Hansard, Tuesday, 6 October 2020

1 Mr Darryl David asked the Minister for Education (a) in the last five years, how many international students have been accepted into local Universities under the Tuition Grant Scheme (TGS); (b) what are those numbers as a percentage of the total University student population; (c) whether this number of TGS international students will be reduced in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and, if so, whether this reduction will mean more places for Singaporean students; and (d) what will be the consequences for international students who cannot meet their TGS bond commitments in this present COVID-19 employment market.

2 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for Education (a) what contingency plans are in place for foreign recipients of scholarships to serve out their bonds given the tightened restrictions on access to employment and other foreign-worker passes; (b) whether the Ministry will consider alternative mechanisms for recent graduates to serve out their commitments such as a deferral of the bond period or service of their bond periods with Singapore-owned or Singapore-affiliated companies abroad.

Mr Speaker, beg your pardon. I would like to take Question Nos 1 and 2 together.

Please proceed.

The objective of our education system is to serve the needs of Singaporeans. Places in the Autonomous Universities or AUs are planned first and foremost for Singaporeans, in line with the cohort participation target of 40%. This year, we set aside more places at the AUs, to cater to Singaporean students whose overseas study plans were disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The AUs first admit Singaporean students who are able to meet their admission standards. They then raise the bar a few notches and admit a small number of international students, over and above the local students. As such, no Singaporean is displaced from an AU because of an international student.

Over the past five years, the number of international students who received tuition grant in each cohort averaged around 1,600, less than 10% of each intake. For Academic Year 2020, we are still finalising the numbers, but expect to see similar trends of less than 10%.

Having some international students adds to the diversity of the overall education experience and cultivates students’ global orientation and inter-cultural skills. It also better prepares them for the future workplace, where they may have to interact with different nationalities. We will continue to review and adjust the number of international students on tuition grant in the future, taking into consideration the quality of applicants and other factors.

We understand that recent graduates may face challenges finding employment in the current economic climate. Our priority remains to support locals in finding employment. However, we will also give fair treatment to tuition grant holders obliged to serve a three-year bond after graduation. These students can serve out their obligations in Singapore or overseas with Singapore-registered companies.

In particular, MOE works with the Universities and other public agencies to facilitate their applications for work pass arrangements here, while keeping to the Fair Consideration Framework. Flexibility is given when assessing these students’ work pass applications. The students are also given time to stay in Singapore to look for a job. Those who have genuine difficulties finding employment – be it here or abroad – may reach out to the Universities and MOE, and we will assess their situation and see how best to assist them on a case-by-case basis. We will continue to monitor the situation and adjust our approach appropriate to the economic situation and outlook.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for the reply. It is very heartening to hear what Minister said, specifically that no Singaporean student will be displaced from a position in our AUs because of an international student. I just have two supplementary questions, Mr Speaker.

First is a question to the Minister that when we decide on the international students to admit into our AUs, do we consider or look at a ratio or a good balance of which countries these international students come from? And if we do, is this ratio periodically reviewed?

The second thing is when we determine which areas or field of study that we offer these international students places in our AUs for, would we also consider not only the needs of Singaporeans but whether or not the respective industries that these students could be graduating into are able to absorb these students into the workforce?

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for the questions. On both questions, the answer is that the Universities look at taking in students from a range of different sources. So, they are very mindful of having a variety of nationalities. As I had highlighted earlier, these international students come in over and above the local students.

When the Universities consider the applications from international students, they will look at them coming in from a range of different countries, bearing in mind that they do not want concentration from any single source and they will also look at them coming in to study in a range of different disciplines, different subjects, bearing in mind the desire for diversity across the student body and also taking into consideration the absorption capacity of the industry.

These are all considerations that the Universities would take into account.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his response. I am just curious if he could clarify the typical career path of scholarship recipients, in this case, especially in terms of the ratio of students who end up taking up Singapore Permanent Residence or Citizenship after they have completed their studies.

Mr Speaker, we are referring here to Tuition Grant holders, not to scholarship recipients. They are a different category. These Tuition Grant holders come in, they apply to the Universities; they do not need to apply for a Tuition Grant, but if they do so, they would have to serve a three-year bond. Quite separate from scholarship applicants. I do not have on hand the data on the percentage of Tuition Grant holders who go on to apply for Permanent Residence (PR) or Citizenship, for that matter. But just to make the point that Tuition Grant applicants and recipients are quite different from scholarship recipients.

I thank the Minister for clarifying the distinction between the two and I apologise for the loose language. I am wondering, since he has brought up that distinction, whether it is possible to elaborate on the approximate ratio of Tuition Grant recipients versus scholarship recipients in terms of foreign students choosing to study here.

Again, if the Member would like to file a separate question asking for those details – number of scholarship holders, number of Tuition Grant holders – these are data that from time to time, Members in this House have asked for and we have released those data. Likewise, if the Member would be interested in the proportion of scholarship holders who have gone on to take on Citizenship or PR, he may file a separate question and we would be happy to provide the information.

3 Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked the Minister for Transport (a) what is the total number of passengers who have made transits through Singapore since Changi Airport was re-opened for transit passengers; and (b) whether there is a plan to open further for business travellers and leisure tourists without the need for Stay-Home Notices if effective and reliable measures such as the swab test can be relied on and faster clearances at designated areas in the airport.

4 Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked the Minister for Transport (a) what plans are in the pipeline to revive our aviation industry and promote safe air travel through Singapore; (b) how will these plans address the medium to long-term risks to our air hub status; and (c) whether the retrenchment exercise by SIA will affect these plans to revive our aviation industry and, if so, what is the impact.

5 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Transport which reciprocal travel arrangements with other countries are expected to be finalised within the next three months.

6 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Transport whether the Government has plans to aid the recovery of Singapore Airlines in the event of a prolonged COVID-19 pandemic situation and, if so, what are these.

7 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Transport (a) how can the Government help the aviation industry and Singapore Airlines preserve their capabilities and pivot in the post-COVID-19 pandemic landscape; and (b) whether the medium-to long-term plans for the industry need to be revised including the building of Changi Airport Terminal 5.

8 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Transport what are the factors that the Ministry will consider before approving no-destination flights and how important will carbon emissions arising from such flights be a factor for approval.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission for the Minister for Transport to take Question No 3 through to Question No 8 in his Ministerial Statement later in the Sitting, please.

Yes. Mr Ang Wei Neng.

9 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Transport whether he can provide an update on the Johor Bahru-Singapore Rapid Transit (RTS) Link including the implications of converting the RTS into a Light Rail Transit.

Mr Speaker, Sir, on 30 July 2020, Singapore and Malaysia formally agreed to resume the Johor Bahru–Singapore Rapid Transit System Link or RTS Link Project, and held a ceremony witnessed by both Prime Ministers to mark the occasion.

Three agreements were signed to give effect to the resumption of the project – an agreement to amend the RTS Link Bilateral Agreement, a Joint Venture Agreement between Singapore’s SMRT and Malaysia’s Prasarana to constitute a joint venture Operating Company or OpCo, and a Concession Agreement for the Government of Malaysia and LTA to appoint this OpCo as the RTS Link Operator for the first 30-year concession period.

