Xie Yao Quan
Singapore
“Thank you, Sir. Sir, the Minister mentioned the incidence rate of bullying behaviour in our schools and I would like to stress that this is based on reported incidences.”
“Thank you, Chairman. I thank MSF for responding to our cuts and I seek leave to withdraw my amendment. [(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)] [(proc text) The sum of $5,822,529,800 for Head I ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.”
“What would be a fair valuation of fairness to current, affected homeowners? The Government will need to use sound and consistent principles for such an exercise, to justify the higher public spending that this implies.”
“My idea of balance that I prompted you on was not so much about keeping versus sharing at the individual level, but about spending and saving at the societal level.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will just reiterate two points that I have made in my speech. First, I think it is more meaningful to look at how a term of government balances its collection against spending over its entire term in government.”
“Sir, I thank the Member for both clarifications. My basic response to both clarifications is yes. I accept that surpluses can be transferred into Past Reserves at the end of a term of government.”
The complete record
Every one of 336 lines we hold for Xie Yao Quan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 6 of 7.
“Madam, for a young country like Singapore, the protection of our heritage is important. Not only does it remind the future generations of our roots, it also reflects the values which the society holds dear. In September, a man was charged under the Preservations of Monuments Act for wakeboarding at the Civilian War Memorial, which was clearly disrespectful of the National Monument. This may be a rare incident – which, I hope, did not leave any permanent damage on the memorial – but society and the Government has a responsibility to safeguard our National Monuments from damage and disrespect. Today, we have more than 7,000 conserved buildings under URA and 73 National Monuments under NHB. To a layperson, it is not always clear what the difference is between a conserved and a protected building. I am very happy to hear that the Government has reviewed the Preservation of Monuments Act and is stepping up protections provided under this Act. National Monuments ought to be accorded the highest level of legal protection in Singapore. The Minister said that the Preservation of Monuments Act will align NHB's powers of enforcement with those under the Planning Act for conserved buildings. This is a good step, but I suggest that the Government look into whether there is a need to strengthen the legal protection of National Monuments beyond that which is accorded to conserved buildings. In addition, I would like to ask about the efforts that NHB has undertaken, and will undertake, to educate the general public, particularly school children, on the significance of our National Monuments. Madam, in Mandarin, please. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] For a young country like Singapore, the protection of our heritage is very important.”
“Sir, I thank Mr Gerald Giam for his clarification. The Public Order Act as amended in 2017 deals with foreign organisation and participation in activities directed towards a political end in physical spaces in Singapore. So, as we debate FICA, I think it is quite clear and we can all agree that the same logic and the same definition should apply to even more nefarious and insidious threats in the online space that can apply to both Singaporeans and foreigners. Mr Gerald Giam mentioned clause 7 in FICA, specifically, I think, clause D. He cited as an example and I would read out clause D – "to prevent incitement of feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will between different groups of people in Singapore". I would point out that the Public Order Act has exactly the same clause 7(2)(E). In fact, it has an additional word, "hostility". I think the construct of the Public Order Act and FICA are essentially the same and I do not see why the Workers' Party, who had no issue four years ago, should have the issue today.”
“Would Mr Giam not agree that his proposed omissions defang FICA and strip it of its basic effectiveness to fight foreign interference? It is a bit like saying, let us fight with one arm tied behind our backs, or maybe more, because we are worried about the power of having two arms. Sir, lastly, I would also point out that the definition of what is "directed towards a political end in Singapore" in clause 8 of FICA is already found in existing laws such as the Public Order Act amended in 2017. In that debate in 2017, the Workers' Party had expressed no concern about the very same definition. So, it is not clear to me why the Workers' Party would have a concern now about the same definition four years on.”
“We are debating FICA today, three years later. Indeed, it would be fair to ask, what actually took us so long? Mr Speaker, the threat of foreign interference is real and urgent and the broad powers provided by this Bill are necessary. But Singaporeans, including youths, are concerned and I implore the Government to double down on transparency commitments as well as constantly communicate on the narrow intent of FICA so as to assure Singaporeans while ensuring that the Government has the wherewithal to effectively protect us against a common threat. Ultimately, each government will be held to account by Singaporeans through the exercise of our individual democratic rights. To end, I would like to touch on Mr Gerald Giam's proposed amendments to clause 8 on what is defined as being "directed towards a political end in Singapore". Mr Giam has proposed to remove limbs (f) and (g) of the definition in the Bill, namely, (f) on public opinion about a matter of public controversy in Singapore and (g) on political debate. Now, I have listened to the Minister explain the philosophy behind clause 8 and Mr Giam's argument for the proposed omissions. Sir, clause 8 sets out the entire political landscape, the entire surface area that foreign threat vectors can and will operate on to subvert our affairs. I therefore like to ask Mr Giam if he would not agree that the real effect of his proposed omissions will not so much scope the powers of the executive to limit the potential for over-reach and abuse of power but rather the real effect will be to curtail the real powers that the executive needs to counter the real and highly complex threats that FICA is exactly designed to counter?”
“Can the Minister assure that the Singaporean youth working overseas and writing, posting from overseas about his or her racialised experience with previous job searches or employers in Singapore will not be deemed a vector of a Hostile Information Campaign and thus, slapped with some Part 3 Direction under FICA? Can the Minister assure that indeed, students, lecturers, academics in our schools and Institutes of Higher Learning here, interacting with foreign students, discussing, exchanging views on any number of political issues will not find themselves subject to designation as Politically Significant Persons? Can the Minister assure that patriots, well-meaning Singaporeans who want to lend their own voices to civic discourse here, no matter how critical of the Government and Government Policies, will not be caught by FICA, simply on account of any actual or suspected interaction with a foreigner? Sir, let me conclude. The Select Committee on Online Falsehoods heard evidence in 2018 on a troll farm cottage industry in Macedonia. Macedonian teenagers worked in these farms and subverted the US presidential elections in 2016. They might very well have zero actual interest in US politics and it is unclear if they were taking directions from other foreign state players. But it was clear that they did this to earn money through advertisements. One teenager reportedly earned US$16,000 – more than 40 times the average monthly salary in Macedonia. There were even dedicated classes to train young Macedonians in this trade. There are two points to note here. One, the content created by this troll farm were not all "fake news" or falsehoods per se. So, not everything can be caught by POFMA. Second point and equally fundamental is that the Select Committee report came out in 2018.”
