Hansard, 2011-03-08

Under the provisions of clause 2(d) of Article 46 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, the following Members have been granted permission to be or to remain absent from sittings of Parliament (or any Committee of Parliament to which they have been appointed) for the periods stated: Name From (2011) To (2011) Mr Teo Siong Seng 11 Mar 11 Mar Mr Cedric Foo Chee Keng 12 Mar 18 Mar Mdm Halimah Yacob 15 Mar 20 Mar 25 Mar 27 Mar

ABDULLAH TARMUGI Speaker Parliament of Singapore

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [5th Allotted Day].

Head I – Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports (cont.) –

Resumption of Debate on Question [7th March, 2011],

"That the total sum to be allocated for Head I of the Estimates be reduced by $100." – [Mr Seah Kian Peng].

Question again proposed.

ComCare

Mr Chairman, Sir, each year, over 50,000 needy Singaporeans apply for ComCare Assistance Scheme through the five Community Development Councils (CDCs). About 90% of these applications were means-tested within four weeks. This is a drastic improvement as compared to the three months' processing time of social assistance cases in the past. Sir, the CDCs and MCYS have been working closely to redesign the work processes of the Social Assistance Services by CDCs so that timely assistance can be given to the needy. But it is important for the needy and general public to understand the workings of our social safety net.

Sir, ComCare is not about giving out financial assistance to the needy quickly. ComCare is about identifying appropriate assistance schemes which will help the needy achieve self-reliance quickly. That is why the CDC Social Assistance officers need to conduct due diligence to understand the barriers faced by needy families and encourage them to take responsibility to work towards self-reliance.

Sir, based on feedback from our officers, there are many barriers hindering the progress of needy families to be self-reliant. These include barriers to employment such as transport cost, childcare issues, low skills, illness or past criminal records.

Sir, I wish to ask the Minister the following questions: (i) Can the Ministry consider enhancing the ComCare scheme to help the chronically ill and unemployable? (ii) Can more resources be given to

the ComCare Local Network to assist chronic cases? (iii) Can ComCare and Workfare Schemes be better aligned to help the unemployed or vulnerably employed to upgrade their skills?

Policy matter

Mr Chairman, Sir, over the years, Singapore has implemented many well thought out policies to benefit Singaporeans. They are laudable assistance schemes which are the envy of other countries. Sir, I am referring to the safety nets like our healthcare 3Ms, especially the Medifund component, our Workfare Bonus and our Public Assistance schemes that target various groups of our society.

These schemes ensure that the vulnerable groups in our society are not deprived of medical care or livelihood due to the lack of means. These schemes showcase us as a caring nation. The Minister for Finance in his rounding-up speech, said that "social mobility is a crucial aspect of our inclusive growth model. And our merit-based system allows any Singaporean with drive, perseverance and different types of talents to succeed. We have to maximise opportunities for everyone to do well. But we have to do more. In particular, we have to do more to prevent an underclass from forming, an underclass that replicates its condition across generations."

Today, I would like MCYS to consider another safety net to further enhance the picture of a caring society. A safety net aimed at helping the children in the bottom 5% of the lowest income group. In this group, the families are extremely hard pressed at nurturing their children. Sir, they need special attention.

There must be a more deliberate and systematic programme for providing assistance to the children of these lowest income families, especially the dysfunctional

ones. The aim is to prevent dysfunctional homes from getting worse and to ensure an environment conducive for them to bring up their children, especially if the children are still young. The pre-emptive move is to intervene and assist the children from an early stage. I would like to echo what the Finance Minister said, we have to maximise our opportunities for everyone to do well and we need this safety net to do just that.

I would like to emphasise that I am not suggesting handouts to them in this scheme. I am asking for provisions of intensive programmes to assist eligible families improve their dire circumstances. We need a deliberate and systematic programme for these families and especially for their children who should be followed-up with until after the secondary school level.

At present, MCYS does not have any system in place to identify such children early on. These vulnerable children should ideally be identified at the registration of birth when some information about them can be collated. There is also no programme to follow up on vulnerable families and to help them in the holistic way that many of them require. Our Family Service Centres are helping vulnerable cases only on ad hoc basis with short-term remedies. It is much like doctors prescribing medicines to patients without diagnosing or curing the underlying disease and definitely without hope of implementing any preventive measures.

MCYS has the following schemes for low-income families: KiFAS, CFAC, CCFA, ICCP, HSP, HOPE, SCFA, CCT, ComCare, PA and WIS. Quite a mouthful but not easily understood in application perhaps even by many of us here, let alone by the disadvantaged families. How do we then make sure that these schemes serve the purposes that are intended?

I suggest that we give hands-on guidance, with emphasis on the well-being of the children, through designated social workers to these families so that they can better take advantage of the various assistance schemes. The aim is to tailor each families' needs to their unique situations. This may entail cajoling non-working parents, especially the mothers, to go for employment so that they are eligible for CFAC, sending their children to pre-school in the first place to enjoy KiFAS or getting both parents to go for upgrading of skills and so on.

In the earlier stages, the children may need nutritional attention and healthcare. Later, in schooling stage, assistance on educational, social and sometimes psychological needs may be required. We may also need special efforts to help the children feel welcome in school, perhaps by assigning extra counsellor or teacher attention to them. Whether providing for physical or psychological needs, may I suggest implementing a structured programme across the board in all schools so that needy children feel at home in the school environment?

May I urge the Minister for MCYS to improve the plight of the children from the lowest income families through such a permanent and constructive safety net? May I also ask the Minister whether the present HOPE scheme is serving its intended purpose and can it be improved further to increase the take-up rate? Lastly, would the Minister tell us if there is a big shortage for social workers and whether this shortage is holding back the ideal targets of MCYS?

Coordinated assistance to the needy

Despite our best efforts to help low-income workers, the needy and the poor, we will always have families who struggle in life. Some may be

destitute, some may have problems getting a job due to poor health or old age. Yet some may be families with school-going children who may get into difficulties following a family break-up. I think while we must help them to manage their problems, financial or otherwise, the primary approach for most should be to help them regain independence through employment, ensuring that their children remain schooling and solving their other problems holistically.

I am grateful that there are so many helping hands in the community to lift their lives. But I wonder if the Ministry has specific plans to improve the service level of these organisations through enhanced coordination among them. Specifically, the VWOs at the local level which can disburse such assistance directly are the Family Service Centres, and I think they have the potential to play a greater role in a coordinated way to help the needy in the community. What are the Ministry's plans to raise the service and delivery standards of the Family Service Centres as the main help points in the community? How can other local organisations like the CDC, schools, Citizens' Constultative Committee play a role to avoid duplication of help or gaps in the delivery of assistance? Who should coordinate such work in the view of the Minister? What is the Minister's assessment of the effectiveness of the ComCare Local Network so far?

Kindergarten and childcare financial assistance schemes

Sir, we run a programme called Back to Work in NTUC and, under that programme, what we do is to try to assist home-makers to get back to work. We have so far helped 8,500 women. One of the recurrent issues faced by the women is that it is really not worth their while to go back to

work because the salary they earn will all be wiped out by the childcare fees that they have to pay. Therefore, it is futile for them to go to work. That is the disincentive. I truly welcome the Ministry's increase of the income ceiling for families in need from the current rate of $1,800 to $3,500. Indeed, this will be very useful.

