Hansard, Tuesday, 13 September 2022

1 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether vaccinations for COVID-19 will be incorporated into the National Childhood Immunisation Schedule; and (b) if so, whether parents will have a choice between mRNA and non-mRNA vaccines.

2 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health with regard to the current COVID-19 Omicron wave (a) whether the hospitalisation rate of 1.9% is expected to rise as more restrictions are removed; (b) what is the highest hospitalisation rate that our public hospitals can currently accommodate; and (c) whether the Government will look into mandating targeted vaccines against the Omicron variant.

Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, may I address Question Nos 1 to 2 for oral answer and Question Nos 21 to 23 for written answer on the Order Paper, please?

Please do.

I am very thankful that the number of questions on COVID-19 has decreased significantly.

Mr Yip Hon Weng asked about COVID-19 hospitalisation rates that our public hospitals can accommodate. As our society becomes more resilient to COVID-19 due to vaccinations as well as safe recovery from infections, we have observed that the incidence of hospitalisation has fallen in the most recent Omicron infection wave, compared to previous waves.

However, it is not possible to estimate a hospitalisation incidence rate which our healthcare capacity can handle, because it is also a function of the transmissibility of the variant and the number of people who get infected on a daily basis during a big wave. So, what we need to do is to continue to keep our vaccinations "up to date", prevent ourselves from falling severely ill if we are infected, we must exercise social responsibility, such as staying at home and self-testing when not feeling well, and do whatever we can to optimise our hospital capacity. We have been and will continue to re-allocate our healthcare resources on a dynamic basis to where they are needed most.

Mr Yip Hon Weng also asked about vaccines. We are bringing in bivalent vaccines into Singapore. It is provided for in our agreements with the pharmaceutical companies. The Health Sciences Authority (HSA) has completed the evaluation of the Moderna bivalent vaccine and a decision will be announced soon. The bivalent vaccines will target both the ancestral strain of COVID-19 and the Omicron variant. Our intention is to update our vaccines for the National Vaccination Programme as the formulations improve. We will share more details when the arrangements are confirmed.

Nevertheless, existing vaccines remain highly protective against severe disease, including for the Omicron BA.5 variant. If you are eligible to receive another vaccine dose, please receive your vaccination without delay and not wait for variant-specific vaccines, as COVID-19 is still spreading in the community.

I will now turn to the Member’s question about COVID-19 in children. As of 29 August 2022, amongst young people under the age of 18 who are infected with COVID-19, the incidence of Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in Children (MIS-C) was 5.7 per 100,000 for those fully vaccinated, versus 38 per 100,000 amongst those not fully vaccinated.

The Member also asked about children’s vaccinations for COVID-19, such as whether Novavax will be made available for those aged 18 and below and whether the vaccines have long-term effects on children. Currently, HSA as well as the Expert Committee on COVID-19 Vaccination (EC19V) are independently evaluating the Novavax vaccine for young persons aged 12 to 17. Novavax has not submitted the application for its vaccine to be administered to children under 12.

There is so far no evidence suggesting COVID-19 vaccines result in potential risk of toxicity to humans or developmental defects in children. There are no plans to include COVID-19 vaccinations into the National Childhood Immunisation Schedule at this point as the pandemic situation is dynamic and the recommendations continue to evolve with new data. MOH will review this when appropriate.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim asked about vaccination-differentiated measures. At the height of an infection wave, measures are taken to prevent our healthcare system from being overwhelmed. However, when cases are lower and steady, many of these measures, including mask-wearing, for example, have been removed. Others, such as vaccinations and vaccination-differentiated safe management measures (VDS), are kept in some form, in anticipation of another infection wave. This is the nature of crisis management – we stand down many measures when they are not needed but we need to keep some, in anticipation of something worse happening later.

While VDS is mandated for specific settings, such as events with more than 500 participants at any one time, business owners and employers also have the flexibility to implement conditions of service that are relevant to their settings, such as requiring the donning of masks, as well as adopting vaccination-related instructions for customers or for workers.

Nevertheless, as the Multi-Ministry Task Force (MTF) had explained in previous replies, we are reviewing vaccination requirements, from one of counting number of doses and boosters we are taking, to ensuring that our vaccination is "up to date". This will be a more enduring posture as we live with COVID-19 as an endemic disease. We expect to complete this review in the next couple of months and will review VDS at the same time.

Mr Yip Hon Weng.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for the reply. I have two supplementary questions. I note the Minister's response on adding COVID-19 vaccinations into the National Childhood Immunisation Schedule. It will give assurance to parents that the COVID-19 vaccination does play an important role to better protect children against severe complications, such as Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in children. What else is the Ministry doing to encourage more parents to vaccinate their children for COVID-19?

My second supplementary question is when will MOH allow children below the age of five to get the COVID-19 vaccination, since other countries, such as the US, have allowed COVID-19 vaccines for babies aged six months to toddlers aged four years?

On the second question first, children under five, we have the supplies; it is part of our supply agreement. HSA has also approved the use of the Moderna vaccine, which is a two-dose vaccine, on children aged six months to under five years old. But because cases are now low and we also want to vaccinate children below five and give the booster for children aged six to 12 years at the same location, it is more convenient for parents to bring siblings often falling into both age groups together to the vaccination centre. But the older age groups, those in Primary schools, many of them are also getting into examination mode and given that the current situation is stable, the cases are relatively low, our intention, as we have announced at the MTF press conference, is to time it around end-October or early November, when examinations are over, so that, with peace of mind, parents can bring their children – those from six months up to 11 years old – either for their primary series or for their booster. That is our current plan. Details will be announced once we are ready.

As we open up vaccinations to all the children for booster or primary vaccination, we want to continue to disclose as much medical information as we can, for example, as the Member has asked, "What is the MIS-C rate for children who are fully vaccinated and not vaccinated?" We can tell there is huge difference. Therefore, it is through encouraging parents through transparent information that we hope more parents will bring their children to get vaccinated.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.

Sir, I understand the desire by the Ministry to allow the private sector to retain maximum flexibility in terms of VDS, but I am wondering if the public sector will move towards a complete removal. I ask, in part, because I believe many of us still have residents that – for religious, health or personal reasons – have chosen not to be vaccinated.

I think it is difficult to adopt a blanket policy to say all in the public sector shall not insist on VDS. It all depends on the settings. For each setting, it depends on whether it is crowded, whether seniors are present in those settings, what is the risk of transmission. So, I think we always need to take a differentiated approach.

We must remember that as we increasingly treat COVID-19 as endemic, "endemic" does not mean that it is not there. Endemic means to acknowledge that it is there and we have to adjust to our normal life and normal procedures in order to live with the virus. And one of the principles to do so is to make sure that, according to the risk of different settings, we adopt the necessary measures to manage the risks. Therefore, it is in this spirit that we allow employers and building owners to impose their own VDS requirements should they need to.

Nevertheless, as I mentioned in my main reply, we are reviewing VDS together with the requirements for vaccinations and it should be completed in the next couple of months.

3 Ms Foo Mee Har asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance whether the Government will consider commissioning a special review to comprehensively review controls and checks in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic-related procurement and expenditure.