Both sides have agreed that the RTS Link will use an LRT system, instead of the Thomson-East Coast Line or TEL MRT system. The LRT system for the RTS Link is more similar to a medium capacity MRT system, such as the Jurong Region Line, with a peak hour capacity of 10,000 passengers per hour per direction.

The change from TEL to LRT system will not require any major changes to the original infrastructure design. The RTS Link station continues to be located next to the TEL Woodlands North Station to provide commuters with ease of transfer.

The RTS Link is an important bilateral project that will ease Causeway congestion, facilitate business and tourism, and bring our peoples closer together. Singapore looks forward to working closely with Malaysia to implement the RTS Link Project and to commence passenger service by end 2026.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for the comprehensive reply. We understand there are a lot of changes in Malaysia recently and it might impact long-term projects between the two countries. So, given the context, I have three supplementary questions.

First, what are the safeguards in ensuring that the RTS Link project will be carried out even if there is a change in government in Malaysia over the next few years?

Second, what are the implications of having the switch of the RTS Link depot from the existing Thomson-East Coast Line's Mandai Depot, to a new depot in Wadi Hana, Johor Bahru? Does it mean that the maintenance of the RTS Link trains and system will lie primarily in Malaysia and what would be the impact on the reliability of RTS Link?

Mr Ang, can you keep it to two supplementary questions, please. Thank you.

Last supplementary question. Thank you. Would MOT consider building a transfer line along the Causeway to supplement the RTS Link or replace the RTS Link if the RTS Link becomes not viable again?

Mr Speaker, Sir, a project of this nature is a bilateral project, something that requires both parties to sit down, negotiate, discuss and find a way forward. I think Mr Ang is aware that for the RTS Link project, it was suspended for a short while and we had to discuss together with Malaysia on what were the arrangements that were acceptable to both countries. In such negotiations and discussions, there will be some give and take, some changes made. And that is what we did with the RTS Link Project.

But the important thing is this – there are safeguards in the agreement to protect the interests of both countries and to ensure that the objectives of the project can still be achieved.

So, I mentioned earlier, and I stressed this point, 10,000 passengers per hour per direction. Because that was what we wanted; to make sure that continues to be the case. So, even though we switched from the TEL to LRT, we continue to be able to achieve this objective.

Mr Ang also asked about maintenance, and again, I mentioned this in my main reply. I said there is a OpCo that is being formed by companies from both sides. Both countries will have a shared interest to ensure that the trains are able to run reliably, safely and meet the needs of commuters from both sides.

10 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Defence (a) how has the COVID-19 crisis affected SAF operations and training in 2020 so far, (b) how has the SAF coped with the challenges to ensure that the operational readiness of SAF and the quality of all SAF training have remained uncompromised.

Mr Speaker, the hon Member, Mr Dennis Tan has asked for the state of SAF readiness during this COVID-19 pandemic. It is a pertinent question, because despite the COVID-19 crisis being dubbed as the test of this generation, our other security threats are in no way diminished. So, let me elaborate.

The SAF operations that are deemed critical such as island defence, protection of key installations, maritime security, air defence and counter-terrorism, continue around the clock even in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. So, they never stop, whether we had circuit breaker or before that or even now. And it will not stop. Similarly, training schools that are essential to sustain our operational units have also continued, namely the Officer Cadet School, the Specialist Cadet School and essential In-Camp Training or ICT.

To be able to achieve that, to be able to continue to be Readiness Condition 1, REDCON 1, for these critical missions, the key aspect is manning. You have to plan for manning, in the face of the risk of infection. So, to minimise the risk of infection for these critical units, the SAF implemented strict health and safety measures. They include cohorting, safe distancing measures, reduction in training group size and testing regimes.

But, in order to make sure that you maintain REDCON 1 across the span of duties, some personnel performing critical operations had to isolate themselves in camps and bases for a period of time. Why? Because this is how it works. You have to make sure that you are ready and you are free from infection before you start your duty. And the only way they could do that was to stay in camp for two weeks away from their families as a cohort before they start their duties and during their operational duties.

For other SAF training, the disruptions caused by COVID-19 corresponded to restrictions and other measures placed on the general public for safety and health reasons. For example, during the circuit breaker period, Basic Military Training or BMT and large-scale overseas exercises were suspended as well as some ICTs were deferred.

Mr Tan asked how the SAF has coped. I think the SAF has coped well with these challenges brought about by COVID-19. In addition to maintaining its core functions and military training, the SAF strongly supported our nation's fight against COVID-19. More than 6,000 MINDEF/SAF personnel were mobilised and deployed across a wide range of national task forces and operations. They range from leading contact tracing, caring for migrant workers in dormitories, converting and managing SAF camps as community recovery facilities, and providing medical care to recovering patients.

With the easing up of restrictions on the public, the SAF has progressively resumed more training and exercises, while continuing to take health and safety precautions. More ICTs have been conducted and some overseas training have resumed. For example, the Navy has just safely completed a 67-day deployment for the Rim of the Pacific, RIMPAC, which is a multinational naval exercise held in Honolulu. It was SAF's first overseas exercise since the COVID-19 pandemic struck. And for this, the RSN had to plan, how do you ensure: one, that you can pick up detections while you are at sea; and two, care for infected servicemen or servicewomen while at sea, because you are out there and you may need ICU. It was an interesting exercise; it was an interesting challenge. They brought on a COVID-19 test kit, they put it on board and they converted their ship with ICU capabilities. I was quite proud of them for being able to do that. Thankfully, they did not have to use the ICU, none of them got infected and they successfully completed that exercise.

The RSAF pilots continue to hone their skills with regular local flying as well as overseas training and exercises. Later this month, the Air Force will be deploying about 200 personnel and 10 aircraft to train in Darwin, Australia for about two months. Our boys and women are there now, doing their two weeks of isolation before they start training.

In tandem with the increase in training activities, the SAF has also added measures to enhance the detection of COVID-19 infections to mitigate their spread. From October, some ICT units will have their NSmen undergo swab tests if proximity to other individuals cannot be avoided during training. That is an added measure on top of the measures that I talked about. For these swab tests, DSO is assisting the SAF to use other methods which are more suited for mass testing. For example, oropharyngeal mid-turbinate swabs or OP-MT, or saliva testing. Initial results of our trials on both these different applications have been promising with regard to the acceptability and accuracy of these newer methods.

While the SAF contributes to Singapore's fight against COVID-19, it will not be distracted from its core functions. The SAF recognises that Singapore's security challenges do not diminish during this COVID-19 pandemic. In fact, our assumption is that, would be aggressors can take advantage of the situation to do us harm. The SAF will therefore continue to be vigilant, maintain its level of operational readiness through realistic training and full-manning of critical units.

Mr Dennis Tan.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for his comprehensive replies. I have one supplementary question. Picking on the experience in handling training and operational matters during the COVID-19 period this year, is the Minister able to share with this House whether the SAF has any plans to enhance its training programme locally or overseas in the coming year, especially if he considers that the COVID-19 situation may have improved as far as the training scenarios are concerned? Thank you – in the coming year, Sir.

