Hansard, Tuesday, 11 January 2022

1 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry keeps track of the number of employees with remote working arrangements and the number of hours spent working remotely in the past year; (b) whether work-from-home (WFH) will become a permanent feature even as COVID-19 restrictions are relaxed; and (c) whether the Ministry will look into introducing new legislation to improve the welfare of WFH employees including barring employers from contacting employees about non-critical work matters outside of their contracted working hours.

2 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Manpower as companies are encouraged to operate in a hybrid operating model to boost business resilience (a) how will the Ministry support employers to help their employees transit towards this model; and (b) how will the Government encourage organisational dexterity in local companies so that work projects based overseas can be managed remotely from Singapore.

3 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Manpower whether, beyond the Tripartite Standards or Tripartite Guidelines, the Ministry intends to retain existing work-from-home legislation and make the right to work from home the new normal.

Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to answer the first three Parliamentary Questions (PQs) filed by Mr Yip Hon Weng and Mr Louis Ng together?

Yes, please.

COVID-19 has catalysed a transformation of workplace practices. Businesses have adapted well and successfully implemented work-from-home arrangements. SMEs can also tap on Government grants, such as the Productivity Solution Grant, to adopt suitable cloud-based digital solutions that can enable productive remote work arrangements for their employees.

In 2020, three in four employees worked in firms that provided some form of remote working. The number of hours spent on remote work would vary depending on businesses' and workers' needs and the Ministry of Manpower (MOM) does not track this.

We expect work-from-home arrangements to become a more mainstream option. Majority of employers said that they would allow their workers to continue to work-from-home for at least a quarter of the time. We should not rush into hasty legislation that unintentionally creates workplace rigidity that may impede our economic recovery at this time.

Our approach for workplace flexibility should be inclusive and not just about working from home. The 2019 Citizens' Panel on Work-Life Harmony highlighted the diverse needs of various sectors and jobs, such as the needs of frontline workers differing significantly from that of office workers. For example, work-from-home is not practical for work that most frontline workers perform. It is therefore critical that a holistic approach be taken to enable more workers' access to appropriate workplace flexibilities, be it flexi-load, flexi-time or flexi-place.

To this end, the tripartite partners have been reaching out to employers and unions to promote the Tripartite Standard on Flexible Work Arrangements. We had also formed the Alliance for Action (AfA) on Work-Life Harmony last year, involving community stakeholders such as employers, employees and HR professionals. The AfA created three Communities of Practice for the food services, manufacturing and finance sectors respectively, to exchange best practices and develop implementation resources that were suited to companies’ sectoral needs. For example, Communities of Practice panellists shared how staggered hours could still be offered to onsite production staff who required them to flexibly manage their personal responsibilities, such as childcare. The HR profession through the Institute of Human Resource Professionals also came together to develop the Playbook on Hybrid Workplaces. We are continuing this ground-up effort by growing a community of Work-Life Ambassadors to champion and support these efforts at their workplaces.

Even as work-from-home arrangements stabilise, we are mindful of the risks from blurred work-life boundaries. The Tripartite Advisory on Mental Well-being was introduced in 2020 and one of the key recommendations was for employers to set reasonable expectations of after-hours work communications, such as not requiring employees to respond to non-urgent work-related messages and emails after certain hours. The AfA on Work-Life Harmony also developed an after-hours communications policy template to make it easier for companies to establish and communicate progressive after-hours communications practices.

The Government will continue to work with tripartite partners to expand the provision of flexible work arrangements in a sustainable manner.

Mr Louis Ng.

Thank you, Sir and I thank the Minister of State for the reply. Could I have two clarifications?

One, I am not asking for 100% compulsory work-from-home, but to legislate the right to work from home and also to give employers the right to reject for work-related reasons. So, for example, if there is a face-to-face meeting that day, then the employee would not be allowed to work from home.

Two, I do agree with the Minister of State. We should not jump into legislating things, but the fact is that we have been debating this right to work from home for quite a number of years in the House now, even in the pre-COVID-19 days. COVID-19 has shown that work-from-home is possible, so I am just wondering what is stopping MOM from legislating this right to work from home.

I thank the hon Member Mr Louis Ng for that question, a very thoughtful one. The number of workers with access to flexible work arrangements has increased steadily over the years. From 2014 to 2019, the proportion of employers who offered at least one formal flexible work arrangement on a regular and sustained basis, rose from 47% to 53%. During the pandemic crisis, work-from-home as a form of flexible work arrangement has also become more common.

The Member asked why do we not legislate the right to request for work-from-home. While the economy is showing signs of recovery and more employers and employees are more comfortable and used to the arrangement of work-from-home, there remain uncertainties. As we look at other countries that have introduced legislation to allow employees to request to work from home, it is uncertain as in the outcomes are rather mixed on whether legislation makes a substantial improvement in the work-life and the flexibility that employees have. After all, like the hon Member said, employers will also have the right to reject the request for work-from-home.

I think we have to take a practical approach towards this. I fully agree with the hon Member Louis Ng that legislation may not be the best solution. In fact, what I think we should focus is on enabling employers and employees with resources and with guides to help them implement work-from-home and flexible work arrangements in a practical and sustained manner.

Mr Yip Hon Weng.

I thank the Minister of State for her reply. I have a similar supplementary question. I note that the Ministry does not want to impose rigidity in workplace arrangements. Can I ask what are the plans for the Ministry to enhance or update existing legislation like the Employment Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, Work Injury Compensation Act and so on, to cover work-from-home situations and essentially, to cover the home as a workplace?

The Employment Act covers basic terms of employment such as timely payment of salary and leave benefits. The protections offered under the Employment Act are not location specific. So, whether an individual is working from home or working in the office or working in the factory, the Employment Act covers them.

As for workplace safety and health, as some Members might remember, last year, the WSH Council issued a bulletin to inform employers about risk assessment for work-from-home. There is a checklist that helps employers as well as employees identify hazards when they are working from home.

On the Work Injury Compensation Act (WICA), we have also similarly clarified that regardless of whether an individual is working from home or working at the office or at the worksite, WICA applies. The key is about proving that the injury is incurred while a person is doing work and not performing non-work-related duties.

Mr Melvin Yong.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her replies. I have two supplementary questions. The first is the tripartite advisory has been launched for quite some time. How many companies have actually adopted some of the advice that we have put out on work-life harmony?

My second supplementary question relates to a commentary written by a Financial Times writer that was republished on CNA just this morning. It mentioned the disconnect between how bosses find workers to be less productive when telecommuting and workers themselves feeling that they are busier than ever. So, there is this disconnect. The writer argued that telecommuting makes workers busier simply because of the increased number of virtual meetings and having more internal coordination emails, work-related communications, but such additional work does not always translate to effective work outcomes.

I am of the view that we would need to come to a new social compact when it comes to such telecommuting work arrangements and reset expectations on what working hours are and what is productivity for those who work from home or those who adopt hybrid work arrangements.

So, can the Ministry study this issue in detail and provide recommendations on how workplaces can come to a consensus on such a new social compact and provide both employers and employees tools to manage the unique challenges posed by such telecommuting work arrangements? NTUC would be most happy to work with the Ministry on this.

I believe the hon Member Melvin Yong was referring to the Tripartite Standard on Flexible Work Arrangements and Tripartite Standard on Work-life Harmony.

