Hansard, Wednesday, 28 February 2024

1 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Education in each year from 2017 to 2023 (a) how many international students who received the MOE Tuition Grant graduated from local Institutes of Higher Learning; (b) how many failed to update the Ministry of their employment status with Singapore entities within (i) one year (ii) two years or (iii) three years of graduation; and (c) what are the most common reasons cited for being unable to find work in Singapore entities.

2 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Education in each year from 2017 to 2023 (a) how many international students who received the MOE Tuition Grant applied for bond deferments due to their inability to find work in a Singapore entity; and (b) how many were granted bond deferments on that basis.

Mr Speaker, may I have your permission to take Question Nos 1 and 2 together?

Please proceed.

From 2017 to 2023, on average, about 2,900 international students who received the Tuition Grant graduate each year from our polytechnics and autonomous universities. Within the first three years of graduating, more than eight in 10 are employed. Of the remainder, the majority are granted deferment for further studies.

Mr Giam.

Sir, I do not think the Minister of State answered my question about how many students have not fulfilled the conditions for the tuition grant, including getting local employment. Is that something the Ministry is pursuing?

Mr Speaker, from 2017 to 2023, we were not informed of the employment status in the first three years after graduation for about 5% of the international students who receive the tuition grant. We take the bond obligations of the international students on tuition grants seriously and we will pursue the international students who default on their obligations.

Can the Minister of State explained how exactly the Ministry pursues these students who do not fulfil their tuition grant obligations?

For those who fail to pay the liquidated damages, actions will be taken to prevent them from working or residing in Singapore. As I had explained earlier on, there is a serious view taken by the Ministry towards the obligations of these international students who have taken tuition grants.

Mr Giam.

Just one more clarification on that point. The Minister of State said actions will be taken to prevent them from working in Singapore. But is it not that one of the requirements of the tuition grants is for them to work in Singapore for three years after they graduate? So, is there any other measures that the Ministry takes to ensure that they pay back what they are supposed to pay back?

For the individuals who fail to honour their obligations for the tuition grants, we do look at the reasons. Some of them cite genuine reasons such as health and that they find could not employment in Singapore. In those cases, we will ask them to pay the liquidated damages.

As I have said earlier on, majority of deferments that were sought were based on the international students' request for further studies. Not that they do not want to find employment, but they want to pursue further studies. For such cases, they will find employment after they have completed their further studies.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.

Could I just check with the Minister of State two things? First, what is the breakeven in terms of taxpayers' subsidies for the number of years if one of these students were to stay in Singapore and work, in terms of, perhaps, what they return in tax revenues and the like, that would be taken from them when they work here.

Secondly, if the Ministry would clarify what the overall motivation is for providing these tuition grants – is it limited purely to providing a source of manpower or is there some soft power considerations that are also included?

For the first supplementary question, I do not have the answer off-hand. I ask the Member to file another Parliamentary Question.

For the second one, having international students adds to the diversity of the overall education experience of our students and cultivates our students' sense of global orientation and ability to understand cultural practices across different nations. I think this is a healthy development and we want to encourage our students to be widely exposed to students of other nationalities.

Dr Tan Wu Meng.

I thank the Minister of State for her answer and the other Members for their supplementary questions. Can I ask two supplementary questions to the Minister of State?

Firstly, if not already done so, would the Ministry of Education (MOE) consider working with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) to have a sense of how many former MOE Tuition Grant recipients progress to provincial, regional or national leadership of their home countries in the years following their education journey in Singapore, in the Singapore system while making Singaporean friends?

Secondly, does MOE wish to consider working with the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) and the Economic Development Board to see whether some of these tuition grant recipients in the years and decades ahead grow to become leaders of firms doing substantial business with Singapore?

I thank the hon Member Dr Tan Wu Meng for the two supplementary questions. The answer must be yes. In fact, we do know of international students who previously were on tuition grant in Singapore having actually moved up and moved on to very successful careers within their countries and also regionally. And certainly, this also augurs well for our economy because they stay connected, they understand Singapore's culture, and they do have friends and their networks built in Singapore while they were students here. So, there is definitely benefit in this regard and we will certainly be interested to find the information.

3 Ms Yeo Wan Ling asked the Minister for Communications and Information given that online advertisements on social media platforms are easily uploaded by individuals based on the social media platforms' rules of engagement, what are the safeguards that the Ministry has put in place to ensure that these rules of engagement are relevant and in line with local regulations and best practices.

Sir, commercial advertising in Singapore is regulated by the Advertising Standards Authority of Singapore (ASAS) through the Singapore Code of Advertising Practice (SCAP).

The SCAP applies to all advertisements for any goods and services appearing in any form or any media, including on social media services. It stipulates that all advertisements should be legal, decent, honest and truthful. ASAS’ Guidelines on Interactive Marketing Communication and Social Media further set out the standards of ethical conduct that are to be adopted by marketers, advertising agencies or media that are involved in social media marketing. Marketers are also expected to familiarise themselves with the relevant laws and guidelines on each social media service. ASAS adopts a complaints-based approach in reviewing potential advertising breaches when reported to them and can get advertisers to amend or withdraw advertisements that are deemed to have breached the Guidelines or SCAP.

Designated social media services with significant reach or impact are also required under the Code of Practice for Online Safety issued by the Infocomm Media Development Authority to minimise users’ exposure to harmful content. This includes putting in place specific measures to protect children, such as ensuring that children do not receive targeted advertisements detrimental to their physical or mental well-being. The designated social media services are Facebook, HardwareZone, Instagram, TikTok, X and YouTube.

Ms Yeo.

It has been observed that the process is much easier for individuals and companies to put up their advertisements on social media platforms, given that many of such platforms encourage boosting or ad buying proactively to their users. It is unclear what these social media platforms do to verify the content of these ads. In a recent case, a water purification company made certain arguably uninformed claims about the safety of Singapore tap water. The Public Utilities Board has since issued advisories for that. There has been other cases of companies who have also done similar things.

Are there regular proactive dialogues the Ministry of Communications and Information holds with these popular social media platforms on their ad rules and what more can be done to advise companies and individuals on responsible advertising claims? Can we work on a local advisory notice embedded on social media platforms before and ad is triggered?

As I mentioned earlier my main reply, commercial advertising in Singapore, like the one that Ms Yeo had referred to, is regulated by the ASAS and the ASAS is established under the Consumer Association of Singapore.

At the heart of matter that Ms Yeo had raised is whether the advertisement meets the threshold or stipulation that is legal, decent, honest and truthful, and whether the parties like the marketeers, the advertisers and the media involved in displaying, presenting or putting in place the advertisements, meet the standards of ethical behaviour, ethical conduct. These are all the guidelines stimulated by the advertising council.

So, what is the recourse if somebody believes that an advertisement breaches some of these stipulations or code of ethical conduct? ASAS takes a complaints approach. When ASAS receives the complaint, it will first advise the advertiser to amend the advertisement. There are direct financial costs to such amendments. Sometimes, they are reputational costs because of the publicity given to the advertisement. Therefore, making a false or misleading claim about products and services may also constitute an unfair trade practice under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act, or CPFTA.

Recalcitrant companies could be referred to the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore, or CCCS, for investigation. And errant companies may be issued injunction orders by the Court. If a company under injunction does not comply with the injunction order, CCCS can take the advertiser to court for contempt of court, which is a criminal offence that could result in a fine or imprisonment.

