Teo Chee Hean
Singapore
“The second point first, Mr Speaker. Certainly, it could have been a factor. But to the Panel which reviewed the thing, it was not an acceptable excuse or reason. The agencies still have to be responsible for what they are doing, whatever season of the year it is.”
“On the balance in ACRA, I would not say it is a conflict, but you have to strike the right balance between the functions that ACRA is meant to provide, which is to have a registry which promotes corporate transparency, and you have to balance that against how you protect personal data.”
“That means, if you do find a bug or you do find a way in which you can penetrate a Government system, you let us know, and there is a bounty for it. And this is evergreen. But we also do, from time to time, have a hunting season. So, for certain of our systems, we invite white hatters to attack those systems.”
“Then, he asked when the political office holders got involved in the public communications on the Bizfile portal issue. They got involved, I think, almost as soon as it became apparent that there was public anxiety. Next question about paragraph 40 and the email to senior officers, yes, the July 2024 CM was emailed to officers.”
“In fact, we monitor the dark web for a variety of things, including this, and we have not seen any sale of NRIC numbers as such. On the question of collection and use of NRIC numbers, actually, in the communication with the Government agencies, I think it is important to know who you are communicating with.”
“So, you actually make your email address available to others. But for authentication purposes, it is quite different. You do not tell your password to others. That is something which you keep for yourself and your email service provider knows. So, there is a difference between an identifier and an authentication.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,689 lines we hold for Teo Chee Hean, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 10 of 34.
“They have the necessary information and context to assess whether to seek to overrule the veto. If the Fifth Schedule entity decides to accept the veto, that should be the end of the matter. Article 37IF(4) stipulates two areas in which the Article 37IF overruling mechanism does not apply. First, it does not apply to the entrenchment framework, which has its own overruling mechanism. Second, it does not apply to Article 22H, which allows a President to withhold assent from the passing of ordinary legislation if he is of the opinion that the legislation circumvents or curtails his constitutional discretionary powers. Third, time limits for the exercise of the President's veto. Where the President does not expressly exercise his veto, but instead chooses to remain silent, there could be ambiguity about whether the Government may proceed. There are currently a few areas, such as Supply Bills, in which the President's failure to exercise his veto within a stipulated time limit will result in him being deemed to not have exercised his veto. Such a deeming mechanism ensures that the President's silence does not result in any ambiguity. It should thus generally be applied to Presidential vetoes. Clause 11 of the Bill inserts the new Article 21A to introduce the deeming mechanism and stipulate time limits for the President's exercise of his veto powers. Article 21A(2)(a) provides that a 30-day time limit applies for certain time-sensitive matters, namely: (i) Supply Bills, Supplementary Supply Bills and Final Supply Bills; (ii) the President's additional protective functions relating to ISA detentions, MRHA restraining orders and CPIB investigations; and (iii) amendments relating to entrenched provisions, when the entrenchment framework is brought into operation.”
“When the President consults the CPA, the CPA will deliberate the matter and provide its recommendations. Where the President and the Government agree with each other, the CPA's views will not have any legal weight. However, where the President exercises his veto, a veto supported by the CPA should have greater finality than a veto exercised contrary to the CPA's recommendations. Where the President's advisory council agrees with the Government instead of the President, the issue may warrant a "second look" by Parliament. This approach currently applies already, only in two areas, namely: (a) Supply Bills; and (b) key appointments to the Public Service and Fifth Schedule entities. In these areas: The President's veto is final if he acts with the CPA's support. However, where he exercises his veto contrary to the CPA's recommendation, a two-third Parliamentary majority may overrule his veto. Whether, and when, to trigger an overruling is the Government's prerogative, but the President's veto stands unless it is successfully overruled. The new Article 37IF(1), (2)(a) and (c), and (3) extends the overruling mechanism uniformly to all fiscal and appointment-related matters subject to a Presidential veto. On a related note, I will later move an amendment to refine the overruling mechanism in relation to Fifth Schedule entities. Under the amended approach, a President's veto of a Fifth Schedule budget or transaction can be overruled only where the relevant entity has requested for an overruling resolution to be moved and the Government decides to trigger the overruling mechanism. The entity's board or management oversees its operations. They are responsible for the budgets and its transactions.”
“The Bill improves the framework by making changes to the following areas: (a) first, the President's obligation to consult the CPA; (b) second, the Parliamentary overruling framework; (c) third, time limits for the exercise of President's veto; (d) fourth, disclosure of the President's and CPA's reasons; and (e) fifth, strengthening the CPA. Other consequential amendments will also be made. First, the President's obligation to consult the CPA. The President is currently required to consult the CPA prior to exercising the discretionary powers listed in the existing Article 21(3). However, this requirement applies in relation to some, but not all, of his fiscal and appointment-related powers. The obligation to consult the CPA should apply uniformly to all such matters. Clause 22 of the Bill introduces the new Article 37IA, which adopts this uniform approach. As a matter of legislative drafting, unlike the existing Article 21(3) which sets out a list of discretionary powers, Article 37IA(1) imposes a general duty on the President to consult the CPA before exercising any discretionary power conferred on him by the Constitution. Article 37IA(2) introduces three categories of exceptions to the general duty, for which the President may, but need not, consult the CPA. First, the President's additional protective functions relating to restraining orders under the Maintenance of Religious Harmony Act (MRHA), detention orders under the Internal Security Act (ISA), as well as investigations by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB). Second, the President's discretionary powers concerning the CPA under Part VA of the Constitution. Third, the traditional discretionary powers that pre-date the Elected Presidency. Second, the Parliamentary overruling framework.”
“I turn now to the framework of the President's custodial powers, which the CPA is an important part of. The CPA is an independent expert advisory body with varied and deep expertise. It helps to ensure that the President's decisions are well-informed and provides a stabilising effect so that the President's important custodial function does not depend solely on the judgement of a single person acting alone. As the President said in his message, the CPA helps to "moderate" the President's custodial powers. The CPA also plays a role in resolving disagreements that may arise between the President and the Government, as I will explain later. Overall, we want the framework to facilitate wise and prompt decisions, with suitable mechanisms to resolve impasses. With your permission, Mdm Speaker, may I ask the Clerk to distribute the third handout?”
