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 6 of 34.
“Such incidents typically involve the accidental mailing of letters containing personal information to the wrong recipient; or mass emails in which officers mistakenly included all recipients' email addresses in the carbon copy (cc) field rather than the blind cc field. The affected agency will inform and apologise to the affected individuals and follow up with the necessary staff education and discipline to avoid a future occurrence. Police assistance or intervention is not required.”
“Loss of personal data by Government agencies is reported to the Police when there is suspected foul play, or when a physical asset, such as a laptop, is missing. Over the past three years, the Government made 41 such reports to the Police. These reports have been made in a timely manner, with 80% submitted on the same day as the discovery of the incident. These incidents are not reported to the Personal Data Protection Commission, as it is not their function to investigate such Government-related incidents. In seven of these 41 incidents, the individuals affected were notified. In another four of these incidents, both the individuals affected and the general public were informed. Among these 11 cases, it took an average of three weeks from the Police report to notify the individual. This was the time taken to identify the exact individuals affected, and assess the extent of loss, to give an accurate report of the situation to the affected individuals, and to recover or safeguard evidence for potential future prosecution. The time required varies from case to case, depending on the complexity of the incident. The remaining 30 Police reports concern loss of physical assets, such as laptops. No specific individual's data was compromised. Government laptops are protected by encryption and laptops that are reported lost will be immediately blocked from the Government network. Nevertheless, a lost laptop remains a serious concern, and the agency affected will work with the Police to make a best effort to recover it. From time to time, there are also incidents of data mishandling that are reported internally but not to the Police.”
“MCI's Digital Readiness efforts encourage and educate organisations to design for digital inclusion. The Government itself subjects our digital services to regular usability checks. We involve diverse users in the design process. The Smart Nation and Digital Government Group, together with social sector agencies and officers across the public sector, are keen to partner community groups and volunteer organisations so that, together, we can better serve all Singaporeans using digital technology.”
“Our Smart Nation narrative and the framework for implementation have three broad equally important thrusts: Digital Economy, Digital Government and Digital Readiness. Digital Readiness includes our strategies to help citizens, businesses, community groups and the Government use technology in an inclusive way to build a caring and resilient society. We want all Singaporeans, regardless of age or ability, to be enabled by digital technology to pursue their dreams and aspirations. This means that everyone should have the digital access, literacy and confidence to participate in Smart Nation. The Ministry of Communications and Information (MCI) has worked with our community partners to drive readiness programmes at our libraries and community centres. Building a caring, inclusive and resilient society is a whole-of-Nation effort, and our Smart Nation initiatives seek to enable this with technology. Technology allows better partnerships to serve our vulnerable communities. For example, the Ministry of Social and Family Development is looking into using digital platforms to work more closely across the social sector agencies, including voluntary welfare organisations. This allows agencies to have a comprehensive understanding of families in need, and coordinate support to get families back on their feet. The Ministry of Community, Culture and Youth's Volunteer.sg and SG Cares app will help volunteers in both public agencies and non-profit organisations to be more engaged and more effective. Platforms, such as the Agency for Integrated Care's Dementia Friends and the Singapore Civil Defence Force's MyResponder, allow individuals in need to receive help from the community in real-time.”
“As employers and co-workers, we can foster more progressive workplace cultures where employees, including young parents with caregiving needs, are supported in managing their work and family responsibilities. As a community, we can extend a helping hand or word of encouragement to young Singaporeans as they navigate through their marriage and parenthood journey. It is with such collective efforts from the whole of society that we can build a more family-friendly environment where marriage and parenthood are Achievable, Enjoyable and Celebrated.”
“From the Baby Bonus Cash Gift, Child Development Account (CDA) and MediSave Grant for Newborns, parents can receive up to $18,000 per child for the first and second child, $26,000 per child for the third and fourth child, and $32,000 per child for the fifth and subsequent child. We also understand that many couples aspire to own their homes before they start a family. The Housing and Development Board (HDB) has worked to provide couples with faster access to housing. Last week, it launched the first batch of 1,100 Build-To-Order (BTO) flats with shorter waiting times of two to three years from point of application. Another batch of 2,000 such flats will be launched in 2019. HDB has also introduced a new flexibility earlier this year to allow deferment of income assessment for housing loans and grants till before keys collection, for young couples who are studying or, in the case of the male, serving National Service. Together with our heavily subsidised education, public housing and healthcare systems, these measures in our M&P Package seek to provide strong support for those who decide to marry and have children. We will continue to study ways to better strengthen this support. We are mindful that no silver bullet or single policy intervention alone will boost birth rates. As the experiences of other East Asian societies, for example, South Korea, have shown, encouraging couples to have children requires more than a package of support measures. For a decisive increase in our TFR over the longer term, mindset shifts among couples and the support of the whole of society are critical. We must continue to encourage young Singaporeans not just to value but to prioritise marriage and parenthood as important life goals.”
“We have invested significant resources and progressively enhanced the Marriage and Parenthood (M&P) Package over the past 17 years to provide support at each stage of the marriage and parenthood journey. To enable parents to better manage their work and family responsibilities, we have enhanced parental leave measures and strengthened support for childcare and FWAs. One, on parental leave, today, working couples can take up to 20 weeks of paid parental leave and two weeks of unpaid leave in their child’s first year. Two, on childcare, the Government is committed to ensuring that every parent who wants a preschool place for their child will be able to have one, to give parents peace of mind that their children are well taken care of. The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has been steadily enhancing the provision of affordable and quality infant and childcare, with 40,000 more places to be added in the next five years. ECDA is also reviewing the preschool subsidy framework to improve affordability for parents. Three, we also encourage companies to adopt family-friendly practices, such as FWAs, and have launched the enhanced Work-Life Grant earlier this year, as well as a Tripartite Standard on FWAs in 2017, to support companies in doing so. To foster a stronger culture of shared parental responsibility, we have improved leave support for fathers to play a more active role in caring for their children. Last year, we made the second week of Paternity Leave mandatory and increased Shared Parental Leave from one to four weeks. In total, fathers can take up to eight weeks of leave in the child’s first year. We have also enhanced our policies to address concerns about costs of raising children.”