The Tripartite Standard on Flexible Work Arrangements was introduced in 2017 and today, the number of companies that have adopted this Standard covers one in four employees in our workplaces. Actually, the progress has been steadily increasing and we are quite glad for that. Certainly, there is room for us to encourage more companies to come on board. For bigger companies, probably, the confidence is a lot higher because they have the capacity and the expertise to implement flexible work arrangements and work-from-home arrangements more satisfactorily. For small companies or SMEs, for example, there might be more help required. And that is where the resources that have been put out by the tripartite partners, the Alliance for Action on Work-life Harmony, will come in useful. We will encourage companies to take a look at them.

The Tripartite Standard on Work-life Harmony was introduced barely a year ago. I think we should give it some time for companies to take a look and also get our employees and unions to work with the employers to adopt this Standard.

The point about making further studies on how we should define productivity and how we need to safeguard employees from the ability to disconnect from work when they are working from home and not suffering burn-out, I think we have debated this last year. It is important that we take practical approach towards this. More studies would help us and help inform employers on what are the practical approaches and tools and norms that they should consider.

But I think we should be mindful that a single guide or a single solution may not suit every sector and may not suit every job out there. Even among employees, there are diverse needs. There are people who may find that work-from-home suits them very well but we also know of individuals who prefer not to work from home, maybe because the home environment is not as conducive, perhaps they feel that their own productivity is not as high when they are working from home rather than in an office environment which is specially prepared for them to be able to work, interact and take part in team work and team meetings with their fellow workers.

4 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in light of the higher-than-expected inflation rate in November 2021 (a) what is the Ministry’s assessment of the resulting impact on economic growth in 2022; and (b) whether the Ministry will consider working with the other Ministries to delay the increase in various statutory charges.

5 Ms Jessica Tan Soon Neo asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what are the reasons for the recent rise in costs impacting consumers across many areas; and (b) what policies or measures will be put in place to manage the impact of these increases on consumers, especially lower-income households and those whose livelihoods have been impacted by disruptions caused by the current pandemic.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 4 and 5 in today's Order Paper by Mr Ang Wei Neng and Ms Jessica Tan; Written Question No 9 in today's Order Paper by Mr Saktiandi Supaat; as well as to take Parliamentary Question Nos 82 and 83 of yesterday's Order Paper by Mr Shawn Huang and Mr Derrick Goh?

Yes, please.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Thereafter, Second Minister for Finance Ms Indranee Rajah will address Parliamentary Question Nos 6 and 7, as well as Written Question No 20 in today's Order Paper. Mr Speaker, may I request that we deliver our replies, which pertain to inflation and the Government's measures to mitigate its impact, and then, for us to take supplementary questions together thereafter, please?

Yes, please.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will provide an overview of the drivers of inflation, the outlook ahead, as well as how inflation is being managed. The Second Minister for Finance will then address the questions relating to the Government's fiscal and household support measures.

Mr Speaker, Sir, today, several global factors are at work, behind the rise of inflation.

First, the world economic recovery has raised the demand for energy and pushed up global energy prices even as supply remains tight. Second, global food commodity inflation is climbing as global demand grows amid the supply constraints that is caused by climate change, weather-related disruptions and labour shortages in key food-producing countries. Third, supply bottlenecks in key global industries and transport hubs have exacerbated cost pressures, including higher logistics costs.

Hence, many countries are grappling with inflation. For instance, inflation in the US climbed to 6.8% on a year-on-year basis in November last year, its highest in 39 years. In the Eurozone, inflation in November 2021 was 4.9%, the highest in 25 years. In Asia, South Korea's inflation hit a decade-high of 3.8% in November.

As a small and open economy that imports most of our items, we are subject to these global economic forces as well. The rise in domestic inflation comes largely on the back of external inflation. Items like petrol, electricity and gas, as well as food prices and imported products are affected by the global drivers I have just described. In the third quarter of 2021, Singapore's CPI-All Items inflation averaged 2.5% on a year-on-year basis and rose to 3.8% in November 2021.

Besides global forces contributing to this northward trend, there are domestic factors at play too, for instance, accommodation and private transport costs. Car prices have been rising at a faster rate due to bigger reductions in the Certificate of Entitlement (COE) quotas and the continuing strong demand for cars. Due to construction delays brought on by COVID-19, the need for rental housing has edged up.

However, as accommodation costs comprise mainly of imputed rentals on owner-occupied accommodation and most Singaporeans live in owner-occupied homes and use public transport, these two factors are not likely to apply to all Singaporeans.

Hence, a more useful gauge of inflation which excludes these two items is the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) Core Inflation rate, which is so far, lower than the headline inflation. While MAS Core Inflation has moved up from 0.4% year-on-year in the first half of 2021 to 1.1% in the third quarter of last year, and to 1.6% last November, it is still lower than the headline inflation of 2.5% and 3.8% over the same period.

Let me now turn to the outlook ahead, which several Members have asked about, including Ms Jessica Tan and Mr Derrick Goh. In the near term, Singapore is likely to continue to face external cost pressures. This is due to global energy prices remaining elevated and bottlenecks in global transportation, as well as supply-demand mismatches in various commodities and goods markets, which are likely to persist for a while. However, the Ministry of Trade and Information (MTI) and MAS expect these rises to be temporary and pressures to ease gradually over the course of the year. In particular, global oil prices should ease as production increases to catch up with demand.

On our domestic labour front, wage growth is likely to continue to improve as the demand for labour strengthens on the back of a continued pick-up in economic activity. The Government’s roll-out of Progressive Wage policies such as the expansion of the Progressive Wage Model to the retail sector would also support wages for lower-wage Singaporeans. At the same time, as the COVID-19 situation stabilises, consumer demand should improve.

With all these factors in mind, MAS Core Inflation is expected to increase in the first half of 2022, before easing in the later part of the year. For the full year, MAS Core Inflation could average within the upper half of the official forecast range of 1% to 2%. As for CPI-All Items inflation, it is projected to average 1.5% to 2.5% in 2022, following the 2.3% expected for 2021.

MTI and MAS will carefully monitor price trends over the next few months of the year closely, before revising the forecasts if necessary.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about the second-round effects of inflation and whether it will persist. MTI and MAS's assessment is that while household inflation expectations have risen slightly, they remain well-anchored. In particular, household expectations of inflation have remained below historical averages. Hence, MTI and MAS do not expect persistent, accelerating inflation.

Mr Shawn Huang asked about the forward-looking inflation indicators that are being monitored. Both MTI and MAS monitor a range of upstream cost indicators to form a forward-looking view of inflationary pressures in the economy. We closely follow external indicators like the global commodity prices reflected by the Brent crude oil benchmark, as well as international food commodity price indices and import prices. Domestic indicators consist of business cost measures such as resident wages and commercial rentals.

Mr Speaker, the Government understands and shares the concerns of fellow Singaporeans and businesses and households about the price increases and empathises with the cost pressures felt. While the small and open nature of our economy constrains how much we can shield Singaporeans from inflationary pressures, the Government will spare no effort to lessen its impact. We have put in place a multi-pronged strategy to mitigate inflationary pressures.

First, the Government is striving hard to keep the Singapore economy competitive, so that we keep creating good jobs for Singaporeans and to bring sustainable wage growth for Singaporeans. For example, before the pandemic, from 2014 to 2019, Singapore's economy was expanding by 3.1% per annum on average. In tandem with economic growth, the real median income of full-time employed residents and that is, after accounting for inflation, grew by 3.8% per annum over those five years I have cited earlier.