Mr Speaker, again, very pertinent questions. Our assumption is, as I had said, on an operational level, critical functions cannot stop. And you do everything you can to make sure you are fully manned, all hands on deck, minimise infections; if there are infections, you get replacements. That is not negotiable and that will continue.

But, of course, a large part of the SAF operations are what we call – not critical real time, but you still need to maintain the operational readiness, the level of training, that tempo. As all of us know, more realistic training, some of it can be done locally to the extent possible. For example, pilots, you can do simulators, you can fly. Yesterday, we just had a question on RSAF pilots and I asked for the indulgence of the public and Members to understand why we have to train locally. We have done everything possible to train as much as we can overseas, but what remains, has to be done here, we have done it and we have made adjustments.

But for a lot of the army exercises, tanks, artilleries, our HIMARS operations, our infantry and so on and so forth, we have done that in overseas areas. That sometimes is subject to the other party. Let me just say that our attitude is not to take COVID-19 as a reason not to train. We keep knocking on doors to say we will take measures to protect your public and we will make sure that we are disciplined. We will make sure that we have testing but we want to start training. But, we can understand that it is subject to many factors. Be that as it may, where we can, we will continue and step up local training.

That is why, I mentioned that, in order for us to give us the confidence to be able to train at the tempo and at the pace that we want to, even locally, our assessment is that we will need mass testing.

If you ask your tank platoons to mount up and go into their tanks, they cannot practice safe distancing. And therefore, you have to test all of them. The way to do that is to have tests which are acceptable, which are accurate and that is why I mentioned saliva testing, I mentioned oropharyngeal mid-turbinate testing, which can be more readily applied to larger groups, as well as other innovative methods of testing that we are working on.

11 Mr Murali Pillai asked the Minister for Health whether the powers under the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act may be expanded to provide intervention for the benefit of mentally disordered persons under the care of relatives who do not allow these persons to receive psychiatric treatment even though these relatives do not ill-treat or neglect such persons within the meaning of section 8(1) of the Act.

The Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act or MHCTA allows for the state to intervene for persons with or suspected of having mental health conditions and who may be a risk to self or pose a danger to others. The Police can apprehend the person and take him or her to a doctor for an assessment or bring the person to a psychiatric institution for treatment. The processes that are empowered under MHCTA apply, even if the person declines to seek treatment on his or her own accord, or relatives refuse to bring the person to receive psychiatric treatment.

Nonetheless, MOH's approach is to intervene early and reach out to the persons who are facing mental health issues and their families to encourage them to seek help voluntarily, before there is a need to enforce mandatory psychiatric evaluation and treatment. MOH has worked with Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) to develop services to support persons with mental health conditions under the Community Mental Health Masterplan. AIC acts as a "first touchpoint" for agencies, service providers and members of the public to refer persons suspected to have mental health conditions and not receiving the treatment they need for further support. AIC, with the support of relevant stakeholders, could refer such persons to the appropriate medical and social services.

To actively reach out to community to provide early identification and community support for persons with mental health needs, AIC has set up 43 community outreach teams and trained over 24,000 frontline staff from Government agencies and community partners across Singapore as of end 2019. These teams have reached out to over 300,000 persons and provided assistance to more than 23,000 persons who were at risk of developing mental health conditions or dementia.

Nevertheless, MOH recognises that there is a need to better support persons with, or suspected with, mental health needs and displaying challenging behaviours in the community. MOH is currently reviewing the enablers for the community support required which include the current legislative levers.

We would like to urge Members and any member of the public that if they come across any person with mental health needs, to contact the Institute of Mental Health (IMH)’s 24-hour mental health helpline (6389 2222) or AIC’s Care-in-Mind (careinmind@aic.sg) for assistance.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the hon Parliamentary Secretary Ms Rahayu Mahzam for her comprehensive answer to my question. With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of elucidation, I wish to state that I filed this Parliamentary Question arising from my tracking of a case involving my resident and attended to by the AIC's Community Mental Health Division, Fei Yue's Community Intervention Team (COMIT), MOH's Mobile Crisis Team (MCT) and Adult Neuro-developmental Disorder Service (ANDS), MSF's Adult Protective Services (APS), HDB as well as my community leaders. The case involved a mentally disordered young man whose parents refused to allow him to be treated by IMH as they believe in religious and spiritual intervention.

The final report from AIC was that if the family refuses to cooperate, there cannot be any intervention under the current legislative landscape because he is physically well taken care of and he does not pose a safety risk. I was advised to tell the neighbours to file a complaint with the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal (CDRT) as the young man screams very loudly in the middle of the night from time to time. Respectfully, I do not think this advice, though well-meant, is useful.

I am glad to note the hon Parliamentary Secretary has indicated that MOH is willing to review the legislative landscape. While waiting for the review, would MOH be prepared to direct its agencies to engage and work collaboratively with the spiritual and religious healers? And in this regard, I would like to offer that the researchers at IMH, led by Prof Chong Siow Ann, in 2012 and 2016, opined that there is a significant treatment gap in Singapore, with more than three quarters of mentally disordered persons not seeking professional help and 24% of people who seek some form of help go to religious and spiritual healers.

I thank the Member for the question as well as the extensive feedback and I am grateful for the acknowledgement given to all the different partners involved in resolving the particular issue that he was faced with. MOH is aware of the concerns that the Member has raised and, in particular, that case. We definitely need to look at how to better support persons with or suspected with mental health needs and displaying challenging behaviours in the community as well as the people around them.

Indeed, this is a work in progress. In 2012, MOH launched the Community Mental Health (CMH) Master Plan to further strengthen mental health care in the community and enable persons with mental health needs to be well supported. In 2017, we announced that the Government will be further enhancing and expanding mental health services over the next few years. So, it is work in progress.

AIC, as the Member has mentioned, has established Community Intervention Teams to support general practitioners, GP partners and service providers with allied health services, such as psychotherapy and counselling. As of end 2019, over 26,000 persons had been supported by these teams.

We have also started mental health and dementia services in more than half of our polyclinics and trained over 210 GP partners to diagnose and support persons with mental health conditions. So, a lot has been done and a lot will continue to have to be done. And it is, indeed, important to enhance these efforts.

I would just like to highlight that we have actually been working very closely with the health care institutions, community health partners, Government agencies like the Police, HDB and grassroots organisations to build up community networks to better support and manage persons with mental health conditions in the community.

So, the suggestion that the Member has raised about working with religious partners is something that we can definitely look into. And we definitely need to look into enhancing the awareness and support.

As I have mentioned, MOH is already reviewing the enablers for the community support. We will take the Member's feedback and input into consideration during this review and assess the appropriate approaches and recourse that we can take to address such cases in the community.

I thank the Parliamentary Secretary Rahayu Mahzam. I have further questions for MOH. Does the Ministry have any data about the recovery rates and outcomes of mental health patients currently receiving existing types of treatment through the methods employed by IMH? Second, will MOH consider exploring or supporting research into alternative treatments or rehabilitative care methods for mental health patients, including, possibly, TCM or other alternative medicines?