“The Government takes the issue of our low total fertility rate (TFR) seriously. While marriage and parenthood are ultimately personal decisions, a persistently low TFR can have far-reaching implications on our economy and our society. The decline in our TFR in recent years is in part due to a demographic shift. A relatively large cohort of young Singaporeans, many of whom are children of "Baby Boomers", are just entering the peak childbearing ages of 25-39. Many of these "echo baby boomers" are not yet married or have not yet started having children. This is consistent with our survey results, which show that while the vast majority of young Singaporeans want to marry and have children, they often have other life goals as well. Some decide to delay marriage and parenthood in order to fulfil other aspirations like establishing a career or travelling the world first.1 Whether or not they eventually marry or have children will have a significant impact on our TFR. Therefore, we must continue to support young Singaporeans and families to achieve their marriage and parenthood aspirations. In formulating our policies, we have studied the experiences of different countries, including the United Kingdom (UK), Germany, France, Denmark and East Asian countries, such as South Korea. The elements that have made a real difference in raising birth rates include: (a) support for work-life through adequate parental leave, childcare and flexible work arrangements (FWAs); (b) societal norms that embrace children and families, and encourage shared parental responsibility in raising children; and (c) support to defray the costs of raising children. Singapore's marriage and parenthood policies aim to provide support in similar areas.”
“This Question for Written Answer has been addressed by oral reply to Question No 1 taken on 1 October 2018. [Please refer to "Salary Components of Prime Minister and Ministers", Official Report, 1 October 2018, Vol 94, Issue 83, Oral Answers to Questions section.]”
“The Workers' Party accepts the principles and has come up with essentially the same quantum, which Mr Pritam Singh and Mr Leon Perera just affirmed. So, let us agree to agree. This is what politics is about also – not just opposing for the sake of opposing. This is a matter which, whether one is in the opposition or in government, we can agree upon – that we need a fair framework to bring in the best team, to do the best for Singapore and Singaporeans.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, so, if this is a difficult subject to talk about, why do we have to talk about this subject from time to time? Because, Sir, we need a fair, open, honest, transparent framework in place, so that we can continue to have able, committed and passionate people, with integrity, come to serve as our political leaders. Sir, I am 64 this year and have served more than 25 years in politics. My most important task now is to help Prime Minister Lee to prepare, not just the Fourth Generation leadership, but also to make sure that we are able to have a Fifth Generation of leaders coming in, having the time to learn, to be tested, and to gain the trust and support of Singaporeans. These are people in their late 30s and 40s. Many would be at the threshold, where they have a good chance of reaching the peak in their chosen careers and professions. Sir, the virtues of passion to serve the people is shared by Members from both sides of the House. The PAP looks for people with integrity, who are capable, committed and caring, who are prepared to put others before themselves. All Members of this House know that coming into politics entails many sacrifices, in privacy, continuous exposure to the glare of the public eye in their careers, in family time, not always being there to watch your kids grow. Sir, Ministers' salaries have been studied and recommended by an independent Committee. They are fair-minded people who have the interest of Singapore and Singaporeans at heart. They have recommended a framework and a quantum that reflects all these things that we talk about – sacrifice, commitment to service, working for the good of our fellow Singaporeans. All these factors are in there. The Government accepts the recommendations.”
“There are misconceptions, sometimes deliberately propagated. It is easily politicised. Even knowledgeable, well-meaning people, who have a deep interest in politics are susceptible to this. I read Mr Ho Kwon Ping's extensive interview with Channel NewsAsia, which was published yesterday. Among other things, he suggested pegging Ministerial salaries to the median salary of Singaporeans. He also suggested an independent Commission to decide the actual quantum. And Mr Louis Ng, in an earlier similar interview, also suggested that there should be public consultations. Sir, from my reply today, Members can see that there was an independent Committee, not one but two. The independent Committee did have extensive consultations in 2012 and a significant part of Ministers' salaries are pegged not just to the growth of average salaries, but to the lowest 20th percentile of salaries and to the unemployment rate – issues which are important to every Singaporean. But even Mr Ho, who is well-informed and has a deep interest in politics, has some serious misconceptions. He claimed, for example, that his salary is lower than the Ministers. Sir, fortunately, the interviewer had checked, done the homework, and pointed out to Mr Ho that his salary, including benefits and bonus – I would not mention the figure, but it is significantly higher than that of Ministers and certainly not lower than Minister's salaries – to quote the article. Sir, otherwise, the misrepresentation would have been carried widely and spread more disinformation. Sir, Ministers, for example, are responsible for tourism development or air transport as just one of their many responsibilities, which contribute to the growth of the tourism industry in our region, in which Mr Ho's company operates.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think Mr Pritam Singh is being slightly disingenuous. I mean, Mr Perera asked for some data. And the next day, the data was misinterpreted and became the widespread basis for false information. I am delighted that Mr Pritam Singh and the Workers' Party are all for transparency and for debunking falsehoods. So, perhaps, Mr Speaker, Sir, allow me to clarify the position and I hope that the Workers' Party will help us to clarify the position by putting it on your website also, especially as Mr Pritam Singh has agreed. So, the key facts are these: first, all salary components, including the Variable Pay, are part of the salary structure benchmarked in 2012 at $1.1 million for an entry level Minister at MR4. There are no components beyond that. Second, the salary structure and benchmark have not changed since 2012. I reported to Parliament earlier this year that the Government had decided not to adjust salaries even though the MR4 benchmark had increased by 9%. Third, in 2012, there was remarkable convergence in this House on the matter of Ministers' salaries. Mr Pritam Singh has just said that the Workers' Party agrees with the principles underlying the current salary structure and that the Workers' Party's alternative formula used a norm salary level that is also $1.1 million. The proposals, Mr Speaker, Sir, are really very close to each other – in principle and in quantum. Indeed, Mr Speaker, Sir, if there were a Workers' Party government in power today, by their own formula, the Workers' Party Minister would be paid essentially the same as what a Minister today is paid. Mr Pritam Singh would pay himself that same amount. The subject of Ministers' salaries, Mr Speaker, Sir, is a difficult one to talk about. It is an emotional one.”