“These proposed amendments will capture the Government's definitive commitment to public disclosure and transparency under FICA and I look forward to the passing of these amendment at the Committee Stage later. At this point, I would like to seek some clarifications. One, the Ministry has mentioned a Registry of Foreign and Political Disclosures for Parts 4, 5 and 6 in its interview with the media last week. So, my question is, where will Part 3 directions be published? Two, will the reasons for actions taken under Parts 3, 4, 5 or 6 also be published, as much as practicable? Three, will the Registry or Registries be accessible online, free of charge, searchable, sortable and downloadable, so as to maximise its intended potential for public education and awareness? And four, will appeals made and decided under FICA be similarly published? Sir, my third suggestion to better assure Singaporeans and keep their confidence in FICA is that the Government needs to constantly communicate the law's intended purpose and the Government's commitment to this intent. This is difficult to do, as the concerns that Singaporeans may have towards the Bill can be very visceral, as I noted at the start of my speech. So, to this end, can the Minister give definitive assurance, in this House, once again, that the youth climate activist working with regional and or international friends to advance their joint vision for climate justice has nothing to worry about as regards FICA and can indeed look forward to continuing and growing his or her work?”
“These commitments generally go further than Mr Perera's proposed amendments which do not cover Part 3 Directions and do not cover some of the stepped-up countermeasures for Politically Significant Persons. Except for the public disclosure of individuals who are reporting to the Government on their involvement in foreign political organisations and public disclosure of individuals and entities reporting certain arrangements to the Government, these are what Mr Perera has proposed to disclose, but I agree with the Minister that information reported by individuals and entities in general to the Government should not be publicly disclosed if the key intent of transparency is really to hold the Government accountable for its actions. At it stands now, clause 116 of the Bill already provide that authorities may make public any designation of Politically Significant Persons and and any stepped-up countermeasures for these Persons, and any transparency directive. So, the commitment that the Minister has expressed on transparency goes even further than the clause 116 in the Bill itself. In that number one, the Ministry will make public these actions and two, it will include Part 3 Directions against harmful foreign online communications with one exception. To this end, I am glad to note that the Minister has also served notice in his speech just now, to move an amendment to clause 116 itself, with the new language reading, "...it must prepare a notice informing about every Part 3 Direction except the Technical Assistance Direction given, every designation made under Part 4 or every directive given under Parts 5 or 6".”
“Having said all these, how can we then assure Singaporeans, nonetheless, and keep their confidence in the Government's judicious administration of FICA? I have three suggestions. First, and most fundamentally, we should recognise that the ultimate check and balance on governmental powers is not in more and more legislative guard rails, but rather, in the democratic vote in our own hands. We should recognise that any government, today or in future, as Executive of this and other laws of the land, will be held accountable to the people and by the people in Singapore. And, in turn, we, the people, should have a key interest to choose suitable persons who will exercise these powers, any legislative powers, discretionary powers under the law, judiciously and wisely. Notwithstanding this, secondly, I think transparency and timely disclosure by the Government to the public in its Executive actions under FICA will go a long way towards modulating the Government's administration of the law and keep trust with the public. In this light, I agree with the spirit of the amendments to clauses 78, 79, 81, 84 and 85 moved by Mr Leon Perera. I agree with the spirit of Mr Perera's proposed amendments. I am heartened to hear the Minister reiterate his Ministry's commitment made to the media last week that any designation of Politically Significant Persons, any stepped-up countermeasures for these Persons, any transparency directive to publish on political matters with foreign links and any Part 3 Direction against harmful foreign online communications except for Technical Assistance Directions will be made public.”
“Second, to deal with this external enemy, the purpose of FICA is, in fact, very narrow, even if the range of tactics provided for in this Bill is, indeed, quite broad. So, there is a whole toolkit of directions, directives and countermeasures, but all these tactical modalities are, ultimately, to serve a very narrow purpose that FICA is intended for. Third, the principles of FICA are neither unique nor novel. In other words, Singapore is neither the only nor the first country moving such laws. Australia, for example, has the Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme (FITS) since 2019. Their definition of activities "on behalf of" a foreign principal is similarly broad. An applicable arrangement with a foreign principal under FITS could be "formal or informal, written or verbal. It could be a contract, understanding or agreement of any kind." As illustration, if Company A and a foreign government make plans to import Australian food into the foreign country and Company A lobbies the Australian government on export regulations, Company A is deemed to be acting "on behalf of" the foreign government, even if it is also acting for itself. One can also certainly say that Company A in this illustration is working "in collaboration with", in its plain meaning, the foreign government. So, Australia has defined these activities quite broadly and the principles behind FICA are really no different. I will also note that none of the amendments that the Workers' Party has moved actually touches on clause 5, on what constitutes activities or conduct "on behalf of" a foreign principal. So, I am glad to see that the Workers' Party agreed on the definitions in clause 5 of the Bill.”
“If the song is catchy, if it is funny, engaging and sung with passion, it will have the potential to viral, no pun intended. And the foreign principal can very well do this in collaboration with some other parties. A foreign principal can also exploit the pretext of collaboration to create memes, videos, articles, even games, essentially, any number of platforms, to achieve its sinister objectives. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] And so, herein lies the central paradox that we have to deal with when we discuss our approach as a people to counter foreign interference. Because the tactics of foreign interference can be so sophisticated, so clandestine, these efforts slide themselves effortlessly into our everyday lives and can so easily masquerade as normal activities and conduct. So, to counter these, we really need to fight these forces where they are, in other words, our laws and actions will have to operate within the realm of everyday activities and conduct in order to be effective. But this grates against our basic sensibilities. It touches a raw nerve and it causes worry, rightly so. But the basic point I am making is that, ultimately, we are contemplating laws like FICA, which can intersect so much with the realm of our daily lives, only because the very threats that FICA seeks to counter have invited themselves into our daily lives first, whether we want it or not, and the powers of FICA scoped on the basis of this fundamental reality. I would like to suggest three key principles as we contemplate what is the right balance in the scope of powers. First, the enemy is without, not within. The real and only threat is insidious foreign interference from overseas, not alternative voices, whether domestically or abroad.”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, youths in Singapore are concerned about FICA. I wish to speak about their concerns today. I will focus instead on two issues: one, the apparently sweeping scope of powers provided in this Bill; and two, the desire for transparency in the Government's administration of these powers. Zooming straight into clause 5 of the Bill, there are concerns that this clause defines activities or conduct "on behalf of a foreign principal" too broadly, to include those "in collaboration with" a foreign individual or entity. Youths are understandably worried if their everyday interactions with foreign friends will run afoul of this Bill. And more precisely, whether any activity or conduct critical of the Government or Government policies and with any shade of foreign involvement, will be hit by FICA. If one reads the proposed legislation with its plain meanings, one can, quite naturally, come to these conclusions and concerns. But at the same time, a foreign principal with malicious intent to interfere with our affairs can very well exploit, or may already be exploiting, the cover of seemingly innocuous day-to-day activities or conduct, to achieve its insidious objectives. That is the whole point of artful interference and manipulation: to operate under cover. And this could certainly involve a seemingly innocent collaboration with another party. Let us take an example, a foreign principal can collaborate on a song about vaccines. We already have a song, a collaboration, may I add, about 菜饭, "Economical Rice". So, I think we can all agree that a song about COVID-19 vaccines is entirely conceivable. The song could be about the supposed superiority of certain vaccines and/or the alleged risks of certain other vaccines.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. My question pertains to my original Parliamentary Question 18, part (b), which I believe has not been quite answered. The question really is this: as we learn to live with COVID-19 and settle into a new equilibrium of elevated daily number of cases, in the longer run, what is the capacity of general wards in public hospitals that the Ministry expects to set aside for COVID-19 patients? The concern is the more beds we set aside for COVID-19 patients, the less beds we will have for non-COVID-19-related conditions. Are there enough hospital beds to go around in our public healthcare system? The other side of this question is in terms of wait time to a hospital bed for a COVID-19 patient. In the longer run, at steady state, does the Ministry have an expectation and what might that be?”
