Yip Hon Weng
Singapore
“But we must also keep building our trust. It is the only infrastructure a small country cannot afford to lose. Every generation since Independence has earned our place in the world. Our responsibility is to see that the next generation is given the chance to do the same.”
“It can reinforce Singapore's role as a trusted financial centre, a gateway to Asia and a platform for long-term growth. But at the end of the day, we should also be clear about how success will be measured in practical terms. How much incremental daily trading volume are we seeking to generate?”
“I thank the Minister of State for his reply. While the US dollar remains dominant, some economists have suggested that the global monetary system may gradually become more fragmented and multi-polar over time.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his reply. Given reports that some firms are slowing workforce expansion due to cost pressures due to the situation in the Middle East, has MOM observed any corresponding shift in firms hiring preferences between local workers and our foreign workforce?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her reply. Many Singaporeans are already facing rising premiums year after year. As we have seen recently, even with cheaper riders, base premiums continue increasing. So, households may still have to pay more overall.”
“Because this is not just a technology transition, it is a workforce transition. The establishment of the Tripartite Jobs Council is an important step in ensuring that this alignment happens in practice. Technology will move. Markets will adapt. But we must be clear about the future we are building.”
The complete record
Every one of 873 lines we hold for Yip Hon Weng, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 18.
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her answer. How would the new US pharmaceutical tariffs affect our healthcare system, particularly medicine availability and drug pricing? Are Singaporeans seeking care likely to face higher costs and will the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI), together with the Ministry of Health and Health Sciences Authority, conduct a formal assessment of near-term risks to common medicines and how tariff costs may pass through to consumers?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her response. Many Yio Chu Kang seniors who have been faithfully paying their premiums are now worried that with the sudden rule changes, like the new pre-authorisation requirements, it could disrupt their ongoing treatments. Could the Minister of State explain what safeguards are in place to ensure that existing policyholders, especially seniors who are in the midst of treatments, are not disadvantaged by such unilateral insurer decisions? And secondly, some of these residents have also asked me if an insurer delays or rejects a pre-authorisation without good reason, what recourse do they have? And I hear from the Minister of State that fee benchmarks are being published, but will the Ministry also consider publishing data on insurer performance, such as approval rates, turnaround times, appeal outcomes, so that Singaporeans can see whether insurers are acting in their best interests?”
“This is our moment to ride out the storm. We must move with confidence, clarity and courage – together. Mr Speaker, Sir, let us rise, not as individuals, not as separate communities, but as one Singapore. Let us SURPASS – Secure, United, Resilient – and ensure Singapore's safe passage through turbulent waters, today and for generations to come, and let us do so with a "we first" spirit, put our people, our families, our nation at the hearts of every step. When we act with purpose, stand together and refuse to be passive, there is nothing we cannot achieve. And let us remember even a small state like ours has agency, if we are careful and united. Our credibility rests on three things: our economic success, our ability to deter threats, and our consistent, confident diplomacy. In a world of shifting tides, Singapore must always strive to be useful but never made use of. Finally, let me acknowledge the men and women who make our defence and diplomacy possible – our soldiers, National Servicemen (NSmen), diplomats and public officers who carry the weight of safeguarding Singapore every day. We honour their service. I support the Motion.”
“We have seen how resilient communities, rooted in solidarity, form the foundation of national strength. Through it all, defence, diplomacy and community must be sustainable, guided by careful planning and prudent stewardship. Singapore is like a small vessel sailing in waters where giants move. Supertankers shift course, sometimes collide. If we drift without care, we risk being capsized. There are strategic dangers if great powers disengage and economic dangers if rivalries fracture supply chains. Survival is never passive. To endure, we must see risks early, seize opportunities fast and equip our ship with radar, engines, reserves and most importantly, a disciplined and united crew. Foreign policy is also personal. Recently, a Yio Chu Kang family came to see me at my meet-the-people session (MPS). A member had faced a serious road incident abroad. Delays in medical care, challenges with local authorities. MFA and our High Commission stepped in. Guidance, support and access were provided. The family returned safely. I met them recently during my community walkabouts. They shared with me that they were very thankful for the consular support. This is what foreign policy really means: the safety of citizens, the security of families, the assurance that Singapore will stand by her people, because foreign policy is not only grand strategy. It is the price of groceries, the security of jobs, the reliability of services. The assurance that when you are in trouble abroad, your country will not leave you behind. So, when history looks back, in 2035, 2050 or 2065 when we celebrate SG100, let it record that we did not shrink from the challenge. We rose above it. We secured our sovereignty, held fast to our unity, and built resilience across generations.”
“Foreign policy is a long game. It requires credibility backed by defence, curiosity about the world and resilience at home. Mr Speaker, Sir, security is not only about the nation. It is also about the resilience of our communities in Singapore. In my constituency Yio Chu Kang, I see how strong communities make strong nations. Dementia-friendly walkways. Food rescue programmes. These may seem small compared to geopolitics, but they are not. They build trust. They build solidarity. And solidarity is the true bedrock of resilience. Here, I must commend the Ministry of Health (MOH) on Healthier SG and Age Well SG. As Vice-Chair of the Health GPC, I have seen first-hand how these initiatives are not just policies on paper, but create real impact on the ground. Preventive health, functional screenings, community fitness programmes and mental health outreach are transforming the way Singaporeans think about health. They bring care into the neighbourhood, where people live, know each other and can support one another. This is where resilience takes root – in the neighbour who checks in, in the resident who volunteers. Yet, we must also address challenges to jobs and social mobility. Rising costs, low birth rates and an ageing population test our resilience. Still, most Singaporeans believe hard work can improve their circumstances. That optimism is not just individual hope. It is our collective strength. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, we have reflected on shifting tides of geopolitics and unpredictable challenges. We have looked at warfare today, from drones and cyberattacks to AI-enabled systems and the need for an SAF that is ready and resilient. We have considered foreign policy that is principled and practical, open but credible, designed to deliver for our people.”