Even though the pandemic led to the economy contracting by 5.4% in 2020, it rebounded by 7.2% last year. The strong recovery has helped to ensure that resident workers enjoyed real wage growth in 2021, after accounting for inflation. Specifically, we note that in 2021, the real median income growth of full-time employed residents was positive, at 1.1%. For lower-income residents at the bottom 20th percentile, real income rose by a larger 4.6% last year.

Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about the potential impact of inflation on Singapore's economic growth this year. MTI's assessment is that Singapore's economic recovery remains on track, with the GDP expected to grow by 3% to 5% this year. This should continue to support recovery in the labour market in the year ahead.

Second, given the imported and domestic cost pressures, MAS tightened the monetary policy in October last year by shifting the trade-weighted Singapore dollar towards an appreciating path. Since then, the Singapore dollar has strengthened, which will help reduce the Singapore dollar cost of imports and shield Singaporeans from some of the external cost pressures. For instance, the Singapore dollar has appreciated significantly against the currencies of the country's major food sources over the longer term, and this has moderated the pass-through effects of external inflationary pressure.

Third, the Government carefully manages domestic supply-side constraints, such as the supply of industrial and commercial space, to help rein in business rental costs that may translate to higher consumer prices. During the pandemic, businesses received rental relief to cope with their rental costs. Additionally, policy measures, such as the Wage Credit Scheme, Jobs Support Scheme and Jobs Growth Incentive Scheme, have alleviated the labour outlay of businesses.

Fourth, the Government has been diversifying our food import sources and today, our food supplies come from more than 170 countries and regions from the world. This helps to ensure that the prices of our food supplies remain competitive and reduce our vulnerability to larger price fluctuations globally. Notably, while global food commodity prices surged by around 30% on a year-on-year basis between July and November 2021 based on the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organisation's Food Price Index, Singapore's domestic non-cooked food prices saw a far smaller increase of 1.6% over the same period. MTI and the various Ministries and agencies want to thank our industry partners, including our trade associations and key supermarket retailers who have been working closely with us, especially in the last two years, to diversify and secure alternate food sources for Singapore.

Fifth, the Government works closely with industry partners, including major retailers, to ensure that the prices of daily necessities and food items are competitive and affordable. Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked whether there are further plans to enhance cooperation with retailers this year on daily necessities and food items. Some retailers like NTUC FairPrice have helped to keep the prices of essential items affordable. It has extended its discount schemes for seniors and low-income families by another year to cover the whole of this year, 2022. This is estimated to result in more than S$11 million worth of savings for customers, covering Pioneer Generation and Merdeka Generation seniors, as well as the Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) blue cardholders.

Another initiative is the Government's effort to work with the Consumers Association of Singapore (CASE) to onboard more retailers onto its Price Kaki app. The app is for consumers, and it promotes price transparency and helps consumers make informed choices by providing easy and timely comparisons of the prices of groceries and hawker food.

Last but not least, our sixth strategy. The Government provides targeted assistance to lower-income Singaporeans who need support for their basic living expenses through schemes such as the permanent GST Voucher scheme, Service and Conservancy Charges (S&CC) rebates and the Public Transport Vouchers. The Second Minister for Finance will elaborate on these in her response.

Mr Speaker, Sir, let me conclude by assuring Singaporeans and businesses that the Government will spare no effort to keep our economy vibrant as well as to create good jobs and this will help continue to bring real wage growth for Singaporeans to meet their aspirations and their needs in the present, as well as the future.

6 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Finance in light of inflation and rising costs (a) whether there are available fiscal resources in the upcoming Budget to further assist Singaporeans to cope with increased costs; (b) whether the proposed GST increase remains part of our strategy for fiscal sustainability; and (c) if so, what can be done to mitigate the impact of GST increase on Singaporeans, especially the lower income households and retirees.

7 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Minister for Finance (a) whether the economic policy involving billions of fiscal support to businesses and households is contributing to higher inflation; and (b) how will the market adjust when the support schemes taper off.

Mr Speaker, in addition to the Parliamentary Questions (PQs) enumerated by Minister of State Ms Low Yen Ling, may I have your permission to answer the PQ by Mr Louis Chua that is scheduled for a subsequent Sitting as it touches on related subject matter?

Please do.

Minister of State Low Yen Ling has just provided an overview of the inflation outlook, including second-round inflation effects which Mr Saktiandi Supaat asked about and the Government's overall approach to managing inflation. I would like in addition to emphasise the following two points.

First, while the inflation rate of 3.8% reported for November 2021 is high, a significant part of that 3.8% is accounted for by accommodation, mainly imputed rentals and private transport costs. However, most Singaporeans live in owner-occupied homes and use public transport. As such, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) Core Inflation measure, which excludes accommodation and private transport costs, would more accurately reflect the actual inflation experienced by most Singaporeans. MAS Core Inflation was at 1.6% year-on-year in November 2021.

Second, a significant share of the recent rise in core prices is being driven by global factors. Higher energy prices have had an impact on utility bills, while global food prices and supply chain disruptions have affected prices of non-cooked food locally. The sharp rise in global energy and food prices is expected to be temporary and should subside as bottlenecks are resolved and supply improves to better meet demand.

That said, the Government understands the concerns of Singaporeans about these cost increases and empathises with the very real pressures felt by individuals and households. The Government has been working hard to help Singaporeans with these costs in a number of ways.

First, through our economic and fiscal strategies. Minister of State Low Yen Ling has given a comprehensive overview on how the Government keeps our economy competitive, ensures sustainable real wage growth, manages business costs and has allowed the Singapore dollar to strengthen to mitigate inflation. Second, the Government also directly helps Singaporeans with the cost of living.

As mentioned, two key drivers of core inflation are higher global fuel costs and food prices, leading to higher prices for utilities and groceries. The Government has been directly shielding the majority of Singaporeans from the full impact of the cost increases for these items and is continuing to do so.

To help with the cost of utilities, the Government provides quarterly GSTV U-Save rebates to Housing and Development Board (HDB) households as part of the permanent GST Voucher scheme. All eligible HDB households received a tranche of U-Save rebates this month. In Budget 2021, the Government provided an additional 50% of U-Save rebates for all U-Save recipients, which was paid out in April and July 2021.

This additional 50% on top of the permanent U-Save rebate has helped HDB households to substantially defray the cost of their utility bills. HDB 1- to 2-room households received $595 in U-Save rebates in FY2021, equivalent to about 4.5 to six months of their utility bills on average, even after the increase in the electricity tariff this month. HDB 3- and 4-room households received $535 and $475 in U-Save rebates, equivalent to three months and 1.5 months of their utility bills in FY2021 respectively.

To help households with daily expenses, especially food, the Government has given $100 in Community Development Council (CDC) Vouchers to every Singaporean household in December 2021. In addition, Singaporeans living in HDB 1- to 2-room flats would also have received $100 in Grocery Vouchers in October 2021. These would help with the increased spending during the year-end and the New Year festive period. We have also begun distributing 600,000 Public Transport Vouchers of $30 each to help lower-income households amid the public transport fare adjustment. These payouts are over and above the regular GST Voucher – Cash payouts of up to $300, Service and Conservancy Charges (S&CC) rebates of between 1.5 and 3.5 months, Silver Support of between $720 and $3,600 per year for seniors who had low incomes in their working years and Workfare Income Supplement of up to $4,000 per year in cash and CPF top-ups for lower-wage workers.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked whether we have the fiscal resources to help Singaporeans with the cost of living. I would like to assure Mr Liang that we will give priority in our fiscal plans to help Singaporeans manage. As we prepare for Budget 2022, we are assessing the situation carefully and reviewing the scope of household support measures.