“Mr Perera should not evade the question. I have provided him all the information there. It is there. Does he agree or not?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we did publish the full information once in the first year after the framework was announced. It is in the public records. And in fact, the method of calculating the National Bonus is well-known. All the components are there. All the factors are there and it can be calculated. And I think people have made an attempt to do so; not very far off from where it actually was. But I take it that Mr Leon Perera does affirm that he agrees that Ministerial salary should be competitive, that the salary should recognise the ethos of public service and that salaries should be transparent. Can I ask Mr Perera whether he agrees that the salary proposals that the Workers' Party had put forward in 2012 would essentially result in the same total annual salaries for Ministers as the White Paper, except for the Workers' Party's proposal having a much larger component of fixed pay?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member asked for what each Minister gets. For the National Bonus and the Annual Variable Component, it is the same for all Ministers. The Annual Variable Component is well-known. So, if that was what Mr Leon Perera wanted, he could have filed an Oral question and he could have followed up, and we would have provided him the answer, as we would today. So, there is nothing secret about it. It is transparent. It is open. And I am answering all the questions today. But could I ask Mr Perera whether he agrees that Ministers' salaries should be competitive, that the salary should recognise the ethos of public service and that salaries should be transparent, which was the Workers' Party's position in 2012?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think I have answered Mr Alex Yam's question as he has posed it. And the most important aspect of that answer is that all the components are within the framework of $1.1 million that was put in place since 2012. That is the most important. I should point out that Mr Leon Perera asked the question for a Written Answer and his question was fully answered in the written form. Had Mr Leon Perera chosen to ask an Oral question, he could have expanded, he could have asked, but he chose not to. And I invite him to ask any questions for clarifications that he may have. And, of course, Mr Pritam Singh as well, who was present during the debate.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I can confirm that the pay for Ministers currently remains the same, in accordance with the 2012 White Paper framework. Of course, it can go up and it can go down, depending on whether the National Outcomes were achieved and the individual performance of the Ministers. And that is, essentially, part of the structure of the framework that was put in place in 2012. And I can confirm to Mr Alex Yam that Ministerial pensions were discontinued in 2012, as part of the revision of the framework, and that Ministers receive the same MediSave contributions, percentages and numbers, as Civil Servants do, under the MediSave-cum-Subsidised Outpatient (MSO) Scheme for medical benefits. So, there are no hidden perks, no hidden medical benefits. There are no pensions.”
“The 2017 Committee reaffirmed the three key principles and was of the view that the current salary structure for Political Office Holders remained relevant and sound. Though the MR4 benchmark had increased by 9% since 2011, the Government decided to maintain the current salary structure and keep salary at the 2012 level. Significantly, no member of the Opposition sought clarification on my COS statement. Mr Speaker, Sir, I have answered all three parts of Mr Alex Yam’s question. Mr Leon Perera has also filed a similar Parliamentary Question for Written Answer on Ministerial Salaries, which I believe Table 1 in my handout answers. Before I proceed to the concluding segment of my reply, with your permission, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to invite Members, in particular Mr Perera, to seek any clarifications that they may have.”
“Handout 2 (Annex 2) is a Straits Times report on the 2012 debate in Parliament. The handout provides a succinct summary of the key points and conveys a flavour of the debate. It reports that there was, I quote, "Real progress in [the] ministerial pay debate", and quoting my remarks that the "Opposition’s agreement on key points marks a breakthrough", and the "Shift in the Workers' Party's stance helps debate move forward". Mr Speaker, Sir, there was convergence in this House on both the principles as well as the quantum for Ministers' salaries. If Members could refer to Handout 3 (Annex 3), the formula put forward by the Workers' Party (WP) in 2012 would have resulted in essentially the same total annual salary level for the MR 4 entry level Minister as that recommended by the independent Committee. But the WP formula would have had a higher level of fixed component of 81%, amounting to roughly $800,800, compared to the White Paper's proposal and a smaller variable component of 19%. And this means that the WP would have paid out a higher portion of the salary – about $880,000 out of $1.1 million – regardless of individual performance or national outcomes, and even if the outcomes were not achieved. This would have made the link between salary and performance weaker, though both the WP's and the White Paper’s proposals would have added up to the same norm annual salary. Mr Speaker, Sir, we recently carried out a second independent review of the salary structure and level. At the Committee of Supply (COS) debate this year, I informed this House that the Prime Minister had formed a new independent Committee in 2017 to review the salary framework to ensure that it remains appropriate and valid.”
“" During that Parliamentary session, the Workers' Party had proposed their own formula based on these same principles. Mr Speaker, Sir, could I request the Clerk to distribute Handouts 2 and 3?”
“Many Political Office Holders hold more than one portfolio, in order to stretch them and to build depth and experience in the Cabinet. But I should emphasise that each Office Holder receives only one salary regardless of whether he holds one or multiple portfolios. Emeritus Senior Minister Goh Chok Tong is not a member of the Cabinet, and has not received a ministerial salary since he retired from the Cabinet in May 2011. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has always been transparent with the salary structure for Political Office Holders. The 2012 White Paper on "Salaries for a Capable and Committed Government" was submitted by an independent Committee after extensive consultation with Members of Parliament and the public. The paper was endorsed in full in January 2012, after a thorough debate in this House over two and a half days with 29 Members speaking on the matter, including seven Members from the Opposition. In determining the salary framework, the Committee was guided by the following three key principles. First, salaries must be competitive so that people of the right calibre are not deterred from stepping forward to lead the country. Second, the ethos of political service entails making sacrifices and, hence, there should be a discount of 40% in the pay formula. Third, there should be a "clean wage" with no hidden perks. Members of Parliament, including those from the Workers’ Party, endorsed these principles. I quote Mr Chen Show Mao – he is in the House, "We (the Workers' Party) agree with the three principles that political salaries should be competitive, that political service is a calling that has its own ethos and their wages should be transparent.”