“Article 19B(2)(b) and (c) deals with such situations. The general principle is that an election will first be reserved for the racial group which has had a longer hiatus from office. If no eligible candidates come forward, then the election becomes reserved for the racial group with the next longest hiatus, and so on. This continues until the election eventually becomes an open election. Article 19B(6) defines the three racial groups that reserved elections can apply to: (a) the Chinese community; (b) the Malay community; and (c) a composite group comprising the Indian community and other minority communities in Singapore. If a person does not fall within any of the three stipulated groups, he can still contest in open elections like any other Singaporean who meets all the usual requirements. The definitions for the Malay, Indian and other minority communities are identical to those adopted in the Group Representation Constituency (GRC) context. It is useful to note that the "other minority communities" refers to groups that have some degree of history, permanence and established presence in Singapore, such as the Eurasian community. A similar definition will be introduced for the purposes of determining whether a Presidential candidate belongs to the Chinese community. These racial community definitions have two aspects – an applicant must consider himself a member of the relevant community, and must also be generally accepted by that community as a member. In the GRC context, this approach has proven to be capable of handling situations involving persons of mixed heritage. The establishment of the committees and procedures to decide whether a person belongs to one of the three racial groups will be provided for by way of legislation subsequently.”
“In trying to ensure multiracial representation in the Presidency, we must carefully balance a number of considerations: the need for multiracialism with our meritocratic ideals; helping, and not impeding, our progress towards our long-term goal of greater multiracialism; and having direct elections while ensuring that Presidents from minority groups are elected from time to time. After considering many different models, the Constitutional Commission recommended a "five-term hiatus" model, which the Government has accepted. It seeks to balance all the factors mentioned earlier. It involves minimal intervention and will come into play only if open elections fail to periodically return Presidents from different races. We also agree that a hiatus of five terms strikes a good balance. If the hiatus is too long, the system may not meaningfully ensure that the Presidency is accessible to the various racial communities. Conversely, if it is too short, the system comes close to designating successive elections for different races, which might not be appropriate in a system of direct elections. Clause 9 of the Bill inserts the new Article 19B to establish the "five-term hiatus" model. Elections will generally be open to candidates from all races. However, if a particular racial group has not held the Presidency for the most recent five consecutive terms, Article 19B(1) reserves the next election for candidates from that group. The usual eligibility requirements continue to apply. If, during a reserved election, no eligible candidate from the relevant racial group comes forward, the election becomes an open election. There may be situations where two or three racial groups have not held the Presidency for five or more consecutive terms.”
“It is necessary to continue emphasising this role, particularly because once we have direct elections, it is difficult to ensure that the Presidents will continue to collectively represent the different racial groups. This is a real concern – that members of minority groups may not be elected to the Presidency for long periods of time. This will undermine the President's vital role as the symbol of our multiracial nation. Views have been publicly expressed, including before the Constitutional Commission, that special arrangements to ensure multiracial representation in the Presidency detract from meritocracy. The argument is that a President must be elected on the basis of merit, and that race should be irrelevant to this determination. But multiracial representation can be achieved while ensuring that meritocracy is not compromised. As noted in both the Commission's Report and the White Paper, meritocracy-related concerns lose force if the eligibility criteria apply to candidates of all ethnic groups. Furthermore, as the Commission put it, "the most meritorious candidate may not always be the most electable", because race "has an impact on at least a portion of the electorate". Indeed, the CNA-IPS survey I referred to earlier showed that a significant proportion of respondents were not willing to accept a President from a race other than their own. Therefore, a candidate's race may work against him in some situations and may have a decisive impact in moderately close elections.”
“Article 18(8), (9) and (10) deal with the PEC's internal procedures. I turn next to the issue of multiracial representation in the Presidency. Mdm Speaker, Singapore has progressed well as a multi-racial society. A recent survey by CNA and the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) shows that Singaporeans strongly believe in meritocracy and that a high proportion report living out multicultural ideals. However, there is a need to ensure multiracial representation in the Presidency, given its historical and principal role as the symbol of our multiracial nation. This unique role distinguishes the Presidency from all other public offices. Prior to 1991, Parliament had appointed Presidents who collectively represented all the different racial groups. As the President noted in his message earlier today, it was no coincidence that our first four appointed Presidents were Malay, Eurasian, Indian and Chinese respectively. As then-Senior Minister Lee Kuan Yew emphasised, this rotation was "important to remind Singaporeans that [our] country was multiracial", and the Elected Presidency had to continue to be "a symbol of a multiracial community, and an expression of our national identity". We are not alone in recognising the importance of multiracial representation in the office of the Head of State. In Switzerland, Canada and New Zealand, the office is rotated among ethnic groups, or periodically held by racial minorities. Since the Elected Presidency was introduced, much public attention has been focused on the "technocratic" aspects of the President's custodial function. The symbolic role of the Presidency has sometimes been overlooked. But the symbolic role remains of vital importance.”
“Currently, the PEC comprises three members: the Chairman of the Public Service Commission (PSC), who is the PEC Chairman; the Chairman of the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority (ACRA); and a member of the Presidential Council for Minority Rights (PCMR), nominated by the PCMR Chairman. Article 18(2) adds: (a) a past or current CPA member appointed by the CPA Chairman; (b) a person who must be qualified to be, or have been, a Judge of the Supreme Court, appointed by the Chief Justice; and (c) a person who has private sector expertise and experience that is relevant to the functions of the PEC, appointed by the Prime Minister. The PEC will remain a standing institution. Article 18(3) stipulates that appointed PEC members will hold six-year terms and may be re-appointed. Article 18(4) provides the grounds on which a PEC member's office may be vacated. Two of these bear elaboration. First, Article 18(4)(c) provides that PEC members who are appointed to the PEC by an appointing authority can have their membership revoked by their appointers. This mirrors the existing approach for the PCMR member who sits on the PEC. However, Article 18(6) specifies that an appointment cannot be revoked from the time a writ for a Presidential election is issued to the time a person is declared to be elected as President. This avoids changes to the PEC composition during an election period, which could lead to confusion and also to possible claims of influencing the elections. Second, Article 18(4)(e) stipulates that the CPA member who sits on the PEC will vacate his PEC office under certain conditions. Article 18(5) and (7) provides for situations where a PEC member's office falls vacant or where a PEC member is unable to discharge his functions.”
“The third way to qualify under the private sector route is through the aggregation of terms under Article 19(4)(c). This operates similarly to aggregation of public sector terms, save that the private sector candidate may only rely on his most recent term in each company. He is not entitled to cherry-pick his terms, as explained earlier. Clause 16 of the Bill introduces amendments relating to vacation of and removal from the Presidential office. The new Article 22L(1)(aa) provides that a President vacates his office if he ceases to be a citizen of Singapore. The new Article 22L(3)(e) provides that the President can be removed if, in demonstrating his eligibility to the PEC, he intentionally or knowingly makes: (a) a materially false or misleading statement of fact; or (b) fails to state a material fact. Similar amendments will be made, in due course, to the grounds for rendering an election void under the Presidential Elections Act. Clause 6 of the Bill repeals and re-enacts Article 18 to strengthen the PEC. With the changes to the eligibility criteria, the PEC members will have additional responsibilities, such as (a) assessing if an applicant held the most senior executive position in a Fifth Schedule entity or private company; (b) assessing if a private company fulfilled the size, profitability and solvency requirements; (c) or determining whether the various eligibility criteria are fulfilled in situations involving aggregation of terms. They also have to sit on a committee to periodically review the minimum shareholders' equity threshold. Article 18(2) augments the PEC with three additional members, so as to expand the PEC's expertise to deal with these additional responsibilities.”
