Hansard, Monday, 3 March 2025

1 Dr Tan Wu Meng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry tracks the number of vaping cases referred to the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) by the Police; (b) if so, what are the number such cases in 2023 and 2024 respectively; (c) how many of such cases arise from parents referring their own children to the Police; (d) what is the approach by HSA to such referrals; and (e) what help is available to parents who are worried that their children are vaping.

Mr Speaker, the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) received about 4,000 and 5,000 cases involving possession or usage of e-vaporisers from the Singapore Police Force over the past two years. In these two years, only one of these cases was a parent referring his child to the Police for vaping. For this case, the person was issued with a warning instead of a composition fine and referred to the Health Promotion Board (HPB) for counselling.

Parents who are concerned that their children are vaping can call the HPB QuitLine for a referral to HPB’s smoking and vaping cessation service. No enforcement action will be taken against the children.

Dr Tan.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister of State for her answer. My Clementi residents shared with me that they discovered their child was vaping. Because they did not know what to do, they brought their child to the nearest Police station. The Police referred the case to HSA and the child was issued with a $300 fine for vaping. The parents were distressed and concerned, and worried that this approach, however well-meant by the agencies, might discourage parents from getting their children help.

Can I ask the Minister of State two supplementary questions? Firstly, how closely does HSA work with the Police when a parent reports their child for vaping to a Police station? Because sometimes, parents may not be aware of what is the optimal channel. Secondly, do we know, for such cases, whether the Police when they update HSA, do they inform HSA that it was a parent who was concerned and thereby, highlighting the child's situation so that the agencies can take an appropriate approach, rather than levying a fine on a child because the parent was trying to get help for the child?

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his questions and for raising this issue. Indeed, for that particular case, because the Member had raised it to us, we managed to remediate the situation and addressed the situation accordingly. In general, we do take a very nuanced approach with regard to a voluntary situation where they want to stop vaping and the parents bring the child forward. Typically, for this kind of situations, it will be flagged to HSA and we will then issue vaping counselling to the child, issue a warning instead.

These are situations where we would need to continue addressing. What I would advise parents, if they are faced with a situation where they suspect their children of vaping, please use the HPB hotline to get them some help, and appropriate support will be given to the children. For those situations where there is an aberration and the matter is reported to the Police, please let us know if there are some difficulties. As mentioned in my earlier answer, it was only one case that we are aware of where the parents reported to the Police. In that case, a warning was issued instead.

If Members are aware of certain circumstances where the parents have approached the Police instead and some fines are issued, you could highlight that case to us. What we want to do is to have a nuanced approach where we are supportive of parents who want to help their children cease vaping.

Dr Lim Wee Kiak.

Can I ask, in light of the fact that we have a smoking cessation clinic, is there a vaping cessation clinic, whereby the public can surrender themselves and say, "I have been vaping. I wish to have some help"? And how does the Ministry of Health (MOH) handle this?

Like the smoking hotline, you can call HPB for their hotline and you can specify that it is an issue of vaping cessation, and the same support will be given to the individual who wishes to cease vaping.

2 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the correlation between PSLE results and socio-economic status has strengthened or weakened in the past three years; and (b) what further plans does the Ministry have to reduce this correlation.

The correlation between the Primary School Leaving Examination (PSLE) results and socio-economic status (SES) has remained stable over the past three years.

The Ministry of Education (MOE) is committed to ensuring that our education system provides opportunities for all students to develop to their full potential, regardless of their backgrounds. Our lower-SES students have done well by international standards. Based on Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD's) Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2022, our students from the bottom-25% SES outperformed the average OECD student in all core domains of Reading, Mathematics and Science, and in Creative Thinking.

We will continue with the following efforts to uplift our lower-SES students.

First, we will continue to build a strong foundation in the early years, both in preschool and at home. We have significantly enhanced the accessibility, affordability and quality of preschools, particularly through government-supported operators. Targeted programmes, such as KidSTART, also support parents from eligible lower-income families with the skills and knowledge to support their child’s development.

Second, MOE will continue to provide additional support to students with higher educational needs through programmes during or after school, both in academic and social-emotional development. For example, primary schools provide targeted academic intervention for students who need more support to strengthen foundational skills in literacy and numeracy. This includes the Learning Support Programme, Reading Remediation Programme and Learning Support for Mathematics. Schools also run programmes to strengthen students’ social and emotional skills, such as goal-orientation, growth mindset and motivation.

Third, we will continue to enhance wraparound support for disadvantaged students. We work closely with community partners to provide targeted programmes such as interest-based activities to impart good values, life skills and habits.

We also provide schools with additional manpower, guidance and teaching resources via UPLIFT Enhanced School Resourcing (UESR). Having observed improvements in students' attendance, behaviour and progression, we have doubled the number of primary schools receiving these additional resources over the past two years.

Addressing social mobility requires a whole-of-society effort. While MOE will continue to work closely with the community and stakeholders in this endeavour, we call on all Singaporeans to share your resources and networks, recognise a diversity of skills and talents, and do your part to uplift those who are less endowed.

Mr Louis Ng.

Thank you, Sir. And I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. I think in reply to my Parliamentary Question (PQ) quite a number of years back, MOE share that there is a positive correlation, which means that students from lower SES are doing not as well in their PSLE as compared to students from higher SES.

So, I know the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has listed a whole range of programmes and outreach we have done to try and help these students from lower SES. But if the correlations still exist, I am just wondering what else is MOE going to do to address this to try and at least lower the correlation or make sure that it does not exist in the first place?

I thank Mr Louis Ng for his supplementary question on that. I think, firstly, it is important to make sure that we are able to identify the disadvantaged students who would need more support, and continue to concentrate on them. Take for example, at the start of primary school, some students who have not demonstrated certain age-appropriate literacy and numeracy skills. In those cases, the students with weak foundations would then be supported by programmes, such as Learning Support for English and Mathematics.

Schools themselves, teachers, school leaders will also have to proactively reach out to students with disadvantaged backgrounds. As the Member said, the correlation already exists, we know which are the target groups, we should focus our attention and resources in those areas. And some of them may not just need academic support in particular, but also non-academic support. For example, schools would proactively identify students would benefit most from, let us say, student care centres, where they will encourage and support families to enrol their children to be part of these student care centres.

In addition, for families under ComLink, there are also dedicated family coaches under the Social Service Offices, where they provide targeted support in co-developing, certain customised action plans, with regard to the background of the family, restrictions and all, and that is where we can start some of our work. And hopefully with those collective efforts, we are able to uplift this group of students.

Ms Hazel Poa.

Does each and every school measure the correlation between academic results and SES? And if so, where can we find that information?

Thank you to Ms Hazel Poa for the follow-up question. Mainly at the broad and the entire national cohort level, for students from lower-income households, as proxied from the MOE Financial Assistance Scheme, the range of results is large, but over the past few years, the median PSLE score has been very stable.

3 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Social and Family Development in respect of each of the Social Service Offices (SSOs) (a) how many Singaporeans and Permanent Residents (PRs) who come under their geographical purviews respectively are recipients of ComCare Short-to-Medium Term Assistance and Long-Term Assistance, respectively, as of 31 December 2024; and (b) what is the total population of Singaporeans and PRs that each of the SSOs oversee for their respective geographical areas.

Sir, in 2024, each Social Service Office (SSO) town assisted an average of around 1,000 Singaporean and Permanent Resident (PR) households with either ComCare Short-to-Medium Term Assistance (SMTA) or Long Term Assistance (LTA). Each SSO town has an average of around 61,000 households.

Mr Pritam Singh.

Thank you to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. Can I just enquire, for the geographical areas covered by these SSOs that showed the highest number of households requiring SMTA and LTA, does the Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) publish this SSO-specific information on its website, and is there any reason why it does not do so?

The second question is with regard to the assistance, I understand there is income guideline which is $800 per capita. And I understand even if the individual who comes to the SSO exceeds this guideline, SSO will still make an assessment. Can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary confirm what percentage of households, who have successfully applied for SMTA, what is that number even though they may have surpassed the $800 per capita income requirement?

Sir, I thank the Leader of the Opposition for his additional questions on SSO-town specific data. We do not publish that. We track the statistics at the national level. As to why we do not publish that, I think that there are some variabilities across towns, for instance, based on the demographic growth profiles of each town's population, there might be some differences in terms of those who qualify for LTA vis-a-vis those who qualify for SMTA for instance. But generally, we do not see a large standard deviation across towns with regard to those who qualify for SMTA and LTA.

As to the second supplementary question, I would encourage the Member to file another Parliamentary Question, because I do not have the statistics with me at this moment.

Mr Singh.

Just a quick follow-up to the Senior Parliamentary Secretary. MSF released a report just two-odd months ago, "Supporting Low-income Household Trends report", I think there is some data. But again, the data is, as the Senior Parliamentary Secretary said, at the national level.

There is some discrepancy between the data of SMTA and the amount of money that has been extended to Singaporeans who apply for that, the SMTA, through the years. So, for example, the annual report in 2022, reported that number that was disbursed comes up to $119 million. That is for SMTA. It is at page six of the report. But in the trends report, that number comes down to $112 million, and the number of households increases for 2022.

So, I hope the Senior Parliamentary Secretary can clarify that, perhaps if not at this session, but perhaps during the Committee of Supply.

Sir, I thank the Member for his additional questions. We will clarify during the Committee of Supply debates.

4 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Digital Development and Information (a) whether the Government is considering restrictions on the use of DeepSeek by public officers, similar to bans imposed by some other countries on its use on Government devices; (b) if not, what factors justify a different approach in Singapore; and (c) how does the Government determine which AI models are deemed secure enough for public sector use.

Sir, the Government has policies, frameworks and processes to guide the use of technology in the public sector, including emerging technologies like artificial intelligence (AI). This allows us to evaluate the suitability of technologies for different use cases, based on factors such as performance, security and resilience. This enables public sector agencies to use innovative technologies effectively while ensuring the security and reliability of government operations and functions.

We regularly review and update our policies to address the evolving technological landscape and security considerations.

Mr Giam.

Sir, I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. I note that he did not address my question regarding DeepSeek. I would appreciate if he could address that more directly.

Secondly, I some supplementary questions for him. I understand that the Government has developed Pair, which is a suite of AI tools that utilise large language models for internal use within the Public Service. Could the Senior Minister of State clarify if Pair is primarily using locally deployed open source models or does it connect to commercial AI platforms, like ChatGPT and DeepSeek that process data on foreign servers?

Sir, I thank Mr Giam for his questions. The Government does not generally comment on specific commercial products. We advise companies to evaluate products on their own merits and the risks of use, including their compliance with relevant laws.

Pair does indeed access large language models, but it does not access only one. The specific details of Pair, I do not have them on hand. If Mr Giam is interested in the technical details, I would be happy to follow up with him offline or he can file a subsequent Parliamentary Question.

5 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether the Ministry has any strategies to revitalise Singapore's nightlife offerings and businesses as part of the overall tourism product; and (b) how will these strategies also encourage local spendings in this sector.

Sir, the Singapore Tourism Board (STB) profiles local bars, bartenders, homegrown distilleries and breweries to showcase Singapore’s diverse and innovative beverage scene. STB also collaborates with nightlife businesses to leverage STB-supported events, such as iLight Singapore, Light to Night Festival, Grand Prix Season Singapore and others to create promotions or special experiences to attract both local consumers and visitors.

Mr Yip.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for his reply. The nightlife industry is heavily dependent on service staff. But rising wages and difficulties in hiring locals have increased the business costs. So, what measures are in place to help these businesses address manpower constraints, such as perhaps a flexible work schemes, training grants or adjustments to foreign manpower policies.

Sir, I thank Mr Yip for his supplementary questions. We have been working very closely with the Singapore Nightlife Business Association (SNBA) during COVID and during the period of recovery. So, for example, during COVID, we worked closely on providing support including financial support, grants and wage support as well. In the immediate post-COVID, there was a bump in nightlife businesses as restrictions were lifted and now, there are the challenges that Mr Yip had raised. And in fact, last night, I was speaking to the SNBA and we were discussing some of these challenges. They have raised what the Member had raised with regard to costs, wages, but as well as consumer behaviour trends that have been changed over the course of the COVID pandemic. That is not just confined to Singapore, but also in countries, such as the United States and Japan, where people are working from home more, they are a little bit more health conscious and they go online more for different entertainment options. So, these are some trends with regard to nightlife and also with regard to cost issues.

At the same time, the Government is supporting on a few different fronts. The first is on making sure that the nightlife scene is vibrant. Second is on transformation. And third, is on workers. STB and Enterprise Singapore, for example, work on continually having new products and services to liven up and make our nightlife scene more vibrant. For the transformation of the sector, Enterprise Singapore works closely with SNBA and other players. And for workers, they have been working together with Workforce Singapore.

Sir, I will discuss and share more about our tourism performance in the Ministry of Trade and Industry's Committee of Supply and how we continue to inject vibrancy into our tourism sector and our nightlife. But I wanted to assure the Member that we have indeed been working very closely with SNBA, through meetings. And we will be organising more later this month to factor in their feedback as well as their suggestions.

6 Ms Hazel Poa asked the Minister for Transport (a) what are the circumstances that led to the unintended release of the information on the new mandatory three-year lock-in period for vehicles registered as business-owned private-hire cars, (b) whether an investigation will be conducted into this incident, and (c) whether any steps will be taken to prevent its recurrence.

Mr Speaker, the Land Transport Authority (LTA) had earlier explained why it brought forward the implementation of a mandatory three-year lock-in period for all newly registered or converted business-owned chauffeured private hire cars (PHCs) in its news release on 19 February 2025. Let me recap the key points.

LTA had originally planned to announce this policy change during the Ministry of Transport's (MOT’s) Committee of Supply (COS) debate in March 2025, as part of an update on our review of the point-to-point transport sector. However, LTA had to bring forward the implementation date due to an unintentional error by its system vendor NCS.

The team from NCS, who was working on the IT system changes, made a deployment error, resulting in the message regarding the lock-in period being prematurely revealed to some users before the planned announcement date. The mistake was due to human error. NCS has taken steps to prevent a recurrence.

When MOT and LTA found out on 18 February that the information was prematurely revealed to some users, we decided to make a public announcement on the policy change on 19 February morning. This was because there was an ongoing Certificate of Entitlement (COE) bidding exercise from 17 February to 19 February, and we wanted to ensure fairness and transparency to all parties and allow bidders sufficient time to decide whether to adjust their bids, before the bidding cycle closed at 4.00 pm on 19 February.

Mr Speaker, three other Members, namely Ms Mariam Jaafar, Mr Dennis Tan and Mr Yip Hon Weng, have filed questions on the lock-in period for business-owned chauffeured PHCs for subsequent Sittings. MOT will be sharing more details regarding the review of the point-to-point transport sector at the upcoming COS debate and we will address their questions then.

Ms Poa.

I think the Senior Minister of State for her reply. Is the Senior Minister of State able to share what steps NCS has taken to prevent a recurrence? And has there been any impact on the execution of this policy due to the implementation being earlier than planned?

I thank the Member for the supplementary question. As I noted earlier in my reply, this was a deployment error. NCS had acknowledged and taken responsibility for the error. The deployment error occurred when the system changes were being deployed to the production environment, that is the actual system. The lines of code for program to control when this lock-in period message will be displayed and to which users, were actually not deployed. So, it resulted in the premature display of this lock-in period message to users who were using the digital service for the relevant vehicle transactions.

When this error was discovered, NCS has taken various steps to prevent the recurrence of this error. Firstly, they have implemented additional checks both before and after the code merging deployment. They have also put in place a buddy system with a senior developer to check on the works or to review the works that were done.

7 Assoc Prof Jamus Jerome Lim asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the justification for treating essential occupiers of HDB flats similar to HDB owners with respect to having to fulfil the minimum occupation period for purchase of private property, while treating such essential occupiers as non-owners for liability for Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider harmonising the treatment of essential occupiers in both cases.

Mr Speaker, the Minimum Occupation Period (MOP) ensures that Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats are purchased for owner occupation. While essential occupiers are not flat owners, they form part of the core family nucleus that determines the household’s eligibility to own an HDB flat. For example, when a married couple buys an HDB flat, both of them must be listed in the flat application in order to form the core family nucleus. HDB allows both of them to be listed as co-owners, or one of them as owner and the other as an essential occupier. Hence, essential occupiers are required to fulfil the MOP before they can purchase a private residential property. However, essential occupiers are not allowed to use their Central Provident Fund (CPF) or any housing grant received to pay for the flat. They also cannot be a mortgagor of the housing loan for the flat.

The Additional Buyer’s Stamp Duty (ABSD) was introduced as a cooling measure to moderate investment demand in private residential property and promote a sustainable market. Broadly speaking, ABSD is applied based on the buyer’s profile and the number of residential properties the buyer owns. As essential occupiers do not own their HDB flat, it is not included in their residential property count. Hence, they do not incur ABSD if they are Singapore Citizens buying their first private residential property after MOP. Permanent Residents (PRs) and foreigners will incur ABSD.

As shared previously in this house, the vast majority of married couples buy HDB flats as co-owners. Only a small number list a spouse as an occupier, often for practical reasons with no intention to invest in a private residential property after fulfilling MOP. For example, a non-resident, married to a Singapore Citizen, cannot be an owner of an HDB flat, and will have to be listed as an essential occupier.

We will remain watchful of market trends and adjust our policies where needed, to ensure that the property market remains stable and sustainable.

Assoc Prof Lim.

I thank Minister Indranee for the explanation. The thrust of my question, the context is in part because of the increasing trend of couples that are getting older before they finally get married. As a result, some of these may end up being married with already substantial independent assets, which could include a private property. When they get married, if they do not have enough resources to purchase a larger private property, they hope to purchase an HDB, but instead, they are forced to sell off these independent assets that they would have acquired over the course of their professional careers.

So, I am wondering if there is some scope for these kinds of individuals who do get married later, entering the marriage already with significant independent assets, whether there could be some waiver for these kind of MOP requirements.