“And more to the point, do we think we still need to pull back – to use Minister Lawrence Wong's words – pull back sharply as a population from time to time in the new normal or can we finally expect to see the last of Phase Two (Heightened Alert)?”
“I thank the Ministers for their Statements and I am particularly heartened to hear the concrete roadmap that Minister Lawrence Wong has provided as to how we will ease ourselves out of Phase Two (Heightened Alert) and the differentiation for vaccinated versus unvaccinated persons in this particular roadmap. The clarification I would like to seek pertains to the longer term. So, beyond immediate easing and reopening, when we are well and truly into a new normal of endemic COVID-19; in this new normal, as Minister Ong Ye Kung has noted, we will have reached a high level of vaccination and, therefore, COVID-19 resilience in the population and the need for differentiation between vaccinated and unvaccinated persons would be less. But Minister Lawrence Wong has also said that, as we reopen, we must expect the case numbers to rise. So, to take this a little bit further, in the new normal, there is still a possibility that we get a major flare-up in infections from time to time. And in such a scenario, the few hundreds of thousands or half a million persons or so who remain unvaccinated will be the ones at greatest risk of severe illness and therefore, at greatest risk of loading our healthcare system. And so, in such a scenario, I would like to ask the MTF how might we tame the flare-up and would the MTF then consider in such a scenario a sharper differentiation, albeit a transient or interim one in SMMs between vaccinated and unvaccinated persons so that we can protect the unvaccinated but yet not cause a major disruption to normal life for the vast majority like we now have in Phase Two (Heightened Alert)?”
“Surveys have shown that even a large proportion of healthcare workers have not prepared for death-related matters, including making an LPA. The LPA allows us to designate a donee whom we trust to decide and execute matters pertaining to our welfare, property and finance on our behalf after we lose our mental capacity. In other words, making an LPA is a precaution. If we lose mental capacity, the donee will become somebody we can fall back on. "If I were to lose mental capacity" may not be a phrase that sounds very pleasant, but it should still be addressed while we can. In fact, the probability of getting dementia is not one in 10,000 but closer to one in 10 after the age of 60. Therefore, we should all have an LPA. With this, I hope that MSF will work with medical institutions to open up more LPA touchpoints. After all, the elderly in polyclinics, public hospitals or day centres should be screened to see if they have an LPA. If we notice that the elderly has no LPA, then the staff or volunteer should immediately have a conversation with the elderly and explain what an LPA is about. Next, we should also tap on the Silver Generation Ambassadors and the Silver Generation Office (SGO) to do house visits just as how we promote the COVID-19 vaccination, because a comprehensive life plan is as important as vaccination. We should also make use of all the online and offline channels to encourage more young and middle-aged persons to discuss LPA matters with their parents, grandparents and loved ones. Looking ahead, I hope that every senior citizen will not only have an LPA, but also have an Advance Care Plan, a Will as well as a CPF nomination. I hope that we can move towards this goal step by step. (In English): Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand in support of this Bill.”
“To conclude, in fact, we need seniors to adopt not just LPA, but also Advance Care Planning (ACP), make a Will and make a CPF Nomination, as part of a comprehensive plan to live well and eventually leave well, for the benefit of themselves and their loved ones. Every senior – an LPA, an ACP, a Will, a CPF Nomination. That should be our overarching goal, to ensure that all bases are covered for our seniors. This Bill is the first of many steps that we would need to take in that direction. Mr Speaker, Sir, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] MSF introduced the Mental Capacity (Amendment) Bill to digitise the process of making a Lasting Power of Attorney (LPA). Hence, the time taken to register an LPA will be shortened from three weeks to an average of eight working days, which is about half the current time needed, and the LPA itself will become an electronic document. At the same time, the new process will not be at the expense of donor protection. This approach is not only in line with the Government's vision of digital transformation in the public sector, but will also bring greater convenience to members of the public who are interested to be a donor or a donee. Some people, especially the elderly, are worried that they do not know how to use computers or online platforms. I am confident that the Government has provided sufficient service centres and resources within the community to help the public in need. Notwithstanding the details of the amendment Bill, I feel that the fundamental significance of the Bill lies in wider public awareness of LPA and its importance. In this respect, we still have a lot to do because too few Singaporeans have done an LPA.”
“I believe that every patient passing through the doors of our polyclinics should be screened for LPA coverage, and for those that are not covered, the correct care planning conversations should take place in the polyclinic, there and then. I believe the same screening should happen in our Specialist Outpatient Clinics and even the wards in public hospitals. The screening should take place in our day care and senior activity centres across the island. I think we ought to incorporate LPAs as part of standard health and care protocol for our seniors, going forward. And I hope that healthcare settings will get the right resources, for example, special LPA Ambassadors and/or training for existing staff, to carry out the right conversations. Second, I suggest that we leverage the Silver Generation Office to promote LPAs door-to-door, engage and spread the message door-to-door, just like how we did for COVID-19 vaccination. The need for inoculation against poor planning or no planning ought to be as important as the need for inoculation against disease. Third, to better reach out to potential donees – youths, young adults, even middle-aged citizens – and encourage them to broach these conversations with their parents, grandparents, loved ones, we should utilise various channels, online and offline, again to reach out to these potential donees and get the message across. Fourth and, finally, IMDA has been training thousands of seniors in a range of digital skills like Singpass, WhatsApp and e-payment, through the Seniors Go Digital programme. It is a very successful programme. I hope that MSF can work with IMDA to incorporate LPAs and make it a standard offering in the Seniors Go Digital Programme, going forward.”