“But ambition must remain sustainable. At around 3% of gross domestic product (GDP), our defence budget is prudent. The challenge is to sustain strength, while keeping it affordable. Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, our foreign policy must adapt just as quickly. We do not choose sides. We choose principles. We stay open. We stay credible. We stay constructive. Principles are like a compass to set our long-term direction. Deepening ties with both the US and China demands careful, calibrated messaging. Openness to one must never be misread as turning away from the other. Ultimately, all foreign policy is domestic policy. When big nations clash, Singaporeans feel it – in the price of groceries, the security of jobs, the reliability of essential services. Our external relationships are directly tied to stability at home. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) remains our cornerstone. But consensus paralysis is real. Beyond trade and digital frameworks, we must explore institutional innovations that enable action – maybe not qualified majority voting in select domains – so that ASEAN is not paralysed by gridlock. As the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) expands its missions in Africa and Latin America, the intent is right. But we must ensure that resources are not overstretched. Missions should deliver trade, partnerships and strategic footholds, not just symbolic presence. Most importantly, diplomacy is about people. Personal relationships. Cultural understanding. The ability to pick up the phone, call a counterpart and have trust built over years. That is invaluable. In our own region, many of the old leaders have passed on. We must invest in the new generation of connections. We must have people who can sit at tables, share meals and build trust beyond formalities.”
“First, Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry of Defence's (MINDEF’s) commitment to deepen ties with partners is vital. Strengthening ties with existing allies is good, but we must avoid over-dependence. We must also cultivate diversified relationships, even with non-traditional partners in the Global South, for example, emerging economies that share an interest in regional stability. At the same time, we have to carefully manage risks from states who may not always share our worldview and whose ambition may not always align with a rules-based order. Meanwhile, warfare is changing. Cheap drones. Cyberattacks. AI-enabled systems. These are not weapons of tomorrow. These are weapons of today. The Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) must not just keep pace. It must set the pace. But it is not enough to buy the most advanced systems. What matters is whether we can sustain and replenish them. A handful of elite systems may not decide the outcome. What will matter is scale and speed – tens, hundreds, even thousands of resilient systems that can be replaced and deployed quickly. This is where our defence industry plays a role. ST Engineering has shown what is possible with reliability and innovation. We must build on that and encourage more to innovate for the next generation. National Service is evolving. We are redesigning vocations, harnessing civilian expertise. That is good. But we must also retain high-value technical talent, rather than lose them once trained. Total Defence volunteerism is expanding, but participation alone is not enough. We must measure outcomes in terms of readiness and trust, not just headcount. Let us be ambitious. Our defence industry can provide high-value jobs, strengthen technological sovereignty and be a source of national pride.”
“If unmanaged, this could harden into greater confrontation. Singapore cannot sit back. We must prepare. And preparation begins with recognising this fundamental truth: Singapore’s security rests on two pillars – defence and diplomacy. One without the other leaves us vulnerable. Defence gives credibility to diplomacy. Diplomacy ensures defence is well-positioned. Together, they form the twin pillars of our survival. I thank President Tharman Shanmugaratnam for his clear articulation of the challenges ahead. His words remind us: this is not business as usual. I speak today not only as the Chair of the Defence and Foreign Affairs Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC), but also as the Member of Parliament (MP) of Yio Chu Kang. From one vantage point, I see the shifting sands of geopolitics. From another, I hear the everyday anxieties of Singaporean families – about jobs, about costs, about our children’s future. These are not separate conversations. They are one and the same story. Mr Speaker, Sir, Southeast Asia, once seen as an oasis of stability, is more fragile than we would like to admit. Border disputes simmer. Political transitions in our neighbours bring forth opportunity and uncertainty. Globally, wars in Europe and the Middle East shake supply chains and energy security. Great power rivalry between the US and China sharpens by the day. Even in advanced democracies, societies fracture not with bombs or tanks, but with inequality, disinformation and digital disruption. If foreign policy begins at home, then the lesson is clear: when nations grow divided inside, they stumble abroad. And when they stumble, the shockwaves ripple across the world. For Singapore, whose survival depends on stability abroad and cohesion at home, the stakes could not be higher.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir. I begin by declaring that I work in a global investment firm with investments in defence-related companies. In the opening chapter of the Chinese novel, "Romance of the Three Kingdoms", we find a line that carries through the ages: "天下大势，分久必合，合久必分". Great powers come together after a period of fracture; and divide after a period of unity. History bears out this pattern. Empires rise and fall. Regions fracture, only to converge again under new banners. The map of the world is never still. It is like the tide – advancing, retreating, flowing. For small, open nations like ours, the world today is not only uncertain. It is like a gathering storm at an inflection point, where old certainties collapse into turbulence. The assumptions that once held steady – open trade, safe sea lanes, shared global norms – can no longer be taken for granted. Supertankers and fleets of all sizes are shifting course, switching lanes and creating waves. For a small vessel like Singapore, the challenge is not to command the seas. It is to chart a careful passage through them. This inflection point is not only geopolitical; it is economic and technological. The British Empire was powered by coal. America’s rise was fuelled by oil. The next era will be built on electrification – from renewable grids to new storage systems. The demand for coal has levelled off. Oil may be nearing its peak. Electrification is still in its early stages, but will rise sharply in the years ahead. Demand will shift. And the nations that adapt will lead. As Ray Dalio warns, we are entering a period of “multi-dimensional conflict” – spanning economics, technology and geopolitics. He notes that the United States’ (US') relative position has declined, while China’s rise has been remarkable.”
“I mean, for small issues or incidents that may not be considered as bullying, but students report it to teachers and teachers may be overwhelmed by some of these small incidents.”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his reply. I have two supplementary questions raised by educators. Could the Minister share what safeguards are in place to prevent over-reporting of false positives that may overwhelm teachers and dilute attention from serious cases? And secondly, in strengthening anti-bullying measures, how does the Ministry strike a balance between protecting victims and helping students build resilience to manage everyday small disagreements or teasing that may not amount to bullying?”
