Hansard, Friday, 7 March 2025

1 Mr Xie Yao Quan asked the Minister for Education in view of the results of the Joint Autonomous Universities Graduate Employment Survey 2024, whether the Ministry will consider further measures to boost the proportion of fresh graduates securing full-time permanent jobs after graduation.

2 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Minister for Education in view of the 2024 Joint Autonomous Universities Graduate Employment Survey which showed that salaries were higher but fewer graduates found employment within six months of completing their final exams (a) what factors are contributing to the decrease in the employment rate; (b) how do the fresh graduate employment rates vary across sectors; and (c) what is driving the increase in median salary among fresh graduates despite fewer jobs on offer.

3 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education in respect of the Joint Autonomous Universities Graduate Employment Survey 2024, what is the Ministry doing to monitor, manage and mitigate the higher unemployment rate of fresh graduates as compared to the past two years.

Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 1, 2 and 3 in today's Order Paper, as well as related Parliamentary Questions (PQs) by Mr Pritam Singh and Mr Leong Mun Wai, which are scheduled for 10 and 11 March, together.

Please go ahead.

Employment rates are affected by various factors such as economic and labour market conditions. The employment rates of fresh graduates from Autonomous Universities (AUs) have remained broadly stable over the decade, with some year-to-year fluctuations due to cyclical changes.

The labour market saw a strong recovery in 2021 and 2022 post-COVID. In comparison, while the labour market was still tight, there was lower hiring demand and fewer job vacancies in 2024. We also observed some graduates taking longer to secure full-time employment in 2024. These may have contributed to the reported decrease in full-time permanent employment rate and increase in the unemployment rate of graduates from our AUs at six months post-graduation.

Even as there was a broad decline in full-time permanent employment rates, some clusters such as Health Sciences and Business continued to see strong employment outcomes. Median salaries for fresh graduates have also continued to rise, with a year-on-year increase of 4.2% in 2024, even as the total number of fresh AU graduates increased over the past five years. This indicates that employers continue to value the skills of our graduates. It also reflects the Government’s commitment to creating good jobs, especially in the growth sectors.

Beyond cyclical fluctuations, we will continue to monitor broader social trends, such as evolving market demand, changing job preferences and aspirations, including more work flexibility and higher salary expectations, that may also affect the employment of our graduates upon graduation.

Apart from the Graduate Employment Survey, which tracks employment outcomes six months after graduation, the Government also monitors medium-term outcomes of our graduates through periodic labour market surveys. These continuous efforts will enable our curriculum to remain relevant and responsive to market demand.

The AUs will continue to engage industry partners to organise industry talks and career fairs to expose students to emerging sector trends, in-demand skills and connect them with potential employers. Alongside the broad-based employment support and career guidance offered to all students and graduates, personalised career coaching is also available at the respective AUs' Career Centres. Graduates who require further support in their job search may reach out to the Career Centres, even after graduation. They may also tap on the career matching services and online resources offered by Workforce Singapore and the National Trades Union Congress' (NTUC’s) Employment and Employability Institute (e2i).

Mr Xie.

Thank you, Sir. And I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Two clarifications.

First, I note the Minister of State's reply that there are cyclical factors, but I wonder whether there are also structural factors at play in some of the data and trends that we are observing. Because compared to pre-COVID levels, full-time employment of graduates did go up sharply and exceeded pre-COVID levels in 2021 and 2022, as the Minister of State has also noted in her reply, as we recovered from COVID. But this regressed back to pre-COVID levels in 2023. And then in 2024, the full-time employment rate for fresh graduates has actually come in below pre-COVID levels, and quite significantly so for certain sectors. In Business, it is about five percentage points lower in 2024 compared to pre-COVID levels; in the Built Environment, seven percentage points lower in 2024; and in Engineering, five percentage points lower compared to pre-COVID levels.

And one would imagine that these are growing sectors and there should be growing demand for our graduates in these sectors. Can I ask the Minister of State what is driving this trend and are there structural factors at play?

The second clarification also on the basis of my first question, have these observations given the Ministry of Education (MOE) any cause to look at and adjust its fundamental assumptions in the determination of the number of places available in each course of study in each university going forward?

To put things in context, the Graduate Employment Survey provides a snapshot of graduate employment outcomes approximately six months after graduation. The employment rates for Singaporeans aged 25 to 29 have remained broadly stable over the decade along with low long-term unemployment rates. In 2024, about 95% of this age group were in full-time employment. This suggests that our graduates do not have prolonged job search difficulties. [Please refer to "Clarification by Minister of State for Education", Official Report, 7 March 2025, Vol 95, Issue 160, Correction By Written Statement section.]

There are fluctuations in sectoral employment rates and these are to be expected given the cyclical nature of the economy and the labour market. We will continue to work with the sector agencies to monitor these outcomes to see if there is a more persistent trend. For specific sectors, such as the Built Environment and Manufacturing, and in addition to the cyclical effects, these have also tended to be sectors that have faced greater challenges attracting graduates into the sector. There are ongoing efforts by the sector agencies and industry to review how they can better attract graduates into these sectors.

On the second question, to ensure that our graduates are equipped with skills that are needed to access good employment opportunities, MOE regularly reviews together with the Ministry of Trade and Industry, and the Ministry of Manpower the forecasts of sectors' investments and from there, adjusts the university places for each course. This takes into account the employment prospects of graduates from various disciplines alongside national manpower needs and of course, the students' interests.

Ms Jessica Tan.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Can I just ask two clarifications from the Minister of State? It is with regard to the higher median salary in the third question of my original PQ. What is driving the higher median salary? Is it a demand for higher skills? Just as the hon Member, Mr Xie had highlighted, is there a skills gap, because there is greater demand in certain sectors for jobs, and employers are facing difficulty filling those. At the same time, our fresh graduates are facing problems. So, is there a skills gap? And also, what is driving the higher median salary?

The higher median salary that we are seeing reflects the market trends and also how more of our graduates are being drawn to the growth sectors. Over the years we have also adjusted the university places in courses that we deem to have higher market demand, as well as high interest of our students. So, actually, in terms of absolute numbers of our fresh graduates from the AUs, it has grown over the last five years. And we see that more are going to the growth sectors with higher salaries. Hence, there is this increase in median salaries of our graduates as a whole.

To the Member's question, whether there could be skills gap, our universities always work with the sector agencies and industry leaders to look at the skills required for the jobs that are available today. We try as well to project ahead what might be the future skills. It takes about three to four years in the universities for our students before they graduate. And it is therefore important that we always update the curriculum to make sure that our graduates are equipped with the relevant skills by the time they graduate.

Also, in my earlier point, in response to Mr Xie Yao Quan's question, the Graduate Employment Survey just gives us a snapshot at the six-month mark. We do know that amongst those who responded that they were unemployed after six months of graduation, actually, about half of them had received job offers, and about I think two-thirds of this group that received job offers that had still not yet started work, they were going to start work in due course. And the remaining one-third of this group that had job offers reject the job offers for various reasons.

So, the texture is not as straightforward as what is seen. We will continue to do our best to support every graduate out there to be able to find a job that suits their needs.

Mr Patrick Tay.

Sir, just one clarification with the Minister of State. In 2020 to 2022, particularly during the pandemic period, there was a sudden surge of high demand in professional services, including and especially in infocomm technology (ICT). And as a result, many in the last couple of years have embarked on Computer Science and ICT-related programmes in our Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs).

However, as we can see, in the last 15 to 18 months, there is a bit of consolidation, rationalisation and restructuring, exacerbated by generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) in this sector. And many of these graduates are coming out in the next three years. How is MOE helping, and integrating possibly the Ministry of Manpower, to overcome this fear or the apprehensions of our upcoming graduates?

Post-COVID, we saw a sudden surge in demand for workers in ICT and also a spike in the starting salary for graduates in this sector. I recall seeing some of these headline figures, some companies offering $8,000 and above for fresh graduates from our universities going into this sector. The market has kind of stabilised in more recent times. We know that there are some graduates in ICT who are able to get employed very quickly and still being offered very high salaries. But the demand has tapered and so, we are also seeing some graduates who feel that perhaps if they wait a little bit more, they might be able to still find a job with similarly attractive high salaries.

I think there is transition going on now. We do ask our graduates who are still looking for a job to speak to career coaches and keep in touch with the Career Centres in the universities so that they are more updated on the industry trends.

On graduates who are in ICT, there is actually still a very high demand, although we also know out there in the market, there is some churn, some consolidation, some retrenchments as well. So, it is understandable that the hiring of our graduates in this sector has softened.

There are enough jobs though in our economy. And as you can see, the full-time employment rates of our employed graduates in the 25 to 29 age group remains decently high – about 95%, if I recall correctly. It means that our graduates from ICT actually do have the flexibility to go to jobs that are in adjacent sectors too.

Last supplementary question. Mr Pritam Singh.

Obliged, Mr Speaker. Thank you to the Minister of State for the reply. My two clarifications will really be a follow-on from the question I asked last month on the Polytechnic Graduate Employment Survey 2024, which also showed fewer graduates securing full-time permanent jobs. The Minister for Education gave an extensive reply in response to that PQ.

My first clarification for the Minister of State is whether the Minister of State sees the latest Graduate Employment Survey as reflective of a perhaps longer-term secular trend of graduates at the university level finding it harder to get jobs? With reference to the Graduate Employment Survey, if we look at course clusters such as Art, Design and Media, post-COVID, 2022 to 2024, Art, Design and Media, a 11.3% drop to 60.9%; Engineering was 91.6%, dropped to 79.3%, and that is a 12.3% drop; and so forth.

So, the concern is, does the Ministry assess this potentially to be a secular issue, going forward?

The second point is with regard to the reply that the Minister for Education gave vis-a-vis the earlier PQ that I filed in February on polytechnic graduates. The Minister also made reference to university graduates and the things that are required to ensure that they get not just a good salary and a fulfilling job at the point of entry post graduation, but also through their careers. And the two points he made was first closer industry university collaboration. I think the Minister of State referred to that. But the second point he made also was about developing adjacent competencies for these graduates, and this includes those university graduates.

So, my point is, can we foresee at the MOE level for there to be a review of course curriculum, course structure to develop these adjacent competencies in a more structured and directed manner? So, it is not a question of doing one extra module or two extra modules in an adjacent subject, for example, like human resources (HR), but more directed courses to ensure that in the event a graduate cannot find a place in his primary course of study, there is something parallel, which potentially could provide good job opportunities for that graduate.

For the two supplementary questions, I will answer the second one first. Certainly, yes, we believe in a broad-based education for our students. From the time they enter our mainstream education, we already start equipping them with different sets of skills and with some specialisation as they go into our tertiary education institutions. And even in the tertiary education institutions, students actually have the ability to choose various other modules beyond their specialised courses, so that they will have also adjacent skills that help broaden their employability.

And certainly, we will continue to review the course syllabus and offerings to our graduates. We do this in close partnership with the industry and the sector agencies. Actually, beyond the technical skills and the professional skills, it is also important to equip our graduates, whether from polytechnics, the Institute of Technical Education (ITE) or universities, with useful life skills, so that they are able to navigate uncertainties and also be able to pick up new knowledge and skills beyond graduation. And I think that is important. So, lifelong learning, getting our graduates to understand that what they have learned or picked up in the first 15 years of their education, while it is enough for them to be able or for most of them to be able to get jobs, they still need to upgrade themselves. And if they are in a sector that is disrupted due to external environmental conditions, then all the more it is important for them to have the relevant life skills and the gumption to pick up new skills.

On the first question, Mr Pritam Singh made reference to polytechnic graduates. The Minister for Education gave a very long reply. I will not repeat it. But I would like to say that while there was a decline in the graduate employment for that group, there are also more and more polytechnic graduates whom we see would want to upgrade themselves beyond a diploma. That also affects the employment outcomes for this group. So, I think it is useful for us not to over-generalise the graduate employment of our polytechnic and our university students together.

And to the question of whether it has become harder for university graduates to find a job, I explained quite extensively earlier on. The Graduate Employment Survey is just a snapshot of the employment situation at the six-month mark after graduation. I think it is important for us to take a step back and look at the employment of our Singaporean adults in the age group, say 25 to 29. What we see is that the trend has been quite stable. The employment rate is 95% and the long-term unemployment for this group is very low. [Please refer to "Clarification by Minister of State for Education", Official Report, 7 March 2025, Vol 95, Issue 160, Correction By Written Statement section.]

Rest assured that we will continue to look out for our graduates' employment outcomes and we are ready to make adjustments so that graduates will be able to find fulfilling jobs that meet their aspirations and needs.

Mr Singh, a short one. I would like to move to the next PQ.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think the Minister of State may have misunderstood my first supplementary question. It was not on polytechnic graduates per se. It was about the longer-term structural trends with regard to university graduates. I referenced polytechnic graduates because the reply that Minister gave earlier in February also include the reference, not just to polytechnic graduates, but ITE graduates, university graduates as well. So, the first supplementary question was essentially about the longer-term secular trend given the numbers coming out of the Graduate Employment Survey since 2022. Does the Minister of State or the Ministry see it as a longer-term structure, secular trend in a particular direction?

I have also replied that for our university graduates, we look beyond the last three years. We look at the last decade. And I think it is important that we not just look at a longer timeframe to ascertain the trend and whether there is some intervention that we require, but also look at beyond the six-month mark. So, beyond six months after graduation, what is the employment and employability of our graduates? I think that is more meaningful.

Minister Chan, you wish to add on?

Speaker, Sir, I thought it is a very useful discussion today. I would just like to make a few points in response to various Members' comments and suggestions. Because yesterday we hear a suggestion for us that we should just increase the number of graduates so long as they can perhaps meet some benchmarks.

And today's discussion actually brings us back to where exactly we want to go. It is not about how many graduates we produce a year that matters most at 18 years old. What matters most, whether is it their graduates from our universities or polytechnics, is that they have the required skills to get good jobs, not just at the starting, with good starting pay, but with good trajectory. And this is the key point. Some countries, they produce over 90% of their cohort as graduates and they have quite poor employment outcomes. Some developed countries in Europe have only 20% going to universities and many of them going to trade schools, and they have very good employment outcomes.

The crux of the matter is what are the skill sets that we are equipping them with. That is most important. And it is not just about having everybody go to university, because we all want to go after the paper chase. So, this is my first point.

The second point is that indeed we must always monitor the long-term secular trends and the short-term cyclical trends. For us to produce a graduate, whether in polytechnic or university, it takes us three to four years, so we cannot be responding to the short-term trends always. It takes us four years to produce a graduate. So, when we design our courses, we must have a long-term perspective of what are the skill sets that are required by the market, not in the next one to two years, but in the next five to 10 years. And more importantly, what are the adjacent skill sets that will allow our people to pivot to new jobs that may be created and may not be even in existence today. And that is how we must work closely with our industry.

So, I would just like to register the point that together with yesterday's discussion, it is not about chasing the numbers of graduates. Certainly, it is about equipping our graduates regardless of their age with the relevant skills.

Mr Singh. Okay, really, last one. I actually really hope we can get to the next block of questions.

Sir, maybe then, I can take this offline with the Minister. Then, we can move on.

That would be appreciated. Mr Xie Yao Quan.

4 Mr Xie Yao Quan asked the Minister for Education whether the Ministry can provide an update on the actions taken by Montfort Secondary School in response to a recent bullying incident in the school.

5 Mr Xie Yao Quan asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry will be minded to adopt a clear zero-tolerance stance towards bullying in our schools; (b) whether the Ministry will be minded to (i) set up a centralised investigation unit and (ii) standardise and centrally administer a framework for punishment and rehabilitation to deal with egregious cases of bullying in our schools; and (c) if not, why not.

6 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry has launched an investigation into the bullying case at Montfort Secondary School; and (b) if so, what is the outcome of the investigation.

7 Mr Patrick Tay Teck Guan asked the Minister for Education what actions can the school take and what can the Ministry provide as a recourse to victims and their families if the bullying behaviour of a student continues even after police reports have been filed, the school's leadership informed and the bully’s parents notified.

Minister Maliki, I hope your answer is about four minutes, because that is all the time we have.

I will try. It is an important question.

You have to, because Question Time is 30 minutes.

Okay, Mr Speaker. I beg your indulgence. May I have your permission to respond to Question Nos 4 to 7 in today's Order Paper?

Go ahead.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. And my response will also address the written question filed by Mr Leong Mun Wai, which is scheduled for a subsequent Sitting.

Mr Speaker, I first want to thank Members for their concern for the well-being of our students. We all are very concerned about the well-being of our students.