“The detailed definition of these concepts may change along with accounting standards and insolvency law. Article 19(7), (8) and (9) introduces an updating mechanism to permit increases to the minimum required amount of shareholders' equity. The amount can be increased if a committee, consisting of all PEC members: one, recommends an increase; and two, Parliament, by resolution, either agrees to the full increase or chooses to increase it by less than the recommended amount. The committee must review the amount at least once every 12 years, but may do so more frequently if it chooses. Parliament cannot raise the threshold when the office of President is vacant, or in the last six months before the expiry of the incumbent President's term. The updating mechanism cannot be used to decrease the minimum amount. That can only be done via constitutional amendment. The second way to qualify under the private sector route is through Article 19(4)(b), which provides for the private sector "deliberative" track. It applies to a person who has served for three or more years in an office in a private sector organisation. The PEC must be satisfied that the person has experience and ability comparable to a person who has served as a chief executive of a typical private company with $500 million in shareholders' equity. As with the public sector deliberative track, the PEC must also be satisfied that he has the experience and ability for Presidential office. Examples of persons who may persuade the PEC that they qualify under this track include, for instance, chief executives of companies limited by guarantee; managing partners of large partnerships; and chief operating officers (COOs) or chief financial officers (CFOs) of exceptionally large or complex companies.”
“While the increase in the quantitative threshold may sound large, significantly more companies fulfil the updated size requirement today than companies which fulfilled the existing criteria in 1993. Third, Article 19(4)(a)(iii) requires that the company must have, on average, made profit after tax for the entire period during which the applicant served as the chief executive. This includes discontinuous periods of service, and also periods of service falling outside the 20-year look-back period. Fourth, Article 19(4)(a)(iv) introduces a solvency requirement. This applies to candidates who have ceased serving as chief executive of the company before the date of the writ of election. The company must not have been subject to any insolvency event within three years of the applicant's last day of service as the chief executive, or until the date of the writ of election, whichever is earlier. Under Article 19(5)(a), candidates may only rely on their most recent period of service in a given company, and the size requirement for that company must be met during that period. This prevents candidates from cherry-picking terms of office for qualification purposes. Take, for instance, a candidate who was a company CEO for six years. For the first three years, the company had an average shareholders' equity of $500 million. But for the most recent three years, the average was below $500 million. The candidate cannot rely on the first three "successful" years of service to qualify for Presidential office, as that was not his most recent period of service as chief executive of the company. Article 19(6) empowers the Legislature to specify how the PEC is to determine shareholders' equity and profits after tax, as well as what constitutes an insolvency event.”
“A person with extensive experience helming a major international organisation may also qualify. The fourth way to qualify under the public sector route is through Article 19(3)(d), which allows for aggregation of two separate terms of qualifying public sector office for the purpose of satisfying the three-year requirement. Each of these terms must be at least one year in length. For example, a person who has served as a Chief Executive of a Fifth Schedule entity for two years and as a Permanent Secretary for one year will qualify, provided that each of those terms falls wholly or partly within the 20-year window. The private sector requirement may be satisfied in three alternative ways. The first way is by serving as chief executive of a company that meets the criteria provided by Article 19(4)(a). As with Fifth Schedule entities, only holders of the most senior executive position will qualify. Four other substantive criteria must be met. First, Article 19(4)(a)(i) requires that the person's most recent period of service as the chief executive of that company, ignoring any period of service less than a year, must be at least three years. Second, Article 19(4)(a)(ii) read with 19(7) sets a size requirement for the company. The company must have, on average, at least $500 million shareholders' equity during the person's most recent three-year period of service as chief executive. As explained in the White Paper, the assessment metric is changed from paid-up capital to shareholders' equity, because shareholders' equity is a better indicator of a company's size and complexity. The updated quantitative threshold of $500 million reflects the vastly different economic climate today, compared to 25 years ago.”
“Article 19(3)(b) also expands the qualifying entities beyond the Fifth Schedule Statutory Boards to also include Fifth Schedule Government companies, such as GIC Private Limited and Temasek Holdings (Private) Limited. These companies are key institutions that manage significant amounts of the national Reserves. Indeed, they are so important to the national interest that the appointment of their chief executives and their annual budgets are subject to Presidential oversight. To ensure that Fifth Schedule entities are of sufficient size, clauses 13(b) and 14(b) of the Bill update the qualifying threshold for adding entities to the Fifth Schedule, from $100 million to $500 million. Clause 34 of the Bill removes Ministry of National Development (MND) Holdings from the Fifth Schedule, as it is now defunct. The third way to qualify under the public sector route is through Article 19(3)(c), which provides the public sector "deliberative" track. It applies to a person who has served for three or more years in an office in the public sector, for which the PEC must be satisfied that, having regard to the nature of the office and his performance in that office, he has experience and ability comparable to a person who has held a qualifying key public office or has been the chief executive of a Fifth Schedule entity. The PEC must also be satisfied that he has the experience and ability to effectively carry out the Presidential functions and duties. Examples of persons who may persuade the PEC that they qualify under this track include, for instance, ambassadors of international stature with deep diplomatic experience who have played key roles in negotiations for complex international agreements requiring political and financial acumen and judgement.”
“In light of this revised presentation, the existing Article 19(3) and (4), which relates to disabilities of the President, are deleted and re-enacted by clause 8 of the Bill as the new Article 19A. I will now elaborate on the public and private sector service requirements. The public sector service requirement may be satisfied in four alternative ways. The first way is by holding the key public offices set out in Article 19(3)(a). And this list remains identical to the existing limb (i). It is a "tightly drawn" list of senior officeholders who have handled "complex matters with a wide-reaching public dimension". There is no current need to modify the list because the demands of these offices are self-adjusting over the years. The scope and complexity of these officeholders' responsibilities will increase alongside the development of our country. The second way to satisfy the public sector service requirement is by serving as the chief executive of a Fifth Schedule entity, as provided for by Article 19(3)(b). As compared to the existing limb (ii), Article 19(3)(b) narrows the qualifying offices to only the "chief executive" of the Fifth Schedule entity. "Chief executive" is defined in Article 19(10) as "the most senior executive who is principally responsible for the management and conduct of the entity's business and operations". This change ensures that candidates who automatically qualify have sufficient experience in exercising authority, managing large organisations and taking responsibility for making critical and major decisions with wide-ranging and long-term consequences.”