“If Members can refer to the handout, (Annex 1) reflects the actual variable pay components received by Political Office Holders over the past five years. Between 2013 and 2017, for the National Bonus, the range was between 3.4 and 4.9 months, with the average over the five years being 4.1 months; for Performance Bonus the range was from three to six months each year, with the average across all the Political Office Holders over five years at 4.3 months; for the Annual Variable Component, the range was 0.95 to 1.5 months over the period and the average over the five years was 1.3 months. All these variable components are in accordance with the framework I earlier described, and not on top of it. The bonuses can be higher than the norm in the framework, or lower, depending on the actual performance of individual Political Office Holders and the national outcomes in each year. The National Bonus is determined equally by the four national indicators laid out in the White Paper, namely, the real median income growth rate of Singaporeans; the real growth rate of the lowest 20th percentile income of Singaporeans; the unemployment rate of Singaporeans; and the real gross domestic product growth rate. The Annual Variable Component is always the same amount that all Civil Servants receive. The Performance Bonus is determined by the Prime Minister who consults the senior Ministers in Cabinet in assessing the performance of Political Office Holders. In determining the Performance Bonus for each individual, he takes into account the actual work that each Political Office Holder does in the specific responsibilities assigned to him, as well as his contributions in Cabinet when we consider broader national issues.”
“But to keep to the principle of making a significant part of the Prime Minister’s total pay subject to performance, that is, 35%, the Prime Minister’s variable pay has twice the National Bonus compared to other Ministers, linking it to national outcomes, in place of the individual Performance Bonus. The independent Committee recommended that the Prime Minister’s total norm annual salary should be two times that of an entry level MR4 Minister, that is, $2.2 million. Again, this includes all components, including his National Bonus, and there are no salary components or perks beyond this. I have prepared a handout on the range and average of each of the variable pay components received by Political Office Holders over the past five years. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Clerk to distribute the handout, please?”
“Thank you. The Committee set out to first determine what the appropriate level of total annual salary should be. In 2012, the Committee recommended a norm level of $1.1 million as the total annual salary for an entry level MR4 Minister, based on a 40% discount to the market reference, to reflect the ethos of public service. The Committee then recommended how this total amount should be divided between fixed pay and variable pay. So, that was the next step. The fixed pay comprises the monthly salary and 13th month Non-Pensionable Annual Allowance. The Committee recommended that a significant part of the total annual salary should be variable, and the quantum linked to individual performance and national outcomes. The variable components of the annual salary comprise individual Performance Bonus, National Bonus and the Annual Variable Component. And, together, these variable components constitute 35% of the total norm annual pay, and this is quite usual for executives and senior people at this level. The fixed pay is 65% of total norm annual pay. All the components added up – fixed pay plus variable pay, including any and all bonuses – make up the norm level of $1.1 million for an entry level MR4 Minister. I underline this point, Mr Speaker, all the bonus components form part of, and are not in addition to, the $1.1 million salary norm. The salary structure is totally transparent. There are no hidden salary components or perks. The Prime Minister’s salary does not have an individual Performance Bonus as there is no individual who can assess his performance.”
“The total number of resident deaths has increased from around 16,200 in 2008 to 19,800 in 2017. The total number of citizen deaths has increased from around 15,600 in 2008 to 19,100 in 2017. Based on current trends1, the number of citizen deaths could exceed the projected number of citizen births around the mid-2030s.”
“These efforts by the larger community go a long way in celebrating and supporting parenthood. We have just celebrated our 53rd National Day a month ago. With the combined efforts of the Government, employers, co-workers and the wider community, we can, together, make Singapore a Great Place for Families for many more generations of Singaporeans to come.”
“In particular, parental leave provisions have been progressively enhanced over the years, including improved leave support for fathers to play a more active role in caring for their children. Last year, we made the second week of Paternity Leave mandatory and increased Shared Parental Leave from one to four weeks. In total, fathers can now tap on up to eight weeks of leave to care for their children in the first year of birth. Over the past year, we have also launched two Tripartite Standards to encourage more family-friendly workplaces – one on Flexible Work Arrangements (FWAs), and another on Unpaid Leave for Unexpected Care Needs. To date, about 880 employers have signed up to the Tripartite Standard on FWAs, and 290 employers to that on Unpaid Leave for Unexpected Care Needs. We have also launched the enhanced Work-Life Grant in July to better encourage the adoption of FWAs by employers. We will work with the tripartite partners to encourage more companies to adopt the Tripartite Standards and Work-Life Grant, so that they can better support their employees' flexible working needs. It is not enough for the Government to act alone. For marriage and parenthood to be achievable, enjoyable and celebrated, the whole of society must come together to foster more family-friendly workplaces and communities. Employers and co-workers can play their part, by showing understanding and support if colleagues need time off to care for young children or aged parents. I was also heartened to hear that the Singapore University of Social Sciences has recently launched a Marriage and Baby Bonus Scheme, that offers each part-time adult student up to two free modules if they get married or have a child during their study.”
“To help them, the Housing and Development Board (HDB) has launched more than 50,000 new Build-To-Order flats since 2015, with priority allocation for first-timers. To provide faster access to housing, HDB will launch 1,100 flats with shorter waiting times of 2.5 years in the next few months, and another batch of 2,000 in 2019. HDB has also been more flexible to allow deferment of income assessment for housing loans and grants till before key collection. This would benefit young couples who are studying or serving National Service and are ready to settle down earlier in life. Preschool. Many parents cite finding good caregiving options and financial costs as key concerns when having children. One of our key priorities is to ensure more affordable and quality preschool places, to give parents peace of mind that their children are well taken care of while they are at work. The Government is committed to ensuring that every parent who wants a preschool place for their child will be able to have one. The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) is enhancing the provision of affordable and quality infant and childcare, with 40,000 more places to be added in the next five years. The Ministry of Education (MOE) will set up more MOE kindergartens (MKs), with a target of 50 MKs by 2023. As announced by Minister Desmond Lee in July, we are also reviewing our preschool subsidy framework to improve affordability for parents. Work-life support. We recognise that more Singaporeans want to fulfil their career aspirations even as they build their families. We are doing more to support them in managing their work and family responsibilities.”
