Hansard, Tuesday, 7 April 2020

1 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the number of police patrols deployed at Little India on weekends; (b) whether the number of patrols at Little India has declined over the past three years; and (c) whether there are any plans by the Police to increase the number of patrols to ensure safety and security of the neighbourhood, especially on weekends and public holidays.

Police operational deployments are confidential and are driven by an assessment of the law and order situation. The Police deploy a significant number of Auxiliary Police Officers and Security Officers to patrol Little India during peak periods such as weekend nights, eve of Public Holidays and Public Holidays. The APOs and SOs are augmented by Police officers from Central Police Division and the Special Operations Command. The level of deployment has not changed over the past three years.

The Police have also deployed cameras within Little India to supplement the ground patrols. We have steadily increased the number of cameras, from 34 in 2016 to about 200 today.

Police’s assessment is that the current deployments have kept the crime situation in Little India in check. Police will work with stakeholders to monitor the situation and will adjust its operational strategies accordingly.

Mr Melvin Yong.

I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the answer. I am heartened to hear that the patrol levels have remained stable. I would like to ask a supplementary question. During my house visits, residents inform me that they were seeing more instances of drunken individuals, sleeping on the staircase landing and along the common corridors at the higher levels of the HDB blocks. Residents said this was because the Police only patrol the ground level, causing the individuals to then move up the blocks. Can the Police consider having the Auxiliary Police Officers conduct vertical patrols to deter individuals from loitering at the higher levels of our HDB blocks?

Patrol deployment plans are calibrated based on the crime trends as well as the crowd footfall. We note the Member's feedback but just to let the Member know, the patrol team does patrol common areas as well as specific areas of concern. This includes the higher floors and staircase landings of HDB blocks where there is specific feedback about congregations or dis-amenities. If the Member has specific feedback in terms of the block or the areas with such congregation, he can share it with the Police and the Police will certainly look into it.

2 Assoc Prof Walter Theseira asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether the Registrar of Societies will assist societies with AGMs or other governance meetings scheduled during the Covid-19 outbreak to (i) waive or modify any requirements in the society's constitution to meet in person to elect officers or determine the society's affairs (ii) waive, modify or delay audit and reporting requirements for societies unable to meet in person to approve their financial and annual statements and (iii) provide guidance on how they can continue to govern their affairs in accordance with applicable regulations during this time.

The Government has announced legislation that will allow entities, including societies, to adopt prescribed alternative arrangements so that meetings can be conducted in a manner compliant with the safe distancing measures announced on 24 March 2020. These prescribed alternative measures can be adopted notwithstanding the requirements in the entities’ constitution. They include allowing a meeting to be held by video-conferencing or other electronic means, or to be postponed, or for the quorum of a meeting to be reduced.

In view of the COVID-19 situation, the Registry of Societies (ROS) will allow societies to adopt such alternative arrangements. ROS will advise societies on the details soon.

Assoc Prof Walter Theseira.

Thank you, Speaker. I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the reply. This is about the measures that will be introduced in the Bill that will be read later today. That is correct, right? So, I just want to have the assurance from the Ministry that they will issue easy-to-understand guidelines for societies on this, because most societies are very small, they do not have legal staff and are not able to interpret the Bill as passed. So, they really do need very clear guidelines on what they can and cannot do to avoid any misunderstandings.

Yes, the Member is correct. It is in the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Bill that will be tabled today. We note the feedback; thank you very much.

3 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for Manpower since the launch of the Return to Work (RTW) programme in 2017 (a) whether all public hospitals have come on board the RTW programme; (b) how many injured workers have participated in the RTW programme; and (c) how many workers have been successfully placed back to work.

Mr Speaker, the Return-to-Work or RTW programme helps workers with traumatic work injuries return to work as soon as medically suitable. As part of the programme, the worker undergoes occupational or physiotherapy, while the hospital assists the employer to make workplace adjustments to support the injured worker’s return and long-term employability.

RTW services are available at seven public hospitals. They represent all the public hospitals with Accident and Emergency (A&E) departments, where ambulances send acute injury cases to. The exception is KK Hospital, whose A&E department caters to women & children.

As of end 2019, 1922 injured workers have participated in the programme. About 95% of the participants have been successfully placed back to work. This was an improvement from around 75% remaining employed before the RTW programme.

We have also received positive feedback about the programme. Some workers shared with us that their supervisors are more supportive after the hospitals’ RTW coordinator explained how the worker can remain productive post-injury.

Mr Melvin Yong.

A few supplementary questions. First, I would like to ask if there have been any situations where the workers or their employers decline to sign up for the Return to Work programme after they were approached by the coordinator. And if so, what were the reasons why they decline to join the programme? Second, could the Ministry also consider expanding the Return to Work programme by placing more hospitals on board?

I thank the Member for his clarification. First, we have about 64% of suitable injured workers participating in the Return to Work programme. For those who did not participate, it was mostly because either the worker resigned or the employer dismissed the worker. So, we expect participation rate to improve as more hospitals gain more experience with the Return to Work programme. With experience, the Return to Work coordinator should be better able to convince both workers and employers. There is hope for restoring work ability.

On the Member's second question with regard to whether we will expand the number of hospitals, right now, the Return to Work service is already available at seven public hospitals and each one is an A&E hospital. So, it is natural that you have ambulances send acute injury cases to these hospitals. The only exception today that has an A&E that is not part of the programme is KK Hospital, as mentioned earlier.

4 Ms Rahayu Mahzam asked the Minister for Manpower in light of cases of children and the elderly being abused while under the care of foreign domestic workers (FDWs) (a) what are the current screening criteria for FDWs beyond the mandatory health screening; (b) whether the screening includes checking for past criminal records, bankruptcy status, mental health records and character assessments; (c) whether there is a need for additional measures to protect vulnerable members of the household from abuse by FDWs; and (d) whether the Ministry will consider mental health screening of FDWs before they are allowed to be employed.

Mr Speaker, all FDWs are required to undergo a medical examination and be certified by doctors to be medically fit for employment before MOM will issue their work permits. The examination includes screening for infectious diseases, such as tuberculosis, HIV, syphilis and malaria to ensure that the FDWs do not pose a risk to our public health. The health screening costs about $70 and is borne by the employer.

While it is possible to add more forms of screening, these will inadvertently increase the employers’ upfront cost of hiring an FDW.

The effectiveness of such additional screening is also uncertain. For instance, any evidence of the FDW’s past criminal or bankruptcy records depends largely on information gained from the FDW’s home country. In addition, while employers can send their FDW to the Institute of Mental Health or private specialist clinics for an assessment if they have specific concerns about the state of mental health of their FDW, it cannot be assumed that the mental well-being of the FDW will remain the same as at the time of assessment. Mental health screening tools can be subjective, and are able to only provide a quick snapshot of one’s mental health at that point of time. There are also many factors that could influence or affect the FDW’s mental state as she tries to settle in and adjust to a new work environment.

Besides health screening, there are many measures already in place to help employers hire suitable FDWs. First, in selecting an FDW, employers have access to the helper’s biodata provided by employment agencies who also conduct interviews with the FDW. In addition, MOM provides employers with information on the FDW’s employment history, such as the number and period of employment she has had in Singapore. Moreover, there is a reference channel which employers can use to contact the FDW’s previous bosses to find out more about her past work experience.

Furthermore, MOM will not approve work permit applications if the FDW has been blacklisted by the Ministry due to previous offences. We will also send back FDWs who are assessed to be underage. At the Settling-in Programme or SIP, FDWs are also reminded of the penalties should they commit an offence. In particular, we highlight that under the Penal Code, there is an enhanced penalty of up to two times the maximum punishment against individuals who abuse vulnerable victims.

It is also important that employers play an active role in the prevention of potential abuse. For instance, when the FDW joins the household, employers can supervise her work closely, take note of her behaviour, and support her in her adjustment to the new environment and work duties.

On our part, MOM works closely with stakeholders to help FDWs better adjust and settle in. For instance, we educate FDWs during SIP on how to cope with stress and seek help when needed. Our non-governmental organisations (NGOs) also provide a range of social activities which are important avenues that help FDWs relieve their stress, share about their challenges and join a network of support.