“Currently, a person can qualify for Presidential office by having held for three years a position in any of the four limbs of the existing Article 19(2)(g). The first three limbs, which have been referred to as the "automatic track", give automatic qualification to any candidate who satisfies their requirements. Limb (i) admits holders of certain key public offices. Limb (ii) admits Chairmen or Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) of Fifth Schedule Statutory Boards. Limb (iii) admits Chairmen or CEOs of companies with a paid-up capital of at least $100 million. Limb (iv) has been called the "deliberative track". Qualification is not automatic, and an applicant has to satisfy the PEC that he has held a position that has given him experience and ability comparable to those under the first three limbs. These four limbs still exist under the revised framework. However, a new presentation is adopted in the new Article 19(2)(g)(i). The current limbs (i) and (ii) are housed under the public sector service requirement found in the new Article 19(3). The current limb (iii) is housed under the private sector service requirement found in the new Article 19(4). As for the current limb (iv), each of the "public sector" and "private sector" routes will have its own "deliberative" track for qualification. Please refer to Handout 2. The Bill retains the three-year qualifying tenure, but introduces, in Article 19(2)(g)(ii), a "look-back" or currency period that applies to all qualifying routes. Any period of service a candidate relies on must fall partly or wholly within the 20 years that immediately precede the date of the Writ of Election. This ensures that each candidate's experience and ability is reasonably current.”
“2% has a paid-up capital of approximately $431 million, and if you go back to the 158th largest Singapore-incorporated company today, it has a paid-up capital of approximately S$1.6 billion. There is, therefore, a need to update and refine the eligibility criteria. Clause 7 of the Bill amends Article 19 for this purpose. With your permission, Mdm Speaker, may I ask the Clerk to distribute the second handout?”
“However, as many of these contributors subsequently conceded, this is a false comparison. A person only becomes a Prime Minister after passing through "many stringent tests of leadership". He must be elected as a Member of Parliament in the general elections. He will generally lead and be endorsed by the political party which wins a majority of Parliamentary seats. He must command the support of a majority of elected Members of Parliament. These Members of Parliament would have had the opportunity to scrutinise his abilities and values closely. These requirements mean that there is a multi-layered filtering process where a person's abilities are tested before he is likely to become Prime Minister. The President comes into office by a different route. He is elected into office directly by the public. There needs to be eligibility criteria that set a baseline for the experience and qualities which a candidate ought to possess. If eligibility criteria are necessary for the Presidency, then the question is whether the current criteria serve as effective thresholds for Presidential candidature. Some clearly require updating because they are out of date. The economic environment we live in is very different from when the Elected Presidency was introduced in 1991. Our gross domestic product (GDP), Official Foreign Reserves and Central Provident Fund balances have grown by approximately six, seven and eight times, respectively. Just consider the eligibility criteria for private sector candidates. In 1993, there were only 158 companies, or about 0.2% of Singapore-incorporated companies then, which met the $100 million paid-up capital requirement. Today, there is a much larger base of Singapore companies, and the smallest of the top 0.”
“Thank you. I will discuss the proposed amendments in the following order. First, the eligibility criteria and the Presidential Elections Committee (PEC). Second, multiracial representation in the Presidency. Third, the framework governing the Elected Presidency's custodial powers, including the role of the CPA; and fourth, the entrenchment framework. First, eligibility and the PEC. When the system of Parliament appointing the President was replaced by direct elections in 1991, a prequalification approach was established to ensure that "voters are given qualified and suitable candidates to choose from". This was necessary because the Elected President had to be a person who "fulfil[s] exacting standards of competence, experience and rectitude". In his custodial role, he can prevent access to past Reserves and veto Budgets, transactions and key appointments. He cannot simply rubber-stamp the Government's proposal or pass off the CPA's recommendation as his own. He must make his own decision in the exercise of his discretion. That means he must have knowledge, competence and discernment to assess whether proposals are in the national interest. He must have the courage, conviction and confidence to disagree, where necessary, with the CPA and the elected Government. If he does not perform his role well, he may allow hard-earned money – the hard-earned money of all Singaporeans – to be frittered away needlessly, or prevent the Government from acting in a time of need to avert a crisis. Several contributors to the Constitutional Commission argued against the imposition of stringent eligibility criteria by comparing the Presidential eligibility criteria with the apparently less exacting eligibility criteria prescribed for the Prime Minister.”
“After considering the report, the Government presented a White Paper to this House explaining our position and the details of the proposed constitutional amendments which are the subject of this Bill. Mdm Speaker, I will now turn to the Bill and, with your permission, Mdm Speaker, may I ask the Clerk to distribute the first handout?”
“Faced with crippling circumstances, the Government sought the approval of the then-President, the late Mr SR Nathan, to use nearly $5 billion of past Reserves to save businesses and jobs, and to guarantee about $150 billion of bank deposits to keep confidence in Singapore. President Nathan meticulously examined the proposals, consulted the Council of Presidential Advisors (CPA) and ultimately gave his approval. When our economy recovered, the sum drawn down was returned by the Government to the past Reserves by 2011. Mdm Speaker, over the past 25 years, refinements have been made to the Elected Presidency from the experience gained from operating the system. However, there remained certain fundamental aspects of the Office that had not been reviewed. The Government, therefore, appointed an independent Constitutional Commission earlier this year to review: (a) the qualifying process for Presidential candidacy; (b) the safeguarding of minority representation in the Presidency; and (c) the framework governing the President's custodial powers. The Commission was chaired by the Chief Justice and included eight other distinguished members from the public and private sectors. It conducted extensive consultations, including public hearings. It received more than 100 written submissions from many sectors of society and invited 20 contributors to make oral representations across four public hearings. Nineteen of the 20 contributors invited did so, while the Workers' Party indicated that it would make its points at this debate instead. The public hearings were widely reported in the media and there were many discussions on the issues. The Commission studied all these representations, then published a detailed report of more than 150 pages, setting out its recommendations.”