“However, young Singaporeans have other life goals as well. With better education and career opportunities, some decide to delay marriage and starting a family in order to first fulfil other aspirations. From the same survey, half of the single Millennials, or 54%, indicated that they wanted to focus on their career and studies before marrying. These factors have contributed to the trends highlighted by Mr Alex Yam, with Singaporeans getting married and having children later, and subsequently having smaller families. From 2006 to 2016, the median age of Singaporean women at first marriage increased from 26.7 to 28 years, and the median age of mothers at first birth increased from 29.4 to 30.3 years. Nonetheless, there are other reasons for cheer. A small but growing number of couples in Singapore are choosing to have larger families. Two thousand one hundred and eighteen babies born in 2017 were the fourth or higher birth-order child, the highest in the past five years. Marriage and parenthood are ultimately personal decisions, and the reasons and timing for getting married and having children vary across couples. The Government cannot interfere with people’s personal decisions, but we can and will continue to encourage Singaporeans to get married and have children, and to help them with strong support when they do. We have invested significant resources in the Marriage and Parenthood Package over the past 17 years to better support Singaporeans at every stage of their marriage and parenthood journey. In line with the feedback we have received, we are doing more in the three key areas of housing, preschool and workplace support. Housing. Many couples aspire to own their homes before they start a family.”
“Singapore's total fertility rate (TFR) had been around 1.2 in recent years but fell to 1.16 in 2017. This fall in TFR is, in part, due to a demographic shift in our population. A relatively large cohort of young Singaporeans, many of whom are children of the "Baby Boomers" born between 1988 and 1998, are just entering the peak childbearing ages between the ages of 25 and 39. For birth and population trends, beyond yearly variations, it is useful to look at longer time periods. In the last five years since 2013, which was when the oldest cohort of "echo baby boomers" first turned 25 years old, we have seen a slight uptick in the average number of births compared to the preceding five-year period from 2008 to 20121. At the same time, compared to earlier cohorts, many of these "echo baby boomers" are not yet married or have not yet started having children. When this cohort starts having children, and as the younger "echo baby boomers" currently aged between 20 and 24 enter their peak childbearing years, we are hopeful that the number of births will increase. Our TFR could correspondingly improve. While our birth rates have fallen, it is encouraging that the number of resident marriages has risen, from 25,927 in 2016 to 26,348 in 2017, higher than the average of the past decade of about 25,000 resident marriages. The increase in marriages could translate into more births in the coming years, as young couples build their families. Indeed, our surveys show that Singaporeans' aspirations to get married and have children remain strong. The 2016 Marriage and Parenthood Survey indicated that more than eight in 10, or 83%, of single Millennials aged 21-35 want to get married, and more than nine in 10, or 92%, of married Millennials want at least two children.”
“Under the Smart Nation Sensor Platform project, the Government is progressively testing and deploying different sensors and related technologies, with the objective of providing better and more responsive services to citizens. These sensors include cameras mounted on street lamps that can support facial recognition for follow-up investigation in the event of a security incident. These cameras are similar to those already installed in other public places. To ensure security and protection of privacy, the Sensor Platform will incorporate industry best practices and standards in data security. These include access controls, encryption and identity hashing to prevent re-identification. Data collected from these sensors will only be accessed by public officers who require such data for their specific operational needs. The Public Sector Governance Act (PSGA), recently passed by Parliament, makes clear when data sharing is allowed across Government agencies, clarifies which agency is responsible, and criminalises the misuse of data.”
“At the same time, we need to work as part of the international community to reduce our collective carbon footprint. The Strategy Group will coordinate Singapore’s domestic and international actions to protect ourselves against the impact of climate change and support international efforts to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. We will fulfill our commitment to the Paris Agreement. The Government will implement the carbon tax, and work together with all stakeholders, including people and businesses, to reduce energy use, increase energy efficiency and reduce greenhouse gases. To this end, 2018 has been designated as the Year of Climate Action to raise awareness and intensify the national effort to bring down our emissions and adopt sustainable practices. Just as we had seized new opportunities to develop solutions to address water scarcity, we can and must do the same for climate change. We will leverage our strengths in research, technology and innovation to seize green growth opportunities. We will develop solutions to address sustainability challenges in our region and beyond, as countries make the transition towards low-carbon economies. This will create good opportunities for Singaporeans and our companies, and ensure Singapore remains economically competitive, sustainable, vibrant and liveable. Across the Government, we are building from a position of strength. We will continue to plan for the medium to long term and lay strong foundations for our collective future. We invite all Singaporeans to join us in this journey.”
“Our population policy is one such cross-cutting issue that will define this phase of nation-building. Our changing demography has wide-ranging effects on many Government strategies, including in areas, such as the economy, healthcare, infrastructure, defence planning and social cohesion. In the medium term, our ageing population presents both challenges and opportunities to sustain a dynamic economy. The slower growth of our local workforce provides a strong impetus to press on with economic restructuring. In the long term, our fertility rates and our openness to others who are willing and able to contribute to Singapore will shape the type of society that future generations of Singaporeans will live in. We will thus focus on three broad strategies across the Government to maintain a population profile that improves the lives of each generation. First, we will develop and implement policies to enable all Singaporeans to age with purpose and dignity. Second, we will make Singapore a great place for families, where marriage and parenthood are achievable, enjoyable and celebrated. Third, we will maintain a careful balance in our foreign worker as well as immigrant flows. In doing so, our population policies will support a cohesive society and vibrant economy. Singapore will continue to be a place where Singaporeans are proud to call home. Climate change is another cross-cutting issue that requires a whole-of-nation response. Singapore must address climate change and safeguard our collective future. As a low-lying, tropical island state, we must develop plans to address the impact of climate change, such as rising sea levels, higher temperatures and more extreme rainfall patterns.”