I thank the Member for the question. The details which the Member has asked for, I will need to check and, if the Member wishes, she can file another Parliamentary Question asking specifically for the data.

In respect of considering alternative treatment, this is work in progress. We are all still new at this and we are all looking at how to better address this situation as a community. With inputs from community partners and people in the sector, we can continue to build on this. I do not believe this is a closed option. But we definitely need to look and find out if the approaches that we are taking will actually meaningfully help address the situation. So, this is something that I can take back. But we hope to also get support from the community with the existing measures that we already have in place to help address the situation as we build towards strengthening the support that we are giving to the partners.

12 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Manpower (a) when will the Tripartite Advisory on Mental Health be published; and (b) whether the advisory can be expedited to provide better support to workers suffering from mental-health-related issues arising from the workplace.

Mr Speaker, we are on track to publish the Tripartite Advisory on Mental Health in the fourth quarter of this year.

Currently, the Advisory is undergoing consultation with employers, unions, mental health professionals and our civil society groups. In the meantime, the Inter-Agency Advisory on supporting mental well-being of workers under COVID-19 work arrangements that was published in April serves as a useful reference. It has a list of external resources that employers can consider engaging to provide support for their workers’ mental health.

Employers can also initiate support for their workers. For instance, supervisors can check in regularly with their workers, talk to them to find out if they are facing any problems and refer them to external help if needed.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Senior Minister of State for his update. I have one supplementary question. The prolonged telecommuting arrangements have blurred boundaries between the home and the office for many of our workers, especially our PMETs. Many have told me that they now work increasingly long hours as emails, calls and WhatsApp messages have come in outside of their regular working hours. Some shared that they now have Zoom work meetings in the night, which they never had before COVID-19. In fact, they told me that they had not even heard of Zoom before COVID-19.

Could the Ministry, therefore, consider incorporating aspects of the right to disconnect legislation as part of the Tripartite Advisory on Mental Health so as to provide our workers with a guideline on how to start a conversation with their employers about commuting outside of work hours for non-critical work?

Sir, I thank the Member for his clarification and questions. Certainly, the work from home arrangement today has changed the way we work and brought access to the office into the home. So, I fully recognise the challenges some of our workers are facing with regard to the blurred lines between work hours and personal time. Certainly, I can see where the Member is coming from, where clearer boundaries between work and personal time would be useful.

Sir, as we work on the Tripartite Advisory that we plan to announce later, it is important that we look at some of these aspects to see how we can use the space to work towards an understanding between employer and employee to see how we can better manage this work-life balance. But the same time as well, we have to also recognise that this is something new. I think it originated in France, if I am not mistaken – the El Khomri law. And many countries are still observing and seeing how this works out before we can consider it – whether it is feasible and open to legislation. The consideration that we must consider is whether something like this would be relevant or rigid in Singapore's context, given the fact that many of us, for example, do work for multinational firms or firms that work across time zones and you need to also pick up calls – and Zoom included – late at night to cater to a different work type of environment. But the same time as well, we also know that enforcing rigidity may also impede on some workers, too, because some prefer the flexibility that they can tend to their kids in the day, run errands, send the kids to pre-school, childcare and then come back, pick up the kids early and then work at night.

So, there are different modalities in terms of how we work and intermingle the work boundaries and personal life boundaries. I think these are important points for us to consider and perhaps something that the union could raise as part of our discussions on the Tripartite Advisory.

Thank you, Sir. Can I ask the Minister whether he can confirm that the tripartite guidelines or advisory will make clear that employers should not request for information on a person's mental health condition unless the condition has a direct connection with their ability to perform the job role.

I thank the Member. The Tripartite Advisory has not been announced and I cannot confirm. But we will certainly look into it. I think, today, the practice is already in place and something we encourage strongly. Where the job does not require it, the employee does not need to declare it as part of his employment application. So, this is something that we need to hold strong, too. But look out for the advisory once it is out. But rest assured that we are looking at various areas in which we want to make sure that the well-being of our workers is well protected, both from the physical health as well as mental health states.

13 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what has been the trend of scam crimes in the past 10 years; and (b) what is the Police's strategy to reduce such scam crimes.

The Police started to track the number and types of scams from 2016 when it started to become a crime of concern. Since then, the number of scams reported has increased by 77%, from 5,383 cases in 2016 to 9,545 cases in 2019. There were 10,402 cases of scam reported in the first eight months of this year, which is a 100% increase over the 5,229 cases reported during the same period last year.

In terms of the total amount lost, it has also risen over the past years, from $89.7 million in 2016 to $170.8 million in 2019. In the first eight months of this year, the total amount cheated increased by almost 71% to $157 million, from $92 million in the same period in 2019.

The Member asked about what the Singapore Police Force is doing about this. MHA adopts a multi-pronged approach to tackle scams. First, strengthening enforcement. The Police have set up specialised units to disrupt scammers’ operations. One of these units is the E-Commerce Fraud Enforcement and Coordination Team or E-FECT in short. Since its formation in November 2018, the E-FECT has arrested 101 e-commerce scammers and solved about 2,000 e-commerce scams. In June 2019, the Police set up the Anti-Scam Centre or ASC, which acts as a nerve centre for investigations into scam-related crimes. The ASC’s focus is to mitigate victims’ losses, through the swift interdiction of the proceeds of the crime. In its first year of operation, the ASC froze more than 6,100 bank accounts and recovered more than S$21.2 million.

Second, the Police have stepped up collaboration with foreign law enforcement agencies. The Police set up the Transnational Commercial Crime Task Force or TCTF in short, in October 2017 to investigate transnational scams such as China Officials Impersonation Scams, Internet Love Scams and Credit-for-Sex Scams. We have seen good results since. To date, the TCTF has conducted 12 joint operations with international counterparts, resulting in the arrests of over 120 suspects. Let me cite two examples.

First, in November 2019, the TCTF worked with the Royal Malaysia Police, Hong Kong Police Force and the Macau Judiciary Police to jointly cripple an Internet Love Scam syndicate based in Malaysia. The group is believed to have been involved in at least 139 cases in Singapore, Malaysia, Hong Kong and Macau, involving losses of about S$5.8 million.

Second, in May 2019, the TCTF successfully extradited two Nigerian men to Singapore for cheating Singapore-based victims in Internet Love Scams perpetrated from Malaysia.

The two accused persons were charged in court in May 2019, and the trial is still on-going.

Third, we work closely with public and private sector stakeholders. The Police regularly engage banks, remittance agencies and convenience stores to train their frontline staff to spot possible scam victims. In 2019, the Police commended 108 recipients from the community for preventing 91 instances of scams involving approximately S$5 million. Earlier this year, the Inter-Ministry Committee on Scams was set up to coordinate a whole-of-Government effort to combat scams and their roles include (a) to improve scam detection and disruption capabilities; (b) to develop measures to secure the digital space; (c) to enhance the loss recovery and remediation experience for scam victims; and (iv) to improve public education and outreach efforts against scams.