If there are instances of specific hardship, they can write in and appeal. The Ministry of National Development and HDB will consider on the merits. But the broad general policy principle which I have outlined does remain the principle underpinning the policy.

8 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will consider increasing the quantum of rebates provided under the Electric Vehicle Early Adoption Incentive scheme and extending the scheme to the end of 2026.

Senior Minister of State Amy Khor, I hope it is a short answer.

Today, it is really a short answer; just two paragraphs, Mr Speaker, Sir.

The Electric Vehicle Early Adoption Incentive (EEAI) scheme was introduced in 2021 to encourage adoption of electric cars by narrowing the upfront cost gap between electric and internal combustion engine (ICE) cars. Adoption of electric cars has been increasing – last year, around one third of new car registrations were electric cars.

We will review the EEAI later this year, taking into consideration factors such as EV adoption rates and upfront cost difference across powertrains.

Order. End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Orders of the day.

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

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, contained in Paper Cmd 33 of 2025. As there are no amendments, I propose to take the Heads of Expenditure en bloc. I will first take Heads E, J, M, P, Q, T, W and Z of the Supplementary Main Estimates.

[(proc text) Question, "That the sums stated for the Heads of Expenditure as shown on page 6 of Paper Cmd 33 of 2025 stand part of the Supplementary Main Estimates," put and agreed to. (proc text)]

I will now take the Supplementary Development Estimates. In respect of the Supplementary Development Estimates, they are Heads E, J, L, P, W and X.

[(proc text) Question, "That the sums stated for the Heads of Expenditure as shown on page 9 of Paper Cmd 33 of 2025 stand part of the Supplementary Development Estimates," put and agreed to. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Question, "That the sum of $3,883,986,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the Heads of Expenditure for the public services shown in the Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, contained in Paper Cmd 33 of 2025," put and agreed to. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Question, "That the sum of $376,273,500 shall be supplied to the Government under the Head of Expenditure for the public services shown in the Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, contained in Paper Cmd 33 of 2025," put and agreed to. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Resolutions to be reported. (proc text)]

Second Minister for Finance.

Mr Speaker, I report that the Committee of Supply has come to certain resolutions.

[(proc text) First Resolution reported, (proc text)]

[(proc text) "That the sum of $3,883,986,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the Heads of Expenditure for the public services shown in the Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, contained in Paper Cmd. 33 of 2025." (proc text)]

[(proc text) Second Resolution reported, (proc text)]

[(proc text) "That the sum of $376,273,500 shall be supplied to the Government under the Head of Expenditure for the public services shown in the Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025, contained in Paper Cmd. 33 of 2025." (proc text)]

Minister.

Mr Speaker, I move, "That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions."

[(proc text) Question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Resolutions accordingly agreed to. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [2nd Allotted Day]. (proc text)]

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head F, Parliament. Ms Sylvia Lim.

Chairman, I seek to move, “That the total sum to be allocated for Head F of the Estimates be reduced by $100”.

Sir, law students learn early that the separation of powers between the Executive, Legislature and Judiciary is the foundation of the rule of law. As such, I hope the House will agree with me that Parliament, as the primary organ of the Legislative Branch, must not only be able to discharge its law-making responsibilities, but also to ensure that the Government remains faithful to its duty to all Singaporeans.

Sir, to this end, I wish to reflect on my nearly 20 years in this House and highlight three areas where I believe we need to do better: first, on the way Parliamentary Questions are managed; second, on Parliament’s reputation as a law-making institution; and lastly, on the Presidential Council for Minority Rights (PCMR), which is a vital safeguard on Parliament.

First on Parliamentary Questions (PQs). PQs are a critical aspect of Government accountability, as they are the primary means by which Members of Parliament (MPs) can scrutinise the Government’s performance, as well as to reflect the concerns that are brought to us by our constituents.

To that end, it is notable that questions posed by MPs to one Ministry may be redirected to be answered by another Ministry, without prior reference to the MP. From my understanding, such redirection is done by the Government Ministries and not the Parliamentary staff.

Of course, sometimes the redirection is justified, such as when the MP may have inadvertently asked the question to the wrong Ministry, for example, questions about banks may be mistakenly filed with the Ministry of Finance (MOF) when the bank regulator, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), comes within the province of the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO).

However, it seems to me that questions may also be redirected simply because the Government finds it expedient to do so. This may undermine the main purpose of Question Time – Government accountability.

To take a recent example, the Leader of Opposition (LO) had in August last year filed a PQ to the Ministry of Transport (MOT) asking for the Land Transport Authority’s (LTA) assessment on the demand for bus services on the routes being plied by the special shuttle bus services at Marine Parade Group Representation Constituency. Even though his question asked for LTA’s assessment of transport needs, his question was redirected to the Ministry of Culture, Community and Youth (MCCY) without his input. When he rose to ask supplementary questions which were transport-related, the Minister of State for MCCY was unable to answer them and instead invited the LO to file a question with LTA instead, notwithstanding the fact that the LO had initially done so. While the Minister for Transport did step in shortly at that session to address the LO’s queries, the question still remains as to why a question posed to LTA was redirected to MCCY in the first place.

Sir, Question Time is precious. Limited to usually 90 minutes per Sitting. MPs compete to have their questions chosen for priority listing, failing which they either let it lapse for written answer or hope to have priority listing on another day. When a question is redirected to a Ministry that cannot address the MP’s concerns, the MP may face procedural objections to refiling it.

Moving forward, could MPs be consulted on any intended redirection of questions, so that our input can be taken into account?

Next, on the reputation of Parliament as an institution that makes laws prospectively and with advanced notice to the public before implementation. Sir, to this end, I believe the recent episode of the urgent Insurance (Amendment) Bill targeting the Income-Allianz deal may have dented Parliament’s reputation.

The Workers’ Party (WP) expressed serious misgivings about the proposed acquisition of Income Insurance by Allianz, but we did not support the Bill. As my party colleague, Ms He Ting Ru, had argued then, the legislation affected a live transaction and would undermine legal and business certainty that was critical to a business hub such as Singapore.

In that debate, Deputy Speaker Christopher de Souza opined that the Bill was a hybrid Bill. He explained that although the provisions of the Bill were drafted in general terms, it was clear that the Bill was, in substance, aimed at the proposed acquisition of Income by Allianz. Ordinarily, the Standing Orders would require that such a Bill be referred to a Select Committee for close scrutiny, since it affected prejudicially the rights of particular parties. But because a Certificate of Urgency was obtained, the Select Committee procedure was done away with. This deprived Parliament of the opportunity to hear from the affected parties themselves before passing the Bill.

Sir, while the circumstances may have required it, such Certificates of Urgency should be deployed as a last resort. For example, the urgent Bill could have been avoided had the lacuna in MCCY’s regulatory ambit been identified in 2022, when Income’s corporatisation exercise was approved.

Sir, this episode is a salient reminder of what is at stake – our reputation as a legislative body that respects the fundamental rights of the rule of law in the discharge of our responsibilities.

Finally, Sir, on the Presidential Council for Minority Rights (PCMR). In 1966, a Constitutional Commission was chaired by then Chief Justice Wee Chong Jin and it recommended the formation of the PCMR, which was established in 1970. Its role is to scrutinise Bills passed by Parliament for any differentiating measures that discriminate against any racial or religious community, and if so found, to refer the Bill back to Parliament for reconsideration. The PCMR was later entrusted with other functions as well.

The Wee Chong Jin Commission had recommended that the PCMR members be chosen from distinguished individuals who did not hold any political affiliation. It also recommended that members serve for fixed terms that could be renewed. However, these recommendations were not adopted and today, the PCMR is comprised of 18 members, five of whom are appointed permanently and for life.

I am very disturbed, Sir, that all five permanent members in the PCMR have been or still are Cabinet Ministers, including currently, Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong and the incumbent Minister for Home Affairs and Law. Of the five, only Mr Abdullah Tarmugi and Mr S Dhanabalan received their permanent appointments after they left the Cabinet.

Sir, the WP values the check that the PCMR could provide against inadvertently discriminatory legislation. However, most of the Bills passed by Parliament are proposed by the Government, and yet the Bills are being sent for scrutiny by a PCMR consisting of life members of incumbent and former Cabinet Ministers. Is there not a conflict of interest here?

I must confess to be perplexed as to why Cabinet Ministers need to be appointed to the PCMR. If it is the case that the PCMR would benefit from hearing from the Government, the Prime Minister is already empowered to authorise any member of the Cabinet to participate in PCMR meetings, albeit without a vote.

Even so, it does not explain why they have to be appointed for life. Indeed, the PCMR is the only institution I am aware of where some members serve for life. Would it thus not be far superior to keep the PCMR as a council of distinguished citizens who are non-political individuals, on fixed terms, as recommended by the Wee Chong Jin Commission?

Sir, we should aim to build institutions that will see Singapore through over a long period of time. Whether or not it works today will not be indicative of whether it works tomorrow. And a system which entrenches the influence of members of former administrations, until quite literally, the day they die, in my opinion, is not a viable one.

Minister Indranee.

Mr Chairman, I thank the Member for her cut. She had three points.

One, on the way Question Time was managed, but essentially, that cut was really focused on redirection of questions; the second, was on the reputation of Parliament, but essentially, that focused, I think, more on Bills brought on an urgent basis, and Certificate of Urgency in the specific context of the NTUC-Allianz Bill; and the third, was on the PCMR, which actually does not quite fall into the gist of the cut that was filed, because it says, "Question time and the legislative process need to be safeguarded and strengthened". And I am afraid there was not sufficient indication that PCMR was going to be part of that.

But nevertheless, I will address the question as it has been presented and if there are any further details that are needed or if the Member thinks is not fully addressed, the Member can let me know.

So, let me deal first with redirection. At the at the end of the day, what is the purpose of PQs? The purpose of PQs is so that Members can ask questions about things and the Ministers can reply. It is really for the Government to assess and determine who would be in the best position to respond to the questions. And in some cases, MPs actually do address the question to the wrong Ministry.

For example, MOF frequently gets PQs on the MAS. MAS reports to the PMO, not to MOF. So, essentially, when the PQs come in, Parliament will look at that and they will send it to the Ministry that is named. And the Ministry that is named will have to look to see whether this is under the Ministry's purview or whether another Ministry is best-placed or is the policy owner or has the carriage of the operational aspects. So, that is something you should leave to the Government to determine.

It is not really for the MP to decide who has the relevant knowledge. It is for the Government, looking at the question, to determine who amongst us, who amongst the agencies and the Ministries is the one responsible or has the knowledge or is in the best position to respond. What is truly important, at the end of the day, is that the question is responded to. And that, effectively, is what is done.

Because no matter who the question is redirected to, which agency or which Ministry, there will be an answer provided. And if, at the end of the day, the answer from the Minister or Ministry is not sufficient, the MPs do have the opportunity to come back and to ask further questions in another PQ or on another occasion.

I think in the example that Ms Lim cited of the Leader of the Opposition's (LO's) PQ that was filed, addressed to the Ministry of Transport (MOT), asking for LTA's assessment. My understanding is that, the bus decision, in this particular case, was made by the People's Association (PA), not MOT or LTA. And it was, therefore, not for MOT to explain why the shuttle bus was launched, because that was a scheme done under PA. And PA is a statutory board that comes under MCCY. That is why the Minister for MCCY responded to that.

That said, I believe the Minister for Transport Chee Hong Tat did rise to clarify a point from LO as he had asked with respect to the Bus Connectivity Enhancement Programme, and that comes under MOT. So, because that one came under MOT, the Minister for Transport responded to that. So, that deals with the first issue, which is on redirection.

Then, the second thing on the reputation of Parliament, let me just say at the outset that actually just bringing a Bill quickly on a Certificate of Urgency is not the most important consideration when it comes to reputation of Parliament. The reputation of Parliament, what is most important is that MPs conduct themselves with the highest standards of conduct, with integrity, do not mislead people outside as to what happened in Parliament and also speak the truth to Parliament and its Committees.

Let me deal with the specific instance that Ms Lim raised. The issue that Ms Lim raised was Bills which are presented on an urgent basis. Our system ensures that Members do have sufficient time to review the Bills and to debate them robustly in this House. Bills are introduced at prior Sittings and as a general rule, there must be 10 clear days between the First and the Second Readings of a Bill. Hence, MPs generally have about a month to go through each Bill, which forms the basis of the Minister's Second Reading speech.

However, there may be situations where it is necessary for a Bill to be brought for Second Reading at short notice. Hence, our system also allows for a Bill to be presented under a Certificate of Urgency on the rare occasions when there is a need to do so. On the Bills that were presented under Certificates of Urgency during this term of Government, there was the COVID-19 Temporary Measures Bill and the three amendment Bills thereafter, as well as the other COVID-19-related Bills.

Then we had the one that Ms Lim talked about, which was the Insurance (Amendment) Bill in October 2024. The purpose of the Bill was to allow the Minister in-charge of MAS to impose conditions on an approval of an application to obtain effective control or become a substantial shareholder of a licensed insurer where a co-operative is concerned. This was necessary because the proposed deal by Allianz was under active consideration by NTUC Income shareholders at the time. A long duration between the First Reading and the Second Reading of the Bill, and thus, a delay in the amended law taking effect, would have given rise to even more uncertainty in the market and for the parties concerned. Minister Edwin Tong had explained this context in his Ministerial Statement when the Bill was introduced.

Sir, we will always respect and uphold due process in this House to ensure fairness and maintain trust in our institutions. But from time to time, there may be exceptional circumstances, such as in the case of the Allianz Bill, that call for us to be an agile legislature so that we can best serve Singaporeans. Measures, such as Certificates of Urgency, have been and will continue to be used sparingly and only when necessary.

I come now to the last point which Ms Lim raised, which I understand, really, to be an objection to the fact that the PCMR has certain permanent members. Sir, there is value in having members who have long experience. There is value in having members who are also members of Cabinet because they provide a certain perspective. There are other members, of course, who come in, and those members may change or provide other perspectives.

But what we try to do, particularly with minority rights, is to have a wide spectrum and a wide range. And it is important to remember, sometimes, that there are Bills which were passed, legislative provisions that were made because of a certain historical context. Therefore, having people who remember that context, who remember the original situation in which a certain legislative provision was provided or certain reasons why we did not put in legislative provisions, that is valuable and that is useful. So, I cannot see any objection to the composition of the PCMR in the terms suggested by Ms Lim.

Ms Lim.

Sir, how much time do I have?

I will give you some time, yes, but I hope not too long. We are actually approaching the end of guillotine time.

Okay, thank you, Sir. I have three clarifications for the Minister based on the three topics which are raised.

First, on the Government deciding which Ministry should answer the question, does the Leader of the House not agree that sometimes questions can cut across more than one Ministry and the MP actually would be the one to know what is the focus of the question. And, therefore, is it not possible for there to be a procedure where there is some loop back to the MP to ask the MP, "Alright, we intend to redirect it to another Ministry. Do you have any concerns about it?" Then, at least, our input can be taken into account. So, that is the first clarification.

The second topic I raised on legislative process, actually, I think the Leader of the House kind of missed the main issue, which was that, as pointed out by the Deputy Speaker at that Sitting, the Insurance (Amendment) Bill was a hybrid Bill that directly affected particular parties. And under the Standing Orders, it is supposed to be the norm that if there are such Bills, then a Select Committee has to be formed so that Parliament can hear directly from the affected parties on how the proposed Bill would affect them. In this situation, we are talking about a really important social issue and the MPs were deprived of that opportunity to hear from the parties because the Certificate of Urgency was issued. And therefore, the Bills were just passed without the Select Committee procedure being activated. So, I think, to that extent, Parliament has been prejudiced.

Last of all, about PCMR. Actually, what the Minister answered was already pre-empted in my speech. She said that having members with knowledge of why particular Bills were passed or the legislative history would be helpful to PCMR. But the Constitution already provides for the Prime Minister to appoint Ministers to attend PCMR meetings to give that perspective to PCMR members. So, there is no need for Ministers to be members of PCMR for their voices to be heard. Does she not agree with me that the system design, if PCMR is supposed to be an independent check on legislation, having Ministers on PCMR actually does not look quite right?

On the PCMR, I am not sure that the PCMR is set up as a check on the legislature. It is set up as a check to ensure that minority rights are addressed or thought about. Whether you appoint members or whether they are permanent members, the point is that, they have something valuable to contribute. So, I do not see the objection to having permanent members.

Then the second point on the legislative process and the Insurance (Amendment) Bill, I do take Miss Lim's point that, in the normal case, it would go to a Select Committee. But the Standing Orders also do provide that in an urgent case, that it need not go to a Select Committee. In other words, when the Standing Orders were designed, this was thought about. And you do anticipate that there may be such situations that are urgent. Because when we go to a Select Committee, it takes time.

And in this particular instance, given that there were concerns with the market, as I have explained, there was urgency to do it. And that is why a Certificate of Urgency was brought. So, in other words, it is not that every day we have Certificates of Urgency. In this particular instance, there was a need to do it quickly. And that was already explained by Minister Edwin Tong, so it is unnecessary for me to go into that in detail.

Then, on the last one about redirection, I think we would not want to put in place a process that for every single question that is filed, you have to go back to an MP and check what their underlying intent was. I mean, really, MPs, when they file their questions, should make their questions clear.

In the situation that Ms Lim describes, where the question is redirected and the Member feels that it should not be because the underlying intent was to ask the other Ministry something, the Member is always free to reach out to the relevant Minister and explain that. Actually, usually what happens is, when we get a PQ that is not very clear, the Ministries or either the Senior Parliamentary Secretary or the Minister of State will reach out to the MP to ask, "What exactly are you asking here?"

There have been cases where we have had to do that because the intent of the PQ is not clear. It does not happen all the time, but, sometimes, when the question is ambiguously worded, we do. In that instance, once we ascertain from the MP, what the real intent is, we can then decide whether to leave it with one Ministry or redirect it to another.