4 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Health (a) whether the Ministry will consider reviewing the Healthcare Services Act 2020 to enhance the recognition and regulation of mental health professionals, such as registered psychologists, to reflect the growing need for accessible mental healthcare services; and (b) whether the review can include allowing mental health professionals to use the terms "doctors" and "treatment" under ethical guidelines and within their scope of practice to encourage people to seek treatment for mental health conditions.

Mr Speaker, Sir, psychological practice is evolving given the increasing importance of mental health and encompasses diverse fields with their own unique patient safety concerns. The Ministry of Health (MOH) is working with agencies, service providers and professional associations to update the risk assessment. This includes determining if there is a need for registration of psychologists to better support the safety and quality of the practice.

The advertising controls under the Healthcare Services Act, or HCSA, were put in place to provide greater transparency and protect consumers from being misled by healthcare advertisements which misrepresent the services provided. The restrictions on the use of the term “treat” applies to all non-HCSA licensees, and not just standalone psychology service providers. Likewise, the protection of the title “doctor” applies to all non-registered healthcare practitioners and not just clinical psychologists. MOH is presently engaging with the psychologists and their association to clarify the proper use of these terms.

Mr Yip.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Senior Minister of State for the reply. Given the growing importance of mental health professionals, will MOH consider expanding the role of such professionals, such as psychologists, beyond direct patient care, such as allowing them to participate in policy development or research initiatives?

Sir, I thank Mr Yip for his question. The current licensing and regulatory structure, as well as any potential review, does not in any way change the possibility for these professionals to be involved in policy development or for them to be involved in research. So, the issues are to do with consumer protection, regulation of clinical practice. Today, Allied Health Professionals, including psychologists and other healthcare professionals can and do participate in policy development – some of them are employed directly through MOH or some of its entities, some of them come and sit on our panels and our consultative entities and they already participate in research. And the protections around research are afforded by the academic institutions as well as the funding bodies that are supporting the research and none of that should change on the basis of the review that we are conducting, which, as I said, is focused on consumer protection and clinical practice.

5 Mr Gerald Giam Yean Song asked the Minister for Sustainability and the Environment (a) in the last 10 years, how many street hawking licences have been issued for streetside ice-cream vendors; (b) how many of these vendors are still active today; (c) whether the licences from the inactive vendors may be transferred to new applicants; and (d) how much longer will streetside ice-cream vendors be allowed to exist.

The Street Hawking Scheme is intended to provide temporary assistance for unemployed individuals who are assessed to be best supported through a street hawking licence, rather than other financial assistance or employment matching schemes offered by a Social Service Office. All street hawking licences are therefore personal-to-holder and are non-transferable.

In the past decade, 21 licences were issued under the Street Hawking Scheme for the sale of ice cream. Of these, 11 remained active as of January this year.

Mr Giam.

I thank the Senior Minister of State for his reply. I understand that street hawking licence cost about $120 a year. Can I ask the Senior Minister of State what is the rational for this quantum because it is a considerable amount for some low-income hawkers and can the Ministry consider lowering it? And secondly, what is the actual eligibility criteria for these licences? Are they only given to those who are financially needy?

Sir, I think the first question on the $120 per year – this is really on a cost-recovery basis for administration. It is not really to make life hard for these hawkers because there is enforcement needed and there are also licensing requirements and the administration that needs to be done.

On the eligibility, as I said in my main reply, the consideration is based on the fact that these people are not suitable for other forms of employment, or it is assessed by the Social Service Office as the most appropriate means to help them tide over a temporary period. But the longer-term intent, is for them to enter a good job where there are better job prospects. So, in the meantime, this is a temporary measure to help them tide over a rough patch.

Mr Giam.

Sir, on a separate point: does the Ministry see any cultural value in street hawking? For example, ice cream sellers. It is something that is part of our shared heritage and something that we all remember from when we were growing up. Is that something that the Ministry will consider letting to continue or even grow besides providing just a financial support for these hawkers?

Sir, I thank Mr Giam for his question. I think the fundamental question is this: for a person who may be in financial need, the first question we ask ourselves is, "What is the best way to support them for longer-term financial stability?"

In present day Singapore, we do have hawker centres and we are building more hawker centres. For those who want to take on hawking as a longer-term job that they want to do, it probably will be better for them to be in a hawker centre where there are better facilities and for them to have a more fixed customer catchment.

Having said that, it is true that ice cream at certain locations can help to liven up the place. This is where if there are funfairs or there are trade fairs, there are still people who are then given licences to participate in trade fairs to add to the festivity. But I would say that, fundamentally, the first question is to see how best we can help them to find a better career, where there are better job prospects for the longer term, and career stability.

6 Mr Yip Hon Weng asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in light of the ongoing challenges in China's property sector and current economic uncertainties (a) whether the Ministry foresees increased trade opportunities for ASEAN countries, including Singapore, with China; and (b) how is the Ministry supporting Singaporean businesses to navigate these changing economic circumstances in the region.

Mr Speaker, Sir, China remains a vital key market for Singapore businesses. In 2023, China was Singapore's largest trading partner and top investment destination. China's long-term economic outlook remains positive due to its large and growing consumer market, skilled workforce and rapid technological developments.

To tap into the opportunities in China, Singapore has upgraded the Singapore-China Free Trade Agreement (FTA) to offer companies better market access for investments and services. We have also broadened our engagements with China, including signing memoranda of understanding (MOUs) on Digital Economy, Green Economy and E-Commerce Cooperation.

In addition, Singapore is strengthening its regional economic integration with China through the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and the ASEAN-China Free Trade Area, the upgrade of which is currently under negotiation.

To navigate the evolving business environment and seize fresh opportunities, Singapore firms can tap on Enterprise Singapore's extensive network of overseas centres and the two Singapore Enterprise Centres in Shanghai and Chengdu operated by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry under the Global Connect initiative. In addition, Enterprise Singapore manages schemes, such as the Market Readiness Assistance grant, which helps our companies expand into new markets by defraying the costs of overseas market promotion, business development and set up. Business owners can also visit the GoBusiness portal for more information on the Government schemes.

Mr Yip.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank the Minister of State for her reply. Can the Minister of State elaborate on emerging opportunities that the recent Joint Council for Bilateral Cooperation (JCBC) meeting has opened up for Singapore companies? Which areas of growth potential have been identified by the leaders; for example, digital economy?

Thank you, Sir. I want to thank the Member Mr Yip Hon Weng for his two supplementary questions. Singapore and China are long-standing partners. Our bilateral ties are anchored on very frequent high-level exchanges, growing people-to-people ties and robust economic ties. I recall just last year alone, I mounted about seven work trips to China – some in support of Singapore Business Federation (SBF), bringing delegation of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to the 东博会, which is the China-ASEAN Expo in September. I recall SBF also led a huge delegation for 进博会, which is the Chinese International Import Expo (CIIE) in November.

Members in the House will recall, about one year ago, during Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong's visit to China in March – first to Hainan and then to Beijing; both him and President Xi Jinping announced the upgrade in bilateral relations to an "all-around, high-quality, future-oriented partnership". In Mandarin, "全方位高质量的前瞻性的伙伴关系."

On the first supplementary question about the recent JCBC, which took place about three months ago, in the first week of December, Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong brought a huge delegation. I had the privilege to join him in this delegation as well. He co-chaired the 19th meeting of the Joint Council for Bilateral Cooperation (JCBC) with China's Vice-Premier Ding Xuexiang. And during the JCBC meeting, we welcomed 24 deliverables, covering various areas: trade, renewable energy, environment, connectivity, finance, digital economy – cited by Mr Yip – and people-to-people exchanges.