I thank the Senior Parliamentary Secretary for the comprehensive answer. I just have one clarification. In relation to the blacklisting, I note that MOM would also blacklists the FDWs if they have committed an offence. I am just wondering whether that is the only threshold for purposes of blacklisting, because there may be other acts or behaviours or conduct of the FDWs that may not amount to an offence but these are things they have done in the course of the work with their previous employers. If the employers give this feedback to MOM, would this be something that MOM would share with prospective employers or put these helpers in a different list so that future employers would not have to face the same difficulties as those previously who had challenges with a particular helper?

Mr Speaker, I want to thank the Member Ms Rahayu Mahzam for her supplementary question. I want to reassure her that other than the blacklist that I talked about, currently, there is a mechanism which is the employer reference channel. Which means that if the employer is trying to recruit a prospective FDW that has worked for previous employers, the previous employer can put in reference, which is available to the prospective employer. So, there is a reference channel that the employer can use to contact the FDW's previous bosses, even if the FDW is not under the blacklist. I want to give her that assurance.

And I also want to reassure the House that MOM is very mindful of the importance of building a good relationship between the employers and the FDWs. Which is why in October last year, MOM announced a series of measures to ensure better matches between the employers and also FDW in a way to better support the employers to finding the FDW that can fit the needs of the household – whether in terms of care-giving duty or to do the domestic work in the family.

There were a few measures and the objective was mainly to make sure that, one, we make available free dispute resolution services for both the employers and also the FDW, through CDE and also through FAST. The second big change that we announced in October last year was to provide more information than we currently do to help the employers and employment agency (EA) find better match in terms of the employers and also FDW. The third one that we announced which will be phased in progressively over the next two years is to ensure that the EA also take greater ownership of the matching outcomes.

So, I want to assure the Member will continue to engage the stakeholders, employers, FDW and also the EAs and NGOs to ensure better match between the employers and the FDW.

5 Mr Melvin Yong Yik Chye asked the Minister for the Environment and Water Resources with the implementation of the smoking ban in the Orchard Road area on 1 January 2019 (a) what is the trend in the number of offenders since the implementation; (b) whether there are plans to add more designated smoking areas; and (c) whether the Ministry will consider moving these designated smoking areas away from main pedestrian thoroughfare.

The Orchard Road No-Smoking Zone (NSZ) came into force on 1 January 2019, as part of the Government's efforts to protect non-smokers from the harmful effects of second-hand tobacco smoke. An advisory approach was adopted in the first three months of the implementation, to give the public sufficient time to adjust to the smoking prohibition. A daily average of 735 advisories were issued to offenders between January and March 2019. With greater public awareness, this number fell sharply when enforcement started on 1 April 2019. The number of recorded offences decreased from 21 cases per day on 1 April 2019 to around 15 cases per day at present.

The NSZ covers a relatively large area with numerous commercial premises. As such, NEA works closely with the Orchard Road Business Association or ORBA, and building owners to ensure sufficient provision of designated smoking areas or DSAs). There are now more than 50 DSAs in the NSZ, spaced about 100 to 200 m apart. The number of DSAs in the NSZ is currently sufficient.

Given the high footfall and densely built-up nature of Orchard Road, careful consideration is made on the location of DSAs. As far as possible, the DSAs are sited in less conspicuous locations and away from the main pedestrian thoroughfare, to ensure that smoking is contained and not done in clear view of passers-by. This will help protect public health and avoid normalising smoking. NEA will continue to monitor the ground situation and review the location of DSAs if necessary.

Everyone plays a part in keeping the environment clean and liveable. Families and friends of smokers, as well as the general public, can help reinforce the right social norms through timely and friendly reminders for smokers to use the DSAs.

I thank the Senior Minister of State for her answer. Since the smoking ban took effect, I have received much feedback from residents living near Orchard Road that smoking activity has been displaced to the fringes of their residential estates. This has caused disamenities to residents living there. Basically, smokers have moved to smoking just outside of the No-Smoking Zone and outside residents' homes such as along Nutmeg Road and along the fringes of Jalan Lada Puteh. Some smokers have even shifted a dustbin and created their own smoking corner along Nutmeg Road. I would like to ask if the Ministry has any plans to address this displacement effect of the smoking ban at Orchard Road.

I thank the Member for the supplementary question. Indeed, NEA is aware of this issue. Smoking outside the boundary of the Orchard Road No Smoking Zone is not prohibited but what we have done is to send our enforcement officers to these areas, around Nutmeg Road, Jalan Lada Puteh, Jalan Jintan and so on, to monitor the ground situation as well as to take enforcement action against anyone found to have committed any public health offences – for instance, littering of cigarette butts and indeed, we have actually done this.

We have also sought to relocate any litter bins around the area further away from the residential premises so that they do not congregate near the residential homes. We have also engaged the service provider in that area to step up the cleaning frequency to ensure the cleanliness of the area.

I think what we want to do is to urge the smokers to be socially responsible and considerate, not to congregate around the fringes of the estate to smoke, but actually to move to the nearest DSAs within the Orchard Road No Smoking Zone instead. We will continue to monitor the ground situation and review the locations of the DSAs if necessary.

Order. End of Question Time. Introduction of Government Bills. Minister Chan Chun Sing.

[(proc text) "to authorise temporary arrangements for the purposes of any election under the Parliamentary Elections Act (Chapter 218 of the 2011 Revised Edition) so that certain electors who are subject to COVID-19 stay orders may vote outside of their electoral divisions, an aspiring candidate need not be present in person during nomination proceedings if ill, and special steps may be taken during a poll and vote counting in the interest of public health", (proc text)]

[(proc text) presented by the Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Chan Chun Sing); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available Sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. (proc text)]

[(proc text) First Reading. (proc text)]

Mr Speaker, I have a Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Bill, to be laid upon the Table.

[(proc text) Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the Bill, laid upon the Table by the Senior Minister of State. (proc text)]

The Certificate is in order. Senior Minister of State, please proceed.

Mr Speaker, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to provide temporary measures and deal with other matters relating to the COVID-19 pandemic, and to make a consequential amendment to the Property Tax Act (Chapter 254 of the 2005 Revised Edition)."

[(proc text) Bill read the First time. (proc text)]

Mr Speaker, copies of the Bill have been provided to the Clerk, who will distribute it to Members now. [Handouts were distributed to hon Members.]

Senior Minister of State, second reading when?

Today, Sir. After the conclusion of proceedings on the Supplementary Supply (FY 2020) Bill.

So be it. Order. Leader.

Mr Speaker, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move a Motion that the debate on Deputy Prime Minister’s Ministerial Statement be taken now.

This will allow the House to resume its debate on Deputy Prime Minister’s Ministerial Statement on the additional COVID measures given on 26 March and conclude on its consideration, before the House proceeds to vote on the sums contained in the Supplementary Estimates for FY20/21 and the Supplementary Supply Bill.

As Members are aware, the Supplementary Estimates and the Bill reflect the necessary funds required for the multi-Ministry programmes outlined in the Ministerial Statement which are subject to Parliament’s approval.

I give my consent. Does the Leader of the House have the general assent of Members present to so move?

[(proc text) Hon Members indicated assent. (proc text)]

[(proc text) With the consent of Mr Deputy Speaker and the general assent of Members present, question put, and agreed to. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Resolved, that, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the proceedings on item 3 on the Order Paper for today be taken now. – [Ms Grace Fu Hai Yien]. (proc text)]

[(proc text) Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [26 March 2020], (proc text)]

[(proc text) "That the Ministerial Statement made by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance on Additional Support Measures in Response to COVID-19 Pandemic be considered by Parliament." − [Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance] (proc text)]

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

Mr Speaker, Sir, many of my fellow colleagues have spoken in support of the Resilience Budget and the Solidarity Budget announced by the Deputy Prime Minister and the Minister for Finance. I add my voice to their support.

I believe that all these additional budgetary measures will go a long way to assuring Singaporeans from all walks of life that the Government is doing its utmost best to help Singaporeans cope with the pandemic. In the current situation, many Singaporeans whom I speak to appreciate the difficulties facing Singapore. They urge the Government to persevere in finding a solution for the COVID-19 crisis and gave their assurance that they will work with the Government to break transmission. In simple Chinese, they say " "

I am confident that with the right political leadership and with strong support from our civil service, we will be able to overcome all challenges. I acknowledge that many of the additional measures can only mitigate the financial struggles to hit Singaporeans.

Whatever the Government does, it will not and should not be seen as a measure to put Singaporeans back to the days before the COVID-19 crisis. Nevertheless, I have two areas of concern which I wish to highlight for the Deputy Prime Minister's consideration. Many of my residents are affected and I speak for them.