On the Monfort Secondary School fighting incident, the Ministry of Education (MOE) issued a media statement on 3 March 2025 about the outcome of the school’s investigations and the actions taken by the school. So, I invite Members to seek clarifications if needed, if we have time.

For Members who asked about MOE’s processes for handling bullying incidents, these have been comprehensively detailed in MOE’s Parliamentary response on 14 October 2024. These remain relevant. However, most of this work happens behind the scenes in schools, and members of the public may not be aware of the actions taken. So, today, I would like to highlight some additional points to make clear MOE’s approach in handling bullying and fighting incidents.

Let me first start by reiterating that any form of hurtful behaviour is not acceptable and has no place in our schools. However, I would also point out that when any incident of fighting or bullying is shared online, for example, via a social media post or a video, usually a one-sided story is presented, from a particular perspective. While we would hope that members of the public can remember that what they see or read online may not present the full facts of the case, people often react emotively to what they see online and form quick judgments on what happened, or who was in the right or wrong in that incident. Hence, let me put forth what MOE and schools do when handling such incidents.

When an incident is reported, the school will conduct thorough investigations to understand the facts before deciding on the appropriate course of action – which could include both disciplinary and rehabilitative actions. If a Police report is filed, the school will also assist the Police in their investigations, including supporting their staff and students who may be called up for questioning. For serious cases, perpetrators will face legal consequences in accordance with the law.

MOE and schools would prefer to handle each case sensitively to provide space and privacy for the students involved to learn from their mistakes and grow from the experience. However, if a case is made public online and the information provided is unduly skewed such that it causes public concern, damages the reputation of other parties, and/or seek to promote one’s side of the story even though the accuser may not be totally innocent, MOE may have to put out the facts of the case to provide a balanced view of the entire incident, including the actions of all who were involved, based on the school’s investigations. This is to be fair to our educators and all parties involved.

MOE may also put out information on the actions taken against all parties who share responsibility for the incident – the initiator who started the fight, and others who retaliated or joined in subsequently. Bystanders and those who recorded the incident and shared the recordings online will also be called out, counselled and punished if necessary. This is to remind them not to do so, to avoid further hurting the ones who are involved and to highlight to them that by sharing the recordings, they are endorsing the acts and are complicit to the act. This will also mitigate the impulse to normalise or chase the extremes in the contest to circulate ever more startling videos and content.

While firm actions will be taken to address the parties involved in each incident, the school will also use the opportunity as a teaching moment for all its students.

Mr Speaker and Members, this is also a teaching moment for us and the whole of our community. We cannot form good conclusions from a video snippet. So, I thank you for your concern for our students. Let us work together to protect schools as a safe space for our children to learn from their mistakes to change and to grow.

Order. End of Question Time. Introduction of Government Bills.

[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]

[(proc text) "to provide for the regulation of social residential homes and other connected or incidental matters, to repeal the Homes for the Aged Act 1988, and to make consequential and related amendments to certain other Acts", (proc text)]

[(proc text) presented by the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social and Family Development (Mr Eric Chua) on behalf of the Minister for Social and Family Development, read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]

[(proc text) "to amend the Estate Agents Act 2010, the Housing Developers (Control and Licensing) Act 1965 and the Sale of Commercial Properties Act 1979 to give effect to certain recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force, and for related matters", (proc text)]

[(proc text) presented by the Second Minister for National Development (Ms Indranee Rajah) read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [6th Allotted Day]. (proc text)]

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

[(proc text) Head S (cont) – (proc text)]

[(proc text) Resumption of Debate on Question [6 March 2025], (proc text)]

[(proc text) "That the total sum to be allocated for Head S of the Estimates be reduced by $100." – [Mr Desmond Choo]. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Question again proposed. (proc text)]

Mr Louis Ng. Please take your two cuts together.

Many in the LGBTQ+ community are relieved that Minister confirmed that discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is covered under the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP). This position is now reflected in Hansard on the Parliament website but strangely, not on the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP) website.

When someone faces discrimination or is handling a complaint about discrimination, do we really believe they will search the Parliament website on whether the discrimination is covered or will they search the TAFEP website?

It would mean the world to the LGBTQ+ community if the TAFEP website can finally explicitly state that discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is covered under TGFEP, along with the other characteristics that TAFEP already lists on its website, including age, race, gender, religion, marital status and family responsibility.

Next, many of us in this House have been fighting hard for parent care leave. We have been asking serious questions of why legislate childcare leave but not parent care leave. Are we signalling that looking after our children is more important than looking after our parents? Why provide parent care leave to all civil servants but not others? It cannot only be that civil servants need to look after their parents.

The Government has said repeatedly that we are an ageing population. The younger generation not only has to bear the tax burden but they will also need time to look after their parents, especially when they are ill. All Singaporeans need parent care leave and depend on us to legislate this so that all companies will provide parent care leave just like how childcare leave is provided and mandated.

As companies enforce return-to-office measures, many caregivers, especially single adults supporting elderly parents and parents of children with severe disabilities, face growing uncertainty. For them, flexible work is not a convenience but a necessity for balancing caregiving and financial stability. Single caregivers form the backbone of informal caregiving, often juggling full-time jobs at the cost of career progression and retirement security. Some are even forced to leave the workforce entirely.

Since my 2022 speech on supporting single caregivers, we have seen progress. HDB now prioritises singles buying flats near elderly parents, and businesses must process flexible work requests, for which we are very grateful.

Yet, these policies fall short of guaranteeing approvals, leaving caregivers in limbo. Likewise, for parents of children with severe disabilities, flexible work is essential, not a preference. Without firm policies, many risk losing employment. How will the Government ensure that caregivers, especially singles supporting elderly parents and parents of children with disabilities, can remain in the workforce while meeting their caregiving responsibilities despite return-to-office mandates?

Caregivers have shared that flexible work arrangements (FWAs) are their most preferred form of support in balancing work and caregiving. The launch of the Tripartite Guidelines on Flexible Work Arrangement Requests (TG-FWAR) in April 2024 is a significant milestone in this effort. These guidelines are designed to address the fact that every caregiver’s needs are unique, and that these needs may evolve depending on job requirements and business realities.

With more than 70% of Singapore companies already offering some form of FWAs, the focus going forward must be to normalise FWAs and the requests for them. FWAs implemented must be sustainable and create win-win outcomes for both employers and employees alike. Progressive practices, which include setting up clear outcome-based KPIs for employees, implementing more frequent and regular check-ins with staff, and upskilling or equipping human resources personnel with current FWA practices must also be encouraged. More resources must also be availed to lesser resourced small and medium enterprises (SMEs) on implementing programmes and policies for the long-term sustainability of FWAs.

Some progressive employers have started to work with the National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) on the creation of employee attraction and retention programmes using FWAs, such as the NTUC C U Back at Work Programme (CUB). The CUB programme helps caregivers, especially women, return to work with flexible work options and flexible training schedules and, of course, an attractive pay package and, to date, we have placed close to 1,000 cubbies in the programme. We believe that the CUB and other FWA-centric programmes can be extended to help pregnant and/or single mothers to stay in the workforce and hope to expand the programme to cover such underserved segments of women and to include more professional, manager, executive and technician (PMET) roles.

I ask the Ministry for an update on the TG-FWAR and whether it can consider measuring its impact on women returning to work, given that employers and employees are not required to report outcomes. In addition, what can the Ministry do to support more flexible work opportunities to open employment options for more underserved segments of women, such as pregnant mothers, in a bid to promote more inclusive workspaces.

Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon.

Mr Chairman, I will now speak about the Ministry of Manpower's (MOM's) efforts to empower workers to build career health at all stages of their lives. I will touch on four groups: first, for the broad base of workers, we will help you build up your career health and resilience; second, for those who lose their jobs involuntarily, we will support you to bounce back into employment; third, for our senior workers, we will do more to uplift your productive longevity; fourth, for our migrant workers, we will continue to support and improve their well-being.

Our workers start from a good position. In the past year, we have enjoyed higher-than-expected economic growth and favourable labour market outcomes. Resident employment grew and median real income rose in 2024, reversing the previous year’s decline.

We must continue to embrace innovation so that workers can progress into better jobs and businesses can generate growth that uplifts all Singaporeans. We must also develop a future-ready workforce that can navigate changes in the job landscape and compete for good jobs.

Let me start with how we are supporting the broad base of workers to build their career health. Forward SG identified career agility and resilience as a key focus in our refreshed social compact. In this age of change and disruption, we need better awareness of our career prospects, keep our skills relevant, stay on top of the competition and seize new opportunities. To empower our workers to do so, we have launched Career Health SG, a nationwide initiative to help workers take charge of their careers and achieve their career aspirations.

How do we take charge of our career health? Well, just as we look after our physical health by eating healthily, exercising regularly and having periodic medical check-ups, we encourage all Singaporeans to take charge of their own career health through three simple steps.

First, assess. Just as we go for regular health screenings, we should regularly assess our career prospects and skillsets. Instead of waiting till something goes wrong, we should take proactive steps to identify our skills gaps and career opportunities.

Second, chart. Just as we develop exercise and diet routines, we should chart our career and training goals. We need to constantly review and update these career plans based on changes in the labour market and our stage of life.

Finally, execute. We need to act on our plans to seek better jobs, upgrade our skills and stay competitive in the job market.

So, assess, chart, execute – or ACE. By taking these three steps to take charge of one’s career health, we can ace our careers with better jobs, better wages and greater resilience.

To empower workers in this three-step journey, we are supporting our workers with jobs and skills insights to help them make informed training and career decisions. The CareersFinder feature on the MyCareersFuture portal is one example of this. CareersFinder harnesses Government data and artificial intelligence (AI) to provide workers with personalised guidance and recommendations for suitable jobs based on their skills and expertise, and training opportunities based on their career goals.

More than 55,000 individuals have used CareersFinder since its launch. We have seen encouraging signs of users broadening their job search horizons. Users have applied for a wider range of occupations, almost 40% more, after using CareersFinder.

Mr Gerald Giam highlighted the need to go beyond digital tools to support jobseekers with personalised and effective career coaching. For those who prefer in-person guidance, we have taken steps to make quality career guidance more accessible. We have piloted Polaris, where employed individuals can receive personalised career guidance from professionally certified career coaches.

Since November 2023, Polaris has benefited more than 620 individuals. Over 90% reported gaining clearer direction and higher confidence in planning their own careers. One such participant is Ms Joanne Wang, the Regional Head of Marketing at Timezone. At 39, Joanne signed up for Polaris to better plan for her career and improve her management skills. With advice from her WSG career coach, she decided to pick up professional coaching to further develop herself and her team. In doing so, she boosted her team performance and her own career satisfaction.

Jobseekers can also receive support from WSG’s Volunteer Career Advisors, who draw from their own industry expertise to provide peer-level support and career advisory. Under this initiative, individuals can receive sector- and occupation-specific insights to help them plan for their career or transition into new roles.

We also want to make quality career guidance even more accessible to all workers. Some may hesitate to go for career guidance because they are concerned about the cost and are uncertain about the quality of service providers.

Mr Patrick Tay and Mr Yip Hon Weng proposed to allow the use of SkillsFuture Credits for career coaching.

We are pleased to share that we have extended the use of the base tier of SkillsFuture Credits, which comprises the $500 opening credit and the one-off $500 top-up that was given in 2020, to all eligible career guidance services endorsed by Workforce Singapore (WSG). For a start, these credits can be used to offset Polaris' fees. The list of endorsed providers will be expanded progressively, to help workers access quality career guidance.

Beyond career guidance, Mr Gerald Giam also emphasised the importance of quality career matching services. As announced by the Prime Minister at the Budget, we will be expanding localised job matching to all Community Development Councils. This will enable jobseekers to find work near their homes to help them to balance work with personal commitments.

This will contribute to the diverse range of services in the employment facilitation landscape. These services support all jobseekers, including those returning after a career break. The services include: (a) career matching services offered by WSG’s Careers Connect, NTUC's Employment and Employability Institute (e2i) Career Centres, and Jobs and Skills Centres; as well as (b) services provided by WSG's appointed career-matching providers, like Ingeus and AKG.

WSG also works with employers to reskill and place individuals into good growth jobs under programmes, like the Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs) and Mid-Career Pathways Programme.

In 2024 alone, these programmes placed more than 56,000 jobseekers into jobs. Through these efforts, we hope to empower our workers to achieve their career goals. Workers must also play their part to proactively upkeep their skills, regularly review their career plans and seize good job opportunities at every stage of their careers.

Employers too, must play a role. Investing in career health is a win-win for employers and workers. Employers who do so can better attract and retain talent, sharpen their competitive edge and grow their businesses.

Assoc Prof Razwana Begum asked how we can support employers to promote lifelong learning and skills development for their employees.

The Government has continued to strengthen support for employers to invest in the career health of their workers, such as through WSG's CCPs. These programmes have resulted in tangible career outcomes for employees. A recent study by MOM economists found that the Place-and-Train CCPs increased participants' wages by more than 2% in the year of placement, with the impact rising to over 6% in the subsequent years. Participants also improved their employment retention compared to non-participants.

This shows that our efforts to reskill workers have an extended, positive impact on their wages and career longevity.

Beyond supporting employers, we are also working hand-in-hand with employers to co-develop effective solutions. Last year, MOM and the Singapore National Employers Federation (SNEF) concluded the Alliance for Action (AfA) on Widening Access to Talent, which worked with businesses, and trade associations and chambers to develop practical solutions for skills-based hiring and workforce agility.

A key recommendation was to build employers' capabilities to guide employees in developing their skills and careers. This entailed providing resources for employers to engage their employees in meaningful career development conversations. In line with this recommendation, WSG has been piloting workshops for human resource (HR) professionals and line managers, to equip them to implement better-structured career conversations in their own organisations.

The AfA also found that employers who implemented an internal marketplace to support talent visibility and internal mobility better retained talent. One of the AfA member firms, Salesforce, introduced a Talent Community Platform with personalised career recommendations, training and resources for employees to navigate career paths within the company. As a result, Salesforce enjoyed higher talent retention amidst fierce competition, with their employees better able to plan for their careers and upkeep their skills.

MOM is working closely with tripartite and industry partners on resources to enable more employers, especially our SMEs, to implement their own internal marketplaces.

For employers to implement these recommendations successfully, they will need to strengthen their HR to move beyond support functions to play a more strategic role in championing workforce transformation. This means taking proactive steps to identify critical and emerging skills, and charting plans to fill those gaps in their companies through hiring and workforce development. Employers can tap on resources by the Institute for Human Resource Professionals, such as their job redesign playbook, to meet these increased demands on HR.

We will continue to support employers to strengthen HR capabilities under the Tripartite Workgroup on Human Capital Capability Development that the Minister just announced.

We will need the strong support of employers to uplift the career health of our workers and will continue to explore new ways to enable employers to do this while meeting their business needs. For example, MOM and SkillsFuture Singapore rolled out the Careers and Skills Passport, and are working with partners, like JobStreet, to use Government-verified jobs and skills data to facilitate job application and hiring. We encourage HR practitioners to tap on these initiatives to better understand their employees' skills profile. This will support training, development and deployment, and better support your business growth.

Few countries have invested in such a holistic and integrated set of efforts to support career planning and workforce development. This underscores our continued commitment to empower Singaporeans to thrive amid economic uncertainty.

Even as our workers build their career health and make progress along their career plans, life, unfortunately, can present curveballs. In a more volatile economic environment, more may face career disruptions due to factors beyond one's control. Therefore, to empower those who lose their jobs involuntarily to bounce back into employment, the Prime Minister announced the SkillsFuture Jobseeker Support scheme (JS scheme) last year.

The JS scheme is not just a safety net that stops one from falling but is instead designed to act as a trampoline that helps one to bounce back. Together with other SkillsFuture programmes, the JS scheme helps individuals better navigate their job search to regain employment, instead of rushing into ill-fitting jobs due to immediate financial pressures.

The JS scheme targets lower- and middle-income workers, and will provide eligible jobseekers with financial support of up to $6,000 over six months. This will help them to get through setbacks and bounce back stronger.

We will be setting aside more than $200 million for the scheme and expect around 60,000 individuals to be eligible for the scheme each year. This accounts for more than 60% of those involuntarily unemployed.

During my time as Deputy Secretary-General in the Labour Movement, I encountered brothers and sisters who faced retrenchment. Being retrenched can have a profound emotional impact, often triggering a mix of shock, fear, anger and even shame. Many shared with me that they experienced a deep sense of loss, not just of job or income but also of identity and purpose. Some may feel a loss of self-worth, especially if their job was tied closely to their sense of identity.