“Thus far, our Government has exercised financial prudence and great restraint in spending the Reserves. But this is not the norm elsewhere. We see cautionary tales of elections descending into auctions, with political parties competing with one another to promise greater largesse from the nation's coffers. Take Greece, for example, where political parties engaged in a "disastrous competition" to offer patronage, cronyism, nepotism and welfare populism. Once the populist policies were set in place, it was difficult to turn back as it would be "political suicide" for any party to do so. The end result was economic and political bankruptcy and a younger generation that finds that its future has been mortgaged. Australia is another example. They have tightly contested elections in rapid three-year electoral cycles. One party comes up with a programme, the other offers more, each trying to outbid the other. This has led successive governments to continue spending accumulated surpluses from a resource boom, which are, by now, gone. The Elected Presidency plays an important custodial role in safeguarding our key assets, in a way a purely Parliamentary process cannot. It is a unique institution, separate from Parliament, that has the electoral mandate to veto the Government in the two key areas. It also deters political parties from making wild promises at pParliamentary elections. They know that even if they come to power, they cannot splurge our past Reserves on populist measures. For the past 25 years, the Elected Presidency has helped to strengthen Singapore's governance, by keeping watch over our nation's savings and enabling their use appropriately in times of crisis. We saw the system at work in the 2008 Global Financial Crisis.”
“Irresponsible governments may use Singaporeans' savings to buy short-term popularity or appoint friends to high places to exploit these for personal gains rather than for the public good. A single five-year "spending spree" could bankrupt us and dismantle everything that we have built. We, therefore, carefully studied and debated various options to guard against the risk of this occurring in the future. Parliament decided that the most effective solution for Singapore was to establish an Elected Presidency with specific veto powers. As before, the President would have no power to initiate action and no policy-making role. The right and responsibility to govern the country would remain with Parliament and the Cabinet. However, he would have additional non-executive custodial powers over two important areas: the spending of past Reserves and key appointments to the public services. In order to effectively disagree with an elected Government in these areas, the President himself had to be elected with direct mandate from Singaporeans. The symbolic role of the Presidency as a unifier and symbol of our nation would remain unchanged and undiminished. At the time the Elected Presidency was proposed, and still today, many, including Opposition Parliamentarians, agreed with the need to protect our key assets. However, some argue that the best protection comes from within Parliament itself. We need to consider this matter carefully. The Parliamentary framework itself may not provide sufficient protection for our Reserves. If a majority government decides to indulge in populist spending of the Reserves, there is really little or no incentive for any other Parliamentarian to resist it. Indeed, the call, from both sides of the House, will often be to do more.”
“The Elected Presidency was first conceptualised in the 1980s, to guard against the risk of a profligate government squandering the nation's Reserves. We must understand this risk in the particular context of the Westminster system of government that we had inherited. English constitutional commentator Walter Bagehot observed that the strength of this system is the "[near] complete fusion, of the executive and legislative powers". This promotes efficient governance and allows the country to move quickly and effectively, with clear direction and purpose. The Westminster system may be contrasted with systems of government that strictly separate their constituent branches. The price, however, of strict separation is inefficiency, and, sometimes, even paralysis or deadlock. The United States (US), for example, experienced this very recently in 2013. Political fights over healthcare laws led to a budget impasse that resulted in a 16-day shutdown of the US government. During this time, about 800,000 federal employees were indefinitely furloughed and another 1.3 million were required to work without known payment dates. Every system of government has its own strengths and weaknesses. The system we inherited permits swift and effective decision-making, but it also means that, if a government chooses to act irresponsibly, there are very few restraints on it, and things can go very wrong, and very quickly. As then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew cautioned at his 1984 National Day Rally, "… all the Reserves are available. The larder is wide open, you can raid it". Any government, including a temporary coalition, would have complete access to all levers of power and decision-making, with "untrammelled power" to abuse the Reserves and public services.”
“Mdm Speaker, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time". Before I begin, on behalf of the Government, I would like to thank the President for his considered and lucid statement, setting out the issues based on his experience. Madam, the Constitutional Commission submitted its report to the Prime Minister on 17 August 2016. The Government studied the report and responded by presenting a White Paper to Parliament on 15 September 2016. The proposed constitutional amendments were introduced at the First Reading of the Bill on 10 October 2016. The amendments seek to do two things to enhance the President's important roles. First, as a symbol and unifier of a diverse and multi-racial Singapore. Second, as a custodian of our nation's past Reserves and the integrity of our public services. Both are integral aspects of our multiracial national identity and the foundations of our success. Let me begin with a brief history of our Presidency. When colonial Singapore attained self-government in 1959, the Yang di-Pertuan Negara was the Head of State. He represented the British Crown in Singapore. Upon Independence in 1965, his constitutional title was changed to the "President". Encik Yusof bin Ishak was our last Yang di-Pertuan Negara and our first President. Like the British Monarch, the President was the ceremonial Head of State. He had no executive role, and acted on the advice of Cabinet, save in respect of several historical constitutional functions, such as appointing the Prime Minister and dissolving Parliament. His "central and defining" role was to be a symbol of national unity and a personification of the state, representing all Singaporeans, regardless of race, language or religion.”
“The number of public officers on part-time work arrangements increased from 1,415 in 2011 to 2,019 officers in 2015. We do not track the number of public officers who are job-sharing while on part-time work arrangements. The range of flexible work arrangements offered by our agencies includes staggered start-work hours, telecommuting and part-time work. Public officers, including mothers and caregivers, may apply for such flexible work arrangements, where their job nature allows. Besides flexible work arrangements, we also support mothers and caregivers through various leave provisions, such as parent-care leave, childcare leave, maternity leave and paternity leave.”
“There are currently 8,400 female pensioners who retired before 2005. Since 2005, all officers, male and female, on the MediSave-cum-Subsidised Outpatient, or MSO scheme, can claim medical benefits for their spouse, and for their dependant unmarried children below the age of 18. Pensioners and serving officers on the older medical schemes can opt to convert to the MSO scheme at any time. However, as the older medical schemes offer more generous benefits than the MSO scheme, few have done so. If medical coverage were to be extended to the dependants of all female pensioners and serving officers currently enrolled in the older medical schemes, the additional cost would exceed $30 million annually. Page: 166 All Singaporeans, including the dependants and spouses of female pensioners on older Civil Service medical schemes, now benefit from lifelong protection provided by MediShield Life. In addition, those who are Pioneers also enjoy the benefits of the Pioneer Generation Package. This includes subsidies for healthcare and MediSave top-ups which will help with their healthcare costs. MediSave top-ups for dependants who are Pioneers, and MediShield Life coverage continue even after the lifetime of the pensioner, unlike Civil Service medical benefits.”
“The Civil Service is looking into ways to make "giving timely feedback to one another" a cultural norm.”