Under the Jobs Support Scheme, JSS, the Government will co-fund the first $4,600 of gross monthly wages paid to each local employee for nine months. For April, the co-funding is 75% of the employee's monthly wages, up to $4,600. However, IRAS' website says that the wages paid to business owners or employers trading in their personal capacity will not be eligible for the payout.

This means that business owners who are directors and shareholders of the companies will get no help at all. They are not considered as self-employed. They are also not eligible for any financial support for the self-employed. Many of them may be just small businessmen who own a small share in a company or a $1 share. And they are also working as directors in the company. They too have their families to support. They too have mortgage instalments to pay. During this period, if their businesses are badly affected, surely, we can offer some help to these people by co-funding the wages of the working directors.

Next, while I appreciate the announcement by the Deputy Prime Minister yesterday to enhance the help given to eligible self-employed and to increase the annual value of the properties to $21,000, may I urge the Deputy Prime Minister to review the criteria? Many self-employed persons who have done well in previous years have bought a property of higher value and they may now be reeling under the negative impact of COVID-19. The fact that they have invested in their dream home, which is more expensive, does not mean that they will suffer less due to COVID-19. In fact, they may well be struggling even more to pay more in terms of their mortgage instalements. For some of these self-employed persons (SEPs), this month, April, this month of suspension of activities mean they would have absolutely no income at all. So, for the SEPs who run retail shops, if they are self-employed housing agents, if they run their own tuition agencies, they will earn nothing this month and yet not receive any help under the JSS, just because they live in a more expensive condominium.

So, I urge the Government to allow appeals on a case-by-case basis and to render assistance to this group of people during this difficult time. Sir, I support the Supplementary Budget measures.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is probably not an exaggeration to say that with more than 200 countries affected, probably close to four billion people now on lockdown, the COVID-19 crisis is possibly the worst catastrophe the world has faced since the Second World War.

Besides tackling the medical crisis, governments around the world are rolling out emergency stimulus and support packages to keep their economies afloat. These packages range from less than 1% of their GDPs to as high as 32%, for example, in the case of Germany.

At 12% of our GDP and close to $60 billion, our Supplementary Budgets – the Resilience and now the Solidarity Budgets – lies probably in the middle ground. Still, it is by any measure an enormous package and quite unprecedented for us.

On one hand, this massive injection of funds helps to boost confidence and goes some way in tackling the current and near-term economic challenges. And as we enter today into the first day of this circuit breaker measure, our fight against COVID-19 here in Singapore enters a critical phase.

It is reassuring to hear from Deputy Prime Minister Heng that the Government is able to and prepared to do even more in the future should the crisis drag on, as seen in the further measures just announced under the Solidarity Budget.

However, on the other hand, we all know that our reserves are not unlimited and some had urged caution about dipping too deep into our national savings, although virtually all the people I have spoken to or I have interacted with over the past weeks have expressed appreciation for the various assistance schemes. The worry is that no one knows how long this crisis will last and that we might need more funds further down the road.

In the meantime, we must, of course, all do our part to minimise further spread of the disease and continue contributing to our community and economy in a socially responsible manner.

For many of us, one of our biggest monthly expenditures is mortgage repayments on our homes and MAS has announced that homeowners may apply to defer repayments for their residential property loans until the end of the year. This is of course good news to owners under financial pressure due to the impact from COVID-19. They can choose to defer just the principal amount or both the principal and interest payments. No interest will be charged on the deferred interest payments. However, they must take note that interest will continue to accrue on the deferred principal amounts. I understand that it may be difficult for the banks and finance companies to consider waiving interest on the principal amounts. Nonetheless, I hope MAS and the Government will consider persuading them to implement a reduced interest rate over this deferment period on those deferred amounts, or at least not to charge interest on the deferred principal amounts. This is probably in line with the fact that lending rates across the board are slowly reducing over the next few months.

This special deferment arrangement also, to my knowledge, does not currently extend to individuals with commercial or industrial property loans. While owners are encouraged to discuss debt restructuring with their lenders, some guidelines for relief measures for this group would be helpful; and this way, the owners may, in turn, be able to extend arrangements for relief to their beleaguered tenants as well.

Next, I would also like to appeal for a little bit more assistance under the Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme. I know that some new measures have just been announced under the Solidarity Budget. But I would like consideration, perhaps, to be made for further help for SEPs who have more dependants. Of course, currently, we now know that under this scheme, SEPs will receive $1,000 a month for a total of nine months. Would MOM consider taking into account the number of dependants supported by the SEPs? SEPs supporting young children, elderly or disabled family members would probably require additional financial assistance during this difficult time. For SEPs who are also not auto-enrolled in the SIRS, I hope that the application and appeals process will be as expedient and as inclusive as possible.

Next, I would like to also bring up the special plight of private hire drivers. In the early days of the COVID crisis, there had been some calls in some quarters for those who had seen reduced employment, or been furloughed, to consider supplementing their income with private hire driving. With this recent drastic reductions in social interaction and travel, many private hire drivers, along with regular taxi drivers, are facing severe constraints on their daily income. Whilst taxi companies have announced rental rebates and waivers for their drivers, many private hire drivers are still bound to their rental agreements, and some who have taken private leases on their vehicles are also finding it difficult to service these loans. I think for the latter, the COVID-19 (Temporary Measures) Bill, which was just introduced, should address some of these concerns. But I hope that he relevant agencies can work together to address these areas of urgent concern.

As to my final area of worry, with the anticipated reductions in disposable incomes, I would also like to ask if more help can be extended to lessen out-of-pocket expenses for essential medical services.

Despite very generous Government subsidies, many Singaporeans still need to pay a portion of their medical expenses. During this trying period, more families’ finances will be stretched. Hence, could I ask whether the Government would consider a temporary, extended liberalisation of MediSave for both outpatient and inpatient essential medical treatments, and also for ILTC expenses? Now, this would not entail any immediate further expenditures for the Government. MediSave has also been looked upon as every citizen’s individual reserves for medical care, and surely the current economic climate provides a mandate to dip into this personal cash reserve for necessary medical use?

Next, for the Medication Assistance Fund – both the MAF and MAF Plus – would the Government or MOH consider increasing the level of subsidy for more costly medications, up from the current band of between 50% and 85%? While these subsidies are generous, again, due to the high costs of certain drugs, the balance costs borne by patients and their families can still be fairly significant.

I would also like to seek clarifications regarding MediShield Life premiums. Insurance policyholders can now apply to defer premium payments for up to six months while maintaining insurance coverage. May I assume that MediShield Life and integrated plan policies could be included as well?

In addition, would MOM consider allowing SEPs to defer their MediSave instalment payments during the current climate of economic difficulties?

Last but not least, I hope that the eligibility criteria for MediFund will be loosened temporarily during this contagion period to assist patients who may not qualify during more regular periods.

Finally, I would like to end by again thanking the Deputy Prime Minister, all the Ministers, civil servants, frontline workers for all their commitment and the hard work during this especially trying time for the nation. All of us are behind you and thank you for your hard work.

Regarding our battle against SARS in the early 2000s, I recall a quote from the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew who said that: "We were united as one people", this was during SARS, "to protect the health and safety of everyone. The experience bonded us as one people regardless of race, language and religion". This COVID-19 crisis, terrible as it is, offers us another chance to emerge stronger as one nation and one people, and stronger we will be. SGUnited, SG Together. And I would like to conclude with my support for this Budget.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we are facing a rapidly evolving crisis. No one alive has seen a global pandemic of this scale, and none can accurately predict how the global economy will look like after the COVID-19 pandemic. This is why the Government is taking extraordinary steps in the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets to inject some certainty, some confidence into the economy and our society.

Singapore is very fortunate that the prudence and hard work of our forefathers and past governments have left us with public reserves to help us through the current phase of the crisis. This illustrates how important it is for a country to maintain healthy financial reserves and a strong economy. The reserves also allow the Government to act quickly and decisively to support the people and the economy, which may not be achievable otherwise.

However, none can predict how long the crisis is going to last or how much of our reserves we will deplete. Singaporeans cannot tide through this crisis by relying on our public reserves alone.