All these deliverables offer fresh opportunities and will support our businesses and create more jobs for our people.

The Member asked about the digital economy. Allow me to elaborate how the digital economy will be a potential driver, key driver of grow for Singapore companies looking at the China market. China's digital economy is indeed the world's second largest and has nurtured many innovative companies. At the same time, Singapore's digital economy is also very significant and we have experienced substantial growth in recent years. For example, in 2022, our digital economy contributed 17.3% of Singapore's gross domestic product (GDP).

On the Member's second supplementary question on the digital economy, I recall that the Minister for Trade and Industry Mr Gan Kim Yong signed an MOU on digital economy with China's Minister of Commerce Mr Wang Wentao, 商务部部长, 王文涛部长. Both leaders have signed it and launched a digital economy working group to strengthen the cooperation in digital trade and data flows.

Other than the digital economy, another potential area is the green economy. On the green economy, we see that China and Singapore can cooperate on areas of complementary interests, including green trade, green investment, green services, renewable energy and carbon markets.

Assoc Prof Jamus Lim.

Sir, in addition to the importance of China as an important bilateral trading partner, I am sure the Minister of State is also aware of how the United States (US) is also a significant investor and bilateral trading partner for Singapore.

In light of the possibility that there is a non-trivial chance of increased trade tensions and commercial tensions – between the US and China, how does the Ministry plan to advise Singapore businesses in how they manage their relationships and investments in China? I say this especially, since the US seems increasingly willing to exercise the tools of economic statecraft on their trading partners.

Mr Speaker, I want to thank the Member Assoc Prof Jamus Lim for his question. We want to say that despite the current economic uncertainties and increasingly challenging trade environment, what we want to share with our Singapore companies is: businesses should continue to seek opportunities, in particular, regionally, in a few areas. Specific areas of growing demand, specific technologies and also areas with upside potential.

China is facing challenges, as it was also mentioned in Mr Yip's Parliamentary Question, but it is also expected to be a major engine of growth, given its large and growing consumer market, its increasingly very-skilled workforce and also rapid technological development. Enterprise Singapore has a very extensive network and when I last looked at the numbers, we have about 37 overseas centres in 21 cities. [Please refer to "Clarification by Minister of State for Trade and Industry", Official Report, 28 February 2024, Vol 95, Issue 126, Correction By Written Statement section.]

All hands are on deck to support our companies, whether they are looking into expanding regionally, including into China, India or into US and Europe; or even into far-flung areas, like Africa and the Middle East.

The following question stood in the name of Ms See Jinli Jean –

7 To ask the Minister for Health for each year over the last three years (a) what is the number of mid-career entrants who took up non-nursing roles at senior or ageing care facilities via Government-funded career programmes; (b) what is the retention rate of the mid-career entrants; and (c) what measures will the Ministry be introducing to improve the retention rate.

Question No 7, please.

Mr Speaker, between 2021 and 2023, about 1,400 individuals joined the community care sector in non-nursing jobs every year, including through schemes, such as the Community Care Manpower Development Award and the Senior Management Associate Scheme, for the training and induction of mid-career entrants into management positions.

We do not track the retention rate for this group. To retain staff, the Ministry of Health (MOH) and Agency for Integrated Care (AIC) have been working with community care organisations to implement job redesign, enhance the competitiveness of community care staff salaries and recently published salary guidelines which would help inform job seekers on the expected remuneration in community care roles.

Mr Pritam Singh, you have a supplementary question? Please go ahead.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I think the Prime Minister announced the expansion of Active Ageing Centres at his National Day Rally last year. And in view of what would be significant manpower requirements, is there a plan that the Ministry has to ramp up or mobilise this manpower and what sort of numbers are we looking at from the Ministry's standpoint?

I thank the Member for the question. Indeed, manpower is an aspect that we have been monitoring quite closely, especially as we transform the efforts in the healthcare sector, in particular, with ageing. Yesterday, we had also another discussion on the Allied Health Professionals. So, we are looking at the different sectors, the different services that we need to have in place and the different manpower.

With regard to the statistics, Sir, I do not have the data on hand. Perhaps the Member would want to file a separate Parliamentary Question on this.

The following question stood in the name of Mr Gan Thiam Poh –

8 To ask the Minister for Transport whether the Ministry will consider more bus services to be introduced for Fernvale in view of the increase in the number of HDB flats and the pending completion of the LRT system upgrade.

Question No 8.

Besides the Light Rail Transit, residents at Fernvale are currently served by bus services that connect them to the transport hub at Sengkang town centre and to other areas, like Ang Mo Kio, Serangoon, Upper Thomson and Yishun. Additionally, City Direct Service 671 provides a direct connection from Fernvale to and from the city during the morning and evening peak periods.

The Land Transport Authority makes enhancements to bus connectivity in tandem with new housing developments. For example, we adjusted the route of Service 102 and increased its capacity to serve the recently completed Fernvale Glades and Fernvale Woods Build-To-Order projects.

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

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

[(proc text) Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [16 February 2024] [3rd Allotted Day] (proc text)]

[(proc text) "That Parliament approves the financial policy of the Government for the financial year 1 April 2024 to 31 March 2025." – [Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance]. (proc text)]

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

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of Budget 2024. For Singapore to continue to prosper, we need our people to prosper. Every Budget brought forth in this House signals the Government's intent in tackling both challenges of today and seizing future opportunities for the people of Singapore.

Rising costs are an ever-present challenge globally and affect how we live in every way – from our kopi-peng to chicken rice, the transport we take to work to the way we are able to care for our loved ones. This year's Budget Speech, delivered by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence Wong, set out various measures focused on mitigating the immediate impact of rising costs on household finances.

These include the U-Save and Service and Conservancy Charges (S&CC) rebates and additional Community Development Council (CDC) vouchers – tactically deployed to help Singaporeans navigate higher prices of food and electricity amidst the backdrop of global inflation. Larger families – especially those with seniors and children – get more help.

I would like to make three key points in my speech: our shrinking populations lead to fragile economies and slower growth in standards of living; and as one of the fastest ageing societies in the world, the importance of upskilling our silver workforce – which cannot be understated; and the implications of a global war for talent, which is happening in an increasingly fractured world. This competition and confrontation of multilateralism can be damaging for us in Singapore.

Sir, in Budget 2023, the Government sowed the seeds for a Singapore built for families, such as the enhanced baby bonus. But even as we encourage marriages and families, we must also acknowledge the other factors contributing to our declining total fertility rate (TFR): stress and health conditions which affect fertility despite couples' best hopes, involuntary childlessness, inability to secure childcare options in line with parents' wishes, housing in estates far away from grandparents or workplaces, busy schedules which make it difficult for youth to date and lifestyle choices from younger men and women who choose to stay single.

But without people, Singapore cannot exist. Deputy Prime Minister has signalled the Government's clear intent in a Singapore built for families, however the effects of these policies are not immediate and our demographic challenges are pressing. We are not endowed with any natural advantages to fall back on, such as oil, vast land or precious metals. The only resource we have is our people; and so, we have to invest in our human capital. Beyond a shrinking population, we are also a rapidly ageing one and no amount of vouchers or rebates will ever be a sustainable way of lifting the standards of our people over a long period of time.