“I thank the Minister and the Senior Minister of State for the Ministerial Statement. I have two clarifications. Singapore's aid to Gaza demonstrates our compassion for Palestinians. It also signals our values as a principle of small states. My first clarification. How effective has Singapore's humanitarian assistance been in meeting the needs of Gaza? My second clarification is this: the International Association of Genocide Scholars has declared that Israel's actions in Gaza are consistent with the legal definition of genocide. Will the Government call Israel out for committing genocide?”
“I thank the Minister for his reply. With the Johor Economic Zone moving closer to reality and the planned seamless MRT link between Singapore and Johor Bahru, does the Government anticipate an increased risk of illicit substances, such as vapes, being trafficked across our borders and what enhanced detection capabilities does ICA have to detect vapes or related components at our checkpoint? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. So, indeed, the Johor Bahru-Singapore Rapid Transit System (RTS) Link will facilitate the movement of convenience between Singapore and Johor Bahru. With this convenience, you can anticipate some travellers who may want to take advantage of the ease of movement to smuggle in contraband. As such, we have an operational response plan in place where we will enhance the way we do things at the RTS, looking at some of the perceived gaps and at the same time, we want to make sure that it does not inconvenience the travellers as much. So, we will deploy CNB and Police officers there, together with the ICA, to see how we can not only apprehend the persons doing this but also to ensure to give the feeling that it is safe and secure at our borders.”
“It is built through smart policies that protect consumers without crushing businesses. It is built through clear, simple rules that everyday people can understand and follow. And it is built through strong enforcement because a law that is not enforced is just words on a page. This Bill takes us in the right direction. It streamlines enforcement, consolidates oversight and modernises how we regulate product safety. But we must get the details right because details matter. We must ensure that small businesses are supported, not drowned in red tape. We must ensure that every consumer knows exactly where to go when they need help. We must give CCCS the resources to do its job effectively, decisively and fairly. And we must prepare for the future because consumer protection is not just about physical goods anymore. Mr Speaker, Sir, this is not just about regulations or the regulatory body. This is about confidence – confidence that when you buy a product, you are not gambling with your safety; confidence that businesses, big and small, are held to the same fair standard; confidence that when the Government sets a rule, it is enforced consistently, transparently and in the public interest. I support the Bill.”
“How will CCCS coordinate with agencies like HSA and the National Environment Agency to prevent enforcement overlaps or if the matters overlap, ensure adequate cooperation without waste of resources? Will there be clear service standards, ensuring that unsafe product complaints are swiftly addressed? How many staff will move over from Enterprise Singapore to preserve the expertise? Will there be lay-offs? A law is only as strong as its enforcement. And without the right expertise and resources, regulation risks becoming just another layer of red tape. Lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, we are moving into an era where digital goods and online marketplaces play an equally important role in consumer safety. Will CCCS have the power to regulate unsafe digital products, like smart home devices with cybersecurity risks? How will CCCS ensure that overseas e-commerce platforms comply with our product safety laws? Should we hold marketplace platforms accountable for hosting and selling unsafe products? And as artificial intelligence (AI)-generated content becomes more common, should we update our laws to include misleading AI-generated product claims? The future of consumer protection is not just about what we buy in stores. It is about what we buy online, in apps, and in the cloud. Consumer protection in the 21st century must evolve beyond physical goods because today's unsafe products are just as often virtual as they are tangible. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, at the heart of this Bill lies a promise – a promise that when people in Singapore buy something, they can trust that it is safe, that it is fair, and that if something goes wrong, help is just a step away. But trust does not happen by itself. It is built.”
“We must ensure that SMEs are guided, not simply penalised by additional regulations. This is especially pertinent as SMEs may operate on thin margins. The cost of compliance due to a few rotten apples may erode the profits that the honest SMEs may have. Second, Mr Speaker, Sir, we need to ensure clarity in reporting for consumer safety. The everyday consumer – the busy parent, the elderly resident, the working adult – just wants to know one thing: if I buy something unsafe, where do I go for help? Right now, some people report to Enterprise Singapore's CPSO, while others turn to CCCS for unfair trade practices. Moving forward, how will CCCS ensure that every consumer in Singapore knows exactly where to go when they need help? Will CCCS introduce a one-stop digital reporting platform to make it easier for consumers to flag unsafe products? How can we speed up product recalls? Can we adopt international best practices, such as real-time public alerts, for hazardous products? Will the products covered by CCCS be limited to non-consumables, or will there be overlaps with other Government agencies like the Health Sciences Authority (HSA)? Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, regulations only work if they are enforced properly. Right now, CCCS is excellent at enforcing competition laws, but product safety regulation is an entirely different challenge. This is not just about watching out for monopolies. It is about testing, certifying, and recalling products that could harm people if they fail. So, does CCCS have the budget and manpower to ensure strong enforcement? Will they work with third-party labs to verify product safety, or will they depend solely on businesses' self-declarations?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this Bill consolidates product safety and legal metrology functions under CCCS. This move will reshape the regulatory landscape for businesses and consumers alike. At the heart of this Bill lies a fundamental question: how do we strike the right balance between protecting consumers and ensuring that businesses, especially small ones, can continue to thrive? Let us be clear: consumer protection is not just about making sure products are safe. It is about trust – trust that when you buy something, it works as promised; trust that businesses play fair; trust that when things go wrong, the system will act, quickly and decisively. I have several clarifications on the Bill. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] First, Mr Speaker, Sir, I have concerns about the impact of this Bill on small businesses and SMEs. Regulations should not be a burden that crushes them under mountains of paperwork. We must not build a system so rigid that it punishes those who are simply trying to make an honest living. In time, CCCS will likely introduce new legislations. When the time comes, will there be Government assistance like transitional support for SMEs so that they are not caught off guard by new compliance requirements? How will CCCS ensure that regulations are practical and not just punitive? Does CCCS have the specialised expertise to regulate product safety effectively, given that its primary focus has always been competition law? And most importantly, will small businesses have a seat at the table when these new policies are shaped? Because, Mr Speaker, Sir, this is not just about writing laws. It is about writing them in a way that the people who live with them every day can comprehend and follow. Consumer protection should not come at the cost of business survival.”