“But, more importantly, I think the feedback brings into focus a larger point that convenience needs to be seen against the other dimension of importance and I will explain this. I know of seniors who have 10, 15, 20 appointments with doctors each year. Almost all of these are attendances in person, although tele-consults are becoming more common. And yet, seniors do not find these in-person attendances with doctors excessively inconvenient because, ultimately, these are about their health and health is, of course, important; and so it should be with LPAs. The general point is this: while the Bill seeks to make the LPA-making process as convenient as possible, ultimately, our attitudes towards an LPA, the importance that we attach to an LPA, must really move to a higher plane. An LPA should be as important as good health, because having an LPA is part of planning well and living well. And having an LPA is part of overall good health and well-being. And so, just like good health, we need LPA adoption in Singapore to be much more widespread. Going forward, MSF expects a transaction volume of around 30,000 LPAs to be made a year, based on pre-COVID-19 trends. I think this is far too low a level of adoption. Thus, I would like to ask how is MSF planning to encourage much wider adoption of LPAs? How can we get many more to be aware of LPA, to be aware of mental capacity issues in the first instance, and how can we get many more to then recognise its due importance and actually take action to make an LPA? I have four suggestions. First, I would like to suggest that MSF partners with healthcare providers to open up a whole new frontier of LPA touchpoints in the community.”
“The move to make the LPA application and registration process electronic by default is a very significant move, a major shift from the practice today. I believe it will bring much more convenience to both donors and donees. And with the shift to digital, LPAs can be registered in just eight working days, compared to the more than three weeks currently. So, slightly half the time needed. No more wet ink signatures, no more multiple changing of hands of hard copy application forms. The proposed move is also in line with our broader digital Government strategy, allowing for much more frictionless transactions between citizen and Government at different stages in life, and for different life cycle needs. There may be concerns that the shift to electronic LPA making could inadvertently exclude the very seniors for whom this move is intended to bring convenience to, because our seniors might not be digitally savvy. On this, I am confident that the Government has created sufficient touchpoints and resources in the community, to make sure that seniors who need help with electronic LPA making, in particular, and digital transactions with the Government in general, will get the help that they need. In MSF’s public consultation exercise, I saw a suggestion to remove the need for in-person attendance before the Certificate Issuer (CI), in order to make the process even more convenient. In other words, make the process completely electronic, just between man and the system. The Bill has, however, retained the in-person attendance before a CI as a critical safeguard and I support this, as it would preserve confidence in the revamped process.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to start by saying that everyone – everyone – should pay attention to this Bill. Because this Bill matters, and should matter, to each one of us. The Mental Capacity Act has come a long way, since it was passed in Parliament in 2008 and came into effect in 2010. In the last 10 odd years, attitudes and mindsets on mental capacity have shifted in the right direction. More people are open to contemplating and planning for morbidity, and indeed, mortality. In other words, planning for disease, dying and death. Yet, it is estimated that one in 10 in Singapore aged 60 and above may get dementia. In advanced stages of the disease, a patient will lose the ability to make decisions for him- or herself, on his or her personal welfare, property, money and other affairs. And as our population ages, there will be more and more of such patients. The key point is, it can happen to any senior. And it is not just about seniors. It can happen to younger adults too. An unfortunate accident, for example, or a stroke, can rob a person of his or her ability to decide and act for him- or herself. And, so, loss of mental capacity can really happen to any one of us. Luck of the draw. Not a pleasant thought, but a necessary one. And, so, this is why every one of us should think about and plan for the loss of our own mental capacity. And after 11 years of the Mental Capacity Act being in force, I believe it is time for the practice and the implementation of the Act to move into a new phase, shift to a higher gear, and gather even more momentum. Therefore, the proposed amendments to this Act are very timely and I stand in full support of the Bill.”
“5 billion, or roughly 10% of recent annual development outlays. Given our credit rating and trends in long-term interest rates, I think this lower cap should be quite practicable. My third and final suggestion is to reconsider the qualifying limit of $4 billion for a nationally significant infrastructure project. I would like to ask the Ministry how narrow a range of projects it expects to qualify under the Act given the proposed limit of $4 billion. Would major healthcare infrastructure projects, for example, which usually cost around $1 billion to $2 billion each, make the cut? If not, why not, if we agree that the value of healthcare infrastructure, in terms of its social value, is certainly of national significance? Since we have the safeguards on total borrowing and total interests, I suggest we lower the qualifying limit for projects so that the scope of qualifying projects of national significance can be made more inclusive and more flexible. Mr Speaker, Sir, the above suggestions notwithstanding, I stand in support of the Bill.”
“Successive Governments had invested billions in defence, which is in turn absolutely vital to create the basic conditions for Singapore to thrive. They have invested significantly in research and the building up of our base economic capabilities and they have invested significantly in our social capital to strengthen our social safety nets. And so, we need to look beyond SINGA, beyond physical infrastructure, about successive Governments', including this Government's approach to long-term planning and development in general which has always been about the whole of society, the whole of nation. Sir, I have three suggestions on the proposed provisions of SINGA. My first suggestion is to lower the cap on total borrowings. The proposed cap of $90 billion in the Bill represents roughly 18% of GDP. This is quite significant, especially if a profligate government were to take over and on this, I echo Member Murali Pillai's point about us not knowing what will happen in the future. Ninety billion dollars is not quite enough to run the country to the ground, but certainly enough to cause a rather bad bout of indigestion. And so, to maintain public confidence, I suggest that the initial cap be lowered to $50 billion, which would represent roughly 10% of GDP. This lower cap would nonetheless give the Minister sufficient space to operate within the Act initially, and the Government can always come back to Parliament when there is a need for the borrowing cap to be raised beyond that. My second suggestion is to lower the cap for total interest payments. The proposed cap of $5 billion in interest payments alone represents almost a quarter of our entire development outlay per year in recent years. To signal prudence, I suggest that the initial cap be limited to $2.”