But on the face of it, questions ought to be clear if they are properly drafted. And if it is clear and it appears to us that this falls under the purview of a particular agency or Ministry, we will redirect it accordingly. Like I said, it is not as though the MP has no chance to come back and file a clearer PQ directed at the Ministry or agency that the Member wants. So, the MPs are not shut out.

Ms Lim, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

May I just make two quick points, Sir?

A very quick one. We are actually out of time.

Thank you, Sir, for your indulgence. Just to respond that under the Standing Orders, a Member may be precluded from filing a question again if it is deemed to have been fully answered. So, that decision, sometimes there is a tussle between the relevant officers and Members about this.

And last of all, regarding the urgency of the Insurance (Amendment) Bill, of course, to note that the deal has been aborted, so I do not know whether the parties felt that they were inadequately listened to, so I do not know the answer to that.

But, Sir, in any event, there are clearly many interesting issues that we can talk about Parliament and its functioning. And I would hope that there is common cause that all of us want Parliament to be effective. And with that, Sir, I back leave to withdraw my amendment.

Minister Indranee.

Mr Speaker, Sir, a very quick response. The first point that Ms Lim made was that because of the Standing Orders, which says that if a question has been answered fully, then you cannot bring it again.

But that is the point, because if the MP felt that this was supposed to have been addressed to another Ministry, it must follow that it was not answered fully, so then they can direct it to the other Ministry.

[Inaudible.]

And with respect to the last question, when she raised the issue of the deal being aborted and what the response was, this is a classic example of a question that should not be directed to me. That should instead go to Minister Edwin Tong. So, if the Member has any clarifications on that, that is something to be directed to Minister Edwin Tong.

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

[(proc text) The sum of $47,784,400 for Head F ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $13,746,000 for Head F ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]

Mr Vikram Nair.

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

Sir, 10 years ago, at the Shangri-La Dialogue 2015, also the year Singapore celebrated 50 years of Independence, Minister for Defence Dr Ng Eng Hen gave a speech titled "New Century – New Players, New Rules?". Within which, Dr Ng described the changing international order in the decades post-World War II, and how the United States (US) and the leading western powers reconstructed, rebuilt and redefined the international system after the war. The most important product of it all was a rules-based system to promulgate an international order for shared interest and mutual benefit.

While we have the same players and largely the same rules today, the rules based system and the alliances that formed post-World War II appears to be under threat.

The US, one of the architects of this system, seems to be re-evaluating its alliances under the current administration, starting with its trade relations with its North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) allies Mexico and Canada, as well as its trading relationship with Europe.

In the recent vote in the United Nations (UN), the US voted, along with Russia and North Korea, against a resolution put forward by its long-time European allies to condemn the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This marks a rift between US and its European North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) allies.

We have yet to see the full impact of the new US administration's trade, economic and foreign policies, and what this means for international institutions and alliances, as well as for the US' role and presence here in the Asia Pacific.

China continues to grow as a power, both economically and militarily. Its rivalry with the US seems set to intensify on multiple fronts, with the latest salvos being a further round of tariffs against each other.

Closer to home, China continues its military exercises in the South China Sea and along the Taiwan Straits, areas that remain perennial sources of tension. Most recently, it conducted live firing naval exercises circumnavigating Australia, which has caused consternation for the Australians.

Globally, the two major conflicts continue to simmer. The Russia-Ukraine war continues, even as the US has engaged both parties, trying to facilitate some settlement. It appears, though, that despite being subject to an unlawful invasion by Russia, Ukraine may have to give up parts of its territory as part of any peace deal.

While there is a ceasefire in the Isreal-Hamas conflict at the moment, this appears tenuous, with both sides making allegations against the other for not having honoured the terms to ceasefire.

Against this backdrop, where collective security and the rules-based order appear to be fraying, the Ministry of Defence (MINDEF) and the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) will be important for Singapore's safety and security.

I would be grateful if the Minister can share, what is MINDEF's evaluation of the security situation in the world and the region, and its approach to the potential threats Singapore may face.

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

Mr Chairman, in recent years, the global geopolitical environment has been plagued with uncertainty, heightened tensions and a clear weakening of international order. It has now been three years since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, in what was a clear and flagrant violation of sovereignty and territorial integrity. The war continues to escalate with ongoing clashes in the physical and cyber domain.

On the physical battlefield, Russia has occupied large swathes of Ukraine's eastern regions and is continuing its advance, with no end in sight. The cyber battlefield has also seen its shares of issues, with multiple attacks on critically important Ukrainian infrastructure since the start of the conflict. Nothing has been spared from this cyber warfare, from disinformation campaigns powered by artificial intelligence (AI) and deepfakes, to cyberattacks on Ukrainian governmental websites to missile strikes on Ukrainian data centres.

And yet, amidst the backdrop of the Russia-Ukraine war, is also the devastating Israel-Hamas conflict. While temporary ceasefire has been agreed in January this year, allowing both sides to exchange hostages, the final outcome is still shrouded in uncertainty. This brief reprieve does not undo the months of conflict that have taken a catastrophic humanitarian toll, deepened global divisions and polarise countries along political, religious and ideological lines, to the detriment of social cohesion and harmony between the global citizenries. The conflict has also caused wider impact throughout the Middle East, drawing countries such as Iran, Lebanon and Yemen into the disarray.

Both conflicts have demonstrated how the nature of warfare continues to evolve. There have been significant advancements in emerging technologies, both in terms of conventional high-end capabilities, as well as low cost and dual-use technologies. The world is now a far more dangerous and uncertain place. To some, these conflicts may seem distant and far from our shores. However, it has had profound implications on both the international order, and can cause trickle-down effects on small nations like Singapore. It is important that we must continue to be vigilant, adaptable, integrating emerging technologies to build an SAF that can defend our sovereignty in times of need, and that is prepared for all contingencies on the modern battlefield.

Considering these recent developments in external security environment, can MINDEF share an update on its plans and priorities to strengthen the SAF, in line with SAF2040.

At last year's Committee of Supply (COS) debate, the Minister for Defence said that a sustained defence spending was the most efficient and effective means of building a strong military over the long term. I agree. We cannot wait until conflict is at our doorstep before we upgrade our capabilities to defend ourselves. The SAF must continually build robust military capabilities to counter escalating threats in our increasingly volatile world.

Ongoing conflicts around the world show the uncertainty of our times. In particular, the war in Ukraine highlights the vulnerability of smaller states and how we need to be prepared. In December last year, NATO's Secretary-General Mark Rutte exalted NATO's European members to adopt a wartime mindset and increase their defence spending from 2% to 3% of their gross domestic product (GDP).

Asian countries have also been increasing their military capabilities and spending. At the start of 2024, the International Institute of Strategic Studies reported an expected growth of 4.2% in Asian defence spending, with China leading the way. Such spending patterns are testament to our troubled times. It is clear that defence remains a large and important area of investments in many parts of the world, and the SAF should similarly keep pace. Could MINDEF provide an update on the progress of SAF's acquisitions and capability development plans?

Chairman, Singapore is a digital nation, with robust digital infrastructure and with people accessing a wide range of services through digital means, including communications, Government services, banking and ecommerce.

As both we and the world become increasingly interconnected and reliant on digital technology, we would also have new vulnerabilities that adversaries can exploit if we are not careful.

On the military front, cyberattacks can disrupt military command and control systems, intelligence and surveillance operations, even the functionality of weapons systems. In fact, the low cost of entry for cyber operations means anyone can engage in cyber warfare.

Unlike traditional military domains, where power is often correlated with economic resources and industrial capacity, the digital domain has very low barriers for entry. Determining the source of the attack can also be difficult and may hinder our responses, making it even more crucial for the military to develop sophisticated strategies to deal with them.

The pace of technological change in the digital domain is rapid and relentless. The military must continuously adapt to emerging technologies to stay ahead on our defence. On this note, I would like to seek an update on SAF's progress in addressing threats in the digital domain.

Mr Chairman, Sir, cyber threats pose a significant risk to the security and economic stability of nations, especially for a global hub like Singapore. We are vulnerable to cyber risks that can cripple critical networks, infrastructure and our economy. Such threats often transcend national borders and sectors. The interconnected nature of our modern world also means that a cyberattack in one area can quickly spread and escalate, causing widespread disruption and damage.

As the digital landscape evolves, so does the battlefield. The future of defence is no longer confined to traditional domains such as land, air, or sea; it now extends into the digital realm of cyberspace. In response to the increasing complexity of cyber threats, a growing number of militaries have established dedicated cyber units. I was heartened that the Digital and Intelligence Service (DIS) was established as the fourth service of the SAF in October 2022.

Notwithstanding, cyber defence is multifaceted, making it impossible for any single entity to tackle alone. Effective cyber defence requires a collaborative approach, one that leverages the collective expertise and resources of various stakeholders, in both public and private sectors. It is essential for the DIS to work closely with other agencies, sharing information, strategies and technologies to build a robust and resilient defence against cyber threats.

With this in context, I would like to ask the Minister for Defence how the DIS is partnering with other Government agencies to enhance our collective response to cyber threats and ensure the security of our nation's digital infrastructure.

Chairman, one of the topics I have raised over the years in the COS debate has been the use of unmanned systems in warfare.

One of the perennial problems SAF faces is falling cohort sizes because of falling birthrates. This is a trend that is set to continue. Against this backdrop, unmanned systems provide a unique opportunity to be able to project force with less manpower.

For militaries, unmanned technologies can potentially improve operational efficiency through automating repetitive or high-risk tasks, such as using autonomous ground robots for battlefield surveillance or remotely-controlled robots to conduct dangerous bomb defusals.

More recently, I understand that AI simulators could allow soldiers to conduct drills multiple times in different variations within a short period of time, improving their learning and practice using the least amount of resources.

As unmanned technologies improve, we are also starting to see platforms that can also execute operations with greater precision and reliability. Some of us may know about the DJI, whose flagship drone, the DJI Matrice 350 RTK, is capable of surveying, mapping and doing infrastructure inspection with great precision. Other unmanned platforms can navigate challenging terrains and support complex logistical operations with minimal human intervention and supervision.

Conversely, unmanned platforms from potential aggressors, including non-state actors, also pose a new threat. The cost of using an aerial drone for an attack is relatively small and more difficult to detect, compared to say flying an aeroplane or launching a missile.

I would, therefore, like an update from the Minister for Defence on how the SAF has been integrating unmanned technologies into its training and operations and its plans on dealing with threats from unmanned technologies.

Chairman, the war in Ukraine has amply demonstrated that drones have fundamentally changed modern warfighting, with tactics surrounding drone deployment and countermeasures evolving rapidly every few months. Drones are now used for reconnaissance, precision strikes and even larger-scale swarm attacks, making them a key factor in asymmetrical warfare. Reports show that militaries worldwide are ramping up their drone operation industries, with the capacity to make and maintain drones in the thousands, if not millions.

Given the rapid pace of technology advancements, ongoing conflicts have shown the urgency of staying ahead in drone defence strategies. It is a challenge to develop and operate counter-drone defence systems that are cost-effective against these low-level, low-cost targets. In last year's COS debate, it was highlighted that SAF was going to set up groups to brainstorm and develop sustainable counter-measure responses to this growing threat.

Can MINDEF provide an update on the progress of these groups? How is SAF integrating lessons from recent conflicts into our own defence planning and what steps are being taken to ensure Singapore remains prepared against these emerging drone attacks and threats?

Chairman, we are witnessing the rapid rise of emerging and disruptive technologies from AI and quantum computing to advanced robotics and cyber warfare. These innovations hold immense potential, but also pose significant challenges, especially when it comes to military security. Emerging technologies are not just reshaping industries, they are changing the ways wars are fought. We now face the reality of adversaries using AI-driven drones, autonomous systems and cyberattacks to disrupt critical infrastructure, communication and defence mechanisms. Take, for example, the use of AI-enabled drones by various state and non-state actors. These drones are becoming an increasingly common weapon on the battlefield.

Ultimately, it is clear that staying ahead of disruptive technology will require not only technological innovation but also strategic foresight and adaptability. Given the rapidly changing technological environment, what are MINDEF and SAF doing to guard against these emerging and disruptive technology that can be used on the battlefield? Our ability to manage, control and protect against these technologies will define the future of warfare and how we defend Singapore.

Mr Chairman, rigorous and realistic training for our SAF is of utmost importance. As General Norman Schwarzkopf once said, “The more you sweat in peace, the less you bleed in war.” Therefore, excellence in training is our first and best line of defence.

The SAF has long conducted overseas exercises in diverse terrains, climates and environments – critical experiences that are not feasible within our limited land area. These large-scale and high-end trainings help our Servicemen keep pace with evolving threats. Modern conflicts increasingly involve dense urban settings and hybrid tactics, requiring our soldiers to be adaptable, quick-thinking and responsive to rapidly changing situations.

Urban warfare, as we have seen in recent conflicts, present unique challenges: the interplay of skyscrapers and subterranean complexes, the constant presence of civilians and the ever-present risk of unconventional tactics. No single strategy can be applied to every city block or building. Our Servicemen must not only master their equipment but also develop the mental acuity to seize opportunities amid complex situations.

To that end, the Ministry of Defence has taken proactive steps to enhance urban training. At last year’s COS debate, we learned of SAFTI City – the next-generation smart training facility. Featuring three Instrumented Battle Circuits, SAFTI City will provide immersive, real-time simulations, allowing for video playback as well as comprehensive After Action Reviews. These capabilities embody the spirit of continuous improvement for our military, ensuring that every lesson learnt on the training ground translates into greater operational effectiveness.

Going forward, Mr Chairman, I would like to seek an update from the Ministry on how it intends to build upon these developments. Specifically, how will MINDEF continue to refine our training methodology, both overseas and here at home, so that our troops remain primed for the demands of ever more complex battlegrounds? Our collective security hinges on our ability to innovate, adapt and prepare. After all, if we embrace challenging training today, we can better safeguard ourselves and our people for tomorrow.

Chairman, the Minister had shared in the past about the network of international partnerships that MINDEF has established to enable training overseas. Such opportunities on foreign land afford the SAF access to precious training space. We appreciate these arrangements deeply, given our own very limited land, air and sea space.

Still, it is just as important that SAF continues to train locally. For one, the COVID-19 pandemic taught us that access to overseas training spaces can be cut off quite suddenly. More importantly, our soldiers need to train realistically and be familiar with our own physical terrain and context in order to be effective when the need to defend Singapore arises.

At the same time, land is a precious and scarce resource for Singapore. I note that over the years, MINDEF has done its part to free up land for national development, such as the return of Seletar Camp for the development of the Seletar Aerospace Park and, in time to come, the relocation of Paya Lebar Air Base to transform Paya Lebar into a regional centre similar to those in Woodlands and Tampines.

In view of these constraints on our land use in Singapore, what is MINDEF doing to maximise our local training areas in an innovative manner?

Mr Chairman, finding land available for training is a major challenge for many militaries, especially for a small and densely populated country like Singapore. As we all know, effective military training requires large and open spaces for high-end live firing exercises and large-scale manoeuvres.

I was glad to hear about the SAFTI City development from the Minister for Defence last year, especially on how SAF is doing more with less to enhance training experiences for our Servicemen, in spite of our limited land availability. Training locally is important so that SAF is familiar with our terrain to be proficient in urban operations.

It is also equally important to train overseas for the exposure and experience to build our military forces’ ability to adapt to a wide range of unfamiliar conditions. They need training under a variety of different situations and terrains to enhance their resilience and abilities. This is how we ensure that we have a well-rounded and prepared fighting force.

SAF has also been training abroad for many years and we are very appreciative to our foreign partners for the opportunities. Training overseas also helps to foster strong defence ties with our key defence partners, improve bilateral cooperation and allow us to benchmark ourselves against other professional militaries.

I am sure my Parliamentary colleagues would agree that the importance of training both locally and overseas cannot be overstated, as each offers unique benefits that contribute to the overall effectiveness and adaptability of SAF. I would like to ask the Minister for Defence if he would share how SAF is further improving training locally and overseas for our Servicemen.

Almost every day, the residents of Sengkang GRC are forced to pause what they are doing as military jets scream past overhead. What is worse, the location of the town, close to the northeastern edge of the island, means that they must endure the noise for an extended period as the planes circle round again after making a U-turn to avoid entry into Malaysian airspace. Such disturbances are especially disruptive, given how an increasingly larger number of Singaporeans now work from home, at least part of the time. Some residents even suggest that the frequency of such incidents may number as many as seven flights an hour.

Over the years, I and my Parliamentary colleagues have implored RSAF to consider various alternatives to their overflights, to cluster take-offs more, to consider alternative flight paths, to take breaks in the early mornings or during exam periods, and to respect quiet hours. The responses, while lengthy and varied, have largely retained the same thrust that the Air Force needs to maintain operational readiness for the good of national defence and that there will eventually be relief after the decommissioning of Paya Lebar Air Base sometime in 2030.

In the meantime, however, our residents continue to experience disruptions to their daily activities. Technology, however, has now offered a tested solution, fin line nozzles that can be incorporated into engine design, much like dimples on a golf ball. This advance in aerospace technology offers potentially quieter jet engines with minimal reductions in performance. Other technologies, like micro vortex generators, acoustic liners and other types of modifications to engine nozzles, also appear to hold promise.

In an earlier Parliamentary Question response, Minister Ng Eng Hen indicated that RSAF will continue to monitor such technologies. Will the Ministry be able to provide an update on its monitoring efforts? Are there any plans to devote a budget toward researching and incorporating noise reduction technologies into military aircraft here? While I understand that defensive capability and safety considerations should always remain priorities for the Armed Forces, surely the impact that achieving such capabilities have on the daily life of Singaporeans should matter, too.

Mr Chairman, as a small city-state with a tumultuous start, it has been deeply embedded in our national psyche that we cannot count on anyone but ourselves to defend Singapore. This has not been mere rhetoric but a principle that has consistently guided the Government’s approach to defence and national security. We have always prioritised defence, ensuring that there are adequate financial and manpower resources committed. I looked up our defence spending in our early years as a young nation and, back then, defence spending was in the range of about 5% of GDP.

