Hansard, Tuesday, 9 September 2014

1 Mr Ang Wei Neng asked the Minister for Transport (a) what is the basis of increasing the Vehicle Entry Permit fees for foreign-registered cars from $20 to $35 per day and goods vehicles from $10 to $40 per calendar month; (b) what is the expected revenue increase arising from the increase in Vehicle Entry Permit fees; and (c) whether the Malaysian government has informed Singapore on their proposal to impose a fee on Singapore-registered vehicles entering Johor.

Mdm Speaker, our Vehicle Entry Permit (VEP) fee and the Goods Vehicle Permit (GVP) fee seek to equalise the cost of owning and using a foreign-registered vehicle in Singapore, with that for a Singapore-registered vehicle. There is a need to do so, given the significantly higher costs for Singapore-registered vehicles because of our Certificate of Entitlement (COE) policy, higher vehicle taxes and so on. By way of background, the GVP has been in existence since the 1960s and the VEP since the 1970s.

LTA periodically reviews these fees to ensure that they continue to serve their objective. The cost difference between owning and using a foreign-registered vehicle and a Singapore-registered vehicle has widened in recent years. This is why we need to revise the fees. I should point out that this is the first increase in the VEP fee in 20 years, the last being in 1994. The VEP is not always adjusted upwards. In fact, it was reduced in 2004 for foreign-registered cars because COE prices had gone down during that period, resulting in lower overall costs for Singapore-registered cars. The GVP fee had remained unchanged since its introduction until the recent revision.

Buses, taxis and motorcycles are not affected by the recent increase in VEP and GVP fees. In addition, all foreign-registered cars and motorcycles continue to enjoy around 125 VEP-free days per year, on top of daily VEP-free hours which are from 5.00 pm to 2.00 am, and which is extended to 12.00 pm to 2.00 am during Singapore's mid-year and year-end school holidays. Effectively, based on 2013 data, only about one in 10 foreign-registered cars

Page: 10

that enter Singapore will be affected by the recent increase in VEP fee.

The VEP is not intended as a revenue generator. The VEP fees collected vary, depending on the number of foreign-registered cars and motorcycles entering Singapore and their length of stay during VEP-chargeable hours.

On Malaysia's proposed entry fee on non-Malaysia-registered vehicles entering Johor, we have not been officially informed of it by the Malaysian government. We are concerned whether it is directed towards Singapore vehicles. We have contacted the Malaysian government to seek details and are awaiting their reply before deciding on our response.

Mdm Speaker, I thank the Senior Minister of State for the comprehensive reply. We understand that the purpose of the VEP is to curb vehicle congestion during the peak hours and typically during the week days. Foreign-registered vehicles entering Singapore are given 10 VEP-free days per calendar year, besides not having to pay VEP during Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays. If the Malaysian authorities had decided to go ahead with their own VEP, would MOT consider negotiating with them so as to provide the same kind of number of fee-free days?

My second supplementary question is about the higher toll charges imposed by Malaysia at the Causeway since 1 August 2014. Both MOT and LTA have indicated the intention for Singapore to match the same. However, many Singaporeans are concerned about the impact of the higher toll charges. Would the Senior Minister of State provide an update on this issue?

As I had noted earlier in our response, we have not had official word from the Malaysian government on what they intend to do regarding the entry permit fees that reportedly they would like to levy. Until details are made known to us, it is premature to comment on it. So, I would suggest that we not say anything more at this point in time.

Regarding the Causeway tolls, there is a Parliamentary Question (PQ) following this first PQ that relates to the Causeway toll, so I suggest we take it together with Question No 2.

2 Mr Pritam Singh asked the Minister for Transport whether LTA plans to review its long-standing policy of matching toll charges at the Causeway and Second Link to those set by Malaysia in future; and (b) whether a Whole-of-Government study has been carried out by Singapore to assess the prospect of higher toll charges on Singapore businesses operating

Page: 11

in the Iskandar zone in Johor.

Mdm Speaker, toll charges at the Causeway and Second Link were introduced by Malaysia in 1998. Our matching policy reflects the shared nature of the two crossings, and ensures a fair distribution of total revenues from the crossings. Without a matching policy, lower toll charges by one side may simply be offset by higher tolls levied by the other side. There is no assurance that toll charges foregone by one side will be translated into lower total charges which benefit motorists.

Hence, in response to Malaysia's Causeway tolls revision on 1 August 2014, we have announced Singapore's intention to match Malaysia's new and increased toll charges in due course.

The Government has limited information on the cost structures and market conditions of Singapore businesses operating in the Iskandar zone in Johor. But clearly, there will be some impact on their costs.

In this regard, we note reports in the Malaysian media that the Malaysian authorities will review the tolls. Should Malaysia reduce or do away with the toll charges, Singapore will follow suit. This would be welcomed, I think, by both Singapore and Malaysia businesses on both sides of the Causeway.

Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for that very helpful clarification. I have three supplementary questions for the Senior Minister of State. First, did the Malaysian government forewarn Singapore of their intention to raise toll charges at the Causeway on 1 August, and have there been any joint discussions about this round of toll hikes since 1 August so as to manage costs for Singaporeans and Malaysians travelling to and fro both countries?

The second question is: did the Singapore Government inform its Malaysian counterparts when it planned to increase VEP charges in July this year, and if not, does it plan to do so going forward?

Finally, in view of the close relationship between Singapore and Malaysia, especially between the Prime Ministers in recent years, has the Government suggested to the Malaysian authorities to consider tagging the additional toll from 1 August along the Eastern Dispersal Link rather than at the Customs, Immigration and Quarantine (CIQ), so as not to penalise drivers who do not use the Eastern Dispersal Link and only travel into Johor Bahru

Page: 12

city?

Mdm Speaker, the answer to the Member's first question is no. We were not informed in advance of Malaysia's intention to increase the tolls at the Causeway on 1 August. The answer to his second question is yes. We informed our Malaysian counterparts in advance why there is a need to revise the VEP fees. As I have explained in my answer to the earlier Parliamentary Question on VEP fees, it is really because the cost of owning a Singapore-registered vehicle and using it on Singapore roads has risen, whereas the similar cost for a foreign-registered vehicle had largely remained unchanged. And so, yes, our Malaysian counterparts were aware of the intention to raise our VEP fees.

We very much would like our Malaysian counterparts to come to the discussion table and look at what are the better ways of managing this issue of the Causeway tolls so as not to penalise drivers who do not use the Eastern Dispersal Link. Our long-standing policy is well known to our Malaysian counterparts, and that means if the Causeway tolls levied by the Malaysian side were to be reduced or removed, we would do likewise.

3 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for Health (a) whether there are clinical trial runs for the Sanofi dengue vaccine being conducted in Singapore; (b) whether an approved dengue vaccine can be used to help reduce the number of people who suffer from dengue fever in Singapore; and (c) whether the Ministry has plans to eventually make a dengue vaccine available under the National Childhood Immunisation Programme (NCIP), just like the polio vaccine.

(for the Minister for Health): Mdm Speaker, a Phase II clinical trial for the Sanofi dengue vaccine has been conducted among 1,200 patients in Singapore. It aims to assess the immune response and safety of the vaccine in healthy persons aged two to 45 years old. The study started in 2009 and follow-up of persons in the study is still on-going at our public hospitals.

A dengue vaccine could potentially help reduce the number of cases of dengue in Singapore. However, it is too early to definitively assess the effects of the Sanofi dengue vaccine. As with all new vaccines, it must first be scientifically assessed by the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) for its safety, quality and efficacy to meet internationally benchmarked standards, before the vaccine is approved for use in Singapore. In granting marketing approval, HSA will take into account whether the data provided from the clinical trial studies demonstrates that the benefits of the vaccine outweigh the risks of potential

Page: 13

side effects, if any.

Results from two large scale Phase III studies, conducted in Asia and South America, were reported recently. Both studies focused on effectiveness of the vaccine in children, whereas in Singapore, most dengue cases occur in adults. The results were similar and showed lower efficacy against dengue virus serotypes 1 and 2, which are the commonest types circulating in Singapore. There had previously been reports that while past infection with one serotype confers immunity and protection against that serotype, it could lead to more serious disease if infection with a different serotype occurs.

More study is needed to ascertain whether similarly, incomplete protection from vaccination could potentially result in the risk of more severe infection from serotypes which the vaccine protects poorly against. To reduce the number of dengue cases, other measures such as reducing the number of mosquito breeding sites and using mosquito repellents continue to play an important part.

An Expert Committee on Immunisation (ECI) advises MOH on matters related to vaccination. The ECI considers factors such as the local burden of disease, vaccine safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness when recommending whether a particular vaccine, such as the dengue vaccine when it becomes available, should be included into the National Childhood Immunisation Schedule.

4 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Defence in view of the celebration of Singapore's 50th National Day next year, whether the Government will consider having two NDP Preview shows so that more Singaporeans can have the opportunity to attend the parade at the Padang and celebrate this very significant National Day.

Mdm Speaker, MINDEF agrees with the Member of Parliament Mr Liang that it would be good, indeed ideal, if more Singaporeans could attend the NDP 2015 next year, in celebration of our 50th National Day.

The Organising Committee is evaluating various options to achieve this. The Member has asked about extra shows. Let me just give some details on our current format. There are now four shows open prior to the actual NDP – three National Education Shows for school students and the NDP Preview itself. The Member has suggested and asked if another NDP Preview would be one way of increasing the attendance. We can explore the idea but adding another NDP Preview may tax participants too heavily, who would require some rest before

Page: 14

the actual NDP Show.

However, the Organising Committee is exploring other ideas to allow more Singaporeans to see the show "live", such as increasing the seating capacity at the Padang or creating satellite viewing platforms throughout the Marina Bay area during the Preview and NDP 2015. We are also working with the People's Association on activities to celebrate National Day in Heartland locations.

Madam, first and foremost, I want to congratulate the Defence Minister for yet another spectacular NDP this year. Increasingly, we are seeing more Singaporeans taking part in the celebration with great pride. And NDP, being a pinnacle celebration, I think, obviously is where more Singaporeans want to be a part of.

I would like to ask the Minister what more we can do to maximise Singaporeans' participation, especially at next year's NDP, and whether we could further leverage or harness on the surrounding places around Padang or the Marina Bay, so that more Singaporeans can be part of SG50. And thirdly, the NDP Preview, whether we could consider one more of this preview because the capacity at the Padang is usually much less and perhaps, we can see if we can have one less rehearsal in the earlier stages so that we can have one more Preview for the public to view.

Mdm Speaker, let me thank the Member for his kind words. Congratulations are due to the participants and the Organising Committee. I will pass on his good remarks.

With regard to maximising capacity and that is indeed what we do around the Marina Bay area. I am glad that the Member has brought it up. It shows that the Organising Committee is on the right track. They have looked around the area. There are possible focal points. I am not giving the distinct details or confirming it, but these are possibilities, because obviously, there are logistical problems. It is right in the middle of town, and if we expand the show, we have to see whether it is feasible.

There are potential sites. Marina Bay, of course, is a potential satellite site. The Marina Promenade is a potential site, but there are other possible sites. The advent of large LED screens with very good resolution makes it possible. I think that is the advance in technology that we have now. We are exploring this seriously to see whether there could be a better option.

Page: 15

To add another NE show is based on the issue of logistics. There can only be so many shows when you are really ready to show to the public, and with the time given and required, we are now putting up all, in all five shows. Three shows are meant for school students, which many of us would agree are useful, and we do not want to rob from them to give it to others. So, we will keep it as three shows.

Adding another show means that we may have to add it on Sunday because we have it on Saturday now, and I think that may be very taxing on the participants.

We will let the Organising Committee evaluate all these options. They will include these inputs as well as, I am sure, inputs from members of the public, but they are quite cognisant that this is NDP 2015, our Golden Jubilee, and they want to put up a good show and include as many Singaporeans as possible either at Padang or the fringe areas.

5 Mr David Ong asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance over the last two years, what is the number of appeals received from senior citizens with qualifying income criteria and no ownership of any residential property but who do not qualify for GST Vouchers because their residential address as an occupier has an annual valuation of above $21,000.

Mdm Speaker, the GST Voucher scheme is a broad-based scheme to help lower and middle income households with their expenses, in particular, what they pay in GST. The criteria for the GST Voucher – Cash takes into account an individual's Assessable Income (AI), the Annual Value (AV) of his place of residence and how many properties he owns.

We receive an average of 120 appeals a year from senior citizens – here, I am referring to those who are aged 65 and above – who are below the income threshold and do not own any properties, but are living in properties with Annual Values exceeding $21,000. To put this in context, properties with Annual Values exceeding $21,000 make up the top 15% of owner-occupied homes in Singapore.

There is no perfect way of assessing a person's financial situation. However, a person living in a high-value property with his family is in general more likely to be supported by adequate family resources, even if he or she does not own the property. While there will

Page: 16

certainly be exceptions, this approach is broadly equitable and progressive.

The Member can be assured that appeals by those who are unable to qualify for the GST Voucher but are in financial difficulty will be carefully considered. We will continue to review the GST Voucher from time to time, to ensure that it continues to reach those who need it most.

Thank you, Madam. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. From the many cases I have seen in my Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS) and house visits, many seniors aged 55 and above were pretty upset that the GST Voucher is based on the Annual Valuation of their residence because most of them do not own a property. They are cash-poor, but simply because they live with their children, they are denied the benefits. Since the appeal cases are relatively low for those aged 65 and above, would the Ministry consider extending the benefit to these senior citizens?

Mdm Speaker, the number of properties that falls into this category is actually 15%. If we take 15%, that number in absolute terms will not be very small. What I can suggest that the Member does in such situations where he has encountered seniors in financial difficulty, is to write in to us and I can give him full assurance that we will look into each case carefully; and for deserving cases, certainly, we will do our best to help.

6 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Prime Minister whether a review of the diminished impact of the Pioneer Generation Package for low-income elderly pensioners is being undertaken.

Mdm Speaker, Government pensioners will continue to receive all their post-retirement medical benefits that they are currently getting.

The Pioneer Generation Package (PGP) honours our Pioneer Generation (PG) by taking care of their healthcare needs. Government pensioners who are Pioneers will also enjoy these Pioneer Generation benefits. All Singaporeans who meet the Pioneers criteria, including Government pensioners, will be eligible for lifelong Medisave top-ups, outpatient care subsidies, and MediShield Life premium subsidies under the Pioneer Generation Package, regardless of their income.

While Government pensioners continue to enjoy their post-retirement medical benefits under their respective medical schemes, they will still benefit from the Pioneer Generation

Page: 17

Package. Like other Pioneers, they will receive lifelong annual Medisave top-ups of $200 to $800. In addition, they will also enjoy enhanced Community Health Assist Scheme (CHAS) subsidies at participating General Practitioner and dental clinics. This will reduce their out-of-pocket expenses under their existing medical benefit schemes as pensioners. Pensioners who have moderate to severe functional disabilities will also receive $100 per month under the Pioneer Generation Disability Assistance Scheme.

MediShield Life is a compulsory scheme for all Singaporeans. Hence, Government pensioners will also be enrolled in MediShield Life, and be able to enjoy the benefits of MediShield Life that are beyond the current post-retirement medical benefits that Government pensioners receive in their respective schemes. Our Government pensioners will each receive a letter from the Public Service Division in October with details on how they are being assisted to enrol in MediShield Life.

Overall, the PGP, together with post-retirement medical benefits of Government pensioners, will ensure that Government pensioners who are Pioneers will be better off than before.

7 Ms Tin Pei Ling asked the Minister for Social and Family Development whether the move for non-graduate teachers to be considered for graduate compensation based on merits can be applied to the preschool sector, especially for teachers employed by the Anchor Operators.

Madam, today, the required qualification for pre-school teaching is a certificate or a diploma in early childhood care and education, which equips preschool teachers with relevant knowledge and competencies to perform their role. The large majority of early childhood educators in the sector, from new teachers to senior teachers and centre leaders, hold a diploma. The Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) does not impose a degree as a requirement.

In line with the Applied Study in Polytechnic and ITE Review (ASPIRE) Committee's recommendations, ECDA is working with early childhood operators and practitioners to define the competencies required for different jobs at different levels. With this, we will be able to develop better career progression pathways and continuing professional development programmes for early childhood educators throughout their careers. It will also enable operators to better tie the remuneration of their staff to job size and performance, rather than whether they have a degree or a diploma.