“This underscores the urgent need for enhanced due diligence and stricter enforcement. To ensure this Bill achieves its intended goals, we must adopt a balanced approach. First, we need targeted support for small estate agents so they are not disproportionately burdened by compliance costs. Second, enforcement must be robust and proactive, not just a box-ticking exercise. Finally, consumer education must be strengthened, so that buyers, sellers and landlords understand their responsibilities in preventing financial crime. This Bill is a critical step in the right direction, but its effectiveness will depend on thoughtful implementation and ongoing industry engagement. Let us work together to ensure that while we strengthen our defences against financial crime, we do not unintentionally weaken the competitiveness and sustainability of our real estate industry. I urge the Minister to take these concerns into serious consideration and to put in place the necessary safeguards and support measures. Let us send a clear message that Singapore remains a place of integrity, fairness and accountability in real estate transactions. I support the Bill.”
“Finally, how will the success of this Bill's enforcement be measured? What key performance indicators (KPIs) will be used to assess its effectiveness? Is success determined by the number of fines collected, the number of cases prosecuted or, more importantly, by a reduction in real estate-related financial crime? Third, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, addressing financial crime in the real estate sector is not solely the responsibility of estate agents. Consumers, including buyers, sellers, landlords, tenants and developers, must also be aware of their role in preventing illicit transactions. While estate agencies must enforce strict controls, property owners themselves have a duty to conduct their own checks and declarations, particularly in cases like harboring illicit funds. A holistic approach is needed. The policy should incorporate strong consumer education efforts to ensure that all parties involved in a real estate transaction understand their responsibilities. Hence, what measures are in place to enhance consumer education about financial crime risks in real estate transactions? How will the Government ensure their buyers, sellers and landlords are equipped with the knowledge to detect and report suspicious activities? In conclusion, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the need for stronger anti-money laundering measures within the real estate sector is undeniable. Singapore has witnessed several high-profile cases highlighting vulnerabilities in our current system. The 2023 money laundering case, involving $3 billion in assets, stands as a stark reminder of the scale and sophistication of these activities. The impact on the real estate market was significant, with at least 105 properties facing prohibition of disposal orders, and at least 54 properties liquidated.”
“Similarly, will resources be made available to smaller firms when dealing with foreign clients? How can we ensure that they are able to perform due diligence without being penalised due to limited means? What safeguards are in place to prevent large firms from passing on their increased compliance costs to smaller subcontractors or resellers, thereby exacerbating the burden? Finally, have thorough industry consultations been conducted, specifically with small and independent estate agents, to assess whether the burden imposed by this Bill is truly proportional to their capacity and the risks they face? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my second concern pertains to the practical challenges of enforcement and the risk of achieving mere paper compliance without genuine oversight. While robust regulations are essential, they are meaningless without effective mechanisms to ensure adherence. If enforcement is weak or overly focused on procedural matters, bad actors will inevitably find ways to circumvent the rules, while legitimate businesses continue to shoulder the burden of compliance. We cannot allow this law to become a paper tiger – compliance on paper must translate into effective enforcement in practice. To this end, does CEA currently possess the necessary manpower and specialised expertise to effectively detect sophisticated money laundering schemes, given their complexity and evolving nature? Or will enforcement remain largely reactive, relying on reports rather than proactive investigation? How does this Bill, beyond increasing reporting requirements, actively improve the detection of real estate transactions linked to illicit funds? What proactive measures are being implemented to identify deceitful activities and prevent them before they occur?”
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of this Bill. Strengthening our defences against financial crime is a critical national priority. I commend the Government's efforts to align our regulations with the recommendations of FATF. This Bill represents a significant step forward in safeguarding our financial system and housing market from exploitation. However, while I applaud the intent behind this legislation, I have several clarifications. First, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the amendments may create an unintended burden on small estate agencies and independent agents, which operate on tight margins and often lack the resources of larger firms. The additional compliance costs imposed by this Bill, particularly regarding counterparty due diligence under clause 6, section 44BA, could prove disproportionately challenging. If these smaller players are overburdened, it could stifle their growth or even drive them out of business entirely. This would reduce competition and limit consumer choice within the already big-company-dominated real estate market. In addition, the lack of expertise and resources among smaller estate agents could result in higher compliance costs. This may ultimately be passed on to consumers or salespeople. We must ensure that this legislation does not inadvertently create an uneven playing field, where only large firms have the capacity to absorb these new obligations. As such, regarding clause 6, section 44BA, how does the Government plan to help smaller agencies and independent agents meet these new compliance requirements without incurring excessive costs? Will there be financial support or training subsidies available to smaller agencies to ensure they do not unintentionally fall afoul of these new regulations?”
“One day, when history looks back at this moment, we would not be judged by the regulations we wrote but by the lives we touched, the dignity we restored and the care we gave. Let us get this right. I support the Bill.”
“A set of rules is not the same as a system that truly cares. That is why we must go further. First, we must plan for the future. Singapore is ageing. The demand for care will only grow. We need a roadmap, not just for today, but for the next 10 to 20 years, so that every Singaporean in need has a place to turn to. Second, quality care must be more than just words on a page. We need minimum staffing ratios so that every resident gets the attention they deserve. We need real mental health support for caregivers because care must go beyond just physical needs. And we must value and support our caregivers because if we do not care for them, they will not be able to care for our loved ones. Third, transparency builds trust. If a home is failing, families deserve to know. If the Government needs to intervene, there must be clear, objective rules on when and how that happens. We need public accountability, real oversight and a complaint system that works. And fourth, we must protect the dignity and rights of residents. No one should feel like they have lost their freedom or their voice just because they need care. No one should feel like they are trapped in an institution when they should feel at home. This is not just about passing a Bill. This is about living our values. If we say we want to build an inclusive, caring and just society, then we have to mean it. We have to live it. This is what Forward Singapore is about. Not just economic growth, but ensuring every Singaporean matters, every Singaporean has dignity and every Singaporean belongs. Because in Singapore, we do not leave people behind. We lift them up.”