“Singapore has succeeded because we have been able to anticipate challenges and opportunities, take a long-term view, and plan ahead to prepare for the future. Singaporeans expect this of their Government. The Strategy Group coordinates and organises the Public Service to implement the strategic priorities of the Government in order to achieve the best outcomes for Singapore and Singaporeans. We are entering a new phase of nation-building. The world around us is changing rapidly and often in unexpected ways. Our own economy is undergoing a fundamental transformation amidst a shift in the global economic centre of gravity towards Asia. Technology will change the way we live, work and play. And the texture of our society is evolving as our population ages and new social challenges emerge. This more complex landscape will require policy responses to challenges that are still emerging and, therefore, not yet well-defined. It will require Government agencies to work more closely together because solutions to policy challenges will increasingly cut across Ministry domains. We will also need to tackle the challenges of today while, at the same time, building for tomorrow. The Strategy Group identifies these cross-cutting medium- to long-term priorities and organises the efforts of Government agencies to collectively address them. We will continue to strengthen whole-of-Government planning and execution. First, we will stretch the bounds of our ambition for a better future that we will build together. Second, we will ensure that all parts of the Government work in stronger alignment in pursuit of these goals. Third, we will ensure that resources and capabilities support our national priorities.”
“NSCS is working with relevant stakeholders in the different domains to identify and mitigate cross-cutting risks. The identification of these risks will also allow the Government to factor in such risks upfront in its long-term planning. To keep public officers up to date with the changing security environment, NSCS develops and conducts national security education programmes. We want to ensure that our officers in different Government agencies are aware of and sensitive to national security considerations and are able to translate these considerations into appropriate responses in their own policy domains. The terrorism threat is at a high, and the Government needs to anticipate and deal with the threat upstream. NSCS works with agencies and research institutes to understand trends and research related to violent extremism and shares these insights with a wide range of partners. These efforts have been useful, for example, in equipping frontline officers in non-security domains with the knowledge and skills to safeguard more vulnerable groups, like youths, against extremist messaging. National security is critical for the survival and prosperity of Singapore. The challenges in the coming years are complex. The Government must stay agile and alert. NSCS will continue to work with agencies and stakeholders to identify risks, sensitise our officers, build capabilities and develop coordinated responses to national security issues.”
“Singapore is facing new and complex challenges to our national security. Changes in the external geopolitical landscape are creating new tensions and uncertainty in the global security environment that we must respond to. At the same time, persistent threats – terrorism, cybersecurity risks, and other traditional security challenges – continue to pose significant risks to citizens and our way of life. Our ability to respond to the multivariate threats is critical to ensure that we maintain our stability, cohesion and resilience. Dealing with such challenges requires a coordinated response. The National Security Coordination Secretariat (NSCS) works with other Government agencies to anticipate threats and develop responses in a timely manner to ensure that the Government as a whole is well-coordinated to deal effectively with present and future risks. NSCS is working to enhance the Government’s ability to identify emergent risks to national security. These could range from new disruptive technologies to unintended consequences of existing developments. The work will draw from a wide range of experts in relevant fields, including academia. The identification of risks will guide the Government’s prioritisation of response measures, including resource allocation. lnter-dependencies and cross-cutting risks which affect multiple domains and agencies are not easily discernible but may affect our national security. For instance, our critical infrastructure depends on different networks of utilities, information and people. Vulnerabilities in any one of these networks could have a far-reaching impact across sectors in the economy. This applies to many domains, such as energy, water, health, infocomm, banking and finance, and transport.”
“Public agencies can hire or re-employ officers who are above 67 years old as long as their services are needed. As at 31 December 2017, there are about 1,400 public officers who are aged 67 and above.”
“NParks also uses technology to help officers work better and more productively. For example, information of trees is now captured in a digitalised platform, accessible on officers' mobile devices, and sensors are now being trialled and installed to detect tilt in trees so that mitigating measures can be taken early by the NParks officers. NParks' people are valued for their skills and passion in this field. All officers are hired into the same Management Executive Scheme. About one third of them hold certifications in arboriculture, horticulture and park management. Our City in a Garden is the best place for these officers to polish their craft. The Public Service never leads in terms of remuneration and benefits. This is our operating philosophy. We see what the industries are offering and try our best to be competitive so that we have our fair share of talent. But where it concerns defining our missions, adopting of new technologies or HR practices in response to emerging opportunities or national challenges, we must be prepared to be pioneer implementers and make that demonstrative impact. This is our role in Singapore's transformation journey, to continuously improve our service to the public and build a better Singapore.”
“At the end of the three-year programme, the trainees will attain a Bachelor of Social Work and be certified a social worker. Minister Desmond Lee will speak more about this at the COS for MSF. Mr Chairman, I will conclude by talking about an agency that has been making a successful leap in changing its mindset and operating model. One public agency that is really this is the National Parks Board (NParks). Its vision has evolved over the years from creating a Garden City to having a City in a Garden. This reimagining of its mission led to innovative projects that integrated nature with our urban landscape, such as Gardens by the Bay, a garden built on prime, reclaimed land, for an extended Central Business District (CBD), which is now a popular destination for locals and a must-see for tourists. There is also the Botanic Gardens, a national park within the city centre, now a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Site and a source of pride for Singaporeans. In my dealings with NParks, I found that they put citizens' interests at the centre of whatever they do. From just providing a park near where you live, they are linking all the parks now through an island-wide Park Connector Network (PCN) so that they become one big park accessible to all. In recent years, NParks has integrated into parks, public facilities, such as the Woodlands Integrated Healthcare Cluster, the Singapore Armed Forces Reservists' Association (SAFRA) Clubhouse at Chua Chu Kang, and the Singapore Institute of Technology Campus in Punggol. In Sembawang, it stepped forward to undertake the sprucing up of the only hot spring in Singapore into a Hot Spring Park for the public to enjoy.”
“The Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS) prepares ATCOs for the job through a very rigorous skills-based training programme. Since July 2017, all ATCOs, regardless of their academic qualifications, will be placed to the same grade and receive the same salaries once they are assessed and found to have the skills required for the job. PSD will work with other public agencies to identify other areas and other schemes where we can implement this. There are, however, situations where the profession or the industry feels that a separation of schemes between diploma and degrees is necessary. In those cases, we will establish a clear, performance-based pathway for an officer to upgrade from the diploma scheme to the degree scheme. This is what the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) will do for the Social Work profession. Today, certified social workers need to be social work degree holders. As such, those who hold relevant diplomas, for example, the Social Work diploma from Nanyang Polytechnic, can enter the sector as social work associates (SWAs), playing a supporting role to the degree holding social workers. To enable more diploma holders to become social workers, MSF has endorsed a new pathway. From the second half of this year, SkillsFuture Singapore, the Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS) and Nanyang Polytechnic will introduce a new work-learn programme for SWAs. Through this programme, diploma graduates and promising SWAs with work experience will be able to undergo social work training with suitable employers, while attending classes at SUSS. This is a work-learn pathway, recognising that social work is really a craft and is skills-based in nature.”