During our Forward Singapore conversations, participants shared that instead of just giving handouts, a well-structured job seeking process that provides professional career facilitation support can help them regain their confidence as they navigate the job market. The JS Scheme is therefore more than just financial payouts and a job. It includes a simple and easy framework to guide jobseekers along the activities that they should embark on, to equip themselves to find a job and re-enter the working world with confidence. This framework, called the "jobseeker support activities-based system", will guide our jobseekers towards re-employment.

Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Patrick Tay asked for more details on what the activities-based system will entail. With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute a handout illustrating how this system will work.

Please go ahead. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]

Members may also access these materials through the MP@SGPARL App. As Members can see, jobseekers will be guided to complete meaningful activities like attending a career fair, updating their resume and going for career coaching. We have carefully curated these activities based on user research with jobseekers. Jobseekers have shared with us that the framework is useful in helping them to regain employment.

This activities-based system is also designed to ensure that jobseekers do not have to go through this journey alone. They can tap on WSG's resources and speak to WSG's career coaches, allowing them to benefit from professional guidance. Through these touchpoints, jobseekers will be more assured that they are on the right track to re-entering employment.

As jobseekers embark on these activities as part of their job search journey, we hope to build up their confidence. And when jobseekers eventually return to work, we hope they will regain their sense of identity and self-worth.

Let me illustrate how the JS scheme will work. Take Mr Lim, who is retrenched from his job due to company restructuring. The Taskforce for Responsible Retrenchment and Employment Facilitation makes concerted efforts to reach out to all affected retrenched workers, such as Mr Lim, to offer career matching services. Through this, Mr Lim books an appointment with a WSG career coach who provides him with advice on job applications based on his skills. He also applies and joins the JS scheme following the advice from his career coach.

During this period, Mr Lim makes use of the comprehensive employment facilitation support offered under the scheme, such as career coaching, SkillsFuture courses and career fairs. He also updates his resume and applies for jobs that match his skills, including those in less familiar roles or sectors.

By making good use of the comprehensive support under the activities-based system, Mr Lim receives the guidance and financial support needed to build up his career health and bounce back into a well-fitting job. Equipped with new skills and having found a new job, Mr Lim regains his sense of purpose and self-worth.

Throughout the process, Mr Lim is also able to focus on rebuilding his career, as the JS scheme provides him temporary financial support of up to $6,000 over six months. But I want to emphasise that the JS scheme should not be viewed in isolation. The Government, in fact, has in place various other schemes to provide financial support for those undergoing substantial reskilling or experiencing financial hardships.

For example, if Mr Lim enrols in long-form training while job searching, he can apply for both the JS scheme and the SkillsFuture Level-up Programme. Over a six-month period, he will receive up to $21,000, comprising $15,000 of training allowance and $6,000 of JS scheme support.

Jobseekers from households with financial difficulties may also receive additional social assistance from ComCare based on their needs.

The JS scheme will be launched in mid-April 2025 and WSG will be sharing more information on the application process ahead of its launch. Involuntarily unemployed individuals can also visit WSG and NTUC e2i's centres island-wide for support in their job search.

The JS scheme will be an added boost to Singapore's ecosystem of support for unemployed individuals, empowering them to take ownership in navigating a difficult chapter of their lives, to emerge with better outcomes. The key is providing jobseekers with financial assistance, complemented by a robust ecosystem of training and employment facilitation support. This way, we can strengthen our workers' career health and their longer-term prospects, and help them to rebuild their confidence to pursue better jobs and make bolder career moves.

This is part of our desired social compact, where the Government will support you through difficult times, while you take personal responsibility and make an effort to overcome career setbacks and bounce back stronger. Together, we will get through every setback.

Sir, let me now speak about our senior workers, a group that has dedicated their lives to nation-building and deserve special attention. Our population is ageing, and seniors today are living longer and healthier lives. We want to enable seniors to continue working if they wish to, so that they can contribute their expertise and accumulate more savings for retirement. This will also help employers meet manpower needs in a tight labour market.

Our policies over the past decade have paved the way for seniors to work longer. Last year, we announced that the retirement and re-employment ages will be raised to 64 and 69 respectively in 2026. This keeps us on track to meet our eventual goal of raising them to 65 and 70 respectively by 2030.

I am heartened that our Government and tripartite partners are taking the lead to implement the increases ahead of the national schedule. The Public Service and NTUC will be raising their retirement and re-employment ages to 64 and 69 this year, and SNEF has implemented the eventual goal of 65 and 70 since 2021. I encourage all employers to start preparing for next year's increases.

As seniors work, we will also help them save more for retirement. Since 2022, we have been implementing the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers' recommendation to increase Central Provident Fund (CPF) contribution rates for senior workers.

As the Prime Minister had announced at the Budget, the CPF contribution rates for those aged above 55 to 65 will increase further by 1.5 percentage points in 2026. At the same time, the Government will extend the CPF Transition Offset for another year. This will help ease the transition for employers by covering half of the increase in employer contributions for 2026.

We will continue to enhance our current measures to enable our seniors to work longer. Today, the Senior Employment Credit provides up to 7% in wage offsets to employers who hire Singaporeans aged 60 and above earning below $4,000 a month. Since its introduction in 2021, more than 117,000 employers have benefited from the scheme, hiring over 514,000 senior workers, and around $1 billion has been disbursed.

As the Prime Minister announced at Budget, we will extend the Senior Employment Credit by one year to 2026. In line with the increase in the re-employment age to 69 in 2026, the qualifying age for the highest Senior Employment Credit wage support tier of 7% will also be raised to 69, up from 68 today. We hope this assures employers that the Government will support you to prepare for our ageing workforce.

Our efforts to help seniors extend their career runways have paid off. Our labour force participation rate for those aged 60 to 69 was 59.7% in 2024, up from 55.8% in 2019. We are proud to rank alongside the top five Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries.

But there is more that can be done. Today, seniors are leaving the labour force before 65, with many leaving in their 50s. Our labour force participation rate falls from 86% for those aged 50 to 54, to 67.9% for those aged 60 to 64, a stark decrease of about 18 percentage points.

This is due to various reasons. Some wish to slow down and focus on family or personal commitments. Others have not worked for some time and may need to refresh their skills to return to the workforce.

Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Sharael Taha have highlighted that all stakeholders must play their part to effect broader societal shifts to support senior employment. Workers will need to embrace career changes over longer working lives. Employers will need to redesign jobs and build capabilities for a multi-generational workforce. The Government will enable these shifts by working with our tripartite partners to develop targeted measures to drive senior employment.

This is the impetus behind the Tripartite Workgroup on Senior Employment, which I will be chairing alongside NTUC Deputy Secretary-General and Senior Minister of State Desmond Tan and SNEF's Vice President Ms Tan Hwee Bin. As announced by the Prime Minister at Budget, this will be a significant tripartite effort to review and refresh our approach towards senior employment. It signals our tripartite commitment to co-creating solutions that meet the needs of workers and employers.

The Workgroup will focus on two key objectives. First, to empower senior workers to be productive and employable. With longer working lives, workers will need to continually upkeep their skills and remain open to trying new things in their late-stage careers. Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Xie Yao Quan asked about what more we can do to train and place our senior workers. Through the Workgroup, we will study better tailoring such services to suit seniors' preferences and needs. For a start, WSG and its partners will provide targeted career guidance workshops for seniors to help them better plan for their later-stage careers.

Second, to promote age-friendly jobs and multi-generational workplaces. We want to support multi-stage careers, where workers can adjust their workload based on their needs and aspirations. For example, Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Mark Lee suggested to scale up job redesign and fractionalised work that caters to senior workers. We will explore these ideas and much more under the Workgroup.

To kickstart this journey, the Workgroup will convene an Alliance for Action (AfA) on Empowering Multi-Stage Careers for Mature Workers. This AfA will bring together diverse stakeholders to co-create new ideas and pilot innovative ways to make workplaces more age-friendly. This echoes Mr Sharael Taha's point on going beyond schemes to shift workplace culture. Instead of adopting a top-down approach, we want to take each step in collaboration with our stakeholders, so that positive change can truly take root and bear fruit.

The AfA will work towards two goals. First, we will engage citizens from all walks of life to develop insights on the challenges and opportunities of an ageing workforce. We will hear from current and future seniors, as well as management and HR professionals representing employers of different sizes and sectors. By engaging widely, we can hear directly from stakeholders and build an enduring social compact together.

Second, we will work closely with employers to prototype innovative solutions to better support senior employment. Participating employers will receive funding and consultancy support to develop new models customised to their business needs. We will be opening applications to join the AfA soon, and I encourage all interested employers to sign up and be pathfinders for your industries. In turn, the insights from the AfA will inform our approach towards senior employment.

Mr Chairman, allow me to say a few words in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Since 2022, we have been gradually increasing CPF contribution rates for senior workers to help them save more for retirement. In 2026, the CPF contribution rates for those aged above 55 to 65 will increase by 1.5%. To help ease the transition for employers, we will also extend the CPF Transition Offset scheme for one year, which will cover half of the increase in employer contributions for 2026.

To better empower seniors who wish to continue working, we will set up a Tripartite Workgroup on Senior Employment this year, to review and refresh our senior employment policies. We will engage citizens and employers to better understand the challenges of an ageing workforce and identify ways to better harness the potential of senior workers. We will also pilot new ideas to enable senior workers to continue contributing at their desired pace.

(In English): Sir, another group we want to support is our migrant workers. We have made significant moves to improve their well-being in recent years.

Mr Louis Ng suggested increasing penalties for employment kickbacks. The collection of kickbacks is a serious offence, which MOM takes a firm stance against. The Ministry will not hesitate to press for the maximum penalties if a case warrants it. To date, the Courts have imposed substantial fines of $10,000 to $15,000 per charge or imprisonment terms.

On top of these penalties, the Courts will order offenders to surrender the monies they received from the affected worker if no restitution can be made. This ensures that offenders cannot retain the illegal kickbacks. We will continue to work closely with our stakeholders to stamp out kickbacks and ensure that our migrant workers are treated fairly.

Mr Chairman, in conclusion, the Government will be implementing several measures to empower Singaporeans of all walks of life to build their career health and seize good job opportunities. We will uplift different segments of our workforce so that no one is left behind.

We will continue to work closely with our tripartite partners and other stakeholders to develop a competitive workforce and support employers in their business growth. Together, we can sustain our economic growth and build a shared future for all Singaporeans.

Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.

With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute the handout detailing our efforts to support lower-wage workers? Members may also access these materials through the MP@SGPARL app.

Yes, go ahead. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]

Thank you. Mr Chairman, for many years, tripartism has been the critical success factor to raising the incomes and skills of our lower-wage workers. This helps narrow the gap with the median and, at the same time, keeps this sustainable for businesses.

How has Singapore achieved this? Under the Progressive Wage Model (PWM), which was introduced in 2014, wage requirements are negotiated by tripartite consensus among unions, employees, employers and the Government. This results in meaningful wage increases for our lower-wage workers. Increases are set at a pace that is sustainable for employers and mapped out over a period, which gives predictability for contracting and business planning.

What does this mean for Singapore's workers and businesses and why does PWM work? PWM works because we do not just rely on a minimum wage line to boost wages – but we rely on PWMs that boost wages for workers across different sectors and occupations.

Negotiated PWMs are impactful because we can optimise wage increments in different sectors, taking into consideration workforce productivity, sectoral growth and business transformation. From a holistic perspective, this means that we can maximise the wage growth potential of different sectors, such as security, waste management and others, and help our workers and their wages to grow.

PWM is not just about wages. It is also about mapping out skills and career pathways. This supports productivity improvements and provides workers with progression prospects.

Collectively, PWM sets the pace for wage growth, with Local Qualifying Salary (LQS) shoring up as our last line. We have a progressive and sustainable system, one that works, unlike a traditional minimum wage system. PWMs form a network of ladders in the ecosystem, leading the way to improve the wage outcomes for our lower-wage workers.

Tripartism is, therefore, our "secret sauce" in providing that balance that, in doing so, we keep businesses sustainable, so that they can continue to hire workers and can sustain their wage growth over time.

We cannot take this balance for granted, nor should allow politics to take over and start auctioning minimum wage levels. We have seen how this has played out in many countries – a blunt minimum wage line determined by politics, or rather, auctioned by politics just to win elections.

Some are unsustainable and fail to be implemented; others are pushed through but the industry cannot keep pace. So, businesses just hire fewer workers or reduce their work hours. So, businesses lose out and workers lose out. Our tripartite partners are keenly aware of these drawbacks and therefore, for PWM, we negotiate outcomes in the best interests of our people's livelihoods and a sustainable economy.

In fact, why offer our Singapore lower-wage workers the minimum when they can already benefit from progressive wages today? Minimum versus progressive. Our suite of Progressive Wage measures – the PWM, LQS and the Progressive Wage Mark accreditation scheme – now benefit up to nine in 10 lower-wage workers today.

Mr Melvin Yong asked about the impact of our efforts and I am proud to share that our tripartite efforts have yielded good, tangible outcomes. Lower-wage workers have consistently seen strong wage growth.

From 2019 to 2024, real wages at the 20th percentile rose cumulatively by 5.9%, higher than the median worker at 3.6%. If Members will refer to the handout distributed, our Lower-wage Workers Chart, you will find a chart of all of our lower-wage workers' wage growth that is coming up, in the coming years, especially in the different sectors.

And for sectors like security, for example, we have seen very good and strong progress. When it started in 2016, the PWM requirement was $1,300. Today, it is $2,870 and, by 2028, our security officers will have a minimum PWM markline of $3,530. That, I think, shows how progressive PWM is today.

It means that even though costs of living rose, the wages of our lower-wage workers rose even more. So, the wage gap between lower-wage workers and the median worker is also narrowing, even while median wages continue to rise.

In fact, a big part of this growth took place in the last three years, when tripartite partners agreed to expand PWM to three additional sectors and to two additional occupations. In the Department of Statistics' (DOS') latest report, income inequality in Singapore, as measured by the Gini coefficient, has declined steadily over the last decade. So, this bucks the trend, compared to many other countries where income wage gaps are widening. Here, we have seen the Gini coefficient reduced and I would like to think that PWM had played a role in this, too.

Sir, household income per member has also risen in real terms for households in the lowest 20% income group. So, I am hopeful that this will continue in the coming years. And this is a reflection of the tripartite partners' relentless efforts – our partners from the union, our partners from the employers, and as well as partners from the Government – for their unwavering commitment. I would like to applaud everyone involved for their contributions.

Besides tripartite partners to drive wage growth, the Government also provides lower-wage workers with additional support through the Workfare Income Supplement (WIS) Scheme, what we typically know as Workfare, and we have enhanced this further.

From January 2025, the qualifying monthly income cap for WIS has been increased from $2,500 to $3,000. And this ensures that WIS continues to help workers in the bottom 20th income percentiles, with some support for those slightly above.

WIS payments have also been increased. The maximum payment has been raised to $4,900 per year, up from $4,200. Those aged 60 and above will benefit from this highest payment tier, as well as persons with disabilities, regardless of age. WIS payments for all other age groups have also been increased. These enhancements to WIS will benefit about half a million lower-wage workers. In fact, in total, WIS payments will increase to $1.4 billion in 2025.

The Government will continue to work with tripartite partners to help lower-wage workers strengthen their wage and employment outcomes.

Mr Melvin Yong would be happy to hear that the tripartite partners are currently studying the expansion of PWM to the Pest Management sector and will provide more details in due course.

Above all, as Mr Edward Chia, Mr Fahmi Aliman and Mr Neil Parekh highlighted, the key to raising wages sustainably over the long term is for both workers and businesses to become more productive. Businesses must transform low-wage jobs for higher value-add and improve the efficiency of their operations. At the same time, with better jobs created, there will be demand for new skillsets and competencies. Workers will need to upskill to seize these opportunities and we will step up our efforts to help them do so.

Since 2010, the Government has been supporting low-wage workers in their upskilling journey through the Workfare Skills Support scheme, or WSS. Currently, WSS is targeted at short courses that can be completed over a few days. It covers the opportunity costs of training for low-wage workers aged 30 and above. For example, those pursuing training on their own receive a training allowance of $6 per hour. However, low-wage workers stand to benefit more from long-form courses that provide more robust upskilling and reskilling, which are associated with more significant wage increments.

The challenge, of course, is that these take longer and the opportunity cost for low-wage workers is, therefore, also higher. As announced at Budget, we will enhance WSS by introducing a new tier of support in the form of WSS (Level-Up). This is targeted at helping low-wage workers who wish to pursue long-form training. Taking reference from the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme, WSS (Level-Up) will provide low-wage workers who pursue long-form training with substantially higher training allowance, to cover the higher opportunity costs.