“Lastly, Mr Speaker, Sir, at its core, this Bill is about people. Not numbers, not statistics. People. Residents should have a voice in how these Homes are run. Could we establish feedback channels so that they can participate in decisions that affect their daily lives? This Bill also restricts the publication of information about residents under section 38, and while privacy is important, does this mean whistle-blowers cannot report poor conditions? How do we balance privacy with accountability? And can we go a step further and introduce a Residents’ Bill of Rights, like some other countries have, to guarantee dignity, choice and respect for every resident? Consequently, a social residential home should not just be a place to stay. It should be a place to live with dignity. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, at the heart of this Bill lies a simple but profound question – how do we care for those who have no one else to care for them? Because the true strength of our society is not found in how far the most successful can go, but in how well we care for those who struggle, those who are vulnerable and those who are left behind. Right now, across Singapore, there are seniors, persons with disabilities and individuals without families who depend on social residential homes for their well-being. They are not just names in a system. They are our mothers and fathers, our sisters and brothers. Some of them are even workers who built this nation, who spent their years caring for others, contributing to society. And now, the question before us is – are we doing enough to care for them? This Bill is a step forward. It creates a licensing system. It introduces new regulations. But let us be honest, a licence alone does not build a caring home.”
“Because if we do not take care of them, they would not be able to take care of our residents. We also have to ask: will the Government issue more work passes for this sector to ensure we have enough trained caregivers? Will the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) also relax the local-to-Work Permit holder ratios for this sector? Because care work is essential work. And we need to start treating it that way. Third, Mr Speaker, Sir, regulations are only as strong as the enforcement behind them. This Bill gives the Government the power to revoke the licences of those homes which fail to meet the standards. That is important. However, nowhere does it say that violations must be made public. If a home is failing its residents, should not the families have the right to know? Should not there be a public rating or inspection system, like we have for food establishments, so people can make informed choices? And what about step-in orders? This Bill allows the Government to take over a failing Home, under section 27, but it does not tell us when that will happen. What are the criteria? How bad does a home have to be, before action is taken? Who will take over the day-to-day operations after the takeover? The Bill also introduces Boards of Visitors to check on homes. That is a good step. But who will be on these boards? Will they be independent committee members or just Government appointees? Finally, residents and families need a clear feedback mechanism. Right now, if a resident or their family has concerns, where do they go? Who do they call? Should there be a public hotline or an independent mediator to handle grievances fairly and transparently? Because transparency builds trust, and if we want families to feel safe placing their loved ones in these homes, trust is essential.”
“Are they evenly distributed, or are we going to see some areas well-served while others are left behind? The Bill also gives the Director-General the power to set capacity limits for social residential homes. I understand the need to prevent overcrowding. Conversely, how do we make sure we are not turning people away because there are simply not enough beds? We should also be encouraging community and private-sector efforts to fill the gaps. Could we introduce more incentives for non-profit organisations and businesses to build more Homes where they are needed most? Because no one – no senior, no vulnerable person – should have to struggle just to find a place to live with dignity. Mr Speaker, Sir, my next point is about quality of care, because at the end of the day, it is not just about having a bed to sleep in. It is about having a home where residents are treated with respect, compassion and real care. This Bill gives the Director-General the power to set licensing conditions, but nowhere does it say that the Homes must have minimum staffing ratios. Let me put this simply: if there are not enough caregivers, the residents will suffer. In hospitals, there are nurse-to-patient ratios. Why should it be any different in social residential homes, where people need daily assistance with everything, from eating to moving to managing their mental well-being? We also need to talk about the people who do the work. Many caregivers in these Homes are foreign workers or volunteers. They are the ones feeding, bathing and caring for residents. But are we making sure that they are properly trained? Are we paying them fairly? And are we providing them with enough support, so they do not burn out?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, today, we are here to discuss a Bill that speaks to the very heart of who we are as a society. The Social Residential Homes Bill is about care, dignity and responsibility. It is about how we treat the most vulnerable amongst us – our children, seniors, disabled – those who, for whatever reason, cannot care for themselves. Some of these individuals have loving families who simply do not have the means or ability to provide round-the-clock care. Others have no one – no family, no safety net, no place to call home, except for these social residential homes. Their well-being, their safety, their quality of life, all of it rests on the people who run and work in these facilities. That is a profound responsibility. And it is our duty to make sure that responsibility is met – not just with good intentions, but with real, enforceable standards that ensure quality care. This Bill takes important steps. But the real question before us today is this: are we setting the highest possible standards? And more importantly, are we making sure that those standards are upheld every single day, for every single resident? I seek several clarifications. First, Mr Speaker, Sir, we all know that Singapore is ageing. By 2030, one in four Singaporeans will be over the age of 65. That is just six years away. That means more people will need affordable, accessible residential care. This Bill introduces a licensing framework, which is good. But let us be clear – this is only useful, if these homes are accessible to the intended users. What is the plan to ensure that we have enough Homes to meet the growing demand in the next decade? Have we mapped out where these Homes are needed most?”
“Mr Speaker, I thank the Prime Minister for his Statement. I have two clarifications. Given that many local businesses operate within global supply chains, how will the anticipated pass-through effect of increased cost to Singapore consumers look like? And two, for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) that lack the skill to absorb the sudden cost increase, what tailored support is the Ministry considering to ensure that it will remain competitive and can continue to meet consumer demand without raising prices significantly? I assume this is something that Deputy Prime Minister Gan's task force will look into.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. With the push towards better living standards in our dormitories, including stricter regulatory requirements, how does the Ministry strike a balance between safeguarding workers' welfare and avoiding excessive compliance costs for businesses? What efforts are in place to ensure that the regulatory upgrades are implemented in a cost effective and phased manner?”