The Minister for Defence, Dr Ng, has also regularly reminded Members of this House that defence is a long-term business that requires sustained and consistent investment. By maintaining sustainable and stable defence spending that avoids sharp fluctuations, we have equipped the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) with cutting-edge technology, highly-trained personnel and the necessary infrastructure to confront a spectrum of threats. This did not take place overnight.

As we celebrate SG60 this year and look towards the next phase of nation-building, it is imperative that we consider whether our defence spending is aligned with the challenges of tomorrow. Looking at ongoing developments in the world, it is no longer sufficient for SAF to only be well-versed at tackling traditional threats, neither can we afford to be playing catch up on emerging non-traditional threats.

The world is also facing the pervasive and fundamental threat of climate change. This will implicate both the conditions in which SAF is expected to train and operate as well as the challenges that SAF may be called on to tackle, especially as a result of extreme weather such as floods and fires. So, while SAF is certainly not responsible for climate change, it must join in collective action to mitigate its impact for Singapore's future.

Our investment in defence must continue to be prudent and forward-looking, ensuring that SAF remains an agile force capable of adapting to the dynamic security environment. In that regard, I would like to seek an update on our projected defence spending for this year. With the acquisition of high-end capabilities, will we continue to stay within the range of 3% of our GDP?

In the area of sustainability, militaries often get a bad reputation as the environmental impact of military operations can be substantial. Also, as militaries often naturally prioritise national security and mission readiness, it would not be uncommon for green practices and sustainability to become an afterthought.

MINDEF last provided an update on SAF's efforts on environmental sustainability in 2022. Since then, what else has been done and is MINDEF or SAF on track to fulfil its commitments as part of the Singapore Green Plan 2030?

Chairman, many current and future security challenges transcend national borders, requiring collective responses and new capabilities. No nation is immune to transboundary threats, like terrorism, maritime piracy, cyberattacks and climate change.

Singapore, being a highly connected city-state with an open economy, is inherently vulnerable to such transboundary threats. Even as we have enjoyed relative peace and prosperity, we must build our capabilities to ensure we have operational expertise in dealing with these threats.

Furthermore, traditional warfare is changing with new domains of conflict emerging alongside conventional military engagements. Hybrid warfare, blending conventional forces with cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns and economic coercion, has become a key tool for state and non-state actors. Cyber warfare threatens critical infrastructure while economic sabotage, such as cutting of submarine cables, can severely disrupt vital communications, trade and energy supplies.

As these threats evolve, new technologies and capabilities, such as secured satellite communications, AI-driven defence systems, robotics, drones and cutting-edge electronic warfare, are increasingly becoming relevant. With geopolitical dynamics shifting and many of these capabilities spreading throughout different geographical regions and private sector players, collaboration is now essential.

Through regular cornerstone events, such as the Shangri-La Dialogue, Singapore has established itself as a valuable convener for bilateral and multilateral security dialogues. I am pleased to see new platforms emerging to discuss modern challenges posed by emerging technologies, such as the Digital Defence Symposium, co-hosted by the ASEAN Defence Ministers' Meeting (ADMM) Cybersecurity and Information Centre of Excellence and the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies.

But apart from dialogue, how can we substantively build partnerships to address common security challenges? In particular, given Singapore's limited manpower and resources, we have to be deliberate and identify niches where our expertise can make a valuable impact. In this context, how is MINDEF/SAF working with defence partners to address transnational security challenges?

Chairman, given the rapid geopolitical shifts and growing security challenges, maintaining strong defence relations is vital for national security, stability and peace. For small nations like Singapore, our security and prosperity are closely tied to navigating international complexities through defence diplomacy. Our approach to defence relations is based on the understanding that no country can tackle transnational threats, such as terrorism, cyberattacks or climate change, alone.

In counter-terrorism, Singapore has closely collaborated with regional partners to share intelligence and expertise against the growing terrorism threat. Through initiatives, like the Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Terrorism (REACT), member countries exchange information, track terror group movements and disrupt terrorist plots. This collaboration has been vital in countering threats from groups, like ISIS, whose activities extend into Southeast Asia. Singapore's involvement has helped prevent attacks in the region and ensured our citizens' safety.

Beyond counter-terrorism, Singapore has built strong defence ties with countries, like the US and Australia, to address emerging security challenges. Our cooperation with US includes joint operations and intelligence sharing to counter transnational threats, such as cyberattacks and weapon proliferation. Similarly, our partnership with Australia supports collaborative initiatives in humanitarian relief and peacekeeping.

We have consistently worked to build a broad network of defence partnerships with like-minded countries to address these issues collectively. These partnerships strengthen Singapore's position as a reliable international partner, advance our interests and ensure our voices are heard globally.

In the face of shifting global power dynamics and emerging security challenges, it is crucial for Singapore to continuously adapt and strengthen these relationships to preserve regional peace and security and safeguard the well-being of our citizens.

In this context, I would like to request an update from MINDEF on the current state of Singapore's defence relations with key partners, particularly in strengthening cooperation and building strategic partnerships. How are we advancing our defence diplomacy efforts to address regional security challenges, especially in counter-terrorism and information sharing? What measures are being taken to further deepen these partnerships for Singapore's long-term security?

Mr Chairman, as a small nation, Singapore is vulnerable to external influences and pressures. Strong diplomatic and defence relations help to mitigate these risks. Building good relations with our neighbours is particularly important, not solely because of our geographical proximity, but also to enable close working relationships to uphold shared security interests.

With Malaysia, we have strong people-to-people ties, with many crossing the borders to visit family, work and study. We also work closely on various important fronts, including trade, defence and environmental issues. With Indonesia, Singapore maintains a multifaceted partnership, engaging in extensive economic cooperation and addressing cross-boundary challenges, like haze.

Much of Singapore's continued survival and prosperity also hinges on a stable, regional environment. Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) is an important platform for Singapore to work with countries with common interests to promote regional stability and to contribute meaningfully to their larger international agenda.

Given the importance of forging strong ties with our neighbours and maintaining ASEAN centrality, what are some of the recent cooperation efforts Singapore has with our regional neighbours as well as with ASEAN?

Mr Chairman, Singapore's birth rate has been on a downward trend for years, similar to the situation in many other developed nations. While this is not news, it is important that we continue with our endeavour to address the implications for our national defence.

It is a major challenge to maintain a robust defence force with a smaller pool of young Singaporeans eligible for military service. In addition, as our population ages, the proportion of those of prime age that can continue to be part of the reservist pool also decreases.

Given the unpredictable state of global affairs, we must be on our guard against potential conflicts or wars. Apart from the countries directly involved, there will be impact on many other countries indirectly, as we have observed from the Russian-Ukrainian War and Israel-Hamas conflict.

Our people have always been our greatest asset for national defence. SAF should explore innovative solutions and policies to ensure that we can continue to tap on our key resource pool to maximise their potential.

It is in this context that I request MINDEF to share more about how SAF is optimising the deployment of our National Servicemen (NSmen) given our declining cohorts. For example, will SAF tap on technology or even medical advances to augment the capabilities, health or stamina of each NSman?

Mr Mohd Fahmi Aliman. You can take your two cuts together.

Chairman, the binary classification of our servicemen either as combat-fit or non combat-fit has been used by SAF for a long time and has great implications on the vocation options and National Service (NS) experiences available to our servicemen.

In 2021, Senior Minister of State Heng shared that SAF is redesigning the Medical Classification System and the Physical Employment Standard (PES) system to maximise the deployment options and contributions of our servicemen.

I fully agree that medical exclusions that used to determine deployments may no longer be so relevant in today's operational context, especially with the changing nature of modern warfare and the new digital domains in which our soldiers are expected to operate. So, can MINDEF share any updates on this initiative?

As a conscript armed force, our pre-enlistees come from a diverse range of educational pathways, with different skillsets and individual career interests. I am glad to see that MINDEF/SAF recognises this and has been offering multiple schemes that allow students with different educational backgrounds to pursue further qualifications while serving NS. This not only optimises their potential but also enhances SAF's operational capabilities by tapping on the skills and expertise of our NSmen.

I note that the newest scheme that was launched last year allows polytechnic students to enlist and serve in SAF while fulfilling their final-year internship requirements for their diplomas. Has this scheme been expanded to include more domains and what is the take-up rate?

Mr Chairman, as our population grows increasingly well educated and skilled, our NSmen can also bring to the table a diverse range of talents and experiences that could be useful to SAF.

The NS system should have the necessary structures and processes in place to ensure that we are making the best use of our NSmen's expertise. This will become increasingly important as Singapore's falling fertility rate affects the number of enlistees the SAF could take in each year.

MINDEF previously announced that they sought to maximise contributions of NSmen through the Enhanced Expertise Deployment Scheme. I believe that this is a good initiative to deploy NSmen to roles that are aligned with the expertise that they have acquired in school or at their workplaces.

We have a win-win situation here as it not only enhances the SAF's operational effectiveness by tapping on specialised skills and expertise, but it also provides NSmen with the opportunity to practise and hone their skills. This will hopefully give them an increased sense of purpose and fulfilment towards NS as they apply their skills to make a meaningful impact with minimal training required.

Can MINDEF provide an update on the Enhanced Expertise Deployment Scheme and how it has helped to maximise the contributions of our NSmen?

Chairman, we face increasing uncertainty and complexity in our security landscape. Potential threats to our national security include conflicts in our region, acts of terrorism, organised crime and natural disasters.

Our servicemen have to respond to a wide range of emergencies and threat scenarios, such as military attacks or cyberattacks, hostile acts involving explosives, chemical or biological weapons, and more.

This is particularly challenging for our NSmen because they are not soldiers by profession. Yet, they must be adequately equipped, both in terms of skills and equipment, to perform their roles effectively and safely.

To perform any job well, hands-on or real-life exposure is needed for the practice and experience. All the more so for our soldiers, who have to perform under a diverse set of high-stakes and time-critical situations that can range from peacetime responses to wartime contingencies.

In this context, what are the ongoing efforts by MINDEF/SAF to ensure that our servicemen are equipped to do their roles well and to enhance their operational effectiveness?

All Singaporean sons go through a rite of passage of two years of NS, which is then typically followed by a 10-year training cycle. It is a commitment that comes at both a personal and societal cost.

At the same time, I think I speak for most, if not all, Singaporeans that NS remains necessary for Singapore's defence. This is particularly so in today's climate of evolving threats and uncertainties.

In that regard, there is the responsibility to ensure that the safety of our Singaporean sons is always the top priority. As we adapt to new technologies, tactics and environments, it is equally essential that our training safety procedures evolve accordingly.

I recall attending some high-risk training in the SAF years ago, and these days we have urban warfare and lots of close quarter battle, and chemical, biological, radiological and explosives (CBRE), and overseas exercises exposure such as Exercise Wallaby. I would thus like to seek an update from MINDEF on our training safety protocols. What are the recent steps that the SAF has taken to improve training safety and yet maintain training realism and effectiveness? How are we benchmarking our safety protocols against industry and global military best practices?

Chairman the demands of modern warfare continued to evolve. So, too must be the tools we use to train our servicemen.

One of the most exciting areas of innovation in the military today is the integration of advanced technologies aimed at improving training efficacy and ensuring the safety of our troops. Technologies like virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) are revolutionising a how we prepare soldiers for the battlefield. They help to develop critical decision-making skills, refine tactics and practice responses in combat situations without physical danger.

Data from wearable technologies is also invaluable too in safety aspects, preventing heat strokes and over exertion, allowing commanders to intervene before a situation escalates. AI-driven systems can be used to identify areas for improvement.

Can MINDEF share more about how technology has been incorporated to improve training efficacy and safety of our servicemen? By incorporating these cutting-edge technologies, the military is not only improving the quality of training but also ensuring that our servicemen are better prepared, safer and more resilient in the face of increasingly complex and dangerous challenges.

Chairman, mental health is as important as our physical health. The need for the maintenance and enhancement of mental health with any needed diagnosis and treatments is still in the process of gaining wider recognition amongst our people.

Nonetheless, we have been making strides as a nation in terms of advancing mental health care awareness and access. What was once surrounded by stigma and kept in the shadows has in recent times been acknowledged as important as physical health. This change was perpetuated by the global pandemic over the past few years, which forced many of us to confront the mental strain of isolation, uncertainty and stress.

In the context of the military, soldiers are trained to be resilient, strong and disciplined. We usually think of the military as a sector where strength is defined by physical power, endurance, or the ability to push through pain, but mental toughness is just as critical as physical strength.

We now understand that mental health challenges, stress, anxiety, or the pressure of adapting to new environments are a natural part of life and can affect anyone regardless of their background, age or rank, particularly for many of our young men who enlist at the age of 18, the stress of gruelling physical training, the mental load from adjusting to military life, and the emotional struggles of being away from their loved ones and the comforts of home can be overwhelming for them.

To this end, I would like to ask MINDEF for an update on efforts to ensure that all our soldiers have adequate mental health support. In particular, how can we better facilitate our Singaporean sons transition to NS and set them up for a successful training stint?

Sir, the demands of NS go beyond physical endurance – mental resilience is equally critical. Our soldiers face operational stress, regimentation, and the challenges of balancing military life. Ensuring they are psychologically resilient is essential for their well-being and operational readiness.

Could MINDEF provide an update on recent efforts to strengthen the mental resilience of our soldiers? How are resilience-building strategies incorporated into training to help our soldiers better manage stress and pressure?

Beyond counselling services, are there plans to enhance peer support networks or introduce structured mental wellness programmes within SAF units? Could technology also play a role in providing early mental health interventions?

Finally, how will MINDEF continue integrating psychological resilience into SAF training and support structures to ensure our soldiers are mentally strong both during and after their service?

Sir, I receive many queries from Polytechnic and GCE "A" level students wanting to know about their enlistment dates, asking about their Physical Employment Standard (PES) status prior to enlistment for.

Sir, I also receive queries about NSmen hoping to study overseas. They want to be able to plan for their studies or plan whether they can take on a temporary job, pending their NS.

Sir, the OneNS web portal and mobile app was rolled-out last year to streamline digital services for NSmen. Since its release, have there been any enhancements made to the OneNS Portal? Will the One NS web portal be able to provide such information to students who are enlisting soon. Can NSmen use the portal to apply for deferment of their NS training?

Has there been any survey among NSmen or to assess the effectiveness and usefulness of the portal? I hope that MINDEF recognises that in this digital age, continuous updates are necessary to keep up with user needs and improve user experience.

The next Member is not present. Ms Jean See.

At its COS last year, MINDEF shared that a one-stop Central Manpower Base (CMPB) would be developed at Bukit Gombak to serve the needs of servicemen and their families, as well as the public living in the area.

Apart from the one-stop service centre, all-weather fitness conditioning centre, and the lifestyle mart, the new CMPB would also house a regional health hub that would centralise the various SAF healthcare facilities that are spread across multiple locations, including the Medical Classification Centre, Specialist Medical and Dental Centre, Health Screening Programme Centre and MINDEF Medical Centre. I understand that servicemen can tap on the regional health hub for comprehensive primary and specialist healthcare as well as health screening services.

I have two questions for the Minister. First, could MINDEF provide an update on the consolidation of medical services at this regional health hub within the new CMPB? Second, apart from services for servicemen, could MINDEF provide details on the amenities which would be open to the public?

Chairman, NS is indispensable to Singapore, given our unique challenges as a small nation with no natural resources. The invasion of Ukraine and the current challenges it is still facing, has further underscored the importance of a strong defence. It is through NS that we maintain the peace and security we enjoy today, ensuring that our nation is prepared, capable, and ready to defend our sovereignty when necessary. At its core, the strength of our defence lies in our people. What has MINDEF done to continue to inspire our servicemen in its important mission? What has MINDEF done over the past year to recognise and appreciate the efforts of our servicemen?

Additionally, family support plays a vital role in the success of NS. Families provide emotional stability and strength, helping servicemen navigate the challenges of their NS journey. Facilities like SAFRA offer recreational, social, and educational activities for NSmen and their families, fostering a supportive environment and giving them a sense of belonging to the bigger NS family. As we move forward, are there further improvements or enhancements that Singaporeans can look forward to in SAFRA facilities for our servicemen and their families?

Mr Chairman, national defence is the primary goal of NS, but NS should also be an investment in human capital. MINDEF should transform NS into a value of creative experience for our NSmen by ensuring appropriate remuneration, relevant training and stronger education and career integration.

First, full time NSmen's pay should reflect their contributions to national defence. The median NS allowance should be raised to at least $1,600 per month. NSFs in their second year are fully trained, performing operational roles essential to Singapore security, yet they continue to receive an allowance rather than a salary with Central Provident Fund (CPF) contributions. The argument that duty and employment are mutually exclusive is flawed.

SAF regulars are paid market salaries while serving the same national defence mission. NSFs make personal sacrifices, delaying their education and career, and consequently, sometimes even marriage and children, because of NS. Pay that acknowledges these realities will strengthen their commitment to national defence. MINDEF should also help NSFs transition smoothly to further education by coordinating with universities to reduce delays between their Operationally Ready Date and the start of their studies.

And finally, NS should where possible, incorporate training that can benefits NSFs future careers, including skills training that can be applied in both military and civilian settings. This way, NS can serve as a launchpad for future opportunities rather than an educational and career detour.

Chairman, NS has long been the bedrock of our nation's defence – an institution through which generations of Singaporean sons and daughters have stepped forward to protect our homeland. The contributions of our full-time NSmen and women are invaluable. At the same time, we recognise that these commitments may impact their educational and career trajectories.

A recent 2023 Institute of Policy Studies report on public attitudes towards NS found broad support for conscription, yet highlighted concerns that time spent in service could affect subsequent transitions to study or to employment. One key recommendation was for MINDEF to strengthen support for service-men-and-women during their final months of NS, helping them prepare for the next phase of life.