“The Civil Service uses Currently Estimated Potential (CEP) as one tool to plan for the career development of officers. CEP is expressed in terms of the highest job responsibility level an officer is currently assessed to be capable of handling in the future. Hence, an officer's CEP may change with assessment over time. CEP is assessed based on demonstrated "AIM" qualities, which stand for (a) Analytical and Intellectual Capacity; (b) Influence and Collaboration; and (c) Motivation for Excellence. After a supervisor assesses his officer for CEP, the assessment is subject to counter-signing and ranking processes at the Ministry level, to ensure that the assessment is robust and fair. All officers have access to information on the CEP assessment framework and definitions of the AIM qualities through Instruction Manuals, assessment guides and training by the Civil Service College. Our agencies also encourage supervisors to have frank conversations with officers and help them along in their career development. We are placing emphasis on developing supervisors so that they are better prepared to coach their officers. The Civil Service encourages timely and regular feedback as part of the appraisal process. Today, leaders receive 360-degree feedback on their leadership qualities when they attend milestone leadership development programmes. The feedback helps them to understand their strengths, developmental areas and blind spots, and motivates them to improve. For other officers, the feedback loop is generally between officers and their supervisors through day-to-day interactions and work review sessions which culminate in the completion of their Individual Development Plans.”
“Public Service agencies offer a range of freelancing opportunities, from administration to research. Stay-at-home mothers with the relevant skills can apply for such work. However, we are unable to gauge their numbers among successful applicants as their family status is not a criterion for job selection. Beyond freelancing opportunities, Public Service agencies also offer mothers long-term careers. Where the nature of the jobs allow, mothers may apply to work on a part-time basis or telecommute from home. As at the end of 2015, about 5% of mothers working in the Civil Service are on part-time arrangements. An internal survey also showed that about one quarter of respondents who are mothers have telecommuted, including 10% who do so at least once a fortnight.”
“Currently, Public Service agencies have to separately prepare and post up job advertisements on the Careers@Gov portal and Jobs Bank if they wish to advertise the same job on both portals. Notwithstanding this, Public Service agencies have been posting an average of 268 jobs on Jobs Bank per month, which is about 21% of total public sector jobs advertised. To make the process more convenient, PSD is working with WDA to build an interface between Careers@Gov portal and Jobs Bank. The interface allows job advertisements on Careers@Gov portal to be easily copied to Jobs Bank. This is expected to be ready by the end of the year.”
“I think even Er Dr Lee would want to employ a person who can do the job best for your customer and, in this case, our customer is a Singaporean. If there are areas in which we need expertise in order to execute public projects well, we will employ them. If we do not have enough Singaporeans to do the job, we will employ foreigners. But clearly, we want to develop a strong engineering core in the Public Service in those areas which I have described. For that, we will train Singaporeans to be able to take leadership roles and build expertise in those areas. Also, they could well be immigrants who have joined the core and become Singaporeans, like yourself, Er Dr Lee.”
“Engineering is a very noble profession. You were asked about whether people can get to the C-suite. Well, you can get to the M-suite if you are an engineer. There are quite a few in the front bench who are engineers. I can cite a few examples of outstanding Singaporean corporate leaders who are engineers themselves. People like Mr Koh Boon Hwee, Mr Liew Mun Leong who runs CapitaLand, Mr Chew Choon Seng who ran Singapore Airlines. These were all engineers. I would say that we should have a good combination of people with technical skills as well as good financial and marketing skills to run companies in which technical knowledge, technical competence are an important part of making that company competitive. If you run a company or an organisation which requires technical competence in order to make it succeed and work, and you do not look after the financials and the marketing, you are not going to be able to sell your product no matter how good it is. It does not sell itself. On the other hand, if you have only financial people and marketing people and they ignore the need for a good product, then you can easily run the company to the ground. So, you do need a combination of both. The advantage that engineers have is that they tend to be very numerate and are able to bring that quality of problem-solving to the problems that they are faced with in companies, whether it is the financial or technical type of problems. So, I would say to a young engineer, "Press on, keep an open mind, make use of the skills that you have. With an engineering and technical background, you are equipped with many of the skills that you need to be successful in life."”
“It is not just courtesy but we also, at each Public Service Week, give awards to members of the public who have contributed to not just positive engagement but to helping the Public Service do their work well. So, we do have such awards.”
“These were cases which were reported to the Police. So, they would be the more serious cases. There might well have been harassment cases of other types, but perhaps not serious enough to be reported to the Police. As Mr Ang has correctly pointed out, if there are threats made to public officers, as we have seen in the media recently, where certain individuals have been taken to task and brought to Court because they were inciting the public to take matters into their own hands against certain Police officers and public officers, they will be taken to task even if that was done on the Internet. We will take these matters seriously, whether they are face-to-face or whether they are on the Internet, when incitement to violence against public officers is made. These are matters which we will take very seriously.”
“Mr Chairman, the recruitment will be over a range of experiences, a combination of all the things Er Dr Lee Bee Wah described. Some will be beginning engineers, some will be experienced engineers. And some will be Singaporeans, but not all. For salaries, we will review salaries not just at the starting level, but also throughout their careers to make sure that progression is good. But I think it is also important that this is not just about salaries. We want to develop their careers so that we have the types of engineers which we are all proud of.”
“Taken together, these measures will attract more Singaporeans to take up engineering as a meaningful, fulfilling and exciting long-term career in the Public Service and deepen our public sector engineering capabilities over time. Mdm Chairperson, let me take this opportunity to thank Members again for their support for the Public Service. Our public officers have worked closely with Singaporeans to contribute to nation-building in our first 50 years. To ensure that the Public Service remains ready for the future, we will continue to identify key priorities early and invest in strengthening the capabilities of our officers in new and important areas, such as emerging technology, data analytics, leadership skills, service management and public engagement. Beyond skills and capabilities, our officers must have the heart and passion to do their best for Singaporeans and Singapore, to derive their satisfaction from seeing other Singaporeans happy and fulfilled. Our Public Service values of Integrity, Service and Excellence provide an anchor for our officers as they carry out their duties every day. I am confident that our public officers will continue, with your support, to work hand in hand with Singaporeans to build an even better Singapore in the future. [Applause.]”
“Through such training opportunities and exposure, good public sector engineers will be prepared to take on positions, such as Chief Engineers, Chief Technology Officers and the like, in the Public Service. We will be expanding the scope of some of the existing technical leadership positions in our agencies and creating more new ones. These technical leaders will champion R&D efforts to develop new solutions, improve performance and service, and help build deep technical expertise in key capability areas. They will act as the bridge with industry and research partners to supplement public sector engineering expertise and help our Ministries and agencies use technology strategically for the future. Fourth, we will establish Centres of Excellence for key engineering knowledge clusters, building them around agencies which already have a strong base of engineering capabilities. These centres will aggregate key capabilities and build deep engineering expertise in critical areas of need. They will support other Government organisations, optimise scarce engineering resources and invest in R&D to build cutting-edge engineering expertise. We have established three such Centres of Excellence: (a) JTC: for infrastructure projects and facilities management services, and R&D in innovation, safety and construction productivity; (b) Defence Science and Technology Agency (DSTA): in the areas of sensors, robotics and the integration of command systems, to boost our Smart Nation efforts; and(c) GovTech: for the digital transformation of the public sector, including nurturing ICT officers, to improve the delivery of public services for Singaporeans. We are in the process of establishing other Centres of Excellence in geospatial information science and cybersecurity.”