Page: 18

I thank the Minister for the clarification. I would like to ask the Minister, based on the conversations that I have with some of the pre-school teachers within my constituency, they shared that there has been a move to encourage them to take on graduate degree kind of programmes and this has asserted quite a bit of pressure on them. I am wondering if the Minister could clarify whether this move is actually signalling that the preschool sector should be moving into a higher skill, higher knowledge kind of basis whereby preschool teachers are expected, moving ahead, to hold a degree before they can dispense proper care for our toddlers or young children. Could the Minister help to address this question?

Madam, I do not think it is ECDA's policy to encourage people to pursue degrees and I do not think we have ever discussed this in my Ministry. As what we mentioned, what we want is to have people who are appropriately trained, adequate for their jobs and not whether they have a degree or a diploma per se. In fact, today, the vast majority of early childhood educators do not need a degree to be in the sector. And I think we all know that what we are looking for in the early childhood sector are people who can relate to children, people who can care and have the heart for them. A degree may neither be necessary or sufficient in itself. I do not think we will have a policy to say that you must have a degree in order to be an early childhood educator.

But, of course, having said that, for those who would like to upgrade themselves to take on positions with larger job scopes, then if they are found appropriate, we will provide the necessary support for them to upgrade themselves, whether they go for advanced diploma or any other qualifications as necessary.

8 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Social and Family Development (a) how many new infant care centres were set up in the past 12 months; (b) how do infant care centres cope with the recruitment of qualified carers; (c) what is the range of waiting times for these centres to recruit qualified carers; and (d) whether there is a shortage of qualified carers and, if so, what is being done to address this shortage.

Mdm Speaker, the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) monitors infant care demand and works with the preschool Anchor Operators to increase the supply of places in areas of high demand. Between August 2013 and July 2014, ECDA added more than 320 infant care places across 25 childcare centres.

In expanding infant care and child care supply, the availability of manpower is one challenge. ECDA is taking steps to facilitate the recruitment of more infant educarers. For

Page: 19

example, the agency organised an Early Childhood Career and Education Fair in May this year. The event attracted more than 1,000 jobseekers, of which 20% were interested in educarer positions.

ECDA has also worked with the Singapore Workforce Development Agency to introduce a traineeship programme for those interested in jobs in the early childhood sector. Trainees will receive a training allowance for the 40 to 80 hours traineeship, and further incentives if they complete the programme and remain in the sector. Twenty preschool operators have come on board the programme since its commencement on 1 July 2014.

In addition, there are Singapore Workforce Skills Qualifications courses for infant educarers that provide mid-career entrants or back-to-work women the flexibility to work in childcare centres while undergoing training. Placement and funding support are available to eligible trainees and centres. There are 160 trainees currently enrolled in these courses.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I have one supplementary question. Every week during my Meet-the-People Sessions (MPS), I have residents who come and ask for help. They have been putting their children on the waiting list of childcare centres. It looks like there is an acute shortage. So, I would like to ask: what is the average waiting time and what more can be done, because every week I have been seeing residents asking for help. I wonder if this problem is unique to Nee Soon South or it is a nation-wide problem.

Mdm Speaker, let me reply to Er Dr Lee Bee Wah's questions. Indeed, we have a challenge now. And let me explain how ECDA and the Ministry try to work with the various operators to try to meet this challenge of the supply and demand issues in the childcare sector.

On the demand side, we are doing two things to make sure that we have the places at the correct location. The first thing, as Members will know, is that we recently introduced a registration management system. This gives us a better fix of who are the people who are really in the queue or demand. And what we have discovered, very quickly, is that the real or actual demand is a fraction of what the queue may have represented in the past. For those operators who have come on board with us, they are able to deconflict the people who have either got a place somewhere else but never informed them and they should be out of the queue, or there are people who are queuing at multiple centres, sometimes more than 10 centres, and that messes up the projection demand.

So, the first thing we want to do better is for the registration management system to get a better queue system in place, to know the actual demand. That will allow the operators to better site their operations to where it is required. So, that is the first thing – right

Page: 20

numbers. The second thing that we want to do better is to make sure that the planning of places in each level is correct. Because while the total number of places is one thing that we are concerned with, we are also concerned with the number of places in each level – whether it is N1, N2, infant care, and so forth, so that there can be better matching. The third thing is a better siting of the location. Some of the high demand areas, like Nee Soon South, Punggol and Woodlands, are where we have allowed the Anchor Operators to quickly expand capacity.

The second set of things that we want to do better on the demand side is to make sure that we get the incentives right, so that we target the subsidies to those people and families who need help the most, so as to avoid a situation where people over-consume the services that they may not necessarily require.

On the supply side, we are also doing four things to make sure that we increase the supply to meet the demand. First, we want to make sure that we strengthen the process of recruitment upstream. We are giving out more scholarships and more training awards, and these will strengthen the pipeline of people coming through to the sector. Second, what we are going to do is to review the career pathways and progression for people to find it attractive and professionally challenging to stay in the sector. Third, we want to make sure that in terms of retention of manpower, we will be able to stretch the career of the early childhood professionals so that we reduce the churn in the sector and also to reduce the training resources we need to pump into this sector. And the last thing is getting the sites right. So, we have placed a lot of emphasis on areas with a larger population of younger families, for example, Woodlands, Punggol, Pasir Ris, Sengkang and some parts of Yishun Town itself. In the eastern part of Yishun Town, we have a lot of new families coming on board.

So, these are various things that we are doing to make sure that we better match the demand and the supply of childcare.

Finally, if I may just share, the structure of the sector is a bit different from some other industries. In this sector, we will have to work very closely with the operators in managing the supply and the demand of child care because this sector is operated by a number of Anchor Operators and many more private operators. So, we have to talk to operators to make sure that they work with us to provide the career opportunities for the teachers to be recruited in the sector and to stay in the sector.

Last but not least, for many of the places like Yishun, what we are seeing is that childcare places are available but the critical shortage is in the recruitment of the teachers. And we have seen some innovative ideas from some other estates whereby they recruit part-timers and women who are hoping to return to work after bringing up their children. And these are

Page: 21

auxiliary manpower that we can quickly get in to staff the centres. So, the availability of childcare places is not necessarily the bottleneck for Yishun. It is the recruitment of the educarers that are required and we welcome suggestions on how we can strengthen this pipeline, especially in a very labour-tight market.

Dr Intan.

Thank you, Madam. I have a couple of supplementary questions. May I know what is the percentage of those who are undergoing training as preschool teachers who will eventually end up as preschool teachers? Is there a high attrition rate for those who undergo the training programme but did not end up as preschool teachers? My second question is about the traineeship programme for the early childhood sector. I think the Minister probably touched on this a little bit earlier, but I am wondering if a part-time scheme or flexi-adjunct scheme for stay-at-home mothers can be introduced under this traineeship programme, to encourage more stay-at-home mothers to come out and join the preschool sectors as educarers or teachers.

Mdm Speaker, in response to the first supplementary question from Dr Intan, yes, indeed, the attrition rate is higher than what we would like it to be. We want to bring this down, which is why we are working closely with MOE and the ASPIRE Committee. The first thing we need to do better is to make sure that we counsel the people taking up early childhood care and development courses, that they must have a passion and they must be prepared to undertake the work in the sector. Like many other sectors in the Polytechnics or even in the ITE, there would be people who took up the courses but eventually did not take on the particular job there. I do not have the exact attrition rate but I know that it is much higher than what I would like it to be. I can get the numbers for the Member subsequently. So, this is what we want to do – to reduce the attrition from the pipeline. That is something that we need to work together with the operators and also do counselling.

On her second question on the flexi scheme, as she called it, indeed, that is what we are working closely with the operators to do, not just for the women who are returning to work but also some of the people who have recently retired and are able to play a role in the sector.

In fact, we are prepared to be very flexible to get the manpower into the sector. Recently, we started a scheme, which is to have a registry of all the people who have just left the sector or who have retired from the sector, for them to come back as part-timers to join us as and when they want. They not only provide a ready source of manpower, they also provide supplementary manpower for our own teachers in the sector to go for training. Without them, it will be very difficult for our teachers to upgrade themselves. So, we are

Page: 22

doing all this and we will continue to welcome any ideas in order to supplement the manpower in this case.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I had gone round to check all the childcare centres in Nee Soon South. They are all filled up. There is no vacancy. Subsequently, I asked them to expand, and NTUC and PCF expanded but they could not find teachers. So, in fact, the real problem is a shortage of teachers.

I would like to ask the Minister whether the Ministry can take on a more structured way of recruiting on a nation-wide basis – give them more incentives and, perhaps, make the training simpler. I was told that for infant carers, they need to go through a certain duration of training. So, if you were to recruit some of those housewives who are very good in caring and have the experience in caring of babies, if you asked them to go and study, they would say, " Ai tak chek ah?" or "we have to study?", then they would not want to come forward. Perhaps we need to put in more incentives, make the training easier, so that we can have sufficient teachers for our centres.

Mdm Speaker, indeed, the issue is not the availability of childcare places but the number of people that we can recruit. For example, in Yishun, I think overall and nation-wide, in the last about five years, we have increased the number of places by three times. But the enrolment rate in Yishun is particularly high. Today, you are at about 88% to 89% enrolment, meaning the places are all filled up. The rest have to do with a bit of matching because of the differences in the level.

Indeed, we are trying to expand the number of people that we can recruit. And let me assure the Member and all Members of this House – do not think that it is our intention to make the qualifications very academic; in fact, I do not think many of the qualifications and the courses are that academic. For most trainees, we recruit them on what we call a place-and-train basis, that is, we recruit them, they show the correct aptitude, they show the skill sets and can give assurance to the parents that they are able to take care of the children, then we do the modularised training and upgrade them along the way. That helps us to bring them quickly into the workforce, into the sector, and when we need to, upgrade them on some of the handling skills.

I agree with the Member that many of our parents never went through this kind of courses but they brought us up all right, I hope so. So, what we are looking for are not academic qualifications. What we are looking for are people with the right skill sets that give assurance to the parents who leave their children with us. Some issues in terms of safety,

Page: 23

hygiene – these are fundamental aspects of training. And at the same time, educarers must have the heart to want to care for the children. So, they are not going to go for a lot of examinations and tests on the academic side, but more on practical skills that can help them. And we are talking about educarers – we are not talking about the people who are teaching the languages, as those would need certain qualifications – with practical skill sets, and we hope that we can have these people.

9 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Home Affairs whether the current licensing regime for moneylenders has been effective in reducing the rate of unlicensed moneylending-related harassment cases against debtors and innocent neighbours of debtors.

Mdm Speaker, for the six-month period between January and June 2014, there were 3,235 reported cases of unlicensed moneylending (UML) and UML-related harassment. This is 31.6% lower than the 4,729 cases reported in the same period in 2013. The number of reported cases has been declining steadily since 2010.

The improvement in the UML situation can be attributed to the tough laws enacted, strong enforcement efforts against loanshark syndicates and the high level of community support in the fight against UML activities. Another factor is the presence of licensed moneylenders who provide access to credit for borrowers who are unable to obtain credit from banks or financial institutions and who might otherwise turn to UMLs.

However, there have been cases of loansharks operating under the cover of licensed lenders. Two cases uncovered in recent years have been charged in Court and convicted for UML-related offences. Police will continue to work with the relevant agencies to monitor the activities of licensed moneylenders.

I thank the Senior Minister of State for the encouraging statistics – a reduction of 31.6% over the last six months. I would like to ask a clarification in relation to licensed moneylenders. I have seen quite a number of residents with debts owed to licensed moneylenders, and these moneylenders, as the Senior Minister of State alluded to in his response, sometimes harassed them at the door, at the office, through many phone calls, in order to recover the debts. Can there be more done to eyeball the licensed moneylenders who may be carrying out the tactics of unlicensed

Page: 24

moneylenders, in terms of harassment, because I do see my residents having this experience?

Licensed moneylenders may take reasonable and legal steps to recover their debts. They must not infringe the laws. This could include contacting the borrowers to ask them to return the loan, or taking legal action to enforce the loan contract. However, as to the concerns raised by the Member, we know some moneylenders do resort to such tactics that the Member has alerted us to. Our point is that moneylenders cannot resort to harassment, vandalism, violence or threatening behaviour when recovering debts – the very things that we try to avoid from unlicensed moneylenders. Borrowers who encounter such behaviour should report the matter to the Police for investigation. Indeed, if we find them committing such offences, they will have their licences suspended, or not renewed or revoked by the Registry of Moneylenders.

The Member might be happy to note that in June this year, MinLaw formed an advisory committee to review the moneylending regulatory regime and will recommend appropriate measures to strengthen it, including the debt collecting practices.

10 Mr Liang Eng Hwa asked the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth (a) when will the Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal be set up; (b) what approach will the Tribunal take to resolve disputes between neighbours; and (c) how will the Tribunal be resourced to cope with the increasing numbers of such disputes.

Madam, the Community Dispute Management Framework (CDMF) is a holistic effort to address community disputes and to promote a more gracious and pleasant living environment for all. Our efforts, in partnership with the community, are focused not just on resolving disputes but also encouraging considerate neighbourly behaviours which are vital to preventing community disputes from arising in the first place. Community-based responses, such as informal mediation by community leaders, and enforcement against anti-social behaviour will be strengthened as part of this framework to resolve community disputes early.

The Community Dispute Resolution Tribunal, which the Member asked about, will be an avenue of last resort to adjudicate long-standing, intractable disputes between neighbours. This is meant as a last recourse after all attempts at resolving what are essentially private matters have been exhausted.

The Tribunal will be established under the auspices of the State Courts, and is slated to be in operation next year. We are working with MinLaw to develop the legislative framework for the Tribunal, and there will be a public consultation on the draft legislation within the

Page: 25

next few months.

Essentially, the Court processes and hearings of the Tribunal will be made more streamlined so that long-running disputes can be resolved expeditiously and effectively. Mediation, which is a process that encourages parties to seek a mutually-acceptable solution, will be a key prerequisite for the Tribunal. So, the person who applies to have the dispute heard by the Tribunal must first attempt to mediate with the respondent. If the respondent refuses the applicant's invitations to mediate, the Tribunal can order the parties to attend pre-hearing mediation and record any agreement as a consent order of the Tribunal that can then be enforced accordingly.

We recognise that resources are required to support the effective implementation of the framework and we are working closely with MOF to ensure that the framework, including the Tribunal, will be adequately resourced.

I do agree with the Minister that the Tribunal will be the last resort and we should try to avoid that if possible. But I want to ask the Minister whether this adjudication approach is the only way to compel the resident to behave or act, or are there other ways like the enforcement approach where we can have specific penalty issued by maybe the Police or the HDB officers, or even demerit points systems that some jurisdictions have. In Hong Kong, they have demerit points for households and so on.

So, whether we want to look also at the enforcement approach. Going into adjudication will be really the last resort. The neighbour disputes can be resolved but there will never be neighbourliness between them.

Secondly, it appears that a minority of the residents still are not conscious of what constitutes anti-social behaviour or socially irresponsible behaviour. On that front, whether the MCCY will want to step up on the education and publicity, especially when the new residents move into the flats, and so on, will conduct themselves in a socially responsible way.

Madam, we will certainly step up our public education and public awareness efforts. That is part of the framework which I talked about because we do not want to go to the Tribunal immediately. We want to have residents take ownership of their own community and resolve problems on their own. Certainly, public education is something that we will be doing more of.

We are also going to work through different mechanisms and not just through the Tribunal alone, primarily through informal mediation. We will be providing training for more

Page: 26

grassroots leaders, for example, to be able to do such mediation.

The Member talked about enforcement. Enforcement is an approach that works hand-in-hand with the Tribunal. To enforce, you need to have an order; you need to have something to enforce against. The difficulty with enforcement when you are dealing with a private dispute is what do you enforce? Whose side do you decide is saying the right thing? Somebody says "A", the other person says "B". But this is a dispute between two parties, so, what do you enforce, how do you enforce?

That is why you need to go to a Tribunal first. And the Tribunal can then issue a specific performance or injunction, for example, to say that, "This person has been a nuisance, has been behaving in a way that is socially irresponsible, and so, there will be no loud music to be played between these stipulated times." Then that injunction can be enforced. In parallel with the Tribunal, we are also working with MHA to see how we can beef up some of these community enforcement processes.

11 Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Minister for Transport (a) during the quarterly ERP rate reviews in the last three years (excluding school holiday adjustments), how many ERP gantries (and corresponding proportion of the total number of ERP gantries) (i) have not had their rates revised; (ii) have reverted to the previous rates; and (iii) have an upward or downward trend of rate adjustment; (b) how does such data support the position that drivers' behaviour has been influenced positively by ERP; and (c) how will the different method of road pricing through ERP2 influence driving behaviour more effectively.

