given the issue at hand, let me focus on EPs. As of 2020, we have around 177,000 EPs, or Employment Pass holders, in our overall workforce.”
“They are also subject to more conditions in their eligibility to bring in dependants and apply for permanent residency or future employment in Singapore. And if they have brought in dependants, the dependants do not have the automatic right to work here. They can only do so if they qualify for a work pass on their own merits. This is a very fundamental point and I hope that everyone will remember this. Thus, and as mentioned by Minister Ong, the total number of ICTs has consistently been very small. In 2020, there were only about 4,200 ICTs. Of these, about 500 were from India. That is 500 out of 177,000 Employment Pass (EP) holders in Singapore. As for the number of "professional visas" issued, I am afraid to disappoint Mr Leong, there is no such category within MOM. As Minister Ong explained, all 127 categories of professionals under CECA currently come in under our regular work pass framework. The PSP has made Indian nationals coming in through CECA a focus of contention. But I am afraid they have been barking up the wrong tree. The number of ICTs coming in under our FTAs, and in particular CECA, is a very small number relative to our total number of EPs. I suggest we set aside this red herring and move on, more importantly, to the heart of the matter. The heart of the matter is this: how do we, as a small country devoid of any natural resources, remain open to global talent for us to continue to create opportunities for our fellow Singaporeans while, at the same time, manage the attendant social repercussions? Singaporeans are pragmatic. They understand we need to remain open to global talent. However, they also face real challenges.”
“Mr Speaker, in his Statement, Minister Ong has explained why FTAs are critical to Singapore, as well as how they have helped us reap significant benefits for our fellow Singaporeans. The same goes for our openness to foreign workers. We take the same approach when we decide on foreign workers coming to work in Singapore: how does it help Singaporeans? At the start of the 1970s, our GDP was S$20 billion. Now, the economy has grown to S$454 billion. Foreign workers account for around one-third of our workforce. There are more than 2.3 million locals who are employed and our resident unemployment rate is 4.1%, half of what it was in 1970. We need to understand the real challenges we are facing today in order to have a constructive debate on the way forward. And that is why we are having these two Ministerial Statements. I will explain with data, with details, as to exactly how our foreign workforce policies are implemented in order to benefit our fellow Singaporeans. I will also give our perspective on the real challenges we face today and the real solutions that are demanded. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim and Mr Leong asked for the number of intra-corporate transferees or ICTs, professionals and dependants that come in through CECA. Let me reiterate a point Minister Ong has made, and that is none of our FTAs, including CECA, gives intra-corporate transferees, or ICTs, unfettered access to our labour market. So, please remember that. They all have to meet MOM's prevailing work pass criteria. Under the ICT route, the employer does not have to advertise on MyCareersFuture.sg, but the ICTs themselves are subject to additional checks on their seniority, on their employment history as well as their work and industry experience.”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to address Oral Questions Nos 1 to 6, as well as Written Question Nos 40 to 42 in today's Order Paper through the Ministerial Statements to be delivered by Minister Ong Ye Kung and myself, later today?”
“The Member may wish to note that the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP), which is available online, states that employers should "ask only (for) information relevant to assessing an applicant's suitability for a job". TAFEP's website further elaborates on the principle of merit-based hiring by explicitly stating that "companies should not ask job applicants to declare personal information such as their mental health condition unless there is a job-related requirement". In assessing complaints, TAFEP will ask for the employers' rationale for requiring information on mental health conditions. We adopt a holistic approach and take into consideration all relevant factors before arriving at an assessment.”
“From 2017 to 2019, about 210,000 or half of all Workfare recipients each year were female1.”
“From 31 December 2022, all licensed cleaning businesses have to ensure that their cleaners attain one Workplace Safety and Health related module, and one core module endorsed by the TCC. IMDA and NEA have also developed an Environmental Services Industry Digital Plan (ES IDP) to enhance employees’ digital skills. The ES IDP, which was refreshed in April 2021, guides Small and Medium Enterprises in adopting appropriate training programmes and digital solutions, such as Robotics and Augmented Reality, for cleaning, waste and pest management firms to improve their business operations. This would enable the ES industry as a whole to create more skilled positions for workers. To attract young talent into the ES industry, including the cleaning sector, NEA launched the NEA-Industry Scholarship programme in 2020, which enables ES companies to attract, hire and groom ITE and Polytechnic graduates.”