I have three points to raise with the Minister. First, I would like to ask the Minister to remove other barriers because some others have also given me the feedback that they have to pay a deposit before they can put their child in a preschool, although they may be under KiFAS or CFAC. And that, by itself, is a disincentive because they do not have that deposit in the first place to pay the childcare operator. Secondly, could I ask the Minister to continue to make sure that childcare fees are affordable because childcare fees have been increasing quite significantly, and that is another disincentive. Whilst we increase the ceiling under KiFAS and CFAC, we should also keep a lid on childcare fees to ensure affordability. Thirdly, could I ask the Minister what is the progress in terms of building more childcare centres because the feedback from a lot of families is that they find it difficult to find a childcare place for their children?

Total fertility rate and singlehood

Sir, much has been said about the need to give incentives to people to have babies. The debate about whether these incentives work or do not is a moot one. Detractors will say that the fact that our TFR remains low shows that the measures are not working, while proponents will say that the incentives are working because if these incentives were not present, then we would have fewer babies.

Last week, Deputy Prime Minister Wong shared that a key contributing

cause to the low TFR is a lot simpler than we thought. From the year 2000 to 2010, the number of single citizens, both male and female, has been on the increase. The trends are quite clear and it is not a pretty sight and does not look like it will slow down, let alone reverse.

Sir, people are not getting married, and those who are, are getting older. Needless to say, this combination is not conducive to increasing TFR.

Even as I read that last sentence, I am conscious of how poorly it sits with the usual notions of marriage – of a matter of heart, not mind, of a matter of matches in heaven, not matchmaking on earth.

The Social Development Network (SDN) coordinates the work of dating agencies, and promotes marriages. It has classifications of activities, dating, self-enrichment, wine and dine or travel. In particular, I like the "heart" section, where you can select 1, 2, or 3. I do not know the basis of selection, but I guess, to put it bluntly, it is how much you want to get married!

Sir, I would like to encourage the SDN in its work. I would like to know what strategies SDN is deploying to combat the declining marriage rates. Should a strategic review be carried out? Finally, given that this is the key contributing factor to the low TFR, I propose that we ensure that sufficient and more resources are deployed to this front.

12.15 pm

Single parents

Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to take part in this debate. Under Singapore law, single parents are treated as singles who are not eligible to purchase a Housing Board flat unless they are 35 years old and they are also given reduced children

benefits like lesser maternity leave and no Baby Bonus.

We know that the Government is not encouraging single parents but like every developed country, Singapore has single parents and we should learn to acknowledge them. Rather have single parents who are responsible, than have problematic couples who end up in divorce and a traumatic child. Why should their children suffer the sin of their parents? Should single parents not be entitled to more benefits than normal couples when raising their children single-handedly? I am not proposing these benefits to say single parenthood is alright. I am proposing responsible parenting and proper investment in our young.

Youth

Mr Chairman, Sir, all of us – parents, schools, local communities and the Government – have a stake and shared responsibility to guide our young. It is painful to read of 14-year-olds engaging in prostitution or some even younger ones engaging in pre-marital sex. Worse is, some are involved in more serious crimes like gangsterism, street fights, doing the bidding of loansharks or abusing drugs and alcohol. I hope the Minister would spare no effort to get his Ministry to work with the other Ministries and VWOs, especially with schools, to address the question of juvenile delinquency and youth crime.

The recent youth gangsters on the street are warning signs that we must work harder on our youth. Their academic achievements imposed both by our education system and by us, as parents, are putting much pressures on our children. Only by working together can we identify gaps and come up with new approaches to deal with these new challenges.

The Ministry of Education is one key Ministry that MCYS must engage as most of our youths are in the education institutes. I fully agree with the Minister for Education which said yesterday that the parents are ultimately responsible for their children. This role of responsibility cannot be surrogated. However, all our schools must play not only the main role of education but the supporting role of character building. The Minister for Education only hold the teachers and principals responsible for the education outcomes. I am afraid the Minister for MCYS would have a lot of persuasion to do.

In this regard, could the Minister share with the House whether there is any study made to better understand the changing social landscape surrounding our families and its impact on young people? Where are the weak links that should be tightened? How does his Ministry intend to tackle the problem and whether it is engaging in any dialogue with different concerned groups in the community, for example, VWOs?

I hope the Minister can share with the House what are some of the upcoming programmes, particularly those aimed at reducing youth crime. We are a small country. Every person counts. Everyone is important and special. And with joint commitment, I am confident that more than ever, Singapore will continue to nurture morally right and productive citizens.

Helping the disabled, needy and elderly

Sir, I want to thank the MCYS Minister, his team and especially National Council of Social Services for having put focus on and adding much value to the disability community.

Through the current Enabling Master Plan for the Disabled, which is due for renewal, many important initiatives were started. These include the non means-tested Fixed Subsidy of $300 per month for every Singaporean child undergoing early intervention; Special Needs Trust company; regular caregiver trainings; and many others. Sir, many people in the community, including the disabled and their families, are not aware of what the Enabling Master Plan is. Other than what is posted on the MCYS website when the Plan was first launched and direct updates by NCSS to the charities involved, there is little information to the disabled and the public on the good work done, the challenges and what is next in the pipeline. This has led to the perception that either nothing has been done or repeated appeals for solutions that may not be relevant. Sir, I urge MCYS to update a wider audience on a more regular basis in multiple channels so that all stakeholders are equally aware of the terrain, and they can contribute to scaling the next height together. Sir, setting up a National Office for Disability was a key recommendation I made in the plan. As I understand, this Office currently comprises mostly senior civil servants from the different Ministries and some agencies like the NCSS. What it stands for, what it does and how it engages the disabled, the families and the VWOs on the ground, are a well-kept secret. I seek more communication and engagement by this National Office through regular and outreach channels.

Next, Sir, as the Master Plan is due for renewal, I would like to ask the Minister to consider addressing the following gaps in the next phase:

Expedite basic health insurance coverage for those born with congenital diseases; and influence top insurers in the private sector to offer optional enhanced plans for those who seek more coverage;

Extend Foreign Domestic Worker Levy (FDW) Concession for children with disabilities who are older than 12 years old. The levy concession currently applies to children under the age of 12 and the elderly above 65. The current policy assumes that the said disability miraculously disappears after age 12 and re-surfaces after age 65. I hope that the Minister will look into this;

Study the daily challenges faced by major disability groups, especially those who are poor. Expand the scope of funds, such as the Special Assistance Fund, to include, for example, interpretation services for the deaf in their pursuit of work or education. I recently held a 3-hour meeting with a young adult who is deaf. Because I do not sign, he had to come with his sign language interpreter in tow, the services of whom were charged to us at an hourly rate. That evening, this young man shared with me how he had to personally fork out $6,000 worth of interpretation fees as he pursues his ACCA accounting studies;

Increase the Norm Costs for Day Activity Centres which cater to moderately to severely disabled adults. Last year, my volunteers and I were approached to support a Day Activity Centre for such a group. The team tried all means to work out the financial model, using HDB void decks and a mixture of both local and foreign staff. We arrived at a cost of about $1,500 per client per month for a very prudent service model. However, the Government norm cost is only about $750 and subsidy is means-tested. Sir, while I agree that it will be impossible for Government to foot 100% of all social services, I think a regular review of the cost and support for more labour-intensive services should be conducted if these services are important and outsourced to other Helping Hands;

On sports and inclusion. I believe that MCYS can also orchestrate more

inclusion in the area of sports. Recently, ex-NMP Jessie Phua graciously agreed with me to broker a collaboration pact between the Bowling Association for the Disabled and the mainstream Singapore Bowling Association. As a result of these inclusion efforts, the disabled bowlers can now leverage on expertise and activities in SBA. It was inspiring for both the disabled and the non-disabled, and made Sports for All a reality, in this case.