Mr Speaker, MOF has started its review of the controls and checks in relation to COVID-19 pandemic-related procurement and expenditure since earlier this year. Respective agencies are conducting their audits on COVID-19 pandemic-related procurement and expenditure to ensure transactions are bona fide and that there is no erroneous payment. This is on top of the Auditor-General’s thematic audit of the COVID-19-related procurement and expenditure. The AGO’s findings on HPB, MOM and SLA were published in its report for FY2021/2022.

Drawing lessons from our COVID-19 experience and from the Auditor-General’s report, MOF is reviewing our guidelines on procurement, contract management and payment, to ensure our control measures are appropriate for future emergencies. MOF will also be issuing an advisory to agencies to strengthen the adoption of good practices and minimise financial risks during emergencies.

Ms Foo Mee Har.

Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Minister for her response. I have two supplementary questions. First, to enhance the preparedness for future emergencies, I would like to ask the Minister what are the key measures the Government intends to put in place to minimise financial risks and better manage contracts and payments during emergencies.

The second supplementary question is, I note that in the Minister's reply just now, MOF has started its review of controls and checks for COVID-19 procurement and expenditure. We are now in FY2022. I wonder if the Minister can give us an update of the actual total COVID-19 expenditure for FY2020 to FY2021, the period that has passed.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for her supplementary questions. With respect to the first supplementary question, for COVID-19, the Government had put in place a number of measures to mitigate fraud risks, such as pre-disbursement checks, anti-gaming framework, ex post analytics and post-disbursement audit checks, to identify potential abuse or conflicts of interest. These measures have been effective in managing the risks involved in large-scale crisis operations.

As mentioned in my main reply, drawing from the lessons learnt, MOF is working with agencies to strengthen the adoption of good practices and minimise financial risks during emergencies. These measures include:

adopting system checks on grant eligibility, including data verification at-source, to reduce the risk of errors from manual processing;

using practical methods to assess price reasonableness for crisis buys, such as applying a percentage mark-up from non-crisis prices or actual costs incurred by suppliers;

ensuring proper documentation of key decisions, such as policy changes and approvals across the lifecycle of a transaction; and

conducting ex post checks, for example, through the use of data analytics, to detect potential irregularities.

With respect to her second supplementary question on what is the actual total COVID-19 expenditure for FY2020 to FY2021, our actual COVID-19 expenditure in FY2020 and 2021 was $72.3 billion. Of this, $13.4 billion was for our public health measures; $50.6 billion was to protect jobs through support for workers and businesses; and $8.3 billion was for direct household and social support. The total amount was lower than the $100 billion committed earlier due to two main reasons.

First, the Government had initially set aside the loan capital in FY2020 in anticipation of a tight credit market. But, eventually, the loan capital was not needed as MAS provided low interest capital to participating financial institutions for ESG loans through its Singapore dollar facility.

Second, we had some under-utilisation in public health spending. We had set aside resources for public health capacity to cater for potential downside scenarios but did not have to fully utilise these resources. The safe management measures and the cooperation of Singaporeans helped to avert severe public health outcomes. These under-utilisations were offset, however, by additional funding for the various support packages rolled out to support Singaporeans and businesses over the heightened alerts and stabilisation phases from May to November 2021. With these resources, we were able to save lives and livelihoods. Members can refer to MOF's occasional paper titled "Assessment of the Impact of Key COVID-19 Budget Measures" which was published in February this year. An interim assessment was also published in February 2021.

4 Dr Wan Rizal asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) what is the estimated timeline for completion of the salary review of early childhood educators under the Early Childhood Development Agency; and (b) whether the review will include implementing measures to manage the workload and provide pathways and progressions for career development.

Mr Speaker, over the past three years, educators’ salaries in Government-supported preschools have increased by around 20% on average.

There is an ongoing salary review for early childhood (EC) educators which we expect to complete in the fourth quarter of 2022. ECDA intends to work with Government-supported operators to implement the changes from 2023 onwards. The review will ensure our educators’ salaries are commensurate with their contributions and professional skills, while being competitive enough to attract and retain talent in the sector.

Apart from the review, there is already an Early Childhood Skills Framework and a Continuing Professional Development (CPD) roadmap. Career pathways have also been expanded so that educators can aspire towards larger or new roles, such as Lead Early Years Educator, Deputy Centre Leader and Curriculum Specialist.

ECDA is also paying attention to educators’ well-being. The ongoing digitalisation initiatives help educators’ better manage their workload. ECDA is also working with preschools to adopt recommendations from the Occupational Health and Safety Assessment for the EC sector to ensure our educators’ physical and mental well-being are well taken care of.

ECDA will continue to engage and work closely with our stakeholders and pursue improvements in these areas.

Dr Wan Rizal.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for sharing some good news for our preschool educators. I am pretty sure the last two and a half years have been difficult for them, especially with our children and the COVID-19 situation. Thanks also for sharing a bit on the mental health well-being plans the Ministry has. Could the Minister expand a bit more on the points that he raised earlier on digitalisation and how we can better support them in those terms?

They have also actually shared a bit on some ergonomic issues, for example, because they are sitting on really low seats and the tables are all smaller. Could we look into expanding this framework and see how we can provide ergonomically better or special equipment for all teachers as they teach, too?

I remember when I was in Primary school and all the way to Secondary school, my teachers used to collect fees in cash every month and then issue receipts one by one to all of us. I am not surprised that we have been doing this for a very long time. And we do need to help our teachers perform these administrative functions, whether they are doing fee collection, temperature-taking during COVID-19, for example, and, now, as it continues to be important; keeping in touch with parents; marking attendance. All these things today can be done through digitalisation efforts and we have been working with preschools to onboard them in applications that can be shared across the whole preschool sector.

We also take inputs from preschool leaders when there are new things that they want to do. For example, I saw applications that use e-learning that they transfer from book-type of recording into digital devices so that they can be reused again and again. Of course, it is also a very good sustainable effort. So, all these things are being done and will evolve. Actually, I am very happy to see, as I visit some preschools, that we are at the leading edge not only to digitalise for the purpose of education but also to help them with their productivity.

Of course, as I mentioned just now, we are always concerned for their physical and mental well-being, including their work environment. Some of the recommendations, as the Member mentioned just now, were to ensure that they have proper seats to sit on. Our teachers are very dedicated and they really connect with our children. They want to sit on the floor and, sometimes, on low stools so that they could connect at eye level with their children. It is not good for their back and their physical well-being in the long term. So, apart from encouraging them to basically take a proper chair or stool when they teach, we have also asked preschools to provide proper desks and seats so that, during their downtime, they can actually sit in an office environment where it is suited for them and not a classroom where there are only low stools and chairs where they continue to do their work.

Mr Leong Mun Wai.

Thank you, Speaker. Can I ask the Minister how the EC educators' pay scale compares with that of the teachers now?

I do not have the numbers. Members who are interested can file a Parliamentary Question on it.

But, certainly, there is a relativity among all jobs and all job families that we want to maintain, not just between educators, but also across many other jobs families so that there is balance between what we pay for their skills and contributions and being competitive enough that they do not move across because they are portable across some skills. We lose them. So, this is the balancing that we have to make across them and to compare. Whether it is a good thing to compare between preschool and school teachers is a question that professionals can help us to answer.