To this end, I am supportive of the boost given to the SkillsFuture Scheme to build an even better future for all. My husband recounted a conversation that he had with a taxi driver to me. Uncle asked where my husband was heading to – to which my husband replied he was heading to school. Uncle said, "Wah, this age, still going to school ah? Very good." My husband said, "Ya uncle, I'm studying part-time, must upgrade and learn new skills." Uncle replied, "But all these 'learn new skills' is for young people like you, not old people like me."

Being under 40, neither my husband nor I are eligible for the enhanced SkillsFuture subsidies or the akan datang top-ups. But uncle's perspective is shared by many of our older workers. Beginning again or learning something new after 20 or 30 years of working is not easy. I have shared in this House how proud I was of my parents, who had no choice after SARS to change course in their late 40s and 50s – my mum, from a homemaker to early childhood education. My dad, from more than 30 years in the airlines to a training company with his peers.

For this reason, I am heartened by Deputy Prime Minister Lawrence's commitment to focus efforts on the objective of upskilling our greying workforce. Sir, there are two broad ways to use SkillsFuture. The direct way is to acquire certification – leading to a new role. The less obvious route involves a journey into problem-solving and innovation. We sometimes associate SkillsFuture with mainly "jobs of the future" – from green sustainability, to coding and artificial intelligence (AI). But seemingly unrelated courses can benefit us too.

An illustration of this comes from the story of Apple. In 1972, Steve Jobs purportedly took a calligraphy class at Reed College – despite knowing that the class would earn him no credit towards a degree. He reportedly learnt about typefaces and varying the space between different letter combinations. I quote, "None of this had any hope of any practical application in my life. But 10 years later when we were designing the first Macintosh (Mac) computer, it all came back to me. And we designed it all into the Mac."

We ought to help citizens understand the application of SkillsFuture credits in this manner. The knowledge and skills acquired through any learning is catalytic for generating fresh ideas and solving challenges by drawing from diverse disciplines. This culture of continuous learning and curiosity is what will position ourselves as valuable assets.

We also need good public communication to support the mindset shifts required. An article published on Channel NewsAsia (CNA) on 8 September 2023, highlights issues around utilisation rates of SkillsFuture. The article noted that across all ages, seven in 10 people have not used the credits since it started in 2015. Diving into utilisation rates by age bands, we can make some observations: 16.8% from 25 to 29; 38.8% from 30 to 39; 38.6% from 40 to 49; 37.1% from 50 to 59; and 26.4% for those above 60.

Utilisation rate in the 40 to 49 band is a signal of hope and we must encourage this. The availability of the credit is one part of the puzzle. However, there are other considerations requiring a shift in attitudes and mindsets and flexibility in the employment ecosystem – families being willing to shoulder more caregiving responsibilities while one spends their evenings in class; enlightened employers providing employees the time-off to do so; and society being willing to support the gap in potential loss of income for gig economy workers.

According to the recent National Trades Union Congress (NTUC) Every Worker Matters Report, 77% of respondents felt they lacked the time to attend training. A separate 2021 study shared that this could be due to fatigue from work and other life commitments. We say "活到老, 学到老", but in order to effectively put this into practice we must also tackle system barriers, such as inflexible working hours – 55% of workers felt they lacked the support from their employers from self-initiated training. I am glad that the NTUC is championing these efforts.

Fundamentally, Singaporeans must know that SkillsFuture is an initiative that is more than chasing certificates. It is a pathway to empowerment and progress. I would like to inquire on the complementary measures the Government is taking to nudge the utilisation rates. I also worry whether these skilling efforts will see fast enough change and we must consider how to supplement our workforce with talent in a way that is integrated with our Singaporean values and that brings additionality to our people.

Sir, all this is amidst a backdrop of challenges to global multilateralism and greater competition. Protectionism is on the rise and we are seeing disquiet and unrest born from a lack of economic opportunities and inequities – US-China relations keep the world on tenterhooks; the war between Russia and Ukraine rages on; and the world feels the effects from the humanitarian tragedy and hostilities in Gaza due to the Israel-Palestine crisis, even as more call for a permanent ceasefire.

Yes, Singapore has worked hard and our reputation outsizes our 700 square kilometres or so. But in a world where bigger countries threaten to dominate due to might and size, smaller countries like Singapore must navigate these turbulent waves. Each move or statement we make comes with trade-offs we must think hard about. This is our reality.

And so, from the beginning, we have made it a point to emphasise rule of law, effective governance, balanced foreign relations amidst global tensions and staying open to the world. Singapore's ability to attract investment and have multinational corporations (MNCs) set up their regional headquarters here create jobs for our people. As of 2023, it is reported that the headquarters of 4,200 MNCs can be found here and is the base of choice for companies as a gateway to Asia, but we are starting to see signs of that trend being challenged.

In December 2023, Unilever announced its relocation of some roles based here to other markets across Asia. Earlier this month, Electrolux also confirmed the closure of its Singapore regional office and relocated to Bangkok. A 2023 survey by the European Chamber of Commerce found that "7 in 10 businesses indicated that they are ready to relocate their employees outside of Singapore if there are no relief from rising operating costs." When businesses leave, jobs leave too.

Further, other economies are competing. The UK recently launched the AI Futures Grant Scheme to attract AI researchers and engineers. Dubai has made a notable push for talent and investments through their D33 Economic Agenda and agile visa reforms. Closer to home, Malaysia initiated their 2030 National Industrial Master Plan and Indonesia launched the Golden Visa programme for high-quality investments.

There is a global war for talent and investments, and Singapore needs to be the hub for opportunities that attracts, but more importantly, builds and retains the talent to help our people to prosper. Sir, in Malay please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] Mr Speaker, in my English speech earlier, I touched on how fragile our position is in the world. As a country where 90% of our food is imported from other countries and where we have no natural resources of our own – we have been fortunate to be able to attract investments, create jobs and build good foreign relations to help our country transform into a successful nation. While our reputation on the world stage outsizes our small land mass, let us not forget that this is an unlikely anomaly.

But tall buildings and magnificent infrastructure alone would be nothing without peace and stability both internally and externally. We are a unique society with different faiths, races and backgrounds. As our people become more educated and their views grow more diverse, I would like to see more efforts through Forward SG to equip Singaporeans with the skills to have constructive and respectful discourses between the Government, private sector and our people; and the space to encourage effective ground-up changemaking.

Peace is not top-down, but instead must be supported by bottom-up efforts and must start from the young. I would like to suggest more partnerships and cross-sector efforts in particular for our youths – for example, programmes, such as the Model United Nations, involving students across both secular schools and madrasahs, building common experiences to enable our youths to work together and interactions to allow young adults to hear and exchange views as regional or global forums.

Secondly, I am grateful that the Government is setting aside $3.5 billion for the Age Well SG initiatives over the next decade. I am concerned about our seniors, especially those who have complex and chronic health needs. Obesity, diabetes, high-blood pressure – these are health conditions which threaten our quality of life. Through Healthier SG, I hope more can be done to encourage our seniors to go for regular health check-ups and connect with family doctors in their neighbourhood and more can be done early-on in their illness to prevent it from spiralling out of control and negatively impact healthy lifestyles.

This is particularly important for older women – the ones who have sacrificed so much. Many of them have been so busy looking after those around them, that they do not have time to look after themselves. We must do more to support the retirement adequacy and healthcare needs of older women and I would like to ask if the Government has considered nuancing the health schemes, given that many women have less CPF savings.