Lastly, on productivity and innovation, the mantra in recent Budgets. Sir, I strongly feel that the People Sector must hop on the bus of our country's productivity movement. There are many useful toolkits, resources and funding programmes which are applicable even to charities, special schools, homes and centres. For example, how many leaders and staff in the People Sector have studied the very useful Productivity Calculators that SPRING has developed? There are some areas in the social services sector that calls for better mapping and study.

One key area, for example, is the integration of the numerous help schemes for the chronic low-wage families to avoid cases of over- and under-serving. Sir, even Mayors and Family Service Centres who are the administrators of these schemes have voiced the need for a more efficient and effective safety net. Such a need makes this an ideal project to qualify for the Productivity and Innovation Grant funded by the National Budget. Finally, Sir, I want to thank the Minister and his team for the good work done in the last five years and I look forward to his consideration for the gaps that I have mentioned.

People with disabilities

Mr Chairman, Sir, the world has

moved on from defining disability as a medical condition. Since 2002, WHO has stated that any decrement in health resulting in any form of disability is now a universal human experience and not just a medical experience. The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities includes respect for the inherent dignity, autonomy, independence of persons, non-discrimination and full and active participation in society.

Singapore has introduced the Enabling Masterplan 2007 to 2011 and it is due for review. It takes a slightly different stand, attributing limitations to an individual's ability to function in society as being due to medically-determined impairments rather than the way the built-up environment is designed and organised. This is the way it has come across to the public. It certainly needs review.

Does MCYS have new initiatives and policies planned to help with the integration and mainstreaming of persons with disability and will we see Singapore become a signatory to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities?

People with special needs

I am very grateful to my fellow colleagues for helping me out of my chair. I am sorry about delaying the proceedings.

Sir, the Government has unveiled impressive plans to upgrade several constituencies, costing millions of dollars that will improve the lives of residents. Whilst this is a good move to improve physical surroundings and the neighbourhood, what is lacking is the compassion and support for our marginalised citizens and their caregivers who are finding it hard to cope.

Our society should create an awareness that these people are shunned

and isolated because of the stigma that is attached to the illness. Caregivers of the mentally ill do not get the recognition and vital support which they badly need and, in the end, they themselves may develop depression, leading to mental illness.

Sir, I therefore urge the Government to educate the public to create awareness on the plight of these marginalised citizens and their caregivers. More financial aid should be allocated to the support groups and the mental health institutions, eg, Singapore Association for Mental Health (SAMH).

12.30 pm

Mr Laurence Wee. You have three cuts, take them together, please.

Long waiting list for integrated childcare programme centres

At this point, I thank the Minister and his team for the good progress over the past five years, and for rolling out many initiatives for the poor, needy and the disabled.

First, I declare my interest as my organisation, Presbyterian Community Services, is running the integrated childcare programme in six of our childcare centres with 10 places in each centre. The waiting list for integrated childcare programme centres may not be an issue now. However, it would be good to constantly monitor the trend, so that no eligible child will be denied a place in integrated pre-school education.

Training of integrated childcare programme teachers

Mr Chairman, Sir, teachers working with children with special needs need to equip themselves with proper knowledge, skills and competency to help each child reach

his/her fullest potential. Teachers in integrated childcare programme centres have to attend 152 hours of training in order to be awarded the certificate in teaching pre-schoolers with special needs in integrated childcare centre (CICP) conducted by the Rainbow Centre at Margaret Drive, which is appointed by MCYS as its training coordinator.

Currently, only the NIE Diploma in Special Education and Ngee Ann Polytechnic's Advanced Diploma in Early Childhood Intervention (Special Education) are being recognised. Could more be done for the CICP's certificate course in terms of greater recognition? Perhaps, it can be considered as a form of foundation module, in view of its existing specialised training content. This could serve as a bridge or stepping stone for trainees without their pre-requisite to further their upgrading in NIE or Ngee Ann Polytechnic.

May I urge the Minister to consider granting recognition of such courses? This will ensure that teachers who undergo such courses are motivated to give their commitment and dedication to serve the children with special needs in pre-school education through further training. If such accreditation is considered, it would be of immense help to those cohorts of teachers undergoing training. Thus, it will not only increase morale, but also help to ensure and maintain service quality in the long term. We can do more to promote early intervention for children with special needs and these trained pre-school teachers are in fact the frontline people who can make the difference.

Child development credit

Mr Chairman, Sir, families with children with special needs will invariably incur greater expenses. This is especially so in the area of providing therapy and other rehabilitative measures to increase their

children's potential with their residual abilities for better functioning. Generally, all concerned parents will go, if they can afford it, for any therapy that will hold promise of greater recovery or healing. Most parents will do anything for their children's progress. However, therapy, rehabilitation and other speciality medical care are just a few of the extra costs that parents face when raising children with special needs. Thus, the families of the disabled require more special attention and relief.

Recommendation one: may I suggest to the Minister to consider a higher quantum of Child Development Credit, as it will go a long way in helping the families to cope with the higher cost of taking care of a child with special needs? Recommendation two: may I also urge the Minister, perhaps to commission a study on the cost of raising a child with special needs in Singapore, if this has not been done before or done much earlier because the cost of living was lower? This study will be of immense value when formulating policies to help these parents financially.

In conclusion, may I reiterate that families of children with special needs require more special attention and relief.

Social workers

Sir, there have been repeated calls by Members of this House on the need for more social workers to work with families facing difficulties. There are even calls for Family Service Centres to be set up in every constituency, and at least a social worker each in the constituency office. Members of this House must have come across too many of such families to make them raise their concerns in this Chamber. MCYS has responded. Remuneration packages have been improved and career progressions

are more attractive. However, there are still fundamental issues which need to be addressed – the capabilities of social worker entrants, quality of social work training programmes, ensuring quality field supervision and putting in place the system that will sustain them within the profession.

The social workers that we need most are those who have the skills and tenacity to work in the community – go out to visit families in their homes at odd hours, handle complex cases that include multiple marriages and divorces, juvenile delinquencies and domestic violence, collaborate with grassroot volunteers and engage community partners. They must have a good grasp of social science theories, excellent interpersonal and organisational skills. Above all, the fighting spirit and readiness to work against insurmountable odds.

The challenge is that many of our budding social workers come from backgrounds that are totally distant from the families that they hope to serve. For example, they will be challenged to understand how a 23-year-old woman whose husband is in prison, and who has three young children aged between one and five years, could abandon her children leaving them with her own mother who herself is undergoing divorce. Beyond ability to work with such families directly, the social workers also need to assess the effectiveness of Government's policies in meeting the larger objective of helping these families to be self-reliant. This means that social workers are more than Mother Theresa, who will only help the poor.

They are professionals who must take an active role in engaging policy makers. The image of social workers must change and go beyond merely helping the poor and the down and out. Social workers

impact not only the lives of the people whom they serve but also the larger systems within which these people exist. We need a system that will nurture and develop talents in the sector through an enhanced image that inspire the young to join the profession. More importantly is to ensure the quality of training programmes that produce social workers with the desired attributes and, subsequently, the quality of field supervision that will ensure longer term sustenance of these social workers in the profession.

I urge MCYS to conduct a comprehensive review of the social work profession to ensure the desired pipeline of quality social workers with the gumption to take on challenging cases and the intellectual ability to engage policy-makers in addressing community issues, and remaining in the profession for the longer term.