“Last year, in light of the COVID-19 pandemic, tripartite partners called on service providers to consider increasing the wages of and providing allowances to cleaners with higher workloads, for example due to increased frequency and intensity of cleaning. This was also in recognition that cleaners faced additional exposure in cleaning and disinfecting potentially contaminated premises. This remuneration would be on top of the mandated Progressive Wage Model (PWM) Bonus of two weeks’ salary. Firms have heeded the call to do so. As COVID-19 remains a concern, the tripartite partners continue to encourage service providers to remunerate their cleaners appropriately. Cleaning wages have been steadily increasing over the years, from a median gross wage1 of $1,100 in 2014 to $1,388 in 2019 (26% cumulative growth). From July 2023, Cleaning PWM’s basic wages will increase at a faster rate. These wage increases were determined in consultation with stakeholders, including service providers and buyers. This gives employers some time to adapt, as many have existing contract obligations that may run for a few years. There is also a mid-point review so that the Tripartite Cluster for Cleaners (TCC) can ensure that the wage increases remain sustainable for firms and meaningful for workers. All stakeholders play a part in adjusting to the wage increases, including our cleaners. They will need to upskill and be more productive. Employers will also have a part to play in transforming their business models and redesigning jobs to drive productivity improvements as a whole. The Government has accepted the TCC’s recommended mandatory training requirements under the Skills Framework for Environmental Services (ES).”
“The questions will be addressed by the Ministerial Statements to be delivered by Minister Ong Ye Kung and Minister Tan See Leng on 6 July 2021.[Please refer to "Free Trade Agreements and Foreign Manpower", Official Report, 6 July 2021, Volume 95, Issue No 32, Ministerial Statement section.]”
“MOM takes stern action against employers or any other party who collect kickbacks from migrant workers as a condition or guarantee of employment. These kickbacks are offences under the Employment of Foreign Manpower Act (EFMA). Between 2016 and 2020, MOM looked into an average of 960 cases per year for kickback offences. An average of 102 employers were taken to task each year; about 80% of them were issued with warnings or composition fines while the remaining 20% were charged in Court. For the cases that are prosecuted, about 90% were successfully convicted. MOM will continue to take action against errant employers who collect kickbacks from migrant workers. In recent years, MOM has made use of data analytics to identify and detect unusual patterns in hiring practices more quickly and accurately. This has helped MOM proactively detect cases of employment kickbacks, in addition to complaints and tip-offs that we received. MOM has also stepped up education and engagement efforts to educate migrant workers that their employers cannot demand or collect kickbacks from them. Migrant workers who are asked to do so, should approach MOM for assistance.”
“I am happy to confirm that the outreach and education efforts on tripartite standards and progressive employment practices reach employees too. The efforts include promotional campaigns across multiple media platforms such as the AskST and AskZB articles in the mainstream media. The Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) also produces educational videos that are available online. These materials are made easily accessible and understandable to both employers and employees, thereby setting the right expectations for progressive employment practices. TAFEP also customises outreach programmes to more targeted segments, such as graduating students or community groups. This effort is further supported by NTUC through regular sharing sessions with union leaders and employees as well as engagements with employers on fair and progressive employment practices.”
“The industry has generally shown that it has been improving in managing fatigue over the years. Preliminary investigations into the four fatal WRTA that have occurred thus far this year indicate that fatigue was not the cause.”