Beyond chronic health conditions, loneliness can have an adverse effect the lives of our elderly too. Recent studies suggest that social isolation was associated with around a 50% increased risk of dementia. I reiterate my calls for there to be targeted focus on mental well-being for our elderly and perhaps we can even take reference from the United Kingdom's Commission on Loneliness, where a Minister for Loneliness was appointed and there was strong cross-sector collaboration to tackle this issue.

(In English): Sir, the many ideas shared in the House over the past three days showed the increasing social needs and growing funding required. The Government will not be able to do this alone. To this end, I am glad that the Deputy Prime Minister also announced measures to further build a stronger culture of giving that encourages collaboration – for example, the Charities Capability Fund Collaboration Grant and the efforts to work with philanthropy on the needs in society.

We must work with philanthropic foundations, individuals and corporates to be strategic, complementary and catalytic in how we deploy capital towards social needs. I hope that the recently established SG Government Partnerships Office can play a role to involve ideas and efforts from our citizens, coordinate efforts and efficiently scale successful projects beyond pilots.

Sir, this tiny red dot has punched above our weight. Over the decades, many hardworking individuals have built their roots here in Singapore. We are ethnically diverse and culturally open. We prospered then because of that, and we must protect this now; continue to keep our hearts, society and workforce open so we can continue to achieve progress for our people, while being firm about our values as a country on the world stage. Sir, I support the Budget.

Assoc Prof Razwana Begum.

Mr Speaker, let me begin by stating my support for Budget 2024.

Mr Speaker, Budget 2024 is fiscally responsible, strategic and future-focused. It delivers an optimistic and balanced first instalment towards implementation of Forward Singapore. The Budget's central message is inclusivity. This Budget makes it clear that Singapore is a city for everyone and that Singapore's future belongs to everyone.

Mr Speaker, this Budget provides for the private and community sectors, but most importantly, it also provides for ordinary Singaporeans: (a) families who work hard every day to make a life for themselves and their children; (b) couples wanting to buy their first home, start a family and begin their life together; (c) young people embarking on their journey of lifelong learning; (d) children, seniors and people living with a disability or struggling with a mental illness; and (e) those struggling with socioeconomic disadvantage or adversity.

This Budget has something for everyone and provides both immediate relief for individuals and organisations, as well as practical and affordable policies and programmes for long-term growth and sustainability.

Mr Speaker, I will now make some comments on several aspects of the Budget. In doing so, I will focus on three values – equity, transparency and accountability.

The last few years have seen a significant increase in the cost of living. Interest rates have increased, making mortgage payments difficult for many and there has also been an increase in the cost of rent, general goods and services, transport and food. Many families are struggling to meet these costs and are being forced to make tough decisions about how to best provide for their children and families.

Mr Speaker, this Budget contains several initiatives intended to provide relief to families, including Workfare payouts, CDC Voucher top-ups and direct rebates. These initiatives are available to all families, yet, as is appropriate, are also targeted towards those families on low incomes or living with significant financial stress. I welcome this targeted approach, as it is important that such initiatives deliver the greatest benefit to those with the greatest need. Simply providing everyone with the same level of assistance is inequitable and does little to address structural or ongoing inequalities and disadvantage.

Mr Speaker, to ensure that families receive assistance that matches their need, the Government, private and community sectors need to work together. We need to reassure families that assistance is available for everyone and that there is no shame or stigma associated with seeking or receiving assistance when needed. We also need to implement culturally appropriate community education campaigns to remind all Singaporeans what type of assistance is available and how to access that assistance.

This is of particular importance to those families which may have become used to living with disadvantage or who, for socioeconomic, cultural or personal circumstances, are unable or unwilling to seek assistance when needed. As well as providing financial assistance to families in need, we also need to offer targeted personal support, including financial planning, parenting programmes, life-skills, employment and housing support and mental health and well-being support. We need to adopt a holistic, comprehensive case management approach.

Mr Speaker, there are many in our community who provide high levels of care to family members, including elderly relatives and family members with a disability or acute or chronic illness. Due to a range of factors, including the cost of professional care, many of those taking on short or long-term carer roles within the family home are from lower-income families.

We need to acknowledge the significant financial and emotional burden that providing home care can have on individuals and ensure that those with caring responsibilities also receive the appropriate level of assistance and relief.

Mr Speaker, on a broader level, Government-funded financial assistance, such as the initiatives contained in this Budget, are commendable and have been shown to have clear and measurable benefits for individuals, families and communities. They can also be expensive, particularly in the context of slowed or limited economic growth and the ongoing viability and affordability of such initiatives need to be considered. That is why we need to think long term and fiscally responsible and innovative in how we plan for our future and the future of our children and grandchildren.

In today's world, it is also important that we consider how social policy can be delivered in an environmentally sustainable way and, in turn, how environmental policy can be delivered in a socially responsible way. While governments around the world are grappling with how to do this, unless we address the reality of climate change, the socioeconomic needs of our population will only increase and the cost of responding to these needs will only become more and more expensive.

Mr Speaker, I, therefore, encourage the Government, private, academic and community sectors to begin an open-ended dialogue on how to continue to deliver financial assistance initiatives in a fiscally, environmentally and socially sustainable manner.

I will now make some comments about lifelong learning. The European Commission defines Lifelong Learning as: "All purposeful learning activity undertaken throughout life with the aim of improving knowledge, skills and competencies with a personal, civic, social and/or employment-related perspective." This definition is preferred by many researchers and policymakers as it reinforces that lifelong learning is not confined to an employment context, but instead extends into the personal, civil and social contexts.

This position is supported by the 1997 UNESCO Hamburg Declaration on Adult Learning, which notes: "Lifelong learning is important because it helps to develop the autonomy and sense of responsibility of people and communities; to reinforce the capacity to deal with the transformations taking place in the economy, in culture and in society; and to promote coexistence, tolerance and the informed and creative participation of citizens."

Consistent with this declaration is the view that human capital is a key driver of economic development and that countries that invest the most in developing their human capital enjoy the most rapid and sustained economic growth and the highest quality of life.

Mr Speaker, in promoting a culture and philosophy of lifelong learning in Singapore, it is important to adopt a whole-of-nation approach rather than a sector- or system-based approach. Lifelong learning is positive in and of itself and benefits society as whole, regardless of whether the learning leads to immediate or identifiable organisation or economic benefits.

It is also important to recognise that lifelong learning is relevant to all Singaporeans, including the unemployed and those in platform, low-wage or manual employment. If we only encourage those in established or influential positions to undertake learning and exclude those who are frequently considered less productive or deserving, we fail to address social disadvantage and we miss an opportunity to tap into a valuable resource.

Mr Speaker, in promoting a culture and philosophy of lifelong learning, we need to move away from viewing education as a time-limited activity that can only occur within traditional institutions, such as schools and colleges. Learning is an ongoing process of change and can occur in formal and informal settings, across multiple arenas and via multiple platforms.

We also need to foster a flexible learning ecosystem that values and rewards curiosity, creativity and adaptability, rather than just grades or academic results and that prepares individuals to think and thrive in a rapidly changing and unpredictable world. We also need to further develop and foster partnerships among educational institutions, employers and community organisations, so as to create multiple coordinated pathways for lifelong learning and skills development.