“Crucially, the Government is not looking to borrow for significant infrastructure because it lacks money. Quite the contrary, it is looking to borrow, so as to take full advantage of our fiscal strength and the expected low cost of debt capital going forward, instead of expending our existing financial resources for lumpy infrastructural outlays, when these resources could be deployed and invested to generate good returns for Singapore and Singaporeans. In other words, the Government's strategy of borrowing for infrastructure on the one hand and investing on the other is an astute, long-term strategy to fully leverage relatively low interest rates and avoid the opportunity cost of dipping into our own resources. The third observation I would make is this: beyond SINGA, beyond physical infrastructure, I think successive Governments have always made long-term plans and investment in our soft infrastructure, in human capital development, to ultimately improve the lives of Singaporeans. And it will continue be a constant work in progress but let us look at their track records. Through the decades, successive Governments had invested steadily and decisively in education, in skilling Singaporeans, because ultimately, that is our surest way to better opportunities and better lives. From $6.5 billion in the 2003 Budget, to $12 billion, $13 billion in recent years. And from a focus on 15, 16 years of formal schooling, to now learning for life. I think it is clear to see how much successive Governments had invested in education for Singaporeans. Successive Governments had also invested steadily in Singaporeans' health. From $2 billion in 2003, to $6 billion in 2013, to $12 billion in 2019. And of course, this Government has said that it would do even more going forward.”
“And in fact, container volumes did not really take off, until the next decade, in the 1980s. But finally, the long-term bet paid off, and since then, more long-term plans had been made and implemented for the Brani Terminal in the 1990s, Pasir Panjang Phase 1 and 2 in the 2000s, and Phase 3 and 4 in the last decade, such that we have the Port of Singapore that we have of today, after almost 60 years since the first plan for a container port was laid. In short, it was a decisive bet, a far-sighted decision and a constant focus on what is next and what is on the horizon that had allowed Singapore to move ahead and stay ahead of the competition. It was a similar story with Changi Airport. Plans were made in the 1970s, with the aim then already to be Asia's largest airport at that time of opening. A significant amount of land had to be reclaimed, and Terminal 1 opened in 1981. Plans were made in 1970s, Terminal 1 opened in 1981. Terminal 2 then opened in the next decade, in 1991. Followed by Terminal 3 in the decade after that, in 2008. And of course, Terminal 4, in the following decade, in 2016. So, decade after decade, a quantum leap each time, anchored on robust long-term planning and execution. Looking ahead, therefore, SINGA, I think, underlies this Government's continued commitment to a long-term, ambitious strategy for our national infrastructure, to secure our future and success well into SG100. My second observation about long-term planning is about this Government's commitment to a long-term fiscal strategy, to sustain and properly steward our strategic fiscal resources and to take full advantage of our strong fiscal standing, in the best long-term interest of Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I will make three observations and raise three suggestions on the proposed SINGA Bill. First, my three observations, which all relate to the larger point about long-term planning. Fundamentally, SINGA reflects this Government's commitment and orientation to plan for the long term and govern in the long-term interest of Singapore. So, my first observation is about this Government's long-term plan for our national infrastructure. There are very bold, ambitious plans, for Changi Airport Terminal 5 and a third runway, for a mega seaport in Tuas, for a massive expansion in our MRT rail network, and much more, all in turn to anchor Singapore's next phase of development, well into SG100. At the same time, SINGA has an eye on the Government's 100-year plan for our coastal defence infrastructure, to secure Singapore against the very long-term threat of rising sea levels posed by climate change. These long-term infrastructural plans are essential to our mission of continuing to improve the lives of Singaporeans, present and future. Indeed, our history clearly shows how we are the current beneficiaries of long-term plans and big bets in strategic infrastructure that previous Governments had made. For example, plans for the first container terminal in Singapore – and the region – located at Tanjong Pagar were made way back in the 1960s, when containerisation was not yet the norm, in fact far from it. The Government then had to borrow $45 million from the World Bank, a very handsome sum back then, and the container terminal was completed in 1972. The first vessel the Terminal received had 300 containers on board; compared to the more than 1,000 people gathered on shore to receive it. So, 300 containers, 1,000 people receiving that.”
“Chairman, COVID-19 has encouraged many arts and culture practitioners to pivot to digital means. Last April, the Jazz Association here held an online concert, Jass@Home. The performance and speakers, including Jeremy Monteiro, had recorded themselves separately and the concert was streamed on the association's FaceBook page and YouTube channel, amongst other platforms. I think digital and blended delivery models will continue to be relevant post-COVID-19, although it is still unclear as to where digital art forms would eventually land. Some see this as revolutionary, others do not view it as art at all. In terms of the art market and its digitalisation, I think blockchain holds some potential in creating a public platform that records and authenticates various transactions. A possibility is the trading of shares in high value artwork on an online platform, continuously and simultaneously, as a new mode of art investment. I would like to ask the Ministry how it intends to support the arts and culture sector in general to adopt more digital means and where it would make sense. Appreciating Our Local Art and Culture”
“We have done well in Singapore but we cannot take for granted that abuse would not happen here. We need to put in place comprehensive measures to ensure sports here remain safe for everyone – men and women, boys and girls, professional, school and community athletes. To this end, what else is MCCY doing to ensure safe sports in Singapore?”
“The act of creating art was a cathartic outlet for the workers, and so we ran as many sessions as we could; facilitators, translators, all in full PPEs. This, I think, is a simple but powerful example of how the arts can uplift all of us in our darkest hour. To this end, can MCCY share its plans to enhance our people's interest and participation in arts and culture and sports, going forward. Major Games Preparation 2021 is a busy sporting year, COVID-19 notwithstanding. Can MCCY update on Team Singapore's preparation for the Tokyo Olympic and Paralympics, and Hanoi's SEA Games and Para Games, and how can we ensure athletes' safety and well-being amidst travelling and training? As importantly, what are the plans to help athletes adjust to safety measures and reach peak condition at the right time? Safe Sport In 2018, the Safe Sports Commission was launched, with a mandate to guard against misconduct and abuse in the sports fraternity. There are many cautionary tales around the world. Larry Nassar, who was US gymnastics doctor, assaulted more than 100 female athletes over three decades, including gold medalists McKayla Maroney, Aly Raisman and Gabby Douglas. Survivors came out and gave heartwrenching testimonies. US gymnastics chief Steve Penny resigned too, on accusations of failing to act and quickly notify authorities on the abuse allegations. In US swimming on the other hand, more than a hundred coaches have been banned for life for working at affiliated clubs because of abuse allegations as well. But the Sports Federation had also been accused of failing to respond adequately to complaints, with some coaches allowed to evade accusers and authorities, moved to new cities and gained coaching jobs at new clubs where they found fresh victims.”