5 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Education (a) whether the Ministry will consider enfolding all Special Education school teachers to come under the Ministry so that they will be able to receive the benefits of being an MOE teacher; and (b) if not, whether there are any future plans to do so to help attract and retain talent in this sector.

6 Ms Carrie Tan asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the current status of the supply and readiness of Special Education teachers to meet Singapore’s needs in the next five years; and (b) what plans does the Ministry have to attract talent to join the special education sector and to retain them in the profession.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to answer Question Nos 5 and 6 together, please?

Yes, please.

Mr Speaker, Sir, let me, first, set out where we are today before I share more with Dr Shahira Abdullah about my views on the way forward.

Today, in Singapore, Special Education (SPED) is supported by the Government, community funders and Social Service Agencies (SSAs). The SSAs have been delivering special education for children with moderate-to-severe special educational needs for decades. Today, we have 22 SPED schools led by 12 SSAs.

While full funding is provided for SPED, SSAs today retain substantial autonomy, including the hiring of staff for their respective SPED schools. MOE has been working closely and supporting SSAs to enhance the career proposition and professionalism of SPED teachers.

One major HR initiative, done in consultation and partnership with SSAs, was the Journeys of Excellence Package, in short, the Journeys Package, launched in 2020. The Journeys Package aims to strengthen the professionalism in SPED as well as recognise the years of experience and service of many SPED educators by placing them at the appropriate competency levels and raising the job size of senior SPED teachers to more closely align with those of equivalent MOE teachers. MOE has been working with SPED schools to put in place progressive HR frameworks to support teacher retention and career development, taking a leaf from MOE’s own frameworks. One example is increasing the number of key personnel positions in SPED schools to provide career advancement opportunities for good-performing SPED teachers.

To support these efforts, SPED schools will receive additional funding for manpower costs in two tranches: one, which was implemented in 2021, and another planned for 2024. To receive the second funding tranche, SPED schools will need to implement more progressive HR practices and the corresponding increases in SPED teacher salaries. SPED schools will determine the salary adjustments for their teachers at different levels based on performance and current salary structures.

Beyond funding and working with SSAs to provide competitive remuneration and meaningful career progression for the 1,600 SPED teachers, MOE funds SPED teachers’ pre-service training in the form of the Diploma in Special Education (DISE) offered by the National Institute of Education (NIE). Around seven in 10 SPED teachers have obtained DISE or joined the sector with other recognised teaching credentials. For the remaining 500 teachers, around half are either on the current course or will be enrolled in DISE in January 2023. MOE also funds in-service training for SPED teachers and invites SPED teachers teaching the national curriculum to attend in-service training alongside MOE teachers. In addition, MOE offers Masters Scholarships in Special Education tenable either overseas or locally.

MOE also works with partners to recognise and profile the important work of SPED teachers. The Outstanding SPED Teacher Award and the soon-to-be-implemented Promising SPED Teacher Award by MOE and SG Enable seek to identify and honour exemplary SPED teachers who are impactful and good role models in the fraternity.

In addition, MOE has seconded MOE educators who have the passion to serve as teachers and key personnel in SPED schools. This includes seconding experienced MOE educators to serve as SPED school principals and vice principals, upon the SSAs’ request. Currently, there are 14 principals and vice principals who are MOE-secondees out of a total of 47 SPED school leaders. MOE is committed to partner closely the SSAs in this journey towards professionalism.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Dr Shahira Abdullah has asked if we will consider enfolding all special education school teachers to come under the Ministry so that they will be able to receive the benefits of being an MOE teacher. My own personal views are as follows.

First, I am prepared to work with my staff, SSAs and the community to explore different and new models. But I would set out five conditions for us to consider as to whether a new model is better and more appropriate.

First, the new model, if it comes about, must deliver better outcomes for our SPED children.

Second, the new model, if it comes about, must deliver better outcomes in terms of support for the SPED children's family.

Third, the model must provide better training opportunities and professional development for our SPED teachers.

Fourth, the model must be able to engage the community to participate and partake in the endeavour.

Fifth, we must also have a model that allows a better continuum of care and support from preschool to school and the post-school environment. So, we are prepared to explore new models with SSAs and the community, so long as we bear in mind these five criteria that I have just laid out. I will be happy to have this conversation with the SSAs and our community partners on how we can take the SPED education sector forward as part of our Forward SG exercise.

Dr Shahira Abdullah.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister for his response. I am very heartened to hear that they are ready to work with the relevant SSAs and organisations. I just have one supplementary question. They are still represented by the Singapore Manual & Mercantile Workers' Union – I understand it maybe because they may have been better adapted to handle this. How has that changed moving forward, so that MOE can better work with the SPED organisations and SPED individuals in this current moment to help retain and attract more SPED teachers to this vocation?

Mr Speaker, Sir. I shall not attempt to answer on behalf of NTUC, but as the ex-Secretary-General of NTUC, I will say that I will leave it to NTUC to decide which union best serves the interests of the SPED school teachers. MOE is agnostic, regardless of whether the SPED school teachers are with SMMWU, STU or any of the other teachers' unions. MOE will continue to work closely with them and also with their SSA organisations.

Ms Denise Phua.

I thank the Minister for the heartening responses and for being open-minded in looking at future models. I just want to ask the Minister to consider that the whole special education model does not comprise only of staff who are known as teachers. Actually, the holistic development of our students over in the SPED system especially, really includes individuals like the allied professionals, psychologists, therapists, occupational therapists (OTs), speech pathologists, social workers and other staff.

So, in considering and even publicising decisions on salaries and benefits packages of mainstream and other SPED school teachers, we need to consider that the other staff also play critical roles and to also include them as we design future models and future compensation packages for them. So, I would like to ask the Minister to consider that.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we fully agree with Ms Denise Phua's comment that, indeed, the whole SPED sector includes both the people who take care of the education component as well as the care component and the therapy component. So, indeed, whenever we review any scheme of service or any benefits, we will certainly take into account all the stakeholders that are involved in taking care of our SPED children.

Ms Carrie Tan.

Thank you, Speaker. I would like to thank the Minister for addressing the question. But my Question No 6 is about whether we are right now meeting the targets of having enough teachers come forward to enter the SPED sector.

I am heartened to hear that there are training schemes and even sponsorships for a Masters programme and so on. But how are we, in terms of meeting the targets that are needed, in terms of the projections of the number of SPED teachers we will need in the coming years and does the Ministry look into what are the current pain points that are preventing people from coming forward, despite all of these very good incentives and training schemes provided?

The other thing is, I am seeing this disconnect, I am a little bit confused – so, I would appreciate the Minister's clarification. I understand that SSAs are coming under MSF, but MOE is now taking a proactive stance in terms of creating the frameworks and training for the SPED teachers. So, is there any kind of operational disconnect for SSAs that they have to navigate, because of this dual Ministry involvement in terms of the development of the sector?

Mr Speaker, Sir, let me address the three sets of issues that Ms Carrie Tan asked. First, I think we have to deal with the quantity and quality of manpower; two, we have to deal with the pain points that the Member mentioned; and three, it has to do with the organisational structures that we have to deal with.