“Chairman, mental health is critical for a thriving society. During last year’s Motion on Advancing Mental Health, I highlighted the need to address seniors’ and caregivers’ well-being, particularly social isolation, loneliness and dementia. I also called for better insurance coverage and subsidies, and welcome the assurance of up to 80% subsidies at public institutions and ongoing efforts to expand public healthcare capacity. However, subsidised options often involve longer waits, while private therapy costs remains a barrier. How can we ensure affordable support is readily available? Community Outreach Team (CREST) teams play a vital role in early intervention. With over 70 teams island-wide, how can we expand their reach and public awareness? Finally, how is the Ministry measuring progress in mental healthcare? Tracking accessibility, early detection and long-term well-being is essential.”
“The Ministry fears premature MediSave depletion if limits rise, but we must balance prudence with compassion. What good is saving for a rainy day if the storm has already arrived? Could a more flexible, needs-based approach be fairer? Could safeguards prevent fund depletion without denying relief? Could temporary fund depletion for essential treatments be allowed, with options to replenish accounts later? As Singapore ages, our healthcare financing must evolve. How do we ensure no Singaporean forgoes necessary care due to financial constraints? How can we make MediSave more sustainable and responsive to changing demographics and healthcare needs? Affordability of Long-term Care”
“What support will be given to providers and how does this model fit into the larger strategy for long-term care and a broader ecosystem alongside home-based and centre-based options? Lastly, what safeguards are in place to ensure good care and protect seniors' well-being? How is MOH tracking and evaluating the programme's effectiveness? This sandbox is a promising step forward, but clear updates and a strong plan for the future are key to making it work. MediSave for Outpatient Needs As our nation ages, we face two pressing challenges: a growing elderly population and rising healthcare costs. MediSave plays a critical role in healthcare financing. But do current withdrawal limits truly meet our seniors' needs? The Ministry aims to balance affordability with future needs, but are these limits keeping pace with actual expenses? We live longer and face more age-related health conditions, requiring complex and costly treatments. As we shift towards outpatient care to ease hospital congestion, outpatient medical costs invariably rise, putting significant financial pressure on individuals and families. Take Flexi-MediSave. Fewer than three in 10 eligible seniors reached the $300 annual limit in 2023. Does this reflect adequacy or are seniors delaying essential treatments due to financial concerns? Are we unintentionally discouraging necessary care? Similarly, the $200 monthly MediSave Care limit for severe disabilities may fall short of long-term care needs. Does this truly support a dignified quality of life for our most vulnerable? Some residents have also raised concerns that the $600 annual cap on MediSave use for health insurance premiums is insufficient. Could this be increased?”
“Could a tiered co-payment approach, where higher-income individuals contribute more while lower-income groups receive greater subsidies, create a more sustainable model? Caregiving costs go beyond medical bills. Home modifications, assistive devices and caregiver support all add up. How will MOH integrate these into a holistic financing model and framework? Are there plans to expand MediSave coverage or introduce new financial tools to help Singaporeans prepare for ageing in place? At its core, this is about fairness and sustainability. Are we striking the right balance between personal responsibility and Government support? Should we rethink risk-pooling and cost-sharing across generations to ensure our system remains equitable and future-proof? We cannot afford to take a short-term view. Our long-term care financing model must not only meet today's needs but remain viable for future generations. I urge the Government to take bold, decisive steps to strengthen and future-proof our system. Strengthening Ageing-in-place At the last COS debate, I spoke about the need to improve home-based care for seniors with higher needs. I have also pushed for better support for their caregivers. The reality is harsh. Families are getting smaller, but the number of seniors needing care is rising. We need new solutions. The Shared Stay-in Senior Care Services Sandbox is one such initiative offering a more affordable option. I would like an update from MOH on its progress. What has the Ministry learnt so far? What is working and what is not? I want to hear from caregivers and seniors. How do they feel about the quality, affordability and accessibility of these services? What can be improved? More importantly, what is next? How will MOH scale this up? What is the timeline?”
“Chairman, Singaporeans deserve to age with dignity. That means ensuring long-term care is accessible, high-quality and financially sustainable. I have consistently championed this issue, raising it in Parliament through speeches and questions. Our entire ecosystem matters, from supporting caregivers and strengthening palliative care to enabling ageing in place through a robust network of community-based services, like Active Ageing Centres, day care, telehealth and remote monitoring. The urgency grows as family sizes shrink and the cost of living rises, adding strain on sandwiched families struggling to care for their loved ones. 3.45 pm While I recognise the Government's initiatives to review MediSave, enhance CareShield and improve palliative care and caregiver support, the fundamental challenge remains. How will the Ministry ensure long-term care remains affordable for all Singaporeans in the face of escalating medical costs? Many will depend on Government subsidies, ElderShield, CareShield Life and personal savings. But are these really enough? Are CareShield Life payouts keeping pace with the soaring costs of nursing homes, home-based care and assisted living? How frequently does MOH review these schemes to ensure they stay relevant as inflation and care needs evolve? Cost efficiency is just as critical as affordability. What strategies are in place to reduce unnecessary spending? Have we fully explored models like public-private partnerships or outcome-based funding to ease the financial burden on families and the system? Other ageing societies have implemented progressive co-payment systems to supplement insurance. Are we considering such measures? If not, why?”