“Chairman, the arts and culture and sports sectors have been severly disrupted by COVID-19. The recent Singapore Tennis Open is a big step forward in our safe, gradual resumption of events and activities, but we far from out of the woods. Last year, MCCY introduced a broad range of support measures for the arts and culture and sports fraternities, for example, the Arts and Culture Resilience Package includes an operating grant of up to $75,000 for over 300 eligible organisations, whereas the sports Resilience Package supports critical players and preserves core capabilities and pipeline development in our eco-system through operating grants and allowances for coaches. I am glad that both packages would be extended in this year's Budget. Can MCCY share more details, please. Arts, Culture and Sports in Social Fabric Arts and culture and sports are key to our social fabric. Without these, we would be a poorer society. Well, actually, without arts and culture and sports, we would be a poor society, full-stop! So, arts and culture and sports are essential. They are essential to who we are as a society and COVID-19 has made this more salient, not less. Last year, I served in the Community Care Facility (CCF) for migrant workers who were confirmed COVID-19-positive. These workers were taken away from work, away from their dorms, away from their community and had to be in the CCFs until they recover. So, anxiety was high – about the disease, about jobs, about their families back home. Recognising this, a ground-up group partnered us to run art therapy sessions for the workers in the CCF. And it was a huge hit! Not only that, it made a real impact.”
“Chairman, our youth today are woke about mental health and well-being, not only for themselves but also in terms of how all of us as a society have a role to play to support and journey with those who are coping with mental health challenges. Our youths are woke about acting on mental health, acting on the reservoir of stigma that still persists today and woke about encouraging and making sure that all those who need help actually come forward to seek help. How can the Ministry better support our youths in their efforts to advance and champion mental well-being and, specifically, the Ministry has set up a Youth Mental Well-being Network? Can I ask what is the role of this Network, what has been its progress, especially in terms of outcomes and what are the Ministry's future plans for the Network? Youth Involvement in Community Initiatives”
“Chairman, I just realised it is quite apt that the mask I am wearing today has a 招财猫 on it because my next cut is about money and donations. Chairman, while donations for specific causes such as supporting those affected by the pandemic have increased, many other organisations have experienced a reduction in donations due to COVID-19. This could hamper the ability to deliver essential social services on the ground and Deputy Prime Minister Heng himself has noted that, and I quote, "Some charities even had to dip into their reserves to keep operations going. This affects the help that goes to those who need it." As such, what are the Ministry's plans to encourage more giving despite this on-going challenging times?”
“However, as Minister Desmond Lee said earlier today, we need to do more to ensure that both our existing and future buildings in Singapore are designed to conserve energy and water and minimise materials wastage. Minister also shared about the "80: 80: 80" by 2030 targets under the next edition of the Singapore Green Building masterplan. And as the Member Mr Henry Kwek said just now, the Government has also announced at COS last year that various stakeholders will be invited to co-create this next edition of the masterplan. In this regard, can the Ministry provide an update on its progress and what are the plans going forward? Transform Built Environment Industry”
“In particular, for prefabricated prefinished volumetric construction, or PPVC, and advanced precast concrete system, or APCS technologies, BCA is looking to raise the adoption rate to up to 70% by 2025. For IDD, I understand that there are over 35 public and private sector projects piloting this, such as the Health Sciences Authority Building and Rochester Commons at 19 Nassim by private developers. Can the Ministry share further updates on the progress of both DFMA and IDD within the construction ITM framework? And moving forward, what are the Government's plans to further drive industry transformation in these areas? And more specifically, what would this mean for Singaporeans in terms of the number and type of job opportunities? Mr Chairman, the built environment sector is made up of many interconnected stakeholders along the value chain, including developers, builders, consultants, contractors, facilities managers. Rather than a single firm or segment of the value chain transforming on its own, Deputy Prime Minister has announced the Growth and Transformation scheme for the entire built environment sector. Can the Ministry share further details and, again, what would it mean ultimately for job opportunities for Singaporeans? Supporting Built Environment Sector Buildings account for over 20% of Singapore's carbon emissions. To-date, more than 40% of our buildings have been greened under the BCA Green Mark certification scheme. Last December, Keppel Bay Tower became the first commercial building in Singapore to be certified Green Mark Platinum Zero Energy. Besides a low energy use index of less than 115 kilowatt hour per square metre per year, the building has all of its energy supplied through renewable sources, both on and offsite.”
“Chairman, the built environment sector has been hit hard by COVID. The Government has stepped forward decisively to help the sector tide over with support measures such as the Construction Support Package, which co-funds additional costs that construction companies have to incur to put in place safety measures, as well as the Job Support Scheme and its various extensions to help businesses in the sector defray salary costs for Singaporeans and protect jobs and capabilities in the sector. The Government has also committed to providing relief for some of the non-manpower costs that construction firms in public sector projects will incur due to the prolongation of projects and there has been legislation such as a universal extension of time to help all contracting parties bear fair share of the impact of project prolongation. So, a whole suite of measures. And yet the sector continues to face an uncertain outlook this year. In this light, how will the Government continue to support firms in the sector to recover in the near term? 5.00 pm Transforming Built Environment Sector At the same time, COVID-19 has shown we must transform the built environment industry to improve productivity and, importantly, reduce reliance on foreign manpower. Under the construction industry transformation map (ITM), the Government has identified two key areas. One, design for manufacturing and assembly, or DFMA; and, two, integrated digital delivery, or IDD. On DFMA, there has been encouraging progress. In 2019, the sector achieved a 31% DFMA adoption rate in terms of gross floor area. I also understand that amongst construction tenders to be called in the next two years, up to 85 of these projects, both public and private, will require DFMA technologies.”
“Chairman, can I take my three cuts together?”
“Chairman, the Minister for National Development has answered questions in this House on Community Care Apartments which is an assisted living typology pilot that is not just about housing but also the integration of care and social services. Can I ask the Ministry to share more details about its plans for future launches to keep up with market demand and, at the same time, because this is about care and social services as well, what are the Ministry's plans to ensure quality and sustainable development of services? Also, bearing in mind that the services can cost quite a significant amount, how would the Ministry ensure that applicants who need these services, applicants for whom the assisted living typologies clearly designed for but may, nonetheless, have difficulties affording such services, how would the Ministry ensure that such applicants would not be excluded from the scheme simply because of financial means? Assistance for Ethnic Integration Policy-affected Flat Sellers”
“Firstly, on point-to-point passenger transport and in this respect, I am applying the question to both taxis and private hire vehicles, as I expect their operating models to further converge in the future. It is worth noting that today, there are roughly 90,000 taxis and private hire vehicles on our roads. And so for both taxi and private hire businesses, what are the Ministry's strategies to work with these companies to drive sector wide adoption of electric vehicles? What are the key principles, and what are some of the key planks that the Ministry is studying and developing, and this could be in terms of licencing requirements or vehicle ownership regime or the mix of charging infrastructure and its availability across both residential and depot settings for example? Secondly, as e-commerce and the movement of goods on Singapore roads continue to grow, what other Ministry's plans to work with logistics businesses, to similarly drive electric vehicle adoption across the whole of that sector? Green Transport”
“Madam, there are few fundamental realities about what climate change means to Singapore and Singaporeans. First, it is a wicked problem. There is no silver bullet and solutions will necessarily be complex. Number two, there is a part for all Singaporeans – all of us to play and make a real difference, despite our size. We can make a difference in Singapore and we can make a difference for the world. Three, we need to start from young. To this end, the Singapore Green Plan aims to enhance environmental sustainability in schools and get at least 20% of schools here to be carbon neutral by 2030, with the rest to follow thereafter. The Singapore Green Plan also calls for us to nurture the next generation of Singaporeans with the will, knowledge and practical opportunities to protect and steward our environment for generations to come. Can MOE share further details about its plans to educate our students on sustainability and their role to co-create and jointly own the Singapore Green Plan, and indeed, our whole-of-society movement towards a greener future? Electric Vehicle Adoption We have a population of almost a million vehicles in Singapore last year, according to LTA. Assuming Net-Zero in the vehicle population going forward, we are still looking at almost a million vehicles in Singapore in 2030. Converting the entire population to electric vehicles will be a huge undertaking. In this light, the $30 million set aside in this year's Budget for electric vehicle related initiatives over the next five years, can only be a start. I would like to ask MOT, specifically about its plans for driving electric vehicle adoption for commercial use. There are two parts to this.”