“We will also review the salaries of our serving engineers and raise them where needed, to ensure that public sector engineering salaries remain competitive at every job level and not just at the starting level. Agencies will implement new starting salaries and make the necessary salary adjustments from the middle of 2016. But improving pay is not enough. So, third, we will offer our engineers good learning and development opportunities to build deep technical expertise throughout their careers. We will start by developing competency frameworks for engineers from seven public agencies, such as PUB and HDB, in the second half of 2016. This framework will articulate the knowledge and skills that our public sector engineers require as they progress in their careers. Our engineers can use this framework to identify their own training needs and develop expertise and mastery in specific areas. So, we hope to have many more engineers of the type that Mr Liang Eng Hwa talked about – people who love their jobs, who thoroughly know their jobs, and who can serve the public very well. In addition, we will build on existing programmes that agencies have in place for technical specialists and make a more concerted effort to identify and develop engineers with deep technical expertise to take on key scientific, engineering and technical leadership positions in Ministries and public agencies. They will be given greater support in their career development and growth, for example, mentoring by senior technical experts, working on exciting interagency engineering projects, and networking across the engineering community.”
“First, the Public Service will employ an additional 1,000 engineers this year, which will grow our current pool of some 7,700 engineers by more than 13%. About 70% of these 1,000 additional engineers will support our infrastructure development needs, including transport and water systems. The rest will support our Smart Nation efforts. Public agencies are also now in the process of studying their medium-term engineering manpower needs and are working towards building up a sustainable pool of engineers in key engineering clusters in the Public Service. Second, we will raise the salaries of our public sector engineers to attract and retain engineering and information and communications technology (ICT) officers in the Public Service. Salaries for engineers and ICT professionals vary across different public agencies today. Some of our agencies are already paying salaries that are largely competitive with the market, while the salaries in other agencies lag significantly. We will review our salaries regularly to ensure that they are competitive with the market. In specific areas, we will pay a premium for engineers with skills that are in high demand and short supply, such as cyber forensics and malware analysts, or those with niche skills that are critical and specific to the Government but for which there may be little market demand. But we still need them and they are critical to us. Taking reference from the market starting salaries of good engineering graduates, we will set the salaries for good engineers joining the Public Service upon graduation starting from $3,800 per month and those in ICT starting from $4,000 per month. This means an increase in starting salaries, on average, of about 20%.”
“So, I will use land-related examples today of how science and technology have played a role in our development. Our geotechnical engineers built the world's first large-scale Underground Ammunition Facility, which opened in 2008, and it freed up space above ground for other uses. The professionalism and thoroughness of the analysis, design and testing by our engineers have been internationally recognised. The safety standards developed by our engineers for underground ammunition storage have been adopted by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) as the standard. In 2014, we opened the Jurong Rock Caverns, Southeast Asia's first commercial underground liquid hydrocarbon storage facility on Jurong Island. There are nine storage galleries with a total capacity almost 100 times the size of this Parliament Chamber. So, each storage gallery is about 10 to 11 times the size of this Parliament chamber and it is about 130 metres under the seabed. Today, our engineers are looking to further exploit underground spaces, such as the feasibility of an underground reservoir. The Singapore Land Authority, National Research Foundation, and GovTech are working together on Virtual Singapore, a dynamic 3D city model and collaborative data platform with 3D maps of Singapore. With a diverse range of realtime and static data, this platform will allow authorised public and private users to run simulations, plan new infrastructure, design new solutions, in line with our Smart Nation vision. 4.30 pm We will need more engineers in the Public Service to drive these efforts. I spoke about building up engineering capabilities across the Public Service at the Institution of Engineers in February and will provide more details today.”
“We also display service charters at many of the service counters so that the expectations that the public bring and our frontline officers have, are better matched. Where the facts justify this, we will take legal action against those who abuse public officers in the course of their duties. The Protection from Harassment Act which came into effect in November 2014 provides for stiffer penalties against such perpetrators. But I would emphasise that we will do so only when the facts of the case justify this. And we will and must continue to promote a culture of mutual courtesy and respect. As Mr Seah Kian Peng says, it is more developing this culture than laws or sanctions or body-worn cameras or CCTVs. It is this culture of mutual respect and courtesy that we should make the norm in Singapore. Mdm Chairperson, I will now answer Mr Patrick Tay, Mr Liang Eng Hwa and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's questions about our plans to build up engineering capabilities in the Public Service. This is an important area, as we depend on science and technology to overcome our resource constraints, such as water and land. These constraints will bite even more in the coming years once the climate change agreement takes effect. So, we will have to make sure that what we do is, indeed, sustainable from a carbon emissions point of view. We will need to use technology more strategically in the next phase of Singapore's development in infrastructure, housing and transport to make Singapore a highly liveable and desirable city, to make full use of the revolution in info-comms technology to improve business efficiency and public services, and to protect our people and our country. Our water story is well-known.”
“Besides upskilling individual officers, agencies are also improving their organisational ability to improve service delivery and this includes integrating key components of service delivery, such as customer experience, data analytics and operations planning. This helps our agencies to serve Singaporeans more effectively. Mr Seah Kian Peng and also Mr Ang Hin Kee asked about harassment towards public officers and the measures to protect them. The Public Service is committed to providing good service to the public, based on the principle of mutual courtesy and respect. Indeed, the vast majority of the many millions of transactions between the public and our officers take place in a courteous and professional manner. In 2015, there were 437 cases of hurt or verbal abuse against public officers that were reported to the Police. As mentioned during the Ministry of Home Affair's COS debate, 344 of these were from the Home Team agencies. So, we have to take this in perspective. The remaining 93 were from other public agencies. This is a very small proportion of the millions of interactions between public officers and members of the public every year. However, we take each of these cases seriously and will take a very firm approach to those who hurt or abuse our public officers. Agencies have already taken steps to protect our officers and prepare them better for their public-facing roles. For example, officers with frontline responsibilities are trained to manage difficult situations. Our agencies have also established safe work environments that encourage positive interactions with the public, for example, by installing CCTVs at service counters, assist buttons for the service staff and, for those who are on the move, body-worn cameras.”