Sir, the true strength of Singapore is not just in our reserves or in the strong balance sheet of the Government. The strength of Singapore must lie in the willingness of our people to make the necessary sacrifices to protect the weakest among us from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mr Speaker, the COVID-19 pandemic has severely impacted the Singapore economy. Minister Desmond Lee noted last week that 60,000 Singaporeans have applied for the Temporary Relief Fund. Globally, unemployment claims have risen at rates far exceeding those during the Global Financial Crisis. Initial jobless claims in the United States for the week ending 28 March 2020 were over 6.6 million – an increase of about 30 times over the average rate the year before. The jobless data, moreover, do not account for reduced hours, cut allowances, reductions in commissions and no business for the self-employed.

So, there are many Singaporeans in immediate need, and many more to come. The Solidarity Budget’s cash payment of $600 to all adult Singaporeans will make a significant difference, as will the Temporary Relief Fund, and other financial support measures. But because many measures are means tested to avoid waste, there is a real risk that Singaporeans will fall through the gaps. The rapidly evolving effects of the pandemic also mean that our schemes, carefully designed as they are, may be one step behind the needs of the public.

That is why we must now consider shifting our approach from means testing and gatekeeping public support, to ensuring that all Singaporeans, on a universal basis, have some basic income necessary to provide for their families in the months ahead.

Mr Speaker, I want to call on the public and the Government to consider implementing a temporary Universal Basic Income Scheme that provides weekly cash payouts to all Singaporeans for the duration of the COVID-19 pandemic in Singapore. But more than that, I want to call on the public to make a sacrifice to finance this scheme through a temporary increase in personal income taxes. If we truly believe that we are only as strong as the weakest member of our society, we must be prepared to pay the price necessary to protect that fellow Singaporean.

I have worked together with Dr Ong Qiyan from the Social Service Research Centre at the National University of Singapore, to produce a concrete proposal on this Universal Basic Income Scheme. We call this scheme the Majulah Universal Basic Income Scheme, or MUBI, for reasons that I will explain shortly.

The MUBI Scheme’s key objective is to give all Singaporean households the certainty that they will be able to pay for basic necessities during these uncertain times. MUBI achieves this by giving all Singaporeans weekly cash payments without means testing, calibrated at the amount necessary to cover an average households’ cash expenditure on food, utilities, and telecommunications. Our initial proposal is to pay $110 per week to all Singaporeans for a period of 12 weeks, starting immediately if possible, through existing electronic payment channels for Government's cash transfers to Singaporeans’ bank accounts. This will cost $4.62 billion dollars. The payout period can be extended at additional cost if the COVID-19 pandemic continues to severely disrupt the economy past these 12 weeks.

But to ensure that the most help goes to those most in need, the payouts can be recorded as personal income, which will be taxable in the Year of Assessment 2021. Hence, the scheme’s net benefit to each Singaporean will eventually depend on the recipient’s taxable income in 2020 and their tax rate.

So, the key feature of MUBI is that all Singaporeans will receive payouts for daily living expenses immediately. But the taxes to finance those payouts will only be paid next year, according to the usual schedule for tax payment.

We have calculated that MUBI requires a temporary personal income tax increase of 4.25%. Even after the tax, the bottom half of taxpayers will benefit. The MUBI payment will be larger than their expected increase in taxes next year. The median taxpayer will also benefit on net if they have Singapore citizen dependants, as the full MUBI payout will be given to children and seniors, who are generally not taxed. Taxpayers who suffer a sharp drop in income due to COVID-19 will benefit because their taxes could drop below what they receive in MUBI payouts. For solidarity, high-income taxpayers will be asked to contribute to financing MUBI, unless they suffer a significant income loss due to COVID-19 or have many dependants. In that case, then the tax structure ensures they will not pay much.

We call this the Majulah Universal Basic Income scheme for descriptive and symbolic reasons. In essence, MUBI will advance income from the future, when the economy and jobs are expected to recover, to the present, when it is needed the most.

But MUBI will also be a symbol of how Singapore comes together to ensure that those hit hardest by the crisis are provided with vital benefits in this time of need. Through the tax system, more fortunate Singaporeans, who retain their earning capacity during the COVID-19 pandemic, will help less fortunate Singaporeans who suffer reductions in earnings.

Mr Speaker, a universal benefits scheme without means testing will address the critical needs of Singaporeans today. Incomes and jobs will be volatile over the next few months. A family that is financially secure today may not be so next month.

Means testing, moreover, is often based on lagging indicators. It may be based on income tax records, housing annual value and it may not reflect present finances. The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic are unpredictable, so it will be difficult to identify today which sectors, which jobs, will be affected the most, even though we know many people in aviation, tourism, retail and F&B, have already been hard hit.

The universal approach will provide some assurance to everyone that there would be some income regardless of their circumstances. This approach is also equitable because many of our affected sectors have already made sacrifices to ensure the safety of other Singaporeans during this crisis.

The certainty of having weekly payments to help put food on the table also means that Singaporeans will never feel pressured to choose between feeding their families and protecting public health. This will help Singaporeans follow public health advice, especially if that advice may hurt their livelihoods. For example, some Singaporeans provide essential home-based personal services such as home repairs and air-conditioning servicing. Not all will be confident they can protect their health and that of their customers. MUBI will allow such Singaporeans and many others like them, to decide, based on the risks at the time, to reduce or halt their services, instead of getting more business just to feed their family.

Mr Speaker, there are also administrative benefits from implementing an automatic, universal payment scheme, instead of a means-tested scheme. We need to preserve the time of policymakers and social service agencies to assist Singaporeans affected by the COVID-19 pandemic in other ways.

When social workers have to navigate through different assistance schemes to find what is the eligible set of aids for each client, this takes up time and energy which could be better used for counselling and supporting clients. Our social workers also need time to respond to emerging issues. Social isolation measures in many countries have triggered an increase in family conflicts and violence, which may well occur in Singapore during this circuit breaker period. Other social problems that may worsen include the social isolation of elderly Singaporeans and care-giver stress syndrome, as many daycare, support and respite services have shut down. These issues require not only timely interventions, but a social service sector with the bandwidth to proactively identify potential problems and implement prophylactic measures.

More importantly, policy-maker attention and time is a scarce resource. The potential flashpoints caused by the rapid development of the pandemic and measures other countries take to control it, require extensive coordination, leadership and creative thinking to develop the optimal response. MUBI saves policy-makers' time and bandwidth as it requires less inter-agency coordination and limits fine tuning of the policy to one dimension – the payment amount.

Mr Speaker, we faced two key design questions: how much should MUBI pay out and how should MUBI be financed?

We focused MUBI on the daily living expenses that receive less support from existing Government schemes, namely food, utilities and telecommunications. While food is an obvious necessity, utilities will also cost more now that people spend longer hours at home. Telecommunications is also necessary, as work and learning must now take place online. Telecommunications also helps people to stay in touch with family and Government agencies; and provides basic home entertainment, which helps keep people at home.

We did not include housing and medical expenses as these are already supported by other Government schemes. We did include utilities despite U-SAVE support because the costs could rise sharply if people work more from home.

Mr Speaker, we computed the daily living expenses based on the most recent Household Expenditure Survey data. We looked at four expenditure categories: one, food and non-alcoholic beverages; two, hawker centres, food courts, coffee shops, canteens, kiosks and street vendors; three, utilities and other fuels; and four, telecommunication services.

Based on the data, a MUBI payout of $110 per week, per citizen, is sufficient to cover basic living expenses in these categories of at least 60% of all households. The actual average per-capita expenditure is $105 per week and two-thirds of this is on food. To ensure that we covered vulnerable groups such as the elderly, we also referred to the 2019 Minimum Income Standards study led by Dr Ng Kok Hoe of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. Their estimated costs in these categories for elderly households were similar to ours. So, we believe that payouts of $110 per week, per person, will cover the most vulnerable Singaporeans.

Mr Speaker, we can finance the proposed benefits by asking Singaporeans to accept a temporary tax of 4.25% on personal chargeable income above $20,000. Based on Year of Assessment 2018 tax data, the MUBI temporary tax increment will raise $4.467 billion, which is just short of projected MUBI scheme costs of $4.62 billion. But the Government will also have to absorb the risk that tax collections next year will be much lower than expected, if the recovery is slow and prolonged.

Sir, I know that asking Singaporeans to pay more taxes in the middle of a crisis may seem insensitive. But I am asking those who are fortunate enough to retain their incomes, to pay more the next year, to support those who cannot survive today. You will only pay for MUBI, on a net basis, if you kept a high income throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.