Measuring the impact of lifelong learning and its benefits is challenging. However, relying solely on hard indicators, such as economic growth or employment rates, may be counterproductive. An effective culture of lifelong learning will benefit all of society, including social factors and sustainable development, and will assist to create an inclusive economy where the advantages of growth uplift everyone rather than disproportionately favouring the already affluent.

Mr Speaker, we also need to move away from thinking that the primary purpose of lifelong learning is to train employees to generate greater output. Lifelong learning also assist employees to develop the capacity to think differently and to generate new perspectives. This may lead to innovative outcomes and solutions. Employers should encourage their employees to take time away from work to learn and then create an environment within their workspace where all employees can openly share knowledge, skills and ideas. Employers should also recognise and reward employees for their informal learning achievements and not just those qualifications gained in a structured environment.

Mr Speaker, I therefore encourage the Government to consider the feasibility of an inter-agency task force or commission to make recommendations to the Government on policies, programmes and strategies to embed an effective, equitable and sustainable culture of lifelong learning across Singapore. Such a task force should actively seek inputs from people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, young people and women entering or going back into the workforce.

Mr Speaker, I will now make some comments on the proposed changes to Singapore's retirement fund.

In a recent report by Mercer, Singapore's retirement income system ranked 7th internationally, only falling behind Nordic and Northern European countries and Australia. Despite this, in 2023, OCBC reported that only two in 10 Singaporeans are on track when it comes to retirement planning. And in 2022, the Retirement and Health Survey reported that seven in 10 elderly Singaporeans received regular cash allowance from their family. The study also reported that an increasing number of Singaporeans consider the rising cost of living when planning for retirement, including the cost of domestic help to assist care for them and their family as they age. Mr Speaker, in Malay please.

(In Malay): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] The initiatives outlined in the Budget are intended to ensure that Singaporeans can retire at a reasonable age and are in a financial position to enjoy a quality of life similar to that when they were in the workforce.

Mr Speaker, comfortable retirement is a shared responsibility between employees, employers and the Government; and all stakeholders need to work together to ensure that no one in retirement is left behind or is forced to live in poverty or significant disadvantage.

To achieve this goal, we need to explain the new Budget initiatives more clearly to all employees and employers and actively encourage and support all employees and employers to maximise the social and economic benefits of this new system. Mr Speaker, retirement planning also need to be culturally specific, as religious beliefs and practices can significantly influence attitudes towards wealth, saving, and financial planning.

For example, the Islamic prohibition of both earning and charging interest (riba) requires retirement funds from banks to establish alternative arrangements for their Muslim customers. Such provisions are available but may not be widely known to the Muslim community.

There are several initiatives that may assist in strengthening retirement planning for Muslims in Singapore, including providing culturally relevant financial guidance; conducting seminars, workshops and outreach programs within the Muslim community that emphasize the importance of retirement planning; developing a wider range of Sharia-compliant investment options to meet the specific needs of Muslim retirees, including sukuk bonds or Islamic equity funds. Mr Speaker, in English, please.

(In English): Mr Speaker, I will now make some comments relating to healthcare. The healthcare initiatives outlined in the Budget are intended to reduce healthcare costs for all Singaporeans, including the elderly and those living with chronic health conditions. As is happening across the globe, healthcare costs in Singapore are rising.

As our population ages, more and more people require increasingly expensive care and this cost inevitably falls on the consumer, insurers and the Government.

To assist offset these costs, I have several suggestions. The first is to recognise the personal and economic benefits of early intervention. Many of us wait until later in life, sometimes too late, before we take measurable steps to protect our mental and physical health and well-being.

We need to do more to support and encourage young people to adopt and maintain a lifelong healthy lifestyle and perhaps this could be achieved through increased community education programmes targeted at children and young people.

We also need to do more to attract and recruit suitably qualified healthcare professionals and to enhance the job satisfaction, professional development and career progression of our health professionals, and we do more to monitor and support the health and well-being of our health professionals, including those experiencing burnout.

While our healthcare sector continues to struggle with human resource issues, the provision of timely, targeted and professional healthcare will remain a challenge.

Mr Speaker, we also need to do more to enable our elderly to live safely and with dignity and within their own homes, and to do so without having to rely on family-funded care provided by domestic helpers who frequently have little relevant formal training. We need to professionalise aged-care, and ensure that in-home care by affordable, professionally trained healthcare professionals is available when needed.

Finally, we need to support and fund research into how AI can be applied across the healthcare sector more broadly, including aged care. AI technology is developing far faster than any of us can ever hope to understand. However we need to be as prepared as possible for emerging technologies and be ready to embed these technologies into existing healthcare systems.

Mr Speaker, I will now conclude by making some comments about a safe and secure Singapore, and the development of National Cybersecurity Command Centre

Mr Speaker, one of the fundamental roles of any government is to ensure the safety and security of its people and Singapore does this well. By many measures, we are one of the safest countries in the world and it is only because of this that we are in a position to develop and implement all of the socioeconomic initiatives contained in this Budget.

Mr Speaker, we cannot, however, be complacent, and must always remain vigilant to existing and emerging threats. The socioeconomic cost of a major cyber incident could be enormous and have far-reaching implications on public trust and confidence.

Mr Speaker, the development of a National Cybersecurity Command Centre is aligned with Singapore’s Smart Nation initiative and demonstrates that safety and security remain a priority for this Government.

Mr Speaker, the safety and security of a nation is not only defined by its approach to hard or technical issues, but also how it responds to the health and welfare of its people. Integrating human-centric design principles and robust safety protocols ensures that our Smart Nation Initiatives not only enhance convenience but also prioritise the well-being of individuals and communities. We also need to adopt an interdisciplinary approach to cybersecurity, integrating insights, methodology and expertise from various fields to comprehensively address complex security threats.

Ms Carrie Tan.

Mr Speaker, I note that many of my hon colleagues have raised concerns about the sustainability of our fiscal health, given the generous support schemes that Deputy Prime Minister Wong announced, which Singaporeans are getting used to and some are starting to expect as a given.

In view of such concerns, I speak to the House again on well-being and emphasise its role as a critical success factor to continued growth, to sustained growth. In my Budget speech last year, I spoke of the need to consider a different model of progress that looked beyond economic growth. To be clear, I am not suggesting de-growth.

On the contrary, what I am advocating for is a mindfulness and a slowing down that can help to unlock more potential in order to sustain or even to leapfrog growth. Slowing down our minds and cutting away senseless busyness, to make time and space for things that nourish our hearts: one, family – to bear and nurture children because we desperately need to raise our total fertility rate (TFR); two, caring – to build stronger relationships and community to help alleviate costly institutional healthcare; and three, for dreaming – to nurture and actualise new aspirations.

These are all desirables that Singaporeans expressed in many Forward Singapore conversations. How do we put these words into action?

I use an advertising sector parlance from my early career and offer this House three strategic actions towards a big, hairy, audacious goal – the twin goals of well-being and high growth. The three strategies are: one, charting Singapore’s well-being with a Well-being Index; two, doing less to achieve more; and three, enhancing collaboration with citizens.

On the first, a National Well-being Index – because we love KPIs and what does not get measured does not get tracked. Now that we have made mental health a national priority, how do we know if we are doing better? And we would not, unless we start measuring and tracking.

There are already ongoing national mental well-being surveys or studies, such as the Quality of Life Survey, which is helpful to track people’s level of satisfaction with their lives. Well-being is not simply an existence of happiness or satisfaction. It is also the absence of dis-ease or dysfunctionality within our collective system.