Mr Louis Chua and Mr Ang Wei Neng asked about mitigating or delaying increases on fees charged by Ministries and Statutory Boards. The Government will do its best to keep costs and in turn, fees as low as possible, to provide the best value to the public. We froze fee increases in 2020 on account of the sudden COVID-19 crisis, but we cannot do so indefinitely. As fees are raised, we will continue to provide support to those who need it most. Our approach of running cost-efficient services and providing targeted help allows us to keep our total burden on businesses and households low.

Ms Foo Mee Har asked if our fiscal support contributed to higher inflation. The answer is no. The size of our fiscal injections in 2020 to 2021 were correctly sized to cushion the sharp fall in output during this crisis period. Much of our support over the last two years has been to relieve costs, through schemes such as the Jobs Support and Rental Support Schemes. These not only helped save jobs and incomes but also had less impact to inflation. As businesses and households adapted to living with COVID-19 and stabilised their revenues and incomes, we were able to taper off our fiscal support and shift the emphasis towards restructuring, transformation and growth.

On Mr Saktiandi Supaat and Ms Foo Mee Har's questions about the fiscal response going forward: we will continue to monitor economic conditions closely to ensure that businesses are adequately supported, especially in more adversely affected sectors and balance tapering off of relief with support for transformation and restructuring.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked if the proposed GST increase remains part of our strategy for fiscal sustainability; and if so, what can be done to mitigate the impact of the GST increase on Singaporeans, especially lower-income households and retirees. We need sound fiscal foundations, not just to provide support to households and businesses when needed, but also to meet our collective aspirations – affordable healthcare, quality education, and a safe and secure home – in a responsible and sustainable way. The GST together with our income and wealth taxes are important parts of a sound revenue structure that will enable us to provide care, support and a strong social compact. Even as we keep our finances on a sound and stable footing, we will ensure that our overall system of taxes and transfers remains a fair and progressive one.

We will also significantly mitigate the impact of the GST rate increase on Singaporeans through the Assurance Package. We have already set aside $6 billion for this Package to provide direct cash and other support to Singaporeans. Such support will effectively delay the impact of the GST rate increase by at least five years for the majority of Singaporean households. This means that for most households, the actual impact of the GST increase will only be felt five years after implementation. Lower-income households will receive more support under the Assurance Package and for this group, the impact of the GST rate increase will be pushed back by about 10 years.

To sum up: while global inflationary pressures have been a significant driver of the recent rise in core inflation, the Government has shielded and continues to shield Singaporean households from much of these price pressures. We will continue to review and improve ways to support Singaporeans, particularly lower-income households, seniors and those with greater needs.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa.

Sir, my question is for Second Minister for Finance. Yes, we know that it is never a good time to raise taxes. Indeed, the Government has been helping Singaporeans to mitigate the cost of living with the various support measures. But given the series of cost increases that we have seen in recent months, with perhaps more to come and that we are still in this pandemic fighting mode, would the Government consider delaying the GST increases so as to avoid adding on to inflationary pressures?

I thank Mr Liang for his question, which is, I think, a question on the minds of many Singaporeans. There are actually two distinct aspects of that question. One is, can we delay the date that GST takes effect? But the second and the much more important question is, can we delay the impact of that increase on Singaporeans?

For the first one, we had announced in Budget 2018 that we plan to raise the GST by two percentage points from 7% to 9%. And we said then that it would be some time from 2021 to 2025. We said the exact timing would depend on the state of the economy and how much our expenditures grow and how buoyant our existing taxes are. And we said all that before COVID-19. Then the pandemic came along. So, we then said in 2020, that the GST rate increase would not take place in 2021 and that was in direct recognition of the hardship that was felt by people because of the pandemic.

It is not something we can put off forever, but the exact timing is something that we have to think about. In deciding the timing for the GST hike, we are carefully considering the overall economic conditions. The economy is recovering steadily and barring fresh disruptions, it should grow in step with global economic recovery, and we expect GDP to grow by 3% to 5% in 2022.

But this brings me to the second question, which is the more important one, which is: irrespective of whatever date we may say that GST takes effect, can we delay the impact on Singaporeans? And the answer is that we have designed it such that, yes, we can delay the impact on Singaporeans through the Assurance Package. For the majority of Singaporeans, we will delay the impact on them effectively by five years and for the lower income, the impact on them will be delayed effectively for 10 years.

So, essentially, whatever the increase to the expenditure as a result of GST, the Assurance Package is designed to buffer them for that increase. The Government is directly supplementing them, so that they would not feel the impact. So, I just hope that Members will bear this in mind. The date that it takes effect and the date that the impact is felt are two separate things and we will continue to look out for the lower-income households and the majority of the middle-income households.

Mr Ang Wei Neng.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have two supplementary questions. The first question is for Minister of State Low Yen Ling. What are the causes of the supply chain disruptions that affect Singapore particularly? Something that happens in the rest of the world may not affect us. Because she said that these disruptions may be temporary, does she foresee that these disruptions will ease in maybe the next one to three months, or will it be longer than three months?

The second question is, we note that some cost increases are those that we have to have, or for some of the services provided by the Government. But will the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) work with the Ministries to coordinate some of the increases which are within the control of the Government? For example, like revising the annual values of HDB flats which will actually lead to increase in property tax and also electricity prices which would affect the majority of people; even the coffeeshops are now using that as an excuse to increase prices for the drinks and more.

I want to thank the Member Mr Ang Wei Neng for his two supplementary questions. Let me respond to the first one on supply chain. I thank him for the concern that he raised about the impact of global supply chain disruptions on our small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and businesses, and thereby, affecting households and consumers. We certainly understand that these disruptions have made it harder for businesses, households and consumers. We all wish for things to get back to normal. However, earlier on in my speech, I also outlined the contributing factors. Lockdowns, labour shortages and transport bottlenecks around the world, because of the pandemic, have caused the disruption of production and also the delivery of goods. This has been exacerbated by the recent rebounding of the demand for goods as the COVID-19 situation is improving in many countries.

In response to his first supplementary question, there are some signs that the global supply bottlenecks are abating, with pressure on input prices easing and we are observing that the delivery delays are shortening. But we are cognisant that some of the supply chain issues such as the lack of production capacity for semi-conductor chips and port congestions are expected to take some time to be resolved. As such, it is likely that the supply chain disruptions will persist in the near term.

Having said that, I want to assure the Member Mr Ang and everyone in the House that for essential supplies including food and healthcare items, we have adopted a multi-pronged approach. First, import diversification. Second, beefing up our local production. Third, stockpiling. These supply chain resilient efforts are also supported by Singapore's strong air and sea connectivity, as well as supply chain management and logistic capabilities which will help to facilitate the efficient movement of goods.