“For certain schemes, where officers have to analyse data, develop policies or even help lead large complex organisations, we do need to look out for applicants with cognitive skills, and academic results is one proxy to measure that. However, for work that is vocational or skills-based in nature, and there are plenty in the Public Service, there is much less need to sort or select based on academic results, or structure diploma and degree holders into different schemes with different salary scales and structures. Instead, we should continue to recruit based on the applicant's passion, skills and aptitudes for the specific vocation. Hence, one change that we can implement for such skills-based jobs is to merge existing schemes for diploma and degree holders. And beyond the point of recruitment, it is on-the-job performance that determines the officer's progression. If we do not do this, we can have a situation where someone without a degree but has mastered the craft after many years of experience and on-the-job training is pegged below a fresh degree graduate doing the same job. This does not do justice to mastery and craftsmanship. PSD has done this merger for the generic Management Executive Scheme in the Civil Service in 2015. And as Assoc Prof Dr Muhd Faishal mentioned, MOE has also done this, so diploma and degree graduates now all come under the same Education Scheme. There are many other examples. One most recent example is the Air Traffic Control Officer (ATCO) scheme. Changi Airport is one of the busiest airports in the world. To keep our skies safe and secure, we need highly skilled and competent Air Traffic Controllers (ATCOs) to plan, guide and direct air traffic in and out of Changi Airport.”
“If it is something that makes things better but their immediate supervisor is not supportive, then inform their Permanent Secretary or the Head of the Civil Service, or have a word with me, and I will see to it. Where the Public Service has fallen short, it will address the problem. But when generalisations that tar the entire service with the same brush are made in public and, worse, further spread through media, it does not do justice to our officers. It discourages and undermines improvement efforts. So, I say to Mr Louis Ng, be part of the change, work with and encourage the Public Service as it strives to transform itself to build a better future for Singapore. Assoc Prof Dr Muhd Faishal Ibrahim, Mr Louis Ng and Mr Patrick Tay asked a very pertinent question how the Public Service can look beyond paper qualifications, to recognise skills and competencies. And I believe Dr Teo Ho Pin asked that question, too. This has important relevance to the SkillsFuture movement. We want to encourage Singaporeans to uncover their passions and aptitudes in a diverse range of skills and master them through lifelong learning. We want a meritocracy of deep skills, not one of past academic results. The behaviour of employers plays a big part to engender this culture. Hence, the appraisal system in the Public Service is based on performance and demonstration of skills and competencies. A public officer is recognised based on his contribution and delivery of results, with past academic results having no bearing. But what I think the Public Service can continue to improve on is the recruitment criteria, how schemes are structured and how people are placed into the schemes.”
“But the next question is: if you accept that the biggest obstacle is ourselves, the next question is: who does "ourselves" refer to? And the answer really is: it starts with me. So, for me as the Minister, I constantly have to ask myself: am I giving policy directions that are bold enough, clear enough and empowering enough for my staff? For a Permanent Secretary or CEO, he will ask if he has built an effective organisation with the forward-looking culture that can embrace change. For a Director, he will ask if, within his area of responsibility, he has sufficiently made improvements, made Public Service more effective, service the public better and empowered, motivated and rallied his troops, the people reporting to him. And for an individual officer, he will ask whether he has acquired the skills to do the job better and serve the public better. If the starting point is that everyone else is an obstacle except yourself, then I say you need to care more about doing your work and doing your part, recognising that there are pros and cons to every proposed change, and that effecting change involves patience, persistence and a hard slog. Mr Louis Ng, although he is not a Public Service officer, as an MP and a public figure, he can do his part, too. If some civil servants tell you they dare not speak up, you can assure them that, from your own experience, you have always spoken up and never got into trouble. If they feel the system does not allow them to make a difference, ask them what it is that they want to change. If it is a philosophical shift in Government policy, like selling land to pay for healthcare costs, then you have to explain to them this is not the policy of this current Government.”
“The Head of Civil Service has called on public officers to have a "constructive discontent", of being dissatisfied with the status quo and wanting to do better. I have urged the service to be bold – "think big, start small, act fast". This deep change cannot happen if the Public Service does not welcome ideas from its own officers. As Mr Louis Ng has acknowledged, many Permanent Secretaries and Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) engage staff directly to hear them out. And I agree with him that there ought to be across-the-board practice. In fact, all agencies today conduct regular employee engagement surveys, and many carry out other organisational development initiatives. One of which is regular 360-degree feedback, to better develop our Public Service leaders. We have also put in place a system, such as the Public Sector Transformation Award, to recognise officers who display constructive discontent, and make the effort to effect transformative change. We have also recently incorporated into the bonus system a mechanism for agencies to specifically recognise officers for their innovation and enterprise. Notwithstanding all these efforts, like all big and complex organisations, when there is change, there will be those driving it, those supporting it, those worried about it, those wanting change in a totally different direction and some resisting it. It is not just the Public Service. This happens in every organisation. We are determined to succeed in this exercise and overcome the challenges and obstacles. The main obstacle is ourselves. Mr Louis Ng and Mr Kok Heng Leun quoted me on this in their speeches during the Budget Debate and I thank them for that.”