Hence, what we also need to monitor are figures such as the rate and incidences of mental health conditions, suicide rates as well as chronic disease rate, and factor all these into a set of indicators that makes sense. We need to be accountable for all the strategies that have been announced by the national mental well-being task force and make the outcomes visible and trackable. It is human nature, that when people are unwell, they worry more and become more needy, whereas a people with high well-being will feel more secure and feel that they have more capacity to give.

Secondly, let us exercise our imagination to achieve more with less. It may sound easier said than done, but I offer a quick hack. Perhaps what we need to do is start approaching complex and wicked problems with new lenses – a strengths-based lens instead of a scarcity lens, a trusting lens instead of a skeptical lens. I spoke about this in my Adjournment Motion a few months ago on improving public rental housing to enable human thriving. That is one example.

What other policies need a fundamental shift in philosophy and thinking?

There were two things in Deputy Prime Minister Wong’s Budget announcement that signalled to me that this shift is taking place and I am glad for it.

One is the extension of preschool subsidies for non-working mothers. Removing the condition of the mother’s employment tells me that the Government respects the choices women are making, regardless of what they choose and that supporting children in their early years should not be conditional. This reduces stress and enables families more freedom to navigate their caregiving needs, enhance their well-being and ensure that all children have an optimal early childhood start.

The other is the SkillsFuture Level-Up Programme – providing training allowance to those who embark on full-time courses. To me, that is a very empathetic policy, showing an understanding of people’s worries and making a full commitment to support and invest in anyone who wishes to grow and upgrade themselves. There has no bond of any kind that has been announced to date tied to this training allowance, and I hope it stays that way, which signals to me the Government’s willingness to trust. To trust that citizens will make the best of the opportunity to create the desired outcomes for themselves, which is a better livelihood, and that itself is aligned with national interest.

In this year’s Committee of Supply, I will be making cuts on issues related to the preschool sector, caregiving, sustainability and integrating persons with special needs, with suggestions on how shifting the underlying philosophy and narratives of some policies to a strength- and trust-based lens can help us improve and accelerate outcomes without spending as much money.

Third, enhancing collaboration with citizens. The Government cannot tackle wicked problems alone. As we transition and evolve our social compact from a less educated population leaning on intellectual elites to craft and implement policies as it was in the 1970s to the 1990s, we now have one of the most well-educated citizenry globally.

The Singapore Government Partnerships Office (SGPO) is hence a positive step forward that must be adequately resourced and developed. As we do this, we must recognise that we are somewhat new at this, and there may be some teething blues as we increase citizen participation and work more closely with one another.

Capability-building of facilitators who have ecosystem thinking, to be skilled at navigating cross-system cultures, mobilising people and building relationships across diverse sectors is key.

I recall in my first year as a Member of Parliament (MP), I sent an email to Deputy Prime Minister Mr Heng Swee Keat, who then forwarded it to the Minister for Culture, Community and Youth Mr Edwin Tong. In the email, I recommended the formation of a team of 100 organisational development-trained facilitators from diverse sectors. I am not sure if they took up my suggestion but I do see many Public Service roles now titled “Community Engagement” and I see increase in efforts to train volunteers to help facilitate national dialogue sessions. This is good and we can do more.

I urge relevant resources for the SGPO and People’s Association (PA) to train and leapfrog facilitation capabilities to right-size salaries to make sure they are realistic and adequate to hire relevantly skilled people. Such support to public agencies is critical for meaningful inclusion to engage Singaporeans in sometimes contentious and difficult conversations and to do so in early stages of policy-making to avoid U-turns on policies and avoid unnecessary spending.

As a social entrepreneur, I have first-hand experience of how tenacity and sustained commitment is needed for real and sustainable change to happen. And it is not always easy to keep morale high as we go through the transition blues, messiness and pains as we will encounter along the way. It is also much easier to grouse and complain than to commit time and effort to create change. And how do we keep people enthused to contribute and to stay the course?

As my past three years being grassroots advisor in Nee Soon South has shown me, when people enjoy working together, they feel cared for and appreciated, the hard work is worth it. And this, we can only achieve by shifting the balance from a performance-based culture to an appreciation-based culture. To shift this, we have to slow down our pace and appreciate what we already have and take time to appreciate one another. Speaker, in Mandarin please.

(In Mandarin): [Please refer to Vernacular Speech.] As the population ages, there is shortage of manpower and people's mental health is beginning to decline. How can we achieve a society that is less stressful, physically and mentally healthy and yet, continue to prosper?

In the face of these challenges, it is necessary for everyone not only to be willing to speak but also be willing to act. Many people may have seen that there are many who can talk but very few who can truly do and are willing to do. Therefore, the Government continues to implement digitalisation and encourages both individuals and businesses to transform.

Some residents complain that excessive mechanisation for efficiency has reduced the personal touch and I understand this very well. But is it inevitable? How can we strike a balance, using technology with a personal touch, making it convenient for us without sacrificing the interaction and communication between people? This is something we should and must reflect on.

So how can we make everyone willing to act and willing to contribute? What I have experienced as a grassroots advisor in Nee Soon South over the past three years is that, as long as everyone cooperates happily, whether they are employees or volunteers, if they can be accommodating and show gratitute towards each other, they will be able to contribute joyfully and everyone can make a difference.

In unity, we learn to be inclusive. In giving, we learn gratitude. I believe this is an invaluable way of interaction in our society. I hope that in the future, through our own practice, we can pass on these values to the next generation of Singaporeans. Citizens and the Government can work together so that even with fewer people, we can still get things done and sustain physical and mental health as well as continued prosperity.

(In English): With that, I conclude with a prayer that the strategies I offer – tracking our well-being, achieving more with less, enhancing collaboration with citizens, and above all, adopting a strength-based and trust-based lens, will help us on a Uniquely Singapore holy grail, towards the biggest, hairiest and most audacious goal of them all – well-being while sustaining high-growth in our economy. I support the Budget.

Mr Louis Ng.

Sir, this is a Budget about building our shared future together. A shared future that has been built on the work by all of us and our migrant workers over the past few decades. As we talk about being an inclusive society, we must not forget our migrant workers. Yet, our policies at times, show that there is an “us” and “them”.

In the past eight years as an MP, I have seen firsthand the backbreaking work our migrant workers do for us. I have listened firsthand to the stories of the homes and families they left behind. And I have personally met the families they have left behind and felt the pain they feel every single day.

Mazibur is a cleaner in Nee Soon East. I have known him for eight years. He came to Singapore in 2012, leaving his daughter Jannat when she was only 22 days' old. Mazibur has not returned to Bangladesh since. Jannat will turn 12 years old this year. He has missed all her birthdays and milestones growing up. When I went to Bangladesh a few years ago to meet all our Nee Soon East cleaners' families and have lunch with them, I met Jannat. It is sad that I got to meet Mazibur's daughter before he did. Jannat wrote to me and what she wrote tore through my heart. She said, "Take care of my father, I love him a lot". I promised her I would.

Sir, Mazibur's story is not an uncommon one. Many low-wage migrant workers similarly endure long periods of separation from their families.

As a father of three young girls, I just cannot imagine how painful and how difficult it must be to be so far from their loved ones. We enjoy time with our families in the homes that these migrant workers build and keep clean for us. The least we can do is to take care of them and ensure that these workers have safe living spaces, safe food and safe avenues for reporting illegal employment practices.