Fourth is public education. The Police and the National Crime Prevention Council have disseminated advisories through various media platforms, including messaging and social media platforms such as Facebook, Instagram and TikTok. In August 2020, an anti-scam public education campaign, "Spot the Signs. Stop the Crimes", was launched. This new campaign focuses on sharing real-life scam examples to educate and inform the public on how to spot the tell-tale signs of various scams.

Indeed, the key to fight against scams is a discerning public. They are urged to stay vigilant and report possible scams promptly to the Police.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for the comprehensive reply. I have a few supplementary questions.

First, I heard a few types of scams mentioned by the Minister of State. Can the Minister of State advise us which is the most common scam and which is the one that has the biggest monetary loss in Singapore?

I understand that five major crimes which are often communicated to the communities have dropped significantly over the years, and the number of online scams has overtaken the five crimes. So, will the Minister of State consider providing the number or type of online crimes by constituency, on a monthly basis, so as to better alert the residents and garner their support to fight and prevent online scams.

Thirdly, I often receive WhatsApp messages asking me to take personal loans from moneylenders. I think it is mostly the works of the illegal moneylenders. I also receive phone calls to tell me that I have a parcel stuck at the custom and mostly this is a fraud case. I understand many Singaporeans also receive similar messages. Can the Police advise Singaporeans what to do when they receive such messages or phone calls? Can the Police consider setting up a hotline or an email account for Singaporeans to send such messages and details of the phone calls to the Police?

I thank the Member for the question. The first question with regard to the most popular scam crimes that we have tracked, the top three, in terms of number of incidents that has happened, will be first is the e-commerce scam. We can all understand why. With the prevalence of Internet and the e-commerce platform, this has become the number one, the most common scam that we see in our community.

The second one is social media, impersonation scam. The third one will be loan scam. These are in terms of the number of incidents that happened. If you would like to see more in terms of the top 10, you can go to our anti-scam website. We have listed the most common scams that have happened.

In terms of the amount, the highest levels of investment or financial losses will be for those related to investment scams.

The Member also asked in terms of breaking down online scams by constituency. I do not have the data right now. We will take it back. We have to bear in mind that online scams represent a very challenging area to deal with, in terms of how we look at the trans-borderless nature of this crime, as well as how anonymous some of these crime scammers can go about doing its operation. So, I am not so sure how this breakdown will help but we will certainly take a look at the Member's suggestions on how to break down the data. If it is useful, we will do that as well.

Finally, the Member talked about how the Police can allow our residents and our people to have a one-stop way to seek help when they need help, so I would like to inform Members of the House that the Anti-Scam Centre was set up for this purpose. Working with National Crime Prevention Council, since several years ago, we have already set up a hotline. This hotline is 1800-722-6688. Any member of the public who needs help, who is not sure, who needs advice on whether that is a scam, they can go to the hotline.

On top of that, we have also set up the scamalert.sg, which is a URL that allows members of the public to see what are the most common scams that have happened and also for members of the public to share their stories about how they have fallen prey to scams.

So, these are the efforts that we will continue to step up, in time to come.

I thank the Minister of State for the reply. I just want to make two small clarifications about what I said. Firstly, we know that the Police communicated to the communities what are the five major crimes, very often, on a monthly basis, and engage the residents. So, I am suggesting that the Police can do the same for the number of online scams by constituency and let the residents know that these are the online crimes that happened in their neighbourhood, where their neighbour are victims, so that they are more aware, and they can help the Police to fight the online crime together.

The second one, I mentioned that we often receive a lot of messages. Is there some way or can we set up a website, and we can send those phone calls and messages to that one site, rather than just making phone call which is sometimes, not efficient because you need people to man the hotline.

I thank the Member for the clarification of the question. As I had mentioned, we will take his suggestions. Today, the Police work closely with the community to also highlight what are the top five crimes in the community. Scam is obviously one of those that are increasing in trend. So, we will take the Member's suggestions in mind.

The second one with regard to the website and a one-stop station for residents to post and also to submit the scam situation, as I had mentioned, the scamalert.sg would probably serve that purpose.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. I thank Minister of State Desmond Tan for his clarifications. May I ask Minister of State Desmond Tan what are the preventative strategies to protect specifically seniors from Internet scams, given the on-going efforts to increase the digital literacy amongst our seniors.

Indeed, the Member has highlighted a vulnerable group. We are also mindful that they are quite prone to scams. The Police and MHA have started, in terms of our public education, to be more targeted and focused on specific targets that are prone to certain different kinds of scams.

So, for the seniors group, other than the mainstream media, we also work very closely with the community networks through their events, through their house visits including the Agency for Integrated Care, to make sure that some of these messages are communicated to them. We also work with IMDA, in terms of the Seniors Go Digital Programme, to try and see whether we can highlight, in the process of teaching them how to use the smartphone, to be more mindful of the risk and the threat that can come their way.

So, these are the efforts that we are working on and we will continue to make sure that our seniors are protected in cyberspace. They are an important group for us.

14 Miss Cheryl Chan Wei Ling asked the Minister for National Development to help the construction sector expedite the availability of overseas workers and restart projects post-COVID-19 (a) whether the Skills Evaluation Certificate (Knowledge) test can be conducted in Singapore upon the overseas workers' arrival instead of at overseas testing centres; and (b) whether there can be an exemption for workers with past experience in the same trade in Singapore.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we require new foreign construction workers to pass the Skills Evaluation Certificate (Knowledge) test, or SEC(K) trade test, at our overseas testing centres to ensure that they are equipped with the necessary trade knowledge and skills competency before coming to Singapore to work. This way, employers and the workers themselves can be assured that the workers are able to meet the requirements before incurring expenses, such as airfare, to travel to Singapore.

For workers that have previously obtained the necessary SEC(K) qualifications in a particular trade, they do not need to retake the SEC(K) test before returning to Singapore to work in the same trade.

15 Mr Vikram Nair asked the Minister for National Development (a) in each of the last three years, what is the number of complaints made in relation to defects in HDB BTO flats within five years of their completion; (b) what is this figure as a percentage of the total number of HDB BTO flats completed in that year; and (c) whether HBD will consider extending the defects liability period with its contractors for a longer period of up to five years to ensure greater responsibility for workmanship.

Mr Speaker, flat owners of newly completed BTO flats are provided with a one-year Defects Liability Period or DLP, where the building contractor will repair defects reported by flat owners.

Based on BTO flats completed over the past five years, about 90% of the feedback on defects was received during the DLP, with the remaining 10% received in the second to fifth year following the blocks’ completion. On average, during the DLP, the number of reported defects per BTO flat was around 2.6 and this dropped significantly to 0.2 after the first year, 0.1 after the second year and 0.05 after the third year.

The vast majority of reported defects involve issues such as scratches or cracks on timber surfaces, walls, tiles and sanitary fittings. These are easily rectified by the contractors and do not affect the structural integrity or safety of the building.

As most defects are resolved within the first year, a one-year DLP is sufficient for the majority of new flat owners and is in line with the industry practice for private developments. In addition, HDB provides all new flat owners with a five-year warranty for external wall seepage or inter-floor seepages, and a 10-year warranty for spalling concrete.