Full-time trainees will receive a monthly allowance set at 50% of their average monthly income based on the latest available 12-month period, and this, with a minimum monthly allowance of $300. Part-time trainees will receive a fixed monthly allowance of $300. This will benefit workers aged 30 and above, earning up to $3,000 per month. So, effectively, WSS (Level-Up) trainees will receive up to $18,000 per year for full-time training and up to $3,600 per year for part-time training. This is more than three times higher than the training allowance currently provided by WSS.

We also recognise that workers in lower-wage jobs may need more bouts of long-form training across their career stages. This is to acquire the necessary skills for more complex job roles, or pivot to new sectors. Hence, WSS (Level-Up) will cover up to 24 months of long-form training done before the age of 40 and another 24 months of long-form training after the age of 40.

WSS (Level-Up) will be rolled out from early 2026. I would like to assure Ms Mariam Jaafar and Mr Don Wee that we will work with tripartite partners to raise awareness of WSS (Level-Up) and help low-wage workers navigate their upskilling journeys. We will provide more details later this year. Ms Mariam Jaafar also asked if there are plans to extend WSS to low-wage workers aged 25 and over. We will keep this suggestion in mind, but at the same time, there are no plans to do so, as there are other schemes that younger workers can tap on, such as the ITE Progression Award and SkillsFuture Credit.

For low-wage workers to put their newly acquired skills to good use, businesses must also transform low-wage jobs for higher value-add and refine their processes for higher productivity. So, upskilling is just one half of the equation. There has been encouraging progress on the business front. In the retail and food services sector, businesses are adopting technological solutions, such as self-service systems and RFID inventory management. So, instead of routine tasks, retail workers can take on more diversified and higher-skilled jobs.

In outsourced sectors, such as cleaning, security and waste management, service providers are adopting robots and Internet-of-Things (IoT) solutions to reduce reliance on labour-intensive operations. So, existing workers can then be retrained and deployed to higher-value roles. The Government understands that it takes time for workers to upskill and for businesses to transform.

In the near term, businesses are also concerned about manpower costs. I would like to assure Ms Yeo Wan Ling that the Government fully recognises these concerns. We recognise that uplifting our low-wage workers will lead to some increases in manpower costs. But in a typical business organisation, low-wage workers account for a relatively modest share of businesses' overall manpower costs. They constitute only about one-fifth of our resident workforce and their wages are relatively lower to begin with. Nonetheless, we hear employers' concerns over the broader cost pressures.

As outlined by the Prime Minister at Budget, we are enhancing the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS) support for businesses. We will raise Government's co-funding of wage increases to low-wage workers from 30% to 40% in 2025 and from 15% to 20% in 2026. This builds on three earlier rounds of PWCS enhancements.

In fact, since 2022, the Government has co-funded the majority of wage increases given to low-wage workers and this was added up to 75% and 50% in previous years. For wage increases given in 2022 and 2023, the Government has already disbursed $2.7 billion of PWCS. These co-funded wage increases were given to more than 520,000 employees by over 90,000 employers.

The upcoming PWCS enhancements will continue to provide short-term relief, but I strongly encourage employers to make use of this opportunity to accelerate your transformation, so that we can uplift low-wage workers sustainably over the long term.

Chairman, we have made good progress so far, but we must press on with our efforts to uplift low-wage workers. We must all work together to reduce income inequality, which can cause risks in society if left unchecked. The work continues ahead of us. Over the next two years, the tripartite partners will be negotiating the next bound of wage schedules for the PWMs. The Government has laid the groundwork for this through PWCS, which supports business transformation efforts and brings some relief to cost pressures. We hope that employers and consumers, too, will play their part in uplifting our low-wage workers.

Chairman, as we uplift the livelihood of our workers, we must also safeguard their lives. Our performance for Workplace Safety and Health (WSH), has improved over the years. Over the past five years, the workplace fatality rate has averaged at 1.1 per 100,000 workers. This places Singapore among the top performing countries, with just four OECD countries consistently performing below 1.

0. We achieved this once in 2023. However, the recent increase in workplace fatalities in the second half of 2024 underscores the need for all stakeholders to remain vigilant and to prioritise workplace safety. While the WSH performance of sectors, such as manufacturing has improved, others can and must do better. We can certainly do much better for construction, which remains the top contributor of workplace accidents today.

Mr Melvin Yong asked for an update on the Safety Accountability, Focus and Empowerment measures (SAFE). All SAFE measures have been implemented over the last few years. They are a comprehensive set of measures aimed at enhancing collective WSH ownership. Take construction, for example. At the sectoral level, we enhanced businesses' incentive to prioritise safety by disqualifying poor WSH performers from tendering for public sector construction projects.

Construction worksites with contract value of $5 million and above are required to install a Video Surveillance System (VSS). This helps contractors to identify WSH hazards and facilitates MOM's investigations and deters unsafe behaviours. At the company level, chief executives and board directors in higher-risk sectors, including construction, must attend the Top Executive WSH Programme to understand their duties and learn how to foster good safety practices in their companies.

Beyond safety, we agree with Mr Melvin Yong that it is equally important to safeguard the health of our workers. Under the Tripartite Oversight Committee on WSH, more than 136,000 workers have access to the Total WSH Programme. So, moving forward, we will continue to work with industry partners, employers and unions to focus on areas of preventive health and occupational health, in support of national initiatives, such as Healthier SG.

WSH is a collective responsibility. Everyone must continue to do our part, to build a strong WSH culture. Company directors must drive home the importance of safety within their organisations and good WSH is integral to business success. Workers are responsible for following safe work procedures to protect themselves and others. Unions must advocate for safe, healthy workplaces and working conditions, for example, by developing WSH champions in each union. The public can report unsafe workplace practices to MOM, as each report can save a life.

Ms Jean See asked about shared responsibility for workplace safety in the creative industry. Service buyers must play their part by ensuring that their contractors, including freelancers, have the necessary competency to work safely. Contractors must work safely and not engage in risk-taking behaviour. The WSH Guidelines on Event Management provide practical guidance on health and safety requirements relevant to the creative industry. Together, we can achieve our WSH 2028 goal of reducing and sustaining the fatality injury rate at below 1.0 per 100,000 workers.

Chairman, I started my speech with how tripartism in Singapore is Singapore's "secret sauce" that empowers our low-wage workers. That, in turn, uplifts their families and communities. More than that, this harmonious partnership among our unions, businesses and the Government weaves the fabric of a resilient and prosperous Singapore. Let me end my speech with a verse from a Simon and Garfunkel song, “Bridge over Troubled Water”, reflecting the spirit of tripartism in empowering our workers in securing the success of Singaporeans and Singapore then, now and for the future.

"Oh! when times get rough and then friends can't be found,

like a bridge over troubled water,

I will lay me down,

like a bridge over troubled water,

I will lay me down."

Minister of State Gan Siow Huang.

Chairman, much has been said about our workforce and workplaces transforming. What remains unchanged is our commitment to ensure that every member of society is able to participate fully in the workforce and achieve their aspirations. Allow me to, first, share how we are enhancing support for persons with disabilities.

To foster inclusive workplaces for persons with disabilities, we are developing a tripartite advisory for reasonable accommodations. Our objective is to raise awareness and shape mindsets around the concept of reasonable accommodations in the workplace, guiding employers and employees to discuss accommodations that will suit their specific work context and needs. This will support persons with disabilities in employment, giving them the chance to thrive in the workplace.

The Government also encourages the hiring and training of persons with disabilities through SG Enable's Open Door Programme, which provides grants and employment support services to organisations that hire persons with disabilities. Each year, about 630 persons with disabilities are successfully placed into jobs through this programme, and more than 80% of them remain in employment for at least six months.

To further facilitate the employment of persons with disabilities, MOM will extend the Enabling Employment Credit (EEC), for three years, until 2028. Under EEC, eligible employers of persons with disabilities receive a wage offset of up to $400 per month. This goes up to $800 per month for the first nine months of employment if the new hire was previously not working for at least six months.

Mr Sharael Taha and other Members would be glad to hear that since its introduction in 2021, the EEC has contributed to the steady increase in the employment rate of persons with disabilities, which rose from 28% to 34% over the past five years.

One individual who has benefited from the EEC is Emily. Despite the challenges she faces due to her intellectual disability, Emily has been keen to work and persevered through her job search. After completing training at the Centre for Inclusive Employment at the Enabling Business Hub @ Jurong, her job coach matched her to a job in packing and order fulfilment with Zyfas Pharma Pte Ltd Singapore, a pharmaceutical products wholesaler. With support from her job coach and supervisor, Emily is doing well in her job and has been converted to permanent employment since January 2025.

Besides attaining greater financial independence, Emily's new role has enabled her to become more confident through greater participation in the community.

We also want to support persons with disabilities to save more for their retirement needs. Today, under the Matched Retirement Savings Scheme (MRSS), the Government provides a dollar-for-dollar matching grant to encourage CPF top-ups for eligible Singaporean seniors from age 55.

As announced by the Prime Minister, the MRSS will be expanded to include eligible Singaporeans with disabilities of all ages from 1 January 2026. This will help individuals like Emily to accumulate their savings for retirement earlier. They will be able to benefit from the compounding effect of CPF interest over a longer runway. For example, a 25-year-old person with disability who receives a top-up of $2,000 every year up to the lifetime cap of $20,000 will receive about $110,000 more just in CPF interest alone by the age of 65, as compared to an individual who receives top-ups from 55 years old. We hope such efforts will help persons with disabilities build up their nest eggs early and approach retirement with a greater sense of security.

Let me move on to how we are strengthening employment support for ex-offenders. For ex-offenders looking to rejoin the workforce, the idea of reintegration can feel daunting at times. However, they are not alone in this journey. WSG partners with Yellow Ribbon Singapore, which provides employment assistance and post-placement support to inmates and ex-offenders.

These initiatives are further supported by the Uplifting Employment Credit which provides wage offsets to employers that hire ex-offenders. In 2024, the Uplifting Employment Credit supported the employment of more than 1,500 ex-offenders hired by about 700 employers.

Building on the positive responses, MOM will be extending the Uplifting Employment Credit for three years, until 2028. Under the Uplifting Employment Credit, eligible employers of ex-offenders can receive a wage offset of up to $600 per month for the first nine months of employment, amounting up to $5,400 for each new ex-offender hired.

One such individual who has benefited is John, not his real name, who secured employment with a communication services company in 2023. As an associate engineer, John provided backend support for customer accounts that were assigned to him. Over time, his duties expanded to include tasks like data analytics work. Today, John’s company continues to support his professional development by employing him in upskilling courses.

For John, the reintegration process has been challenging but rewarding. Reflecting on his journey, he shared: "The hardest part of reintegration was believing in myself again. I am grateful to the company for hiring me and trusting my ability to value add to the organisation. This job has been crucial in rebuilding that self-confidence". As John continues to grow in his new role, his success story is helping to reshape perceptions of ex-offenders, paving the way for more inclusive hiring practices in Singapore.

Next, I will share more on our efforts to support the employment of women and caregivers. Many women shoulder the caregiving responsibilities for their children, elderly parents or family members with disabilities. Some caregivers have had to take a break from their careers to care for their family members full-time. While others are able to continue working, they deal with challenges like burnout as they try their best to balance the demands from work and family. Whether at home or at work, we want women and caregivers to feel supported in managing their roles and be empowered to pursue their career aspirations.

Women in Singapore have made progress. The employment rate for women aged 25 to 64 increased from 73.3% in 2019 to 78.3% in 2024. This means more women who wish to remain in work or return to work have found the opportunities to do so. However, as Mr Desmond Choo, Ms Yeo Wan Ling and Miss Rachel Ong have pointed out, there is room to do more, and we agree.

Mr Mark Lee suggested better support for training of part-time workers. We are enhancing the Career Conversion Programmes (CCPs) to support reskilling of mid-career new hires and employees on jobs with flexi-load arrangements. CCPs provide employers with salary support when they reskill mid-career new hires or existing employees into growth job roles identified under the Industry Transformation Maps or Jobs Transformation Maps. These roles span about 30 sectors, including financial services, retail, built environment, and information and communications.

The CCPs currently cover only full-time jobs. However, from 1 April 2025 onwards, we will enhance CCPs to support reskilling of mid-career new hires and employees in jobs with flexi-load arrangements such as part-time work. To qualify, they must be reskilled into growth job roles and be employed on permanent terms or contract terms of at least one year.

For instance, a cybersecurity company looking to hire a part-time employee can now tap on the CCPs to hire and reskill a mid-career worker from another sector. During the training period, WSG will fund up to 90% of the worker's salary, capped at $7,500 per month.

Besides making part-time work more viable, we are building on our efforts to foster family-friendly workplaces so that workers can give their best at work and at home. Mr Louis Ng has called for parent care leave to support caregivers of elderly parents. We are open to ideas on how to better support caregivers, including those who wish to work. When considering additional leave, we must be mindful to balance caregivers’ needs with the potential impact on businesses. Working caregivers have also highlighted that flexible work arrangements (FWAs) are a more sustainable way to manage work and caregiving responsibilities, which is something that we have made progress on.

As Mr Sharael Taha pointed out, building inclusive workplaces requires a shift in workplace culture and norms. The Tripartite Guidelines on FWA Requests launched in April last year aim to facilitate this.

Mr Edward Chia would be glad to hear that we are working closely with trade associations and chambers, as well as our community partners, to raise awareness of the guidelines and help both employers and employees understand how the guidelines can help them.

Some partners have even gone further to develop resources to support their members in adhering to the Guidelines and implementing FWAs. For instance, the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) has helped raise awareness of the Guidelines through briefing sessions and these have reached more than 650 companies thus far.

Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked for an update on the outcomes of the Guidelines. As these Guidelines have only been in effect for three months, it will take some to observe its impact on workplace norms and culture. However, I am happy to see that the Guidelines have prompted more open conversations about FWA requests.

One such employer is Sheng Siong Supermarket. As an employer in the manpower-tight retail sector, Sheng Siong is leveraging FWAs as part of its strategy to retain employees. The company recently introduced staggered working hours for their office employees, as well as options for alternative work schedules for those in frontline operations. For example, instead of a standard six-day work week, frontline employees may request for a five-day, four-day or even three-day work week, with commensurate adjustments in the salary. With a formal FWA policy in place, Sheng Siong is able to observe trends in their employees’ needs, which helps the company identify ways to support their employees.

I am heartened that the proportion of firms offering FWAs increased in the last year from 68.1% in 2023 to 72.7% in 2024. Firms such as Sheng Siong are continuing to explore how they can leverage FWAs to better attract and retain talent.

On supporting women to take up leadership roles, Mr Desmond Choo suggested mandating that 40% of company boards comprise of women. I thank him for his support for women. But such measures to mandate some kind of quota, if there are not enough women who are ready for such roles, could actually unintentionally affect the credibility of women at the workplace over the long term.

Singapore has put in place voluntary targets to accelerate the representation of women on boards and we have seen good progress. Through the Council for Board Diversity’s efforts to shift mindsets of boards towards appointing more diverse candidates, as of end December 2024, the percentage of women on boards of top 100 Singapore Exchange-listed companies reached 25.1%, which is a more than three-fold increase from 7.5% in 2014.

To build inclusive workplaces we have taken steps to strengthen fair and merit-based employment practices. The Workplace Fairness Bill, which was passed earlier this year, will provide an additional layer of protection against workplace discrimination.

Mr Louis Ng suggested clarifying on TAFEP’s website that discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity is covered under the Tripartite Guidelines on Fair Employment Practices (TGFEP). To reiterate, the Government does not tolerate any form of workplace discrimination, including discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

The TGFEP covers all forms of workplace discrimination and the listing on the website is not meant to be exhaustive. Highlighting selected characteristics or scenarios may not achieve this broader intent and may give the impression that characteristics or scenarios which are not mentioned are not covered.

I would like to reassure the Member that we will continue to collaborate with community groups to raise awareness on the TGFEP and refer any individual that faces workplace discrimination to TAFEP for advice and assistance.

On supporting the well-being of workers in the workplace, I would like to thank all those who have raised suggestions. Ms Hazel Poa suggested increasing the number of public holidays by three days for Hari Raya, Thaipusam and Chinese New Year. Assoc Prof Jamus Lim asked for the inclusion of Thaipusam as a public holiday, echoing similar requests by other Members such as Mr Gan Thiam Poh in the past.