At last year's Committee of Supply debate, MINDEF announced enhanced SkillsFuture@NS initiatives, allowing full-time NSmen access to the SSkillsFuture@NS Learning eXperience Platform (SF@NS LXP), which offers over 75,000 online courses. This move of course reflects the Ministry's commitment to investing in our servicemen's development, both during and after their time in uniform.

Chairman, with these developments in mind, I would like to request an update on the concrete measures that MINDEF has implemented, or plans to implement, to facilitate our Servicemen’s smooth transition into their next chapter, be it as students or in the workforce. Specifically, I seek more details on how MINDEF’s initiatives, such as SkillsFuture@NS, will continue to equip our full-time NSmen with the skills, knowledge and confidence to excel in their post-NS endeavours.

Mr Chairman, besides conventional military threats, there are many other threats and risks that could disrupt our daily life and threaten our way of life in Singapore. Even though five years have passed, we must not forget how quickly the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted our daily lives and every sector of our society. Our peace and stability can be fragile and should not be taken for granted.

In addition, intense ongoing conflicts and geopolitical tensions persist, not just in far-flung regions but close to home as well. Conflicts far abroad may still cause Singapore to be vulnerable to shocks, such as supply chain disruptions, economic instability and widening socio-political divisions.

That is why Total Defence is key in rallying Singaporeans together to combat the challenges ahead as one united people. We just concluded Exercise SG Ready 2025, a two-week exercise where more than 800 organisations, schools and units from different sectors carried out different disruption or preparedness activities to strengthen their contingency plans for power disruptions or phishing attacks. Have there been any findings or analysis on the resilience gaps in our society?

It is difficult to predict what the next black swan event that could destabilise Singapore might be, but we must do our best to prepare Singaporeans and build resilience. How relevant is the role of Total Defence in raising the level of civic preparedness among Singaporeans for disruptions to daily life?

Chairman, the inaugural Exercise SG Ready was a timely demonstration of how crises and disruptions can strain our daily lives – from power and water outages to digital connectivity failures, widespread cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns and drone threats. These simulations challenged our readiness across multiple fronts, ensuring that Singaporeans remain prepared to respond swiftly and effectively to such hybrid threats.

We have witnessed how these dangers can escalate in real-world contexts. Amidst the still ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, repeated strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure have led to prolonged power blackouts. Hospitals have been forced into crisis mode, with critical medical procedures delayed or disrupted, underscoring the grave consequences when essential services are compromised.

This year’s edition of Exercise SG Ready, held in February, built on those lessons learnt from last year. As part of our SG60 commemorations, the exercise invited Singaporeans to reflect on the crises and disruptions we have overcome over the six decades of our Independence and to brace ourselves for potential future threats.

In light of SG60, I would like to request an update from the Ministry on this year’s exercise. Could MINDEF also share other initiatives that are underway to further strengthen Singapore’s crisis preparedness so that our nation remains resilient and well-guarded against emerging threats?

I served my NS many years ago and have always been convinced of the importance of NS and the need for all Singaporeans to understand that only we are responsible for defending our nation. We cannot depend on any other nation to help us deal with an aggressor country. Last week’s incident in the White House is a grim reminder to all nations of the need to be self-sufficient.

In recent years, as we observed the wars in other countries and how some nations have rallied to respond in the face of aggressive forces. The nations that have responded best tend to be the ones with higher levels of social resilience. Social resilience is important and is crucial because it helps communities withstand, adapt to and recover from crises that could impact social cohesion.

To build social resilience, we have to foster a society that embraces staying together and staying strong even when under stress. Singaporeans must learn to adapt to new challenges and be ready to contribute to developing solutions to tackle them head-on. This requires community networks and support systems to help people share resources and provide support to one another during times of crises. We also need to build public trust in our Government, public services and emergency response systems.

I wish to ask MINDEF, beyond preparing for conventional warfare, could MINDEF share more about its efforts in strengthening our society’s resilience in dealing with emergencies or crises?

Chairman, Total Defence is a shared responsibility. As we see in conflicts around the world, a nation’s strength and ability to defend itself rely on the collective power of its people.

Our youths play a critical role in ensuring a secure and resilient future. Investing in youth participation in Total Defence is an investment in national stability. When young people take ownership of national resilience, they inspire others and foster a culture of preparedness that endures for generations.

With this in mind, I would like to ask how MINDEF is fostering and enabling discussions on Total Defence, particularly with our youths?

Mr Chairman, Total Defence is the cornerstone of Singapore’s national security strategy. Total Defence is premised on the understanding that our security, stability and prosperity depend on the collective commitment and efforts of all Singaporeans and sectors of our country. Each of us has a part to play to defend Singapore.

We are facing complex security threats and challenges even during peacetime, from terrorism and cyberattacks, to pandemics and climate change. We must build our resilience as a people. We need to be prepared through exercises and drills to cope with the potential disruptions from emergencies and crises.

We commemorated 40 years of Total Defence last year. Would MINDEF provide a summary of the outcomes of the activities?

Chairman, the Advisory Council on Community Relations in Defence (ACCORD) has long served as a vital bridge between Singapore’s defence sector and the broader community. It plays a critical role in garnering public support for our defence efforts, building trust and fostering understanding across various societal segments.

Through ACCORD, we have seen active engagement with diverse groups, including ethnic communities, businesses and grassroots organisations. These efforts have not only heightened public awareness of our national defence needs but also encouraged active participation in Total Defence, ensuring every Singaporean understands their role in safeguarding our nation.

Given the evolving security landscape, I would like to request an update from the Ministry of Defence on ACCORD, their initiatives and activities over the past year. How has ACCORD further strengthened its outreach and engagement with the community?

Sir, our MINDEF and SAF museums serve as a key platform to educate Singaporeans on our military history and reinforce the importance of Total Defence. These museums must remain engaging and relevant for future generations as security threats evolve.

How is MINDEF leveraging these museums to deepen public understanding of Total Defence, especially beyond military security, such as digital threats and social resilience? Are there efforts to modernise exhibits by incorporating interactive elements, simulations or digital storytelling to enhance learning experiences?

Beyond education, these museums can foster stronger connections between the public and MINDEF. Could MINDEF explore initiatives, such as using soldiers for guided tours, to incorporate real-life experiences into the learning process?

As Singapore continues to evolve, how will MINDEF ensure that these museums remain dynamic, relevant and impactful in shaping our national defence consciousness?

Chairman, Total Defence is a collective effort, and it would be useful to tap on our people’s ideas and feedback to obtain fresh and a wide range of perspectives on how we can defend Singapore. By empowering the public to contribute meaningfully to our nation’s security and stability, Singaporeans will feel a deep sense of belonging and build stronger community networks.

We should provide flexibility to allow ground-up initiatives to experiment with methods and solutions that may not be immediately feasible in large-scale Government programmes. Let us consider crowdsourcing of innovative ideas from the broader community, particularly from youths who have fresh perspectives and savvy skills.

In the face of new and evolving threats, how is MINDEF/SAF encouraging innovation in Total Defence?

Minister for Defence.

Mr Chairman, that we are living in turbulent times is plainly evident. Some of my colleagues who have filed their cuts said so in so many words. Mr Vikram Nair said that the collective security and the rules-based world order appeared to be fraying. Mr Desmond Choo said the world is now a far more dangerous and uncertain place. Mr Shawn Huang said the war in Ukraine highlights the vulnerability of smaller states to larger powers and how we need to be prepared. I agree with all these sentiments. So, how do we prepare Singapore and our people for a disruptive future, even a disrupted one?

For leaders everywhere, that surely must be the overriding concern as the global order changes before our very eyes. From a liberal world order characterised by inclusion, rules for large and small states and a protection of the global commons, we have now moved from that liberal world order to a literal world order based on size and influence, based on power. It has happened before, not only for Singapore, but the entire ASEAN region and beyond, where your basic assumptions change precipitously and your futures are altered rapidly.

How do we prepare Singaporeans for this kind of change? We want to learn from history, surely, about how the world might change when big power diplomacy dominates. Let me tell you before I quote the examples that are not a pretty picture, but nonetheless, we should learn them and learn the right lessons. And we ask, as we look at these examples, how are the fates of nations decided when big power politics and big power diplomacy dominate in this literal world order?

History teaches us that the fates of nations, particularly the weak ones – and I use the word "nations" in the broadest sense – can change without their choice. It is decided in the corridors of power and then declared publicly as a fait accompli. Take the 1824 Anglo-Dutch Treaty, when Singapore and Malaysia came under British rule. If the powers that be had decided differently, we could very well have been under Dutch rule and a radically different future from today. Just as a lark, I typed into your ChatGPT and asked what would happen to Singapore if we were under Dutch rule? It gives you a very, very good answer. Well, it will tell you that a lot of things will change.

Or fates of nations decided by others unannounced, without the knowledge of the affected states or the nations most affected, as in the Sykes-Picot agreement, secret agreement in 1916, between the French and the British, when they decided to divide up the remnants of the Ottoman Empire, and it was only because the Bolsheviks discovered it a year later, and then it was made public.

Or change can be inflicted through open aggression and brute force. I do not like this situation, I am going to deal with you. Sheer force. Whether you like it or not, whether you can withstand it or not. Never mind the suffering. As it did for this region on 7 December 1941, when Japan attacked Pearl Harbor under their strategy for a Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere. And barely two months later, the hitherto impregnable "Gibraltar of the East", as we were referred to, fell, and Japanese occupation ensued in Singapore.

Were those events foreseeable? Perhaps, in hindsight.

I have been to the Pearl Harbor museum twice. It is fascinating every time I go there. I can spend hours there. They lay it out in wonderfully chronological order. There are actually two halls, one before the attack, one after. In retrospect, it is so logical that these countries would do what they did. You see the Japanese ambassador to the US writing his letter to Franklin D Roosevelt, and you understand why countries behaved as they did.

But the Pearl Harbor attack, that day in infamy, caught the US and Allied powers, even with their vast intelligence network, by surprise.

If you look at the military strategy of the Pearl Harbor attack – I come from MINDEF, so, I have some inkling of what military plans are – the Japanese Pearl Harbor attack, an audacious pincer attack. One on land, one for sea. Thousands of kilometres by sea. I want to control the Pacific. And yet, they were caught by surprise.

We sit here and we watch the events. Many Members of Parliament (MPs) have expressed how every week, there are different headlines, something that you have never see. No one can predict the future precisely, but the feel of change is in the air. What further surprises lie in store?

Seasoned columnists who have witnessed historically churning events liken our time to that before the First World War and ask if we are sleepwalking into our future. In the aftermath of World War I, four empires, some which had existed for hundreds of years, laid waste. It changed the map of the world – of borders, of alliances, of ethnic groups, of societies en masse.

For Europe, especially after the recent NATO meetings and the Munich Security Conference (MSC) – I was there, so I could feel the mood directly – there is presently great consternation.

The headlines reflected this. The Associated Press said, "NATO is in disarray." This was after the US announced that its security priorities lie elsewhere. The Wall Street Journal, "Planned US-Russia talks over Ukraine throw Europe into crisis." More dramatically, Politico asked, "Is this the end of NATO?"

The trans-Atlantic partnership has remained strong for more than a century despite great stresses, not least two World Wars. Only time will tell if these headlines and fears are accurate or over-reactions.

That is in Europe. But what about us in Asia? More pointedly, what is in store for Asia? That, to me, is the quintessential question for our time. That, to me, is the most important thing that we have to decide. Your residents on the ground will ask you, as MPs, what is in store?

I know that this is our Budget and our COS. We also know that this is an election year. But the answer to that question is going to occupy us for at least a decade. It is going to decide the fate of Singapore and Singaporeans for this generation.

All the headlines that you read – it is not business as usual. It is ground shaking, earth shattering. It is a political earthquake, with a tsunami coming. We do not know when the tsunami will occur. We know that it registers on the political Richter scale. All these examples is one point. You know something is coming, you do not know how to predict it accurately, when, in what shape and form.

But whatever comes, whatever comes, we must face our future resolutely. Singapore has thrived since our Independence because we took the world as it is and not what we wished it to be. We responded to daunting challenges as one nation, with grit, perseverance, sacrifice and hard realism. We must now do the same as we enter into uncharted waters.

Before 1965, we were not in charge of our own fate. So, we could have blamed other countries – the British or other large powers. But now, as an independent and sovereign nation, we Singaporeans have agency and can decide and do all we can to secure our future together. And certainly, building our own defences to protect our own interests must take priority. We count on no one else to protect Singapore, but ourselves.

Let me deal with the hows squarely. Because ultimately, it has to be a strong SAF. We are not a threat to anyone and wish all to be friends. But as the saying goes, strong fences – and I would add, defences – make good neighbours.

Mr Desmond Choo and Mr Shawn Huang pointed out the progress of the SAF. It is now a modern four Service military able to operate effectively across all domains of air, land, sea and digital, as Mr Neil Parekh also alluded to. But building capacity and capability for the SAF is a continual exercise. You either upgrade or regress.

In the interest of time, I will first name the big-ticket items, starting with conventional capabilities that some of you have asked for.

You remember in 2017, we started building four Invincible-class submarines. That programme is on track, with all four custom-made submarines for the Republic of Singapore Navy (RSN). German-made. It is the first time we have had custom-made. Previous submarines were bought. I do not know whether you refer to those submarines as second-hand or third-hand, but anyway, they were not custom-made for us. This is the first time that we custom-made them. They will be operational, all of them, by around 2028.

These submarines were manufactured in the icy waters there. I remember when then-Prime Minister Lee launched two submarines. One was delayed because of COVID-19. They had to bring out blankets and warmers for those of us on land. This was the launching. Just imagine how cold the waters were.

Two submarines have returned, are already plying our tropical waters and they are functioning well in our conditions. I think they are proven.

But four submarines are not optimal for a fleet. Submarines are subjected to more rigorous and frequent maintenance cycles, stringent checks as you can imagine, because they need to operate under intense pressure, literally. Sometimes, operational time is reduced relatively. This is why most navies that operate submarines have more than four – Australia, Indonesia, Vietnam, to name a few of our close neighbours.

Having proven that the Invincible-class submarines can perform to expectations in tropical waters, the SAF plans to procure two more submarines to make up a total of six as a steady state for our submarine fleet.

The Navy will also launch its first multi-role combat vessel (MRCV) later this year. They are going to replace our Victory-class corvettes, which have been around since 1989. So, calculate for yourself – nearly 35 years old.

The MRCVs are larger and have greater range than the Victory-class corvettes – about three times further. The MRCV is actually not one ship but a mothership with unmanned platforms. Some of you have spoken about unmanned platforms. This modern design incorporates that feature. Together with its suite of advanced sensors and combat systems, the MRCVs will strengthen our Navy's ability to safeguard our maritime interests.

That is the sea. Let us talk about the air. Our Fokker 50 maritime patrol aircraft are also due for replacement. Our Fokkers have served with distinction for three decades since 1993. The RSAF is now looking intently and evaluating appropriate replacements. Two possible ones: the Boeing P-8A and Airbus C295.

At last year's COS, I announced our decision to acquire eight more F-35As, in addition to the 12 F-35Bs we had previously announced. We have recently confirmed the purchase of these F-35As from the US and look forward to the establishment of our F-35 and F-16 fighter detachment at Ebbing Air National Guard Base.

It is not just that we buy the planes from the US, not that they acquiesce to us training in the US. These moves reflect the strength of our defence relationship with the US and the continued commitment to a multi-decade partnership. We thank the US for their support.

For the Army, we will have a new infantry fighting vehicle (IFV). So, I have finished the sea, the air, let us move on to the Army. The new infantry fighting vehicle, I think most of the MPs who were still serving SAF are from the Army here. You will have a new IFV. It will be called the Titan.

The Titan will still be wheeled, but for the first time, it will have its firepower upgraded with a 30 millimetre cannon as a remote weapon system. It will also be equipped with counter-Unmanned Aerial System capabilities.

The Army's High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS) – I think many of you would have read about it during the Russia-Ukrainian War. These were quite useful and effective – they, too, will be upgraded with more capable rockets.

With these added large-ticket items for air, land and sea, the SAF as a relatively small military would have been transformed into a state-of-the-art military with platforms comparable to advanced militaries elsewhere and fit for our security purposes.

But as some MPs would have alluded to, there is a common dictum, a cautionary caveat, that militaries must be careful that they do not arm themselves to "fight the last war". I take all your points, I accept them. There have been new developments that are going to impact the way militaries conduct their operations. I think that is wisdom. So, for the past decade, indeed, that is what we have been doing.

When you ask yourself, how do you respond to these new changes? For the militaries, it boils down to two things: structure and platforms.

If you do not have both, then you are not really serious about re-organising and meeting these demands. If you have not changed your structure, if you have not gotten new capabilities and platforms, then you have not been adequately responding. We need to reorganise the SAF, to equip it, to incorporate emerging technologies and capabilities.

Mr Vikram Nair and Mr Neil Parekh referred to this in terms of the DIS. I am glad that it reaffirms the confidence that was formed about the SAF. The DIS was formed in 2022 and indeed it is one culmination of efforts in the reorganisation so that they could better meet future needs and threats in the digital sphere. I am happy to report today that almost three years after its inception, the DIS is now ready to stand up two new commands.

Remember I said unless you have structure and a new platform, you really are not adapting. The fact that we can stand up two new commands reflects progress.

First, the SAF C4 and Digitalisation Command (SAFC4DC). It will have two centres: the Digital Ops-Tech Centre and the SAF Artificial Intelligence (AI) Centre. The mission for these new commands and centres is to bring to bear for the SAF the full effects of new digital hardware and software.

Let me explain that. In the prosecution of missions now, or previously, we will use mainly conventional capabilities. Yes, you would enhance it with software aspects, but in modern military affairs, the comparative advantage is how you meld the two and bring to effect the capabilities of both. That is the job of the new commands and centres.