Mr Speaker, let me outline how MUBI would in practice help Singaporean households. First, MUBI is progressive and it helps lower income taxpayers more. For example, let us look at a lower income taxpayer, who earns about $30,000 a year. They will receive $1,320 in MUBI payouts this year and they will owe about $200 more in taxes the next year. So, they keep about $1,120 of the MUBI payout once all taxes are paid.

For the median taxpayer, who earns about $58,000 a year, the MUBI benefit is just $100 more than the temporary tax increase. For the median taxpayer, MUBI really just helps to bring their income forward to cover any short-term problems due to COVID-19. But, if they have dependents, it will help even more. I will explain shortly. A high-income taxpayer will pay more in taxes than they receive in MUBI benefits. If you earn about $110,000 a year, you will help pay for one and a half other Singaporeans to receive their MUBI benefit.

Second, MUBI helps support households with dependents better. Nearly half of Singaporeans, such as our children, elderly and homemakers, pay no income tax. But they would receive MUBI payouts. This means that a median income taxpayer with two dependents would get a total MUBI payout of nearly $4,000 this year, but only pay about $1,200 in tax the next year on this.

Third, MUBI gives automatic insurance against unexpected drops in personal income. A taxpayer keeps more and more of the benefits, the more their income is hurt by the COVID-19 pandemic. The median taxpayer with two dependents keeps 95% of the payouts if they were to lose half of their income during the year.

Mr Speaker, the MUBI scheme is a fundamental shift that we propose from the standard means-tested welfare system used today in Singapore and in many other countries. While means testing can help target social protection benefits to those who need it the most, means testing can be complex, administratively costly, and it may deter recipients from seeking and receiving the necessary help.

The severe economic impact of the COVID-19 crisis will stretch social safety nets throughout the world to the breaking point. Our means testing systems will be an expensive distraction for social services agencies and policy-makers at a time when the very structure of our economy and society is under threat. Means testing also runs the risk of letting Singaporeans fall through the gaps, or asking Singaporeans to make impossible choices between protecting public health and earning a living.

The MUBI scheme therefore makes cash payments on universal basis to cover basic daily living expenses, because we cannot predict which Singaporean will be affected by the COVID-19 pandemic next and to what extent. We must be prepared to extend help to all Singaporeans and we must give that help before our fellow Singaporeans even realise that they need the help.

The MUBI scheme is also financed on the principle of solidarity, because all Singaporeans must face the COVID-19 pandemic together. Therefore, all Singaporean taxpayers are asked to contribute towards financing the scheme. Some will give more, but all will give some.

Mr Speaker, I know the Government has rolled out a comprehensive set of measures in the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets that will help Singaporeans make ends meet. I fully support those measures and the hard work that went intof them. But we can innovate. If the damage caused by COVID-19 persists we must do more. In this spirit, we propose the MUBI scheme. Majulah Singapura!

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to start by thanking Deputy Prime Minister Heng Swee Keat and his team at MOF for working relentlessly and tirelessly on successive packages in response to the rapidly escalating COVID-19 pandemic. From the Unity, to Resilience, to Solidarity Budgets, it is clear that the Government is listening hard and responding with great competence, boldness and heart.

The resources needed to fight this escalating crisis seem unending. More than 3.9 billion people or half the world's population have been asked to remain in their homes to combat COVID-19. After battling the virus for over two months, with successive restrictions, Singapore too, joined those confined to their homes, in an effort to slow the worrying growth rate of unlinked local cases.

Whilst I fully support these enhanced new measures, designed to be circuit breaker to arrest the escalating infections, such restrictions will incur significant economic costs in addition to imposing a severely constrained way of living on everyone. The Solidarity Budget proposes that another $5.1 billion be spent to save jobs, support businesses and families during these extraordinary four weeks, with $4 billion of that coming from our Reserves.

No one is sure how widely the COVID-19 pandemic will spread and when it will peak. Containment may take longer than currently projected and no country has seen a clear path to recovery. Even China, which has seen its reported infections dwindle, has urged their citizens to avoid non-essential outings and has continued to discourage foreigners from entering, in order to prevent a resurgence of infections. Without widespread availability of a viable vaccine, the removal of restrictions on economic activity is likely to be painfully slow. The longer the duration of lock-down, the more complicated the resumption of economic activity will be.

I would like to ask Deputy Prime Minister what he plans to do if our efforts to contain COVID-19 is not successful and circuit breaker measures need to be extended or even tightened? Would he extend a similar set of support measures?

It is at times like this when we feel grateful of the privileged financial position Singapore is in, endowed as it is with the wherewithal to weather this storm. Our reserves have enabled Deputy Prime Minister to act decisively when the nation faces such extraordinary circumstances.

The lion share of Resilience and Solidarity Budgets will go towards the Job Support Scheme in order to save jobs and protect people's livelihoods. I am pleased that the Government chose to bear the full costs of savings jobs with wage support, instead of cutting CPF. After the previous CPF rate cut in 2003, it took eight years for the employer contribution rate to be restored to 16%. I hope we can continue to safeguard CPF for our workers in this crisis.

Despite the strong efforts on Job Support Scheme, less than half of the Singaporeans polled by The Straits Times believe that the measures would be enough to rescue jobs. In the US, the COVID-19 "freeze" is expected to cost 47 million jobs and send the unemployment rate past 32%, according to St Louis Fed projections. With such grave outcomes being predicted in other parts of the world, I would like to ask Deputy Prime Minister about his outlook on Singapore's unemployment – both the base case as well as worst case scenarios? Even as we work relentlessly to mitigate the scale of retrenchment and rise in unemployment, I would like to ask Deputy Prime Minister whether he has in mind a limit to which the reserves should be tapped?

There is no historical precedent of the type of economic dislocations that we are experiencing. More are drawing parallels with the trauma wrought by World War II or the Great Depression. I would like to ask Deputy Prime Minister for his view on the nature of this crisis – how different it is from past crises and the challenges that he believes Singaporeans and the enterprises will need to face.

Mr Speaker, Sir, many of the support schemes in the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets are broad-based to provide for cash flow during this time of crisis. I note that some countries, such as Australia, eligibility for wage support only kicks in if business turnover drops by 30% due to the pandemic – so there is an eligibility criteria. And for larger companies with turnover of more than A$1 billion, their drop in turnover must be at least 50% before they are eligible.

Whilst I agree with the broad-based approach Singapore is taking, it is incumbent on companies who enjoy disproportionately greater benefits to “do the right thing”, and share these benefits with their business partners, employees and the wider eco-system, in the spirit of solidarity.

Sir, let me share one example. Food delivery platforms such as Grab and Deliveroo typically charge 30%-35% in commission fees. This means food outlets need to pay an exorbitant one-third of customer receipts, in fees to delivery platforms, as commissions for delivery. Judging by the compensation that delivery platforms pay their riders and charges they impose on consumers for delivery, I think this seems excessive.

Owners of food outlets have told me that the high commissions are barely tolerable during "peacetime". However, with the onset of COVID-19, deliveries have now become the dominant portion of their business – indeed, the only mode of business from today, for at least a month. Under these circumstances, payment of such commissions renders the sustainability of food establishments untenable.

Some relief is provided by the recently launched Enterprise Singapore’s package to support F&B players by funding 5% of the commission cost. I urge, and I really urge, GrabFood, Food Panda and Deliveroo to do their part – review their commission model and foster more equitable sharing of costs and benefits with food outlets owners, riders and consumers.

I believe it is in the delivery companies’ interests to adjust their commission rates, so that food outlets may have a fighting chance to survive. As for delivery riders who "brave" the deliveries to ferry our favourites to us at home, we as consumers can also play our part by giving them a little extra. Should those of us who can afford it not consider tipping our delivery riders 5%-10% of food receipts as a discretionary "service fee"? We can all do our part to keep Singapore’s treasured, unique and colourful food culture alive.

In the coming days, more relationships between parties will need to evolve and creative new models that benefit all stakeholders must emerge. I hope such solutions will be developed by businesses themselves, without depending on the heavy hand of the Government or the law. It is regrettable that we have to enact new laws to compel landlords to pass on property tax rebates to tenants.

Sir, I commend the coordinated efforts of MAS and the financial industry to roll out probably the biggest restructuring of household and corporate debt in Singapore’s history, providing individuals and businesses relief in cash flows. The relief package offered by banks and insurers, to defer repayment of loans as well as insurance premiums until the end of the year, will be a lifeline for many impacted. It will also help financial institutions reduce risks of delinquencies and bankruptcies, by sharing the burden of debt with individuals and SMEs.