In a speech delivered at the height of COVID-19, Prime Minister Lee assured our workers, "To our migrant workers, let me emphasise again: we will care for you, just like we care for Singaporeans." I am glad we do care and, over the years, our policies on migrant workers have improved. In this Budget for Singaporeans, I hope we continue to make improvements and remember to care for our migrant workers.

Many of our youths have set a shining example in caring and speaking up for migrant workers. I have been inspired by the passion of these youths. One such youth is Kari Chua. Kari co-founded the migrant worker ground up Sama Sama in 2016. Sama Sama and their partners support migrant community leaders to address mental health issues, enhance the quality of life and ensure equitable opportunities for migrant workers. Migrant worker NGOs like Sama Sama back up their calls with concrete actions through ground-up initiatives to support our migrant workers. Many Singaporeans like Kari are calling for the Government to do more to treat our migrant workers fairly. I hope we heed their call. I will raise three recommendations.

First, we significantly improve the living standards for migrant workers.

Second, we ensure the food catered for migrant workers comply with existing food safety standards.

Third, we recognise and treat kickbacks as a form of corruption, by ensuring that there are equivalent penalties and whistleblowing protections.

I am not asking for any preferential treatment for our migrant workers. I ask only that we treat our migrant workers the same way that we would want our loved ones to be treated. I ask that we be fair and inclusive – have one set of policies that apply to all.

My first recommendation is that we ensure that the housing standards for dormitories are at least equivalent to the dormitory conditions for our full-time National Servicemen (NSFs). I am glad that MOM announced a set of improved standards for worker dormitories last year. It is a huge step in the right direction. By 2030, the dormitories must meet an interim set of housing standards. By 2040, the dormitories must meet the new standards. MOM said that these housing standards are meant to improve the dormitories' ability to contain disease outbreaks. I am glad that MOM is acting on lessons learnt during COVID-19.

In addition to addressing the public health risks, it is also right that we make sure that our migrant workers have decent living conditions. However, many feel that the interim and new housing standards simply do not go far enough. Our current standards require at least 3.5 square metres per migrant worker. By contrast, each NSF in SAF gets seven square metres of sleeping and resting space. Why the double standards on this question of public health? Viruses will not discriminate between our migrant workers and our NSFs. We are now asking for dormitories to improve this from 3.5 square metres to 3.6 square metres per migrant worker by 2030 and 4.2 squares metres by 2040. We are asking for a 0.1-square-metre increase within seven years. To put things into perspective 0.1 square metre is less than the size of two A4 pieces of paper.

Another example is the spacing between beds in migrant worker dormitories. Currently there is no requirement for spacing between beds. It is only in 2040 that we will mandate a spacing of one metre between the beds. The pandemic taught us hard lessons about how diseases spread like wildfire when people are packed into tiny, cramped dormitory rooms. Yet, for the next 16 years, we are choosing to accept this risk. We are choosing to roll the dice and pray very hard that we will not have another pandemic in the next 16 years. It is a gamble with the lives of those living in the dormitories and it is a gamble with the lives of Singaporeans.

I understand there is a cost factor. Business costs are rising and employers have financial constraints. We must consider this, too. MOM has said that dormitory standards cannot improve more quickly because beds are short in supply and rising in price. Surely, then, the way forward is to study and implement solutions that tackle those problems, rather than wait for them to go away.

JTC used to own and manage dormitories directly. I am glad MOM will be building and owning two migrant-worker purpose-built dormitories (PBDs) through the new entity called NEST Singapore. Again, it is a step in the right direction. MOM has announced that the MOM-owned PBDs seek to promote innovations in public health resilience and liveability. They also aim to transform practices in migrant worker housing.

Indeed, if the private market cannot efficiently deliver services at minimum standards and costs necessary for public health, we should ask the hard question of whether Government agencies should reassume the role of managing and operating more dormitories more urgently. By expanding the number of dormitories owned and run by MOM, there would be significant economies of scale and perhaps even lowered costs for employers. It could be a win-win solution for both employers and employees.

Again, we must remember that this is a question of public health. This is a life and death issue when, not if, the next pandemic happens. We already know that the SAF was largely successful in keeping COVID-19 transmissions low. We already have a successful model to learn from – with a minimum standard of seven square metres per resident and all the measures that SAF took. All I am asking is that we learn from experience and urgently improve the living conditions of migrant workers.

My second recommendation is that food catered for migrant workers is safe for consumption. Our migrant workers need a proper place to rest and proper food to eat. I am glad that MOM recently ensured that there are measures in place that protect catered food from contamination until it is collected by dormitory residents for consumption. MOM clearly takes food safety very seriously. But that solves only one part of the equation. The other parts need to be urgently addressed, too.

The Singapore Food Agency (SFA) requires that all catered food be consumed within four hours after it is prepared. SFA also requires that all catered food be labelled with a consume-by timestamp. Many Singaporeans will be familiar with these timestamps for catered food or buffets. This four-hour rule is strictly adhered to for food catered for Singaporeans. However, a different set of standard seems to apply for some migrant workers. Workers tell me that many of them are catered with food without a consume-by timestamp. Many workers tell me that they regularly consume food way past the four-hour timeframe. It is quite obvious that this is true. We know their catered lunch is cooked in the wee hours of the morning before workers even leave for work. We know the food is delivered to the dormitories early in the morning as well. By the time workers have their meal around noon time, the food is way past the four-hour timeframe.

We know for a fact that our requirements are being breached. The Ministry of Sustainability and the Environment (MSE) has said that in the past five years, SFA has not received any reported cases of catered food for workers in dormitories without a consume-by timestamp. MOM has also said that they have not received specific complaints from workers about not being able to consume food within a reasonable time of preparation. This is at odds with many workers' experiences and the realities on the ground. I know that MSE and SFA take food safety very seriously. I also know that MOM takes worker safety and welfare very seriously.

My recommendation is that MOM and MSE work together to investigate this and set specific requirements to ensure that catered food is consumed within a safe period. Migrant workers deserve food that is safe for consumption, just like all Singaporeans.

My third and final recommendation is that we recognise and treat kickbacks as a form of corruption. We should ensure that there are equivalent penalties and whistle-blowing protection. I have called for this in my previous Adjournment Motion and I am calling for it again.

We know that from 2021 to 2023, MOM investigated 210 cases of kickbacks per year and took 70 employers to task each year. That is more than one employer every week being taken to task for collecting kickbacks. Also, we do not know what the full number of unreported cases is. Our laws to protect our workers are only as good as our ability to enforce our laws. We cannot enforce our laws if workers are fearful of reporting abuses when they happen.

I have personally spoken with migrant workers whose employers coerced them into paying a sum of $3,000 in kickbacks. For some, this is more than four times their monthly salary. A crime had been committed against them. Yet, their hands were trembling as they spoke to me. They were fearful of the consequences of reporting their bosses. Many of these workers incur debt to work in Singapore in the first place. Losing their jobs may mean they have no way of repaying the loans they took to work in Singapore. One of them told me, "When I came to Singapore in 2016, I paid $14,000. In 2018, I paid $1,500 for my Work Permit. Now, they said that if I do not pay them $3,000, they will fire me". The worker faced the stark choice of paying his boss $3,000 to renew his Work Permit or face repatriation. The same worker told me, "I am a really poor man. I have no money to give them. In this situation, I am really helpless and feeling depressed. I am an honest and hardworking man."