On the first issue, on the quantity and quality of manpower, certainly, we would need to do much more to increase the number of SPED school educators and support staff. We have laid out the plan together with MSF. We intend to increase the number of SPED schools in our system. But I must share this with the House. In planning for a SPED school, the manpower needs are not as straightforward as a conventional school. Because in a conventional school, the needs are perhaps more homogeneous whereas, in a SPED school, different SPED children have different types of needs and different degrees of severity. This is why the planning is not as straightforward. We do have certain planning ratios, but we, certainly, will need and would like to recruit more Singaporeans to join the SPED sector.

Today, we do rely quite a bit on some foreign manpower and, just like any other parts of our education and care sector, we would like a significant core of Singaporeans to be there, so that we can take care of our own people, especially the vulnerable, even amidst possible disruptions in the manpower supply. So, we will want to step up on this and we do have a roadmap worked out on how we progressively increase the number of SPED school teachers and caregivers as we build up the infrastructure in the next few years.

The second issue is about the pain points. For many of us who have SPED children or have been involved in the SPED school sector, we would know that it is emotionally very demanding. It is not easy. So, I have given guidance to my staff that we cannot just plan on the basis of how many staff we need for how many children. We need to have a bit of a buffer, if you would like, for us to be able to roster our people to go for training and also, sometimes, for them to take a break. So, that is one part of how we try to address the pain points.

The second part is that we would also like to have a wider group of people who understand the SPED community. Even within the MOE conventional schools, we have our fair share of some special needs children where we would need to "up" the skills level of many of our teachers to take care of the higher needs of these children in our conventional schools. That is why we have a system to roster some of our teachers to the SPED schools to cross-share experiences, so that we can take better care of the SPED children in our conventional schools and yet, at the same time, allow some of the SPED school teachers some time to go for their own training and perhaps to be rostered out for a break in their long journey with the SPED sector. So, these are, indeed, some of the things that we need to do.

On the third point about the structure and organisations, rest assured that the two of us work closely together. We sit side-by-side on many committees. We have this model before and we started this model between MSF and MOE, not just for SPED, but we did this for early childhood education. ECDA is an agency that jointly reports to Minister Masagos and myself.

And, of course, I have a secret weapon, to make sure that nothing falls between the cracks. That is my Permanent Secretary, Wan Yong. She is both the Permanent Secretary in MOE and MSF. And I have personally asked her to oversee the continuum to work out the models required to support our SPED community in terms of infrastructure and manpower. I would say that between infrastructure and manpower, infrastructure is the easier of the two. The more difficult of the two is for us to recruit the number and quality of people.

Having said that, we are both working closely now to deal with the most difficult challenge which we want to take a crack at and which we think we need to do much better at as a society. That is the continuum of care from preschool to school and the post-18-year-olds' care and work arrangement for our SPED community.

If anybody can do this well, it must be Singapore, because when the SPED children come to us in the preschools, we have the Early Intervention Programme for Infants and Children (EIPIC); we have the SPED schools for them. With the data that is available, it enables MOE to forward plan the school system requirement. And from MOE's data, we should be able to forward-plan the post-18 requirement and we really want to do this much better.

Our current gap, the biggest gap, in my view, is not so much the preschool and the school system in which we have invested a lot of effort over the years; we can still do better. In our next lap, the biggest gap will be how we provide a continuum from the school system to the post-18 arrangement so that we can better support the SPED community, including the caregivers, who will always be worried about what will happen to their special needs children when they are no longer around.

Mr Pritam Singh.

Thank you, Speaker. Just a quick question for the Minister in regard to his original reply where he stated that there were 1,600 SPED teachers, if I heard him correctly. Can I just confirm with the Minister whether that number includes the allied educators, who are an integral part of the SPED system? As the Minister also shared, in certain cases where there is a gap, a cognitive gap for certain children, the allied educator could be as, if not more important than the SPED teacher, depending on where the child is developmentally.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the short answer is no. As what Ms Denise Phua has said, beyond the SPED educators, we have another group of people, which includes the allied educators, physiotherapists and so forth who form the entire community.

And I can get the Member the number that he had asked for.

7 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Transport (a) how does the Government determine the current annual amount of public transport subsidies; (b) in light of rising costs, whether the Government will consider reviewing this amount; (c) what intrinsic values does the Government derive from the provision of public transport subsidies; and (d) how do public transport subsidies compare with other areas of subsidies and support provided by the Government.

Mr Speaker, pre-COVID-19, Singaporeans took about eight million trips every day on public transport for work, school, social purposes. A reliable, convenient and affordable public transport system is essential to ensuring connectivity in our densely populated city. It also boosts economic activity, reduces road congestion and emissions and contributes to sustainability and the liveability of our city.

Over the last decade, we have steadily enhanced the public transport system with attendant increases in cost. Commuters have benefited from a 40% expansion of the rail network, 80 new bus services, reduced peak-hour waiting times for basic bus services from 30 to 15 minutes, as well as significant improvements in rail reliability from 67,000 to over one million mean kilometres between failures.

From 2012 to 2021, operating costs for public transport increased by 7% per year on average. This was not matched by revenue growth. Consequently, Government subsidies have been increasing. The Government, currently, subsidises public transport services by more than $2 billion a year, or about $1 for every journey. In addition, we have committed over $60 billion to expand and renew the rail network over the next decade.

As with other subsidised services, the Government has to consider how best to share the cost between users and current as well as future generations of taxpayers. There are three key aspects.

First, the Government continues to fully fund the expansion of public transport infrastructure as these are large lumpy expenditures.

Second, we must find ways to economise and get value-for-money. This requires a comprehensive approach – from efficient procurement by LTA and productivity-focused operations by public transport operators, to optimising the provision of bus and rail services even as we grow the overall network to serve new residential areas. Ultimately, we have to deploy our finite resources in a manner that best serves all Singaporeans.

And third, we have a fare formula to ensure that commuters pay a fair share of the costs, by accounting for key cost drivers for public transport, in particular, wages, energy and inflation. The Government is also mindful that we have to support those with greater needs and fewer means. We keep fares lower for concession groups, such as seniors and students, and provide Public Transport Vouchers to low-income families.

We will continue to work with public transport operators to ensure judicious cost management. The fare formula is being reviewed to ensure robustness and relevance, in light of changes in the industry and in commuting patterns. As we continue to expand the public transport network and operating costs rise with inflation and other cost drivers, we will continue to seek an optimal balance between the fiscal sustainability of Government spending on public transport and ensuring affordability of public transport fares, especially for the vulnerable segments of our society.

Mr Liang Eng Hwa.

Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister and also commend MOT and LTA for the significant build-up of public transport connectivity. It is, indeed, money well-spent and value-for-money, I would say. The Minister mentioned about the upcoming fare adjustment formula review and, of course, in every fare review, we wait with bated breath on the outcome. Can I ask the Minister how he sees the fare adjustment formula being improved upon and what can the public expect?