“Senior Minister of State Dr Janil Puthucheary will speak more about the efforts we are taking to fully leverage technology to deliver public service. The second challenge of inflexibility is much harder to overcome. It involves tempering a system that is consistent and six sigma reliable by design with the recognition that there are exceptions, rules are not perfect, and human judgement and discretion are needed from time to time. In the Public Service, my view is that the key innovation is not so much driven by technology, but by our humanistic instincts to make a sound judgement, to take a bit of risk, to take responsibility for our decisions. And we need to empower middle management, even ground officers, to be able to do that, while ensuring that the integrity of the system not to give special favours remains intact. Making this change pervasive will truly transform the Public Service delivery to be even better in meeting citizens’ needs. To bring about a change in human behaviour, we need to make changes to the system that influences it most, which is the HR system. This brings me to Mr Louis Ng's question. In fact, during the Budget Debate, Mr Ng expressed concern that there is a culture of compliance, public officers dare not speak up for fear of getting into trouble, and they gave up trying to improve things because such efforts would be in vain and, therefore, some of them say "Let's stop caring". 2.15 pm Mr Louis Ng may not be aware, but the Public Service is undergoing a major transformation. An exercise has started in 2012 in order to serve the public better and be ready for the future. And it is self-initiated, demonstrating the long-standing ethos of serving with heart and commitment, and always striving to do better for Singapore.”
“In certain circumstances, such as when the Bills are time-sensitive or revisions are routine, a Ministry may decide not to conduct a public consultation exercise. Ms Sylvia Lim also mentioned that Bills can be better presented and Second Reading speeches can also be improved. We take note of all that and, as always, we are always striving to improve. Another area which the Public Service is continuously improving on is the last mile of service delivery and the touchpoint with the public. The basic nature of Public Service is that it serves the masses. So, the first challenge is that service delivery can be impersonal. Further, because the system must work for the masses, consistency in application of rules is critical. Otherwise, we get invidious comparisons between citizen A and citizen B. So, the second challenge is that the system can be inflexible and does not cater sufficiently to exceptions. Assoc Prof Fatimah Lateef, Mr Cedric Foo, Mr Seah Kian Peng and Mr Patrick Tay asked how the Public Service is innovating, raising productivity, especially in the context of technological advancement. I think tackling these two challenges is a good, down-to-earth start. To tackle impersonality, we can leverage technology. Today, our smart phones and apps can communicate with us in an individualised way even though they are automated systems. So, the Health Promotion Board's Health365 App is like a fitness buddy to us. And the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board has launched a CPF Retirement Planning Service, where frontline officers use technology to transform citizens’ data into personalised infographics to provide citizens with personalised advice on CPF matters. As a result, the conversations between the CPF officers and the public became richer and more meaningful.”
“So, on Ms Chia Yong Yong’s question again when she asked about whether public servants understand ground sentiments and whether sufficient effort has been put in to engage the ground, the Public Service has, over the year, expanded both digital and community outreach channels. For example, the People’s Association (PA) has a Kopi Talk series; the Ministry of Communications and Information's (MCI’s) REACH Listening Points and Facebook Live Chats enable agencies to engage broader segments of society in understanding the people's sentiments. We have also been growing our citizen engagement capabilities. For example, the Citizen Engagement Seed Fund was set up in 2016 to encourage agencies to trial innovative engagement approaches. This fund has supported 16 projects by various agencies which have created new opportunities for citizen participation. These projects include the Ministry of Health's (MOH’s) Citizens’ Jury on Diabetes, and the Singapore Tourism Board’s envisioning exercise for Chinatown and Little India. To Ms Sylvia Lim's question, it has become the norm for agencies to do public consultations on legislative amendments. Over the past one year, Ministries have done consultations over a wide range of Bills. These are very useful exercises to solicit the concerns the public may have on the Bills, or suggestions that can improve both the policy thinking as well as its implementation. The extent and approach to consultation and the duration of consultation, however, are determined by each Ministry, depending on factors, such as the nature of the legislative amendment, impact of the changes and also the level of public interest.”
“Today, Ministers and the Public Service work closely together to continue to deliver public housing, healthcare, education, transport, maintain law and order, keep Singapore safe and secure, attract investments, regulate various sectors, ensure social mobility and so on. So, to Ms Chia Yong Yong’s question whether public servants have buy-in to Government policy, I would say, by and large, public officers are committed to policies set by the elected Government. It does not happen that way in every country, and it did not happen here just because public officers are yes-men or yes-women. In fact, Ms Chia is correctly worried that we do not want buy-in to be weakened over time. So, what she said is actually the opposite of Mr Louis Ng's concern that public servants are not speaking up and opposing the Government's policy. The system works today because of the mutual trust and respect between Ministers and public officers, which have been built up through years of working together. Public officers know that national policies are developed in the long-term interest of Singapore and Singaporeans. Ministers have confidence that when they set the policy direction or make a policy speech, the Public Service will back them up with diligent implementation. But public officers are not public figures, so Ministers understand that they have to do the heavy lifting in engaging the populace and speak up for public officers when they are unfairly criticised. This is something that we must continue to work on and not let it be weakened. Citizen engagement, including co-creation with the public, has been a major focus since Public Sector Transformation started in 2012.”
“It must benefit our citizens through more effective delivery of services. To maximise the benefits and savings, operating models and business processes must also be re-engineered and jobs redesigned so that our officers can immediately put their new skills to use. Mr Chairman, Sir, let me thank Members once again for their strong support for the Public Service. Let me conclude by assuring this House that we are gearing up as One to ensure that the Government and the Public Service are ready to embrace the challenges and create a better future for our current and future generations. With your permission, Mr Chairman, Minister Ong Ye Kung will now elaborate on the Public Service’s transformation efforts. The Minister for Education (Higher Education and Skills) and Second Minister for Defence (Mr Ong Ye Kung): Mr Chairman, every industry is undergoing transformation and disruption. The Public Service and its 145,000 employees are no exception. Transformation is not new to the Public Service. From computerisation in the 1980s, the Public Service (PS)21 Movement in the 1990s, the Public Service has pushed itself to change with the times. Today, as Deputy Prime Minister Teo mentioned, we will need to find opportunities amidst the challenges of technological disruption and slowing workforce growth. The question is: what areas should we focus on? To answer that question, let me first talk about the state of the Public Service today. It is generally healthy. It continues to uphold the values of honesty and integrity, strives to serve the public better, and we are able to attract our fair share of talent. These are the critical aspects of a functioning and effective Public Service.”