I thank the Minister for her explanation which I think clearly shows this is not a widespread problem. But in certain BTOs I have had in my estate, Woodland Glen is one of them. There are about 888 units and we have had more than 200 complaints so far on defects; most of which HDB is trying to rectify but HDB has no recourse against the original developer legally.

So, I was just wondering whether HDB or MND has a way of keeping track of maybe individual developers that have significant issues like this, where more than a quarter of the units will have defects that have come up later. And these are not things to do with wear and tear; it is like windows panes melting, toilet seats breaking. So, it just sounds like quality is bad or workmanship is bad.

I thank the Member for his question. I had earlier omitted in my answer to also mention that if any maintenance issues are reported after the DLP, HDB will investigate the likely cause and advise flat owners on the follow-up action accordingly. So, if the issue is assessed to be due to an inherent defect or quality issue, HDB will engage the building contractor to rectify it.

The Member raised the question of what happens when you have certain developments that may have more than the usual number of defects. And I think he referred in particular to Woodlands Glen. The BTO project at Woodlands Glen consists of five residential blocks with a total of 888 units and the flats in the MSCP were completed between March 2017 and June 2017. And I think that a number of the residents had appealed to Mr Nair with regard to the defects.

HDB met up with the building contractor, Precise Development Pte Ltd, and the contractor agreed to replace, in this case, I think a number of the defects related to the cracked toilet seat cover. So, they agreed to replace that – the bumpers and the window weather seal, upon the residents' feedback. And with regard to the other reported defects, for example, there was feedback about rusty gate and timber toilet door issues, HDB followed up to resolve the issues with the residents. So, HDB is working closely with the contractor.

In short therefore, I think the position is this. On DLP specifically and the length of it, the numbers show that one year would be sufficient because the vast majority of the defects appear within that period and those are generally fairly minor defects. We have provisions obviously for major things like wall seepage and spalling concrete.

So, when you do have outliers like this, HDB will work closely with the contractor to rectify the defects and to see how they can be made good because obviously people moving into new BTOs would want their premises to be nice to live in. And it is obviously upsetting when there are defects, because they mar your enjoyment of the premises.

Mr Gerald Giam.

Sir, I have two supplementary questions. Firstly, defects are sometimes reported before the end of the Defects Liability Period or DLP, but are not fully acted on by HDB or the developers, or not satisfactorily resolved by the end of the DLP. So, will HDB continue to act on these defects until they are fully resolved?

My second question – several residents in DBSS development in my constituency have reported a large number of similar defects soon after the DLP. What options are available to lessees who encounter defects after the DLP and will HDB consider co-payment arrangements, so that lessees do not have to bear the full cost of rectifications on their own?

With respect to the first question, if the defects are reported within the DLP, then obviously, it is within the relevant time frame and they should be followed up upon. For the defects which come up after the DLP period, as mentioned earlier, HDB will investigate the cause and then decide on what the best course of action is.

The reason I say this – and I sort of cannot give a definitive answer that yes, automatically everything after the defects liability period will be attended to by HDB – is because it depends on the nature of the defect. It depends on what exactly the cause is and it also depends on the nature of the follow-up action that needs to be taken. So, I think the the assurance we can give is this. If there is a problem after the defects liability period, HDB will look into it and do its best to resolve it with the contractor. But obviously if it is something that crops up 10 years later, then that is a very different thing.

Ms Carrie Tan.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. In cases where the residents have encountered multiple repair attempts to water seepage and wall seepage problems due to shoddy waterproofing works done by the contractor, and despite multiple attempts by contractors to fix the same problem, the problem keeps coming back in intervals of two to three years for the past 10-15 years – what recourse do residents have from HDB in terms of the distress that they have had to live through for the many years in encountering these problems?

Again, it goes back to a question of identifying the source or the cause of the problem. The question as framed by the Member was where the residents have multiple attempts at repairs and this continues over many years with respect to seepage, I understand. So, if it is seepage, then there is a five-year warranty. So, if it falls within the five-year warranty, it will be dealt with on the basis of that warranty.

But if the seepage arose, let us say, maybe in the sixth year and it was because of the unit above having done certain renovation works and therefore broken the waterproofing or done something, then, it really would not be correct to look to HDB for that because the owner above will also have to bear some responsibility.

Hence, it goes back to the approach that I said earlier. We would look at the cause, we would look at where the fault is or what the reason is. Sometimes, it is a diagnostic problem. All of us have encountered this. The residents will point to leakage, they think it comes from a certain place but actually it may come from somewhere else. You have got to trace it, you have got to find the cause. And whoever is responsible for having generated that cause or made that leakage happen, should generally be the one to deal with it.

But bearing in mind that for flats – and this is the same for HDB as well as for private developments – there is a defects liability period or DLP for a reason and there is a warranty period for a reason. Because it cannot be that a developer remains responsible for the entire lifetime of the building which is subject to fair wear and tear. So, if it is a new flat and there are defects, that will be followed up on, general rule – DLP; seepage, then the warranty for the seepage, spalling concrete, that is a 10-year warranty, which is a really long time. And the assurance you have is that they will be investigated and dealt with accordingly.

Mr Leon Perera.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. One supplementary question for the Minister. Does the HDB monitor the extent of BTO flat defects associated with particular contractors in particular developments? And is that information then, given consideration in the decision-making process to award future contracts to that particular contractor? Is that information set analysed and given some weight in the decision-making process to award tenders to contractors?

I do not have that particular information with me at the moment and hence, I do not want to hazard an answer, and inadvertently, not give correct information. So, if the Member could just file a question on that, then we will be able to get back to him.

Ms Mariam Jaafar.

Good afternoon, Sir. I just have a question. For the defect liability period for both BTO and HIP projects, given the length of time of the circuit breaker and shortage in workers, will the Ministry consider an automatic six-month extension or some suitable period for the defect liability periods that have expired within this time frame?

Can I just clarify with the Member, before she goes back to her seat. Because the defects liability period usually runs from a certain time. So, if the works have not been completed yet, the defects liability period does not run. So, I just wanted to clarify what time period she meant?

Yes, I think since the end of an HIP project that perhaps was completed at the end of last year or somewhere where during the COVID-19 period, we have had the liability periods come up.

So, meaning it is already into the defects liability period, but because of the circuit breaker, the works could not be dealt with?

Yes.

We will certainly look into that.

Thank you.

16 Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked the Minister for Social and Family Development what has been the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the employment prospects and status of those with special needs and persons with disabilities and how is the Ministry progressing with measures to raise inclusivity during this challenging period.

17 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) whether the Ministry monitors (i) the retrenchment rates for persons with disabilities (PWDs) and (ii) the proportion later found to have been "disguised retrenchments"; (b) if so, how do these findings compare with employees who are not PWDs; and (c) what is the average duration before a retrenched PWD finds new employment.

Mr Speaker, can I take Question Nos 16 and 17 together, please?

Yes, please.

Thank you. Based on the latest available survey data from MOM, there were 4.9 residents retrenched per 1,000 resident employees in the first half of 2020. This is higher than the incidence rate for the same period a year ago, which was at 2.5 residents retrenched per 1,000 resident employees.