Also, it would appear that, under the current formula, the balancing item to square up the costs versus the revenue is the fare adjustments. Can I ask the Minister if this is, indeed, the case and whether the Public Transport Operators (PTOs) as well as the subsidies from the Government can also help to take a bigger share of any cost increases?

My final point is whether the Public Transport Vouchers can also be part of the household support or GST Offset Package.

Mr Speaker, I thank the Member for his questions. First, just so that we are all having the same frame of reference, there is a Fare Review Exercise. This is really the annual exercise conducted by the Public Transport Council to decide whether there is a need for an increase of the public transport fares and, if so, by how much, based on the current formula. This should normally come out sometime in the fourth quarter.

Separate to that is the Fare Formula Review. In other words, the formula itself needs to be reconsidered, taking into account the changing commuting patterns, the cost drivers and other factors, so that we can ensure that any fare formula we use in the next cycle is one that is robust and relevant to the circumstances within which our public transport system operates.

So, how will it be improved upon? I think, by that, the Member refers to the fare formula. We ought to give the Public Transport Council the time to go through the process and come up with these recommendations. But we can also be quite clear that it is apparent that there are many factors that are at play at this point, not least of which are, for example, commuting patterns, which may have changed – in fact, we already see some changes because of work-from-home and so on – the energy costs, whether that is a pattern that we expect to sustain inflationary pressures and so on. So, we should allow the Public Transport Council the space and time to do a proper job and come back with its considered recommendation. But clearly, the intent is to ensure that whatever formula we use is one that is relevant and applicable, given the circumstances within which we will find ourselves over the next three to five years.

On the fare adjustment itself and Government subsidies, well, in some ways, it is arithmetic. There is a cost to providing public transport. There is revenue that comes from the fares that commuters pay. And if the two do not meet, then somebody has to pick up the slack. And the slack, in general, has been picked up through Government subsidies. And as I have said, today, the Government subsidy is of the order of the magnitude of $2 billion a year, about $1 billion each for our train and for our bus services. And we will have to see how the formula works out, what the specific recommendations are going to be and then, we have to take stock from there.

But, the fundamental point – one that I made earlier in my response but which I wish to re-emphasise – is that we do need to strike that balance between on the one hand, having a public transport system that is reliable, efficient, accessible and, at the same time, affordable because the reliability, efficiency and availability of public transport do come at a cost and the costs are increasing. So, we need to decide how that cost burden is to be apportioned, not just between the commuters and taxpayers of this generation but also the taxpayers of future generations because liabilities that we take on today will also be imposed on future generations of taxpayers. So, we have to keep that in mind in making the decision.

Finally, the Member's question on Public Transport Vouchers to help mitigate the impact, in particular, on vulnerable segments. This is something that we take very seriously. Members may recall that, last year, when the fares were increased, we also announced about 600,000 Public Transport Vouchers would be made available. That is about the third decile in terms of income earners – in other words, up to the 30th percentile of income earners. Or if you include those who have no income, it is up to the 40th percentile or the fourth decile, so, up to 40% of Singapore households would be able to benefit from those Public Transport Vouchers. And we will make sure that we continue to address the needs of these vulnerable segments through an appropriate provision of such Public Transport Vouchers.

8 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Manpower (a) whether the Ministry is aware of any ongoing studies being conducted by third parties to examine the feasibility of a four-day work week in Singapore; and (b) if not, whether the Ministry will consider this as a core issue and prioritise the commission of its own study to examine the benefits and challenges of a four-day work week.

Mr Speaker, the Ministry is not aware of any ongoing studies conducted by third parties to examine the feasibility of a four-day work week in Singapore.

We have noted reports of four-day work week pilots in other countries, such as Ireland, Japan and Spain. Elsewhere, such as in Belgium, employees have the right-to-request for a four-day work week, but with daily work hours extended so that the total number of hours worked per week remains the same. So far, results appear to be mixed. Some of the key concerns that stakeholders have include the impact on productivity, business costs and employee well-being. While productivity improvements have been reported in some cases, this depends on sector and job type. In some instances, reduced work hours have had to be compensated by hiring more labour. At the same time, employees are concerned that their salaries could be reduced due to fewer hours worked, while some could face increased stress when they work more hours than usual in a day to complete their work.

As with any work arrangement, a four-day work week may work well for some employers and employees but not others. We should adopt a flexible mindset. A four-day work week is one of many types of flexible work arrangements, and the Ministry, together with the tripartite partners, strongly encourage employers and employees to be open to flexible work arrangements in all its various forms to identify and adopt those that best suit their unique business needs and those of the workers.

Mr Melvin Yong.

Sir, I thank the Minister of State for her reply. I have one supplementary question. First, let me state that the Labour Movement is heartened to hear about the Government's commitment to continue promoting flexible work arrangements. The COVID-19 pandemic has shown all of us that a variety of flexible work arrangements, once thought impossible, can work.

To better understand the impact of a four-day work week, would the Ministry be open to conducting a small-scale trial among some of its employees or perhaps within segments of the Public Service? This way, we can better understand and study the pros and cons, benefits and challenges. For example, how a reduced work week can possibly better facilitate and encourage employees' continual training and upskilling because setting aside one day a week for training and upskilling can be a win for both workers and the companies. And with better work-life balance, perhaps, a win also for Singapore, with possibly more babies.

Mr Speaker, different sectors and roles have diverse needs and may not be able to adopt the same type of flexible arrangement in the same manner. A four-day work week has worked in some companies, places and jobs, but not others. So, we welcome employers and employees out there, whether in the private or public sector, to try the type of flexible work arrangement that they think best suits their workplace. MOM does not intend to specify any trial or rigidity or impose any of these formulas on the public sector.

9 Mr Louis Ng Kok Kwang asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) what are Singapore’s climate targets that will be announced at the UN Climate Change Conference 2022 in November 2022; and (b) whether the Ministry have held consultations with civil society on the climate targets to be announced and, if so, what are they.

Mr Speaker, as announced at Budget 2022, Singapore will raise our climate ambition to achieve net-zero emissions by or around mid-century. We are also reviewing our 2030 Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC). Under the Singapore Green Plan 2030, we have been consulting closely with industry and citizen stakeholder groups, including more than 1,200 youths and civil society representatives from green groups and NGOs, through various engagement sessions.

Building on these efforts, the National Climate Change Secretariat has launched an online public consultation on Singapore's climate ambition via REACH. Members of the public are invited to contribute views on their vision for a low-carbon Singapore and how the Government, businesses, communities and citizens can work towards it.

We are taking into consideration the views received from these ongoing consultations as we finalise our climate targets later this year.

Mr Louis Ng.

Thank you, Sir. I thank the Minister for the reply. Could I just ask whether we can do a follow-up dialogue with the climate activists so that we can close the loop in terms of the feedback and concerns that they have raised?

Second, I am very glad we have done a public consultation on our climate ambition but could I ask, maybe for next year, whether we could do it a bit earlier? Because, by the time we end the consultation, it will be less than two months before we announce our NDCs at the UN Climate Change Conference 2022 (COP27).

Mr Speaker, I thank the hon Member for making this request on behalf the green groups. Please be assured that the Government will be reaching out and we are in constant dialogue, whether it is on NDC or our ongoing Green Plan initiatives.