Mdm Speaker, in the past three years, 58 of the existing 74 Electronic Road Pricing (ERP) gantries, which is 78%, have not had to have their rates revised. Of the remaining 16 gantries that had rate revisions, eight had an upward trend, while four had a downward trend. The remaining four gantries had no discernible trend. None of the gantries are currently at the rates they started with when they were introduced.

The effectiveness of ERP in influencing drivers' behaviour and keeping our roads congestion-free is not evidenced by the number of gantries that see rate changes, but from the changes in traffic speeds that result from each rate change. Rates are changed when speeds exceed or fall below the range that is optimal for traffic throughput.

For the eight gantries with an upward trend in ERP rates because speeds had fallen below the optimal range, speeds subsequently rose an average of 7% per dollar increase. As for the majority of the gantries which did not need a rate change in the last three years, a

Page: 27

balance has been achieved, with the ERP rate sustaining a traffic speed in the optimal range.

With a satellite-based ERP system, we have the flexibility of charging drivers according to the distance they travel on a congested road and not just at specific gantry points. This is an inherently fairer system as those who contribute more to congestion will pay more. The incentive for these drivers to change their time, route or mode of travel would thus be stronger.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I do not disagree with the principle of using financial disincentives to control traffic volume and, hence, alleviate traffic congestion. However, I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State, has our consistent tweaking of ERP rates been confusing motorists on keeping track of and remembering the prevailing rate of a specific gantry during different time slots of the day and how effective has this scheme in addressing psychology of motorists and changing their driving behaviour? It is interesting, given that the high percentage of 78% of gantries had not changed their rate in the last three years, would this not indicate that the ERP had not helped to bring down the traffic volume across those gantries?

Mdm Speaker, the ERP rates are changed when the speeds fall outside the optimal range. So, it is not an optimal speed, but it is a range. And the range is 45 km/h to 65 km/h on expressways. The reason why this is a range is so that you do not have to make ERP rate changes so frequently. Speeds have to go below 45 km/h for us to increase the rate. Speeds have to go beyond 65 km/h for us to bring down the rate. And that is precisely to address the Member's concern. We do not want to confuse the motorists too much.

Speaking as a motorist myself, I have to confess that it is probably true of many motorists that even when rate changes are announced in advance through the media, we do not always pay attention. Very often, we only pay attention when our in-vehicle unit goes "beep", we look at the number and realise that it looks different from the last time we were on the road. With that, the motorists take notice and then they have to make a decision on whether they should modify their travelling behaviour.

From that perspective, we try not to adjust the rates too frequently. When it is adjusted, we also make sure that the amount is significant enough for people to take notice in the hope that this will cause them to rethink their driving behaviour. Not all will respond because even with the rate changes, they may consider that it is still well worth the time savings for them. Alternatively, they may assess that they have no better alternative but to travel in that particular time slot. But each time there is a rate change, we do notice that there are certain drivers who have changed their travelling pattern, and that is why there has been an impact on the speeds of travel on the particular stretches of road where ERP rate changes have

Page: 28

occurred.

Thank you, Mdm Speaker. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State, will the Ministry look into reviewing the evening ERP along CTE to zero?

May I make sure I understand the Member's question clearly – you are proposing to reduce the ERP rate, that is, to abolish it completely? The current traffic speeds along that stretch do not justify such a consideration.

12 Dr Lim Wee Kiak asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in the light of the recent gas pipe explosion in Taiwan (a) what are the safety features or processes in place here to prevent a catastrophic gas pipe leak, especially in crowded areas; (b) how frequently are checks carried out to detect if there are any leaks in all the gas pipes and how are these maintenance checks carried out; (c) during the past five years, how many cases of gas leaks were detected; and (d) is there a replacement programme for old pipes and what is the age of the oldest underground gas pipe.

13 Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what measures are in place to maintain all underground gas and water pipes in good working order; (b) what is the lifespan of these pipes before they are replaced; (c) how are underground pipes inspected; and (d) what are the safeguards to prevent leaks that can cause a serious explosion.

Mdm Speaker, may I take Question Nos 12 and 13 together?

Yes, please.

Ensuring the safety of our utilities infrastructure is a key priority. EMA has put in place robust regulatory requirements and conducts regular inspections to ensure the reliability and safety of Singapore's gas pipelines.

Careful attention is paid to the planning and design of our gas network. SP Power Grid (SPPG), which manages Singapore's gas network, must conduct a risk assessment exercise and meet the requirements set by SCDF and other authorities, before constructing a pipeline.

All high-pressure gas pipelines are constructed using high-strength steel with anti-corrosion coating. Pipelines on the mainland are buried at a depth of 1.5 metres on average

Page: 29

and further protected by concrete slabs to ensure pipeline integrity. Gas that is distributed to consumers is also odorised to facilitate detection in the event of any leak.

To ensure that the pipeline network remains in good working condition, SPPG carries out various surveillance and maintenance measures, as required by the Gas Transporter Licence and relevant codes of practice such as the Gas Safety Code and Gas Supply Code. SPPG continuously monitors pipeline pressure and flow for any anomalies. It also surveys the pipeline network regularly for leaks using gas detectors. Such surveys are conducted more frequently in crowded and residential areas. For example, SPPG inspects the pipelines in the vicinity of MRT stations on a monthly basis, while non-residential areas are surveyed on an annual basis.

In addition, SPPG conducts annual mechanical inspections of critical pipeline components and inspects high-pressure pipelines using pipeline inspection gauges every five years to ensure that the pipelines remain in good working conditions. EMA conducts annual audits and enforcement checks to ensure that SPPG carries out the pipeline surveillance and maintenance processes as scheduled.

The service life of gas pipelines is about 50 years. SPPG systematically replaces pipelines before the end of their service lives, or earlier if the condition of these pipelines is found to have deteriorated. Our high-pressure pipelines are less than 20 years old, so they are well within the estimated service lifespan.

As for water pipes, PUB's water mains are relatively new, with an average age of 24 years. Since the 1980s, older pipes have been systematically replaced with cement-lined ductile iron and steel mains, which are more durable and have an expected lifespan of 70 years. A strict maintenance regime is in place to ensure that our water pipes remain in good working condition. There is a dynamic leak detection programme in which all water pipes are checked for leaks at least once a year. Our leak rate is six leaks per 100 km of pipes each year, which is among the lowest in the world.

Mdm Speaker, I would like to thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State what lessons can be learnt from the Taiwanese experience, as well as what is the possibility of such an incident happening in Singapore. I would also like to ask, for example, about water pipes. There are ground movements and as Members of Parliament, we do receive complaints from residents about water pipe leakages as well as bursting of pipes. Water pipes may not be as dangerous as gas pipes. So, I am just wondering what other measures are taken to make sure that such instances do not happen, and in the past, how many of such cases have happened in

Page: 30

Singapore.

Madam, in the Taiwanese case, the recent explosion is due to a pipeline supplying petrochemicals to a chemical plant. The gas carried there is propene (C3H6), which is different from the natural gas that our SPPG is distributing. Propene is a heavier gas than air. So, when it leaks, it tends to stay underground until it gathers a bigger mass, which makes it more dangerous. Whereas natural gas, in our case, is lighter. So, if it leaks, it tends to dissipate into the air quickly, therefore, reducing a volume build-up and explosion.

Having said that, they are all inflammable. The results of the investigation in Taiwan have not been released, so, we probably can take some lessons from that incident at a later stage. In the case of Singapore, I mentioned SPPG being the one that manages our natural gas distribution pipelines on the mainland mostly, whereas our petrochemical pipelines are mostly concentrated on Jurong Island. And therefore, they are supervised by SCDF which imposes in them another and more stringent set of construction, operation and maintenance regime. We have confidence that the two sets of pipelines are separately managed, and there is sufficient rigour and robustness in the way that they are maintained and operated.

The Member also asked about the frequency of leaks. For high-pressure gas pipelines, there was one case that took place in 2012 on Jurong Island. The leak was detected early, so there was no casualty or fatality. It was rectified in a relatively short time, as the gas supply was resumed after a short while.

Over the last five years, there were 500 minor gas leaks – 300 were detected by SPPG and 200 were reported. These represent a frequency of 0.1 incident per 1 km of pipeline. This makes us very comparable to Hong Kong, and well ahead of other cities like New York, Melbourne and London.

14 Mrs Lina Chiam asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether Singapore has any bilateral ties with Nigeria and, if not, whether Singapore has taken any steps at the international level to support and assist the Nigerian Government for the release of the 200 Nigerian girls kidnapped by rebels more than three months ago.

Mdm Speaker, Singapore and Nigeria established diplomatic relations on April 1970. Our ties with Nigeria are very good. I recently met the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs, Prof Viola Onwuliri, when we hosted several African Foreign

Page: 31

Ministers whom we invited to Singapore.

Mdm Speaker, the hon Member, I believe, is referring to the incident on 14 April 2014 when Boko Haram, a Nigerian militant Islamist Group, abducted more than 200 girls from a school. The incident captured worldwide attention. More than 50 of the abductees managed to escape but the rest are believed to be still in captivity.

We sympathise with the plight of the abductees and their families. We strongly condemn the abduction of innocent girls. Singapore has not been approached by the Nigerian Government to render assistance. We also do not have the same capabilities as the US, UK or France, which had earlier provided intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance support to the Nigerian government.

I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State a supplementary question. Will the Singapore Government do anything to help the Nigerian girls? This is a global moral obligation. Could we do something to help them, or what can the Government do in this case? Any suggestion?

We should be mindful about being proactive in offering assistance. This is also to respect our bilateral partners. When I met the Nigerian Minister of State, she did not broach the matter. I think we should respect that.

15 Mr Christopher de Souza asked the Minister for National Development (a) what are the current policies on providing housing grants or incentives for married children to purchase flats in close proximity with their parents, and vice versa; and (b) whether the Ministry is considering any enhancements to its current policies, in order to strengthen the state of family bonding and inter-generational care in Singapore.

Madam, helping extended families live together or close by for mutual care and support has been a long-standing priority for this Government. Currently, we help support this in six ways.

First, under the Married Child Priority Scheme, those who apply for a new HDB flat near their parents or married children get double the ballot chances. Those who apply for a new flat to live together get triple the ballot chances.

Second, under the Multi-Generation Priority Scheme, we allow married children and their parents to jointly apply for a pair of flats in the same Build-To-Order (BTO) project and

Page: 32

we set aside flats for this purpose. We set aside up to 15% of the Studio Apartment, 2-room and 3-room flat supply for parents and the corresponding number of 2-room and larger flats for their married children.

Third, under the Studio Apartment Priority Scheme, we reserve half of the new Studio Apartment supply for eligible seniors who apply for Studio Apartments near their married children or their existing home.

Fourth, in September 2013, we introduced 3Gen flats, at the suggestion of Er Dr Lee Bee Wah, which feature four bedrooms and three bathrooms, to facilitate multi-generation families who wish to live in the same flat. I always credit Er Dr Lee Bee Wah as the mother of 3Gen flats. Our first 3Gen BTO was, correctly, launched in Nee Soon.

Fifth, first-timers buying a resale flat to stay near or with their parents or married children are eligible for the Higher-Tier CPF Housing Grant for Family of $40,000, which is $10,000 more than the standard CPF Housing Grant.

Sixth, we ensure that the income ceiling for the purchase of a HDB flat is set at a higher level for extended families who buy a flat to live together.

In the recent series of Housing Conversations on "Closer Families, Stronger Ties", we received many valuable suggestions and feedback from Singaporeans on how we could further help extended families live together or nearby. We will take these into consideration in our on-going policy reviews.

I thank the Minister for the response. Perhaps, living in mature estates presents more difficulty for children to want to move in close to their parents. May I ask the Minister's clarification on this particular issue, where in a mature estate, for example, the constituency I serve, Ulu Pandan, there is limited space to build more flats. HDB is good at finding pockets of space and building flats, and children would move into those flats to be close to their parents. But the parents usually live in older flats which are possibly coming up for en bloc development. My question is: would HDB look at it in a considered fashion to try to find space even for the older flats to undergo en bloc within that mature estate setting? I know it may be a tall order, but I would be grateful if consideration could be given for that.

Madam, indeed, it is a tall order. And for mature estates, there are particular challenges for the simple reason that land for a big number of BTO construction is less available than in non-mature estates. But because this is such an important social objective, we try very hard and we continue to strive to the best of our

Page: 33

abilities to fulfil those needs. There are various ways we go about it. If the Member checked back on the last three years of BTO launches, he will note that I have launched quite a number in several mature estates. Within the next 12 months, there will be several BTO launches in several mature estates. Whether these would be in the Member's ward, I do not know, but wherever possible, we try to do so.

Then, there is always the possibility of en bloc or SERS development. There is yet another avenue which is resale flat. There are a large number of resale flats, more so than the number of new flats that I can build. In fact, until this current property cycle, most people buy their flats through resale transactions – the ratio was about 60-40; 60% from resale and 40% from BTO flats.

But the last three years have been unusual. As I step up the number of BTO launches and kept the prices very competitive, now, almost 95% of young couples buy directly from HDB. This cannot be the steady state. But now that Cash-over-Valuation (COV) has turned negative, with many transactions settled below market valuation, it opens up huge opportunities for buyers. I see that possibility growing within the next many months.

The short answer is yes. In MND, we try very hard to meet the aspirations of both parents – especially parents – and their children wanting to be able to live close by and we will do our very best. Of course, there is, yet, another option which is the parents may decide to sell off their flats and move with their children to the new towns. Theoretically, it is logical and possible, but I know many parents are very reluctant. As we have heard yesterday, they are used to the hawkers, to a particular wet market stallholder and they find it very difficult to move to a new place. But we will try to change such mindset.

Madam, a follow-up on the Minister's last point about parents living in mature estates finding it difficult to relocate into a new estate, would the Ministry consider giving financial incentives for these parents to move? The CPF Grant that the Minister had mentioned earlier, I think, typically does not apply to these parents because they would have enjoyed previous subsidies. And, therefore, I hope that the Ministry would consider giving, perhaps, cash grants to incentivise parents to move into the new location and settle down there.

This particular idea, Madam, was, in fact, raised a couple of times during our recent Housing Conversations. To probe further, we asked the participants, "How much do you think will move you?" And the figure is something I cannot afford. It is six digits! As I said, we will try within our capabilities and financial limits to meet such aspiration. But if some parents can change their attitudes and be prepared to try out a new town, you may

Page: 34

discover better new environment – maybe in Yishun.

I was also hoping the Minister would also share his thoughts on en blocs within a mature estate. My follow-up question really was also in relation to the elderly in mature estates worrying that due to a lack of space, if they were to undergo en bloc, they will be moved outside the precinct. Would one of the considerations, or major considerations, for MND be to have the en bloc flats within the same area as far as possible, because location is actually the top priority for these elderly people?

I heard that to mean SERS, right?

Yes.

En bloc is a private condominium term but, in HDB, we call it SERS. And, yes, we will do SERS wherever it is "SERS-able". [Laughter]

16 Mr Baey Yam Keng asked the Minister for National Development (a) what is the reason why HDB rental flats do not come with window grilles; (b) whether tenants who install their own window grilles need not remove them upon their vacation of the flat when the grilles are still in good working condition; and (c) whether HDB can review this policy to reduce the cost for rental tenants.

17 Mr Png Eng Huat asked the Minister for National Development whether HDB will consider making window grilles a standard safety feature for rental flats.

Madam, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 16 and 17 together?

Yes, please.

Madam, HDB does not provide window grilles as a standard feature in its flats, whether sold or rental, as they are not considered essential by all households. However, rental tenants may install their own window grilles. If they are unable to afford to do so and have safety concerns, HDB will help to install the grilles on a case-by-case basis.

Page: 35

Rental tenants who have installed their own grilles do not need to remove them when they move out of the rental flat if the grilles are still in good condition.

Mr Baey.

Thank you, Madam. I can understand that HDB flats are designed with the basic necessities or essential necessities to keep costs down. But I would like the Ministry to see window grilles in high-rise living as a safety requirement rather than non-essential item, especially for low-income families who need help with our rental housing scheme. For these families earning less than $1,500, and especially with young children, even a few hundred dollars can be a lot of money.

I would like to ask the Minister of State what is the proportion of rental tenants with young children and what is the proportion who have sought approval to either install window grilles on their own or that HDB has helped to install window grilles for them at HDB's cost. What is the application procedure and what is the success rate?