The current configuration of public holidays in Singapore is the outcome of careful deliberations and consultations with various religious groups at the point of Singapore’s Independence. Over the years, we have learnt to live harmoniously as a multi-ethnic and multi-religious society, with everyone making some compromises for the greater good. We encourage employers to make it possible for Singaporeans of all faiths to observe their respective religious festivals. Maintaining the current balance has served us well, and it continues to be the sensible approach for Singapore.

Ms Yeo Wan Ling, Mr Edward Chia and Miss Rachel Ong asked how we can continue to promote mental wellness in our workplaces, especially amongst SMEs that may not have built up dedicated infrastructure to support such initiatives. To equip companies, especially SMEs, with the resources and know-how, the tripartite partners have rolled out various initiatives.

A key initiative is the Tripartite Advisory on Mental Well-Being at Workplaces introduced in 2020. It provides practical guidance on measures that employers can adopt, such as tapping on Employee Assistance Programme to offering counselling support for employees.

Beyond the consultations and workshops offered by the Total Workplace Safety and Health Programme, SkillsFuture Singapore has also funded various courses relating to mental wellness for self, peers and employees. Training Providers for such courses are able to contextualise the content to suit the needs of organisations, including SMEs.

Further support is also available through the Well-being Champions Network and National Council of Social Service’s Peer Support Specialist Programme, which offer additional resources and training for workplace mental well-being.

Mr Chairman, I will now say a few words in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] To encourage employers to provide job opportunities for persons with disabilities and ex-offenders, MOM will extend both the Enabling Employment Credit and the Uplifting Employment Credit until 2028.

Under the Enabling Employment Credit, eligible employers who hire persons with disabilities can receive up to $400 per month in employment credits. This amount will be increased to $800 per month for the first nine months of employment if the newly hired employee with disabilities has not been employed in the previous six months.

Under the Uplifting Employment Credit scheme, employers who hire ex-offenders can receive up to $600 per month in credits during the first nine months of employment.

From 2026, we will also expand the Matched Retirement Savings Scheme to benefit eligible persons with disabilities regardless of their age. This will help them start accumulating retirement savings earlier and benefit from CPF compound interest.

(In English): With your permission, Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerk to distribute an infographic that summarises the support schemes available at different life stages?

Go ahead. [A handout was distributed to hon Members.]

Members may also access these materials through the MP@SGPARL application.

As Minister Tan See Leng shared yesterday, the Government is committed to supporting every Singaporean in their career journey at every life stage, and with greater support for those in need. While the Government has a role to play in empowering our people, we also recognise that true transformation requires the support and action of those at the heart of our economy – our businesses, workers, tripartite partners and community partners. For that, I thank all those who have worked closely with us.

Together, we can break down barriers, challenge stereotypes and continue to build an inclusive society where everyone has the opportunity to contribute meaningfully and play a role in our shared progress.

Our guillotine time is 12.25 pm. I see a couple of hands. I will try to get as many across as possible. The same usual request – keep your clarifications short and succinct. Mr Desmond Choo.

Mr Chairman, just two clarifications.

One, why is the Ministry raising the S Pass qualifying salary despite the labour market being already quite tight and the potential economic headwinds? What is the expected impact on the local workforce's wages?

Second, MOM is raising the maximum employment age for Work Permit holders and aligning it to the local retirement age. Would the increase in the maximum employment age of Work Permit holders result in increased healthcare and insurance costs borne by the employers and also increase the competition for jobs with senior workers?

Mr Chairman, I thank the Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) chairman, Mr Desmond Choo, for raising the clarifications.

Our S Pass qualifying salary is benchmarked to the top one third of our local associate professionals and technicians' (APTs') wages. It does not lead market wages, but it is actually adjusted in line with what the prevailing wage is.

As I have shared extensively yesterday in my COS speech, we do this as we need to continue to raise productivity and not just have a case of just pure numbers coming in alone, but we do this to ensure our S Pass holders are of high quality. At the same time, we want to maintain a level playing field for our locals.

MOM has taken into consideration and we have heard from various trade associations and chambers on the rising costs of manpower as well as their constraints in hiring. Therefore, even though we have earlier announced this two years in advance and even though we are going ahead with the third step increase, what we have done this time round is to moderate the increase to give businesses more time to adjust. So, the S Pass qualifying salary announced this year will only apply to new applications from 1 September this year, 2025, and renewal applications for passes expiring from next year, 1 September 2026.

We have also said earlier on that we have announced this S Pass qualifying salary increase since COS 2022. This is 2025. We said that it is over three steps. This allows businesses the runway to plan ahead and to make the necessary adjustments.

To the second point about why we raised the maximum employment age, we took in feedback, significantly, again, from the different business chambers, the different trade associations. It is the collective feedback, working with all the different small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) on the ground, the general consensus is that once the workers have been here for quite some time, the skillsets, the experience that they have already gained, it would be a waste for them, after they reached a certain period or ceiling of maximum employment period, to leave the country.

So, what we did after taking their feedback into their consideration, we raised the maximum employment age for Work Permit holders so that we can give these firms the flexibility to retain their more experienced, more skilled workers.

Firms have the option and they are best placed for themselves to assess the benefits of retaining their more experienced workers against the potentially higher insurance costs that they may have to bear for these older workers. It is really their option. What we have done is to give them the breadth, the latitude and also the runway for them to assess what is in their own best interests.

I hope that gives you that reassurance.

Ms Jean See.

Thank you, Chairman. I thank Minister Tan, Senior Minister of State Koh and Senior Minister of State Zaqy for their replies to my cuts. I have four questions.

I note that for specific occupations such as cooks, companies can hire Work Permit holders from Laos, Cambodia and Bhutan, in addition to another seven odd countries. I have three questions for the Minister. First, how will MOM step up efforts to foster inclusiveness and fair practices like reasonable work hours in the food sectors? Second, how will MOM help workers from these new Non-Traditional Source countries to acclimatise to the work intensity in Singapore? The third is to protect these new groups from being exploited by recruiters in their home countries. Is MOM planning to facilitate direct outreach and referral programmes to bridge them to jobs in Singapore?

To Senior Minister of State Koh, I would like to ask about the JS scheme. Could the scheme consider on a case-by-case basis self-employed persons such as creative freelancers who can prove income loss over a continual period because their jobs were cancelled or contracts were ceased when their work was offshored or due to AI substitution?

Minister Tan will take the first set?

I thank Ms Jean See for her clarification. We have the Settling-In Programme. We are also socialising these Non-Traditional Source countries with many of the SMEs and also the business owners themselves. By widening it, we hope that they can assess for themselves these options.

We constantly take in feedback. We work with different agencies, not just working in an insular fashion within MOM itself. We work with, of course, security agencies, for instance. We work with our economic agencies, of which I am Second Minister for Trade and Industry. We obviously work with the Ministry of Trade and Industry to assess the fit.

Once they have buy-in from many of the business owners, the assessment is really up to the business owners to see whether they want to access the workforce from these Non-Traditional Source countries.

When they are onboarded, before they come into Singapore to work, they come in at our onboarding centres. There is a Settling-In Programme and orientation. What we hope to do is to also be able to socialise them to some of the expectations, the cultural norms, the living conditions and most importantly, what their rights are, the necessary helplines, the social agencies that are available to help them.

There will be an adjustment period. We will check on them. We have got different non-governmental organisations, including the Foreign Domestic Worker Association for Social Support and Training (FAST), which is a separate initiative from MOM's Assurance, Care and Engagement (ACE) division, to engage them, to assess the feedback. If they run into problems, we will not hesitate to step in. So, broadly, the framework is there for them to access.

At the same time, we are also very careful. We are very deliberate and very calibrated in terms of opening the Non-Traditional Source countries. We do not open it up in a very extensive manner. For a start, we extended it to Cambodia, Laos and Bhutan, because these are the countries that we do have very strong networks and also bilateral diplomatic ties with.

I think the Senior Minister of State will cover the balance of your questions.

Sir, I thank the Member for her clarification about whether self-employed individuals are covered by the JS scheme.

To be clear, the JS scheme is aimed to cushion unemployment shocks as a result of economic transformation. So, it applies to employees, who have no control over the decision by their employers to retrench them.

Self-employed individuals do negotiate for projects on their own. Sometimes, even if the project cannot take place, it could well be a mismatch between what the self-employed person's expectation of his own remuneration from the project owner is, or it could just be a business deal that could not take place because the negotiation did not succeed.

I think it is very hard for us to prove a priori whether that kind of issue constitutes involuntary unemployment, which is quite different from an employee.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.

Sir, I appreciate Minister Tan's suggestion that there is an existing mechanism – the qualifying salary for S Passes and Employment Passes (EPs) – that may fulfil a similar function to levelling the wage incentives faced by employers choosing between the foreign versus local hire.

But respectfully, I believe that this would only work in a special case when wages for a given position are lower than the S Pass or EP threshold, which is currently set at $3,300 and $5,600 a month, although this adjusts upward with age and for rehires. But as long as the market wage exceeds this floor, which it could, for any given job in any given sector, although I acknowledge Minister Tan's point that it is pegged to the top third of overall salaries, then we could encounter a situation where a local could still be outcompeted by a foreigner so long as that Singaporean cannot accept a take home salary that is too low compared to a foreigner who is willing to accept a slightly lower gross income, but still receives a take home salary that is higher, just because —

Assoc Prof Lim, do you want to get to your clarification?

I understand. So, the question is, if the Minister could explain how the qualifying salary in such instances would address this situation?

On the call for the consideration of Thaipusam, I had cited in the conclusion of my cut former Minister EW Barker's implicit promise to revisit our public holiday schedule should our economy prosper. Could I ask the Ministry if there are no economic conditions or no level of prosperity under which the Government will be willing to consider the schedule of public holidays?

I thank Assoc Prof Lim for his clarification.

My personal view, and I am not an economist, but I think he looks at it from a fairly theoretical and academic viewpoint. In reality, today we have a very tight labour market. I have repeatedly stated in this House that our businesses, our SMEs, our large local enterprises, these are owned and run by Singaporeans too. They have constantly harped on the fact that there are significant manpower constraints, resource constraints for them to grow and expand their business.

So, in this kind of very tight labour market, when you peg it at the qualifying salaries at the top one-third of the respective sector, we are not setting up a new forward projected qualifying salary. The way we set the benchmarks is based on the prevailing salary of the top one-third of the EP and S Pass holders. [Please refer to "Clarification by Minister for Manpower", Official Report, 7 March 2025, Vol 95, Issue 160, Correction By Written Statement section.]

At those levels, what we have seen consistently – and this is real, the numbers, the statistics do not lie – over the last 10 years, I have stated, notwithstanding the fact that we have this qualifying salary, from 2014 to 2024, the number of EP and S Pass holders increased by 38,000. But over that same corresponding period, the number of residents holding PMET jobs increased by 382,000. This is a ratio of 1:10. I mean, that is our real experience.

For the record, in June 2024, the unemployment rate for Singapore Citizens was 2.8%, which is amongst the lowest in the world. And our definition of unemployment is at that spot in time.

If you look at our long-term unemployment, it is around about 0.7%, 0.8%. Long-term unemployment is defined as someone who is unemployed for more than six months. So, if you take off the unemployment rate of about 2.8%, let us say, take away the long-term unemployment rate of 0.7% or 0.8%, that 2% delta is actually churned within six months – these people find a new job, or they find something that fulfils their calling and they get on to a new career, perhaps to a new calling.

So, I want to again emphasise today: does anyone think that we have an issue? Our issue is a very, very tight labour market. We have Mr Mark Lee here, our Nominated Member of Parliament, who has repeatedly called for the Government to help businesses. He is from the SBF. You could check with him after this debate to see how tight the situation is.

Chairman, as I said earlier, the decision on which public holidays to observe was only reached after very careful consultation with religious groups in Singapore in the past which, undoubtedly, required difficult decisions for the leaders from each faith to take. Any move to reinstate a festival, such as Thaipusam, as a public holiday, may invite competing claims from members of other communities, both religious and non-religious. Maintaining the current balance has served Singapore well and continues to be the sensible approach.

Regardless of the intervening years and the progress that we have made, this is a sensitive issue. We should not take Singapore's economic progress for granted and look to introducing additional public holidays at every opportunity. And while we cannot designate all important festivals public holidays, there must be understanding and regard given for Singaporeans to observe occasions that are significant to them. That is why we urge all employers to show understanding and flexibility in this regard.

Ms Yeo Wan Ling.

Chairman, I have two sets of clarifications.

The first set is to Minister Tan See Leng. Given that there could be other sources of labour which are in higher demand by businesses, could the Minister for Manpower explain how MOM decided on the list of countries for the Non-Traditional Sources occupation list?

The second set of clarifications is for Minister of State Gan Siow Huang. What is the current gender pay gap in Singapore and how does the Government plan to reduce it further? Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) careers are high-value career choices and can move the needle in further closing the gender pay gap. What more can the Ministry do to encourage young women to consider careers in STEM as well as equipping female mid-careerists to convert into STEM careers?

Additionally, given the recent development to support caregivers to stay in the workplace, what steps will the Government take to ensure that the gender pay gap does not widen further for female caregivers who opt for alternative work arrangements, including FWAs, due to caregiving responsibilities?

I thank sister Wan Ling for her clarification. On how we decide on the list of countries to be included, we, like many, many other countries in the world, carefully regulate the profile of non-citizens for our beloved country, Singapore, including those who wish to work here. Our policy is shaped by our context. One constraint is that we are a small and very densely populated city state. And because of our constraints, we need to carefully, very delicately, balance infrastructure, security, social and economic considerations. Hence, MOM will never work in isolation. We constantly work closely, calibrating with other Ministries, other sector agencies to assess the suitability of new sources, taking into account the earlier considerations that I have elaborated on.

Minister of State Gan Siow Huang.

Singapore's unadjusted gender pay gap has reduced from 16.0% in 2002 to 14.3% in 2023. Our adjusted gender pay gap, which adjusts for differences in occupation, industry, hours worked, age and education, narrowed from 8.8% in 2002 to 6.0% in 2023. Singapore's adjusted gender pay gap compares favourably with other countries, such as the United States and Canada, both of which are around 8%.

The key factor driving gender pay gap in Singapore is occupational segregation. In other words, there tends to be a lower share of females in higher paid occupations, such as business development managers, managing directors, chief executives and general managers. Likewise, for STEM-related occupations, there is still a higher proportion of men than women although the proportion of women in STEM jobs has increased over time from 28.8% in 2013 to 35.2% in 2024.

We will continue to work with tripartite partners and community stakeholders to support women's participation in the workforce and help them enter and remain in occupations of their choice, including in traditionally male-dominated industries. This way, women do not fall behind their male colleagues in terms of career, experience, progression and hence, wages.

This includes measures, such as FWAs, promoting shared-caregiving responsibilities at home, as well as career drives, networking and mentorship programmes. The Workplace Fairness Legislation will also help further reduce the gender pay gap, as women will be protected against discrimination based on their sex that could inhibit their entry into and progress in careers of their choice, especially in the male-dominated and higher-paying occupations.

There are still many, many hands from those who have filed four cuts. I will give the floor to Mr Leong. He only raised one cut, but it was a long cut. Mr Leong Mun Wai. He had raised his hand earlier.

Thank you very much, Mr Chairman. I have four clarifications for the Minister.

First of all, I would like to thank the Minister for his energetic response to my arguments. I have always respected him for that. However, because I think our views are still very different, I have —

Mr Leong, remember my instructions to all.

Okay, yes, Mr Chairman. So, first question, can I confirm that MOM still does not track the change in work pass holders that turned to PRs in the resident PME statistics? If yes, does the Minister agree that there is no way to conclude definitively that the existing resident PMETs have not been displaced and become underemployed because all the statistics that he has quoted are affected by this effect?

Second question, the platform workers are a good example of the underemployed. The Minister has admitted that about one-third of the platform workers, or 28,000, are involuntary. But for many of the balance of the 70,000 platform workers who have preferred platform work for flexibility, does the Minister think that low wages and poor prospects are also a factor in their decisions?

Third question —

Mr Leong, if I could ask, how many clarifications? Because I am conscious of the guillotine time. How many more clarifications?

Two more.

Okay, make them short so that we can give enough time for the Minister to answer.

Yes. Third question, the increase in part-time workers and contract work are also examples of underemployment. Can the Minister explain why we do not need to be concerned that the proportion of part-time workers out of all employed residents has increased from 8.4% in 2009 to 10.1% in 2023, and can the Minister quote the corresponding increase in resident contract workers in the same period, 2009 and 2023?