Mr Hawazi is not here. Mr Seah.

Responsible gambling and compliance

Sir, much has been said in this House about the impact of the IRs on ordinary Singaporeans and the need to protect them from undue influences. I have heard the messages on radio in Mandarin, depicting a man’s downfall at the gambling tables: first, borrowing from the loansharks, and then losing the love of his wife, esteem from his teenage son, and the respect of his daughter.

Sir, gamblers know all these. They know the odds, better than most of us. They know the outcomes. They would have seen their circle of friends go the same way. They know, and yet the flesh is weak. That is why we need a mixture of pre- and post-casino measures. We take measures to prevent those whose addiction is particularly great from going into the casinos and we help those who

have already fallen prey, to dig themselves up from the hole.

Sir, the vice taxes are a great way to redistribute wealth, assuming it comes from the comfortable cushions of the very rich, and not the meagre earnings of the poor. But I think we do not yet know nor fully understand what the social impact is.

Sir, I do not want nor do I think the IRs will fail. But we need a win-win approach to ensure that even as the IRs succeed, the social costs and issues are always on top of the mind of our Government, and that the various measures do kick in.

As we have seen, with the need to reduce free buses or advertisements, there are always refined or new ideas that may be introduced to achieve this. MPs, grassroots leaders and yes, the IRs themselves, are partners in these. The IRs must do more to promote responsible gambling and it is in their interest to comply with guidelines and to work together with us.

Sir, I want to ask the Minister’s assessment of the measures in place to promote responsible gambling and making sure IRs comply with the guidelines so far. What else should be done?

Casino

Sir, Singapore was ranked the second coolest nation in the world by the lifestyle and travel section of CNN. We are just behind the samba-loving country of Brazil. This is a big step forward for this friendly red dot.

Not too long ago, Singapore was considered boring with very little to offer, in terms of night life. We have certainly transformed ourselves from a clean but boring city to a city with an endless run of activities to do and an exciting night life.

The two casinos and other facilities at the two IRs certainly have played an important role in sprucing up the tourist image of Singapore. There is no doubt as to the economic benefits of having a casino at the two resorts. What is uncertain would be the social ills associated with the casinos at our very door step.

Studies have shown that having a casino within a 10-mile radius has a significant impact on problem gambling. I was told by an ex-gambling addict that the entrance levy of $100 is no deterrence to a gambler. There is a Chinese saying: "小财不出 , 大财不入". He is saying, "put money, get money". In other words, if you do not gamble, where is the opportunity to take in money?

Sir, we are seeing more people seeking help with their gambling problems or problems arising from their family members' gambling addictions. There are reported cases of people who lost millions of dollars in the casino. We also hear of cases of people turning to loansharks or selling their flats as a result of losses in the casino. We also had cases of thefts and cheating by the casino workers, and reports of prostitution or sex workers plying their trade in the casinos. Therefore, I seek an update from MCYS on the nature and the extent of social problems relating to gambling at the casinos following the full-operations of these two casinos in Singapore. What are the control mechanisms in place and how effective have they been so far?

Gambling

Mr Chairman, Sir, being the third person talking about gambling, I think quite a lot of points have been brought up. I will just share by way of anecdotes. Of late, I have been taking taxis. And I hear taxi drivers talking about picking up passengers who have lost everything.

There are passengers who plead with the taxi drivers to say they do not have the $30 needed to pay for the taxi fare. These persons have lost everything. We also hear of children who, in good faith, give money to parents and say: "you go to the IR and enjoy yourself". I do not know how the relationship would turn out in chapter two. I just want to say that all these little anecdotes show that we are already beginning to see some initial indications of gambling problems. These may be just the tip of the iceberg, and the more serious cases may soon come.

Gambling, of course, is not new in Singapore. In the past, we had regulated gambling very carefully. Strictly speaking, only bettings are allowed – we are referring to Sweep, TOTO and 4D. Such bettings will not make people lose their fortune. But one night in the casino can cause people to lose their life savings.

I personally am not sympathetic to the billionaires who lose millions. If I have a billion and lose a million, I lose only 1% of my asset. What is the big deal? I can afford to lose. But I am very concerned about the working class losing their entire life savings and CPF. All of us would get a minor fortune when we reach 55 years old. We are able to dip into our life savings and suddenly we would see a lot of money. Some said that it is when men become the most attractive – God knows what I mean [Laughter]. But if one is complacent, and through gambling, he can lose everything. The fact that children give parents some money to have a good time in casino shows how complacent we can be.

Mr Chairman, I want to propose that we must be more aggressive in publicising the ills of gambling. Let us take the example of smoking. Real pictures of health hazards are shown on the boxes to deter people. I would like to propose to

the Minister to consider an annual gambling awareness month, where programmes and activities will be organised to remind people the social ills of gambling. It may be illustrated with real or anonymous cases. We can have it during the school holiday month because that is the time when people are most likely to try to have a good time. I think this should be an addition to whatever that the Minister may be replying to Dr Ong's point on mechanisms that will be put in place.

12.45 pm

Mr Chairman, Sir, Members of the House, I apologise for my voice, I have got a viral infection and it is not because I am campaigning prematurely.

Last year has been an eventful one for MCYS. If I can just get the first slide up [hon. Members were shown a slide]. On the legislative front, we enacted the International Child Abduction Bill, we also made amendments to the Women's Charter and The Charities Act, The Children and Young Persons Act, The Hindu Endowments Act and, of course, if you all remember, Mr Seah Kian Peng amended the Maintenance of Parents Act. He amended it but we have to do the work.

Beyond legislative work, we have also pushed ahead in enhancing our programmes for all Singaporeans. This next slide gives Members a flavour of some of the things we have been working on. For the needy, we refined the Public Assistance criteria as well as the means testing framework, in order to provide more subsidies for social services.

We improved the accessibility and the quality of childcare by adding 107 new childcare centres in 2010. We also launched a Child Development Network

and we upgraded the quality of our childcare teachers. We made the early intervention programme for infants and children more afforbable. Ms Denise Phua and Mr Laurence Wee spoke about this programme. We also opened up more employment pathways for the disabled in order for them, ultimately, to integrate into the mainstream.

We raised the funding norms for social workers and we also launched the first of five new Family Service Centres. The Office of the Public Guardian began its operations last year, in order to bring the Mental Capacity Act into effect. We also continued to foster integration through the work of the National Integration Council which I chair and, of course, Singaporeans will remember, the Inaugural Youth Olympic Games in August which is now part of our national legacy.

My Ministry will continue to do more to strengthen social cohesion and support. Perhaps, I can classify our chief beneficiaries into the following five clusters. First, families in need; second, young children; third, youth, especially those at risk; then, the other vulnerable groups which include those with disabilities and also groups who may be susceptible to problem gambling.

In addition to that, we have also been looking at the social service sector as key infrastructure for our social services in order to upgrade and to uplift that sector. Let me now go into more details on families in need. Mr Seah Kian Peng asked about our efforts to help the most needy amongst us. I know I have said this many times but I will have to reiterate again our key principles, just to make sure that we do not lose sight of them. Finding work and staying in work is the key to self-reliance. And that is why the Government invests so heavily in order to help Singaporeans upgrade their skills and to get higher paying jobs. For those in lower paying jobs, we have Workfare, in order

to boost their income from work and to make work worthwhile.