Madam, let me contextualise the availability of grilles in rental flats. Although I have mentioned that we do not put it as a standard feature today, historically, rental flats which were mainly built in the 1960s and 1970s were originally designed without window grilles. Tenants who wished to install it at that time can do so at their own cost. But over the years, as part of the Government's efforts to improve the living conditions of our rental flat tenants, window grilles were included as one of the improvement items and installed during the various upgrading programmes. For example – rental flats – the Main Upgrading Programme, the Project LIFE rental flats upgrading project.

Households with young children generally welcome the provision of these window grilles for safety reasons. However, some tenants also provide feedback that the window grilles caused a "caged in" kind of feeling in the smaller flats and hindered or obstructed some of their activities, for example, especially for the elderly ones, who have difficulties when they want to hang out their clothes. Therefore, HDB, after having upgraded some of these rental flats with window grilles, in 2007, we had a review and we decided to exclude window grilles as essential items for fitting in rental flats for the following reasons: one, is as mentioned, not all rental tenants need window grilles and it is consistent with the non-provision of grilles in purchase and rental flats and, at the same time, based on the feedback that we have received.

The new rental flats which were built after 2007, when we resumed our rental building programme, were not installed with grilles. With all the upgraded rental flats today, with an existing stock of 109 blocks, we do have about 74% of them that are already provided with

Page: 36

window grilles, meaning that three-quarters of our rental flat tenants are already living in rental flats with window grilles.

Mr Baey asked about the proportion of our tenants who are living with children below the age of 12. Today, about 15% of our rental flat tenants are made up of families or households with children below the age of 12. So, the number is quite small.

We had another review recently, in April 2014. HDB decided to install window grilles for deserving households on a case-by-case basis if the tenant meets one of the two following guidelines: one, is that the family with young children aged below 12. For those who meet this criterion, HDB will assist them in installing the window grilles. At the same time, households where family members with medical conditions, for example, hyper activity, those with intellectual disability, or hallucinations, and there are safety concerns for these families.

To date, we have received about 60 requests for such cases. In the last two years, HDB has assisted about 27 cases and installed the grilles for them. The others who do not meet the criteria, we asked them to seek help from FSOs, VWOs, because they are not seen as families with young children at risk or maybe having safety concerns.

Henceforth, from April this year, families with children below the age of 12 will be assisted. But as I have mentioned earlier, we do have a stock of rental flats that are already installed with grilles, and if those flats are available for tenancy, we will actually offer those to meet the needs and match the profile of families or households with children below the age of 12.

18 Mr Seah Kian Peng asked the Prime Minister given that amongst all eligible public officers, only 72% used the 6-day childcare leave, 48% used the two-day extended childcare leave and 78% used their paternity leave, what are the underlying causes for these relatively low take-up rates.

Mdm Speaker, the public service supports the well-being and work-life needs of our officers. On top of vacation leave, officers are provided with a range of pro-family leave benefits to help them balance their family and work commitments. And these include childcare, paternity, maternity and parent-care leave. Officers utilise their leave benefits on a needs basis. Rather than focusing on the utilisation rate for specific leave types, we will continue to ensure that pro-family leave benefits are made known and available to

Page: 37

officers so that they can utilise them when they need to do so.

I thank Deputy Prime Minister for the answer. A few supplementary questions. As Members know, I have been pushing a lot on paternity leave, and I am glad this was legislated.

I appreciate the efforts by the Government in giving our civil servants all these pro-family measures. The Deputy Prime Minister mentioned about needs basis, I recognise that. I do think that all those, whether it is childcare leave and, in particular, paternity leave, I think we would want every father to take the paternity leave that is available to them to spend some time with their children.

Which is why my question is: what are the underlying causes that fathers are not taking up their paternity leave? This is something which we would want to encourage our civil servants to do, to proactively tell them, "Please go and take leave and spend time with your children and family".

I am asking what are the underlying causes and to, perhaps, from the top-down signalling approach, encourage our public officers to celebrate the joy of having children to, please, take their paternity leave amongst other things.

Mdm Speaker, I did not see a question there. I do not think I need to respond to it. I do not disagree with Mr Seah.

Order. End of Question Time. Dr Amy Khor has asked for the floor.

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

Mdm Speaker, pertaining to Question No 5 at the Sitting yesterday, I would like to make a correction that the 34 re-employment dispute cases I mentioned in my reply to a supplementary question by Er Dr Lee Bee Wah is for 2013, and not from 2012. [Please refer to "More Incentives to Retain Workers Beyond Retirement Age", Official Report, 8 September 2014, Vol 92, Issue No 12, Oral Answers to Questions section.] My apologies and thank you.

Page: 38

[(proc text) Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [8 September 2014], (proc text)]

[(proc text) "That this House (1) endorses the Applied Study in Polytechnics and ITE Review Report (Paper Misc 3 of 2014), which sets out this Government's policy to ensure that all Singaporeans, whatever their qualifications, enjoy full opportunities to upgrade and progress during their working lives; and (2) supports a tripartite approach to instil a culture of lifelong learning, and to recognise and reward individuals based on their skills and performance." – [Senior Minister of State (Ministry of Education)]. (proc text)]

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

Mdm Speaker, the ASPIRE report has four basic recommendations.

First, better choices: helping Polytechnic and ITE students make better choices for their education and careers, both in school and after graduation;

Second, equipping students: this is to equip young Singaporeans with good skills foundation to face challenges and to seize opportunities;

Third, deeper skills: creating more opportunities for Polytechnic and ITE graduates to deepen their skills and excel in their chosen field.

Finally, multiple paths: building more paths for Polytechnic and ITE graduates to advance in their careers.

The report has been well received. One key focus of this Motion is how can we ensure that all Singaporeans, regardless of their qualifications, enjoy full opportunities to upgrade and progress during their working lives.

Madam, education has always been seen as the universal leveller. It allows someone from a poorer socio-economic background to secure a better job because he or she has better training and better educational qualifications and, hence, has a higher probability of success in life. In Singapore, many parents encourage their children to secure a degree in the belief that they can get a better job and secure better pay.

Page: 39

You can see this each time any one of us visits a house. You will see, occupying the place of honour in the living room is probably a framed photo of the family with all the children dressed up in their convocation gowns, demonstrating that the children have graduated.

However, I recognise that not everyone is academically inclined to go down the path of University education. Some students may be more suited for technical studies; some may not be interested in academic pursuits and prefer to do "hands-on" kind of work; some may be very good in their work but somehow do not have the right techniques to score well in exams.

For some of these young people, they may be better off developing their personal interest and pursuing their dreams. I know of many people who do not have University degrees but who have done exceedingly well in their careers because they have other lifeskills which are equally important in life.

Yesterday, the hon Member Ms Denise Phua had named some prominent people who did not go to college but had done well in life. The Straits Times had recently highlighted several individuals who had done well in life, even though they do not have a degree.

However, regardless of the number of success stories which we may share, many young people, whether from the ITEs or the Polytechnics still aspire for a University degree because they believe that it is the only path to success in Singapore. Very frankly, I think many parents share the same view. I am sure every parent in this House would also hope that their child can get to University. In fact, many of them would also have a bank account to provide for overseas university studies, in case their child cannot make it to the local Autonomous Universities.

Thus, it is very important for the Government to assure our young people that, regardless of their educational qualifications, everyone will have opportunities to realise their potential and to progress in life.

A degree, whilst important for the training of the mind, should not be the only way in which a person can attain success in life. Our ITE and Polytechnic graduates must know that as long as they have the right attitude, the right competence, are willing to work hard and contribute to the organisation, with sufficient experience, they will be able to achieve the success which they have worked hard for.

The recommendations by the ASPIRE Committee go a long way to assure our young people that the Government is committed to helping them achieve their fullest potential.

Page: 40

For the ASPIRE report to have meaningful impact, we need to do more. First, we need to have a better explanation of ASPIRE and for greater buy-in from the young people and their parents.

At a recent dialogue with residents and grassroots leaders, some of them had asked me: what is the message from the Government? Are they saying that it is not necessary to get a degree anymore? They pointed to newspaper articles which highlighted non-graduates who had performed well in their careers.

Some residents had queried whether the Government intends to cut down more University places and, hence, are promoting ITE and Polytechnic education. Other residents had highlighted that, as a nation, we cannot have too many graduates; otherwise, there will be a glut of graduates who cannot find suitable jobs and this will eventually lead to greater resentment. Others had declared that they will definitely want their children to get a University degree because society see those without a degree as failures.

Thus, there is some misunderstanding about the recommendations of the ASPIRE committee. I would like to ask the Senior Minister of State what are the plans of the Government to explain more about the ASPIRE recommendations. How can we better explain to parents and students that a degree is still useful as a training of the mind? However, not having a degree does not mean that there will be no progress. Would our young and their parents be persuaded that there are, indeed, multiple pathways to advance in their careers? How useful would postgraduate training be in helping them deepen their skills? What kind of certifications would be issued and would these certifications be recognised? More information and clarifications will help Singaporeans understand the ASPIRE recommendations better and buy into these recommendations.

Next, the Government should take the lead to provide multiple pathways. Within the Civil Service, there is a clear difference between staff who are graduates and those who are non-graduates. I recall years ago when I graduated from University and I was considering a job with the Legal Service. The advertisement said, "Only those with First Class Honours or a good Second Upper will be considered." So, the type of Honours degree makes a difference.

There is also a difference between graduates who are scholars and those who are non-scholars, commonly known as "farmers". The distinction is even more stark if one compares graduate scholars in the Civil Service and graduate scholars who are from the elite Administrative Service. Their progress or promotion depends on whether they are graduates or non-graduates, whether they are scholars from the Administrative Service. But this distinction is not real because, in the private sector, the employer looks at your skills, your

Page: 41

experience and whether you can deliver results.

Yesterday, Deputy Prime Minister Teo had stated in a reply to my Parliamentary Question that the Civil Service will provide more opportunities to support the aspirations of all our officers, graduates as well as non-graduates, and will continue to reward all officers who show good performance and readiness to take on larger roles. I am, indeed, glad to hear that position.

As long as the Government continues to maintain a distinction between graduates and non-graduates, we will struggle to persuade Singaporeans that they can progress in society based on their skills, contributions and experience. I call on the Government to take the lead in changing the mindset of Singaporeans. This will be a long journey as we need students and parents to be convinced that a person can have multiple pathways to success regardless of their educational qualifications. The Government can take the lead by showing them that skills and experience are just as important as qualifications.

Our civil servants should be given every opportunity to progress in their careers not based on whether they have a degree; but due consideration should also be given to how they perform in the delivery of their task. One good example is the appointment of Mrs Elaine Quek – this was reported in The Straits Times. She is a non-graduate and she was appointed as principal of Maha Bodhi School. I truly hope that we can have many more similar cases in the Civil Service, where employees are promoted based on their skills and experience.

Finally, mindset change. The ASPIRE report talks about the need for a mindset change. One important change which is critical is the need for all of us to respect every job and value every individual for what they do. Currently, there seems to be a bias in favour of white collar kind of work. Parents generally want their children to work in offices and to shun work that would require them to wear a uniform or to work in non air-conditioned places.

I would like to ask the Minister what else can the Government do to persuade our citizens to respect every job and to value every worker. Can we do more to acknowledge the contributions of the blue collar workers like our cleaners, our school attendants, our service staff at supermarkets or restaurants?

They all play an important role in making Singapore a better place to live in. There is no reason why we should treat such people with less respect. Perhaps, the Government can explore ways in which skilled technicians or people with strong vocational skills or strong service skills can be better remunerated for their expertise. We can also consider redesigning some of these jobs so that they carry more responsibilities. For example, bus drivers are now

Page: 42

called "bus captains" with more responsibilities for the passengers in their buses. Our cooks are now called chefs. Our bank tellers used to be called clerks, but they are all now capable of providing financial advice.

The ASPIRE recommendations will have a long-term impact on Singaporeans. I support the recommendations. I look forward to the Government working with Members of Parliament and the people of Singapore to enable Singaporeans to realise their fullest potential, regardless of their starting point in life.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mdm Speaker, fellow Members of Parliament, good afternoon! Firstly, I would like to declare that I am the President of the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the Chairman and Managing Director of Teckwah Industrial Corporation. Today, I would like to speak about improving the technical education from the business viewpoint.

Last month, the Applied Study in Polytechnics and ITE Review (ASPIRE) Committee made 10 recommendations to transform our vocational education. I have discussed this with the business community and we are all very pleased to learn about this. The shortage of local skilled workers has been in existence for much too long and this improvement can be said to be a welcome rain after a protracted drought.

Many SMEs, especially those in traditional industries, rely on a pool of skilled, experienced and loyal older workers to be responsible for their operations. Although they have tried all means, it is extremely difficult to attract the young generation into their industries. They have no choice but to impart the skills to foreign workers. Once the foreign workers leave, there is a vacuum in the pool of skilled workers. Currently, this is a serious human resource problem confronting our local SMEs. We are thus very supportive that the Government is embarking on improving our vocational education, to help enterprises groom a pool of skilled workers.

However, in the composition of the ASPIRE Committee, business representatives practically all come from large corporations and MNCs, and there are no SMEs or traditional industries among them. When we look at the name list of the Committee members, SMEs begin to worry that in revising the course curriculum, planning for internship and so on, SMEs' needs may not be considered. Young people would only see large corporations in the newspapers' limelight; they will thus be inclined to join these large companies and not be

Page: 43

willing to join SMEs.

Singapore faces a manpower shortage. The pool of young people is like a cake, which every industry is eyeing. Large corporations and MNCs have big appetite and very strong appeal. Very quickly, this cake would be entirely eaten up by them. In view of this, I urge industry and trade associations to collaborate closely with ASPIRE, and actively inform the Committee of the needs of your industries and manpower requirements, and participate in the process of enhancing vocational education. Only by engaging actively in the process can SMEs receive the attention you need.

Looking through the report, with regard to Recommendation 7 on launching the Place-and-Train programme, and under point 4.6 on page 29, it clearly states that Polytechnic and ITE graduates would be matched to progressive employers committed to support the internship programme. Therefore, SMEs and industry associations need to act fast.

At the same time, I also urge the Government that when reviewing the vocational education system, it could devote special attention to the SMEs. Implementing the Place-and-Train programme requires companies to make certain adjustments in their human resource management policies. Compared to large corporations, SMEs are considerably weaker in this regard. However, they could integrate resources through their industry and trade associations. I hope the Government could consider rolling out related assistance schemes to ensure that local SMEs do not miss out on the chance to participate.

Transforming vocational education is an arduous journey that would benefit both the nation and the people. I believe that under the Government's able leadership and with the hard work of the tripartite partners, we would be assured of creating a career pathway for our young people which will allow them to fulfil their potentials!

On this note, I support the Applied Study in Polytechnics and ITE Review report.

(Punggol East): Mdm Speaker, the recommendations made by the ASPIRE Committee represent a welcome shift in how we approach education and how we enable Singaporean students to succeed as they choose different educational paths. This shift is important as we recognise the growing diversity of Singaporeans and their interests, as well as the changing needs of the markets.

Today, I will focus on recommendations on how students in ITEs and Polytechnics can get meaningful work experience through internships and Place-and-Train or apprenticeship

Page: 44

programmes. Work experience is an excellent opportunity for students to learn practical aspects of industry-specific jobs, not just the theoretical mechanics in the classroom. This helps them achieve a high level of competence and understanding of their own interests and abilities.

While I agree with the ASPIRE recommendations that we need to enhance internships in collaboration with industry partners and expand options for students through apprenticeship programmes, what is critical is how we go about implementing these recommendations to bring real benefit to our ITE and Polytechnic students.

The value of work experience. Madam, during my time at Ngee Ann Polytechnic, I did an internship for four months at the Inland Revenue Authority of Singapore (IRAS) as part of my Business Studies course. Although it was for a short period, it was a very fulfilling and pivotal experience for me. I was fortunate enough to be assigned to an encouraging mentor who dedicated time to setting goals for me and evaluating my progress. My internship gave me greater insights into that particular industry and what I realised was that tax and accounting were not quite the right path for me, something I may not have realised till much later, if not for this internship.

Every student, regardless of whether they are in University, Polytechnic or ITE should have the opportunity to explore and demonstrate their skills through quality work trainings.

Companies will also have greater exposure to students from Polytechnics and ITEs. They can evaluate them first-hand, based on skills and capabilities, and not just on paper qualifications. This would help reduce any perception that employers may have towards students from particular institutions.

Challenges. While work experience programmes are becoming increasingly popular today, one challenge is ensuring some level of consistency in terms of what students can expect to gain during their internships. Internship and apprenticeship programmes are often voluntary and informal, so students can get vastly different experiences. While I benefited from my internship, many of my peers who had done internships elsewhere felt that they did not have much guidance, and others felt that they were given pointless tasks where they did not learn. I have learnt of similar experiences today when speaking with students in my ward.