For businesses, for industrial supplies, we have been working with our companies, SMEs, trade associations and industry associations to strengthen their Business Continuity Plans (BCPs) to better cope with possible supply chain disruptions. To this end, MTI, ESG and EDB stand committed to support our SMEs and local companies. If they are facing cashflow issues arising from supply chain challenges, ESG will continue to work with participating financial institutions to support them through the Enterprise Financing Scheme.

To turn to the next question, he asked about charges and so on, and then he also asked a question about annual value. I believe the Second Minister has responded to another Member about the statutory fees and charges. I will respond to his second supplementary question where he was alluding to profiteering. Let me assure him that MTI and the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCCS) take a tough stance against profiteering. We keep a very close watch on prices. Specifically, MTI monitors general price movements through the Department of Statistics (DOS), the CPI Survey and where necessary, MTI also monitors the prices of specific goods.

If you recall, about 20 months ago between January and May 2020, there was a surge and very, very high demand for masks. During that period, MTI and CCCS swung into action, monitored the prices of the masks on a weekly basis. We took proactive actions and sought price information from e-commerce platforms. That certainly helped to shape the necessary behaviour by retailers and organisations.

So, I want to assure the Member that the Government is committed to ensuring that Singapore has a conducive and competitive business environment for companies to thrive and at the same time, a wide range of choices for our consumers. By equipping consumers with the Price Kaki app, consumers will be able to make an informed choice with regard to their purchase of goods and services.

Earlier, I mentioned our multi-pronged approach of import diversification, local production and stockpiling. This is critical because import diversification will ensure that Singapore enjoys a continuous supply of goods at competitive prices, even if any one of the sources is being disrupted. So, through this multi-pronged approach, this will help us to mitigate any supply shock-induced price fluctuations. We will continue to work very closely with trade associations and local companies to strengthen their Business Continuity Plans to better cope with possible supply chain disruptions.

Ms Jessica Tan.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. My supplementary question is for the Minister of State Low Yen Ling. As we talk about rising costs, businesses are facing those rising costs which then translates to rising costs for the consumer. So, what is MTI doing to assist with the rising costs of businesses?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to thank the Member Ms Jessica Tan for her very important question and want to assure her and everyone in the House that MTI, the Government and the various agencies monitor business costs closely. And I want to assure everyone in the House that support is at hand to support our businesses to mitigate cost pressures when needed.

First, in the area of cashflow, which is very critical now, the Government supports our businesses in need of additional loans to support their cashflow. Businesses can make use of the Temporary Bridging Loan (TBL) which provides additional working capital support of up to S$3 million for enterprises. TBL is available for our businesses at 70% Government risk share. From April to December 2021, more than 6,000 enterprises have benefited from the TBL. This amounted to S$1.8 billion worth of loans being catalysed. In addition, businesses that need funds for purposes like working capital, fixed assets, trade, projects, merger and acquisitions (M&As) can look to ESG's Enterprise Financing Scheme for assistance.

Second, the Government also provides support to businesses in cost components especially in the last two years, such as manpower costs and rental. For instance, the Jobs Support Scheme (JSS), the Wage Credit Scheme, the Jobs Growth Incentive Scheme and the Rental Support Scheme all helped our businesses, our SMEs, with their cashflow challenges during the pandemic.

To date, more than S$28 billion of JSS support has been disbursed since the scheme was introduced in February 2020.

Third, the Government will also continue to defray investment expenditure to help our SMEs to pivot and strengthen their capabilities. These include the enhanced financial support for capability development and productivity upgrading through grants such as the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) and also the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG). These grants will go some way to help our businesses transform and turn the current challenges into long-term opportunities.

Over the longer term, certain trends like climate change, and these are trends that may cause our companies to think about their strategies and their cost structure, businesses can look to the S$180 million Enterprise Sustainability Programme (ESP) recently launched by Minister Gan Kim Yong on 1 October. This ESP is designed to help our local SMEs build capability in sustainability, not just company-centric but also sectoral-centric. We will support the trade associations and chambers (TACs) to bring on board or to adopt sustainability standards across the sub-sectors or the whole sector. We will also take an ecosystem-wide approach in terms of financing – we launched the Green Financing shortly after the launch of ESP – as well as training and certification. All these are done to better position our local companies to help them to build capabilities in sustainability and seize new opportunities in the green economy.

The Government certainly strives to moderate business cost increases by managing domestic supply side constraints. For example, the Government ensures an adequate supply of industrial and commercial space to meet rising demand which will then help to relieve rental and price cost pressures that are faced by SMEs and businesses.

Members may recall the Rental Support Scheme announced by Minister Lawrence Wong. The Rental Support Scheme payouts in 2021 have also provided more than S$900 million of support benefiting over 40,000 tenants and owner occupiers.

So, I want to assure Ms Jessica Tan and the House that the Government will spare no effort to support our enterprises, especially our local SMEs. We continue to stand by our local SMEs, our businesses, to support them and help them emerge stronger than before.

Ms Foo Mee Har.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have one supplementary question for the Second Minister for Finance. Sir, I acknowledge that there are wide-ranging Government assistance schemes, such as the CDC vouchers and transport vouchers that were mentioned, to help with the cost of living. But I would like to ask if the Government can put in place structural measures to provide long-term support to help with cost of living, instead of giving these one-off benefits every year.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her question. Actually, we already do that. We do not just give out one-off benefits. We have a lot in terms of structural support and let me explain our approach to it. The first thing is directed at incomes and earning a living. The second thing is essential areas. And then third, providing essential support for the low-income and elderly.

On the first one, the most sustainable way that we can help Singaporeans with the cost of living is to help them have good incomes. And how we help them to have good incomes is to ensure that they have good opportunities and good jobs. We have often heard that it is said, "Oh, you must not pursue growth for growth's sake". This Government does not pursue growth for growth's sake. This Government pursues growth because we want good jobs for people and we want them to have good incomes, and that will help them to manage not just the increase in cost of living but to be able to attain all the other things and aspirations that they want to achieve in life. So, we pay a lot of attention to growing the economy. And that is structural.

The second thing we do is we have structural schemes to uplift and supplement their incomes. This includes the Progressive Wage Model, as well as the Workfare Income Supplement Scheme.

In addition, we have broad-based structural support measures to help Singaporeans in essential areas, like education, healthcare and housing. Education, as we know, is heavily subsidised. Every Singaporean child could receive about $180,000 in education subsidies by the time he or she turns 16, including preschool subsidies, with more for those who come from less well-off backgrounds. And for healthcare, we have many schemes, such as CHAS, the Pioneer Generation Package and the Merdeka Generation Package. We also provide housing subsidies to keep HDB flats affordable, so eligible first-timer households buying a resale flat could enjoy up to about $160,000 in housing grants and around 80% of new HDB flat buyers have little or no cash outlay on their mortgage payments.

Then, in addition, we have other permanent schemes, like the GST Voucher, or the GST-V Scheme, Silver Support Scheme and ComCare. And then, on top of all of these permanent structural schemes, we do provide the one-off support, or schemes for a specific period to help people where there are specific hardships or problems which may continue for a few months, but after that they are able to manage on their own.

Mr Louis Chua.

I thank the Minister of State and the Second Minister for their response. I just have one supplementary question. I do recognise that inflation is a concern for everyone and it is something that is reflected in the lived experiences of all our residents.