The second new DIS command is the Defence Cyber Command (DCCOM), which will consolidate all cybersecurity operations and capabilities, and partner with whole-of-Government and industry to strengthen national cyber defence. The new command will have to deal with hostile digital threats against Singapore from state and non-state actors. Because as you can imagine, if anyone attacks our digital backbone, our essential services will be crippled. And it is obvious that as a small geographic entity, we are vulnerable. It will impact economic and social well-being and will have a direct impact even on our security forces – the SAF and the Home Team – because we have to operate in this country. We will be severely hampered.

We have redundancies but we have to protect our digital backbone. And that mission to deal with such external actors falls on the new command.

Mr Henry Kwek and Mr Vikram Nair asked about unmanned platforms. I am glad they did because this is something that we are doing serious work and intense work on reorganisation in all the Services. Because militaries must not only be able to integrate that new technology and force structure and operations, but counter and defend against these threats.

As some of you rightly alluded to, it is proven that drones will be part of modern warfare. It is only how much and whether you are prepared. A study by the Kyiv School of Economics showed that Ukraine is now capable of producing four million drones annually, a hundred-fold increase from before their war with Russia. And they are not producing it because they are under intense pressure; they know how useful it is. Drones have been used to target support, gather intelligence, strike operations, decoy, relay signals and many other functions.

And, in fact, the SAF has already progressed in the use of unmanned platforms. They are already deployed for operations. So, for example, in the Singapore Straits, the Unmanned Surface Vessels (USVs) conduct patrols now and these USVs – if you happen to be on a boat along the Singapore Straits, you can say hello to them – they are equipped with electro-optic devices, radars and a 12.7-millimetre weapon system. These USVs can issue audio-visual warnings. They use lights, sirens, long-range acoustics device, and where justified, they can fire shots with their remote gun system.

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are now becoming part and parcel of the soldier’s arsenal in the Army, very much like how scouts use binoculars and can tap in and with far greater range and precision. And so, commanders can tap into a common picture from these various drones, inputs from the unmanned platforms to fight more effectively and smarter.

But it is in the Air Force that the pace and scale of drones have grown exponentially. So much so, that the Air Force has found it necessary to reorganise and to establish a new UAS Warfare and Tactics Centre. This new centre will drive the development of UAS warfare and its integration with the other forces and working with industries and tech agencies. The Army will also establish the Drone Accelerator for Rapid Equipping (DARE) a similar office to scale up operations for UAVs and ground vehicles for its units across the Army.

If we can leverage on drones as platforms, on the flip side, the SAF will also need to build up its capabilities to defend against UASs. And in these small commercial UASs are easily procured on the open market, I think, Mr Vikram Nair alluded to it. They can be re-tooled as weapons to inflict harm and destruction, for example, terrorists could do that. They are commercially available; you re-tool them.

So, to meet this threat, the SAF will build new counter-UAS capabilities – a suite of sensors, jammers and weapon solutions to detect and neutralise smaller UASs, to add to our existing Island Air Defence capabilities. A newly established SAF Counter-UAS Development and Operations group will be responsible to guard against this threat in collaboration with other Government agencies.

I do not want to give the wrong impression that it is so easy and that there are comprehensive solutions to deal with all UASs. That would be a wrong impression and would not be telling you the honest truth. Small drones are, in fact, hard to detect. There is also, as some of the Members alluded to, Mr Vikram Nair alluded to an asymmetry of costs. So, let me give an example. You remember the situation that is going on now, it is called the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait, this is what connects the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, where the Houthis fired drones. If the aggressor fires 100 drones, it will cost about $15 million. But to defend against them would cost nearly $250 million; clearly unsustainable. The challenge is currently a focus of intense efforts everywhere, everyone is trying to find a cost-effective solution to the problem of mass small drones used for attack.

Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim spoke about how technology can disrupt militaries, and he is right. So, therefore, we must maintain our technological superiority, which includes the potential use of AI. MINDEF and the SAF needs to partner this, and I agree with the MPs who have spoken about this, that we need to partner with civilian entities and use appropriate crowdsourcing. So, for example, MINDEF’s Future Systems and Technology Directorate and the DSO National Laboratories have launched the AI Grand Challenge, in partnership with AI Singapore. The AI Grand Challenge has awarded funding to five teams to carry out research. The theme was “Robust AI” or “AI for Materials Discovery”. So, the idea is that, over time, the SAF can harvest good ideas for its needs.

And in fact, quite a number of emerging technologies are dual use, both civilian and military, with very quick adaptation cycles. So, for example, in the Russia-Ukraine war, an AI company was able to modify its commercial voice transcription to intercept Russia communications and automatically highlight key information to the Ukrainian armed forces.

To capitalise on such opportunities, the SAF has set up technology adaptation teams. Basically, you put combatants and engineers together, and their task is to adapt new technologies to the problems on the ground in quick and real time. And we actually tested these teams during the recent Exercise Wallaby. They had a practical problem where they needed to extend the range of communications, which they did by using a UAV fitted with a 5G base station to extend communications. So, that is an example.

All these new capabilities and structures will better prepare the SAF to defend Singapore, but it will come to nought if our soldiers are not committed or trained for their tasks. This was a recurrent theme by Mr Alex Yam, Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Ms Poh Li San, and I agree with them. The SAF indeed has put significant amounts of money to invest in training infrastructure. Some of the Members wanted an update, so let me do that now.

The SAFTI City Phase 1 has been available for training since October last year. Battalions are trained in urban operations and homeland security, and the initial feedback has been very positive. Our SAF soldiers can feel the difference immediately. Let me quote from one – 3SG Robin Teoh is from 5SIR – and he said, “Training in SAFTI City as a motorised infantry unit has been a game changer. The urban environment feels real, like stepping into an actual city. Moving and driving through tight alleyways, clearing high-rise buildings and adapting to different scenarios pushes us to think fast and stay sharp.” It is gratifying because his reaction is exactly what we build SAFTI City for.

We will build more of such facilities, and I think some Members wanted to know what more we can do, so that we can enhance realism for effective training. Pulau Tekong will be expanded to stretch 10 kilometres in distance. We know 10 kilometres is not a huge stretch, but for Pulau Tekong, it is. For Singapore, it is. And we will find some way of stretching it so that you can make longer circuits. So, it will act as the Army’s second manoeuvre training area for soldiers as well as combat vehicles, because that is important as the Army becomes increasingly platform-based.

As Mr Chong Kee Hiong alluded to, it is overseas where we need to leverage large training spaces. And the Shoalwater Bay Training Area has been expanded with many new and better facilities. As a result of the expansion over the years, we were able to conduct the largest edition of Exercise Wallaby ever last year – over 6,200 personnel and 490 platforms. In Singapore, I can have 6,000 soldiers and 500 platforms but that is about it. They will not have much room to move if you gather them together. But in Shoalwater Bay, you can. And they were tested to the limits, with the realism, because they were free to manoeuvre armour and armoured infantry, and the soldiers can feel it. They can feel that this is realism.

In the steady state, we are going to do more. After the development of the adjacent Greenvale Training Area, the SAF will have a combined training area 10 times the size of Singapore. This combined training area will allow us to deploy up to 14,000 personnel and 2,400 vehicles annually, so that the SAF can exercise its full range of capabilities, land, sea, air and digital.

Other countries are invested in our defence. We thank the government and people of Australia for these opportunities. We look forward to commemorating the 10th anniversary of Singapore’s Comprehensive Strategic Partnership (CSP) with Australia this year and to explore further ambitious and strategic areas of cooperation.

Apart from infrastructure, we are doing more to recognise the contributions of our servicemen. Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How and Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad will talk about this. There will be a new SAFRA Clubhouse in Bayshore.

These investments to build our defence capabilities must be treated as precious resources. Through them, we turn our people’s hard-earned monies into tangible benefits, tangible bulwarks to protect Singapore.

Mr Don Wee asked for financial projections. Let me give a straight answer. This financial expenditure is projected to be around $23.4 billion. It is a 12.4% increase from last year. It is sizeable but it reflects a catch-up of projects deferred or disrupted due to COVID-19, we are still catching up, including those impacted by supply chain disruptions in recent years. But going forward – the last three years we have been playing catch up – we expect smaller increases year-on-year.

Even so, over the past decade, defence spending has stayed within the range of 3% of our GDP. Let me thank all Members of this House for their unwavering and steady support for the defence Budget and it has allowed us to build the SAF to what it is today.

I expect the growth in defence spending to taper down from FY2026 and keep within this 3% of GDP range over the next decade, of course, barring any major conflicts or severe economic uncertainty. But given the rapid changes in our external environment, I think, we will have to continually monitor the situation closely and if the need arises, we must be prepared to invest more in further strengthening our capabilities.

Miss Rachel Ong, Mr Shawn Huang and Mr Henry Kwek talked about us needing to be self-reliant and at the same time, expanding our network of friends and partners where interests align. As geopolitics becomes more unpredictable, it will affect our state-to-state relations with other countries, and that will also impact defence capabilities. MINDEF takes reference from our overall foreign policy.

Some partnerships are historical, like the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA). It is now in its 54th year. There is a strong ongoing commitment from all partners. The UK’s Prime Minister has announced that the UK Carrier Strike Group will be deployed to this region this year to take part in the FPDA exercise.

With Indonesia, the Defence Cooperation Agreement (DCA) has been in force, some Members wanted updates, let me give them now. With Indonesia, the DCA has been in force since March last year and it provides a strong basis for us to promote closer interactions between our defence establishments, especially in new areas of defence cooperation. Our two leaders met in November 2024, Prime Minister Wong and President Prabowo, and both expressed support for more military engagement between the Tentara Nasional Indonesia (TNI) and the SAF. President Prabowo invited the SAF to train in Indonesia, particularly Kalimantan, to train with the TNI and we will be taking up their offer as well as the joint air training. Both Air Forces, for example, will conduct the inaugural bilateral air patrol under the Singapore-Indonesia Coordinated Patrol (PATKOR INDOPURA) later this year.

For Malaysia, we have good relations. It is our closest neighbour. Malaysia is at the helm of ASEAN this year and we will support their chairmanship as they uphold ASEAN centrality and unity.

For example, at the recent ASEAN Defence Ministers' Meeting (ADMM) Retreat, Singapore and Thailand introduced the protection of critical underwater infrastructure. Some MPs talked about this, whether it is energy grids or communications, that if they are disrupted, it affects nations. Singapore and Thailand introduced a paper, Malaysia, as Chairman, strongly endorsed it and for the full concept paper to be formally tabled.

We talk about US and China. Our defence relationships with them. They continue to grow and we enjoy regular high-level exchanges with both countries.

On China, I co-chaired the Singapore-China Defence Ministers' Dialogue, this was in May last year and I did it on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue with then-recently appointed China Minister of National Defense Admiral (ADM) Dong Jun. In September last year, I was invited to speak at their 11th Beijing Xiangshan Forum and also had a dialogue session, this was alongside, it was not part of the Xiangshan Forum, but we organised a dialogue session with their senior People's Liberation Army (PLA) commanders in their National Defence University (NDU) – the pinnacle group. There, I met ADM Dong again. I also had a bilateral call with Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission GEN Zhang Youxia. For those of you who know the PLA structure, it is a privilege, and my delegation and I acknowledge and appreciate the privileged access to both Vice Chairman Zhang and the pinnacle commander class at their NDU. During these meetings, we affirmed the good military-to-military interactions that we have through various exercises and these high-level meetings and we plan to step-up further interactions.

The US is a Major Security Cooperation Partner, our collaborations with their Department of Defense and military are extensive. We are not a treaty ally, but it is plain that our military engagements and mutual benefits have grown over the years. Singapore is thankful that our pilots have trained in the US for many years since the early 1970s. All our high-end fighting air platforms – the F-16s, F-15s, and soon F-35s – are manufactured by and purchased from US companies, alongside other high-end weapon platforms. Singapore invests heavily into our own defence, and the US appreciates this fact.

The US also has a lead in dual-use technology that Singapore can benefit from. Under former US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, our two Ministries signed new agreements to strengthen cooperation in defence innovation, in data, analytics and AI.

I look forward to further strengthening our defence relations under the Trump Administration. Members in this House may remember that the Protocol of Amendment for the 1990 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the US was signed by President Trump and then-Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong in 2019, during President Trump's first term. This MOU bears some detailing, because it is important. This MOU, I said that in 2019 it was a Protocol of Amendment, so the primary MOU, which was signed in 1990 by our founding Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew and then-US Vice President Dan Quayle. It is important to know about this because it remains a cornerstone document for our military ties and engagements, wherein we facilitate rotations of US ships and planes through our military bases in Singapore. The 2019 Protocol of Amendment extended the 1990 MOU for another 15 years.

This 1990 MOU continues to underpin Singapore-US defence relations. During my call with Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, it occurred very soon after his confirmation, we both reiterated and affirmed our commitment to this long-standing defence relationship which has benefited both Singapore and US. Secretary Hegseth was very familiar with the details of our past and present military engagements. We also discussed further projects briefly and I invited him to the Shangri-La Dialogue and look forward to deepening our defence relations together.

As our defence capabilities grow, the SAF can do its part to help internationally. The SAF's Changi Regional Humanitarian Assistance and Disaster Relief Coordination Centre (RHCC) works closely with both governmental and non-governmental organisations for humanitarian assistance. In March last year, RHCC coordinated a delivery of aid supplies to Gaza via Jordan and used our A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT) aircraft, a C-130 transport aircraft and a commercial plane.

In September again, it also coordinated the delivery of aid supplies to communities affected by Typhoon Yagi in Lao PDR, Myanmar, and Vietnam. Earlier this month, the RHCC worked on similar efforts to deliver another tranche of relief supplies to Gaza through Jordan using our MRTT. This was to alleviate the humanitarian situation during the lead-up to Ramadan.

The SAF is making concrete plans to provide further medical assistance to the people in Gaza. We have spoken to our counterparts in the Middle East. It is not safe now to deploy SAF medical facilities in Gaza. The risks are high and unlikely to subside for some time to come. We do not want to put SAF soldiers and civilian volunteers in harm's way there. But there are other options in the region, whether it is in Egypt, Jordan or the United Arab Emirates (UAE), as more civilians from Gaza have gone to receive treatment over the past months. We have already seen that and the SAF medical teams, together with the Ministry of Health (MOH) medical teams, may be able to deploy to such a place in the coming months.

Apart from natural causes, chemical, biological, radiological and explosive (CBRE) threats can precipitate national and humanitarian crises. We all saw this during SARS and COVID-19. By extension, we should also realise that bioterrorism is a real threat. MINDEF/SAF established the Network of ASEAN CBR Defence Experts when we were ADMM and ADMM-Plus Chair in 2018 to deal with this threat. That network was useful. We conducted table-top exercises, training workshops, lab visits and created a harmonised set of guidelines to sample and analyse and to report. This was done last year.

We think it is time now to build a physical centre and this will greatly facilitate cooperation. So, that is what we are going to do. MINDEF/SAF will therefore establish a regional CBR Centre in Singapore. It will strengthen and complement this network. We will work alongside RHCC, partner civilian agencies and military agencies across ASEAN and international organisations.

I also announced in 2021, that MINDEF/SAF will build a Biosafety Level-4 lab. I think the reaction to that was quite muted and I think because it was after COVID-19. We all saw the need for it and this facility will complete construction in 2026 and, in line with WHO and MOH guidelines, it will be certified as a Maximum Containment Facility (MCF), the highest grade, to be able to handle bio-agents that are deemed highly contagious and lethal, such as the Ebola virus.

That MCF will provide us with the capability to assess the nature of an outbreak, isolate, identify the bioagent, and develop early disease control measures. That is a significant capability. Just imagine if the equivalent of a Grade 4 bioagent was used and you are testing it in a Biosafety Lab 3. It risks everyone being contaminated and you will not be able to test it. So that BSL4 facility, I think, will strengthen our capabilities against bioterrorism.

Mr Chairman, as the World around us becomes more unpredictable and changes, the more we need to keep the strongest commitment to strengthen our own defences and, if needed, we must be willing to do more. Singapore celebrates 60 years of Independence this year. With the support of Members of this House, we will continue to build a strong SAF, to protect Singapore and keep Singapore as a sovereign and independent nation, and to ensure our peace and prosperity for another generation. My Senior Ministers of State, my colleagues, will continue to answer the rest of your questions.

Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How.

Mr Chairman, Defence Minister Dr Ng Eng Hen described our geopolitical environment as being marked by heightened tensions in recent years. Across generations, our NSmen's dedication has ensured that Singapore remains ready to face an increasingly complex security environment. We do not take for granted the strong support for NS that we have. Today, I will outline ongoing efforts to further strengthen NS and highlight new initiatives to enhance its effectiveness and to recognise our NSmen's contributions.

Let me begin by how we seek to optimise the contributions of every soldier.

Mr Chong Kee Hiong and Mr Mohd Fahmi asked how we are ensuring NSmen are deployed safely to meaningful operational roles. In 2021, I shared that the SAF is redesigning the way we medically classify our servicemen, shifting away from the binary classification of servicemen as either being Combat Fit or Non-Combat Fit. The new system will assess each serviceman on a more granular scale, allowing better characterisation of their medical fitness and functional capacity so that they can be better matched to more operationally effective roles. This is a fundamental change that we are carefully studying and determining how to implement.

Over the past two years, we have been conducting functional assessments for pre-enlistees with selected orthopaedic conditions, in addition to the standard medical screening. Since 2022, some 300 pre-enlistees have undergone selected functional assessments, and 230, or about two-thirds of them, were able to contribute more effectively over a wider range of roles. This is heartening because it opens up more deployment options for our servicemen. It also allows the country as a whole to make best use of as many of our servicemen as possible in the defence of this nation.

The SAF has also continued to leverage technology and redesign jobs to expand deployment opportunities. Since 2021, more than 1,000 servicemen have taken on important operational roles, such as Combat Medics, Infantry Carrier Vehicle Operators and Military Police, which they would not have been able, or been eligible for if the roles were not redesigned.