Without a formal programme structure, there is plenty of opportunity for abuse. There are situations where employers see interns as cheap labour and are herded from one department to another to fill gaps in any manpower crunches without any focus on their

Page: 45

development.

As internship programmes are not extensive across courses and not all students have the opportunity to participate, students who are looking for work experience may source for internships on their own with individual companies. I have come across situations where outside a formal internship programme, interns may not even get an allowance and end up doing tasks that the company needs them to fill in for, without much supervision.

Therefore, it is critical to enhance and expand official internship programmes led by the educational institutions, with companies agreeing to participate and implement more formal programme structures.

While we do not want to over-formalise practical training either, there must be some guidelines to ensure that students do gain from their experiences, are monitored and get significant work-ready skills. This should include having company orientations, regular mentorship and evaluation sessions and, of course, clearer goals, timelines and outcomes, including relevant certification, for both students and the company.

Making firm and clear commitments. I think we can agree that internship and apprenticeship programmes are critical for students to make well-informed choices and acquire the right skills for successful future careers. We should aspire for each student to have exposure to at least one internship or apprenticeship programme during his or her time in ITE or Polytechnic, even going so far as ensuring that formal work experience becomes part of their course requirement. Mdm Speaker, we must commit to setting clear goals going forward so that the desired outcomes of the ASPIRE report can be made a reality.

Active consultation with industry. In order to ensure a successful internship or apprenticeship programme that is available to more ITE and Polytechnic students, there must be an active drive to attract a network of committed companies across industries to support, share and mentor students through internship and apprenticeship programmes.

There must be adequate consultation between education institutions and companies from identified industries to ensure that programmes help students further develop their skills and learning, in line with the needs and expectations of industries today.

We need to also help companies see the value of being part of internship or apprentice programmes. The benefits include having access to a steady source of skilled pre-professionals which can address manpower needs, as well as the opportunity to source for talent for future recruitment, and get fresh ideas and perspectives from students to solve company challenges. For SMEs especially, who often struggle with manpower shortages, it

Page: 46

allows them to tap into a flexible, short-term and cost-effective workforce.

We must also recognise companies who are seen as actively investing in the student community and creating opportunities for them, aligned with national initiatives.

While looking at shifting mindsets, there may also be a need to incentivise companies to commit to official work experience programmes, by reducing some of the short-term challenges they might face so that they can see the long-term benefits.

Many companies, especially SMEs, lack the manpower to supervise and mentor interns and to provide them with adequate training while on the job. They may also lack the budget to compensate interns and apprentices.

In addition, while it is true that interns can help address a company's manpower needs, there will be students who lack initiative and treat internships as simply a course requirement or something to put on their CVs without putting in much effort. Some may only expect to do more "interesting tasks", and such interns always require more supervision and can add to the workload for the company. Such factors are disincentives for companies with limited resources.

While lead institutions must encourage a culture of responsibility amongst their students and employers, there are real constraints that may need to be dealt with more specifically to incentivise companies to support such programmes.

Some examples of how incentivisation can take place would be to offer grants or funding to cover the costs of taking on a student intern or apprentice which would cover things like resources required for internship supervision and mentorship. Alternatively, we could look at tax incentives for companies who sign up to participate in specific internship programmes. Such incentive schemes are implemented in countries, such as the United States and Canada, for businesses to offer high-quality work experience programmes for students. In Singapore, we have similar schemes in place as well, such as the SME Talent Programme for SMEs. We should review such existing schemes and assess how to expand and enhance them to bring a larger number of students and companies into the fold.

Madam, in conclusion, I am glad to support the recommendations by ASPIRE. It shows commitment to equip students, regardless of their background or chosen path, with the right skills and experiences to empower them to take charge of their careers and plot their path to success. However, the tough part will now come in making firm commitments and dedicating the resources required to making these recommendations a reality. With that,

Page: 47

Madam, I support the Motion.

Mdm Speaker, thank you very much for allowing me to join this debate. I fully support the recommendations of the ASPIRE Committee's report and the Motion before us.

To the Labour Movement, a better future for Singaporeans must include good prospects for Singaporeans to get good jobs and to enjoy an improving standard of living. And for that to happen, good jobs must be created in the first place in Singapore, and then Singaporeans must have the aptitudes and competencies needed to take on those good jobs.

Indeed, the two are inter-linked. If companies find that Singaporeans do not have the competencies needed for the better jobs that they intend to create – and here it applies to companies both big and small, MNCs and SMEs – then they find less reason to create those jobs in Singapore or to bring those better jobs into Singapore. So, the ability and the availability of skilled manpower and talent are very critical to ensuring the availability and the creation of good jobs in Singapore and that better future for Singaporean workers and Singaporeans.

Should that be a worry for us? Could there possibly, potentially, be not enough Singaporeans with relevant competencies to attract or to undertake and to anchor these better jobs for the future?

I think it is possible and I can think of a number of possibilities of why that might happen.

One challenge would be our small population and our low fertility. There may be a constraint in sheer lack of numbers, though, to some extent, progress in our efforts to improve job design, value-add and total productivity will help to ameliorate the challenge.

But for the students that we do have, there could also be challenges because students could be studying courses that mismatch with industry needs, or because the industry needs change and their catch-up process in terms of what is being taught to the students is not quick enough.

Students may also choose to work in industries that need competencies that are totally different from their course of study. So, they study in one thing but they choose to work in

Page: 48

a different line. All that investment does not convert into value.

Companies also may be part of the problem because some companies may not be able to retain the workers by providing challenging work, competitive rewards or attractive prospects. So, even if they have the right students coming to work for them, they do not keep them long enough. And, again, they lose the experience.

In other words, if we are already short of people, we really, as a country, cannot afford to waste anyone, waste the talent or the skill, through any sub-optimal matching of training and work requirements, or through the premature loss of talent and skilled personnel.

It is, therefore, imperative that we "Teach Right, Learn Right, Work Right and Reward Right". I believe that if we do these four things right, we will then put ourselves on a virtuous cycle of skills building, value creation, good rewards and, eventually, ever improving living standards.

In this regard, I welcome and support the recommendations of the ASPIRE Committee as they seek to strengthen our ability to cut waste and maximise value with respect to students studying and working in relevant and related areas.

I think that for the full value of the ASPIRE report to be realised, we must focus on three critical points.

The first one is the link between "Teach Right" and "Learn Right". This is about ensuring that courses of study being offered are themselves valuable and relevant to current and emerging industry needs, and also in helping students choose the right course of study that best fits their talent, their aspirations and their abilities.

This is conceptually easy to understand, but it is actually not easy to put into practice correctly and continuously because there are many different parts that are moving. To articulate them and to synchronise them will be challenging. But it is a very important part for this enhanced capability to link between the ITE, the Polytechnics on the one hand, and industry on the other, in order for both sides to better understand the job requirements and the job opportunities, and also the training that must be put in place to link the two. This must be properly resourced and carefully built up.

The second link is that between "Learn Right" and "Work Right". This part concerns the workplace. In today's reality, lifelong learning and lifelong updating of knowledge and skills are not just nice add-ons for those people with extraordinary aspirations. In fact, it is a basic action: for all workers, in order to preserve employability for themselves; and for companies,

Page: 49

in order to preserve their competitiveness.

The better Singapore is at ensuring updating and relevance of skills, the more resilient and attractive our workforce and economy would be for the future. This is precisely why the Labour Movement is very keen. This is at the core of the future of our workers.

Thus, it is vital that substantial attention be paid to, and significant investments be made in Continuing Education and Training (CET). An ideal CET system would be one with strong institutions and service providers within itself, that these providers are able to train, upgrade, retrain and match and rematch workers efficiently into good and well-fitting jobs. It must also be one that interacts actively with education institutions in a two-way loop to mutually update and upgrade on needs and capability-building. When that happens consistently and pervasively, then the investments of time, effort and money that each person and the country put into pre-employment education will yield a longer stream of good returns throughout a person's working years and will not be wasted mid-stream.

In this regard, the Labour Movement fully supports the proposed improvement to ITEs and Polytechnics in strengthening the industrial link through purpose-focused internships and Place-and-Train programmes. We also support the enhancement in the capability to provide more accurate and timely job-market information and also job counselling.

I would just like to also quote an example with regard to how companies and the education institutions can work closely together in order to make this happen. Here, I quote the example of Rolls-Royce. Rolls-Royce has a longstanding relationship with Singapore, and when they decided to invest in an Asian-based production plant for their state-of-the-art Trent engines, they chose Singapore, and we are very glad for that.

While Singapore had offered Rolls-Royce more than production infrastructure, Rolls-Royce, at the point of investment, was concerned about the possible lack of skilled technicians with the expertise to produce the aircraft engines. In order to meet their requirements for these skilled technicians, Rolls-Royce worked with our Polytechnics and ITEs to design courses on aero-engineering, and the students in these programmes were given the opportunity to intern with Rolls-Royce at their Seletar campus in order to deepen their understanding with regard to the production process. Many of those who subsequently graduated from their programme were employed by Rolls-Royce as technicians and engineers and enjoyed good career prospects. This is a good example of how industry and our local Institutes of Higher Learning can jointly co-create certification programmes to meet an emerging, ongoing or expanding industrial need.

Page: 50

The benefits of such partnerships are, indeed, two-fold. First, that these tertiary academic programmes are structured based on in-depth consultation with industry players, and that these programmes are, therefore, highly relevant to the real needs of industry and are able to produce graduates who are immediately employable. These industry-sponsored programmes offer also our diploma and ITE graduates the opportunity to undergo structured training and internships which are aligned and value-add to their tertiary education.

But after a person starts work within the workspace, then we talk about CET. Here, also, we have strong frameworks and entities, such as the Devan Nair Institute of Employment and Employability (DNI) which is run by NTUC's e2i, the WDA-run Lifelong Learning Institute (LLI), the modular Workforce Skills Qualification (WSQ) upgrading framework, the numerous industry-focused union clusters at the NTUC and their counterparts at SNEF, and many strong industry-based skills and capacity-enhancing entities. Some of these are already creating value. My point is, as we do and improve things from the schooling end, we should tap fully the CET part of the eco-system and join the two up in a very seamless way.

Just to give an example, it is a real challenge faced by companies in the electronics industry to find and keep skilled personnel. This particular challenge is felt, for example, by the wafer fabrication industry. It is made all the harder by intense international competition and fast-changing technology inherent in that industry. There are also issues of intellectual property protection that companies need to address.

All that, when unresolved, became hurdles to industry development as each company tries to address its own manpower shortages by attracting people from other companies, otherwise known as poaching from one another. Such action does not grow the pool of skilled personnel, but just intensifies job switching and create a wage cost spiral.

Through the hard work and partnership of various players – companies in the wafer fabrication industry and subsequently in the different WSQ, those in the Assembly and Test industry, the union in this industry which is the United Workers of Electronics and Electrical Industries, the WDA and EDB – barriers were overcomed and industry-wide WSQ upgrading frameworks were then put in place.

As a result, hundreds have already graduated through that process and thousands more stand to benefit from structured training that will upgrade their competencies for which they are certified and ways in which these competencies are recognised industry-wide and receive recognition and have market value. The companies benefit from a more stable and expanding pool of manpower and the people who graduate from these programmes see better prospects as well. There are many advantages.

Page: 51

These entities and capabilities across different industries must be fully harnessed to work in tandem with the ASPIRE initiatives for the best and smoothest overall outcome for Singapore and Singaporeans.

Third, the link between "Work Right" and "Reward Right". The most advanced car wash that will give the car the best and most lasting shine is of no use if there are no cars going through the car wash. The best intentions of the ASPIRE report will come to nought if there is poor follow-through at the workplace, or if companies are not able to or not doing their best to retain or to upgrade the talent, skills and experience of their workforce.

To guard against this, aside from ensuring that the CET system and players are proficient and proactive, there is also an important role for Government agencies and industry associations spearheading the development of the different sectors, and industries must also proactively paint exciting visions for their industries to catch the attention of students, parents and workers seeking better futures. Yet another key ingredient is the role of management in using, motivating, rewarding, retaining and developing their scarce manpower truly as assets.

In this respect, there is another area of potential waste that we must look at and avoid. Some employers view paper qualifications as a proxy for a person's capability at the point of recruitment, and progress thereafter depends on the person's performance, value-add and demonstrated potential to advance. Then there are others who rigidly destine a person's ability to advance within their companies and organisations, largely on the basis of their paper qualifications at the point of entry, sometimes almost to the extent of running a caste system of sorts.

We must be quite clear about this. Having a degree is not itself an entitlement to career success. Likewise, not having a degree is also not a sure-fire way to job success. Success ultimately rests on outcomes and is built on integrity, initiative, competence, contribution, determination and adaptability. In other words, merit. So, you have got to deliver that value, whether you have a degree or not.

Having a degree is not a guarantee and, obviously, given the need for Singapore to make the best of every person that we have, we must strongly encourage all employers to design and see to career progression based on merit, and to remove glass ceilings. In this way, companies allow themselves the biggest possible pool of talent and contributors to develop and tap, while all workers have the chance to advance by proving their worth through their performance and merit.

Page: 52

This will, in turn, make the best use of the enhanced education and CET eco-systems to develop workers with better and more relevant skills to meet the demands of the better jobs that we hope to create and bring in.

The Tripartite Committee to be chaired by Deputy Prime Minister Tharman Shanmugaratnam will, thus, have a critical role to play to bring all these pieces together into a coherent, working whole. We must make this work so that Singaporeans can and will look forward to a better, brighter future at work for themselves and their children.

With a clear mission and road map, strong tripartism and progressive industrial relations, I think we are ready for the journey. Mdm Speaker, I support the Motion.

Madam, I share the view of the Committee that education is very important to Singaporeans who see it as a key to unlocking the opportunities in life and securing a good future. Over the past weeks and months, a case had been made that applied education can be as viable a pathway as a University education. But in order for this notion to gain traction among our young minds and worried parents, narrow societal mindsets have to evolve, and the objectives, as set forth by the Committee in the ASPIRE report, should be embraced by the public at large.

Madam, Members in this House acknowledged that there is a need for a fundamental review of the prevailing assumption in education today, key of which is the definition of success in Singapore society today and the parameters that operate under this assumption.

For years, our society has been socialised to view a University degree as the sole means to an end – career success and economic progress in life. The Committee has taken a step forward in trying to shape and reframe existing attitudes and prevailing mindsets. We should welcome that.

The Committee has conceived a different approach to the viewing of success and progress in Singapore society, and I believe their painstaking intents, as illustrated in the report through the various recommendations, can be realised. Indeed, the shifting of mindset is no doubt an uphill and tedious task, one that requires constant calibration and adaptation. The Government, through the ASPIRE report, has taken the lead in the reframing of mindsets. The direction, as set forth, should be complemented with efforts on the part of employers and industry players to realign their work processes and resynchronise their organisations' objectives and outcomes.

Page: 53

At the same time, parents and students have their respective roles to play in this brave new world. Parents should continue to remain engaged with their children's future while simultaneously providing adequate space for them to pursue their own interests and aspirations. I see the role of a parent more as a cheerleader rather than as a director. The student himself is the director of his hopes and dreams in life. As a society, we should encourage our young minds to strive for the best with the skills they have been equipped with. Thus, parents play a fine balancing act between expressing concern for their children's future, providing them with autonomy to empower themselves at critical decision-making points in their academic and career junctures.

Madam, for the student to better empower himself and exercise the confidence invested in him by his parents, he needs to actively inform himself with the academic and career information provided to him and immerse himself in the world beyond our shores. On this note, I would like to encourage students to step out of their comfort zones, away from the paternal culture prevalent in our education system today. It is hoped that, without the shackles of a narrow societal mindset in which one's value and contribution are solely based on University paper qualifications, the student can better express himself with greater gumption, creativity and entrepreneurial tenacity and, in doing so, start towards the future that he envisions for himself and his loved ones.

To this end, I hope that in the not-too-distant future, applied education can be as rewarding and fulfilling as a University degree. Both would be recognised, appreciated and encouraged by members in our society.

Madam, in this next section, I will be touching on some of the recommendations that have been put forth in the report and provide some of my views and inputs.

As a Member of this House, I support the recommendation to strengthen and coordinate Education and Career Guidance (ECG) efforts as part of an integrated National ECG Framework, in particular, the brand of end-to-end ECG, as laid out in para 2.7 of the ASPIRE report.