If you look at what MAS has done from a monetary policy standpoint, they have tightened for the first time in the last three years. From a fiscal standpoint, I also note that back in 2006, the Government has put in place a freeze in fee increases for one year after the GST increase. This time round, if there were to be a GST increase, whether or not the Government will consider a similar freeze in the fee increase, which is similar to my original Parliamentary Question (PQ), as well as that asked by the Member Mr Ang?

Mr Speaker, the answer is as I had indicated in my original answer, which is that we will do our best, but we cannot defer fee increases forever. If and when we do have to have fee increases, we will do our best to ensure that Singaporeans are supported and buffered against such increases.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.

Mr Speaker, I wish to challenge the notion of Minister of State Low and Minister Indranee that inflation pressures are actually transitory and benign. Both of them cited how the latest 2021 November all items inflation rate was 3.8% and that is true when measured on a year-on-year basis. But if you look at all items analysed from the month-on-month basis, it is actually 6.2% and even if we use the average from the past three months, it is even higher at 7%.

If you measure other elements, where they have spoken about being more benign, actually if you net out accommodation, and this is for a year-on-year basis, you have a higher inflation rate at 4.1% or 4.2%, depending on how one measures such housing inflation. Transportation cost, which is the third largest component of household expenditure after food and housing, is actually 14.2% year-on-year in the latest data. And even if you look at food, the second largest component of household expenditures, while it is true that it is relatively lower at 1.9%, over the past three months, they have actually increased 2.8% on an annualised basis and 3.7% over the past month.

So, again, my point is not to throw out additional figures per se, but both of them mentioned one of the levers for controlling price inflation was the idea of real exchange rate appreciation. I will note that measures of our own trade-weighted real exchange rate show that the Singapore dollar has actually been depreciating since 2013 and at least in the latest data for 2020, this continued to be the case. So, I wonder whether there is going to be a more concerted effort at allowing real exchange rate appreciation as a broad-based approach to contain inflation pressures imported from aboard?

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his supplementary question. I think that the short answer really is this. Neither Ms Low nor I suggested that everything is temporary. I think there is recognition that there are real cost pressures and there have been increases. So, some of it may be temporary, but whatever it is, we know that households are facing pressures and therefore this Government will do whatever it can to alleviate those pressures and the full impact of such cost increases on households and for individuals.

Mr Leon Perera.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir, I just have two supplementary questions for Minister of State Ms Low Yen Ling. I think the core inflation rate is an average and inflation of course affects different demographic groups differently. So, I am wondering if MTI is studying and will publish CPI indicators for different demographic groups. For example, parents with young children will have expenditures on diapers and milk powder, which other demographic groups will not. Elderly people living alone, empty nesters will have certain healthcare expenditures and other groups will not. Is this being looked at because the inflation could be felt very differently, based on different demographic groups? I had an exchange with the then-Minister for MTI in 2018 in this House and the indication given was that MTI was looking at publishing these kinds of indicators, so I wanted an update on that.

The second question is, if I heard the Minister of State Ms Low correctly, she said that the Government's outlook is that inflation will pick up in the first half of 2022 this year and then it will ameliorate or go down a bit, in the second half. Is this outlook assuming that there is GST increase in the middle of the year, or it is assuming there is no GST increase? I just wanted to understand the assumption behind that expectation of that forecast.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to thank the Member Mr Leon Perera for the two questions. On the first question, we monitor the CPI all items inflation based on different household income groups. That will allow us to also work with MOF to design the necessary targeted assistance for the relevant segments, based on household income. If I could use this opportunity to share with the House, in Q3 2021, the CPI all items inflation came in at 1.9% year-on-year for the lowest 20%; and 2.2% year-on-year for the middle 60%; and 3.0% year-on-year for the highest 20% income group.

This leads me to my next point. This shows that the households in the lowest 20% income group experienced lower inflation compared to the other income groups. And earlier on in my speech, I shared about the importance of monitoring indicators like the real wage growth, that is after accounting for inflation. And I also took the opportunity to specify that for the lower-income, they saw higher real wage growth last year, while we were still in the thick of COVID-19. In fact, I think Minister Lawrence and Minister Gan will say that we are still in the thick of the COVID-19 pandemic. And for the lower income, the real wage growth was, I cited, 4.6% for the year 2021.

His second question about the MAS core inflation, I may have read it very quickly, allow me to slowly read it out now. I cited the various factors driving global inflations and what are some of the contributing factors for domestic inflation. And I talked about the CPI all items inflation and then I cited the MAS core inflation. So, let me repeat: MAS core inflation is expected to increase in the first half of 2022, before easing in the later part of the year.

But having said that, we know that we are still in the thick of the COVID-19 pandemic, the situation is very fluid, is very volatile. We are a small and open economy, and we are exposed to a lot of developments in other parts of the world, including the key food producing countries. For the full year MAS Core Inflation, it could average within the upper half of the official forecast range of 1% to 2%.

Leader of the Opposition.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Just two questions for the Minister of State Ms Low Yen Ling. I do thank her for her reply, which essentially was almost in pari materia vis-à-vis the measures to mitigate increasing cost of living with Minister Chan Chun Sing's 2018 Parliamentary reply.

My two questions pertain to two points of departure, arising from the supplementary questions that came up just now. One was a point that was made about anti-profiteering and Minister of State suggested that the Government looked very closely, for example, at the price of masks that were going up. Minister Chan, a few years ago, took a different approach, although it was with regard to a different item. It was with regard to coffee, coffee in the coffee shops. The approach then was relying on crowdsourcing platforms to address price increases, taking a step away from anti-profiteering-type committees. In view of the situation today, given the answer that Minister of State has shared, is the Government veering towards the formation of anti-profiteering committees as a way to track prices and how they affect our people on the ground?

The second question again is a pick-up from what Minister Chan shared as a way to combat inflation and this is in the case of businesses. This involved looking at meaningful ways and effective ways to lower regulatory costs, which include improving regulatory efficiencies, simplifying processes and removing unnecessary licences. I was listening to Minister of State's reply from the supplementary question asked by Member Ms Jessica Tan. In that regard, what has been the Government's progress on lowering regulatory costs for businesses as a way for combating inflation?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to thank the Leader of the Opposition Mr Singh for his two questions. And I do not think there has been a departure between what I have cited and what Minister Chan had shared. I want to thank him and I want to also use this platform to reiterate again, the Government understands and shares Singaporeans' concerns about rising prices and inflation.

I also want to use this opportunity to assure everyone in the House that MTI, the Ministry of Finance (MOF) and all agencies will spare no effort in supporting Singaporeans and also households and businesses as we face this global specter of inflation. MTI and all economic agencies are also working very closely with MOF to mitigate the effects of inflation on businesses, households and also consumers.

On his first question, I cited a six-pronged approach, a multi-pronged approach because this will allow us to take a very comprehensive stance and engage with our SMEs, our trade associations and of course, at the same time, leveraging on our extensive network of FTAs to provide market access for companies. I cited the first strategy, which is working hard to keep our economy competitive, working hard to create good paying jobs that generate real wage growth for our Singaporeans. So, really, it is about providing conditions for our companies, especially our local SMEs to create good jobs with sustained income growth that outpaces inflation.

Because when companies raise their productivity, real wage growth will follow. When workers can attain real wage growth, they also have new skills to take on new jobs. This is where MTI schemes like the PSG and the EDG come in. And really, this is the whole notion of ITM 2.0 that Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat has talked about: refreshing, strengthening our 23 Industry Transformation Maps to raise the innovation capacity of our SMEs across the 23 sectors, raising productivity and designing good jobs that are not just good jobs for today, but also jobs and skills for tomorrow; at the same time, supporting our local companies to expand their international footprint.