Last question, does the Minister agree that while wage growth may be faster than some developed countries like the United Kingdom, it is meaningless if the wage growth is still not enough to catch up with the escalating cost of living and housing prices in Singapore?

I thank Mr Leong for his persistence, notwithstanding the fact that we went through quite a fair bit of exchange yesterday. I will cover some parts of his point just to put it to rest, hopefully once and for all, before I hand over to my colleague, Minister for National Development, Mr Desmond Lee, who will also talk about housing, in just a while. So, Mr Leong, please be patient. We are coming.

To the Member's clarification about part-time work and that he thinks that many of them are underemployed, I have actually shown in my explanation yesterday that the statistics that we have on time-related underemployment are very, very low and, in fact, it has dropped. I do not have the statistics offhand, but please refer to the Hansard on what I said yesterday. It was quite clear.

Since the Member persistently wants to keep harping on the division between foreign-born Singapore Citizens versus local-born Singapore Citizens, I just eyeballed the numbers, and I am happy to see what other statistics we can glean moving forward. But the majority, more than 63% of the increase over that period for the PMETs from 2014 to 2024 – more than 63% of that increase – is due to local-born Singapore Citizens. So, let me put that to rest once and for all.

Please do not forget that many, many of our naturalised Singaporeans, many of our Permanent Residents (PRs) are married to a local-born Singapore Citizen, and I really hope we should not keep harping on a "us versus them" mentality, because Singapore is a largely immigrant nation. We are all here because we love this country. My father, and I am pretty sure Mr Leong's father, also were not local-born Singapore Citizens. I benefited from here, just as he has, and we both want to do our best to serve our country.

I will invite Minister Desmond Lee to respond to the clarification on housing.

I assume this is in relation to what Mr Leong raised in his cut.

Yes.

Alright.

Mr Chairman, I would like to apologise to Minister Tan See Leng and Members who had filed cuts at MOM's COS, for taking up some time. I would like to make a clarification without distracting from MOM's debate.

Yesterday, Mr Leong made two points in his speech: first, he spoke about selective use of data on Singaporean and PR employment; and second, he said that Singaporeans today are worse off than in the past and he used the example of public housing, comparing the Housing and Development Board (HDB) affordability for university and Vocational and Industrial Training Board (VITB) graduates in 1979, with affordability today.

These were not raised at the Ministry of National Development's (MND's) COS at all. The Member did not speak at MND's COS, nor raise any clarification.

I checked and would like to make a few points to add to what Minister Tan said yesterday. He spoke about the situation, the improvements in our graduate situation, and I will talk about housing.

Sir, the Singapore in 1979 is, firstly, very different from the Singapore in 2025.

In 1979, only 4% of each cohort went to university. Today, it is more than 40%.

Mr Leong used the median wages of VITB graduates in 1979, but he did not mention that back then, only 9% of each cohort went to VITB. Today, around 60% of each cohort go to polytechnic and the Institute of Technical Education (ITE).

So, the vast majority of each cohort today go to university, polytechnic and ITE; compared to only around 13% going to university and VITB back in 1979.

Mr Leong was comparing housing affordability for a small group in 1979 with housing affordability for the vast majority of Singaporeans today. He also did not present the affordability picture for the majority of Singaporeans back in 1979, who were less well-educated, less skilled and earned much less in those early days of Singapore.

Second, the HDB flat in 1979 is also very different from the HDB flat in 2025. In the 1970s, HDB flats were simple, functional homes in estates with few amenities and very limited transport links. Today, our flats come with modern amenities, far better transport connectivity, offering residents a higher standard of living.

In 1979, only 68% of our population lived in HDB, of whom 62% owned their flats. This is not surprising because the university and VITB graduates that Mr Leong cited yesterday were at the higher end of the income spectrum. Today, more than 80% of Singaporeans live in HDB homes and over 90% own their flats. In fact, more than eight in 10 first-timer households who collected their keys to their Build-To-Order (BTO) flats and resale flats in 2024, used little to no cash to service their HDB monthly mortgage instalments.

Third, the housing market in 1979 was very different too. In the 1960s and 1970s, there was almost no resale market to speak of. It was early days. In the 1960s, buyers had to return the flat to HDB at the sum that was less than what they had initially paid for. In the 1970s, there was a very rudimentary resale market with strict conditions and limited financing. We were just starting out. Back then, there was limited potential for appreciation, it was not quite the store of value, it was a basic home and expense for Singaporeans.

The resale market only started to mature in the 1980s and 1990s, after changes in conditions for resale and mortgage financing policies.

Today, our HDB flats are both a home and also a store of value for Singaporeans, which they can monetise in their older years for retirement by selling on the open market, renting out a room or a flat, through our Lease Buyback Scheme and so on.

We also wondered why Mr Leong was so selective in using the year 1979; and we realised why. From 1968 to 1987, in the early years of HDB, we sold flats to Singaporeans and the flat price was fixed to recover cost. So, this most resembles the Progress Singapore Party's (PSP's) Affordable Housing Scheme. So, in a way, PSP's idea is not an original idea, but an idea adapted from the past.

HDB flats back in those days were priced based on construction costs. The PSP's Affordable Housing Scheme uses a similar idea. But construction cost then, as it is today, fluctuates based on economic factors, like labour availability, the price of construction material, global commodities like oil and so on.

In the 1960s and 1970s, construction costs were relatively low, but the turning point came at around 1979. Around 1979/1980, construction cost went up by 30%, because there was a construction boom which led to severe labour and material shortages. So, HDB flat prices went up by 15% in 1979, another 20% in 1980 and another 38% in 1981.

So, Mr Leong presents, selectively, the 1979 data, but does not mention what happens in the next one, two years. He did not share this with the House. In fact, the challenge of sharply fluctuating construction and therefore, HDB prices, according to the AHS, when pegged to construction costs, applies equally to the PSP's Affordable Housing Scheme.

Sir, we have long since moved away from the system where HDB flats were priced based on construction cost. In fact, we do not price flats to recover land and construction cost. We look at the market value of the flat, apply significant market discounts to bring the price down so that there are flats affordable to Singaporeans of different income levels. And then, we do means testing for explicit grants on top of the market discounts. This ensures HDB flats remain affordable to a wide range of incomes.

Sir, since the 1970s, we have matured and progressed as a society. We have improved our initial policies. We have developed our strong social compact where Singaporeans buy affordable housing, have a tangible stake in this country and form strong communities.

Sir, most importantly, what the PSP has suggested through the Affordable Housing Scheme is a major change from the social compact we have had all these decades. They want to go backwards to the time where housing was a shelter, an expense, and does not serve as a store of value and assurance for retirement, where Singaporeans do not have a stake when they leave, according to the AHS, just return keys, get some deposit back and move on.

Is this really the kind of Singapore that we want to have?

We have come a long way since 1979. We will continue to look forward instead to ensure that our policies remain relevant, effective in providing public housing that is affordable, accessible and inclusive for Singaporeans. I would like to thank Minister Tan. [Applause.]

Minister Tan See Leng.

Sir, thank you for the permission to allow Minister Desmond Lee to respond on housing.

Minister Tan, a short one, because we are almost reaching our guillotine time.

Yes, Sir. I wanted to reassure everyone, our economy grew significantly in the last decade. I have repeatedly spoken at length to this House and also, rebutted Mr Leong's allegations in terms of the statistics not being transparent.

I want to use, perhaps, a Cantonese movie anecdote and I will translate. It goes like this.

(In Cantonese): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] When I speak, you do not listen. When you listen, you do not understand. When you understand, you do not do it. When you do it, you do it wrong. When you do it wrong, you do not admit it. When you admit it, you do not change. When you change, you do not accept it. What then do you want me to do?

(In English): I have done my best repeatedly to explain to him over and over again, but he still refuses to accept —

Minister Tan, you might want to translate for those who do not understand Cantonese.

I think that was the gist of it already, I have translated.

I want to reassure: while we may not be able to guarantee the same outcomes for all Singaporeans, but we will certainly do our level best that Singaporeans, at every stage of their lives, at every stage of their careers will have the same opportunities to upskill, to train and to upgrade. [Applause.]

Mr Sharael Taha and Mr Louis Ng, sorry, I know you filed four cuts but we have run out of time. Can I invite Mr Desmond Choo, if you would like to withdraw your amendment?

Chairman, I would like to thank Minister Tan See Leng, Senior Minister of State Koh Poh Koon, Senior Minister of State Zaqy and Minister of State Gan Siow Huang for their comprehensive responses and driving policy changes; and also Permanent Secretaries Ng Chee Khern, Jeffrey Siow, and their team of MOM officers, for their dedication in building a great workforce and workplace for Singapore and Singaporeans.

On that note, Chairman, I seek leave to withdraw my amendment.

[(proc text) Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $3,584,806,700 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $119,216,800 for Head S ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]

Chairman, I move, "That the total sum to be allocated for Head Q of the Estimates be reduced by $100."

Digitalisation is our present reality and an inevitable future. This transformation is not just about technological upgrades, but fundamentally reshaping our society, economy and way of life. It presents vast economic opportunities, promising a better quality of life for future generations.

Singapore has always been unafraid of transformations, having pivoted through multiple strategic ones since our Independence. This is especially meaningful given that this is the year of SG60. Our latest push in digitalisation has seen positive results, as our digital economy grew from contributing 13% of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2017 to 17.3% in 2022.

Yet, as we pick up the pace in our march towards a digital future, we must also ensure that our digitally-driven growth must be sustainable, inclusive and safe for all.

There are several factors that I believe are imperative to a digitally-successful future, namely: world class digital infrastructure, vibrant talent community and ecosystem, widespread adoption by businesses, sustainable and green development, safe and inclusive digital society, and stronger global cooperation.

In this opening cut, I will focus on world class digital infrastructure, sustainable and green development as well as safe and inclusive digital society.

Singapore has always invested heavily in building up our infrastructure ahead of time so that when the wave arrives, we are ready to ride it. Underpinning our digital growth must, therefore, be enabled by high-performing, resilient and secure digital infrastructure, which includes broadband networks, cloud services, data centres and high-performance computing power.

Singapore ranks first in Asia for digital infrastructure in the recent IMD World Digital Competitiveness Ranking. This is no easy feat and only possible because of years of careful planning and hard work. So, we must not let up. More importantly, in the digital world, everything runs 24/7. A small failure in our digital infrastructure can cause major disruptions to our economic activities and daily lives.

Hence, can the Minister share what measures are being put in place to build up our digital infrastructure further and ensure its resilience and security?

I note that the Infocomm Media Development Authority (IMDA) released the Advisory Guidelines for cloud service providers and data centres last month to enhance their resilience and security. Can the Minister elaborate on the key measures in these guidelines and how they help operators uplift their resilience and security measures?

As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more integrated horizontally and vertically across industries and sectors, as the overall adoption of digital technologies increases, the demand for data centres and higher computing power will increase. Consequently, the demand for energy will also rise exponentially.

Data centres, the backbone of a digital economy, currently consume around 1% to 1.5% of global electricity, a figure that Goldman Sachs Research projects will increase by 50% by 2027 and potentially by up to 165% by 2030 compared to 2023 levels. Training advanced AI models, for instance, can emit a carbon footprint comparable to driving a gasoline-powered vehicle for five to 20 miles per unit of processed text. Therefore, as we embrace digitalisation, we must also accelerate our decarbonisation efforts, enhance energy security and reduce reliance on brown energy.

Hence, can the Minister elaborate on the Government's strategy to balance the growth of our digital infrastructure with our commitment to environmental sustainability? Can we consider having structured programmes to drive the use of energy-efficient algorithms across industries?

Can we consider setting more instructive guidelines to advise industries on the preferred type of hardware to be used and standards to adopt when designing software? There is currently one developed by IMDA and Microsoft on software development. Is there scope for such guidelines to be further expanded?

Despite the geopolitical sensitivities, what can we learn from DeepSeek's experience as it is considered to be cheaper and greener than other AI models? How will the Government secure more green energy to support a sustainable digital development for Singapore?

Lastly, trust is fundamental in a society and underpinning trust in a digital society is to ensure that it is inclusive and safe for all.

For a digital future to truly succeed, Singaporeans must be able to enjoy easy access to digital services and participate meaningfully in the digital economy. They should also feel safe when they interact and transact online. To this end, our Government Parliamentary Committee (GPC) for Digital Development and Information moved a Motion in January last year to "reaffirm our commitment to adopt a whole-of-nation approach to sustain trust by building an inclusive and safe digital society". Members discussed the imperatives of ensuring an inclusive and safe digital society and put forth 13 calls to action to achieve this.

Could the Minister give an update on what has transpired or implemented since the Motion with these 13 calls to action in January 2024?

And in ensuring safety, Prime Minister Lawrence Wong mentioned that there will be a new law to protect victims from online harms, when he launched Smart Nation 2.

0. In the very recent media report, we have been told that, and that is just last month, that online harms have been increasing because the number of people who have been approaching support centres to received help for online harms have pretty much doubled. And so, there is new imperative and new urgency for us to do more to protect those who are victimised online. And, therefore, can the Minister provide more details on how the new law will help address online harms?

As I still have time, please allow me to speak in Mandarin.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Chairman, going towards a digital economy is a must in Singapore. There are two important factors for success. First, we must continue to make our digital economy green and sustainable; and second, ensure deeper participation from our citizens so they can share the fruits of progress.

Based on the second point, we need to ensure that we can build a safe and inclusive digital society where citizens can participate meaningfully in the development of the digital economy with peace of mind.

Last year, the GPC tabled a Motion in Parliament, in which we put forward 13 calls for action. I hope the Government can focus on these 13 calls and continue to enhance the overall safety of our digital society. I hope the Minister can update us on these calls.

In addition, can we also consider legislation to strengthen the crackdown on harmful behaviours, such as cybercrimes, scams and bullying? I hope the Minister can provide us with more information on this.

(In English): Sir, our pursuit for digital growth and realising a digital future will mean nothing if it cannot be sustained and if our people do not feel safe or get to enjoy the benefits of digitalisation. Hence, I seek to move.

[(proc text) Question proposed. (proc text)]

Ms Tin Pei Ling, again. You can take all of the rest of your cuts together.

Sir, in my opening cut and in my past speeches in this House, I set out why I think digitalisation is important to our nation's growth and well-being. I talked about both the opportunities and challenges that come along with that. I also shared that there are several factors that I believe are imperative to a digitally successful future, namely: world-class digital infrastructure, vibrant talent community and ecosystem, widespread adoption by businesses, sustainable and green development, safe and inclusive digital society, and stronger global cooperation.

Here, I will talk about talents and ecosystem, support for businesses and global cooperation.

Narrowing the focus on AI, Singapore has a clear strategy as set out in the National AI Strategy (NAIS) 2.0 report. In the report, Singapore sees AI as no longer an opportunity but a necessity, that it has to go from projects to system and that it has to go from local to global.

Now that NAIS 2.0 has been launched for more than a year since December 2023, can the Minister share what are some of the efforts and outcomes in driving adoption, experimentation and innovation for the Government and industry?

Within NAIS 2.0, people and communities form an important system. I fully agree. No digital future can be realised without the right human capital. We must nurture our young, build our native talent pipeline and attract the brightest minds from across the globe.

Not only do we want to build up our Singaporeans to have what it takes to capitalise on the opportunities in and out of Singapore, we want them to learn and spar with top talents. And by fostering a vibrant community of talents, research institutes and enterprises, ideas can cross-fertilise, collaborations can happen and we can create a virtuous cycle of innovation that benefits both our economy and our people. Public and private partnerships, along with robust peer-to-peer collaboration, are essential to provide the meaningful opportunities that will keep talent anchored in Singapore.

Hence, can the Minister provide an update about what is being done to strengthen our talent pool and enhance the "staying power" of these talents and community of partners in Singapore?

Next, our local enterprises are a key part of the engine driving our economy. We must help our local enterprises to adopt new and impactful technologies, so that the power of these innovations can be fully unleashed to benefit our economy and Singaporeans.

Over the years, the Government has taken significant steps to support these enterprises in adopting new technologies. However, with the breakthrough of Gen AI models, such as those that have emerged recently, we must redouble our efforts. It is imperative that enterprises across sectors integrate AI into their core strategies and operations. And a more targeted approach for specific sectors and for businesses with different digital maturity is needed to help them move along.

With the recent refresh of the Industry Digital Plans (IDPs) for several sectors and the launch of new IDPs for the legal and tourism sectors, can the Minister elaborate on how these plans are tailored to address sector-specific AI tools and challenges? How does IMDA plan to support businesses at different stages of digital maturity in adopting and leveraging Gen AI technologies, and what specific benefits would the Minister anticipate for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) from these new initiatives?