Mr Fahmi asked for an update on how we are continuously investing in the skills of our servicemen. Since 2018, we have partnered Institutes of Higher Learning on Work-Learn Schemes that allow Full-time NSFs to attain diplomas or partial university credits, while serving for a duration of three to four years. This enables NSFs to fulfil their academic aspirations and contribute meaningfully to the SAF. Since its inception, over 650 NSFs have enrolled in nine Work-Learn Schemes, serving in roles, such as Cyber Specialists, Air Force Technicians and Naval Warfare Systems Specialists.

We are also looking upstream to tap on the potential of pre-enlistees. Last year, we introduced new schemes for polytechnic students to enlist and serve in the SAF while fulfilling their final-year internship requirements. We opened it to students in aerospace electronics, cybersecurity, electrical and electronic engineering and information technology courses. Most recently, we partnered Temasek Polytechnic on the SAF-Polytechnic Sponsorship for Naval Warfare System Experts, where those selected will serve five years, fulfilling their polytechnic internship requirements, while picking up relevant skills. The take-up rate for these schemes have been promising and this will be expanded to other polytechnics and vocations in due course.

Mr Shawn Huang asked for an update on how we are tapping on the rich skills and expertise of our Operationally Ready NSmen. Under the Enhanced Expertise Deployment Scheme (EEDS), we have redeployed more than 600 NSmen over the past three years by tapping on their civilian expertise and qualifications.

One example is ME4(A) He Jianyuan who had served in the Air Force during his full-time NS. He was redeployed as an Assistant Engineering Officer in the Navy in view of his civilian expertise, leveraging a decade's worth of his marine engineering knowledge to assist the Chief Engineering Officer in mechanical and engineering operations.

Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about our efforts to improve the operational effectiveness of our Servicemen. We have been attaching SAF medics to the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) under a collaborative programme which allows them to respond to critical incidents, gain hands-on experience and contribute to saving lives in high-pressure emergency situations.

For example, Lance Corporal (LCP) Chen Anhong was attached to the SCDF's paramedic team at Alexandra Fire Station for six months. During the attachment, he responded to emergency calls daily, including a traffic accident with multiple casualties. As a first responder, LCP Chen administered life-saving treatment to casualties before they were conveyed to the hospital. Such experiences sharpen our medics' clinical skills and ensure that they are well-prepared to respond to emergencies.

We will enhance the SAF's medical responsiveness by acquiring a new fleet of ambulances, which are equipped with mechanical chest compression devices and powered stretchers, similar to the ambulances used by SCDF. This will alleviate the challenges faced by a lean ambulance crew, consequently resulting in enhanced patient care.

NSFs in the Island Defence Task Force will also be equipped with non-lethal pepper-spray projectile guns. This avails a more calibrated response to manage security incidents for better operational outcomes.

Maintaining operational effectiveness is crucial and this does not always come easy. With respect to Assoc Prof Jamus Lim's question on aircraft noise, MINDEF had previously shared with Members how local flight training is critical to our pilots' continued proficiency and operational readiness, and the measures RSAF has taken to reduce public inconveniences arising from aircraft noise. For example, where possible, local flying is conducted over waters rather than land and avoids residential areas during take-off, landing and transit to-and-from training areas. The RSAF also flies at higher altitudes and lower airspeeds over land, to minimise noise to housing estates.

The Air Force also adjusts its training tempo during selected periods, such as the national exams. And this is over and above the training that we conduct overseas, which obviously does not result in noise over Singapore.

While we are aware of experimental noise-reducing aerospace technology, such as fin-lined nozzles, engine insulation and aircraft fuselage shaping, there are, to our knowledge, currently no aircraft manufacturers that have certified or successfully incorporated the use of these technologies in the manufacturing of military aircraft. Our Air Force will continue to monitor the development of such technologies and whether any can meet the operational requirements in a cost-effective way.

So, I want to reassure Assoc Prof Jamus Lim that we are doing our best in order to ensure that we can defend our skies, protect our country and, at the same time, minimise the inconvenience to Singaporeans.

I spoke earlier about the initiatives to strengthen NS. Now, I would like to elaborate on how upholding a strong safety culture in the SAF remains a priority, which is something that Mr Patrick Tay asked about. The Inspector-General's Office (IGO), established in 2019, conducts 40 to 50 audits and system reviews every year to ensure adherence to safety protocols in SAF Formations. For example, arising from IGO's focus on driving safety, we designed "safe-to-fail" driving circuits that allow our transport operators to experience driving transgressions safely. Such circuits, coupled with driver monitoring systems installed in all SAF vehicles, have enabled us to correct improper driving habits and to ensure safer driving. Likewise, NSmen training now incorporates safety sharing and incident reporting in both the planning stages and debriefs, reflecting greater emphasis on safety.

To help the SAF benchmark against best practices and standards in training safety, the fourth ERPSS, inaugurated in May 2024, will continue to review selected SAF Formations' training. We are confident that the ERPSS, like in previous panels, will offer valuable insights to shape improvements in our safety systems.

Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim asked how technology is used to improve training safety. To sustain this strong safety culture, SAF has leveraged digitalisation to provide insights into safety performance, allowing safety efforts to be more targeted and more effective in accident prevention. We will build on the foundation of the SAF's Enterprise Safety Information System, which is a platform for Servicemen to submit safety reports and access safety operating manuals. The system will be upgraded with AI-enabled business processes and personalisation. The Army also leveraged AI to develop a model that recognises and detects safety transgressions in activities, such as live-firing in ranges and driving.

Beyond training safety, the psychological well-being of our Servicemen is just as important. Ms Joan Pereira and Dr Wan Rizal asked for an update. Between 2020 and 2022, Care Hubs were set up in Basic Military Training (BMT) Centres to support NSFs during their transition to NS. To sustain the delivery of care, we piloted the deployment of Roving Care Teams last year, and these teams comprised psychologists and counsellors, to partner unit commanders to enhance the immediacy of care for Servicemen after BMT. In 2024, our Mental Health Office's well-being campaign focused on fostering a positive workplace culture across MINDEF/SAF. A new mental health e-learning module was launched to equip Servicemen with the knowledge and skills to build a positive workplace culture and offer peer support.

The SAF is also applying evidence-based best practices to strengthen psychological resilience. The Army Resilience Centre (AReC), established in March 2024, partners Army training centres and units in implementing structured resilience-training curriculums and redesigning training programmes to bolster Servicemen's mental resilience and adjustment to military life. AReC has implemented these in BMT, and we have seen higher training participation and Servicemen reporting improved ability to cope with challenging tasks during military training.

Apart from enhancing NSmen's operational effectiveness and sustaining a strong safety culture, we also want to improve the NS experience. We will do more to facilitate the enlistment process. MINDEF is collaborating with GovTech and the Public Service Division to incorporate pre-enlistment features on the LifeSG app to complement existing MINDEF touchpoints. Since May 2024, information guides on preparation for NS have been made available to pre-enlistees and their parents on the LifeSG app and website. This year, we will progressively roll out personalised features on the app to pre-enlistees commencing NS registration, when they turn 16 and a half years old. This includes push notifications to provide timely reminders on key tasks, and a milestone tracker which tracks their progress from NS registration to enlistment, providing information, such as their Physical Employment Standard (PES) status as well as enlistment dates.

Members who are NSmen would also be familiar with the OneNS app and web portal released last April. Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked about the enhancements. NSmen can now access NS digital services with fewer disruptions. NSmen can submit applications for deferment of In-Camp Trainings (ICT) on the platform. The OneNS Portal is constantly enhanced to address feedback from Servicemen through surveys submitted after their NS activities in order to improve the user experience. In March 2024, the Smart Mobilisation system, which digitises mobilisation status in real-time, was onboarded to the OneNS app for selected SAF units. This will be extended to all SAF units by the end of the year. We will continue to enhance OneNS, so that Servicemen can access their ICT records on-the-go and utilise their NS credits more conveniently.

Ms Jean See asked for updates about the new Central Manpower Base (CMPB). Last year, I shared with Members that the new CMPB was under construction. This new CMPB, located opposite Cashew Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station, will be an integrated one-stop service centre consolidating Servicemen's various NS administrative needs. This includes completing medical screenings, attending NS fitness activities at the all-weather Fitness Conditioning Centre, as well as purchasing NS necessities.

The new CMPB will also house the second Regional Health Hub (RHH), which will span two levels. And that RHH will consolidate key healthcare facilities into one location. Today, a pre-enlistee with pre-existing medical conditions will have to visit multiple locations on different days for his medical classification test and specialist reviews. At RHH, which will come up at the new CMPB, this pre-enlistee will be able to complete his medical assessments in a single visit, with specialist appointments scheduled on the same day. An improved queue management system will also reduce waiting times. By streamlining these medical processes, the hub is expected to serve around 200 Servicemen daily, ensuring prompt and comprehensive healthcare support throughout their NS journey.

Beyond consolidating NS-related administrative needs, the new CMPB also functions as a community space. The public can access exercise facilities, such as an outdoor running path, fitness zone and even a soccer field. Residents who live nearby will have access to amenities, such as a childcare centre, a café and a food court that will operate even in the evenings and on weekends. The new CMPB will open progressively from the middle of 2025.

I have covered how MINDEF/SAF will continue to enhance the NS experience and would like to wrap up my speech by underlining our efforts to recognise our Servicemen's contributions to the defence and security of Singapore, which Ms Denise Phua asked about.

Members will recall that in November last year, MINDEF and the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) disbursed $200 worth of NS LifeSG credits to 1.2 million past and present NSmen. These credits can be used for a variety of essential goods and services. Over 77% of eligible NSmen have made at least one transaction using their NS LifeSG credits. I am glad that our NSmen have found these credits helpful.

Mr Gerald Giam shared his views on how NS should be value-accretive and suggested some ways to do so. As I shared with Members last year, we fully recognise and value our NSFs' contributions to the defence of this country and for which there is an NS allowance which recognises those contributions.

Beyond recognition packages, each NSF receives a monthly allowance that supports his personal upkeep and recognises his service. We regularly review the NS allowances so that they remain adequate. The last adjustment was made in July 2023. Following our latest review, we will raise our NSFs' monthly allowances by between $35 to $75 from 1 July this year. This is an increase of about 4% to 5% for most NSFs. With the change, NSFs will receive a monthly allowance of between $790 and $1,955, depending on their rank and vocation.

Another key effort in supporting our NSFs is to facilitate their transition to work and studies after completing NS. This includes helping NSFs develop skills that can apply in their civilian life after NS. A study conducted by the Institute of Policy Studies in 2022 found that seven in 10 Singaporeans agreed that NS was beneficial for learning skills useful for civilian employment. Beyond practical skills, about nine in 10 agreed that NS was important for personal character development, such as instilling discipline and values, and transforming our NSFs from “boys to men”.

Mr Alex Yam asked how we have enhanced NSFs’ employability and supported their transition into the workforce and further education. Apart from the Certificate of Service package that documents the skills and competencies they gained during NS, the SAF also works with SkillsFuture Singapore to accredit certifiable skills under the national Workforce Skills Qualification (WSQ) system. For example, NSFs can receive accreditation for the skills they acquire through BMT and specialist courses, such as in leadership, medical and logistics.

In addition, since 2022, MINDEF and MHA have partnered the NTUC Learning Hub and the NTUC Employment and Employability Institute to enhance the SkillsFuture@NS programmes. NSFs attend the SkillsFuture@NS Fairs which, aside from providing job opportunities in growing industries, also feature workshops that provide them with resources and tools for skills planning. For NSFs who prefer self-directed training, the Learning eXperience Platform (LXP) offers a range of courses from data analytics to self-management and interpersonal communications. These are transferrable skills that NSFs can apply in their transition to work and studies. Since Nov 2022, about half of our NSFs have signed up for accounts. We continue to encourage more of them to sign up to benefit from this resource.

Mr Chairman, as we look forward, MINDEF/SAF’s commitment to NS and to our NSmen remains steadfast. We will continue to enhance the NS experience, maximise the contributions of our NSmen, and strengthen recognition for their service. Most importantly, we will uphold the safety and well-being of every soldier, ensuring that they return home safely to their loved ones.

I thank all NSmen for their sacrifices and service. Together, we will keep Singapore safe and secure for generations to come.

Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad.

Mr Chairman, Minister for Defence Dr Ng briefly mentioned SAFRA Bayshore earlier in his speech, allow me to provide more details.

SAFRA was set up in 1972 to recognise NSmen and build bonds among servicemen and their families. I cannot emphasise enough the role that the families play in supporting our servicemen through their NS commitments. Today, the seven SAFRA clubhouses across Singapore provide servicemen and their families with affordable recreational facilities and lifestyle offerings.

I am pleased to announce that MINDEF will build a new clubhouse in the Bayshore area, to better serve our servicemen and their families in the East. It will have direct access to the MRT, which will provide greater convenience to users. Ms Denise Phua had asked for an update and she will be pleased to know that SAFRA Bayshore will be SAFRA’s largest clubhouse, about 50% larger than the average SAFRA clubhouse, and will offer unique family, entertainment and recreational facilities. We plan for SAFRA Bayshore to be ready in a few years’ time, and to replace our oldest clubhouse at SAFRA Tampines, built in 1988.

Dr Ng and Senior Minister of State Mr Heng also updated the House on our efforts to ensure that the SAF remains effective and ready to defend Singapore, and this is amidst a more challenging geopolitical environment. We must also be prepared for the risks of various kinds of disruptions caused by climate change, cyber-attacks or civil emergencies. Many of these disruptions are not limited to the military domain but have impacts on the wider society.

To answer Mr Saktiandi Supaat’s questions, the threat of such far-reaching disruptions is part of the reason why Total Defence, our concept of a whole-of-society defence, remains as relevant and useful today as it was in 1984, when we first started Total Defence.

Looking back, some of the disruptions we face today – food, water, and power disruptions – are similar to those we faced back in 1984. However, as our lives became more interconnected and fast-paced, these disruptions have the potential to be more severe and more far-reaching than before.

Other sources of disruption are more recent, such as disruptions caused by cyberattacks on critical infrastructure, or extreme weather arising from climate change. We have experienced some of these disruptions in the past, and we must be prepared for such disruptions in the future.

The six pillars of Total Defence – military, economic, social, civil, digital and psychological – working in concert have allowed us to respond to different crises that jeopardised Singapore’s future over the past four decades. These pillars provide us with a strong foundation for our defence and based on a public poll that we conducted last year, we are glad that most Singaporeans are willing to partner with us, to play their part in bringing Total Defence into action.

However, the same poll found that Singaporeans were less confident about our preparedness to withstand crises and disruptions. As such, MINDEF/SAF has been working with Singaporeans to strengthen community resilience and readiness for disruptions, particularly though Exercise SG Ready.

Mr Alex Yam and Mr Lim Biow Chuan asked about Exercise SG Ready and MINDEF’s efforts in strengthening societal resilience. Last year, we conducted the first Exercise SG Ready, to prepare Singaporeans for disruptions to food and water resources.

I reported last year that over 800 organisations participated in simulated disruptions of our water, our food and our power supplies, as well as cyber disruptions. The positive response has rallied more organisations to come on board this year. Over the past two weeks, MINDEF, together with the Energy Market Authority, conducted the second edition of Exercise SG Ready, focused on enhancing community preparedness for power disruptions and cyberattacks.

This year, over 1,200 organisations participated in the exercise, including schools, communities, businesses and Government agencies. Over 600 participating organisations also took the opportunity to exercise their business continuity plans. For example, Senoko Energy simulated a total blackout of their power plant, where all its generators were shut down and restarted using back-up generators. Several multinational and local financial institutions also reviewed their readiness plans through a Table-Top Exercise organised by Quantedge Capital.

Close to 200 organisations also took part in a coordinated phishing exercise, of which half were small and medium enterprises (SMEs).

This year’s exercise was also unique in spotlighting the need to care for the vulnerable segments of society during major disruptions, as part of SG60. For example, corporates like HP Inc. have adopted Active Ageing Centres to support seniors in times of crises, ensuring that no one is left behind.

MINDEF also supported the Singapore Association for the Deaf in developing sign-language educational videos on emergency preparedness for the Deaf community, to ensure that they are aware and prepared for cyber or power disruptions.

Aside from disruptions caused by accidents or malicious actors, we also have to prepare for the risk of disruptions arising from climate change. Climate change is not just an existential threat for a low-lying island like Singapore, its effects are being felt today in the form of extreme weather events. 2024 was one of the hottest years on record, and in January, we felt the effects of climate change in the form of prolonged rain and flash floods because of the monsoon surge.

To prepare our community for disruptions caused by such extreme weather, we conducted a community Table-Top Exercise with PUB in November last year. The event brought together over 50 grassroots leaders, residents, youths and business representatives to discuss an extreme flooding scenario, and how to plan and prepare for such a scenario, in partnership with community groups. We will continue to hold more of such exercises to increase our community preparedness and resilience, bringing together the experience of our community leaders, the experience of our business representatives and the energy of our youths. These exercises covered some of the likely disruptions that we may encounter in the coming years, and I am glad that many Singaporeans today are now more prepared to face these disruptions.

Beyond preparing Singaporeans for disruptions caused by climate change, MINDEF/SAF is also part of the Singapore Government’s sustainability efforts to safeguard Singapore’s future. To reduce our carbon emissions growth, we had committed in 2021 to deploy more solar panels in SAF camps and bases, to achieve a target of 50 mega-watt peak of solar capacity by 2025, equivalent to the annual electricity consumption of 13,000 4-room Housing and Development Board (HDB) flats.

Over the past three years, we have been installing rooftop solar panels in all suitable SAF camps, as part of HDB’s Solar Nova programme. By the end of this year, we will have rooftop solar panels in most of our camps. On top of that, we will be building a solar farm within Sembawang Air Base this year. The solar farm will comprise 18 mega-watt peak solar photovoltaic systems and will generate energy equivalent to the annual electricity consumption of 4,700 four-room HDB flats. This will lead to cost savings of approximately $1.9 million a year for the SAF and bring us closer to achieving our emissions reduction target for 2030.