I had cited the mask example. This is just an example of how, when necessary, we will intervene in terms of monitoring prices. We are also making sure that we promote market competition. In addition to promoting market competition, it is also about lowering barriers to entry where possible, so that we can help Singaporeans enjoy competitive prices. Furthermore, I cited how we need to focus on diversifying our sources of supply, expanding our sources of food supply to more than 170 countries and regions across the world.

The Member also asked about Ms Jessica Tan's question. I want to use this platform to reiterate again that MTI and all our economic agencies are working very hard, in particular, in the last two years, to keep a lid on business cost increases and we do so by carefully managing our domestic supply side constraints.

And in terms of prices, coming back to it, we will continue to monitor prices and inflation very closely and we are prepared to adjust policies where necessary. We understand the concerns of businesses and Singaporeans and we will do whatever we can to mitigate the cost pressures that are being felt and the effects of inflation.

Mr Saktiandi Supaat.

Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Minister of State and also Minister Indranee Rajah for explaining that inflation will be assessed not to be persistent and that lots have been done through fiscal and monetary support so far. I have two supplementary questions.

The first is whether the Government can assure Singaporeans that we can continue to monitor the situation and design targeted measures to help specific groups. That is my first supplementary question.

Second, we have been talking a lot about prices of essential items. An issue that I am very concerned about is interest rates, which would trickle down and cascade into prices eventually. Singapore is a price taker. We know that. We take in a lot of imported goods from abroad. But we are also a price taker for interest rates. In particular, with interest rates expected to rise in 2022 and beyond, what will be its impact, especially when we are also trying to emerge out in an endemic scenario, whether there will be any ramifications of rates going forward, especially in accommodation and so on?

Mr Speaker, on the question of whether we will continue to design targeted measures, the answer is yes, we are working hard on that for Budget 2022. We have been taking feedback. We are looking to see what we can do to support households and that is something that Members can look towards in Budget 2022.

8 Mr Edward Chia Bing Hui asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the Ministry is considering reviewing the household income and per capita income criteria for ComCare assistance in view of rising inflation against a backdrop of slower economic growth.

Mr Speaker, ComCare provides assistance to low-income households for their basic living expenses. Households that need help to tide over temporary financial difficulty are provided with ComCare Short-to-Medium-Term Assistance (SMTA).

While there is an income eligibility criterion for ComCare SMTA, the criterion is not a hard threshold to qualify for assistance. Rather, our SSOs assess the needs of individuals and families holistically and exercise flexibility as needed to provide the necessary financial assistance and community support.

The Ministry of Social and Family Development (MSF) reviews the ComCare eligibility criteria every two to three years. The last review was conducted in 2019, and we will review the ComCare eligibility criteria sometime this year.

Building an inclusive and caring society is a collective effort. The community plays an important role in partnering the Government in helping those in need. If anyone encounters a neighbour, friend or family member who needs support, they can call the ComCare hotline at 1800-222-0000 or refer them to the nearest SSO or Family Service Centre for assistance.

Mr Edward Chia.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for the reply. I have two supplementary questions.

I would like to ask the Minister what the considerations on the review period are. I think the Minister mentioned the last time it was reviewed was in 2019. Is the Minister exploring other ways of reducing the time lag between the review and cost of living increases for our lower-income households?

The second supplementary question is: for the short- and medium-term assistance periods, can the Ministry consider extending the periods to reduce the anxiety for many of our lower-income families?

I thank the Member for the supplementary questions. The period concerned is not critical because it is just a guideline for us to set for our staff in order to qualify and, when they do not qualify, to look at other reasons how to bring them over if they need help from the community or the Government.

What is your other question, please? Sorry.

It is whether the period of assistance can be extended to reduce anxiety because most of our residents do feel that three months sometimes is very short, and they are very concerned about extensions.

During this period, we have actually auto-extended SMTA a few times. If we need to do so, we will do it again. The period is to ensure that during normal times, we want to check on them that they are actually making effort maybe to look for jobs or have gotten better in their health condition. Therefore, that review period is necessary. However, there are also instances when we do extend it automatically when we need to. And for the last few periods during this COVID-19 crisis, we have been extending it beyond the three months and six months automatically.

9 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Transport in view of the rising petrol prices, whether the Ministry has considered giving support to the point-to-point (P2P) sector to help defray such costs as the industry faces a slow start to passenger recovery.

The Government actively monitors the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the point-to-point (P2P) sector. Amid lower ridership, the Government has set aside more than $1 billion to provide broad-based as well as sector-specific support to the P2P drivers. Since February 2020, the Government has introduced the Point-to-Point Support Package (PPSP), Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme (SIRS) and multiple tranches of COVID-19 Driver Relief Fund (CDRF).

At Budget 2021, the Government raised the petrol duty as part of Singapore’s sustainability drive. To mitigate the financial impact of this on active P2P drivers with petrol vehicles, the Government provided road tax rebate of 15%, which is about $120, as well as additional petrol duty rebate of $360 in 2021 as offsets.

P2P ridership has steadily recovered from about 70% of pre-COVID-19 levels in October 2021 during the Stabilisation Period, to about 80% in December 2021. This has bolstered the incomes of our P2P drivers.

The Government currently has no plans to provide additional support to defray higher fuel costs which is the result of market forces of global supply and demand factors. We will continue to monitor the P2P sector and the demand for such services to ensure that drivers are coping well in this challenging period.

Ms Yeo Wan Ling.

I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. Our P2P drivers have given feedback on the rising costs to their businesses, such as the impending GST hikes, in addition to what we had mentioned about the rising petrol cost. When was the last time meter and flag-down rates were revised, and would the Ministry and the Public Transport Council be looking at revising flag-down fares or fare structures for both the taxi and private hire services?

Let me say that the Government does not regulate fares. In fact, for taxis, in 1998, we had deregulated the fares. So, taxi and Private Hire Car (PHC) operators have actually been making adjustments to their fares over the years. In fact, most recently, a PHC operator actually adjusted the fares last year. The operators are responsible for adjusting the taxi and PHC fares, taking into account prevailing market conditions. And I think they are best placed to do so, to better match the supply and demand of P2P services even as they take into account their own cost structures as well as, of course, ensuring that fares remain competitive, given the landscape.

This will also allow market forces to effectively respond in a timely manner and also encourage the service providers to improve their service offerings. In fact, there have been benefits to this approach. You can see that there is high vehicle availability during peak hours. What the Government does – it does not regulate fares – is that it requires the operators to provide the Public Transport Council advance notice of any fare adjustments. We also want to ensure that these fares are transparent, easy to understand, so that commuters can make an informed choice.

Additionally, what we have also done is to ensure that the P2P regulatory framework provides an open P2P market so that the taxi drivers are allowed to multi-home, instead of just driving exclusively for one operator. With regard to fuel cost, for instance, one of the ways really would be for them to do more ride hails and reduce the mileage clocked from plying the streets.

10 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Health (a) how many people gave up smoking in the past two years compared to the pre-COVID-19 pandemic figures; (b) whether this trend is in line with our target to reduce the smoking rate to 5% by 2035; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider a ban on cigarette sales to young Singaporeans born after 2012 that can result in the gradual phasing out of tobacco smoking altogether in Singapore.