“MOM last studied the issue of long driving hours together with industry partners in 2019, in an effort to reduce Work-Related Traffic Accidents (WRTA) involving vocational drivers. The tripartite Workplace Safety and Health Council has issued the Guidelines on Fatigue Management in 2010, updated the Workplace Traffic Safety Management Guidelines in 2014, and more recently in 2021, revised its Guide to Safe Riding. The guidelines include recommendations on preventing fatigue. For example, the guidelines recommend that in addition to limiting shifts to no more than 12 hours including overtime, drivers should take scheduled breaks such as 15 minutes of rest for every two hours of driving. The Council considered whether to mandate its recommendations or reduce the current limit of 12 hours of work a day permissible under the Employment Act. It decided to focus instead on addressing the core attitudes and mindsets towards safety. The Council also stepped up measures to educate employers and drivers on the risk factors and share recommendations on the good practices that can be adopted to prevent fatigue. MOM has also worked with IMDA and ESG to provide grant support to adopt vehicular safety technology such as the Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS) to improve the situational awareness of drivers and warn of collision risks, and the Driver Status Monitoring System (DSM) to detect fatigue and distractions such as handphone usage or not looking ahead for extended periods. Since September 2020, 171 companies have taken up the grant to install vehicular safety technology and we urge more to come on board. Businesses can refer to these solutions under Fleet Safety Management System in the Productivity Solutions Grant for more information.”
“This year’s campaign targets key accident types, such as slips trips and falls and machinery safety, by drawing attention to the importance of safe operating of machinery and making slips trips and fall risks more apparent to workers. More recently, following the spate of accidents between May and June that resulted in nine fatalities, the WSH Council called for a Safety Time-Out (STO), which received strong support from the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) as well as industry associations and commenced on 25 June. I strongly urge all employers to review and update their risk management and work processes, and to ensure compliance with safe work procedures. Other ongoing efforts remain essential. For example, WSH training ensures workers have the skills and know-how to carry out work safely. All workers in high risk industries or performing specific high-risk activities are required to undergo the requisite safety training. Recertification is a prerequisite for work pass renewal so that workers remain current. MOM's safety inspections complement such efforts and continue to be an important part of safeguarding Singapore’s WSH. While fewer inspections were conducted last year due to worksite closures during the circuit breaker period, MOM averaged more than 15,000 inspections annually over the past three years, across all industries. Around 5,000 or 33% of companies inspected were from the construction, manufacturing and marine industries, which are higher risk. Mr Speaker, the first half of the year has seen quite a number of workplace accidents, which is of grave concern. However, if all stakeholders take ownership of WSH and do our part, I am confident that the situation will turn for the better.”
“Singapore has made significant progress in our workplace safety and health (WSH) fatality record over the last decade, from a rate of 2.9 per 100,000 workers in 2009 to a rate of 0.9 in 2020. This is the result of concerted efforts by all stakeholders: business leaders and employers, workers, and Government. Over the years, tripartite partners have worked together to raise awareness and ownership of WSH, build capabilities and strengthen WSH regulations. Recent efforts have been guided by the WSH2028 strategies, with the aim of reducing Singapore’s workplace fatality rate to, and sustaining it at, less than 1.0 per 100,000 workers. One key strategy is to ensure WSH is aligned with business interests. We have done so on two fronts. First, we amended the Work Injury Compensation Act to require insurance claims data to be shared amongst insurers. This facilitates more accurate insurance premium pricing. In turn, companies with good safety records are rewarded with lower premiums while those with poorer safety records pay more. The legislative amendment came into effect last September. Second, in January this year, MOM launched the CheckSafe e-service, an online tool that provides information on the WSH performance of construction companies. This enables developers, contractors and clients to make informed decisions on contract awarding and partnerships, taking into consideration companies’ safety track record. On 29 April, the Workplace Safety and Health Council launched the National WSH Campaign, a year-long initiative calling upon employers and employees to "Take Time to Take Care of Your Safety and Health" at every level, from management to individual workers.”
“Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to address Oral Question Nos 1 to 3, as well as Written Question Nos 19 to 24 in today's Order Paper through the Ministerial Statements to be delivered by Minister Ong Ye Kung and myself tomorrow, 6 July 2021?”
“Many of the companies looking to invest in Singapore, particularly from the semi-conductors to even data centres and so on, they have also moved on to source for many of these carbon credits. I think it is now an opportune moment for us to work collectively together to nuance this approach and, at the same time, bring many of our own enterprises locally, as well as regional SMEs that have decided to sink roots here in Singapore, along with us. So, I thank the Member for highlighting this. It is certainly one of those targets that we not just aspire to do, but we have every intention to fulfil.”