Making a well-informed choice is paramount. A comprehensive and continuous education and career guide in schools and institutions can have a rewarding outcome, especially considering that decisions on education options and clear opportunities can be a rather complex and risky process.

On this, I would like to suggest that the Government include the administering of psychometric tests as part of the initiative in strengthening the ECG framework. Conducting psychometric tests, such as the DISC personality assessment, will enable students to develop

Page: 54

a better understanding of their attributes, the special qualities that they possess and an honest reflection of their own weaknesses. An in-depth awareness of oneself will enable him to better tailor his education with his career decisions. Psychometric tests, as part of the national ECG framework, would certainly be helpful for the students in the long term.

Additionally, I hope that the system can be set in place to encourage the active involvement of parents in the planning of their child's educational progression and subsequent career prospects. Invitation to parents to attend ECG sessions at the Secondary school level should be seriously considered. In the report, it was stated that 62% and 49% of the Polytechnic and ITE students surveyed cited parents as one of their top three influences in choosing their course of study. Clearly, parents have a disproportionate influence on their child's mindset and thought processes. Thus, they need to be well-equipped to provide the necessary advice and opinions to their own child. In doing so, it would also provide parents with a realistic and rational perspective to their child's academic potential and their accompanying career opportunities.

Madam, as part of the effort to strengthen education and training in Polytechnics and ITEs, it was highlighted in para 3.2.2 that there is a need for Polytechnics and ITEs to provide more development and support programmes to help every student succeed, no matter what his or her circumstances may be.

On this, I would like to suggest that the Government consider strengthening the links and partnership between the Family Service Centres and the Student Affairs Centres and Counselling and Wellness Centres in Polytechnics and ITEs. These would not only ensure prompt and ready assistance, financial or otherwise, whenever needed, but it would also allow cases to reflect earlier and symptoms better addressed. Such an arrangement would be beneficial to enhancing the social and emotional competencies of the students as they navigate the consequences of their decisions. Madam, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] I agree with the ASPIRE Committee's view that education is very important to Singaporeans where education is key to unlock opportunities in life and guarantee a good and bright future. There were recent discussions and efforts made to raise the awareness that success in life is not necessarily achieved through University education but, in fact, applied education or education via the Polytechnic and ITE route can also unlock opportunities for similar success. This is the objective that the Government wants to realise through the 10 recommendations or proposals contained in the ASPIRE Review Committee report.

The change that the ASPIRE report wants to make is to give more recognition, and also to provide career progression and success to Polytechnic and ITE graduates. This is a good step and it should be supported, and it needs the involvement of everyone who has to play

Page: 55

their role to achieve this objective.

Madam, all along, Singaporeans have been inculcated with the paradigm or mindset that University education is the only way to achieve success and progression in their careers and lives. A mindset change must be made if we wish to achieve the objectives set out by ASPIRE. The Government has taken the first step by initiating a mindset change through ASPIRE and all of us should take the next step to give support so that we, as a society, can work together in this effort and, together, achieve the objective of giving more recognition and also providing career progression and success to Polytechnic and ITE graduates.

Madam, in my English speech earlier, I touched on and gave my viewpoints on two recommendations from the ASPIRE Committee. Here, I would like to touch on two more recommendations from the ASPIRE report.

Firstly, it is about increasing opportunities for NITEC graduates to continue their studies to Higher NITEC.

This is a positive step, especially for the Malay community, because we have a rather large number of students who are studying in NITEC courses in the ITEs. I hope that Malay students can take advantage of the opportunity that will be made available. This pathway will not only increase skills and knowledge, but it will also present a better chance for students to continue their studies in the Polytechnics.

Madam, another recommendation that I would like to touch on is the recommendation on having collaboration between the Polytechnics and ITEs with MINDEF and MHA. The focus of this collaboration is to enable the Polytechnic and ITE graduates to be given vocations that are related to their course of study while they are undergoing National Service. This is to ensure that these graduates not only retain their skills and knowledge that they have gained but, at the same time, they would also gain practical experience and knowledge that are relevant to their course of study. The recommendation to give accreditation is also a good initiative. This effort is akin to the Malay saying "while diving, you drink the water" where many benefits can be gained while undergoing National Service. My hope is that this recommendation can be implemented well and fairly so that each ITE and Polytechnic graduate will be given equal opportunity, regardless of race or religion, especially the chance to serve in the Air Force or the Navy of the Republic of Singapore.

(In English): In conclusion, the ASPIRE report crafts a worthy vision – difficult though it may be – for the type of society Singapore is to aspire to as we enter the 50th year of our nation's Independence.

Page: 56

University education remains important and, for students who are academically able, no efforts should be spared to ensure that they receive a world-class University education. However, there is also a need for Singapore and Singaporeans to deepen our zeal to enhance technical competency and uphold alternative pathways to success. In the years ahead of us, the composition and profiles of parliamentarians in this House can, in fact, serve as a good litmus test as to how much our society has come in recognising the value of applied education vis-a-vis a University degree. I believe, to have Prime Ministers, Chiefs in the Singapore Armed Forces, Permanent Secretaries and Heads of Civil Service from the Polytechnic or ITE route is not only a worthy aspiration, but it can be a practical reality in the not-too-distant future.

In this regard, I hope that this national effort to improve the prospects of Polytechnic and ITE graduates can, in the longer term, expand and enrich the mindsets of our political leaders and allow this to translate into greater diversity in our leaders' perspective on talent and the recognition of success in our political discourse and the employment of talents in our Civil Service. Politics and Singapore can only benefit from the paradigm shift that this report attempts to encourage in our education system. Madam, I support the Motion.

Mdm Speaker, the recommendations from the ASPIRE Committee come at a timely moment when our technical and vocational institutions and courses are becoming more prolific and popular among our young Singaporeans. Confucius, as a revered educator, abided by a principle that has been lauded since ancient times, if you would allow me to pronounce it: "因材施教". It means to teach students in accordance with their ability or aptitude. Indeed, this is a good principle for us to take note of.

In recent times, we have been improving in this aspect. From sports, to cooking, to marine, our training and education landscape has, in conjunction with the trainers and educators, conjured a variety of quality training courses to serve the growing needs of our young people who find themselves more at ease with technical education and vocational training, in contrast to the conventional academic lessons in class. We must continue to help these students stretch their potential to the fullest. It is not only beneficial for their aspirations, but also for the progress of our country.

Mdm Speaker, allow me to highlight why I believe that technical education and vocational training were instrumental to our phenomenal growth and success in the past 50 years and why they are still key and so vital for our future.

Page: 57

Madam, in the early days when we were still a young nation, University and even our Junior College admission was almost an unattainable goal for many. In a whole kampong or even block of flats, there was only one or maybe none of these graduates. And he or she will be the buzz among the neighbours. Only a very small percentage of our population had a high level education qualification. For the rest of the population, it was primarily about getting basic education, skills and work.

Technical education, vocational training and on-the-job training were the main routes for many after Secondary school and Primary school. I was told that during the days when the British Forces were still stationed here, they even recruited students who were doing their Secondary 2 to join their vocational and technical training scheme. Their education would be taken care of and they would even be paid for on-the-job training. For those who did not sign up for the British dockyard training scheme, education was focused on the needs of the industry. Students would receive hands-on training which would help them get specific jobs when they leave school.

Then, Singapore took a different route in its economic policy after gaining Independence. We realised that foreign investment was crucial for our nation building and economic prosperity. To attract investors, we needed a more skilled workforce. Educating and training our population became a key national policy for growth.

To quickly support this rapid growth strategy, we needed to supplement the long-term education objectives with the growing demands for manpower for industry growth. I think, back then, EDB realised this and EDB started several dedicated training centres and programmes. The Manpower and Training Unit was established to focus on industrial training within Singapore. The Overseas Training Programme and Joint Government Training Centres saw many young Singaporean workers being placed in apprenticeship programmes in countries like India, Holland and Germany to learn and improve on their skills. In the marine industry, many young Singaporeans had to undergo on-the-job training and other training programmes to be groomed into skilled draftsmen, technicians and welders, more for the shipyards. The money was very good, especially for welders, because the shipbuilding industry was booming fast. Some even went to work in the Middle East and were paid even better wages in US dollars.

As we move to value-add industries, I think our economic policy also changed, and EDB started a specialised institute to accelerate manpower development for new industries. Three institutions, in partnership with three developed nations famed for their technological advancement, were established. They were the German-Singapore Institute for Precision and Manufacturing, Japan-Singapore Institute for Software Technology and the French-Singapore Institute for Electronic and Control Systems. Our technologies were groomed in these institutes for the industries and a new term called "the teaching factory" was coined

Page: 58

for these specialised institutes. I was the product of one of these specialised institutes.

We had to develop this trained skilled workforce for the needs of the rapidly growing industry and companies that had set up their operations in Singapore. All this was happening in parallel as we complement the supply of certificate and diploma holders who were trained in the Singapore Polytechnic, Ngee Ann Polytechnic, Singapore Technical Institute and the then VITB, all of which continue to exist in mainstream education until today in the form of the five Polytechnics and the three colleges of the ITE.

The trip down memory lane serves as a reminder that industrial training was fundamental to the success we enjoy today. We must not forget it. And we must not ditch it. Paper qualifications are not the only way to move forward or upwards. Not everyone is academically inclined. Some of us are just gifted with the abilities to use our hands and brains in the application of tools and skills.

The objective of wanting to uplift the overall image and value of technical education and vocational training as a viable and attractive path for sustainable progress and development of our students and employees is a correct and noble one. I am in full support of the ASPIRE Committee's recommendations.

Having said that, Madam, I am also aware that the paper chase culture that we have in Singapore is quite entrenched and it will take some time for mindsets to change and take shape. Logic and rationale tell us that non-graduates who do not have paper credentials or qualifications should not be denied recognition and opportunities to move up the career ladder when they are clearly equipped with the relevant skills and experience. But is that ideal thought translated into real life practice in the industry?

We should ask these hard questions of all our employers. Every now and then, we hear of good stories of ITE graduates and Polytechnic graduates who rise up to hold key positions in industries. The key reason why these stories are good and interesting is because they are not the norm but the exception. I believe more needs to be done to change the mindset on how we value our workers and their contribution beyond their qualifications. Thus, the work of the ASPIRE Committee and the follow-up implementation are very important.

On the other hand, we should not also send the wrong message that all levels of University qualification are not important. There need to be a more holistic and balanced views of path of progress and development towards success. We are not saying that our graduates, after years of slogging for a degree, now have come to nought. Academic abilities are important but they must also be pegged with relevant practical skills. You must be able to value and recognise the importance of practical and implementable skill sets. It is pointless

Page: 59

to have a degree in business when you do not actually have practical knowledge and skills to run a business. Or, what good is an architect if there are no welders, artisans, draughtsmen, bricklayers, to put his ideas into reality? Thus, we must value workers for their contribution and service but not only their paper qualifications.

Mdm Speaker, another point that I would like to highlight is the vital link between training and industry. The link between the industry and training must be of high relevancy, and it must also be seamless. Training should eventually contribute to the industry and one's job. Lifelong learning and upgrading opportunities should not be about getting a higher or better qualification for the sake of the paper chase. There should also be upgrading opportunities for specialised skills and craftsmanship. Workers should be incentivised and motivated to go for such upgrading of skills. Specialisation and craftsmanship should be properly rewarded and recognised. Over time, society and community will begin to understand the value of these highly regarded jobs and skills.

Let me raise an example in the form of vocational training in Germany, a country which, I believe, is widely respected for having a skilled and efficient workforce, strong economy and advanced technology. In Germany, training for vocations is usually done by a dual programme of training and theoretical education. Students work three or four days a week at a partner company as apprentices or interns. The remaining one or two days are spent doing theory lessons in school. This apprenticeship lasts about two to three or three-and-a-half years.

This is different from our education system whereby students are generally spending only a short portion of their education on internship or dedicating several modules to the classroom and just one module for the internship. Moreover, some of these internships are sought out by the students themselves, who have little knowledge about the industry or even their very own desired career path and wind up in the wrong company doing something totally different or irrelevant.

I hope the Government will put more emphasis on internships so that these attachments are really hands-on learning experiences and not just another excursion in the course of a study programme.

Mdm Speaker, a senior officer in the hotel industry who was part of the ASPIRE Committee told me this, and I quote him, "It is all about hard work, positive attitude and undying passion in what you love to do and to dream big. It is an uphill task to change the mindset of parents that it is not just about paper chase. We want the dual study-work programme to succeed but it will take some time." I agree with him, and I think we must believe that these changes that we see in the ASPIRE's recommendations are for the better

Page: 60

and we must stay on course with this strategy. Mdm Speaker, in Malay, please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] One of the recommendations made by the ASPIRE Committee is to enhance skills and post-diploma education through CET. Madam, this is important as many of our Polytechnic and ITE graduates want the opportunity to upgrade. It should be encouraged and identified as soon as possible. These upgrading opportunities and programmes should run in line with the needs of industries and companies that are growing. These upgrading opportunities should be made easily accessible and flexible enough for those who are still working.

The important factor in motivating our workers to upgrade their relevant skills is to create suitable jobs and good pay. If this post-diploma qualification is just for the sake of a paper chase, this effort will not be fruitful.

Cooperation between employers, workers and educational institutions is important so that workers are continuously motivated and would want to have the education and upgrading so that they can get suitable jobs with their increasingly better capabilities.

I would like to encourage our Malay community to seize the opportunities and chance to improve their capabilities and skills for a better future. With these changes and new methods that are recommended in the ASPIRE report, I am confident that more of our Malay workers with ITE and Polytechnic qualifications will be able to benefit from the new programmes and continue to upgrade their skills to get a better life for themselves and their families.

(In English): Madam, it is right and very important that we look back at what we have done right in the early days of our economic growth, and also the methodology that we have implemented in our Polytechnics and ITEs, which are seen by all the foreigners as wonderful institutions. It is also important that we see that the improvisation and creation of new training programmes and the assistance that we are providing for our workers and our students, in partnership with companies, locally and globally, will result in a better system. This is all in aid of helping our youngsters to obtain useful, marketable skills for good employment and the right employer. It will help to improve the quality of our workforce and, in turn, our productivity for a sustainable economic growth that we want to achieve for the long term. Madam, I support the Motion.

Order. I propose to take the break now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 4.25 pm.

Page: 61

Sitting accordingly suspended

at 4.07 pm until 4.25 pm.

Sitting resumed at 4.25 pm

[Mdm Speaker in the Chair]

[(proc text) Debate resumed (proc text)]

Mdm Speaker, I support this Motion that can set the tone for our society. I thank Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah for her leadership and the ASPIRE Committee for their tremendous efforts.

Hon Members in this House have given thoughtful and constructive ideas. I commend, in particular, our Nominated Members who made their maiden speeches – Mr K Karthikeyan, who spoke of his experience in the industry, and Mr Mohd Ismail Hussein who spoke from his experience as an employer.

When the ASPIRE report was presented, I was happy to accept, on behalf of the Government, the recommendations in full. I appreciate the report for the highly consultative approach in the vein of Our Singapore Conversation, engaging many stakeholders on a significant scale – Polytechnic and ITE students, parents, alumni, staff, employers, workers.

I appreciate how faithful ASPIRE's strategies are to Singaporean's aspirations to build a society of opportunities, regardless of our starting points. The report addresses the needs of Polytechnic and ITE students. Senior Minister of State Indranee and I have interacted with many of them. We applaud their spirit. We are determined to help them succeed, and that is why we are strongly supporting the many interesting ideas that came out – structured internships, Place-and-Train programmes, Higher NITEC places, online learning, better development programmes in the campuses and so on.

I also appreciate its deep insights. Although the report focuses on Polytechnic and ITE education, its findings can transform our beliefs about education and learning in all areas – in our schools, in our Institutes of Higher Learning, in the Universities, at the workplace.

Page: 62

I would also like to thank Mr Zainudin for giving us a history of the Polytechnic and ITE education in Singapore. I am happy to say that we are not fixing a broken system. In fact, the Polytechnic and ITE education in Singapore is first-rate. It has allowed many Singaporeans to make good progress and it is widely admired around the world. ASPIRE represents the forward thinking and planning in our policymaking. It represents a way that we respond to the aspirations of Singaporeans.

Members would agree that our beliefs can shape our choices. Our beliefs can either limit or expand opportunities. My remarks will address three beliefs about qualifications that limit our potential, how ASPIRE breaks through these limiting beliefs and the actions that we must take to break through these limits.