11 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Government will study the implementation of a ban on the sale of tobacco products to those born after a particular year, in addition to the current minimum legal age; (b) if so, what are the factors the Government will look into when determining whether to implement such a ban and when will the results of the study be announced; and (c) if not, why not.

12 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Health whether the Government will consider introducing a lifetime ban on cigarette sale to young persons below a certain age, similar to New Zealand’s plan to introduce legislation to eliminate smoking for the next generation, reported on 9 December 2021.

13 Ms He Ting Ru asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry intends to introduce a generational tobacco purchasing ban similar to that implemented by New Zealand; and (b) whether other measures are being studied to reduce rates of smoking in the general population.

14 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Health (a) for each year over the past five years, how much does smoking-related diseases cost the healthcare sector; (b) whether the Ministry will study New Zealand's ban on the sale of tobacco products to those born after a particular year; and (c) if so, when will the study be expected to be completed and results presented to the public.

Mr Speaker, with your permission, can I take Question Nos 10 to 14 together, please?

Yes. If you can try and keep your response succinct if possible.

Sir, smoking and second-hand smoke exposure are associated with at least 11 major medical conditions that accounted for about $180 million of healthcare cost in 2019. Our consistent policy approach has been to reduce our smoking rates and encourage smokers to quit.

We do not have comparable figures of the smoking quit rate in the past two years as requested by Dr Lim Wee Kiak. But our tobacco control measures have been successful. It has progressively reduced smoking prevalence rates from 11.8% in 2017 to 10.1% in 2020.

The most effective has been tobacco tax. Several economic studies have reached a consensus that for every 10% increase in real price, there will be about a 3% to 5% decrease in overall tobacco consumption, a 3.5% reduction in young people taking up smoking and a total of about 3% to 5% reduction of new young people taking up smoking as well. [Please refer to " Clarification by Senior Minister of State for Health ", Official Report, 11 January 2022, Vol 95, Issue No 45, Corrections by Written Statement section.]

But it was last increased in 2018. So, with inflation and income increases, the tax burden gets eroded over time and we will have to continue to work with the Ministry of Finance (MOF) to review the tobacco tax rate.

In 2020, standardised packaging and enhanced graphic health warnings were required for all tobacco products sold here in Singapore to reduce the attractiveness of cigarettes. It is, however, still too early to evaluate the effectiveness of this measure.

We also progressively raised the minimum legal age for smoking from 19 years in 2019 to 21 years in January 2021. This aims to denormalise tobacco use among youth below the age of 21, restrict their access to tobacco products in their social circles and hence, reduce the likelihood of smoking initiation. It has contributed to a decline in smoking among younger adults aged 18 to 29 years, from 9.8% in 2017 to 8.8% in 2020.

The Ministry of Health (MOH) and the Health Promotion Board (HPB) will be piloting a new smoking cessation programme where eligible individuals will be offered subsidised Nicotine Replacement Therapy that is complemented with counselling in public healthcare institutions.

Smokers who are looking for support to quit can also join HPB's I Quit Programme. It offers smokers a range of smoking cessation interventions, such as phone or face-to-face counselling, or frequent nudges via text messages to encourage participants to sustain their behaviours.

There have been several questions raised by Members of Parliament on New Zealand's recently announced cohort smoking ban. It is an attractive proposal, in that it prevents young people from taking up smoking while not putting too many restrictions on older smokers. Then, of course, as the years go by, more and more cohorts are smoking free.

MOH is open to studying such a policy. But we need to take into account a few considerations. First, in Singapore's case, young people are generally not taking up smoking, unlike the youths in many other countries. Our youths today no longer see smoking as glamorous and are aware of its harms.

Second, our bigger challenge amongst the young people here are e-cigarettes, which are still tobacco products and harmful to the users, despite its fruity flavours. It is, therefore, outrightly banned here in Singapore. But with e-commerce, they still find their way here. We will need to do more to enforce the current ban, to push back against the tide of popularity and increasing use. If vaping becomes entrenched amongst the younger population, it undoes all the progress we made on curbing smoking and will take an enormous effort over many years to curb its use.

Although New Zealand has announced a cohort smoking ban, it promotes vaping as an alternative to smoking. So, over time, the habit may well shift from smoking to vaping, which in itself is still harmful.

Third, the challenge with a cohort ban is in enforcement. For such a ban to be effective, we would need to introduce laws to penalise older persons who are not subject to the ban but for abetting offences such as supplying tobacco products to the affected cohorts. A similar proposal was discussed in Parliament in 2016 when amendments to the Tobacco (Control of Advertisements and Sale) Act were introduced and MOH explained the challenge of implementation and enforcement then.

Nevertheless, we remain open to the idea. New Zealand’s announced ban will be the first time a country will be implementing such a ban at the national level. We will study how New Zealand implements the ban, its effectiveness and how their experience could be applied here to Singapore.

My Ministry will continue to enhance our approach to tobacco control, through public education, provision of smoking cessation services, legislation and taxation. We will also study new measures to further reduce access to tobacco products and tackle vaping, particularly among our youths.

Order. End of Question time. Mr Leong Mun Wai, you have a Personal Explanation?

[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), Written Answers to Question Nos 15-16, 22, 27-28, 30-31, 33-40, 43-56, 58, 60-71, 74-75, 77, 79-85, 87-89 and 91-97 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the Appendix. The remaining Question have been postponed to a later sitting of Parliament or withdrawn.]

Mr Speaker, thank you for the opportunity for me to respond to Minister Chan's query yesterday.

Dear Minister Chan, yesterday, I attempted to get assurance from your good self that children in schools will not be vaccination-differentiated. You may wish to know from ground feedback that many distressed parents are still trying to get reassurance from you and your Ministry, and to be very clear of your position. I see it as my duty as a parliamentarian to bring their valid concerns to this House. Yes, Minister Ong Ye Kung and yourself have given the assurance before —

Mr Leong, this is not to make another speech. You were meant to clarify the source of some of the feedback that you provided.

Yes, Mr Speaker, I will come to that very soon.

You will come to that, fairly immediately?

Yes.

Thank you.

In spite of that, I sought to get your commitment of a more definite scenario that Vaccinated-differentiation Safe Management Measures (VDS) will not be considered for children at least until non-mRNA vaccines are available for children, which you have avoided to answer directly.

Mr Leong, I am not going to repeat myself.

Yes, thank you.

You are here to clarify the source of the points that you made, not to make another speech.

Okay, yes. Point taken. The point I raised that some schools might have started practising VDS is based on a screenshot from a Telegram chatgroup, sgconcernedparents, sent by a Facebook friend. The relevant messages, among others, are as follows: one, "Depends on school; my niece came back crying, saying her teacher scolded her for being unvaxxed" —

Mr Leong, the question was about which school, where and so on. Do you have those details?

I am going through the thing.

No. You are going through the thing, the question, which you said you would clarify and the question was about which school so that the Minister could follow up on the allegation that you have made or is it just a screenshot from some Telegram page?

Mr Speaker, can you let me finish the —

No, we are asking you to substantiate. We are giving you airtime to substantiate what you said yesterday. So, is that going to come out? Or are you just going to repeat —

Okay, this information that I am going to say —

Or are you just going to repeat about the screenshot?

I am going to repeat about the screenshot.

Do you know the source? Which school and so on?