As low-income families upgrade themselves or look for jobs, there is a need, as Members have alluded to, to make sure that ComCare complements Workfare. Here, I think it may be worth reiterating and our priorities in ComCare are: first, to help people with urgent needs, immediate needs; second, to overcome the social barriers to work because ultimately we want them to get into jobs and if need be to take advantage of Workfare; and third, we must facilitate childcare arrangements because there is much concern in this House about social mobility. For social mobility, the key focus has to be on children.

For those who are unable to work, with no means of income and either no or with very limited family support, we take care of that through the Public Assistance Scheme. We monitor the cost of living very closely and we pay particular attention to the price of basic food items. I would like at this point in time to remind Members that, in this term of Parliament, we have raised the Public Assistance rate. All the Members in this House came in here in 2006. In 2007, the Public Assistance rate for a single person was $260. Since then, I have raised it four times and today it will become $400. From $260 to $400 in one term of Parliament.

In fact, for a household with two adults and two children, they will receive a total of $1,350, which will more than cover the cost of food. I think Mr Seah Kian Peng tried to calculate for us yesterday. Internally in my Ministry, we track what we call a basket of low-cost, uncooked food every month. We regularly shop at Fairprice. I am not trying to sell a commercial but making the point that we do track these very closely because we must ensure that nobody goes hungry in Singapore.

It is also important to understand that we must not be overly focused on the cash component. It is only one component of the total Public Assistance package. We should remind ourselves that PA recipients receive totally free medical care, they receive totally free education for their children, they receive rental subsidies, U-SAVE subsidies, as well as considerable additional support from the community.

Even as we acknowledge that, I will continue to give the assurance that we will make sure no one will be left behind. No one will go hungry. No one will go without food on the table or without a roof over their head or healthcare for yourself or education, regardless of how the cost of living increases. We have the wherewithal to ensure that for this most vulnerable group in our society.

It is also noteworthy that the Minister for Finance has made a $500 million top-up to the ComCare Endowment Fund. When I first thought of ComCare Endowment Fund, I wanted an Endowment in order to ensure that MCYS will continue to have funds available, even in a downturn. It has to be counter-cyclical because in a downturn, when all other Ministries' budgets are being cut, in fact, the Social Assistance budget may need to go up. When I first persuaded my colleagues to have a ComCare Endowment Fund, our target was only $1 billion. Now, very generously, the Minister for Finance has said, let us aim for a target of $1.5 billion and, in fact, today, it stands at $1.3 billion. I belabour this point because I want to emphasise that we have the wherewithal to look after our people even in tough times. And, therefore, I can give this assurance that our social safety net is robust and quite unique right now. Fully funded and sustainable for the long term. This is not the case in many other societies who

pretend that they have got great social safety nets because they are going to run into intense physical pressures in the years ahead.

Let me now move on to young children. Dr Lily Neo has spoken about the need for holistic and early support to be available for children in need. I agree with her. As I said earlier, the key for social mobility is to work with the young children, in particular, their education. We had a long debate yesterday in the Ministry of Education's COS session.

Today, I want to remind Members that my Ministry has been investing considerably in early childhood education, in particular, to make sure it is affordable, of high quality and accessible to all. That is why we raised the income caps for the Kindergarten Financial Assistance Scheme (KiFAS) and the Centre-Based Financial Assistance Scheme for Childcare (CFAC) in order to benefit more children. In addition to having a larger group of children eligible, we have also made adjustments in quantum. It is worth highlighting again that in this term of Parliament, the quantum of subsidies for both schemes has increased significantly. For instance, for the lowest income tier, we raised the CFAC subsidies from $300 to $340. This is over and above the universal $300 subsidy. So, in other words, this lowest income family gets $340 every month available for childcare. For KiFAS, Members of the House will be familiar that we raised it in this term of Parliament from $65 a month to $108 a month.

Mdm Halimah mentioned the need for deposits. There is a start-up grant available to ensure that even the deposit for uniforms and school text books will not be a hurdle. This allows me, again, to give that assurance that money will never be an impediment for children from low-income households accessing good quality early childhood education and, ultimately,

education in primary and secondary school and beyond.

We need to remind people that this is available, and I agree with Members we will need to continue our outreach programmes to make sure that no parent ever keeps a child away from school simply because of worries about cash flow.

There were some queries about childcare costs rising. Mdm Halimah brought this up. I have been watching this very closely and I agree with the Member. We have noticed that some, especially private childcare centres, have taken the opportunity of the fact that we have now given more subsidies to all parents to also raise prices. Some of those price rises may be justified if it has been accompanied truly by increased standards, increased and better infrastructure or better quality teachers. But beyond that, there is a free market operating and that is why I have been pushing for this accelerated rate of an increased number of childcare centres to be established in order to promote more competition and also while we are working closely with PCF and with the NTUC's the Little Skool-House, so that there will be anchor operators functioning in the same way like FairPrice does for supermarkets and food products, to ensure that there is healthy competition and fair pricing standards available. In the years to come, I will ensure that there is even greater transparency and more information available on every childcare centre, so that parents can make informed choices.

We have also enhanced our outreach and programming for children in need. Members of the House will again be familiar that, every year, MOE gives us a list of children who have so far not been registered either in kindergarten or childcare. We and our grassroots' leaders go and knock door to door to identify who

is missing, why are they missing, are they overseas or is there a social problem. We have also a whole range of other programmes like the Healthy Start Programme (HSP), the Intensive Case Management framework pilot and, of course, the Home Ownership Plus Education (HOPE) scheme to help families and their children break out of the poverty cycle.

Since we passed the International Child Abduction Act, and acceded to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction last year, my Ministry has also set up the Singapore Central Authority in order to implement our obligations under this Convention. Basically, what this means is that we will help ensure the return of children who were wrongfully removed from their state of habitual residence and this works both ways. The message to parents is: please comply with Court orders. I know it is a very emotional and difficult thing but do not breach Court orders and kidnap your own children.

Let me now move on to our plans for youths. Six years ago – actually, it is nearly seven years ago because I remember that was when I first came to MCYS – we conducted a nationwide youth consultation exercise which enabled many young Singaporeans to participate and give us ideas. The legacy of that exercise continues today with the Shine Youth Festival, the Young ChangeMakers grant, in fact, the new *Scape in Orchard Road, the Extreme Skate Park at the East Coast. These are legacies of that exercise. We believe that it is time to conduct a second youth consultation exercise. We will embark on this in the latter part of this year. I look forward to more fresh ideas from young Singaporeans.

1.00 pm

and the issue of youth crime. Well, first, let us put things in perspective. Our juvenile crime rate is stable and even our recidivism rate if we include all youth offenders who have gone through either our guidance programme or probation or have had a stay in our boys' home or girls' home, in fact, 80% of them do not re-offend within three years. That is not bad.

Good progress has been made over the years to lower the school attrition and to reduce re-offending. But I agree with Members that we can do more to improve co-ordination between the different agencies and Ministries and, in particular, focus upstream, especially on the risk factors. For instance, we know that a significant number of youths, who drop out of school prematurely, will ultimately get into trouble and end up in the criminal justice system, in fact, within five years from leaving school. Once they end up in that system, there is a risk of recidivism. Although I have said our recidivism rates may not be that high but the point is, we can join the dots: school drop out, crime, entering a programme or home and then facing another possibility of re-offence.

And that is why arising from the recommendations of the Committee on the Prevention of Re-offending which was shared by the Minister of State for Education and Home Affairs, Mr Masagos, we decided to establish Central Youth Guidance Office (CYGO).