At the same time, geopolitical tensions, particularly the United States (US)-China rivalry, pose challenges. Companies will need clarity and assurances when choosing which Gen AI platforms to adopt. For example, some may have concerns about the use of DeepSeek's AI models due to potential implications from US sanctions. As we navigate these complex dynamics, there may be scope for us to provide clearer guidelines and support for our enterprises to adopt technology without fear of reprise or sanctions from either of the major powers.

Building on hon Member Henry Kwek's point made during the Budget debate, I agree that it is important to ensure that we are able to build up a model that can take into consideration our local social values, ethical standards and other more local factors. If we take a look at DeepSeek, we also know that DeepSeek itself, hailed as a breakthrough, was also distilled from many other AI models as well. Therefore, I would like to ask whether it is possible for Singapore to also develop or distill our own AI model, so that our companies can leverage on this and to continue to grow and develop with greater sense of assurance.

Finally, global cooperation is essential. In a world where digital economies are increasingly interconnected, Singapore's role as a financial and trade hub is more important than ever. We have signed Digital Economy Agreements (DEAs) with countries, such as Australia, the United Kingdom (UK) and New Zealand, and we are actively advancing the Association for Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Digital Economy Framework Agreement. These initiatives will facilitate data sharing, harmonise understanding and standards, promote technological collaboration and perhaps also help combat online harms, ensuring that we remain at the forefront of the global digital economy.

Therefore, can the Minister provide an update on how the Government is collaborating with governments and organisations globally to build capabilities, facilitate data sharing and transactions, and combat online harms?

Sir, the Ministry of Digital Development and Information (MDDI) shared at last year's Budget that $260 million was earmarked for SPH Media Trust for the FY2024/2025. We were also told that the Ministry had established key performance indicators (KPIs) for SPH Media Trust. The Minister said that while SPH Media Trust had maintained its overall reach and achieved a modest increase in its digital subscriptions, it did not meet all its KPIs on digital reach, youth reach, vernacular reach and average time spent on its websites and apps. Accordingly, it did not receive the full funding that was committed.

For FY2024/2025, what objective criteria did the Ministry set for these KPIs that were not reached? More specifically, were these KPIs lowered or were they increased? Has SPH Media Trust fared any better since last year? Can the Minister share data on print and digital subscriptions to its English and vernacular titles, respectively, over the last two years?

I had also asked the Minister about the way the Ministry presented its subsidies to SPH Media Trust in the Budget book, and whether there was a simpler way for the public to track and understand the KPIs the Ministry had set for SPH Media Trust. This point is important given the size of the subsidy granted to the mainstream media. After all, as the Minister would agree, the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

I would like to share anecdotal feedback from those who follow local English news closely, for example, that CNA's reporting and commentary on local issues, in terms of depth, has overtaken that of The Straits Times. Does the Ministry conduct local surveys to gauge the public response to our local media outlets? And if so, how does it make the decision to deploy taxpayer dollars to those media outlets that rank less satisfactorily in the public eye? How often are such surveys undertaken? What other objective KPIs does the Ministry keep track of to ensure that the taxpayer dollars for SPH Media is purposefully spent?

Ms Hany Soh, you can take your two cuts together.

While advancements in technology and AI bring about new opportunities, they also present new challenges and competition. Take the news, media and entertainment spheres, for example. Consumers worldwide have been increasingly moving towards online streaming services and non-traditional sources, such as social media.

In July 2024, BBC announced plans to cut 500 jobs by March next year in a bid to save £200 million and become a "leaner, more agile organisation", as it copes with funding and inflationary pressures. This came after a reduction of its headcount by 10%, or nearly 2,000 roles. Its long-time flagship current affairs interview programme, HARDtalk, was also axed as a result.

CNN also announced its plan to lay off 6% of its workforce in January earlier this year, as it revamps its schedule and digital strategy. This followed having already cut 100 jobs, or about 3% of its workforce, last summer as it reorganised its news gathering operations.

Back home, SPH Media announced in November last year that it has laid off 34 employees, amounting to 10% of its technology division amidst its restructuring and digital transformation.

During my interactions with union members who are in the broadcasting industry in my capacity as the advisor of the Singapore Union of Broadcasting Employees, I picked up on one of their concerns that job restructuring is inevitable as Singaporeans, like the rest of the world, are consuming media from across a range of digital sources and platforms, and there is thus a rapid decline in consumption of its content from traditional analogue media platforms.

Against this evolving backdrop, how does MDDI intend to support our Public Service Media entities, ensuring that they remain relevant and maintain or improve audience outreach, given ongoing technological disruptions and the proliferation of information sources?

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Over the years, the Government has been helping vulnerable groups integrate into the digital society through various initiatives, such as DigitalAccess@Home, Seniors Go Digital and Mobile Access for Seniors. These programmes provide subsidised broadband equipment, raise public awareness about digital technology and offer training to support these groups.

In light of this, could MDDI share the current outcomes of these initiatives? For example, how many households have benefited from DigitalAccess@Home to date? What progress has Seniors Go Digital made in training seniors to use digital tools? Additionally, what challenges have been encountered during the implementation of these programmes and what measures have been taken to address them? Are there plans to further expand this support in the future?

I would like to suggest the following measures for the Ministry to consider, in order to further strengthen support for vulnerable groups: increase collaboration with business enterprises to introduce a more comprehensive package to reduce the cost of digital access for low-income families. Expand community workshops to provide more personalised digital training for seniors, such as one-on-one tutoring, to meet their learning needs while continuing to enhance their awareness and ability to prevent online scams.

Strengthen support for assistive technologies and training for people with disabilities, possibly by collaborating with business enterprise and professional organisations to provide customised solutions. Digital inclusion is essential for social equity and progress. I look forward to the Ministry's response and believe that these efforts will continue to benefit more Singaporeans.

Chairman, digitisation is transforming the way we live, work and interact. From e-payments to telemedicine and digital Government services, technology has become a cornerstone of our daily life. As Singapore advances, we must ensure that every Singaporean, regardless of age, ability or background, can confidently navigate the online space without fear of exclusion or exploitation. Our digital future must be built on inclusivity, empowerment and safety. While many have adapted, others remain digitally vulnerable and lack digital confidence. These include seniors struggling with e-services and persons with physical and mental disabilities.

IMDA announced a strategic collaboration involving over 300 partners under the National Digital for Life Movement to help advance Singaporeans' essential digital skills. These efforts are commendable and instrumental in closing the digital divide. But more needs to be done to reach underserved communities. A report by the Ministry of Social and Family Development has highlighted the need for design and technological solutions to promote independent living among persons with disabilities.

I would like to ask the Ministry how would ongoing digital initiatives ensure mass access so that no one is left behind? How can we scale efforts to further bridge the digital divide? What strategies are in place to empower citizens with the skills and confidence to use technology safely and effectively? How are we ensuring accessibility across all digital platforms, particularly for persons with disabilities? How are we strengthening public awareness of online threats, ensuring that Singaporeans can identify and protect themselves against digital risks?

An inclusive, safe and digitally empowered society is not just a goal. It is a necessity. We must ensure that every Singaporean can access, use and benefit from technology securely and confidently.

Mr Gerald Giam, take your two cuts together.

Sir, digitalising services improves efficiency and convenience for both individuals and organisations. However, some Singaporeans struggle to keep up, whether due to physical limitations, lack of digital literacy or difficulties adapting. These individuals risk being left behind as more Government and business services move online.

Providing parallel paper applications is not always a solution to digital marginalisation. Instead, all agencies should have walk-in computer stations staffed by officers who are trained in that agency's processes. These officers should guide users through digital applications, helping them to use the systems independently over time.

ServiceSG centres play an important role in guiding citizens through Government e-services, but their officers cannot be expected to know every agency's processes in detail. While they assist with common digital functions, they are not equipped to handle complex applications like for a Long-Term Visit Pass or public defender. Government agencies must take responsibility for guiding users through their own systems. The ServiceSG network should also be expanded, including to Serangoon.

The Seniors Go Digital programme was introduced to help older Singaporeans navigate digital services. How effective has it been so far? How many seniors have been trained and to what extent has their digital literacy improved? Are there plans to expand the programme to reach more citizens?

Beyond basic training, digital inclusion efforts should also ensure that seniors and other digitally marginalised groups can more confidently use essential platforms, including communication apps that connect them with the family, businesses and Government agencies.

Sir, digitalisation must bring greater inclusion, not create new barriers, so that all Singaporeans, regardless of age, ability or financial means, can fully benefit from digitalisation.

Sir, last year, I took a survey conducted at the doorstep of my flat which covered various political and social topics. I was asked about my satisfaction with life, the economy and my neighbourhood. I was also asked to rate whether I believe the Government makes decisions in the best interest of Singapore, whether it takes my opinion seriously and if there are enough channels to voice my views. I was also asked to rate the quality of the Armed Forces, Civil Service, mainstream media and online media, as well as my confidence in the Police and the Courts. There were questions on affordability, whether I find housing, healthcare, public transport and education affordable. I was asked about competition from foreigners at work, the pace of immigration and the quality of migrants. Lastly, I was asked how strongly I identify as a Singaporean and whether I would migrate to another country for a better quality of life.

When I asked who commissioned the survey, the pollster could not tell me. More recently, I saw another pollster conducting a similar survey in my neighbourhood. I also received similar surveys via phone in the past. Are these surveys being commissioned by the Government? And if so, which Ministry is responsible? Are they used only to shape public policy or are they also used to gauge public sentiment for electoral purposes?

If public funds are being used, the results should be made public. Otherwise, there is a risk that such surveys will be seen as serving partisan interests rather than benefiting Singapore and Singaporeans as a whole.

Sir, in 2022, I spoke about the risks of exposure to sexually explicit materials, gaming addiction and other harms online. I emphasised the need for awareness, appropriate interventions and collective efforts from the Government, families and society to create a safer and more constructive online environment.

Last year, I highlighted the pervasiveness of digital technology in exposing youths to harmful online content and how unrealistic body standards being purveyed through mainstream and social media platforms have become a source of mental health strain for our society.

The online world has become an indispensable part of our lives, offering opportunities for networking, knowledge sharing and content creation. However, it must also be made safer, especially for the young and impressionable. Some have suggested access bans as a solution to online harms, but banning access alone is clearly not the way forward.

For instance, social media bans might generate unintended dangers. The premise is: young people are adept at using the Internet. Bans might push them to access social media without their parents' knowledge or prompt them to look for unregulated and hidden areas of the Internet.

I, therefore, reiterate my call to the MDDI to dive deeper into how we can shape an online environment that balances safety as well as opportunities for growth. After all, our digital space should remain a constructive platform for young people to network, share knowledge and create content, one that is safer and more conducive for everyone.

Chairman, online safety is a work in progress and perhaps, will always remain so. The inaugural Online Safety Assessment Report bears this out. IMDA's mystery shopper test showed that Instagram acted on just 2% of legitimate user reports on content that violated its own community guidelines in the first instance. Facebook took an average of nine days to act on legitimate user reports, and X took an average of 10 days, much, much longer than the median time of 15.06 hours – very precise, I must add – that X itself has declared in its annual report.

Taken together, most of these designated social media services took action on only around half of legitimate user reports and took an average of five days to act. Do not get me wrong. I think MDDI has done a lot to advance online safety for Singaporean users and our online safety laws are landmark. Yet, much more needs to be done.

I have a few questions for the Ministry. First, how would the Ministry work with the designated social media services to ensure that they do much better in acting on user reports and take down harmful content much more quickly? Two, would the Ministry consider stepping up punitive measures on the social media services? How many fines has IMDA imposed so far on the platforms for failing to fulfil their obligations under our laws? And three, are there plans to finally designate Telegram as a social media service, too, because, in practice, it is a social media service, not just a messaging app?

Mr Alex Yam. Your three cuts, please.

Mr Chairman, I love the libraries when I was growing up. A visit to the National Library at Fort Canning or the regional libraries was always a real treat. I, therefore, rise to invite the Ministry to update the House on how our public libraries will be evolving to support a future-ready Singapore. In particular, libraries have long been a cornerstone of community enrichment. Yet, the digital age calls for more innovative approaches to learning.

What new initiatives can we expect to see in our libraries that will encourage greater tech adoption and skills acquisition for all Singaporeans? Furthermore, how will these initiatives be scaled up for different age groups, especially our seniors, so that everyone, regardless of digital fluency, can benefit?

Libraries should not just be repositories of books, but living, breathing testbeds of new knowledge and digital hands-on experiences. I look forward to hearing how the Ministry plans to bring these transformative opportunities to the heart of our communities.

In our interconnected world, social media and digital platforms are powerful tools for community building. Yet, they can also be fertile breeding grounds for harmful discourse, misinformation and polarising narratives that threaten our social fabric.

We have long prided ourselves on our cohesive society and we must not let online vitriol undermine our unity. Youths, in particular, are vulnerable to the negative influences in these digital spaces. Could the Minister please share the Ministry’s strategic efforts to foster civic-mindedness on the Internet, be it through digital literacy programmes, collaborative initiatives with community groups or targeted policies encouraging responsible online behaviour?

Mr Chairman, how will the Ministry ensure our digital services truly leave no one behind, especially our seniors and people with disabilities? As we forge ahead with smart initiatives and digital transformation, how will these advances remain equitable and accessible to vulnerable groups in our society? We know that technology can be intimidating at times, even exclusionary, if not implemented thoughtfully. Will the Ministry, therefore, be introducing new standards or guidelines to ensure our websites, apps and other digital resources are user-friendly for individuals with varying needs?

Finally, how will the Ministry measure success, track progress and provide transparent updates so that we can be assured that every segment of our community benefits from our digital future?

I would like to also take the opportunity to affirm the staff of MDDI and associated agencies for the work that they do in advancing an inclusive and informed nation through digital transformation. I have worked with many of them on various projects, and I can attest to their passion and dedication in making lives more closely connected and digitally-efficient, yet also so tremendously people-centred. Thank you to everyone for their work.

Sir, MDDI should take the lead in coordinating efforts across Government agencies to protect personal information. During the January Ministerial Statement, Minister Josephine Teo clarified that scammers are not known to directly use NRIC numbers to steal or unlock valuables.

Still, NRIC numbers continue to serve as a gateway to accessing personal, but not secret, information in Singapore. Take, for example, the Eligibility Checker for the Matched Retirement Savings Scheme, on the Central Provident Fund (CPF) Board website. Anyone can check whether a senior has less than the Basic Retirement Sum in their Retirement Account, earns less than $4,000 a month, and if the annual value of their residence is below $21,000.

All this information can be unlocked with a senior's NRIC number and date of birth. It may not be obvious how this information could be misused. But in the hands of scammers, it could be used to build credibility and manipulate vulnerable individuals through social engineering tactics.

I appreciate the CPF Board's intent to make the eligibility checks convenient. However, with scams becoming more sophisticated, should we not re-consider the right balance between security and convenience more carefully?

We must act with foresight to stay ahead of emerging threats. With its deep expertise in data protection, MDDI is best placed to help our Government agencies develop the instinct for proactive data security.

Ms Jessica Tan. Please take your three cuts together.

Thank you, Chairman. With the increasing adoption of digital technologies and services and Singapore's Smart Nation ambition, ensuring digital resilience is essential in building and maintaining trust, amongst citizens as well as businesses. Our cybersecurity ecosystem, the Next Generation Nationwide Broadband Network (NextGen NBN) and infrastructure development, our education and workforce development, digital governance and innovation play pivotal roles in Singapore's digital resilience strategy.

As digital technologies become more pervasive, the risks of cyberattacks and sophistication of cyber threats are increasing. The demand for skills in cybersecurity, AI and emerging technologies continue to grow, both public sector and businesses are facing talent shortage. To ensure robust digital infrastructure, Singapore will need to invest in infrastructure upgrades and readiness. The rapid pace of technological advancements will require the regulatory and policy frameworks to be agile and adaptable, to ensure that regulations are supportive of innovation while still providing the necessary safeguards.

So, how is Singapore preparing to stay ahead of emerging digital threats and having an adaptive digital strategy? And can MDDI share what the strategic priorities for enhancing our digital resilience in Singapore is?

Mr Chairman, the adoption of AI and innovation offer substantial growth opportunities for businesses across sectors. By adopting AI solutions, businesses can unlock new revenue streams, enhance customer experiences, optimise operations and mitigate risks.