However, I was surprised to hear from Senior Minister of State Chee Hong Tat during a Parliamentary Question yesterday, that the SME Working Capital Loan Programme has so far helped only 662 enterprises and the Temporary Bridging Loan interest rate is as much as 5% despite the Government’s risk-sharing at 80%. This contrasts poorly with Switzerland’s crisis loan scheme to SMEs, where over 76,000 small businesses availed themselves of more than SFr 15 billion in the first week of launch, at zero interest.

I thank the Deputy Prime Minister for announcing risk share to 90% and that banks and finance companies may also apply for low-cost funding through a new MAS Singapore Dollar facility. With these strong Government interventions, I would like to ask if MAS can prescribed a much lower interest rate chargeable such that there is more take up, and boost SMEs chances of surviving this storm and ease their recovery with less debt burden.

Finally, Sir, the impact of coronavirus hits everyone. Many of our PRs are part of Singaporean families and have contributed socially and economically. They are hurting too. In solidarity, could the Deputy Prime Minister consider giving them some help, even if not the full $600, means tested on a case by case basis, and applicants can be asked to show that they are part of Singaporean families. Also there are many Long-Term Visit Pass holders who are spouses of Singaporeans. Many of these families are not well-off. They would certainly appreciate this, even if it is just a fraction of $600.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is clear that the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic will be felt for quite a while. The Unity, Resilience and Solidarity Budgets provide comprehensive measures for individuals and companies to build capabilities for the eventual recovery at all levels. Despite our best efforts, some companies and jobs will disappear, but new ones will emerge. Those who stay resilient in the face of hardship and adversity will be rewarded, when a new dawn breaks.

As we face the mighty storm together, for days, months or even years, our shared sense of identity and solidarity will be our greatest strength. Every generation of Singaporeans has been defined by its own crisis; each has come through stronger and more united than before – this challenge is ours to face down, as one united people. Together, I am confident Singapore will prevail. Sir, I support the Budget.

Minister Grace Fu.

Mr Speaker, the livelihoods of many Singaporeans in the arts, culture and sports sectors have been badly affected by COVID-19. Arts and sporting events, and CCAs, were cancelled or postponed even before the new circuit breaker measures that take effect today, 7 April. To deal with this unprecedented crisis, the government has introduced additional measures to protect livelihoods, help businesses overcome immediate challenges and strengthen economic and social resilience. Fifty-five million dollars has been set aside for an Arts and Culture Resilience Package (ACRP) as part of the Resilience Budget. We will: (a) protect livelihoods and careers in the arts, culture and sports eco-systems; (b) invest in capabilities that will position ourselves well for the post-COVID recovery; and (c) digitalise these sectors to create new markets, provide new job opportunities and ensure that Singaporeans can continue to benefit from the arts, culture and sports.

We must first protect the livelihoods of our arts, culture and sports practitioners. They have been badly affected. Individual professionals, such as freelancers, may tap on broad-based relief schemes like the Temporary Relief Fund and SEP Income Relief Scheme or SIRS, and defer their income tax payments and mortgage instalments. Depending on individual circumstances, an eligible arts or sports freelancer may potentially receive $12,000 from May to October 2020 from SIRS and the Enhanced Workfare Special Payment among the broad-based measures in the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets, even before factoring other schemes.

For companies, the Deputy Prime Minister announced that the Government will co-fund 25% of the wages of every local employee under the enhanced Jobs Support Scheme or JSS, which will last till end 2020, and 75% for the month of April, in view of the heightened measures. This will support all eligible companies and employees in the arts and culture and sports sectors. MCCY will announce additional support for major companies, as well as leading arts and culture groups, shortly at a later date.

To help companies and businesses further defray costs, all eligible tenants in MCCY-owned properties – be they in the arts and culture, youth, or sports – will benefit from the two months of rental waiver announced by the Deputy Prime Minister. This will benefit more than 300 tenants. These measures will provide some immediate relief for our arts and culture companies and allow them to use this period – when they are working from home – to plan for the future with greater assurance and certainty.

To further support employment in the sports sector, as part of the SGUnited Jobs Initiative, we have identified more than 500 temporary job opportunities for various roles in the sports sector to support our national sports associations (NSAs), sports centres, academy and clubs as well as to support digital and exercise-science related capabilities. While many of these jobs will not be available while circuit breaker measures are in place, we are preparing them now so that we can start hiring as soon as these measures are relaxed.

Beyond relief support, we will invest in retaining and upskilling the arts, culture and sports professionals. We want to protect and sustain the breadth and depth of skillsets and talents in the eco-systems as much as possible. Practitioners in these sectors will already benefit from the $500 to $1,000 SkillsFuture Credit top-up, and the SEP Training Support Scheme. I encourage our practitioners to hone their professional skills, and explore new complementary skills through the many online courses that are available from home.

For the sports sector, we have been working with partners to build up the range of Continuing Coach Education or CCE courses to upskill our coaches and instructors. When the situation allows, coaches and instructors can avail themselves of more than 3,000 training opportunities by end-2020. This is in addition to the more than 2,000 ActiveSG SkillsFuture training opportunities currently available to coaches and instructors. These courses are either free or well covered by training grants from SkillsFuture. We will progressively make more training programmes available to individuals in the sports sector. We will also set aside $100,000 for the Coach Development Grant, up from $30,000 in previous years, to cover coaches’ registration and course fees when they sign up for CCE courses.

Arts and culture freelancers, as well as those in the wider creative sector who provide important complementary expertise such as sound and lighting professionals, hold essential capabilities for our arts and culture eco-system. The Arts Resource Hub or ARH under the National Arts Council or NAC, has been set up to promote employability and sustainability of freelancers’ careers by providing resources and services. The ARH has been engaging and surveying a wide range of cultural and creative freelancers over the past months to better understand their profiles and the impact of COVID-19 on them. It helps us refine our range of shared resources and services, and provide reliable and relevant information to help them tide over this difficult period. Freelancers who have experienced contract cancellations can also seek advice from the ARH.

I strongly encourage all cultural and creative freelancers to sign up online with the ARH, at no cost, to enjoy the convenience of a centralised point-of-contact.

This is the time for companies to invest in their employees. The Enhanced Training Support scheme announced by the Deputy Prime Minister provides absentee payroll to employers who send their employees for training in SkillsFuture courses and is open to companies in the arts, culture and sports sectors. In addition, arts and culture organisations can apply for further support under the expanded Capability Development Scheme for the Arts or CDSA administered by NAC, to send their employees for professional-led training courses, beyond those endorsed by SkillsFuture. In the coming months, NAC will list more online courses which are eligible for CDSA support. We have enhanced the CDSA so that Major Companies can now receive up to $20,000 for training, while other arts groups can receive up to $6,000. Up to 200 companies will benefit from this.

In addition to organisations and their employees, we will also support the training of up to 6,000 freelancers through the CDSA. These freelancers can apply for the CDSA to participate in a variety of courses, including local and international online courses. These include masterclasses in graphic communication skills in outreach with digital media, courses in creative writing, music production and studio recording. NAC will invite suggestions on training programmes and welcome courses by our own major arts companies and established professionals who are keen to offer their skills and experience in their areas of expertise. Our freelancers can receive up to $1,000 for their training, which can cover both course fee subsidies and a training allowance of $10 per hour. Just like companies and their employees, freelancers can also use this time to apply for the CDSA and use it to take online courses, or for future training.

Arts, culture and sports lift our spirits in these difficult times, and sustain our emotional and physical well-being. To ensure Singaporeans continue to have access to the arts, culture and sports during the next few months, our culture and sports agencies will be releasing digital content to engage Singaporeans even as we stay at home, provide enjoyment for the entire family, and encourage them to keep fit. Interested audiences can view available offerings at NAC’s A-List website, an integrated platform featuring cultural offerings from our cultural institutions, arts groups and artists to offer greater access and connectivity for audiences. A-List is already available with many exciting programmes. I urge Members to check it out.

We also want to step up on-going digitalisation efforts to enhance capabilities of the arts and culture, and sports sector, create new experiences for audiences and participants, and expand economic opportunities. Beyond bringing their products online, we see that it is a good time for the sector to acquire technical skills in data analytics, audience sensing, online marketing and more.