“CPF Board also provides personalised financial tips on retirement planning targeted at different segments. Mr Ang Hin Kee also asked about our plans to help our public officers do a better job at the frontline. In line with SkillsFuture, we will continue to raise the skills of all our public officers and provide them with learning and career development opportunities. This applies to our frontline service officers as well. We have developed a service competency framework to spell out the skills that our frontline service officers need. These include partnering members of the public to address concerns and working across organisations to manage cross-cutting issues. For a start, five public agencies – CPF Board, HDB, the Immigration and Checkpoints Authority, National Environment Agency and National Library Board – have adopted this service competency framework. We have also provided additional learning and development opportunities for service staff to acquire these skills. For example, the Civil Service College runs a suite of programmes for service staff and these service staff come from different levels of responsibility. Some of these modules count towards a UniSIM certification programme in public sector service management. Officers can also use these credits to count towards a minor in public sector service management from UniSIM, if they wish to pursue a degree. This helps to raise the professionalism of the service role and provides avenues for our officers to deepen their knowledge and skills. The Public Service Division (PSD) is also working with agencies to develop competency-based service career paths and introduce more leadership positions for service professionals.”
“Members would know that when a family needs temporary financial help, housing rental assistance and employment assistance, they can go to the nearest SSO, which will coordinate with the Workforce Developement Agency and the Housing and Development Board (HDB) to provide this help in a holistic way. At the Ministry of National Development's (MND's) Committee of Supply debate, Members were updated about the work of the MSO to improve the coordination and delivery of municipal services across public agencies. The Ministry of Finance also highlighted recent e-initiatives by several Ministries during its COS debate. We will continue to use technology more effectively to enhance the delivery of Government services, for example, by making more services available online and on mobile platforms, so that they are accessible at any time, from anywhere. This recently has been tax-filing season, and many Members would have filed their taxes. The Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) has quite an efficient system to make paying taxes as painless as possible. Never a pleasure, but, at least, as painless as possible. We are also doing more to communicate Government policies and programmes in a simple and clear manner. For example, our Pioneer Generation Ambassadors go door to door to help our Pioneers and their families better understand how they can benefit from the Pioneer Generation Package and MediShield Life by using different languages and dialects most comfortable to our Pioneers. The Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board has added an illustrated summary in CPF members' annual statements so that we can see at one glance our own CPF contributions, account balances and transactions.”
“Mdm Chairperson, first, I would like to thank Members for their interest in and strong support for the Public Service. The Public Service has continually reviewed and reorganised itself to be ready for the future. Last July, we set up the Strategy Group under PMO. It is headed by the Head of Civil Service. Its role is to identify emerging priorities early and tackle medium- to long-term issues. The Strategy Group looks at the impact of future trends on our external and domestic environment, the policies we might need, and the capabilities we need to build in Government to address the challenges. It has also coordinated the plans and programmes across Ministries to set out the policy agenda for this term of Government. This year, we are reorganising four Statutory Boards to deepen capabilities and better tackle emerging challenges. SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) and Workforce Singapore (WSG) will support our citizens in acquiring useful skills to remain employable. The Info-Communications Media Development Authority (IMDA) will develop and regulate the converging info-communications and media sectors in a holistic way, while the Government Technology Agency (GovTech) will transform Government services using technology. These changes allow the Public Service to develop and deliver better policies, services and programmes for Singaporeans. Mr Ang Hin Kee asked about our efforts to deliver good services to citizens. Our public agencies have made progress in working together to serve Singaporeans better. For example, the 24 Social Services Offices (SSOs) under the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) partner other public agencies to offer integrated services.”
“As an employer, the Public Service provides family-care leave for our officers, separate from their vacation leave. Our officers enjoy up to 15 days of childcare leave, two weeks of paternity leave, four months of maternity leave and two days of parent-care leave. Where the job allows, our officers may also apply for flexible arrangements in the form of staggering their work hours, telecommuting or working part-time. We have progressively enhanced our family-care leave benefits over the years. We introduced two days of parent-care leave in 2012. In 2015, we took the lead to enhance paternity leave from one week to two weeks ahead of national legislation. As a large employer in Singapore, any change we make to our family-care leave benefits will put pressure on private sector employers to follow suit. Even as we support pro-family initiatives, we will have to carefully consider the implication of more generous family-care leave benefits on private sector business cost and on the employability of private sector workers.”
“Employers can tap on the Work-Life Grant administered by MOM, under which eligible companies can receive up to $160,000 to help them defray the costs of developing, piloting and sustaining FWAs.”
“Last year, we enhanced Government-Paid Paternity Leave by an additional week, which employers may offer voluntarily. Taken together with infant-care and childcare leave provisions, fathers can enjoy up to five weeks of leave upon the birth of their child to bond with their newborns and care for their wives2. In considering whether to provide parents with more leave to care for their children, we are mindful of the possible impact on businesses’ operational and manpower needs. In particular, given that childcare leave is provided for 12 years after birth, we are careful not to inadvertently affect parents’ employability. Further enhancements to these leave provisions have to be considered, balancing both the needs of parents and concerns of employers and employees. This is why the second week of Government-Paid Paternity Leave was introduced on a voluntary basis. The Government is now considering when to legislate the second week of Paternity Leave, with a view to providing a reasonable amount of time for businesses to make the necessary adjustments. At the same time, some parents have provided feedback that they would like more flexibility for mothers to share their Maternity Leave entitlement with fathers, even as overall leave provisions remain unchanged. This would enable fathers to play a larger role in caring for their newborns and allow parents to decide flexibly how best to care for the child according to their family circumstances. We are considering this proposal carefully. The Government will continue to encourage companies to do their part by providing a family-friendly work environment, including the provision of flexible work arrangements (FWAs). Such measures can also help employers to attract and retain talent.”
“The Government is strongly committed to supporting Singaporeans in their marriage and parenthood aspirations. Leave is one of the range of measures to support parenthood, and like many other countries, Singapore has legislated leave provisions to support parents’ infant and child care-giving needs. These provisions have been progressively enhanced over the years to help parents better manage both their work and family commitments. Childcare leave provisions were increased in 2008 from two days to six days per parent per year, for those with children below the age of seven. We extended these provisions further in 2013 so that parents with children aged seven to 12 can also enjoy two days of Government-paid childcare leave each year. Parents with more children are able to enjoy the annual childcare leave entitlement of six days per parent for a longer period of time, until their youngest child has turned seven years old. They continue to enjoy two days of childcare leave per parent per year, until their youngest child is aged 13. Beyond this, we have also enhanced our leave schemes to enable fathers to play an active role in raising their children. International studies have shown that children with more involved fathers have better physical, cognitive and emotional developmental outcomes. Greater paternal involvement in child-raising also helps mothers to stay active in the workforce. In 2013, we introduced one week of legislated Government-Paid Paternity Leave, as well as one week of Government-Paid Shared Parental Leave, which allows fathers to share a week of their spouses’ Maternity Leave entitlement. This is in addition to unpaid infant-care leave of one week which both parents may take.”