Although this office sits within MCYS, it actually is an inter-Ministry office which co-ordinates the work of MOE, MHA and MCYS. Focus-upstream, comprehensive integrated intervention and long-term follow-up. I think Members of the House will support this programme. This programme, of course, will complement what is already available – things like the

Enhanced STEP-UP and the Streetwise programmes.

The Central Youth Guidance Office will be piloting the Youth GO! programme. We will start off first with the North-East CDC. The Mayor just happens to be in my Ministry, pure coincidence. This programme will focus especially on outreach to youths who currently are not involved in any of our programmes. We hope to engage them in meaningful activities and to bring them back into the fold of the community and we have set aside a sum of $1.2 million for this pilot project in the next two years.

We will also develop an inter-agency Youth Information System. That is to implement Members’ suggestion that we need a comprehensive and shared database so that the youths at risk and the factors for youths at risk will be shared between MOE, MHA and MCYS. This will allow us to draw, first, a composite picture of the problem as well as longitudinal data which will help inform future policy formulation.

We will continue to provide a safe and supportive environment for our youths in residential care. I am not sure how many Members of this House have actually visited the Boys’ Home and Girls’ Home. We do want to introduce a wider and more engaging range of academic, vocational and therapeutic programmes in the Boys’ Complex and the Girls’ Home in order to cater to the different needs, risk profile and aspirations of these boys and girls. We want to ensure that they are not there just for punishment but that their time with us will result in them emerging with both vocational and emotional skills so that they can grow up to be contributing, well-functioning, well-balanced adults. We will be working with the MOE, WDA and the Prisons in order to enhance the educational and vocational framework in our homes. We will also introduce a more targeted and standardised assess

ment in order to better tailor our intervention to the needs of these youths.

In line with these changes, MCYS will spend $60 million to expand the Boys’ Complex not because I am expecting a flood of new entrants but because I want to provide a better environment for them. We will also enhance post-care support that means after discharge to follow up with them up to the age of 21 in order to help guide them and keep them on the straight and narrow path.

Yes, it is true that MCYS, MOE and MHA can do more and that we can work collaboratively, more effectively and more synergistically. I want to emphasise that we need the support of the community and, in fact, not just the VWOs but the employers as well. Today, I want to acknowledge employers and enlightened employers like Alo Car Pro, Secret Recipe, Adrenaline Events and Education and N.K. Hair Works who have helped our youths re-integrate into society and I hope we will have more enlightened employers who will come onboard and join us in this cause.

Mr Chairman, let me now turn to the disability sector. Ms Denise Phua has, as usual, made an impassioned and important speech which I have listened to carefully. Let me just deal with the specific points that Ms Denise Phua raised and then go on to the substantive ones. One of the things which Ms Phua asked for was to extend basic healthcare insurance to those born with congenital diseases. I think she is aware that MOH is reviewing this but we are not in a position to make specific announcements yet. So, watch this space.

The Member suggested that we extend the foreign domestic worker levy concession for children with disabilities who are older than 12. The Member will notice that when she was speaking I was having a side discussion with the Minister

for Manpower. The negotiations with MOM have begun but, again, I am not in the position to make promises yet.

Sir, the Member also asked MCYS to study the daily challenges faced by major disability groups, especially those who are poor. She gave a very apt example of, for instance, a person who is deaf will depend on sign language interpretation in order to integrate or to access mainstream services and participate in mainstream life. If we think about that on a larger scale, it is what we are also trying to do with the assistive technology to ensure that whenever tools or specific services are needed, we will look at the means-tested way to help those especially who may not be able to afford the extra services or extra technology which they need. So, we will continue to work on that.

The Member has also asked MCYS to review the norm cost of the day activities centres: we will do this. I believe the Member has made some very valid points on sports and disabilities and I will say more about that later as well but, again, I agree with her. So you see, every year, I agree with almost everything that she asks for.

Let us now go on with my substantive points on disability. A few months ago, we made major announcements to ensure that every Singapore Citizen child who needs to attend the Early Intervention Programme for Infants and Children receives a $300 base subsidy. In addition to that, low-income families will receive an additional means-tested subsidy from the government and that amount can go up to another $600. So, it is $300 plus $600 for low-income families – $900.

In addition to that, we know that those who are most needy will also receive help from VWOs, very often the service providers themselves as well as from the Community Chest. This allows me to say, hand over heart, that for the

low-income families with disabled children, money is not the limiting factor.

Having said that, we should also recognise that MOE recently announced that we will be extending the financial assistance scheme to special schools. My Ministry and NCSS obviously will have to do some fund-raising to help them but, again, it sends the message: if you are a low-income family, or a lower-middle income family, and you have a disabled child who needs to access education, help is available, money is not the impediment. I believe that this was a point that Mr Laurence Wee wanted reassurance, so I hope I have given Members some cause for reassurance.

Now, if we solve the money side of it, there are still other challenges. We have been pushing to increase the number of EPIC Centres. In 2007, we have 10; today, we have 13. We have increased the number of places from 1,004 to 2,000 but guess what? Once I have provided more subsidies, I increased the number of places, the demand also went up. That means we will have to work harder. Over the next four years, we intend to build another seven EPIC Centres and to further increase the capacity to 2,700 places. I am sure in due time, demand will also increase and we will have to respond accordingly. The point is, we have made a lot of progress just within this term of Parliament alone.

For older children, MOE has raised the age limit for special education to 21 so that students will be able to continue acquiring vocational skills beyond the age of 18. From this year, SPED students will also begin their vocational education from the age of 13. Now, vocational education without jobs is also a dead end. We have also been working with some very enlightened employers who have constituted the Enabling Employers

Network. This is an alliance of private sector champions who have provided work opportunities, attachments and internships in order to provide our students from SPED schools with some real exposure to real work.

Enabling Employers Network has also launched two centres for training and integration in hospitality and call centres as part of the employment value chain framework. More than 450 disabled persons have benefited from the open-door fund which provides grants to employers for workplace redesign and apprenticeship opportunities for the disabled.

In 2008, we set up the Centre for Enabled Living (CEL), a one-stop information referral centre for persons with disability and it also administers the caregiver training grant. Mr Chiam mentioned the need to support caregivers, so there is help available for caregivers. In fact, this grant has so far benefited more than 2,000 families with disabled members.

CEL of course continues to provide public education and to advocate the inclusion of the disabled in society. We do not have a "disabled month" but we have a "Live Enabled Week" and a campaign. Although we have to make sure that we do not have an excessive proliferation of campaigns in Singapore, the point is there is attention, there is support and there are resources available.

I still remember launching the first of 10 wheelchair-accessible buses. This was in the Pasir Ris Bus Terminal in 2006 and, today, I am glad to see that we are well on our way to making all public bus services wheelchair-accessible by 2020. We will have at least two barrier-free access routes in more than 70% of all our MRT stations by the end of this year. The Town Councils have all been working very hard to upgrade our precincts with barrier-free accessibility. In sports, we have

made sure that all Singapore Sports Council facilities meet barrier-free access requirements. The Singapore Disabilities Sports Council and our National Sports Association run various outings, activities and programmes as Ms Denise Phua has advocated for. And disabled athletes do win medals and International competitions such as the Paralympics. People like Yip Pin Xiu and Laurentia Tan are heroines and are recognised icons for Singapore. They are not disabled icons, they are national icons and we should recognise them as such.