“Chairman, I have long championed extending the productive longevity of our senior workers – not just to tackle demographic shifts, but because their experience, resilience and skills are invaluable. Yet, in our ageing society, are we truly harnessing this potential? In 2022, 31% of residents aged 65 and above were employed, but nearly 69% earned less than $2,500 monthly. The old-age support ratio has plunged from six in 2014 to 3.5 in 2024. Are we underutilising a workforce that still has much to give? What if we flipped the script? The employment rate for seniors aged 65 to 69 hit 47.5% in 2022. More seniors want to work, but are we offering them the right opportunities? To our senior workers: lifelong learning is not just a buzzword. It is the key to career reinvention. How can we better match skills to new roles, including those in the gig economy? I have pushed for tailored courses that align with seniors' interests and experience. Are we doing enough to ensure that fair wages reflect their productivity? To employers: age-friendly workplaces are not just nice to have; they are a necessity. Over 5,000 companies have committed to raising retirement and re-employment ages. But are they redesigning roles to make work more flexible? Are job-sharing and hybrid arrangements becoming the norm, or the exception? To the Government and tripartite partners: the Senior Employment Credit benefited 400,000 senior workers and 90,000 employers in 2023. But why stop there? Could we proactively partner with businesses to create more opportunities? It is time to rethink ageing in the workforce. Can we build a society where every individual, regardless of age, has a place to contribute meaningfully? Extending Employability of Senior Workers”
“Chairman, career health is just as critical as physical well-being in today's fast-changing job market. PME job placements doubled from 8,800 in 2023 to 17,000 in 2024 – a strong sign of momentum. But are we doing enough to future-proof our workforce? How often do we check in on our own career health? The SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme's $4,000 top-up supports mid-career upskilling, but financial aid alone is not enough. Are we fostering a true learning mindset? WSG offers job-matching and career counselling, while SkillsFuture remains key to staying relevant. During the SkillsFuture Singapore Agency Bill debate, I called for stronger course quality assurance and feedback channels. I am encouraged by growing university participation, which has boosted course credibility. Can the Government share updated utilisation rates, demographics and popular course types since 2022? Employers play a critical role in career development. Beyond IHRP certification for HR practitioners, are they building a real culture of learning? Are training efforts aligned with future industry needs? At the same time, businesses navigate evolving work norms – FWAs, new leave policies and upskilling demands. How can we better support them in investing in employees while managing these pressures? I seek updates on two key areas. Jobseeker support: what active job search criteria must involuntarily unemployed individuals meet to qualify for SkillsFuture aid? How will this scheme drive re-employment? Career coaching expansion: NTUC has proposed using SkillsFuture Credit for career coaching. What is the Government's stance? Could this enhance personalised support and employability? A future-ready workforce needs proactive individuals, committed employers and bold policies. Let us build that together.”
“Chairman, workforce transformation is critical to our economic future. But for employers, navigating the current support landscape may feel overwhelming. We need a more integrated, holistic approach, one that focuses on three key areas. First, job redesign and skills upgrading. I have raised concerns before about vulnerable workers, especially older and lower-skilled individuals, from the risk of automation. While initiatives like Jobs Transformation Maps help, we must be more proactive. How many companies have actually benefited from job redesign support under the Productivity Solutions Grant? What more can we do to help businesses create higher-value jobs and accessible training pathways? Second, strong HR standards. With workplace fairness legislation coming, good HR practices matter more than ever. A litigious workplace helps no one. Mediation should be the first line of resolution, something I have long championed. But as I highlighted in the workplace fairness debate, some employees do not feel safe approaching HR and small businesses may not even have formal HR departments. How do we equip SMEs with the right HR support to mediate disputes and foster inclusive workplaces? Third, empowering HR professionals. HR plays a strategic role in workforce transformation. But to maximise their impact, we must invest in their professional development. How is the Government strengthening the HR ecosystem to drive workforce transformation effectively? By simplifying the support system and focusing on these areas, we help businesses embrace change, boost productivity and build a resilient workforce. The Underemployment Problem”
“Speaker, I thank the Senior Minister for his explanation. Section 4 of the report highlighted that MDDI's July 2024 CM lacked clarity, leading to misunderstanding in implementation by ACRA. So, could Senior Minister elaborate on the steps taken to enhance clarity in future communications to prevent similar incidents? And secondly, how do we strengthen the clearance and approval processes within the Ministry to prevent similar issues from happening in the future, especially of such a misunderstanding, especially when it pertains to issues across different agencies? I think this is quite important because, as we move forward, the issues that the Government is dealing with is going to be more complex and it involves much more agencies coming together to solve similar issues.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his reply. Considering the recurring nature of chronic or permanent medical conditions, what are the Ministry's views on implementing an automatic renewal system for ComCare assistance in such cases? And what potential benefits or challenges have been identified in adopting this approach? And how might it improve the quality of life for some of these affected Singaporeans?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. In light of recent influenza outbreaks in regional countries, such as Thailand, what steps is the Ministry taking to enhance influenza vaccination coverage amongst the high-risk populations in Singapore? For instance, in Yio Chu Kang, we work with donors and clinics to provide free flu vaccinations for seniors. And how are these strategies informed by lessons learnt from COVID-19 vaccination roll-outs?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for his reply. What is MAS' view on banning cryptocurrencies and will it lead to consumers going underground? And given that individuals aged 18 to 25 are increasingly adopting cryptocurrencies, what specific factors did the Ministry consider regarding this demographic when formulating these regulations? And how does the Ministry plan to address these unique financial literacy and risk exposure challenges faced by younger consumers?”
“Essentially, that is why we have the Re-integration Hub, where we bring in programmes relating to employment, relating to how they can improve their social esteem and also how they can feel they have a sense of belonging. There are also religious programmes at the Re-integration Hub. We also have organisations, platforms like the Yellow Ribbon Community Project, Malay/Muslim Organisations Rehabilitation Network, Prison Fellowship, Hindu Centre, coming on board to help us. Recently, we also roll out the Desistor Network to get these desistors to play a part in this effort. It is about enhancing all these efforts together so that we will continue to support them, even though they have taken drugs. They have abused drugs, they have committed an offence, but we want to provide them with second chances, so that they can build up their lives for better days ahead.”
“So, with this we know the harms that drugs do to individuals. That is why we go upstream to work with the community to see how we can prevent anyone, even one person, from taking drugs, because we know drugs are harmful. We have extensive preventive drug education programmes and then, recently, we launched the Inter-Ministry Committee on Drug Prevention for Youths, and we have organisations coming onboard to help us with Dadah Itu Haram programmes. It is about reaching out to the community so that we can help our people to stay away from drugs. This is important. I hope that we can get support from the House as well as society here in Singapore, fellow Singaporeans, because when you do not have a tough stance on drugs, it will seep into the society, it will break the society, destroy the society. Many of my counterparts that I have met overseas shared with me, without them knowing, some of their countries have become a narco-state. So, we want to make sure we help Singaporeans to have avenues for a pro-social quality of life. What is key is that we must make sure that while there are those who just do drug abusing, consumption, but we have seen how drug consumption have led to criminal activities. So, when someone is arrested, not only for drug consumption, but with some criminality aspect, it gets difficult and it gets more complicated. It will destroy the families, it will destroy the society, not only the individual. So, I hope that we can work together on this. While there are those who have been arrested for consumption or any related drug antecedent, we want to help them.”