The re-entry rate of retrenched residents in the first half of 2020 was 61.4%, lower than that in the same period a year ago, which was at 63.2%. MOM does not have a further breakdown of these indicators by persons with disabilities and persons without disabilities. Similarly, we do not track statistics on complaints of "disguised retrenchments" from persons with disabilities, or PWDs. That said, I would like to assure Members that as the Minister for Manpower explained to this House on 4 June this year, MOM will take appropriate actions against employers who disguise retrenchment to avoid fulfilling their contractual obligations.

To help retrenched workers secure new jobs, the Taskforce for Responsible Retrenchment and Employment Facilitation proactively reaches out to them to provide timely employment support. This includes matching them to suitable jobs and training opportunities under the SGUnited Jobs and Skills Package. In the first half of 2020, the Taskforce reached out to about 8,200 affected workers. The Taskforce will continue to engage retrenching companies on responsible retrenchment practices.

SG Enable and its job placement and job support partners have implemented additional measures during this challenging period. SG Enable has reached out to PWDs who stopped working since the start of the year, to encourage them to sign up for employment support services. Job support initiatives are offered online as far as possible, while considering the accessibility needs of PWDs.

SG Enable's Virtual Career Fair held from April to May 2020 offered over 100 job opportunities, and another 150 job opportunities were advertised during their online Training and Career Fair in September. To facilitate e-learning, SG Enable helped training providers to convert lessons into online modules. Where training cannot be conducted virtually, SG Enable has put in place safe management practices to ensure that the health of clients and trainers are not compromised.

These additional efforts to support PWDs come on top of existing training and job placement and job support services that SG Enable provides under the Open Door Programme. The Open Door Programme training grant was recently enhanced in July, with more course fee subsidies and training allowance, as well as a new training commitment award of $100 per completed eligible training course. We will replace the wage offsets for employers of PWDs under the Special Employment Credit or SEC and Additional SEC with the Enabling Employment Credit or EEC, when the former expires in December 2020.

The EEC will provide employers that hire Singaporean PWDs earning below $4,000 a month with wage offsets of up to 20% of the employee's monthly income. Employers hiring PWDs who have not been working for at least six months will receive an additional wage offset of up to 10% for the first six months of employment. This is in addition to the Jobs Growth Incentive or JGI announced by Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat yesterday. Under the JGI, employers will receive the highest tier of 50% wage support for additional new hires of PWDs from September 2020 to February 2021.

It is encouraging that despite the challenges of COVID-19, many employers are still committed to inclusive hiring and over 140 organisations have signed the President's Challenge Enabling Employment Pledge since it was launched in March this year. While many PWDs and their care-givers tell us that they are temporarily exiting the workforce due to concerns over contracting COVID-19, we will continue to engage them and strive to serve more jobseekers as the situation stabilises and more activities resume. We are also working through the National Jobs Council to provide further support for those who need it, and we will announce these plans when ready.

Dr Tan Wu Meng.

I thank the Minister for his answer and for his sharing about the efforts to continue shaping the market and to bend the arc of our society towards further inclusivity. I have got two supplementary questions for the Minister.

The first is on statistics. Would the Minister consider tracking the statistics mentioned in my Parliamentary Question more actively and more deliberately? I say this because sometimes, to understand the situation, we need to seek truth from data and seek truth from facts. And by having that data, we are in a better position to understand if certain companies or certain sectors may be disproportionately retrenching PWDs.

My second supplementary question is: what efforts are ongoing by the Ministry to help shape the awareness of employers, the awareness of what a PWD can bring to the workplace in an intangible way. For example, the power of having a PWD team mate inspire other colleagues?

And if I may just seek Mr Speaker's indulgence, I have a resident, a young lady, who survived a car crash. She moves around in a wheelchair but got back to work, started a family and has continued in work as a working mother. But recently, during COVID, she was retrenched by a company which has a significant presence in the Singapore private sector and that actually had an emotional impact on neighbours and fellow residents.

So, it is important, Mr Speaker, I would put to the Minister that we look at shaping that intangible element as well.

I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. For the first question, we will work with MOM to see whether it is something practical. Because to get the data on unemployment or employability, all these have certain angle of statistical reliability which, in the case of the PWD, is a very small segment. It is not like male and female – that is statistically significant. Therefore, we may need to customise how we get this data and how we report this data.

But nevertheless, as I had mentioned if there are any complaints that may arise from their parents or the disabled themselves that they were unfairly treated either through retrenchment or employment practices, MOM, as well as MSF will take action.

Secondly, on the efforts of building this spirit of inclusivity in our community, it is something that we will never stop getting this work done, we will never stop doing this work. I think for the longest time, we have been putting out awareness campaigns, but we also put in enabling courses that employers can get involved in. As an example, there is a training grant under SG Enable curated training courses where we support up to 90% of co-workers to build up their capabilities and confidence in hiring and integrating PWDs into the workplace. This is amongst a few incentives and framework with which we are putting to the employers to enable and encourage them to be inclusive in hiring PWDs.

As persons with special needs or disabilities are more vulnerable, particularly during periods of crisis, does the Ministry have case managers to follow up with those who lose their jobs or who have been retrenched so that you can render direct assistance?

Certainly, for those who have come forward and ask for help, we will render the help. But if Members know of anyone in their wards who may not be coming forward to ask for help, we will be happy to hear from you.

Ms Denise Phua.

Speaker, I would like to thank MSF and the Ministers. They have been some of the strongest partners for the PWD community. I have some comments and to seek Minister's comments as well.

First of all, issues like employment, healthcare, education, mobility, transport and so forth, these are the basic essential rights that every citizen should have. So, when we grant these rights, it is not meant to inspire other people so that they become better persons although that is one of the desired outcomes. Basic rights are actually where we should start from, that persons with disabilities are equal members of our society and therefore, things like work, the right to be schooled, to be educated, to have healthcare and to work whenever possible, these are the basic rights. So, this is the starting point when we look at issues such as these.

The second thing is this. While the COVID-19 pandemic has really raised challenges, especially in the areas of technology and the fast pace of change that affect Singaporeans and especially the PWDs, there are other root issues like the unemployment and the under employment of PWDs that need to be looked at. There is already a work group, thanks to MSF – Minister Desmond and Mr Masagos and team. There is already a Workgroup looking at this. But because of the question —

Ms Phua, is there a question there somewhere?

— because of the GE and the changes, the results and the progress updates are still not there. Hence, I request the Ministry to speed up the work of this work group and get those things that can get going, get going first, so that those things that need discussion do not have to wait till the expiry of the Enabling Masterplan. I seek Minister's indulgence and support of that.

The Member has the Ministry's and the Minister's support. The answer is yes.

18 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) how many Singaporeans aged 60 and above have been retrenched, or did not have their contracts renewed, as fallout from the economic impact of COVID-19; (b) how will the Ministry address the challenges of ageism in the COVID-19 economy; and (c) whether the Ministry will provide additional assistance to help seniors who are seeking employment opportunities.

19 Ms Sylvia Lim asked the Minister for Manpower whether she can clarify how the national guidelines on managing excess manpower and responsible retrenchments and other related policies ensure that Singaporeans are better off compared to permanent residents and non-Singaporeans in terms of job and income security.