For the arts and culture sector, we have established a Digitalisation Fund to support arts and culture groups and practitioners, cultural institutions, and cultural festival organisers to go digital with their arts and culture content. NAC will offer a new Digital Presentation Grant for the arts of up to $20,000 per project, to ramp up efforts in digitalisation of arts and culture content and delivery. This will be open to all arts and culture groups and practitioners, including freelancers. Artists and arts groups offering student-facing programmes including NAC Arts Education Programme (AEP) providers are encouraged to apply to NAC for this support to create digital content that can be offered for online use by schools. While some ideas may only be possible to execute after the circuit breaker measures, I encourage arts and culture groups and practitioners to prepare and submit their grant proposals now, so that they can bring their best work to Singaporeans once the situation improves. NAC also welcomes proposals which include creative means to develop digital projects while fully working from home.

The Digitalisation Fund will support large-scale digitalisation of existing festivals and projects. We are committed to continuing with our annual large-scale festivals through digital means. As far as possible, we will hold digital editions of Singapore Heritage Festival in June, Singapore Writers Festival and Arts in Your Neighbourhood in November, followed by Singapore Art Week in January 2021. They will involve virtual arts and culture presentations, workshops, and tours. NAC and Arts House Limited will work with local arts groups involved in the Singapore International Festival of the Arts 2020 to explore how they can offer innovative arts and culture experiences digitally later in the year.

The Digitalisation Fund will also support the digitalisation of our museum exhibitions and collections. The National Heritage Board (NHB) will progressively make available virtual exhibitions of the galleries at our national museums and heritage institutions, so that Singaporeans and international visitors alike can experience and learn about heritage without leaving their homes. NHB will also be working with Museum Roundtable members to support similar projects, and assist them in building up their digitalisation capabilities.

We hope to roll out digital offerings by our arts groups in the coming months through multiple platforms and festivals. We aim to generate demand for the arts and culture sector, support over 200 new digital projects, and create more than 1,000 opportunities for our cultural and related practitioners once the circuit breaker measures are relaxed.

SportSG will leverage technology to continue to engage Singaporeans in sports events and activities in this period. It will set up the ActiveSG Circle, a virtual sports centre in the form of an online platform. This will enable citizens to stay connected and active with an expansive offering, a wide offering of content such as exercise videos, programmes, talks, workshops and even races through a virtual space. For this year’s Get Active! Singapore, we will also offer a new $2 million grant to support more than 50 projects for sports SEPs and businesses to develop initiatives that create digital and virtual content and provide innovative ways to deliver sports for Singaporeans to stay active and fit in the lead-up from now to National Day in August.

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

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] In this challenging period, MCCY will strive to help our arts, culture and sports sector overcome the impact brought about by COVID-19. We will introduce a $55 million Arts and Culture Resilience Package (ACRP) to help protect jobs and maintain livelihoods. First, Deputy Prime Minister had earlier announced that the Government will co-fund 25% of the wages of every local employee under the enhanced Jobs Support Scheme (JSS) till end of this year, and 75% for the month of April when "circuit breaker" measures are in place. This will benefit all eligible companies and employees in the arts, culture and sports, sector. MCCY will also provide additional support for major companies, as well as leading arts and culture groups. More details will be announced at a later date.

Next, all eligible tenants in MCCY-owned properties will benefit from the two months of rental waiver, to help lower their costs. Also, we want to quicken the pace of digitalisation efforts of the arts and cultural sector via the new Digitalisation Fund. Finally, we also want to encourage arts organisations and practitioners to upgrade their skills, and be ready to bounce back stronger than before during this period. As such, we will enhance the National Arts Council’s (NAC's) one-time Capability Development Scheme for the Arts (CDSA) to benefit more arts and culture organisations and practitioners, including freelancers, up to end of 2020. The Arts Resource Hub (ARH) under NAC will continue to promote sustainability of freelancers' careers by providing shared resources and services, including advising them on various support schemes by the government, to tide them over this difficult period.

(In English): Mr Speaker, if I may summarise. The relief packages announced by Deputy Prime Minister provide financial support to the individuals affected, sustain the eco-systems of these sectors by minimising the loss of capabilities, and raise the capabilities of the sectors in the physical and digital spaces. Individuals can benefit from financial reliefs, such as the Temporary Relief Fund, SIRS for freelancers and the COVID-19 Support Grant; training subsidies and grants in the Capability Development Scheme for the Arts to build their long-term capabilities. They will also benefit from the temporary jobs SportSG will be making available.

Companies can benefit from wage support measures such as the enhanced JSS, and the Enhanced Training Support scheme and the CDSA. Our push to digitalise these sectors will provide economic opportunities to both individuals and companies, and allow them to continue bringing arts and sports experiences to Singaporeans. These schemes will be relevant even when circuit breaker measures are applicable, and will help us emerge stronger.

Everyone has a part to play to overcome the situation we face. We are in this together, and the arts, culture, and sports communities must work together, work with the public, to protect the safety of our patrons, students and audiences. I urge larger and more established groups with deeper capabilities to help the smaller ones and individual practitioners, and ask that corporations, foundations and members of the public continue supporting the arts and culture and sports. All of us should take this time to prepare, with agility and resourcefulness, to welcome our audiences and students again with better creations, better works, greater competencies and broader outreach.

Our arts, culture and sports sectors have proven their resilience time and again. I am confident that they will be ready with our best shows, most creative content, and highest quality classes once Singapore is ready for us, so that arts, culture and sports will be an even more important part of people’s lives. COVID-19 is a test and we will rise to the occasion.

Mr Dennis Tan.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. The COVID-19 pandemic, with the effects of lockdown or stay-at-home orders, has brought a standstill to businesses all over the world and Singapore has not been spared, too. Beyond aviation, tourism and F&B, most industries and sectors in Singapore have been affected, some earlier than others. The effect on economies worldwide will be an unprecedented one, possibly worse than any global economic downturns we have ever seen since the Great Depression. The economic fall-outs may go on for quite a while after the COVID-19 pandemic has been tamed.

I declare my interest as an SME owner. As the businesses of our SMEs are affected, many Singaporeans they employ are in turn affected. Under the Resilience Budget, the Jobs Support Scheme extended greater assistance to specified sectors, such as aviation and tourism and F&B sectors, giving 75% and 50% support for wages up to the first $4,600 of each of their staff wages for these respective sectors for nine months. The remaining businesses only received a flat 25% of their staff wages up to the first $4,600. While the aviation, tourism and F&B sectors may be badly affected, the vast majority of our SMEs outside of the aviation, tourism and F&B sectors lament they will get much less than the 75% or 50% wage support received by the priority sectors. Who is to say that businesses in other sectors are not as badly affected or will not be as badly affected?

While the wage support for the Jobs Support Scheme under the Solidarity Budget has been boosted to 75% for all businesses for the solitary month of April and will be welcomed by all, for many businesses, it may only mitigate part of the losses expected from the enforced month-long closure of workplaces starting today.

Since the Resilience Budget has been proposed on 26 March, has any study been done to assess the grave effect the pandemic has or is about to have on all business sectors?

Let me share one example of a troubled sector here.

On 24 March 2020, the Government announced that all centre-based tuition and enrichment centres will be suspended. The reason given is the need to reduce the intermingling of students from different schools and enhance the safety of our students. This brings to a stop the daily bustling activities that take place in our tuition and enrichment centres during both weekdays and weekends.

While some of the tuition centres may have resorted to online learning, yet online learning has not been able to completely replace many of the pre-existing programmes in the tuition centres and enrichment centres. Some programmes may not be suitable for online learning. Some tutors, are for various reasons, not able to convert their face-to-face programmes to online modules. Some parents are also, for various reasons, not keen to convert existing programmes to online learning or even via Zoom, when offered. Many parents prefer traditional methods of personal teaching.

Habits and mindsets will always take time to change, but that is scant comfort to businesses suffering the sudden shock to their businesses brought about by the abrupt ban. For centres who may not have locked in their students' subscriptions for a longer time, having chosen to collect fees on a monthly basis, they face abrupt loss of revenue as some parents have not continued to pay the fees.

Learning service providers to MOE schools and to pre-schools are another group of SMEs in the education industry which have been affected from an even earlier time, with all outdoor programmes and all large-attendance programmes being cancelled in early February and co-curricular activities (CCAs) in March. Given the requirements in pre-schools that trainers cannot teach in other schools concurrently and students of different classes cannot share the same enrichment classes, many enrichment classes had to be cancelled from February onwards, with many left without any revenue.