“Madam, can I have your permission to take my two cuts together?”
“Chairman, the global digital economy today is worth almost $3 trillion. And within ASEAN, this is expected to grow to $197 billion by 2025. Data will be our most valuable resource and data connectivity infrastructure and enablers, both globally and in ASEAN, will be critical. There is a huge opportunity for Singapore to be both a thought leader and the trusted hub for secure, seamless cross-border data flows. Can the Ministry provide an update on its work, both globally and regionally on: number one, frameworks for data management including data categorisation and controls, as a common language for all parties in the digital economy; and, two, mechanisms for cross-border data flows to drive business innovation? Chairman, on a related note, cyberspace has become a global common. Can the Ministry update on how Singapore is shaping the international governance of cyberspace, just as how we continue to shape international norms in the governance of air and sea spaces? Finally, in 2019, Singapore launched the model AI governance framework at the World Economic Forum in Davos. The framework contributes to the global discourse on AI ethics by translating principles into practical recommendations for organisations to deploy AI responsibly. On this note, can the Ministry update on the framework and how it would continue to support our national AI strategy? Postal Sector Transformation”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two supplementary questions for Minister Chan. The first is in terms of the timing of the announcement by JTC on 16 February, can the Minister provide an explanation on that timeline? The discovery of the erroneous clearance was on 13 January and it would seem the announcement came after a member of the public – a private citizen – first shared about this on social media. The second question is to just pay recognition to the fact that this land is ultimately for agri-technology. And so, does the Minister have any assessment of whether the delivery of this capacity and industrial development will be delayed as a result of this incident?”
“It is such a stark paradox, but one that bears constant reminding that as the world went into lockdown last year, and as we entered our own circuit breaker, the workers that continued going to work, the workers that could not work from home, the workers that basically kept our world going were so often the low-wage workers providing essential services. So, as a society, I think it is high time – high time as COVID-19 rages on – that, we, not the Government, but we – as consumers, as a people – do what is right, what is just, and show our willingness to pay a fairer level for our low-wage workers' services. Madam, let me conclude. We have an opportunity to shape the post-COVID-19 society that we want to be, transform our compact, transform how we commit to caring for one another. COVID-19 has fundamentally upended how we value things in life, reshuffled what truly matters, and redefined how we look at the world, each other, and ourselves. We can – we must – ride on COVID-19 to emerge as a society that is ever more vested in one another's success, where those with more are ever more willing to put in their treasures, talent and time for those with less, where the hallmark of success is to pay it forward, and to help others do well and be well. In this way, we can emerge stronger, together, as a thriving democracy of deeds. Madam, I stand in firm support of this Budget. [Applause.]”
“In this way, I think every Singaporean can have his or her shot to become the fullest version of himself or herself in life. Madam, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] COVID-19 has allowed the world, Singapore and the individual to undergo a major change. In fact, we should capture the opportunity and transform. In the area of healthcare, I fully support the move to raise the salaries of nurses and other healthcare workers. After all, salary cost is a key component of the healthcare industry. It will be worth pondering over how the framework of Government subsidies can adjust to it, and how we can rebalance the allocation of subsidies within the framework. In terms of supporting vulnerable families, I hope that ComLink will be upgraded to become a platform for future community service operations, integrating community services and resources in a holistic manner. In conclusion, I hope that our social compact will become stronger and stronger, and this is probably one of the fundamental meanings of emerging stronger in a post-COVID-19 world. (In English): Madam, in Singapore, we say the best welfare is a job. In this light, a key part of our compact must also be about how we, as a society, could enable and sustain good jobs, and good salaries, for our lowest wage workers. And to frame this properly, I think it is not so much about reskilling and pivoting these workers to new industries, but about helping them to do better within their sectors. To this end, I agree that the expanded Progressive Wage Model (PWM), when conditions allow, would be a key plank. But at the same time, a big part of the basic equation here, I think, must simply be for all of us to recognise and pay more for low-wage workers' services.”
“At the same time, we need to double down on holistic support for the entire family at the bottom, so that we help parents and care-givers to do well, and do better, even as they continue to do their best for their children. There is a whole range of needs – housing, jobs, food, physical and mental health – with complex interdependencies, and we need to coordinate more to address these needs. So, I strongly support the planned expansion of Community Link (ComLink), from 1,000 families in the pilot phase, to 14,000 families, and, hopefully, to many thousands more eventually. Just yesterday, I spoke to a CEO about corporate giving. I explained the gist of ComLink to him, and his first response was, "Oh, this is huge". So, his corporate instincts told him so immediately. Indeed, this is huge. ComLink has the potential to be the platform that transforms our social service sector, the galaxy that lifts all agencies and partners up to a higher plane and pulls everyone closer together, with its gravitational force. And as a society, I hope we can all help make ComLink succeed quickly. In Singapore, our approach has always been Many Helping Hands. In fact, we need more helping hands, going forward. But we also need one plan. Many helping hands, one plan, because, ultimately, it is about one family, the same lives. Madam, an ever fairer and more just society in Singapore should be one that keeps progressing, keeps advancing, but one where we all find it in ourselves to look back, reach out, pull fellow Singaporeans along, and on a platform, an impact multiplier, that coordinates and weaves all our efforts together. I hope this "social operating system" can become a core capability, at the whole-of-society level, for Singapore to emerge stronger.”