Ms Denise Phua will also remember that she chaired a parents work group on financial security for the disabled and she echoed very eloquently the concerns that parents have about the long-term security of their children when the parents pass on. Because of Ms Phua's work and the work of her work group, if she looks back on the last few years, we have set up a Special Needs Trust company and we will be amending the CPF Act in order to implement the Special Needs Savings Scheme, and we will continue to provide advice and counselling to parents to enable them to plan for future financial security.

Mdm Cynthia Phua has quite rightly expressed concern about youth at risks

1.15 pm

Ms Denise Phua asked about a central office. We have a standing committee on disability which coordinates across all Ministries. It is chaired by my Permanent Secretary. I agree with Ms Phua that, perhaps, he should have taken a higher profile and communicated more with the public but I want to emphasis that there is no lack of high-level attention to this issue.

Let me now move to what else we are going do. The Enabling Masterplan – the current one – will end soon and let me give the assurance that we will review it and we will have another masterplan from 2012 to 2016. Although we should not

prejudge the outcome of that review, a couple of aspects I felt we should start focusing our minds on are: one, there is empirical evidence that there is an increasing number of pre-schoolers who are diagnosed with learning difficulties, with speech and language disorders. Our vision is that these children should stay in the mainstream and that they should be assisted by appropriate services in order to keep them in the mainstream. As suggested by Mr Laurence Wee, we will enhance the ability of pre-school teachers – this is in mainstream childcare centres and kindergartens – to diagnose potential disabilities and to either provide or recommend the additional intervention which they need.

The second area of emphasis I was going to recommend to the Committee was to look at adult disability. This is something people like Ms Denise Phua and even my good friend, Dr Lee Wei Ling, have been campaigning for for a very long time. We recognise that with better healthcare and better community support, people with disability will also live longer. Increased life expectancy applies across the board. That also then means that there will be challenges and especially in a future where we envisage smaller family sizes and a rapidly ageing population. Consequently, we will be developing a new day activity centre for person with intellectual disabilities and I will take up Mr Laurence Wee's suggestion that we review norm cost as well. We will also build a new home for the disabled by 2013. We will commission a study to project the future demand for disability homes in the next 15 years. The next two decades are going to be critical because of the extremely fast pace of ageing and we will make sure that that plan does not exclude the disabled.

The $1 billion Community Silver Trust is also another big boost for this sector because it enables us to now work and support VWOs who are planning to

provide innovative new services for elderly, disabled persons. I expect that we will see new ideas, new models of group homes, new concepts of community-based care facilities as well as the piloting of new technologies which, hopefully, can improve care and also, dare I say, lower costs. It will be a challenge.

The Enabling Masterplan has allowed us to make much progress over the last five years. We are not perfect. I do not think we have arrived 100%. There were 31 recommendations and we have acted on every single one of them. At this point, I really want to thank the advocates. Ms Phua is in this House but there are many advocates outside this House who have passionately, diligently year after year pushed us to do more, given us new ideas, raised and mobilised support from the community. And, therefore, I would also be in a position to inform Assoc. Prof. Fatimah Lateef that we will accede to the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and we will do so by next year. While we are doing so not because that is the be-all-and-end-all, but because we actually have done a lot and there has never been so many opportunities for the disabled to participate in the mainstream of our society.

Can I now move to the social services sector? The office of the Commissioner of Charities was set up within my Ministry in 2006 and we established the people sector-led Charity Council the year after. Together, these two institutions have strengthened the standards of governance in our charities through a balanced regulatory framework that facilitates both the good work of the charities as well as given the public the confidence to donate, and knowing that the money will be properly stewarded and properly spent. Hence, in order to help the charities be more effective, the Code of Governance

was introduced and this Code of Governance has been refined earlier this year. Beyond governance, we also continue to provide training grants for charity board members and key staff so that they can keep updated on proper ways to manage donors, to conduct fund raising and volunteer management.

The next slide* [indicating a slide shown to hon. Members] will show what we are spending on social services and the trend over the last three years. A couple of things I want to point out. First, is that, in fact, the total sum is more than half a billion dollars. Second thing is to note that about half of that comes from Government and the other half from the community. This is a reasonable balance when we talk about the many-helping-hands model. In fact, even in the downturn, we noticed that donation amounts, especially from individuals, continued to hold steady. With the Minister for Finance's extension of the 250% tax deduction for another five years and the introduction of the Community Silver Trust of $1 billion, I am confident that Singaporeans would continue to be generous and I think the VWOs should continue to be confident that the next five years, in fact, the next decade, will be a decade of growth for them.

I also want to share a short anecdote because I do not want people to think this is all about money. The Compassion Fund has a programme called "Share a Meal". This basically raises funds for students whose family has suddenly lost a main breadwinner. One day, when the VWO was opening the cans – most of it were coins because you are raising funds by the students – they found two pieces of folded green paper. It was not a $5 note. When they unfolded it, they found out that a seven-year-old boy had actually put in his own meal coupons into the tin. He put in his own meal coupons because he is from a disadvantaged family, he was

given the coupons to spend for himself to buy food, he sacrificed his food in order to share with others. Of course, the boy did not know that the coupons are only valid in his own canteen but the point is the motivation, the heart behind that act of giving by this little seven-year-old boy from a disadvantaged family. I think this is a very heartwarming story, a true story, and it is a timely reminder to us that philanthropy is not just about opening wallets but, in the words of the social worker who shared this story with me, it is also about opening hearts. We need to make sure that even as we improve our processes and build infrastructure and provide more money, never, never lose sight of the heart and the need to open hearts.

Dr Maliki and Dr Lily Neo have asked for plans to address the supply, development and retention of social workers. First, the SIM University and Nanyang Polytechnic are now running programmes at both degree and diploma levels in order to enhance the supply of trained social service professionals. We also give subsidies, scholarships and training awards to help in-service personnel attain social work qualifications. In addition, we provide training and upgrading opportunities for social workers through the Professional Leadership Development Scheme.

Second, we enhanced the image and professionalism of social workers because we now have formal accreditation. As of January this year, 835 social workers and practitioners have been accredited. We also have the Outstanding Social Worker Award which is given every year by the President to recognise special social workers who are role models to others.

Third, we have raised the funding norms for social workers regularly and, in the last five years, our funding for VWOs – the employers of this group of professionals – has increased by up to

27%, including a 14% increase last year. A recent survey by NCSS suggests that almost all the VWOs surveyed have increased their salaries or intend to do so shortly.

Our focus this year is to continue to strengthen the professional and leadership capabilities of social workers. We are also glad to receive the $20 million hongbao from the Minister for Finance and he has told me specifically to use this money to enhance the professionalism of social workers. It is not going to buy equipment or to buy hardware but to work on the software. We will use this to support social workers who want to develop and further their careers either to become specialists or, for the more senior ones, to become supervisors. Ultimately, I hope to see more leaders – leaders not chosen by me but peer-selected leaders – who are role models, who are repositories of wisdom and experience, who can lead the profession. One of the key legacies which I want to leave behind is to put the social work profession on a high and stable pedestal – you are professionals, you are key people who fix hearts and fix relationships and you deserve the remuneration, the resources and the recognition that, perhaps, for a long time we have under-delivered. I hope social workers will agree with me that we have made considerable progress, we will continue to push forward.

Let me now move on to Family Service Centres (FSCs). We are going to build more Family Service Centres and we are going to elevate their standards. I announced last year that we will build five new FSCs by 2013, bringing the total number to 41, and the first three will be at Chai Chee, Telok Blangah and Tampines. The FSC at Chai Chee has already begun operations. The centre at Telok Blangah will be ready by end of the year. For the third new FSC at Tampines, we have invited agencies to submit proposals and I believe there is keen

interest to run this centre. The two remaining FSCs will be in Admiralty and Punggol, and they should be ready by 2012 and 2013 respectively.