The first limiting belief is that qualifications are all that matter to get a good job, to get a good life. This is limiting because the highest qualifications will do a person no good if there are no good jobs available in the first place. And, indeed, in many parts of Europe, even nearer home – Taiwan and other examples – we see highly educated people without a job because the economy does not create jobs for them – for structural or cyclical reasons. It is very painful.

The belief that qualifications are all that matter is also limiting because there is a variety of jobs out there requiring us to learn in different ways in all our life. Some jobs require degrees, some jobs do not. Some, like heart surgeons, for instance, require deep skills that take years of postgraduate specialised training. And there are some jobs, like those of a master craftsman or master chef, that also require deep skills but which can be better acquired on the job.

This belief that qualifications are all that matter is also limiting because, as several hon Members have pointed out, we need a whole package of attributes to succeed. Mr Mohd Ismail Hussein mentioned about IQ, EQ and AQ. And Ms Jessica Tan yesterday mentioned about soft skills. And, indeed, qualifications are a proxy measure for some competencies and some attributes, but cannot represent the full package of attributes each of us brings to the table.

The second limiting belief is the opposite extreme – that qualifications do not matter at all. As several hon Members have noted, some members of the public are asking, "Is the Government now saying that qualifications do not matter? Then why are we urging people to learn and upgrade?"

So, let me be clear. ASPIRE is not about dissuading Singaporeans from upgrading ourselves, or pursuing degrees, or pursuing any form of qualifications. ASPIRE is about

Page: 63

creating opportunities for all, not creating more competition for some. ASPIRE is about keeping pathways open for all, not blocking pathways for some. Qualifications matter but they must be the right qualifications and of the right standard for what we want to do. For example, we want our doctors, nurses, pharmacists, physiotherapists to each have the right qualification for the job they do. We want the engineers who certify that our buildings are safe, to be well-trained and well-qualified to do the job. We want our architects similarly to be well-qualified for the job.

The right qualification signifies that you have the right skills, the right combination of knowledge, application and experience. But not all qualifications matter, not if they do not help us build the right skills for what we want to do. This can happen when we seek qualifications as a paper chase rather than as a quest for skills.

Recently, a young resident came to see me for advice. She shared that after she got her diploma, she went directly to do a private degree programme because she thought that she could get a better job and earn a better pay. But after spending tens of thousands of dollars on the programme, she now got a job that paid her at a fresh diploma holder level, about $2,000, because her company did not find her degree skills relevant. She lost three years of salary had she gone on to work, so an opportunity cost of over $70,000, plus the cost of doing this programme. What is worse is that she realised, after all this, that this line of work does not suit her strengths and interests. She was so caught up in chasing a piece of paper that she lost the chance to discover what she really cared about. Each person has a different learning and working journey. This story moved me because her family is not well off, but it is such a huge cost to them. It is only now, three years and a lot of costs later, that she is getting a good sense of what she really wants to do. Would it not have been so much better for her and her family if she could have realised this earlier?

By sheer coincidence, last evening, at my Meet-the-People Session (MPS), I had a chance to play an untrained educational and career guidance officer. The father of this young lady had come to see me a few weeks back asking me for help to get his daughter to a University, any University. I asked him to ask his daughter to come and see me instead because I wanted to understand what I could do for her.

Last evening, she came and I found out that she had a diploma from one of our Polytechnics. She was very interested in communications and design. I asked her why she wanted to do a degree, and she said because it would allow her to do better. I was really impressed by this young lady. She was full of zest for learning and wanting to do well. I explored a number of options with her as to what her career interests were, what her passion was and what she enjoyed learning and doing most. And she told me that she is very keen to learn how to marry communications with design and with planning. And I said that is very good and, in fact, there a number of useful courses in our Polytechnics for doing that. Since

Page: 64

I am an untrained career counsellor, I told her to send me a longer note on what she is really interested in doing and what her career plans are and I will get someone trained and well-versed in this industry to advise her.

I feel strongly that we must provide better career and education guidance to our young people. And our captains of industries must come out and explain what they are looking for.

The third limiting belief is, that if others are better qualified, I would lose out. Is it true that if Polytechnic and ITE students learn better, the value of degrees will go down? Again, this is very limiting. The opposite is true – when our friends and colleagues can do a better job, we all benefit.

Just think about this: what does it take to make a visitor to Singapore to have a great experience? From the airline pilot, to the cabin crew, to the moment he lands at the airport, the way that our counter staff deals with him, to our taxi driver, to the baggage handler, to the frontline staff at the hotels, in the restaurants, in the places of interest – everyone will have some role to play in making it a great experience. Not to mention the architects and the engineers who designed all these attractions. Not to mention the technicians and the cleaners who maintain these facilities. In fact, the more that each of us can do our part, the more that each of us is highly skilled and can do a great job, the more we create the right conditions for everyone to thrive.

In fact, this is the Singapore story. We enjoy a better standard of living because we work as a team and we earn others' respect and we earn a premium for being team players, for cheering one another on, for helping one another to do better. Think about it, if we do not have enough skilled people, investors will not even come in the first place.

Those are the three limiting ideas. The ASPIRE report encourages us to break through these limiting beliefs, to think anew about qualifications, jobs and opportunities. Breakthrough number one is to go beyond qualifications to the pursuit of excellence by recognising that attitude, deep skills, knowledge and experience matter if we want to perform and excel.

The second breakthrough is to go beyond the classroom to recognise the value of applied learning and lifelong learning, and make the workplace a great learning place.

The third breakthrough is to go beyond narrow definitions of success to recognise that everyone excels at different things, in different ways and that we can all excel if we apply our minds, hands and hearts to what we do.

Page: 65

Mr Zaqy Mohamad and Er Dr Lee Bee Wah asked what ASPIRE's breakthrough means for the value of a degree. Does this mean that degrees no longer matter? None of these breakthroughs devalue some qualifications over others. None of these breakthroughs limits opportunities for one group of people over another. It is not about one kind of qualification versus another, one group versus another. ASPIRE seeks to support each of us on the path that best suits our personal needs and aspirations so that we can each excel and lead fulfilling, happy lives. It is about breakthroughs, not limits; widening opportunities, not narrowing them; addition, not subtraction; more, not less.

As hon Members have pointed out, these, indeed, add up to a major transformation, so, can we put these breakthroughs and ideas into practice? The answer is yes. The Public Service Division is doing so. In MOE, we recognise that qualifications matter for teachers and we also recognise that some teachers who did not take the degree route can develop the depth of knowledge, which, along with other qualities like care and skill at their craft, allows them to excel as teachers. All teachers should have opportunities to deepen and upgrade their skills. That is why we will be emplacing outstanding non-graduate teachers on graduate pay scale. These are teachers who have proven themselves to be excellent teachers.

Er Dr Lee Bee Wah and others asked if this means that there has been a change in MOE's position. Let me assure Members that we will not just maintain but seek to raise the level of teaching. We have an important responsibility to all our children. MOE will continue to recruit graduates as we need teachers with a strong grasp of the academic subjects to help our children build their foundation, but we will also hire some non-graduates who have the passion and predisposition for teaching and help them deepen their skills.

Let me recap that we must not be a society where paper credentials mean everything. We must also not be a society where paper credentials mean nothing. We limit ourselves if we believe that qualifications are all that matter to get a job, or the opposite – that qualifications do not matter at all. We limit ourselves if we think that some people improving their qualifications increases competition for others. If we limit ourselves this way, we block our individual ability to reach our aspirations and our collective potential to build an inclusive, fair society of opportunities for all.

As individuals, we can shed these limitations and see things in these terms: what are our real interests? What is the right qualification and the right form of learning that will help us to be the best at that? What are all the changing conditions around us that can affect our ability to succeed at our jobs? How can we keep learning to be ahead of these changes? And, finally, how can we support one another through our unique learning journeys to each reach our best?

Page: 66

Let me now talk about the three action areas. We create opportunities for all Singaporeans to learn and succeed through multiple pathways, through multiple modes of learning in a continual progression, developing a culture of passion, recognition and respect with every part of society playing a part. It is about learning the right thing, at the right time, at the right place, in the right way, and learning all our life. This leads to three action areas – learning at every stage, learning in every way and respecting everyone.

First, learning at every stage. We need to have seamless integration from schools to IHLs to the workplace. Our education system must provide the broad and deep foundation for life and lifelong learning. I have spoken on this before in the MOE's Workplan Seminar last year. Mr Christopher de Souza pointed out yesterday that ASPIRE's recommendations, built on "Every School A Good School", applied learning programmes, and he reminded us of the Committee on University Education Pathways last year. And, indeed, this is so.

The 10 years of basic education in Primary and Secondary schools enable our students to develop the values and character traits, give them the basic academic foundation and help them discover their strengths and interests. We recently added Applied Learning Programmes and Learning for Life in our Secondary schools to help students develop their life skills and to learn how to apply knowledge and to develop a lively interest of the world around them.

ASPIRE takes this forward, by having education and career guidance, it will help our students develop an even better understanding of these options. By deepening the structured internships and applied learning opportunities, especially for our ITE and Polytechnic students, it will help our students explore this even more deeply.

We will, over time, develop a seamless integration across our schools and IHLs to help students learn the right thing at the right time, while encouraging them to explore their strengths and discover the opportunities out there for them to deploy their strengths fully.

I appreciate Ms Denise Phua's point yesterday that we must have porosity between the pathways. And, indeed, our aim is to create many pathways and facilitate and encourage interconnections among them. There will be multiple pathways with no dead ends.

Let me say a few words about applied learning. Earlier on, Mr Muhd Faisal Manap spoke about applied learning as the alternative to University education. As Senior Minister of State Indranee mentioned in her opening speech, it is not. It is not one or the other. In fact, applied learning will be a key feature of our fifth University – the Singapore Institute of Technology (SIT) and the degree programmes at UniSIM.

Page: 67

In fact, our existing Universities are all developing applied learning in some ways. The learning is two-way. It is not just the Polytechnics and ITEs learning from what the Universities are doing but, in fact, the Universities are also learning what the Polytechnics and ITEs are doing. I think this is a very healthy interchange.

I see the integration of theoretical and applied running throughout our education system, not just in the Polytechnics or ITEs, because this sets the foundation for future learning. So, the first action area is to learn at every stage, at every stage of our learning journey for life.

The second area is to learn in every way, to embrace and encourage lifelong learning. Learning must not stop when we leave school. In fact, the more reflective we are, the more we turn each day into a learning day, and the more we can learn from everyone we meet or work with. When we share our learning experience, the wiser we get.

I have been very amazed at how many teachers and professors in the universities tell me how much they are learning every day from their students. These are reflective teachers, that when they reflect on how they do the lessons, whether they do it well, when they encourage students to express their views, they, too, learn from the students. We must have this habit of learning in every way. We must sow the seeds of lifelong learning in our students when they are in school.

Beyond school, we must make learning real, relevant and meaningful. Many lecturers create simulated situations to help students learn in a real-life manner. These are useful but nothing is more real than the workplace. Great employers understand this and have plans to help staff learn the real stuff, the relevant stuff. We will work with employers to turn workplaces into great learning places, to help every Singaporean build deep skills that matter.

Earlier on, Mr Thomas Chua spoke about SMEs. Indeed, we will work with SMEs, whether as individual organisations or as an association. Let me share a very inspiring story. I recently met a Polytechnic student at the National Day Rally who designed our ASPIRE logo. He had just graduated from the Polytechnic and I asked him what he was doing. He had started work with a company, very similar work to what he was taught in the Polytechnic and he is a very talented designer. It was a small company. So, I asked him, "What was the biggest difference between studying in the Polytechnic and now doing the work?" He said, "Well, the difference is that in the Polytechnic, I do one project for the term. Here, I have 10 projects anytime". So, it is extremely challenging, but he said it is also an extremely rich learning experience and that because of this variety of work, he learns such a variety of skills because every client has a different need. He gets to understand the needs of the whole

Page: 68

spectrum of clients and his learning curve is steep, but so is his learning.

So, companies, big or small, can play a very important role. In fact, I find this story of this Polytechnic student very inspiring, that he wants to apply what he has learnt and he is doing it really well.

Beyond the workplace, let us have many more ways of learning, including online learning. Earlier this year, I was at Silicon Valley to look at what the Americans are doing on online learning. I see that there are some very important areas that we have to pick up and that we have to learn. We will have to make a concerted effort in this area. At the same time, as Mr Heng Chee How pointed out earlier on, the unions have also been playing a very important role in working with companies, and in creating their own learning institutions, e2i and so on. We will support all these efforts and work together on these.

The first area is about learning at every stage. The second is about learning in every way. The third area is about respecting everyone, developing a culture of respect and recognition in Singapore. It is to respect that we all have different talents and every job deserves respect. Mr Lim Biow Chuan mentioned this earlier today; so did Mr Zaqy Mohamed yesterday and several other Members. I am glad to say that we are putting a renewed emphasis in this area.

Our Values in Action programme in our schools seek to do precisely better. I am very happy to see our students showing great respect, be it for cleaners in the schools and taking on cleaning duties themselves in order to understand and appreciate that this is hard work and it is work worthy of respect. I agree with Er Dr Lee Bee Wah that we must not frighten our kids and say, "If you don't study hard, you will end up doing certain kinds of jobs."

Employers are very important. I hope that employers recognise performance, not just paper qualifications. By recognising performance, we expand the space for staff to learn, to innovate, to contribute and to encourage them to learn the relevant skills and apply these in their daily job. I agree with Mr Lim Biow Chuan that we need to look for ways to enlarge jobs and that this is how we can create the virtuous cycle that Mr Heng Chee How spoke about – the higher skills, higher job content, higher salary, higher productivity, higher competitiveness – everyone benefits. So, Madam, every stage, every way, everyone. May I say a few words in Mandarin, please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Some people believe that only through having good qualifications can one find a good job and do well in life. Others believe that one does not need any qualifications. These are all limiting beliefs that we need to break through. Therefore, the objective of ASPIRE is for us to break away from our customary thinking about qualifications, career and opportunities. There are three breakthroughs that

Page: 69

we seek.

The first is to go beyond qualifications to recognise the attitude, deep skills, knowledge and experience that enable us to perform and excel.

The second is to go beyond the classroom to learn continuously, recognise the value of applied learning and lifelong learning, and make the workplace a learning place. This is where employers play an important role in developing people.

The third is to go beyond narrow definitions of success to recognise that everyone excels at different things, in different ways, and that we can all excel if we apply our minds, hands and hearts to what we do.

None of these breakthroughs devalues some qualifications over others. It is not about one kind of qualification versus another. It is about creating more opportunities, opening up more pathways so that everyone can excel and succeed.

This leads to three action areas.

First, Learn at Every Stage – allow Singaporeans to continue learning in a seamless way from schools to institutions of higher learning and to the workplace. Our education system must provide a broad and deep foundation for life and lifelong learning. ASPIRE's recommendations take our good practices forward through Education and Career Guidance and by deepening the structured internships and Applied Learning opportunities.

Second, Learn in Every Way – embrace and encourage lifelong learning. The workplace is the best place for us to learn in real life. We will work with employers to turn workplaces into the best learning places so that everyone can continue with their lifelong learning and benefit from it.

Third, Respect Everyone – to build a culture of respect and recognition in Singapore. Everyone has different talents and every job deserves respect. We recognise performance, not just paper qualifications.

Every Stage, Every Way and Everyone. Through multiple pathways, we ensure that everyone does his best in school and in the workplace, has a passion for learning, and continuously upgrades his skills. They should be able to learn and apply their knowledge in a flexible way and benefit from their learning throughout their life. At the same time, they

Page: 70

should love what they do and strive for excellence in the workplace.

(In English): Madam, to conclude, I addressed three limiting beliefs that hold us back from realising our full potential. I talked about three important breakthroughs that ASPIRE makes. And I shared the three areas of action for us to break through our limiting beliefs. We must learn at every stage, learn in every way, respect everyone. These are not ideals, Madam. These are imperatives. We must not limit ourselves to some places, sometimes, some people over others. We must break through into every stage, every way, everyone.

The Government will work hard on "Learn at Every Stage" and "Learn in Every Way" together with employers, schools and families. To me, the most important part of all is "Respect Everyone". Because at the heart of the matter, it is not just about qualifications, not just about jobs, not just about economic growth. All of this is to create conditions for Singaporeans to pursue lives of meaning, achievement and joy – every one of us, regardless of our starting point.

So, I urge Members to give your robust support to this Motion. [Applause.]

Mdm Speaker, thank you for this opportunity to express my initial comments as a newly appointed Nominated Member of Parliament.