Besides a significant loss in revenue, these SME businesses still face the pressures of premise rental and staff salary. The Government's offer to pay 25% of the salary of their staff up to the first $4,600 under the JSS – which is just a few percentage points above the amount of employer's CPF contributions the employers will have to pay for each staff per month anyway – may assist to a certain extent, but it may not be significant enough to save jobs – the reason stated by Deputy Prime Minister Heng for the Resilience Budget. How will the Government provide greater assistance to these businesses?

At this point, let me touch on one further aspect of the Jobs Support Scheme or JSS, again. The JSS is not applicable to one category of employees – employees who are shareholders, partners or sole proprietors of businesses even though they may take a salary as an employee of the business.

I understand that in the private education business, there are many people in such a position – sole proprietors, partners or company shareholders of their businesses – who are at the same time registered employees of their business. Those such persons can be regarded as self-employed in some ways. The Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme is not applicable to them as the scheme stipulates that there should not be any employee income.

I believe that this situation is not unique to the private education business. There are many in our micro-SMEs in other industries or sectors who are in the same situation. On Sunday, I met one of our residents, who runs a phone repair business and who is in this exact position. How would the Government help these affected Singaporeans?

Yesterday, it was announced that all pre-school operators are to provide 50% refund of net school fees for non-attendance during the circuit breaker period. Parents will no doubt welcome this announcement. For parents who send their children to MOE Kindergartens and pre-schools run by anchor and partner operators, including those run by PAP Community Foundation (PCF) and NTUC, they are already entitled to various subsidies. But for other SME operators, where Singaporean parents only get the standard subsidies, or for faith-based kindergartens, where there are zero subsidies, the net refund that these operators must cough up is relatively much higher as the net fees payable are higher compared to MOE Kindergartens and those run by anchor and partner operators.

In some cases, the total refunds will likely be higher than the 75% wage support received by way of the JSS. Furthermore, many operators had to incur extra costs recently to have additional manpower to cover for those on Leave of Absence (LOA) or five-day medical leave, and for extra cleaning works.

I have dealt in some detail on the private education industry. However, it is but one example out of many businesses which have been affected by the COVID-19 crisis. With the circuit breaker announcements, things will get worse for many businesses in the coming month or longer, especially the many businesses that do not thrive on working remotely.

The property tax rebate, together with the savings by way of the rental rebate, will be helpful in some ways to alleviate the sharp pain, and so will the Jobs Support Scheme. But will it be enough to ensure the survival of the business and to save jobs?

Retrenchment has already started in different industries. Just last week, one of our residents, who is a chartered accountant in his 30s, shared with me that he has just been retrenched from a mid-sized accounting firm and is struggling to find employment in his industry.

Indeed, if business is down, businesses will struggle to pay all their business expenses until a certain level of business has resumed – especially many SMEs, who may have precious little to sustain their business expenses, including rent and income beyond a few months. This economic crisis is likely to hang over the world for quite some time. Beyond the Resilience and Solidarity Budgets, how will the Government assist businesses and Singaporeans to stay afloat in the coming months and beyond?

Before I move away from businesses, I would like to seek some clarifications regarding arts businesses.

With the cancellation of entertainment, our flourishing arts professionals have to cancel their plays, musicals, concerts and other performances, and shows, which may go on until the end of the year. When performances are cancelled, there are no ticket sales and corporate sponsorships are often cancelled – not to mention that in these difficult times, it is challenging to expect support from many corporate sponsors. Many of these arts businesses are registered charities. May I clarify whether such arts businesses, i.e. those registered as charities, will be entitled to the same wage support under the Jobs Support Scheme as available to other businesses? If not, what is the corresponding assistance being given to this group of arts businesses?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I move on to certain aspects of the Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme (SIRS). May I ask how did the Government arrive at this figure of 100,000 self-employed persons?

In MOM's paper titled "Labour Force in Singapore 2019", it was mentioned that in the year ending June 2019, and I quote from paragraph 1.1.9, "211,000 residents were engaged in own account work as some form of employment" and own account workers were defined in the same paper as, and I quote from paragraph 1.17, "individuals who operate their own business or trade without employing any paid employees".

The Self-Employed Person Income Relief Scheme will be open to those who earn a net trade income of no more than $100,000, live in a property with an annual value of no more than $13,000 originally and do not own two or more properties. While it is good that the $13,000 annual value limit has since been raised to $21,000 yesterday. In principle, the concern with setting a figure – a limit – at all, on this is that we are talking about a special economic crisis situation caused by the global COVID-19 pandemic, which has developed suddenly. These self-employed people see their livelihoods being adversely affected in a short time and require quick and immediate assistance from the Government, regardless the nature of their residences.

The property that they live in or own or co-own may not be relevant to their current income and earning capacity as well as most relevantly, their present position of suffering from sudden financial problems due to the COVID-19 crisis. If they own such property, is the Government expecting such self-employed people to sell their property quickly? If so, is it really fair or realistic to expect such persons to sell their homes immediately in such a market condition? This is different from the usual situation of people applying for financial assistance due to longer term employment and so on.

May I also clarify whether this relief is open to those who live in such property above $21,000 annual value but do not own such property?

Next, I move on to help for our taxi and private hire drivers.

It is already a well-known fact that our taxi drivers and private hire drivers are suffering from a huge drop in business. I would like to seek some clarifications regarding the Point-to-Point Support Package for taxi drivers and private car hire drivers.

I would like to know whether it is true that the Special Relief Fund under the Point-to-Point Support Package is only available to taxi drivers who work under the auspices of a taxi company or for private car hire drivers who work with Grab or GoJek?

A resident who has a private car hire licence and serves his own source of customers had checked and was told that he did not qualify. If it is true, may I know the rationale behind this?

A private hire car driver also shared with us at our Meet-the-People Session in Hougang last week that the incentives that come together with the Special Relief Fund may come with conditions imposed by his company that are impossible to fulfill in this economic climate. He asked whether the Special Relief Fund can be paid directly to all registered private hire drivers instead. I urge the Government to look into this.

On the issue of landlords passing on savings from the property tax rebate and rental waivers granted under the Unity and Resilience Budgets, I am glad that the measures are being taken to ensure landlords' cooperation. However, I would like to ask what measures are being taken to ensure that tenants will share any property tax rebate or rental waiver savings they obtain from landlords with their sub-tenants, including the newly announced increase in rental waivers for Government-owned properties?

Now, be they tenants or sub-tenants of Government-owned, private, commercial, industrial or office properties, what can sub-tenants do to ensure that they get to enjoy any rental rebate passed on to the tenants by the landlords? Are coffeeshop store-holders in this position as well?

Finally, I would like to ask the Government to look at how we can extend better protection to many elderly Singaporeans working in hawker centres and coffeeshops as well as those elderly working as cleaners against the risk of the COVID-19 virus as I believe that they are the most vulnerable group – the elderly. For example, could the Government look into whether they could take more measures to ensure that these elderly hawkers and workers will have better protective equipment and safer working environment?

Mr Speaker, Sir, in closing, the COVID-19 pandemic and the economic fallout resulting from it are likely to be here for quite some time. I look forward to the Government rendering more assistance to more of our affected Singaporeans and SMEs.

Mr Leon Perera.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in my last speech in this House, I talked about seeing the opportunities in this crisis. What a difference a month makes. I will not talk about opportunities this time. The focus should be on getting through this to the other side – a post-COVID world. Other things should not distract Singaporeans from this mission right now. Before I begin, I declare my interest as a CEO and a shareholder in a company providing research and consulting.

Sir, many of us feel fear right now. I would argue that what we should fight is not fear. Rather, we should fight the twin evils of indifference, complacency and unscientific views, on the one hand, and unbridled panic, on the other. A little fear may actually be helpful, keeping us on our toes and mitigating the risk that bad habits will return at the first sign of good news. But it should be a little fear for everyone and not only a little fear for ourselves. That should come from trust in the scientific view that if most people get sick, no one will be safe as individuals and families.

As the famous scientist, Neil deGrasse Tyson, recently said, this COVID-19 crisis will put to the test a key question: does society listen to scientists? We all have a role to play in answering that question as a country. All of us react differently to an event like this based on our personalities, medical profiles, socio-economic circumstances and many things besides.

It is easier for some of us to work from home than others, for example. Recognising these differences means accepting that there will be questions, there will be discussions, there will be debate, trade-offs and, yes, course correction. It is unity that will ultimately breed success in this effort but it is understanding that will beget unity. It is openness and accountability that will get us to understanding and it is our democratic society enshrined in our pledge that will beget openness and accountability.