10 Mr Desmond Choo asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how much have the retail and hospitality industries rebounded since the start of 2022; (b) what is the Ministry's forecast for the growth in these two industries for the next 12 months; and (c) what are the adaptations made to the respective Industry Transformation Maps for these two industries to incorporate resilience against future pandemics.

Mr Speaker, Sir, total retail sales, excluding motor vehicles, in July 2022 were about $3.4 billion, which is an increase of about 18% year-on-year. Hotel room revenue in July 2022 was about $319 million and this is an increase of four and a half times year-on-year. So, both sectors, the retail and the hospitality sectors, have recovered to comparable levels in 2019 before the COVID-19 pandemic, with retail sales even exceeding 2019 levels.

The recovery was bolstered by the healthy rebound in travel, with 1.5 million visitor arrivals in the first half of this year, which is nearly 12 times more than the same period in 2021. We expect the recovery to continue, though global geopolitical tensions and economic slowdown may slow this recovery.

The pandemic has been a severe stress test for many sectors. The 23 Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs) are being refreshed and updated to incorporate insights gleaned from the pandemic and to address new challenges and also to seize opportunities arising from it.

Specifically, the retail and hotel ITMs will need to ensure that the sectors' manpower, supply chains, operations and revenue streams become more resilient against pandemics and other disruptions. The ITMs will also aim to boost the abilities of our companies to seize new opportunities in the digital and sustainable space. More details will be announced when we launch the retail and hotel ITMs later this year.

Mr Desmond Choo.

I would like to thank the Minister of State for her reply. I have two supplementary questions. It is very encouraging to see the recent improvement in these two sectors. Will the Minister of State be able to share more on the depth and quality of the improvements? Second, while these two sectors are doing better, they still struggle with manpower. So, what will be the plans to attract more workers into these sectors?

Mr Speaker, I would like to thank the Member, Mr Desmond Choo, for his two supplementary questions. Indeed, both the retail and hospitality sectors, like I mentioned in the answer earlier, have experienced a rebound and recovered to pre-pandemic levels. Of course, we still have to monitor the global development and situation, especially the very volatile geopolitical tensions.

I mentioned earlier that, this year, we had 1.5 million visitor arrivals in the first half of 2022. STB projected that we should welcome four to six million visitor arrivals for the whole year in 2022. This augurs well, not just for the retail and hospitality sectors, but also food services sector.

The Member asked for some numbers. Let me share that we asked the hotel sectors and, in July this year, we understand that the average room rates for hotels reached higher than pre-COVID-19 levels at $259, compared to $94 in 2019 before COVID-19. And the average occupancy rate of hotels has risen to about 79% in July 2022 verses 58% a year ago.

For the retail sector, we track the numbers very closely. The total retail sales this year from January to July, over seven months, have averaged about $3.3 billion per month. What is very noteworthy is that $3.3 billion per month is comparable to the per month average of about $3.2 billion dollars in 2019, which was pre-COVID-19.

So, like what Mr Desmond Choo has mentioned, the retail, hospitality and food services sectors were the sectors hardest hit by the pandemic, including the aviation sector as well. The retail and hospitality sectors have shown incredible resilience and grit. The improvements that we are seeing today are really hard-won by the retail and hospitality sectors – and to a certain extent, the food services sector – in terms of their determination to adapt, transform, press on with digitalisation and do things very differently.

Allow me to use this platform to thank the trade associations and chambers (TACs). We have been working very closely with the TACs – for the hotel sector, it is the Singapore Hotel Association; for the retailers, it is the Singapore Retailers Association and, for food services, the Restaurant Association Singapore – to press ahead with productivity gain initiatives, with raising the innovation capacity and business transformation.

Having said that, having seen this rebound, it is important for companies in the retail and hospitality sectors to press on in their business transformation journey to be more productive, more competitive and more cost-efficient. And like what the Member had mentioned, not forgetting to upskill and reskill the workforce to stay resilient against disruptions.

To the Member's second question, how do we attract more Singaporeans to these sectors, we speak very regularly to the companies in the retail and hospitality sectors. We have tried different manpower and talent attraction initiatives. In order to attract more Singaporeans to the hospitality and retail sectors, we have been encouraging companies to redesign the jobs. And we do, in partnership with MOM, Workforce Singapore, e2i, create roles with larger, more meaningful work scopes, which can then offer better wages, higher salaries and very clear progression pathways.

In addition, they can also complement the job redesign with technology and digitalisation, to be more manpower-efficient.

We will continue to work with the companies in the retail and hospitality sectors to ensure that, moving ahead in the post-COVID-19 era, we are able to future-proof our companies and also workforce in these two sectors to be industry-relevant, future-ready and market-relevant.

The following question stood in the name of Mr Seah Kian Peng –

11 To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) whether he can provide an assessment of the cost of doing business in Singapore; (b) what is the trend of business costs over the last five years; and (c) what measures are being taken to ensure Singapore and local businesses remain competitive in the light of significant increases in costs for all businesses.

Question No 11, please.

Mr Speaker, a confluence of external and domestic factors have contributed to higher costs for businesses in Singapore. Notably, the global prices of energy and other intermediate inputs have risen sharply from a year ago and are expected to remain elevated amidst the ongoing Russia-Ukraine war and protracted global supply disruptions.

This has, in turn, raised the cost of utilities, fuel and transportation, amongst other costs, for Singaporean businesses. Domestically, the tight labour market will continue to exert upward pressure on labour cost. Reflecting these cost pressures, the unit business cost (UBC), which refers to the business cost incurred to produce a unit of output in each sector, has risen for the manufacturing and service sectors.

Specifically, the unit business cost of the manufacturing sector rose by 5.2% on a year-on-year basis in the second quarter of 2022, extending the 4% increase of the previous quarter. This is a reversal of the 7% per annum decline in the five years between 2017 and 2021. Similarly, the UBC of the overall services sector rose by 7.2% year-on-year in the first quarter of 2022, following the 7.9% increase in the previous quarter.

This was faster than the 1.9% per annum increase between 2017 and 2021. Nonetheless, businesses have remained profitable, with their gross profits increasing by 9.8% year-on-year on average in the second quarter of 2022, extending the 10.1% rise in the first quarter.

The Government is monitoring business costs closely and will continue to provide targeted support to businesses where needed. For example, under the Small Business Recovery Grant (SBRG), over 40,000 businesses in the sectors most badly affected by COVID-19 restrictions were eligible for a total of about $132 million in payouts. We are also helping businesses cope with higher electricity prices through the Energy Efficiency Grant (EEG) and alleviating their cashflow challenges through the Enterprise Financing Scheme (EFS).

In terms of labour costs, the Government will co-fund the wage increases of lower-wage workers for five years from the year 2022 to the year 2026 under the Progressive Wage Credit Scheme (PWCS). As part of the $1.5 billion support package announced in June, the Government's co-funding share for 2022 PWCS support was enhanced from 50% to 75% for wages up to $2,500, and from 30% to 45% for wages above $2,500 and up to $3,000. In addition, the Government has extended the Jobs Growth Incentive (JGI) until March 2023 to support employers that hire vulnerable workers.