I thank Minister Heng for sharing his valuable imperatives. First of all, I would like to thank the Prime Minister for his commitment that "Singapore must always give our people full opportunities to achieve their potential and to give every Singaporean the confidence to shoot for the stars". I also wish to congratulate the ASPIRE Committee for the hard work done. I believe the ASPIRE recommendations have come in a timely manner, as our country's industry employers are experiencing a shortage of talent, especially at the technical mid-management level, and, as the recent #AskPMLee sessions noted, a degree of dissatisfaction amongst our nation's students. In this context, I am thus in full support of educational reform in the name of applicability and accessibility.

However, I believe that the conditions and context within which ASPIRE has come into being are indicative of greater cultural problems that go beyond the scope of this report and so need to be duly addressed.

Page: 71

I will first begin my speech with a statement of my support for the Motion, before moving on to a wider assessment of these cultural issues in greater detail.

As a qualified professional architect with over 25 years of experience in the building and construction industry, I can affirm that the skills-based approach of the ASPIRE recommendations has great industrial relevance, particularly in the field of architecture, which combines the need for scientific knowledge and artistic skills. Employers and industry professionals alike have noticed with frustration a steep decline in the value of craftsmanship amongst incoming batches of graduates.

The element of cultivated artisanship, of refining one's skills and priding oneself on it, has, indeed, taken a backseat in the relentless paper chase as professional success becomes increasingly defined by the number of degrees one holds.

Of course, employers, too, have a part to play in affecting this work climate, and we should, henceforth, be careful not to let such arbitrary degree bias affect our hiring decisions. The ASPIRE Committee's movement to instate benchmarks for hiring and progression with sector-specific standards should go some way towards alleviating this, though with any attempt at establishing universal criteria there must be room for nuance and flexibility.

ASPIRE can thus prove to be a turn in the tide: the mentorship and apprenticeship structure of the Place-and-Train programme will make strides in the development of our students' experiential wisdom, as they spend the sector-specific amount of time working with and building the necessary interpersonal relationships with industry professionals, which will effectively become important stepping stones in their careers ahead. Students receive the learning opportunities and valuable face time with future employers that can only come through on-the-ground experience, and their skills are put to good practical training with the promise of equitable remunerations.

The resulting collaboration and dialogue between school and industry foster a synergy that not only provides our country's employers with a competent and well-suited workforce, but also ensures our students undergo a first-hand understanding of their prospective professions that they might not have sought for otherwise, and I believe such training is a necessary part of the preparatory curriculum.

It is with this spirit that I look forward to the implementation of the aforementioned recommendation. At the same time, I believe that this bid to strengthen our country's skills-based education will not grow in opposition to but, in fact, will inspire similar initiatives in the Humanities and the Arts. For while we equip our students with the skills needed for industry, our education system is also responsible for their growth and development as self-

Page: 72

fulfilled adult individuals, which I believe cannot happen without a firm grounding in or at least personal acquaintance with the Humanities and the Arts.

Arts and culture in Singapore are often framed outside of civic engagement or even more meaningful productive activity and any attention paid to them is usually, as in the case with most urban politics, expressed within the conversation of attracting tourism and economic development, rather than creative self-expression or self-fulfilment. This tendency for Singaporeans to distill everything into its pragmatic value has suffocated the intellectual and artistic capacities of our youth: the fact that the motivation for tertiary education can be so easily abbreviated into a degree chase for higher professional salaries instead of a personal thirst for knowledge is one such indicator of this trend. The loss of craftsmanship I mentioned earlier is, in fact, reflective of a deeper societal attitude that needs to be worked on.

Our students are people before they are commodities in the labour market. Madam, we need to see every child as an individual with their own talents and gifts and the entitlement to an individualised education that goes beyond simple behavioural modification to comply to a particular set of industry norms. This will be the first step towards inculcating a broader curiosity in the world, so that our students realise their own gifts and develop a sense of purpose and willingness to work towards the mastery of these gifts.

The ASPIRE report briefly touches upon the emotional development of the students but only nominally and the recommendations seem to go the way of token gestures by HR departments to create "better working environments" without doing anything substantial. Personal growth goes beyond financial support and a hotline.

The so-called "soft skills" should also be the primary focus of ASPIRE, as well as the education initiatives to come. As such, we first have to eradicate the notion of arts and culture as deeply elitist, and place it at the centre of a holistic education. We need to create and foster cultural equity by providing equal opportunities for arts education and, hence, remove it from the ivory tower of cultural institutions, for it is through the Arts and Humanities that we can cultivate in our country's students an integration of the head, heart and hands, which is the essence of fruitful creativity.

Our ITE and Polytechnic students must not be made to feel that they do not deserve to develop creatively and artistically, or that their education simply stops at the quick acquisition of skills for future employment. There needs to be instilled in our students a sense of personal artistic actualisation, which cannot be achieved by ownership of a degree or diploma alone. A holistic education should activate the heart; it should build confidence and self-assurance in one's own unique creativity without using a school degree as a security

Page: 73

blanket. This self-motivated passion for utilising their artistic capacities will prove to be a key component to the success of ASPIRE, as the degree chase will fade away in the face of a personal drive towards mastery and a cultural conviction of an individual's skills as valuable in their own right.

There are already existing methodologies for holistic education we can learn from. Examples, such as Dr Howard Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences, which was elaborated earlier by my fellow colleague, Ms Denise Phua, or Daniel H Pinks' theory on what motivates us, where factors such as autonomy, mastery and purpose are proposed channels for better performance and personal satisfaction.

In order to achieve this shift in cultural attitudes, we need to re-examine our entire preschool, Primary school and Secondary school education. Teachers will need more training in developmental science, brain-based learning and the enhancement of their students' multiple intelligences. Apart from simply updating their skill sets, we need to prepare our kids for autonomous self-directed learning, a drive towards mastery and self-discipline for deep concentration.

Moving on from ASPIRE we will thus need to further investigate our country's stance on culture and creative production. We need to build broader definitions of who and what an artist can be in our society. The pursuit of artistry should not be viewed as a leisurely indulgence, or as counter-productive to professional and industrial excellence. For the cultural health of our society, Singaporeans will have to create an environment where art is valued for its own merit, so that our children no longer see artistry, craftsmanship, skilful mastery and self-expression as merely bad financial decisions.

The Government often sees our local arts scene as self-focused, constantly asking for support, while members of the artistic community often choose not to work through the redundancy of the Government bureaucracy and start their own community-based initiatives. There has to be more mutual support between these two entities: on the part of those in Government, we need to celebrate, not dismiss or criminalise, our grassroots artistry; we need to reconfigure how we handle the processing of permits and artistic access to the community's public spaces; and, most of all, we have to start promoting art as an asset for the city, so that we may become a flourishing democracy with a strong cultural centre.

At this point, Madam, it is important to recognise the nature of our demographic make-up as a population that is witnessing a rapid rise in our median age. In Singapore's fondness for everything new and everything fresh, we should not be neglecting a significant part of our population who continue to actively seek professional dynamism in their middle age and beyond. So, while I commend the ASPIRE Committee's due diligence to ensure the sustainability of these skills-training programmes post-graduation, we need to make sure

Page: 74

that the same opportunities and support are accessible and affordable to all ages.

Lifelong learning is a process and a journey. I am, indeed, heartened to note that a continuing education and training masterplan is in progress, as mentioned by Senior Minister of State Ms Indranee. I believe that there must not be an age limit to the acquisition of knowledge and skills. What is especially important is the need to encourage and facilitate those in their mid-careers to have access to such facilities without having to sacrifice their careers just to acquire additional expertise.

There seems to be an ageist partiality that is pervasive throughout our society's attitude towards our older citizens, and it is something we should be consciously working to change for the better. As the official retirement age inches upwards from 62 to 65, we are hence tasked with helping more and more of our older citizens maintain and assert their cultural-economic relevance.

Our cultural infrastructure has to keep up with the developments in our country's physical infrastructure: efforts by the Building Construction Authority to achieve greater public mobility through the implementation of the universal design mark have greatly improved way-finding and navigation around our city, making it a friendlier place for all. On the part of the urban planning sector and the construction industry, we are determined to reconfigure our physical landscape in a way that is all-inclusive. Universal accessibility is a key spatial indicator of a progressive city. This concept should apply to all layers of our societal reform: we will need greater improvements in our country's physical, cultural and educational infrastructure in the name of accessibility, and we will need to move even faster to catch up with our citizens' demands and seize these new dimensions of economic opportunity.

Madam, I believe these internal shifts in culture will prove to be vital to the strengthening of our global representation, as Singapore and Singaporeans become increasingly dominant players internationally. The implementation of the ASPIRE recommendations itself will be a big step forward: instead of seeking foreign validation and certification of our abilities, our students will find enough assurance in the competitiveness of their own local training to confidently step forward as highly skilled professionals in the international arena. This will be especially relevant as local companies seek to assert a greater and bigger presence in the region and beyond.

And so, I stand with Minister Heng Swee Keat and Senior Minister of State Indranee Rajah in support of the Motion, and I look forward to more holistic reforms on our country's education front.

Page: 75

Thank you, Mdm Speaker, for this opportunity – my first to speak in the House. Mdm Speaker, I would like to speak in support of the Motion. I would like to provide my interpretation of the role the ASPIRE Committee's recommendations play in our economic restructuring by identifying three of its underlying implications.

Singapore has enjoyed half a century of sustained jobs growth with steady resumption of employment growth after each downturn. The longer this continues without interruption, the greater the danger of believing falsely that we are specially endowed with recovery abilities denied to other countries, all too familiar with widespread joblessness.

Recoveries that our labour market has been able to stage arise from nothing more than a basic philosophy imbued in our workers that productive workers and successful companies work together to create jobs.

Madam, the ASPIRE recommendations are a responsible and necessary step forward. More importantly, what they do is to reiterate this guiding philosophy. We must approach the implementation realistically without expecting a panacean change because the experiences of other countries make it clear that there are difficult challenges to be confronted. We should continue to bear in mind the circumstances within which Singapore's economy is required to operate.

Mdm Speaker, please allow me to elaborate on the implications before I describe some practical concerns which I believe would have to be addressed in implementing the recommendations.

First, I see the recommendations as recognising that knowledge penetration in the economy can occur through both academic excellence as well as accumulated experience, and by degree holders as well as non-degree holders.

I would argue that the ASPIRE Committee has not gone out of its way to dispel well-established notions about the importance of University degrees. Its recommendations also do not constitute a challenge about the importance of University education. The fact is that degree holders and degree aspirants should not need anyone to argue on their behalf. Instead, what I see is a warning against leaving our students unprepared for the rigours of the workplace that is set to become more and more competitive over time.

Page: 76

The ASPIRE report recognises that the ultimate aim, regardless of whether an academic pathway or an applied pathway is taken, is to equip students to make an impactful and fulfilling contribution before they enter the workforce. Being fully prepared for the workplace is the key, and the reality is that, given the right vocational training, some of our students will likely enjoy an equally, if not more, rewarding career over their University-trained counterparts.

On the other hand, students who rush headlong and unprepared into a University degree without taking time to decide on what is most suited to their aptitude and inclination may not achieve their full potential, and may actually fall behind their vocationally-trained counterparts. There is growing concern about this, not just here in Singapore, but many advanced industrialised countries as well.

In Singapore, the statistics on the labour market performance of degree holders already contain some warning signs. For example, resident degree holders are the only group with a re-employment rate that falls below 50%. What this means is a majority of residents succeed in gaining re-employment after losing a job, except for degree holders. This is why it is important to work with students on applied pathways to help them to understand that merely getting a degree does not place them at the leading edge in the competition for good jobs.

Secondly, ASPIRE also addresses key economic vulnerabilities which could be attributed to our size limitations. Our size limitations prevent us from relying heavily on foreign manpower. However, in the transition to more self-reliance, we have to be careful not to end up in a precarious position which compromises our economic competitiveness, especially when it comes to employment creation.

The Singapore economy has developed to a stage where further progress depends on access to manpower with deeper sets of skills and a broader range of capabilities than the resident workforce alone at the present stage can supply. Without freer access to foreign manpower, the economy's manpower needs cannot be satisfied by depending on education and training through the academic pathway alone.

Driven by their bottom line, employers have to be very discerning when it comes to skills. The voracious hiring appetite over the last decade or so had been caused by employers relying on manpower to increase their productive capacity. Choosing manpower instead of investment in new capital or technology when expanding the scale of production could be a sign that employers are uncertain about the appropriate entry point they should make into new technology. Some of this could be signs of a persistent shortage of skilled manpower, which could explain why some employers are blaming the tight labour market for forcing

Page: 77

them to curtail expansion plans.

Regardless of the opinion one holds about our reliance on foreign manpower to make up these gaps, the fact remains that there has been a significant numerical shortfall in the availability of local manpower to meet the needs of our economy. For example, unemployed degree holders number only about one-tenth the number of Employment Pass holders. You would need to integrate all economically inactive residents with at least diploma qualifications before you match the Employment Pass numbers we now have, something that is clearly impossible. This is what I interpret the emphasis of ASPIRE on broader and deeper skills to mean: our resident workforce must broaden and deepen its skillsets and have the range to cover more positions as we continue towards further labour market tightening.

Hence, I am particularly encouraged by the ASPIRE recommendations for a Place-and-Train scheme to improve the ability of new entrants to the workforce to meet employer needs. This brings employers into the picture earlier and involves them in the training process. In order for Singapore to have a more secure manpower policy that does not involve excessive reliance on foreign manpower, we need to build up the technical and academic skills of our workforce.

The recommendations delivered in 2012 by the Committee of University Education Pathways Beyond 2015 (CUEP) put us on a path to seeing half of each cohort achieving a Government-subsidised degree education by 2020. However, even if we were at that level of cohort participation now, it would be insufficient for the economy we have managed to create.

We already have an existing ITE and Polytechnic education infrastructure that is performing well, but the excess demand for graduates could be attracting more of these graduates to go for a degree without them first making a distinction about whether the prospects they gain will result in an improvement in their employability and their long-term ability to contribute to the economy. The ASPIRE recommendations fill that gap.

The emphasis on alignment with employer needs will enable ITE and Polytechnic graduates to gain a first-hand understanding of what is valued at the workplace. This will help them to inform their choices should they decide to invest further valuable resources into pursuing education.

Preserving the capacity of the Singapore economy to create jobs is what I see to be the third and most important implication of the ASPIRE recommendations.

Page: 78

The process of job creation does not easily lend itself to policy fine-tuning. If it did, you would not see the massive rates of unemployment many OECD economies have been struck by since the great recession. For some time now, we have been constantly reminded of the lengths to which these economies have had to resort to address their unemployment woes, as observers guess at the chaos that could accompany the withdrawal of Quantitative Easing. As we move to moderate the pace at which jobs are being generated by the Singapore economy, we have to be careful to avoid severely impairing the job creation process. Once it is impaired, even literally throwing money at it may not even work.

The situation is not, I believe, catastrophic, but we cannot ignore the fact that after four years of increase in foreign worker levies and tightened quotas, some businesses have been squeezed hard. Hence, being responsive to the needs of businesses when it comes to the shortfalls they experience in manpower supply is important. When employers can rely on well-trained, highly skilled, reliable workers, they have the confidence to invest in better equipment and technology. This produces a virtuous cycle which leads to better productivity performance and, in turn, encourages further job creation. The economy as a whole benefits from the improved competitiveness. This is the celebrated achievement of Germany's model which has attracted worldwide admiration.

But we cannot understate the difficulties of implementation. We will face them and we should set in place performance monitoring and quality assurance systems to detect and handle them.

Countries mentioned in the ASPIRE report have agencies which spearhead research into and monitor the outcomes of their vocational training programmes. Such monitoring has revealed issues, such as a lack of interest from students in certain occupations, poor completion rates and insufficient training positions provided by companies. The effectiveness with which such issues can be dealt with will improve with early detection.

Unlike Germany, we have not had the type of relationship between employers and trainees which recognises the latter's future value to the company they train in. This trade-off would affect whether employers decide to take trainees under their wing. Without a longer term association between the trainees and their host companies, if you see trainees moving from one company to another because of relationship issues, the costs will mount and could outweigh the benefits for the companies involved.

In addition to getting employers to support and participate in the scheme, we will need qualified trainers within the participating companies. Other countries who have considered adopting Germany's model, have discovered that this key ingredient – the close relationship between its employers and training providers – was not something that they could easily replicate. Despite its highly celebrated status now, Germany's apprenticeship scheme has

Page: 79

also seen its share of ups and downs. In the early 2000s, for example, Germany was stung by criticism over the poor performance of its students in international PISA assessments. Throughout, it was this solid arrangement of having a tradition of qualified trainers that saw it through.