I feel a need to respond to Dr Lily Neo's point. I am not sure whether I misheard her, but I want to give the Member the assurance that FSCs are not like doctors dispensing pills without making a diagnosis. Let us give them the recognition and credit that they are due. They are professional social workers, they are properly trained, as highly motivated as doctors although not as well paid as doctors, doing their best to fix problems. When you are dealing with social work problems, it is not just a person, it is the family. Even when you are dealing with a family, often it is a community. There is a very, very heavy burden on the social workers. I would hesitate to criticise social workers. My response is to provide more resources for more support so that social workers can fulfil the already heavy and onerous tasks which are on their shoulders. I think the Member would agree with me on that point.

In response to Mr Seah Kian Peng's question on welfare homes, my Ministry will build a new welfare home and we should target this to be ready by 2014. Our current welfare homes are not full yet, but I want to ensure that we always have some slack, so that gives the assurance that our social safety net has sufficient flexibility to deal with fluctuations and volatility in economic cycles.

Let me end with some words on problem gambling. I totally agree with the three Members that we must not normalise gambling in Singapore. We must not make it fashionable. We must not make it a badge of honour. We should continue to assign it the vice that it is. It is a human weakness. It is not a

means of getting a living. It is not a means of getting rich.

Members have raised questions on the adequacy of our social safeguards. We actually do have a comprehensive system which is unmatched anywhere in the world. If I can reiterate: a ban on minors; a casino entry levy; the casino exclusion orders which currently exclude, I think about 33,000 people; disallowing gambling on credit; and, having strict advertising and promotion rules.

*Cols. 4291-4292.

The casino operators by now know me well and they know that we are quite prepared to act decisively and abruptly, if need be, in order to stop them from targeting the domestic market, whether it is trying to advertise or to increase accessibility by shuttle bus services or casino promotions during the Seventh Month or publicity of winners on their websites. I have a good functional relationship with the operators so when we speak or discuss things, things usually happen. I do not want to be complacent but I do not want Members to run away with the idea that this thing has gone out of control. We are watching very, very closely and, if need be, we will strengthen measures further.

1.30 pm

Let me just conclude by saying if we look at this term of Parliament, we have invested considerably in the social services sector. We have brought together resources. We have professionalised people. We have uplifted standards of governance in organisations in order to address the diverse needs in our society. But our journey does not stop here. We have committed to building an inclusive society in Singapore – one that is cohesive, actively engaged and takes responsibility for looking after our weakest and our most vulnerable.

At the same time, we must not lose our core values – self-reliance, family responsibility, hard work, community support. These are key foundations of our

society. These values have propelled us from third world to first. An article that was published in The Australian last week, and I believe it has been carried in today's Straits Times, "Proof of welfare's multiple failings" written by an aboriginal Australian, I believe, social worker. He reminded Australia, "Don't look at the US or look at UK, within this region, look to Singapore as an example". Let me just quote from his article, he says, "The sacrifices, the thrift, the hard work, the determination were all part of a national undertaking." I believe and I am sure Members of this House will agree so long as we stay true to these values, the collective will of our people gives us strength, gives us the competitive edge to deal with the challenges ahead, to succeed and to succeed gloriously and, at the same time, to be inclusive and to uplift the weakest and the most vulnerable members of our society.

(In Mandarin): [For vernacular speech, please refer to Appendix A*.] I would like to thank my parliamentary colleagues for their recognition of our work at MCYS in the past five years. The aim of the Ministry of Community Development, Youth and Sports is to develop Singapore as the best home for starting families and nurturing children. I would like to thank Mr Seah Kian Peng for giving me the opportunity to do some publicity for the Social Development Network (SDN). We had announced this last year that their website is www.lovebyte.org.sg. Mr Seah is correct to say that the main reason for Singapore’s falling birth rate is that people are not getting married. To identify the problem is not difficult. However, how can we influence the personal decision of Singaporeans? SDN has four main strategies.

According to a survey conducted in 2009, around 80% of young Singaporeans still want to get married, so we

have hope. First, we will start from young singles. SDN will target young Singaporeans by organising talks and courses in universities, polytechnics, junior colleges and Institute of Technical Education (ITE) to improve the relationship skills of students and impart family values to them. Such talks and courses are already available in 83% of institutes of higher education.

Secondly, SDN will collaborate with more partners, for example, Singapore Sports Council, Sentosa Development Corporation, SAFRA and others. According to feedback from Members of Parliament and officers from our Ministry, we should also strengthen collaboration with employers. We hope employers from private organisations and companies, public sector organisations and quasi-Government organisations will help our workers by taking on the role of "matchmakers", and encouraging singles to socialise.

SDN’s third strategy is to develop the private dating sector, through the Partner Connection Fund and the SDNTrust accreditation scheme, so that our dating services industry will become more professional. As of last month, there are 10 dating agencies and 15 practitioners accredited under the scheme.

Finally, SDN has also launched various public education initiatives and publicity campaigns, through platforms such as radio talk shows, the SDN publication "Duet" and SDN website in order to create more public awareness about singles’ issues.

Last year, SDN and partnering organisations organised around 1,000 activities for over 31,000 single individuals. Since 2008, we have provided an additional $4 million every year for five years to fund SDN activities and

operations. I believe our colleague, Mr Seah, is also very pro-family. I hope his NTUC FairPrice will also collaborate with us more.

However, the root cause of the decreasing marriage rate is that social norms and individual preferences have changed. According to a survey that we did last year, young Singaporeans cite a few reasons for delaying marriage. Firstly, they want to work hard to achieve financial stability. Secondly, they want to have a successful career. In addition, they said that they have no time and cannot find a suitable partner. Hence, the work of helping singles cannot be done by a few institutions alone. More importantly, we should work on addressing individuals’ perspectives. In the past, we believed that we must start a family and establish a career, that among the most unfilial behaviour, not bearing any offspring is the worst. Nowadays, the younger generation may not accept this way of thinking. Hence, through individuals, families, schools, public opinion, public awareness and mass media, we should show more concern towards our young people. In the past, if you did not get married, it was a concern for the entire family and community. They would help introduce potential partners. Today, we assume that young people have their own way of handling these things. But I think we should not give up this responsibility.

Let me also take this opportunity to show Members the new Registry of Marriages. The newly-upgraded Registry of Marriages is quite nicely done up. Our budget was $7 million, but we only used $4 million. Now, we also want to partner with the private sector to explore the possibility of allowing solemnisations in the evenings. This will allow couples to register their marriages after getting off from work, so that they can get married in a more romantic ambience.

Let me elaborate on the resources we have invested in the development of young children. Just a while ago, our Minister mentioned three strategies in early childhood development, the first being to establish more childcare centres. As of January this year, we have established 171 new childcare centres since 2008. Currently, we have a total of 888 childcare centres, providing 79,000 places. Compared to 2008, this is an increase of 26%.

We will implement more measures to improve the standard of childcare services, especially the standards of teachers. In the past three years, we have trained an additional 1,700 childcare teachers, so that they have at least a professional diploma in Early Childhood Care and Education. In addition, the turnover rate of childcare teachers has also dropped from 23% to 15%. As more and more new childcare centres start operations, our Ministry will also invest $15 million in the next three years to attract more good quality teachers to join the childcare industry. To attract talent, we will provide 840 scholarships and awards for Early Childhood Education courses in the next three years.