20 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Manpower of the total retrenchments of 11,350 workers in the first half of 2020, (a) what is (i) the number of workers with less than two years' service with the company versus at least two years' service and (ii) the median and range of the retrenchment benefit based on the number of months' of salary for every year of service; and (b) whether a baseline retrenchment benefit can be legislated.

Mr Speaker, may I seek your permission to take Question Nos 18 to 20 together?

Yes, please.

Sir, Singaporeans are understandably concerned about retrenchments. Since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, retrenchments have risen and exceeded the peak observed in the SARS outbreak of 2003 but are still lower than during the Global Financial Crisis of 2009. Nonetheless, MOM is monitoring closely.

In the first half of 2020, the incidence of local retrenchment was 4.9 per 1,000 local employees. To the question by Mr Yip Hon Weng, the incidence of local retrenchment for senior workers aged 60 and above was generally comparable, at 5.2 per 1,000 local employees.

As for employees on fixed-term contracts, they constitute about 8% of all employees in the workforce. The number of contracts not renewed in the first half of 2020 has remained stable compared to the second half of 2019. MOM does not have data on non-renewals of contracts by age groups.

To the question by Ms Sylvia Lim, the Tripartite Advisory on Managing Excess Manpower and Responsible Retrenchment – which I will henceforth refer to as the Tripartite Advisory – this emphasises retrenchment as a last resort, only after employers have exhausted non-wage-related and wage-related cost-savings measures. The advisory sets out expectations for employers when they have to retrench staff.

The main goal of the retrenchment must be to give the business the best chance of survival or continued long-term viability, without which both the employer and all employees are worse-off, even if they were not retrenched. Selection of employees to be retrenched should be based on objective criteria, with primary considerations given to employee merit and preserving skills to help the business keep going. In addition, the Tripartite Advisory calls on employers to maintain a strong Singaporean Core even as they retrench. So, let me say that again. The Tripartite Advisory calls on employers to maintain a strong Singaporean Core even as they retrench.

Based on MOM's investigation of retrenchment cases, businesses have generally taken heed of the advice and made serious efforts to retain Singaporeans in their workforce. Where retrenchments cannot be avoided, WSG will reach out to offer job assistance. In unionised companies, NTUC has sought to minimise their period of unemployment through its "lift and place" efforts, partnering with the Government. A good example is how Singapore crew members from SIA were helped to take up jobs in healthcare with funding support.

Beyond efforts to help them stay in work which I will say more about later, Singaporeans also get extra support in social policies, such as education, training and healthcare. Schemes like Workfare and Silver Support, which help to boost incomes during work and in retirement, apply only to citizens.

The Tripartite Advisory that Ms Lim asked about also stipulates that the prevailing norm is to pay a retrenchment benefit of between two weeks' and one month's salary per year of service, depending on the financial position of the company and industry practices.

To the questions by Mr Louis Chua, the requirement to submit retrenchment notifications to MOM covers about 90% of the workforce and provides a broadly representative view. Based on notifications received between April and September this year, about two-thirds of the employees affected by retrenchment had at least two years of service with their employers and were eligible for retrenchment benefits. About nine in 10 of these eligible employees received some retrenchment benefit, of which about 84% received at least two weeks' salary per year of service. Even amongst employees who were not eligible, almost half received some retrenchment payout.

The question of whether a baseline retrenchment benefit should be legislated is not new and has also been debated in Parliament. The tripartite consensus, after extensive deliberation, is that it does not guarantee better outcomes for retrenched employees.

The legislated baseline would likely become the default. Even when employers can afford to pay more, they would be unlikely to do so.

On the other hand, setting a high baseline retrenchment benefit would strain the financial health of businesses that are already struggling, and potentially jeopardise their survival and the jobs of the remaining employees.

With legislated retrenchment benefit, employers would also be less likely to offer long-term or permanent contracts to employees, and resort more to hiring employees on short-term contracts.

Hence, while recognising the usefulness of retrenchment benefit and encouraging employers to pay according to the prevailing norms, we are even more focused on helping retrenched workers return to the workforce. Besides heavy subsidies for skills programmes, we provide substantial training and wage support to employers while their new hires undergo conversion programmes.

During this period where hiring sentiments have weakened, we have significantly enhanced the support to local jobseekers.

We introduced the Jobs Growth Incentive to spur employers to expand local hiring, with double the support for new hires aged 40 and above.

We created the SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways Programme to help mid-career locals gain relevant work experience through attachments hosted by companies. This will position them to take up jobs later.

We have also expanded the SGUnited Skills programme which offers full-time training programmes ranging from six to 12 months.

Mr Yip asked about the additional help for seniors who wish to continue working. For many decades, we have recognised employers' concerns about the cost of hiring and retaining them. With encouragement from the tripartite partners, many employers have therefore moved away from a seniority-based wage system to competency- or performance-based wage systems. Senior workers aged above 55 years have lower employer CPF contribution rates. The Government further provides the Special Employment Credit to employers to offset wages of Singaporeans aged 55 and above. Employers who redesign jobs to be better suited for senior workers can tap on the Productivity Solutions Grant.

In more recent times, we observed that senior workers increasingly prefer to reduce their work intensity as they approach retirement. To encourage more employers to offer part-time opportunities for them and enable them to stay on in the workforce, we introduced the Part-time Re-employment Grant earlier this year that will provide up to $125,000 to companies that commit to a part-time re-employment policy.

Through these measures, we have made good gains in senior employment. Our employment rate for residents aged 60 and above has increased from 27.2% in 2009 to 38.5% in 2019. During this period of economic uncertainty, the unemployment rate for locals aged 60 and over remains comparable to that of the overall workforce.

Nonetheless, MOM recognises Mr Yip's concerns about ageism, especially in a slack job market. Singapore's employment laws protect employees against discriminatory employment practices, including wrongful dismissal on grounds of age. In January this year, we also strengthened the Fair Consideration Framework for greater deterrence against all forms of workplace discrimination by raising administrative penalties across the board.

Our seniors are important and are valued members of our workforce. We will continue to look out for them and support their employers' efforts to retain them.

Mr Speaker, I appreciate Members for raising these important questions on retrenchments. Until the economy recovers more fully, we will maintain the stance of heightened vigilance on the job situation.

Where retrenchment can be avoided through cost-cutting measures, we will keep a lookout for instances where the wage cuts cause excessive hardship to workers. In cases where MOM has intervened, employers that have the means have shown willingness to moderate their wage cuts. Where retrenchments cannot be avoided, we will watch out for Singaporeans, give full support to employers' efforts to retain them or to help them move into new jobs as quickly as possible.

Order. End of Question Time. Ministerial Statement.

[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 22-36 and 39-53 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. Question Nos 21, 37 and 38 have been postponed to the sitting of Parliament on 14 October 2020.]

Mr Speaker, Sir, as the COVID-19 virus spread around the world earlier this year, many countries closed their borders. It was a drastic and unprecedented measure. But faced with an unknown and dangerous virus, governments around the world concluded that this was the best way to stave off a viral invasion. Singapore did the same on 24 March this year.