As we provide short-term relief to help businesses cope with rising costs, we will also not let up on our long-term efforts to raise productivity, build capabilities and transform our businesses to seize new opportunities. This is really because the only sustainable way for businesses to cope with cost pressures over the long run is to become more productive and more competitive.

The Government will continue to provide support to businesses seeking to strengthen their capabilities and scale new heights through schemes, such as the Enterprise Development Grant (EDG) and the Productivity Solutions Grant (PSG).

Mr Desmond Choo.

I would like to thank the Minister of State for the update. Just one supplementary question. As we transition to a higher cost economy, how do we intend to balance between supporting companies in the short run and maintaining our competitiveness in the longer run? And would being a higher cost economy make us more vulnerable to external shocks, causing disruptions to the local workforce?

Mr Speaker, I want to thank the Member Mr Desmond Choo for his two supplementary questions. This has been a very atypical year, where a confluence of external and domestic factors has contributed to higher costs for businesses in Singapore. Notwithstanding that, businesses have remained profitable. The gross profit increased by 9.8% year-on-year, on average, in the second quarter and this extends the 10.1% rise in the first quarter.

I just read that Minister Josephine Teo graced a Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce & Industry (SCCCI) conference this morning and, if I remember correctly, the conference is a two-day conference that is organised by SCCCI.

It released findings from a survey. It is very heartening. The SCCCI survey polled SMEs. The survey findings indicate that most businesses expect to be profitable; that is one. And the second takeaway from that survey is that the SMEs in Singapore that SCCCI polled said they will embrace digitalisation efforts to overcome manpower constraints.

Therein lies, in a way, the answer to the Member's supplementary questions, the key to supporting our businesses, not just in the near term, but also medium term and long-term.

In the near term, as I have mentioned earlier, not just MTI and our economic agencies, but we work very closely with MCI, IMDA, especially in terms of supporting our SMEs with digitalisation initiatives. We will take a whole-of-Government effort to support our companies, to make sure they are well-placed to seize the opportunities in the digital economy and also in the sustainability space. And, for example, the various schemes that I have talked about, just taking the example of EDG and PSG.

A few years back, the support level for EDG and PSG was pegged at 50%. We increased it to 70%. But because the two sectors, the retail and food services sectors, were hit hard by the pandemic, this year in March, we announced that under the Food Services and Retail Business Revitalisation Package, we would increase the support level to 80% for companies in these two sectors.

We will keep our eyes and ears very close to the ground to continue to see how we need to improve and refine our existing initiatives or even roll out new initiatives. For example, we have improved and refined the Enterprise Financing Scheme – Trade Loan. We have increased it from $5 million to $10 million, from 1 July this year to 31 March next year, because we heard feedback from SMEs that some of the raw material costs have increased since the first quarter of this year.

Similarly, we have also increased the SME Working Capital loan from $300,000 to $500,000. This increase would take effect from 1 October this year to 31 March 2023. To help our companies address utility costs, we have also just rolled out EEG, targeting the companies in the three sectors that are most affected, that is, the food services, food manufacturing and also the retail sector. The support level is at 70%. In a way, the Government is co-funding the investment in energy-efficient equipment to help them bring down the cost of electricity and utilities.

So, I want to assure Mr Desmond Choo that all hands are on deck, not just from MTI, but the whole-of-Government, to support our companies to tide through this challenging period and to ensure their long-term competitiveness.

12 Mr Chua Kheng Wee Louis asked the Minister for Transport (a) whether there is any evidence to suggest that car rental companies, particularly those leasing to the private hire vehicles (PHVs) market, have affected Certificate of Entitlement (COE) bid prices in the past year; (b) if not, whether a study on this will be conducted; and (c) whether such rental cars and those used for PHVs can be removed from the COE bidding process.

There is no evidence that private hire car (PHC) companies have caused the increase in COE bid prices. LTA has been monitoring the market closely and, over the past year, the demand for COEs from PHC companies as well as the overall PHC population have been stable.

Recognising the role which shared point-to-point (P2P) transport plays in our land transport system, from 2012, taxi operators did not have to bid for a COE to register their taxis. Instead, they draw from the pool of Category E (Open) COEs and pay the Category A COE prevailing quota premium. Taxi availability standards were also introduced and taxi operators can grow their fleets by up to 2% per annum, subject to meeting the standards.

Unlike taxis, PHCs are, essentially, privately-owned cars that have the flexibility and autonomy to take passengers, thereby augmenting our supply of P2P vehicles. Hence, PHCs are treated like privately-owned cars under the vehicle quota system. Removing PHCs from the bidding pool and creating a new category with specific requirements, such as a minimum number of trips to prevent abuse, would be difficult to enforce and add to the compliance cost for PHC operators, drivers and, ultimately, consumers.

LTA will continue to monitor the P2P sector and study schemes for further enhancement.

Mr Louis Chua.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I just have a supplementary question for the Senior Minister of State. As she has mentioned, in 2012, taxis were removed from the COE bidding system and I think, in July 2016, then Transport Minister Mr Khaw Boon Wan shared that, on PHCs, the Government will monitor its rate of growth and uptake of COEs to see if a similar move will be appropriate.

If you look at the point-to-point transportation sector today, the number of PHCs are about 70,000 versus about close to 14,000 taxis – about five times more. So, in terms of the relevance of PHCs within this P2P sector, it is now much more than that for taxis. So, I am just wondering if the Senior Minister of State and the Ministry will consider having a similar treatment when it comes to COEs for both PHCs and taxis.

As I have explained in my reply earlier, for PHCs, essentially, they have the autonomy and they have the flexibility to decide if they are going to pick up passengers. So, basically, they are like privately-owned cars and if they do take up passengers, it means it helps us supplement the P2P sector in terms of the vehicle population.

But if you are going to put them like taxis into a separate category, as I have mentioned, first of all, there is an additional difficulty because we will then have to have specific requirements like ensuring that they comply with minimum number of trips and that is actually very difficult to enforce. It will add to compliance cost which will, eventually, trickle down to consumers.

But in addition to that, this call or request to review COE categories is actually quite a perennial suggestion.

Essentially, there is a trade-off between having specific categories to meet specific requirements versus ensuring that there is sufficient COE quota for that category. Actually, whether you have a specific category for PHCs or something else, the fact is that it is going to lead to further fragmentation and volatility, particularly when COE supply is low. So, if you are looking at COE premiums and so on, basically, it is, fundamentally, demand-and-supply for vehicles that determines COE premiums.

As I have also said, we will continue to monitor the situation. For PHCs, we have been closely watching the market and there is really no evidence that the PHC companies have caused an increase in COE premiums. The population of PHCs is stable and the demand for COEs has also remained stable. And, in fact, the PHC entities have actually not submitted bids or reserved prices which are higher than non-PHC entities.

13 Dr Shahira Abdullah asked the Minister for Education with the new distance-based allotment process for Primary 1 registration, how is the Ministry ensuring that popular schools in higher-income residential areas remain accessible to families from lower-income and social brackets.