As shared in the Ministry of Trade and Industry's (MTI's) COS yesterday, AI adoption is increasing across different industries. The landscape for businesses in the drive to adopt AI solutions is both promising and challenging.

So, how is the Government creating an enabling environment to support businesses to actively, and I emphasise the word "actively", embrace and implement AI solutions to enhance competitiveness and to drive growth? How are Singapore businesses progressing in the digital adoption and embracing of AI solutions for their businesses?

A significant challenge for businesses in their adoption of AI solutions is the shortage and competition for skilled AI professionals. Businesses will also need infrastructure and resources. These include computing power, data storage and cloud services. Having access to high quality data is also essential for successful AI adoption as data is an essential building block for training AI models.

As AI adoption grows, businesses must ensure that they use AI responsibly and ethically, including how they handle data privacy, bias and transparency. This is crucial in building and maintaining trust.

The new Enterprise Compute Initiative of $150 million announced in Budget 2025 aims to address these challenges that businesses face in adopting AI solution. How can businesses tap the Enterprise Compute Initiative and what are the eligibility criteria to qualify?

Singapore's vision for a Smart Nation and our commitment to digital transformation for sustainable growth require us to have a strong talent pool of digital expertise and capabilities. A key pillar of Singapore's digital strategy is accelerating AI development and deployment. The latest iteration of the National AI Strategy (NAIS) 2.0 was launched in 2023. An important enabler of that is talent. A critical factor in advancing AI capabilities is the development of a strong talent pool.

The landscape of AI expertise and capabilities is dynamic and rapidly evolving, with countries around the world making significant investments in AI research, development and talent acquisition. So, how is the Government ensuring a strong pipeline and retention of technical expertise and AI capabilities, within the public sector and the wider Singapore ecosystem?

Considering Singapore's limited resources, how are we building these capabilities and what are the key consideration in helping us leapfrog in AI innovations? In a global competitive landscape for AI talent, how is Singapore progressing in the development and attraction of top AI expertise and capabilities?

The next Member is not here. Miss Rachel Ong.

Chairman, AI is rapidly transforming industries, reshaping jobs and redefining essential skills. DBS Group's recent announcement to cut 4,000 jobs over the next three years highlights AI's growing impact. This shift is not limited to large enterprises. SMEs must also adapt to stay competitive. AI proficiency should be a universal workforce asset, not a specialised skill limited to a few.

Education institutions are stepping up, with initiatives like Ngee Ann Polytechnic's Gen AI courses, equipping professionals with practical AI skills.

Yet, SME adoption of such training remains uncertain. As AI reshapes the job landscape, how is the Government ensuring that businesses and the workers, especially in SMEs and vulnerable roles are prepared? What initiatives are in place to help the Workforce develop AI skills for productivity gains and how will workers in these sectors be supported through this transition?

Ms Mariam Jaafar, you can take your two cuts together.

Sir, AI and Gen AI are transforming how government agencies around the world operate across all core government sectors and functions – to streamline government services, improve governance and improve citizen experience.

For example, in healthcare to predict and manage disease outbreaks and growing medical conditions, in infrastructure to do smart traffic planning, in social services to speed up document processing or detect fraudulent activities, in customer service and citizen engagement. The Government as a lead user can also provide a base load for emerging AI infrastructure, and develop and stress test emerging responsible AI frameworks are tailored to our values.

In Singapore, the Government is already using AI in use cases, like traffic management. What is the value that has been created? What steps is the Government taking to accelerate the adoption of AI and Gen AI, and value creation through AI in Government?

Sir, AI is no longer a distance technology of tomorrow, it is here, transforming industries and reshaping jobs. Many enterprises are already using AI to drive productivity, especially individual productivity, deploying tools like Microsoft Co-Pilot – but these productivity-driven AI use cases typically deliver only 10% to 20% productivity improvement.

For true enterprise value creation, enterprises must go beyond to use AI to reshape their critical core business processes, such as AI-driven fault detection, or to invent new products and services, such as by charging their customers AI credits on a pay-as-you-go basis for new AI features. Only then can we drive true value creation through higher revenue growths, dramatically transform operational efficiencies and enhance customer experience.

On this front, enterprise adoption of AI in Singapore remains very uneven, especially amongst SMEs. Having done some research on this topic, I can share that the main challenges are setting the right ambition and alignment on AI, scaling from AI proof-of-concept to generating value at-scale, and finding the right talent. Smaller companies also find access to Cloud and AI infrastructure expensive.

Sir, we need to democratise access to infrastructures, ecosystems and talent, and raise the AI ambitions of our enterprises. How is the Ministry supporting our local enterprises to accelerate the adoption of AI for larger scale value creation, so that Singapore can continue to harness AI for economic gains and social benefit?

Next Member is not here. Mr Sharael Taha, you can take your five cuts together.

Chairman, my first cut. While Singapore is building deep capabilities in AI, cybersecurity and other emerging technologies, these skills are not just critical for tech professionals, but also basic end user knowledge is increasingly essential for the general workforce. While we strive to develop a workforce with deep expertise, it is equally important to uplift the broader workforce with foundational digital and AI skills.

AI should not remain a niche skillset for a select few. Rather, it should become as commonplace as the use of Microsoft Word or Excel in today's workplace. On developing expert capabilities, how effective has a TechSkills Accelerator (TeSA) been in equipping our local workforce with the deep tech skills needed for AI and cybersecurity roles? Are we on track to meet our target for AI practitioners?

Beyond the tech sector, AI has the potential to enhance productivity and enable faster and better decision-making, particularly for SMEs too. However, adoption remains uneven for SMEs. How can we accelerate the development of AI literacy and digital skills across the broader workforce, ensuring that workers, whether in retail, logistics, professional services or any other industry, can harness AI to drive productivity, scale their businesses and stay competitive in the global market?

Many SMEs lack the budget to build in-house digital teams to hire AI talent to identify and implement AI opportunities in their businesses. How is the Government supporting SMEs in leveraging AI to boost productivity, enhance decision-making and scale effectively through the adoption of AI enabled solutions?

Singapore aspires to be a global leader in AI adoption, innovation and digital technology solutions. In Budget 2024, it was announced that there would be collaborations with industry to drive AI adoption and innovation. Can the Ministry provide an update on these collaborations? How can we further encourage companies to develop or establish their AI capabilities in Singapore?

Beyond schemes and grants, building the right ecosystem is crucial to attracting and sustaining AI-driven developments. This requires not only skilled talent and cutting-edge infrastructure, such as an ultra-fast broadband network, but also effective matching of technology to business needs, alongside the necessary safeguards to prevent misuse. How are we progressing in our NAIS 2.0 strategy to realise Singapore's vision of AI as a force for good, one that empowers businesses and uplifts our people?

At the same time, the very infrastructure and expertise that enables AI innovation can also be exploited for criminal activities. What safeguards are in place to prevent misuse by malicious actors and ensure the integrity of our AI ecosystem?

Cybersecurity threats continue to be on the rise, while we have amended our Cybersecurity Act to strengthen the protection of critical information infrastructures and expand the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore's (CSA's) oversight to cover new classes, how do we continue to raise our national cybersecurity posture?

Many SMEs lack the budget to build in-house cybersecurity teams or hire talent with deep expertise in cybersecurity. How can we assist SMEs to upgrade their cybersecurity posture?

The support for our vernacular media has enabled the platforms to transform and provide many innovative digital products to engage the community.

Berita Harian, in particular, has been able to provide many media offerings for the Malay language speaker, not only in Singapore, but in the region. This is important as it provides the Singapore Malays' perspective on current affairs issues in the region. How has this increased the viewership of Berita Harian and how can we further assist our vernacular papers to reach out to the much larger Malay speakers in the region?

Minister Josephine Teo.

Mr Chairman, I thank Members for their cuts.

Last year, the Prime Minister launched Smart Nation 2.0 – a refresh of our vision for Singapore to use technology to uplift the lives of our people. Today, I will elaborate on our efforts in four areas: (a) how we support our workforce to succeed in the age of AI; (b) how we keep Singaporeans safe by fighting harmful online activities; (c) how we protect our cyberspace against malicious attacks; and (d) how we preserve trust in our information space (infospace) by strengthening public service media.

Mr Chairman, may I ask the Clerks to distribute the package of handouts?

Yes, go ahead. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.]

Thank you. Members may also access these materials through the MP@SGPARL app.

Sir, in this year's Budget and COS debates, Members spoke often about AI. Ms Jessica Tan, Miss Rachel Ong and Mr Sharael Taha also raised concerns about its impact on workers.

I understand these concerns. They are real and will be with us for some time, because we are only at the very early stages of AI adoption globally. People all over the world would like to know who will be impacted and how. While there is no perfect clarity, there are ways in which we can help.

The first is to recognise that many jobs will still be around. The risk is not that these jobs will be lost to AI, but that they are lost to another country or city that is more competitive than us. Our most important task, therefore, is to help as many people and businesses as we can become more productive, with the use of AI. We want to become a nation of competent and confident AI users. In doing so, we can maintain Singapore's economic competitiveness and retain more good jobs here.

Sir, I have compiled a list of comparisons by various organisations in the handout . Members will see that Singapore is well-regarded and well-placed to benefit from widespread AI adoption. We should capitalise on this opportunity. We have established strong partnerships with tech companies, like Amazon Web Services, Databricks, Google and Oracle. For example, Microsoft has partnered with NTUC Learning Hub to train up to 100,000 workers with AI skills.

At the same time, IMDA is working with SkillsFuture Singapore to expand the curriculum in SkillsFuture for Digital Workplace 2.0 to include AI and Gen AI content. Under this expansion, workers in all sectors, be it manufacturing or retail, can learn how to use tools, such as ChatGPT and CoPilot. This will help them to enhance their productivity at work, even if they have no background in technology.

The second thing we must recognise is that AI will create new jobs even as it replaces some existing ones. As Members have highlighted, our next most important task is to deepen our AI capabilities and anchor more new jobs in Singapore. This means growing our pool of AI practitioners, which includes data scientists, machine learning engineers and more.

Take, for example, the need for AI safety. As AI adoption grows, there will be greater demand for AI testing and assurance service providers, just as the widespread information technology (IT) adoption led to greater demand for IT auditors. Estimates of the market for such testing, inspection and certification services vary, but they would be in the billions in time to come.

Singapore believes in the importance of good AI governance. We were one of the first in the world to introduce a testing framework and software toolkit, AI Verify. Just last month, I launched the Global AI Assurance Pilot of the AI Verify Foundation to promote best practices in the testing of models using Gen AI. These efforts can help to grow the AI testing industry here and create new jobs.

In response to Mr Sharael Taha and Ms Tin Pei Ling, let me provide an update on efforts to expand our pool of AI practitioners.

I previously shared our ambition to expand the pool from under 5,000 to 15,000 in about five years. In the last year or so, we estimate that the pool has grown by nearly 25%.

The AI Centres of Excellence that MDDI and MTI worked closely together to set up will catalyse more demand for AI practitioners, by the hundreds if not thousands. The public sector itself has growing needs. For example, Home Team Science and Technology Agency (HTX) is on track to hire and train a 300-person AI workforce by end-2025.

To meet demand, we need to grow a strong pipeline of AI practitioners. To this end, we will expand our efforts under IMDA's TechSkills Accelerator (TeSA). We will provide more company-led training opportunities. We will also explore ways to expand the AI Apprenticeship Programme together with AI Singapore.

Let me share an example of how these programmes benefit Singaporeans.

Seow Yuxin studied business and started her career in Regional Operations for an e-commerce platform. She did not work on AI systems directly, but the role sparked her interest in the field. After seeing her husband and brother-in-law go through the AI Apprenticeship Programme, she took a leap of faith and enrolled in the programme.

I spoke to Yuxin recently and was pleased to learn that she has pivoted to a new role in a new company delivering AI and data-driven solutions to other organisations.

We are determined to keep AI opportunities open and inclusive. Yuxin shows that one can access AI opportunities even without a STEM background. We will aim to support more Singaporeans like her to fulfil their AI aspirations.

As a Government, we will always put our people at the heart of all we do and that includes our AI plans. I hope these efforts reassure Members of our support for Singaporeans to make the most of AI.

Besides succeeding with AI, we want Singaporeans to feel safe when they go online. But this is not something the Government alone can achieve. Social media platforms must do their part, no different from how all service providers bear some responsibilities towards their users. This is why we passed the Online Safety (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act in 2022 to set out their basic obligations.

Like Mr Eric Chua, we believe in adopting a holistic and balanced approach to online safety, particularly for young users. Where it is useful to do so, we will strengthen regulatory levers. For example, in January, we issued a new Code of Practice for Online Safety for App Distribution Services. For the first time, we are introducing measures to ensure that young users under 18 do not access age-inappropriate apps.

Last month, we also published our first ever Online Safety Assessment Report. To questions raised by Mr Xie Yao Quan, the report showed that the designated social media services made good efforts to put in place baseline user safety measures. However, as he has also pointed out, there are areas for improvement. They should respond more quickly to user reports. Their measures to protect children from harmful content are also far from satisfactory.

This is why MDDI is studying whether the age assurance obligations for app stores should also apply to social media services.

We also want to do more to support the victims of online harms. IMDA's report found that, more often than not, platforms fail to take action to remove genuinely harmful content reported to them by victims.

One such victim was Jane, and that is not her real name. At 18, she was horrified to find an image of her face superimposed onto another person's nude body, circulating on an image sharing platform. Strangers reposted the image and left comments, some of which sexualised or insulted her. When she reported this to the platform, they took down only the original post but not the reposts. During this ordeal, she felt scared and embarrassed, even blaming herself for posting photos online in the first place. A full decade later, at 29 years old today, Jane continues to question who created that photo of her and if it is still found online. Victims like Jane need more support to find closure.

During the Smart Nation 2.0 launch, the Prime Minister announced that the Government will introduce new legislation to support victims seeking relief from specified online harms. Ms Tin will be glad to know that the proposed law, the Online Safety (Relief and Accountability) Bill, will be introduced later this year. It will establish a new agency called the Online Safety Commission (OSC) so that victims can get timely help if they encounter online harms.

The OSC will be set up by the first half of 2026. Victims will be able to request OSC to issue a direction to the platform to take down the offensive content. The platform must also remove existing identical copies on the platform – something they refused to do for Jane.

The new law will also help victims hold their perpetrators accountable. If they want to sue the perpetrators, they can request OSC to direct the platform to provide information about the perpetrators.

In drafting the new law, the Minister of Law and MDDI have engaged a wide range of stakeholders from industry, academia, community groups and international partners. We also invited the public to provide their feedback. The public consultation findings have been published on the website of Reaching Everyone for Active Citizenry @ Home (REACH).

We are heartened by the strong support and useful feedback which will help refine our proposals. Given the complexity and vastness of the digital space, rules and regulations alone are insufficient. Everyone has a part to play. Minister of State Rahayu will share what citizens can do to protect themselves online.

Sir, in his Budget Statement, the Prime Minister talked about the global context being more uncertain and having more downside risks. This is reflected in the digital domain, where cyber threats have become more severe. Criminal groups are increasingly going online to look for illicit gains. Advanced Persistent Threat actors, linked to certain states, are actively seeking to advance their national agenda.

We have seen both kinds of activities in our cyberspace. Last year, a global botnet, which included infected servers and devices around the world, was discovered. More details can be found in the handout. Until the Cyber Security Agency of Singapore (CSA) participated in an international operation to disrupt this botnet, about 2,700 devices in Singapore had been infected, unbeknownst to their owners. The malicious actors exploited poor cyber hygiene practices to infect devices, including baby monitors and Internet routers.

Members may ask, so what if the botnet had remained? Well, it would have meant the devices were vulnerable and personal data belonging to device owners could have been stolen. More worryingly, the devices could be used as a standby army, much like our full-time National Servicemen, ready to be deployed into active duty. Except in this case, it would be foreign state-linked actors using the bots for malicious purposes, which can include targets directed within Singapore.

As Ms Tin Pei Ling highlighted, international partnerships are critical in combatting such complex threats. CSA could act only because it has recognised capabilities and was trusted by its partners to be involved in this international operation.

Botnets are just one of the many cyber threats we need to defend against. This is why we emphasise the need to safeguard our cybersecurity at multiple levels.

For individuals, we will continue working with industry partners to offer better protection. One example is the Enhanced Fraud Protection feature under Google Play Protect. A common scam tactic is to entice victims to download apps from unofficial sources that can inject malware into our devices. With this feature, such download attempts on Android devices will be blocked.

For organisations, the Government is improving the SG Cyber Safe Programme. Senior Minister of State Tan Kiat How will share more details later.