The locations for these solar panels were carefully selected to ensure that our operational effectiveness would not be affected. This included detailed studies to ensure that the glare from the solar panels would not pose a danger to military aircraft. We will continue to expand solar deployment to other MINDEF/SAF camps and premises where operationally feasible.

We are also on track to achieving our other sustainability targets, including a 10% reduction in water and energy utilisation and a 30% reduction in Waste Disposal Index. For example, the RSAF has built a super low energy flight simulator in Tengah Airbase, which consumes up to 40% less energy than previous designs. The Chinook wash shed, which uses up to 60% less water per wash this time. In 2024, the estimated amount of water saved was equivalent to the average daily amount of water used by about 1,500 four-room HDB flats.

We have also implemented trials of the Smart Utilities Metering System at three SAF camps, with good results of up to 10% reduction in electricity consumption. We will begin rolling them out in all SAF camps and bases in the next few years, which will further help us to maximise the resource efficiency of our buildings and infrastructure.

Mr Don Wee asked about how MINDEF is investing resources to contribute to sustainability. Through these initiatives, I would assure Members that MINDEF/SAF is committed to achieving our sustainability targets in line with the Singapore Green Plan 2030.

Chairman, looking forward, it is pertinent that we continue to partner all Singaporeans to strengthen our collective commitment to Total Defence, so as to safeguard Singapore’s future. We need to continue to advocate for and engage Singaporeans on the need for Total Defence, to build a strong, secure and cohesive nation.

Mr Chong Kee Hiong asked for a summary of our initiatives last year to commemorate 40 years of Total Defence. Aside from improving our community resilience through Exercise SG Ready, we also focused on inspiring Singaporeans to act and energising our Total Defence practitioners. Let me give you an update on the key initiatives.

From February to October last year, we conducted a Total Defence Exhibition at 52 locations around Singapore, where we showcased examples of Singaporeans putting Total Defence in action. Over 300,000 Singaporeans were encouraged to reflect and make pledges in support of Total Defence.

We also engaged and energised over 300 National Education and Total Defence practitioners through the inaugural Total Defence Convention, organised jointly with the National University of Singapore. Practitioners from Government agencies, educational institutions, community groups and businesses were able to come together to exchange best practices, network and discuss ideas around the theme of "Building Societal Resilience and Readiness in Crises and Disruptions".

This year, we will continue to engage specific groups to strengthen community resilience while engaging all Singaporeans to strengthen commitment to Total Defence.

One of the ways we will do this is through the Advisory Council on Community Relations in Defence (ACCORD), which Miss Rachel Ong spoke about.

ACCORD runs a wide range of community outreach initiatives, bringing society together to champion and advocate for Singapore's defence and for NS. Some MPs such as Mr Don Wee, Ms He Ting Ru, Mr Neil Parekh and Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim are also active members of ACCORD. ACCORD has existing programmes reaching out to pre-enlistees, youths, new citizens, Permanent Residents (PRs), national servicemen, families and women.

This year, ACCORD will focus on engaging businesses, particularly SMEs, leveraging on the memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed between MINDEF and the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) last month. Under the agreement, the SBF will conduct activities to engage businesses in support of Total Defence and national resilience and will conduct cybersecurity training and exercises for businesses to strengthen their digital defence and resilience.

Since 2021, ACCORD has also been conducting virtual visits to the Basic Military Training Centre (BMTC) for Singaporean families residing overseas, ensuring that both pre-enlistees and their parents have greater access to NS information and feel more connected to the NS journey. Following good feedback from the attendees, we will open the virtual visits to all pre-enlistees enlisting in 2026 along with their families to allow more family members to take part in the BMTC tour and understand more about the importance of NS.

Miss Rachel Ong also asked about how we are encouraging and enabling conversations about Total Defence, especially with our youths.

One way we do so is through our MOU with Temasek Foundation, which was recently renewed to provide cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillator (AED) training as well as psychological first aid certification training for all nine uniformed groups. Over the past two years, over 10,000 cadets have undergone CPR-AED training and have been equipped with emergency preparedness skills to react to critical medical emergencies in the community.

We will extend this initiative for an additional year to continue equipping cadets from uniformed groups with valuable knowledge to identify and respond effectively to medical emergencies. Such initiatives strengthen our community resilience and our readiness for crises.

We also want to continue strengthening our engagement of Singaporeans through presenting our defence stories and messages in new and exciting ways.

Dr Wan Rizal asked for an update on our MINDEF/SAF museums. Last August, our Singapore Air Force Museum was handed over to Defence Collective Singapore to operate alongside the Singapore Discovery Centre and Singapore Navy Museum.

The Singapore Air Force Museum will undergo a refresh this year to update its galleries and introduce more engaging and immersive programmes. Beyond the fleet of aircraft on display, the refreshed museum will feature precious artefacts and equipment from the early days of the RSAF, telling the story of the growth and innovation of our Air Force. The public can look forward to visiting the refreshed museum in early 2026.

Looking further ahead, we can look forward to the re-opening of the Army Museum of Singapore in Jurong in 2027 after it completes a major revamp and the opening of the NS Gallery in 2028. These refreshed museums will inspire visitors to defend what it means to be Singaporean. This is part of our overall effort to explore new and innovative ways to expand our reach and put Total Defence into action.

This brings me to my last point – encouraging innovation in support of Total Defence, which Mr Gan Thiam Poh asked about.

For the past three years, I have mentioned the Total Defence Sandbox as our flagship initiative to call for and implement ideas from Singaporeans on how the community can put Total Defence in action. Through the programme, we have received a total of 258 innovative proposals.

This year, I would like to highlight the Total Defence-themed hackathon YouthxHack as an initiative that empowers our youth to put Total Defence into action.

The four-day event organised by Cyber Youth Singapore last September involved over 160 participants across 36 teams coming up with innovative ideas to strengthen the digital, social and economic pillars of Total Defence. Let me highlight one example.

In response to the Hackathon's challenge to enable the public to distinguish between trustworthy and malicious interactions, one of our hackathon teams developed the "5Seconds" initiative to provide a secure and scalable communication method between businesses and customers. The application enables convenient and secure communication over email and SMS through encryption, eliminating concerns over phishing and bolstering public trust in our digital communications.

Since the hackathon, the team behind "5Seconds" has participated in several events to showcase their solution, including at the Association of Small and Medium Enterprises' Artificial Intelligence Festival Asia event in January, sharing their solution to help improve the digital defence of our companies.

These are just some examples of the projects we have received from youths over the past year, which we are supporting. The active participation and creativity of our youth give me confidence that together, we can build a strong, secure and cohesive nation capable of dealing with any crisis.

Mr Chairman, I would like to close by reiterating that the world we live in is a challenging one and the threat of disruptions in the future is all but certain. MINDEF has been and will continue investing in Total Defence as our best preparation and our best response to these disruptions.

We are doing our part towards meeting the sustainability targets as part of the Singapore Green Plan 2030 to safeguard our collective future.

I am heartened that Singaporeans have also been preparing and equipping themselves and contributing in creative ways towards strengthening Total Defence. We will continue to partner Singaporeans in this shared responsibility of keeping Singapore strong for the future. I am confident that together, we can build a strong, cohesive and secure Singapore for many generations to come. [Applause]

We have time for clarifications. Mr Zhulkarnain Abdul Rahim.

Thank you, Chairman. I also thank the Minister for answering my questions on training safety. I have two clarifications.

I welcome the news that SAF and MOH will consider further medical assistance deployments to help civilians affected in Gaza. First of all, exactly last year, I was with Minister Vivian Balakrishnan in the Middle East. We saw the military humanitarian drop in Gaza, but I must say I was quite concerned about the safety of our troops.

The Minister mentioned how it is not safe right now to establish medical facilities in Gaza, but they are thinking of deploying in safe areas in the region in the coming months. May I ask what would be the size of the deployment in terms of manpower and medical equipment and possibly, the duration of the deployment as well?

Secondly, how do such medical humanitarian assistance deployed in areas of crisis or warzones contribute to our own technological advancement or SAF capability building and overall operational readiness?

Of course, the safety of our troops is of utmost importance and mission success critical.

Regarding details – when and the size of it. Usually, the process is that we will evaluate sending a needs assessment team. We have already begun to do that. Senior Minister of State Zaqy accompanied the SAF Multi-Role Tanker Transport (MRTT), there was a recent delivery of aid. Subsequently, they went from there to meet some counterparts in Egypt for fact finding.

So, we are at the fact-finding stage. But in response to the Member's question, ultimately, what we deploy, we want it to be meaningful. There will have to be, of course, a medical element. When I mentioned MOH, it is in the context of MOH also has a volunteer programme. Minister Ong has expressed some interest. If they could be co-deployed, we will look for opportunities there. In addition, there was to be security, logistics.

I do not want to give numbers now because we are not there yet. But usually, it is more than what we have deployed there. In terms of duration, we are prepared for a number of weeks or even months, if there is a need. We could also deploy on land or use a hospital ship. So, there are many details. But ultimately, we recognise that it is a humanitarian situation and we want to give medical assistance, and we think the SAF can contribute. How does it affect our operational readiness? The truth is, it will help, but I will not stance the mission for that. It is primarily a humanitarian assistance and disaster relief mission.

Mr Vikram Nair.

Just two quick clarifications. The first is on unmanned technologies. I think the Minister mentioned that in relation to drones, the Air Force is going to have a special unit dealing with it. The Army will have a drone accelerator as well. Are there any plans for the Navy to similarly have its own unit dealing with unmanned technologies? That is the first.

The second clarification is – in a world that is increasingly fracturing and alliances may become more uncertain, to what extent are we also doing acquisitions of defence technology locally and helping the local defence industry to grow?

The Air Force and the Army initiatives to set up units to consolidate or path find for unmanned systems, I have explained. The Navy already, as I mentioned, deploys uncrewed platforms. They are already in operations in the Singapore Strait. The new MRCV will have it. Whether they need a dedicated unit, I leave it to them. That is where I will just leave it.

For procurement, obviously, foreign policy will affect our business dealings. It is often said, trade and security are two faces of the same coin. But there are realities of our current procurement. In terms of the platforms we need, we are always guided by effectiveness and, of course, cost. But the platform has to be effective, has to meet our security needs. And we will buy the best in class. Then, we will see where it is manufactured, the price and also the maintenance.

If there is an option to develop locally, obviously, we will explore the option. For example, as we did for our frigates. The first ship was produced together with the French Direction des Constructions Navales (DCN), but the subsequent five ships were built locally – as we are also building for a number of naval platforms.

I think it is easier for naval platforms because we have got some experience and worked with partners. But even then, certain modules may also have multinational involvement, but yes, it may be built here.

For the Army, as you can imagine, tanks may be a different class, but we could build the Titan, as we build other platforms.

For planes, it is a bit more difficult. It is highly specialised equipment. The planes that we purchase from US manufacturers are deemed to be at the front edge. I think for some time yet, they will continue to be seen as that.

Mr Gerald Giam.

Sir, the Minister stated that defence spending has fallen from 5% of GDP two decades ago to 3% today, despite nominal increases due to GDP growth.

I agree with the need for steady defence spending to maintain operational readiness, but can the Minister clarify whether the budget requests from MOF each year is actually pegged to Singapore's GDP? And has this peg shifted from 5% to 3% of GDP over the years and, if so, how has this been justified?

Secondly, given that GDP fluctuates from year to year, while the need for operational readiness does not, would it be more prudent to base defence spending on a fixed annual percentage increase from the previous year and on actual and projected operational and development needs? This would avoid a situation where defence spending spikes just because we have strong economic growth in a certain year or drops if the converse happens.

Lastly, I appreciate Senior Minister of State Heng's announcement that NS allowances will increase in July. Has MINDEF considered making CPF contributions to NSFs to support their retirement adequacy?

I think the primary question is does MINDEF seek defence dollars based on how the GDP goes. That is going to be very hard to plan, because ex ante you do not know how the economy will do. If you ask dollars this year and we go into a COVID-19 pandemic as it did, that is not practical. Or you ask X dollars based on last year's performance and you have conflict, so I am not sure that that system works.

As I said, our starting basis is that defence is a long-term investment business. The starting point must be, not only for Singapore, but for all countries. Actually what we have, is quite amazing, that you can actually start from that basis: what does the military need to secure Singapore's defences? And for any country, that must be the starting basis. Then you say, well, can I afford it and how long do I take to achieve that basis?

It cannot be pegged to the economic performance because it may not be related. I do not think any serious planner would go on that and I would not suggest anybody does that. You start from the basis, what do I need to defend Singapore adequately and then, you say, well, what do I need?

But in practical terms, what is also constrained and is a virtuous state, because our economy has been growing and the Members of this House has supported the defence budget that we have asked for. Our practical constraints have been not so much in dollars but in manpower. That forced SAF to redesign their systems. For instance, if you had operated the previous artillery – remember you needed 12 people to stabilise the base plates and so on – and now, with shoot-and-scoot systems, you only need three people. Or previous naval vessels, which required many more men, but were redesigned so that you require less. I think we try to keep this virtuous state of affairs as long as we can to make sure that we can invest steadily.

Year-to-year fluctuations would occur, whether it is economic, not so much in COVID-19, but remember the Global Financial Crisis? Everybody needs to take a haircut. If you have to take a haircut, you have to take a haircut. That is for national interest. MOF says, "This is what I have and you have to live within your means", and we will adjust. But the relationship we have together with MOF is very useful, it is not from year to year, it is over a period. And it allows MINDEF/SAF to make year to year adjustments, but at the same time keep to the overall schedule of building our SAF.

Mr Chairman, I thank Mr Giam for his question. The NS allowance, the nature of it, it is in a form of honorarium and for that, CPF is not payable. However, I just wanted to emphasise two points.

One, within the NS journey, they are actually eligible for NS HOME Awards, which are paid out in the course of the NSmen's journey. Those actually come in a mixture of CPF as well as cash. So, if you look at the entire journey, SAF and MINDEF does help to improve or invest in the retirement adequacy for our NSmen as well.

More broadly, I think one should really see how the Government looks after Singaporeans and find different ways in which to help Singaporeans get a good education, to be able to access good jobs and then, to be able to earn and to save in a regular manner. Taken together, we would want to ensure that a Singaporean who works consistently and pays into CPF during his work life, will have the ability to have basic retirement adequacy.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat.

Mr Chairman, I would like to thank the Minister for his speech earlier. It was quite extensive and detailed, especially on the geopolitical and military front.

As an economist, I would like to ask a geopolitical and defence-related question in terms of threat assessment, whether the Minister can share whether Singapore can continue balancing US and China interests, especially within these geopolitical dynamics and what your defence outlook would be?

Secondly, is in terms of the wider HADR mission in Myanmar, Australia, Middle East and Afghanistan, that Singapore's military has actually participated in and contributed to, can the Minister share in terms of our costs, what we have spent on those wider HADR missions and given our technical capabilities, and how we have actually contributed to the wider HADR globally?

Mr Chairman, I encourage the Member to direct that question to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in terms of crafting our foreign policy, which will come after this. And I am sure there are many live questions. How do we deal with other countries? Remember the famous line, "There are no permanent friends, there are only permanent interests". And that is true for our countries, as the interest change, as the global system change.

But what I have tried to explain is that we ourselves can be the slow frog that is being boiled. We get socialised to things that are different and we say, "Well, that is just the norm". And my overall point is not business as usual. It is not business as usual when the transatlantic relationship is threatened. It is not business as usual when people question whether NATO can survive. It is not business as usual when the US takes a different position and the US vote in the way that it did, compared to previously. And if you think it is business as usual, you are in serious trouble. And the question for us is, what is coming? And the answer to that, as I was trying to explain in historical terms, you do not know.

There was a famous quote which I like to use and this is from Secretary Robert Gates, and I respect him immensely, previous Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) director, serious mien; when you speak to him, you can see the machination in his brain going, the database going. You know he weighs his answers because there is a lot going on. But he made this speech to West Point Cadets graduation. He said and I paraphrase him that the US' record for predicting where they would go into military operations has been perfect. Out of the last 10 military campaigns, they never got it right, 100% wrong. And then he added and this is the clincher, "We never got it right even a year from deployment."

Just think. US, with its vast intelligence; just as US before the Pearl Harbor attack, with its vast intelligence, with a vast machinery, cannot get it right one year before a conflict. If you think what you know what is coming, you tell me, you may be Nostradamus. But I tell you, you can sense something is coming, you just do not know what it is. But when you see machines spinning faster and faster, one will spin out of orbit and something will break.

How do you prepare Singapore and Singaporeans for that kind of scenario? You have to go back to the fundamentals, a united people, a strong SAF, strong security, a working economy, a strong fiscal Budget, a strong fiscal position. It is all fundamentals, because you really do not know what is coming.

How does humanitarian aid help us? We selectively respond. I mean, we have to do our part. I think as Singapore grows in capability and wealth, I think we need to do more, but we are not out there to deal with every humanitarian situations, where we find that there are needs and if we can contribute effectively, we will do so. I can cost it for you in terms of dollars – it is not cheap every time we send a military plane, but that is probably the wrong way of assessing it. For example, when we send an A330 Multi-Role Tanker Transport to deliver goods to Gaza, it would have been less costly to send by commercial means. But we wanted to send a signal and these are the considerations.

On that note, Mr Vikram Nair, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

Chairman, I would like to thank Minister Ng Eng Hen, Senior Minister of State Heng Chee How and Senior Minister of State Zaqy Mohamad for sharing the good work of MINDEF and SAF in an increasingly uncertain world. I would also like to thank all the staff at MINDEF and the people of SAF. With that, I withdraw my cut.

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

[(proc text) The sum of $22,099,590,500 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. (proc text)]

[(proc text) The sum of $2,226,482,800 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. (proc text)]