Mr Speaker, Sir, changes to the Primary 1 (P1) Registration Framework was introduced this year to enable more children to enrol in a school near where they live, even if they have no prior connection to the school. The changes benefit children living in all parts of Singapore, including those from lower-income and social brackets.

If there are more registrants than vacancies in any phase, children will be admitted based on citizenship and home-school distance. This is in recognition of the convenience for a child to study in a nearby school as it reduces travelling time, allowing the child and family to spend time more meaningfully.

We will continue to monitor the developments and review the need to change our P1 Registration Framework in the future.

Dr Shahira Abdullah.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, and I thank the Minister for the response.

Recently, there is a study from Harvard University that published the fact that social capital was the strongest predictor of upward income mobility; basically, that those with friends of higher socioeconomic status (SES) actually have better income mobility.

So, I am also aware that there are a lot of measures that MOE has which allow a lot more social interactions between those of lower- and higher-SES. But I am also concerned that for these social interactions, there must be a focus that the students internalise that the low SES ties are also valuable, as compared to only thinking that high SES ties are valuable. So, I was wondering whether there is a focus on those social interactions, whether it is curated for them to learn that particular lesson.

Sorry, Mr Speaker, can I have Dr Shahira Abdullah to repeat the last three sentences?

Okay. Basically, there are a lot of measures. I am aware that MOE has to ensure that there is social mixing between students of different backgrounds – high SES, low SES and many other different backgrounds. But I think the mindset may be that if you form ties with those in higher SES, you actually have better social capital, you move up better.

So, I just want to know whether in these interactions that are curated, there is a focus to ensure that they understand that these ties even with people from different backgrounds that are of lower SES are actually valuable to them, as compared to just having friends in higher places.

I thank Dr Shahira. Yes, indeed, MOE agrees with what Dr Shahira says. We do encourage all our students to interact meaningfully across different backgrounds and, perhaps, especially across different backgrounds. That is what makes Singapore special – not just in terms of family backgrounds, occupations, where they stay, what race, language or religion they come from. That is part of our social fabric.

Indeed, we also acknowledge the challenge that has been highlighted, not just in Singapore but across many societies, that, over time, there is always the danger that society will stratify by different backgrounds, different socioeconomic backgrounds, different race, language or religion. And it is always a work-in-progress that we have to consciously make sure that our children have the opportunities to interact with people beyond their own background and we do have some good efforts by some communities and we hope to see more.

For example, there is one particularly popular school that has decided to have a combined sports team with another school that is not from the same background. And I thought it was a beautiful effort by the alumni of this school to reach out; not so much to benefit the students from this less popular school, but I think the students from this so-called more popular school also benefited by having the chance to interact with people from different backgrounds, understanding the challenges, the perspectives of people who are different from them.

That is important when, ultimately, they come out to work, to be able to appreciate that the workforce, the people they work with are all very diverse. And the more we appreciate one another, the more we appreciate each other's strengths and weaknesses, the more we can bring out the best in the team. So, we will continue that effort.

14 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Manpower whether there are further measures to encourage higher labour force participation to address the labour crunch and reduce dependence on foreign labour.

Mr Speaker, the overall resident Labour Force Participation Rate (LFPR) in Singapore has increased steadily, from 66.1% in 2011 to 70.5% in 2021. This is comparable to the top five OECD countries. In particular, more women and seniors have joined the workforce, even during the pandemic. From 2019 to 2021, the female resident LFPR increased from 61.1% to 64.2%, while that of residents aged 55 to 64 increased from 69.9% to 71.1%.

While the LFPR in Singapore is already relatively high, we can, potentially, increase it further. One key strategy is to make work more flexible, so that more can participate. We are working with the tripartite partners to promote flexible work arrangements (FWAs) and build HR capabilities to implement FWAs successfully. We will also be establishing a set of Tripartite Guidelines on FWAs by 2024 to require employers to consider all requests for FWAs fairly and properly. This will allow more workers to remain in the workforce or return to the workforce while meeting other needs, such as caregiving.

The Government is also committed to improving access to affordable and quality preschool services, which enables parents with young children to go to work with peace of mind. Overall, the Government’s annual spending on the early childhood sector is expected to more than double over the next few years, from around $1 billion in 2018.

In addition, we have increased the retirement and re-employment ages to 63 and 68, respectively, on 1 July 2022. In line with the recommendations of the Tripartite Workgroup on Older Workers in 2019, our eventual aim is to increase the retirement and re-employment ages to 65 and 70, respectively, by 2030. This will support more senior workers who wish to continue to work to do so.

MOM further encourages employers to hire senior workers through the Senior Employment Credit which provides up to 8% wage offsets for Singaporean workers aged 55 and above and earning below $4,000 a month. The Part-time Re-employment Grant supports employers in providing part-time re-employment opportunities to senior workers who may prefer a lower work intensity.

To further promote local employment, Workforce Singapore offers SGUnited Mid-Career Pathways Programme (SGUP) through which employers can take in mature candidates on attachment programmes. Employers can also tap on career conversion programmes which provide higher support levels for mature hires.

Fundamentally, to cope with the manpower crunch, our businesses need to continue to transform, increase their productivity and improve manpower efficiency. The Government remains committed to supporting businesses and workers to achieve this. Sector agencies are working closely with industries across the 23 Industry Transformation Maps (ITMs).

Workforce Singapore has rolled out Job Redesign and Reskilling Programmes to support employers to upskill their employees to take on enhanced job roles. Other schemes, such as the Enterprise Development Grant and the Productivity Solutions Grant, are also available to help our businesses strengthen their capabilities.

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

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

[(proc text) Order for Second Reading read. (proc text)]

Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of the Minister for Home Affairs, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The number of Police reports made against the conduct of debt collection businesses and debt collectors has remained high. From 2018 to 2021, an average of 367 reports were lodged each year. The reports were mainly against debt collection tactics aimed at pressuring debtors into payment by causing public embarrassment and inconvenience to them.

Such tactics have attracted significant public attention and affected the public's sense of safety and security. Let me share two examples.

In 2019, a debt collector made multiple visits to a debtor's home and workplace within a month to collect a debt. On three occasions, he wore a traditional Chinese funeral outfit to the debtor's workplace, while carrying accessories, including a banner with the debtor's face, a funeral lantern and incense paper, and engaged in actions, such as shouting loudly, chanting, kneeling and blowing a whistle. He refused to leave even when told that the debtor was not present. On one such occasion, he even shouted at the debtor's colleague.

Some Members might also recall that back in 2015, six debt collectors visited a debtor at a food stall in Funan Mall to collect a debt. They unfurled a large banner stating that debt recovery was in process and proceeded to disrupt the stall's business, including harassing the staff and damaging the stall's equipment.

Such debt collection conduct is unacceptable and causes unnecessary alarm to members of the public. The debt collectors in both cases were successfully taken to task under existing legislation, such as the Protection from Harassment Act and the Penal Code. However, we need to ask ourselves, can we do more to prevent such problematic debt collection conduct from occurring in the first place?

Debt collection is a legitimate economic activity that facilitates the fulfilment of financial obligations. However, individuals and businesses should not be subjected to debt collection methods that clearly exceed what may be considered reasonable pressure for payment, especially if these methods also affect the public's sense of safety and security.