“And so, these are tough choices, but choices that we, as a maturing society, must continue to make. In short, to secure the healthcare dimension in our future social compact, I think we need to flatten the cost curve, keep a lid on total subsidies and, within this, distribute subsidies judiciously across means and settings, and, number four, create better health and care outcomes for all Singaporeans, and, five, all these on the basis of a sound economy. We need a refreshed consensus on how we can all lean in to make this happen. Madam, let me speak next about strengthening social service delivery for Singaporeans with less in life. We have decided, fundamentally, that we will not impose a cap – a ceiling on our progress as a society – that the top, and the middle, will continue to grow as fast, and go as far, as they can. Our central task, therefore, must be to do our level best to help the bottom, especially children at the bottom, to level with their peers. For every tuition class, every sport, coding or other passion that their peers pursue because they can afford to, we have to help the young at the bottom level with their peers, as much as possible. Therefore, I support the Government’s commitment to intervene actively and intervene more in early life. I support the additional $0.2 billion set aside for the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA), to further develop quality and affordable childcare for every Singaporean child, and I especially look forward to the expansion of KidSTART, so that more children at the bottom can get a holistic and sustained uplift, starting from early in life, even before birth.”
“6% from last year, to roughly 2019 levels, and corporate income tax would grow 8% compared to 2019 before COVID-19, and even Net Investment Returns Contribution would go up 7.8% from last year. Can the Deputy Prime Minister clarify the basis for these projections amidst the severe economic contraction that we experienced last year? My final point on healthcare subsidies is this. In the aggregate, we must keep the growth in total subsidies to a sustainable pace because, ultimately, things do add up. This Budget draws on past reserves for a second year running. And as many Members have noted, eventually, we want to start replenishing our reserves. And so, we must be very prudent about how much our total outlay in healthcare subsidies should grow in the years ahead. Now, if costs grow faster than fiscal revenue, then healthcare subsidies might need redistribution because, ultimately, the pie is finite. And some of us might get less subsidies, in order that those who need these the most can continue to get the right level of support. At the same time, we should review how subsidies could also be redistributed across various settings of care so that we can further channel care to each right setting and enhance care continuity across settings. I repeat the call I made in my maiden speech for the Government to invest more deeply in Intermediate and Long-Term Care (ILTC) so that we go beyond basic to dignified care for Singaporeans who need such care. Our nursing homes ought to be more home than nursing. And I believe that we, as a society, support such a basic direction. But more subsidies for this sector may mean less subsidies for acute and specialist care in hospitals, for example.”
“So, while I cheered at the plans to enhance salaries in public healthcare, we need to recognise that manpower is a key driver of healthcare costs and, ultimately, any salary enhancement must mean that subsidies and other financing tools must somehow keep up. If we can all intuitively understand and support this, it will be a good example of how we, as a society, can continue to evolve our consensus and do what is right and fair. All these, in turn, would mean that we need to raise more revenue. And this is my third point. Already, GST will increase, sooner or later. But GST, fundamentally, relies on a robust consumption base. This is why I support the Budget’s laser-sharp focus on investing in our economy: investing in recovery from COVID-19; investing in industry transformation; and investing in our people. In his Budget Statement, the Deputy Prime Minister mentioned Xnergy, a local start-up in contactless charging. In fact, one of the co-founders of Xnergy is my resident, and I could sense the absolute energy as he talks about his team and his business. For me, it is a glimpse into our economic possibilities, where Singapore is the place to create the future, for the world, yielding exciting roles for Singaporeans and, importantly, generating the means for us to better care for one another, as a society. And, so, there is a direct link between our economic success and social objectives, and the economy must continue to be a basic parameter as we think and talk about our social compact going forward. On this note, I like to ask: the Government projects that GST collections this year would recover 14.”
“Within our social compact, the central question for the future of healthcare is this: How – and how much – would we, as a people, continue to care for one another, in sickness and infirmity? One of my residents’ parent came to Singapore to visit before COVID-19 and could not go back home since last year. The parent declined in health, went in and out of hospital here, as a non-Singaporean and eventually passed on. The hospital bills came up to five digits, even in a C class ward. I think his experience shows vividly the real cost of healthcare, and the real difference that Government subsidies for Singaporeans, at the outset of care, makes. And, so, subsidies must continue to be a central feature of healthcare here, in order to keep it affordable for Singaporeans, but the challenge is how might we, as a society, keep these subsidies going, for the maximum benefit of all Singaporeans? Let me make four points. First, we have to try and contain cost per capita – in other words, the cost to care for each Singaporean, on average. This is a difficult task, as ever more tests and therapies rapidly become standard in care. So, we need to continue making tough decisions on standard versus non-standard therapies and care modalities. Ultimately, we all want the best care for ourselves, and our loved ones. But we need to also keep a firm eye on value and effectiveness. And this would only work, if all of us, as a society, embrace this basic principle. Even so, I think it is inevitable that costs per capita will rise, and this is my second point. One reason is the need to duly recognise healthcare professionals for their noble and very hard work.”
“Mdm Deputy Speaker, every Budget is a statement of intent on our social compact. Today, I would like to talk about how our social compact might look like as we emerge stronger, together from COVID-19. First, on Healthcare, which is a top concern for Singaporeans, especially as we get older. Indeed, healthcare costs for us, as a society, are escalating. This year, the operating expenditure for health is estimated to be $17.4 billion, compared to an estimated $11.7 billion last year, and $10 billion in 2019. This makes healthcare the highest Head of Expenditure in 2021, compared to third highest in previous years, after Defence and Education. A big reason for this is our on-going fight against COVID-19, with close to $5 billion allocated to the COVID-19 Package. And I think this $5 billion is absolutely vital ammunition, for testing, tracing and vaccination. It bears reminding that there are already 2.5 million confirmed COVID-19 deaths around the world to date, with many more unreported. In Singapore, the toll is 29 deaths. The Government has done well in managing COVID-19 here so far, and the COVID-19 Package will give the Government the means to continue keeping all of us safe in 2021. But beyond COVID-19, we might as well start getting used to healthcare being the highest expenditure item, and start getting used to numbers like $17 billion because, in due time, even with COVID-19 behind us, this would be our fiscal reality. For this year, already, $0.5 billion more has been set aside – for more patient subsidies as three polyclinics open, for the ramp-up of Woodlands Campus, for recruitment of manpower into these new facilities, and for MediShield Life premium support, as well as other forms of grants and financial assistance to Singaporeans.”
“On the other, having a calibrated way to also enhance public security and safety. I thought long and hard about this matter and, ultimately, after considering the Minister's clarifications, my personal views and by listening to the whole range of views amongst my residents, I am prepared to support this Bill.”