“I thank the Minister of State for his reply. The Minister of State mentioned that repeat drug abusers have a higher likelihood of reoffending. What are two-year recidivism rates of those with drug antecedents compared to those without drug antecedents? And recognising that re-integration into society is critical for preventing relapse, what post-release support systems are currently in place for former DRC inmates and how does the Ministry collaborate with community organisations to ensure continuous support? And are there plans to expand these initiatives? Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Sir, I thank the Member for the supplementary question. Indeed, based on the two-year recidivism rate, inmates with previous drug antecedents are approximately three times more likely to reoffend than those without. If you look at the release cohorts over five years, you can see that the recidivism rates are also different, about three times more. When we look at the recidivism rate for the release cohort in 2018, for those with drug antecedents, it was 29.9%. For release cohort 2019, it was 27.4%. For release cohort 2020, it was 26.9%. For release cohort 2021, it was 29.2%. For release cohort 2022, it was 29.7%. And if you look at those without drug antecedents, so, for the 2018 cohort, with drug antecedents, it was 29.9%, and without drug antecedents, it was 11.6%. For 2019, with drug antecedents, it was 27.4%, compared to without drug antecedents, it was 9.8%. For 2020, with drug antecedents, it was 26.9%, without drug antecedents, it was 9.4%. For release cohort 2021, with drug antecedents, it was 29.2%, and without drug antecedents, it was 9.4%. And the recent one, for release cohort 2022, with drug antecedents, it was 29.7%, and without drug antecedents, it was 9.8%.”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for his response. I have several Yio Chu Kang residents coming to me, expressing concerns about AMDs and fires related to AMDs. Considering the role that retailers, repair shops and especially online shops play in the modification and maintenance of AMDs, how does the Ministry determine the current frequency of inspections for these establishments? What criteria are being used to assess compliance and are there plans to increase inspection frequency or implement additional measures to ensure adherence to safety standards? And lastly, what is being done to ensure compliance of safe devices being sold by online retailers?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for her reply. I have two sets of supplementary questions. First is while the Ministry conducts regular inspections to ensure compliance with food safety regulations, can the Ministry clarify whether these audits encompass the entire supply chain of RTE food production, from ingredient sourcing to final delivery? And if certain stages are excluded, what are the reasons for these like omissions and how might they impact the overall safety of the food provided to Singaporeans? And secondly, to enhance public trust, is the Ministry considering making food safety violations by suppliers more transparent? For instance, will there be a public registry of food safety lapses or penalties imposed on suppliers?”
“Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for his reply. The nightlife industry is heavily dependent on service staff. But rising wages and difficulties in hiring locals have increased the business costs. So, what measures are in place to help these businesses address manpower constraints, such as perhaps a flexible work schemes, training grants or adjustments to foreign manpower policies.”
“Chairman, our citizens' needs are becoming more complex and interconnected, crossing traditional Government boundaries. While we have developed new services, the main challenge is integrating them. We must ensure help is accessible without obstacles and bureaucracy, providing solutions and support instead. In previous debates, I spoke about the sheer number of Government apps and systems, about how, for too many Singaporeans, finding the right service feels like navigating a maze. I emphasised the necessity of transitioning from an agency-centric approach to a citizen-centric model, because no one should have to struggle through Government silos just to get the help they need. No one should be left wondering where to turn when services should already be meeting them where they are. So, how do we achieve this integration? How do we move from complexity to clarity? The answer is this. The Public Service cannot just provide services. It must orchestrate them. It must understand that our citizens' needs do not exist in isolation and neither should the solutions. This means bundling services across multiple agencies, proactively connecting the dots at every stage of life and it means more than just adopting new technology. It means adopting a new way of thinking, a mindset shift, a commitment to breaking down silos so that no Singaporean is left behind. That is how we build a Government that is not just effective, but responsive; not just efficient, but compassionate; a Government that does not just serve the people, but truly empowers them. Career Longevity of Public Officers”
“However, while the gift is a meaningful gesture, we must ask: will it be enough to move the needle on our total fertility rate? What are the deeper barriers – housing costs, childcare affordability, work-life balance – that prevent young families from growing? Additionally, can we have more clarity on the gift's nature? What is in the package? Who is eligible? When and how will parents receive it? Let us ensure that this initiative is part of a broader effort to make raising a family in Singapore truly sustainable.”
“Chairman, raising a large family is rewarding but challenging. As a father of five, I understand the sacrifices parents make. While I support the Large Families Scheme, financial incentives alone will not reverse demographic trends. That is why I advocate a whole-of-society approach. Families need more than money. They need affordable housing and childcare, FWAs and strong community networks to share caregiving. A major concern is competition. Parents fear a third child might stretch resources, disadvantaging their other children. Policies should turn large families into an advantage, not a burden. We can: (a) set aside more primary school vacancies for their children; (b) enhance the Third Child Priority Scheme to provide them with more chances to secure the Build-To-Order (BTO) of their choice, including 5-room BTO flats if they wish; and (c) better match flat types with family needs. Beyond policy, we must foster a culture that values large families. Workplaces can offer tax benefits for employees with three or more children. Housing supply should accommodate growing households. Small efforts like family-friendly parking, restaurant accommodations and mentorship programmes signal support. Investing in big families means investing in Singapore's future. Let us build a society where families of all sizes thrive. SG60 Baby Gift It is a thoughtful initiative shaped by feedback from parents who emphasised the need for practicality, usefulness and aesthetic appeal. As the Minister highlighted, parents do not want just beautiful but impractical items. They want something they could use and treasure. This approach is certainly a step in the right direction.”